Archive for November, 2017

Time for a sanity check?

Danger in AP’s relentless drive to dump on Trump By Ralph Z. Hallow – “This lead sentence, like the rest of the “news” story, reads like a press release from the Democratic National Committee. A news story it wasn’t.”

“The news service’s distinctly liberal bias alone doesn’t seem sufficient to explain the extent of its relentlessly harsh criticism of President Trump. The AP has been gut-punching him since he declared for the Republican presidential nomination way back on June 16, 2015, in New York City.

A replay of the televised Oval Office ceremony shows the obviously proud and happy code talkers continuing to beam at Mr. Trump as he makes his Pocahontas crack. No stunned silence after. No outward sign of shock or tension or crushed sensitivities. Yet The New York Times’ version of the event claims that when the president made the Pocahontas remark, the code talkers “stood stone-faced.”

In a lead sentence that was even nastier than the AP’s, The New York Times managed to drag, for the umpteenth time, race into its habitual disparagement of Mr. Trump.

Here’s the world-informing wire service quoting a full-time Democratic Trump disparager and selected relatives of code talkers, all impugning the president every way to Sunday. And smearing him as racist, based on no facts or evidence. If you don’t see danger here, you’re not looking hard enough.

How Hateful Are The Democrats? This Hateful by John Hinderaker – “You can’t make this stuff up: Vogue, a reliable Democratic Party outlet, has gone crazy over First Lady Melania Trump’s White House Christmas decorations

“When I read this sort of thing, I always wonder: did anyone say anything like this about Michelle Obama? I lived through those long eight years, and I can tell you the answer is No. As an antidote to the Democrats’ hatefulness, let’s close with some photos of this year’s White House decorations:

Anti-Trump Media: White House Christmas Decor ‘Spooky,’ Like a Scene from ‘The Shining’ By Debra Heine – “Did you know that those exquisite White House Christmas decorations First Lady Melania Trump proudly unveiled yesterday are “spooky,” “spine-chilling,” and “nightmarish” — like scenes from Mordor, Narnia, or The Shining?”

“It took most of the day yesterday, but by nightfall, the Trump-hating media was able to settle on an unfavorable narrative with which to belittle the newly unveiled decor.

Speaking of overactive imaginations, “Melania Trump decks the halls with dead branches, spine-chilling wails of the damned,” according to the AV Club. …
Good Lord. Someone tell this Edgar Allan Poe wannabe that these are fairly standard Christmas decorations.

Apparently these people despise Trump so much they must also despise his Christmas decorations.

I can’t help but wonder where these journalists were nine years ago during the Obamas’ first Christmas at the White House. The first family chose a far-left partisan to decorate the White House that year and the results were truly amazing.

Does anyone but me remember their tacky Christmas tree with Chairman Mao, transvestite Hedda Lettuce, Obama on Mount Rushmore, and Obama Lincoln ornaments?

This Is Why We Can’t Trust Factcheckers, Part Infinity By David Harsanyi – “It’s another op-ed column masquerading as a fact check.”

“During a speech at the Tax Foundation last week, Vice President Mike Pence dropped a meaningless but innocuous political talking point about the U.S. economy. “There are more Americans working today than ever before in American history,” he reportedly said.

This statement really irritated one of The Washington Post’s factchecking professionals.

It’s improbable that Obama would ever have been factchecked for saying something as insipid as Pence has. These days, in fact, factcheckers have become extraordinarily literal when rationalizing the former president’s failed promises.

All of this is important to note because, no matter how unreliable factcheckers continue to be, countless self-styled lovers of science and fact will send you these kinds of articles and treat them as irrefutable truths. They are not. Quite often, they’re just op-ed columns.

Thanks to Conyers, Identity politics finally is splitting the Democrats By Thomas Lifson – “we are in the midst of a form of hysteria that is driven by long-repressed anger.” This anger is a result of what has risen to the surface, not a cause of it.

“Even worse for the Get Trump crowd and the feminists, Rep. James Cliburn, third-ranking Democrat in the House, seemed to offer the opinion that being elected confers immunity:

Nancy Pelosi tried to defend Conyers as an icon on Sunday, and had to walk that back in the face of fury from women. But that hasn’t Rep, Gregory Meeks from arguing that Conyers” has made America a better place” while paying lip service to the concerns of feminists, and bringing racial discrimination into the conversation.

It has gotten so bad that another prominent member of the CBC is reverting to shocking racism, dismissing the complaints because the victims are white, and implying that racism is at work, likening the complainers to one of the most hated women in recent memory:

There is enough anger in the air among Democrats, with the self-identification with victim groups continuing to outweigh the joint quest for power, that Democrats have got to worry about whom to sacrifice, and how — to keep their female turnout high, without damaging black turnout in 2018.

Objections raised to deporting illegal alien MS-13 members. Wait… what? By Jazz Shaw – “It may be time for some sort of sanity check, not just in this single Maryland county, but in all the cities where gang violence is ripping apart the fabric of civil society.”

“If decent people want to take back control of their own communities they have to jointly decide that enough is enough. If you keep electing officials who refuse to make the hard decisions and actually take on the bad guys, nothing is going to save you. Sheriff Sahler should have been getting a medal for the work he was doing, but he’s instead the target of criticism. We’re living in Bizarro World at this point.

CNN wonders: Is Trump … competent? By Allahpundit – “What’s the line between being, shall we say, overly credulous about dubious information that flatters your prejudices and being a little unbalanced upstairs?”

Who is funding the Leandra English lawsuit for control of the CFPB? By John Sexton – “Tuesday, English’s lawyer, Deepak Gupta, was asked that question and struggled with his answer.”

“That’s a mighty amount of hand-waving over a pretty simple question: Who is paying your bill? No one is asking Gupta for a legal justification for whatever set up was made behind the scenes. All that’s needed here is the name of a person or organization.

This is the sort of battle you sometimes see in banana republics where two opposing sides fight for control over the same lever of power. Legally, Trump is going to win this battle. The fact that the country’s leading Democrats are trying to win this fight with politicized public appeals (like the one above) is a worrisome development.

They are playing with fire here and I suspect if the shoe were on the other foot and Republicans were trying something like this, the opinion pages would be bursting with hot-takes calling it a dangerous violation of established norms. As it stands, the media reaction to this entire dubious effort seems fairly muted so far.

The Moving Finger Fingers Our ‘Moral Betters’ By Sarah Hoyt – “The trendy way of shutting up any complaints of women not behaving in any sensible way is not going to work with me.”

As the skulls of Matt Lauer and Garrison Keillor are added to the ever-growing pile collected by the #metoo and #sohardtobeawoman feminists, this libertarian is starting to wonder if there will be any straight, normal testosterone males remaining on the left — so it’s time to inject a little sanity.

I’ve been observing the dynamic of victim worship in America for three decades. Call it an outgrowth of rooting for the underdog. It’s nauseating.

What happened in most of these cases is extortion and abuse of power. Almost all of the fields where this happened are highly oligarchic and controlled by the left. The males who rose to power in it, mostly by mouthing feminist platitudes, were, therefore, left with unchecked power over the careers of a lot of women.

Let’s make no mistake here: yeah, sure, the abusers were enabled by the media. They were enabled by an establishment that protected men acting like moronic glands on legs if they spouted the right opinions. They were protected by money, power, and prestige.

And the women gave in to them because they had power, money, prestige. Because the women wanted a career, advancement. Money.

Some of us grew up in another time and place. We were taught the way women respond to unwanted advances, much less to advances that amount to professional extortion.

The dream of equality in the workplace depends on women stopping these abuses themselves when they happen.

You can choose to stop this now and turn it around. Or you can go shambling further into insanity and restriction of women’s options.

Mash, Suicide is Painless, is here again.

Leave a Comment

Nazi normalizing, civil heat, neutrality SJW, and the Pocahontas Pickle

The New York Times’ Nazi story goes off the rails By Tammy Bruce – “they were right to be appalled at what they were reading, but they were wrong about what the The New York Times’ agenda really was.”

“The arrogance of the legacy media doesn’t begin and end with biased coverage of existing events; it also involves stories meant to convince Americans of something about themselves and their neighbors which is ugly and untrue.

Their latest? A remarkable piece of agitprop, in the form of a profile of a neo-Nazi who helped organize the white supremacist contingent of the Nazi and antifa Charlottesville Confederate statue demonstrations.

The Times’ agenda wasn’t to generate sympathy for the Nazi, it was to inject into the public discourse the notion that the average American was, and could actually be, a literal Nazi. Without you knowing. It was a story meant to change, in the most horrific of ways, how Americans think about their neighbors. It was meant to sow paranoia and division.

For years, people who do not pay allegiance to the liberal narrative have been condemned as Nazis. President Trump and his supporters are accused regularly. This favorite accusation of the left is meant to shut down debate and isolate the nonconformist, the challenger of orthodoxy.

The Times’ effort to reframe reality as a Nazi America backfired. And big time.

The Times knows how awful it is to agitate for more division, as they work to convince their readers that Americans are awful, disgusting racists masquerading as your next-door neighbor.

Yet, we now have The New York Times, admittedly, trying to convince people that “hate and extremism have become far more normal in American life than many of us want to think,” when the opposite is true. Our becoming a better country has ruined many political agendas, but it’s dangerous when some attempt to artificially recreate what we have worked so hard to banish.

From cold to hot civil war? By Angelo M. Codevilla – “The increasing energy going into the intractable issues that divide Americans is producing a vicious cycle naturally tending toward violence.”

The Pocahontas Pickle has struck nerves. The President tossed an arrow and it hit a bulls eye. There is US News, the Investor’s Business Daily, Don Surber, American Thinker, and Fox News. Jaun Williams stepped into it on The Five by spouting the party line that Trump was a racist. There are many who see that calling the President a racist, biggoted, homophobe, dumb, unfit, facist is, perhaps, just making yourself a tool and a fool to be played by Trump.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai Calls Out Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Silicon Valley for Censorship and Internet Content Manipulation… by sundance – “Chairman Pai righteously called out Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other platform control agents for being ideologically biased, and using their platforms to target their ideological opposition.”

“This debate needs, our culture needs, a more informed discussion about public policy. We need quality information, not hysteria, because hysteria takes us to unpleasant, if not dangerous places. We can disagree on policy. But we shouldn’t demonize, especially when all of us share the same goal of a free and open Internet.

when you get past the wild accusations, fearmongering, and hysteria, here’s the boring bottom line: the plan to restore Internet freedom would return us to the light touch, market-based approach under which the Internet thrived. And that’s why I am asking my colleagues to vote for it on December 14.”

One law professor’s overview of the confusing net neutrality debate by Orin Kerr – “The most confounding aspect of the contemporary net neutrality discussion to me is the social meanings that the concept has taken on. … The most notable aspect is that net neutrality has become a social justice cause.” Kerr posted the explanation of the topic he received from Gus Hurwitz. It explains the debate and even part of the argument and notes some of the arguments more interesting features.

“Progressive activist groups of all stripes have come to believe that net neutrality is essential to and allied with their causes. I do not know how this happened – but it is frustrating, because net neutrality is likely adverse to many of their interests.

The last comment that I will make is how I think about this entire issue: it’s just the latest example of a fight between bilateral media oligopolists. “Big content” and “big distribution” have always fought over how to split the rents they extract from consumers, users have always distrusted distributors, and content providers have always used this to their advantage. From this perspective, the net neutrality rules are pure rent seeking by a content/edge industry that had largely captured the previous FCC.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson – Speech and Questions, The Wilson Center – Washington DC… by sundance – “Secretary of State Rex Tillerson delivered a speech today outlining the State department engagements throughout the world.”

“The speech was delivered right into the belly-of-the-progressive-beast, with an audience filled with limo-liberals. However, the eloquence and articulation of policy by T-Rex makes him a formidable adversary for the ideological opposition.

It’s an hour well worth our time, with transcript included below:

Case shows judges matter by Don Surber – “I keep bringing up judicial appointments because unfortunately the courts have become the dominant branch of the federal government.” McConnell has been taking a lot of heat but on this topic, he is a key warrior.

“Again, this is Mitch McConnell’s doing. He refused to take votes on Obama’s appointees for two years. He bet on having a Republican president and a Republican Senate.

The trend towards a judicial oligarchy as typified by the efforts to veto the President’s national security efforts is one of the more putrid swamp pools. It is being drained, too.

Leave a Comment

Where you live? Why? CFPB and matters of control

Choosing political bias over economic reality By Richard W. Rahn – “The debate about the tax rate cut proposal shows this same reality disconnect.”

“Why is it that those who have been right in the past are often ignored, while great attention is paid to those who have been wrong? Many “politically correct” forecasters’ words are accepted as gospel by the media despite dismal records.

The debate about climate change, the minimum wage and the proposals for tax reform illustrate why so many get it wrong.

The debate about the tax rate cut proposal shows this same reality disconnect. Minority party leaders Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer and many of their colleagues claim it is a tax cut for the rich when, in fact, almost all low- and middle-income people will receive a meaningful tax reduction. And yes, in Mrs. Pelosi’s San Francisco and Mr. Schumer’s New York, some of their fellow wealthy constituents might pay higher taxes.

The majority of economists claimed at the time that the economy could not grow nearly as fast as it did after the Reagan tax rate cuts — and they were wrong.

Most economists and even members of the media understand that high taxes on cigarettes and sugary drinks discourage consumption. Why then is it that so many seem to have such a hard time understanding (despite the empirical evidence) that lower tax rates on work, saving and investment will stimulate economic growth and grow the tax base? Why do members of the media (e.g., The New York Times editorial page) give more credence to those who failed in their past predictions than those who got it right? Is it political bias or ignorance of history that causes the reality disconnect?

Denzel Washington on black incarceration: ‘I can’t blame the system,’ ‘it starts in the home’ By Jessica Chasmar – “If the streets raise you, then the judge becomes your mother and prison becomes your home

“According to The New York Daily News, Mr. Washington expanded on his answer when pressed by reporters, saying, “It starts with how you raise your children. If a young man doesn’t have a father figure, he’ll go find a father figure.

“So, you know, I can’t blame the system,” he said. “It’s unfortunate that we make such easy work for them.”

In Draining The CFPB Swamp, Trump Finds Monsters by IBD – update on English v Mulvaney at the CFPB.

“If nothing else, this shows what a monumental, perhaps even Sisyphean, job it will be for Trump to drain Washington’s fetid bureaucratic swamp. It’s not the dirty water so much as the swamp monsters that make it such a perilous task.

Those who work in the CFPB, which was created by the Obama administration in 2010 as the right arm of the financially disastrous regulatory monstrosity known as Dodd-Frank, think of themselves as having a special mission: to regulate every nuance of the U.S. consumer financial world, supposedly to “protect” consumers.

As we’ve said before, the CFPB is basically a rogue agency, with virtually no accountability to Congress or to the American people for that matter. It was designed that way. And no, this is not just a question of governance style; it’s a question of constitutionality, of the rule of law.

In its current form, the CFPB is unconstitutional, as a federal court way back in October of 2016 already ruled.

The mainstream media have largely treated this as a kind of he-said/she-said spat. It’s not. It’s quite serious. If Leandra English can declare herself head of a major U.S. agency, then the chances of truly reasserting control over the administrative state would shrink to near zero.

Why Democrats are to blame for consumer agency debacle By Lorraine Woellert – “The CFPB turmoil highlights how Democrats shunned Republican efforts to broaden its governance to a commission that would have included diverse viewpoints.”

“In truth, the bureau has been mired in controversy since its creation. Warren has built a political career railing against Wall Street. Cordray infuriated industry and inspired lawsuits. And the bureau itself is unique, investing great power in one person with almost no accountability.

It was predictable that such a toxic mix would eventually explode. Now Democrats are facing the consequences of their decision to protect the agency’s powerful independent director. Anybody Trump nominates to replace Cordray will have the ability to undo a lot of his work. On Monday, Mulvaney wasted no time, imposing a regulatory and hiring freeze.

For Democrats, there seemed to be a political strategy.

Richard Cordray Delivers the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Punchline By Ronald L. Rubin – “The CFPB’s first director cared about consumers, but he was consumed by politics.”

“Obama installed Cordray by using an unconstitutional recess appointment, Democrats threatened to change the filibuster rules, and Republicans surrendered.

Perhaps it was this two-year ordeal that turned Cordray into a cynical partisan mercenary. … By 2017, there was no denying the ugly truth. Cordray cared about consumers, but he was consumed by politics.

Warren built a political battleship, and Cordray deployed it. The bureau’s powerful media division dictated policy to its regulatory professionals and relentlessly exaggerated the agency’s achievements in daily press releases and social-media posts. Political operatives used the CFPB’s super-independence to stonewall congressional subpoenas and hide unethical investigation tactics, internal discrimination problems, and other inconvenient facts. Republican critics were dismissed as Wall Street sycophants.

Meanwhile, millions of dollars were diverted from the CFPB to Democratic allies.

Cordray’s sickening stunt left no doubt about the absurdity of claims that he and the CFPB were ever politically independent. For this, we can all give thanks.

Watchdog Finds More Evidence Obama’s EPA Broke Federal Law by Chris White – “Judicial Watch obtained 900 pages of documents Monday showing the EPA used social media to lobby support for the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule.”

“Federal law prohibits agencies from engaging in propaganda. It also forbids agencies from using federal resources to conduct grassroots campaigns that prod U.S. citizens into browbeating lawmakers to act on pending legislation.

“The Obama EPA knowingly did an end run around federal law to push another Obama environmental power grab,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a press statement Monday. “These documents show how these Obama-era bureaucrats seem to be more like social activists than public employees.”

“Credible” stories by neo-neocon – “what is with this “credible” business? I’ve seen it over and over to describe the Roy Moore allegations, as well as allegations against other figures in cases in which I don’t find the allegations especially credible although they might be true.”

“Each camp is going on “credible” evidence rather than anything even remotely approaching highly convincing evidence. Much of it is an emotional reaction to the accuser’s tale, and reflects a sort of hubris about our ability to detect a liar vs. a truthteller, based on that emotional reaction (and sometimes an over-identification based on personal experience). Almost any story about anyone can sound “credible” unless it contains obviously fanciful elements that are literally impossible. Are we all now required to believe any allegation by a woman against a man that is not impossible?

Science Moms Fight Fears with Facts by Harriet Hall – “a group of 15 women scientists, bloggers, and educators to send a letter to Paltrow, Gellar, and other celebrities asking them not to co-opt motherhood and wield their fame to oppose beneficial technologies, but to use their influence responsibly and ensure that their advocacy is supported by facts, not fear.” 

At the recent conference of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSICON) in Las Vegas, on October 28, 2017, I had the great privilege and pleasure of being in the audience for the American premiere of a new documentary, Science Moms, as well as for the following live panel discussion by the women featured in the movie. In the documentary, a group of scientists and science communicators who are also moms address misperceptions created by misinformation in the media about GMOs, vaccines, and other issues important to parents. They point out that “moms whose opinions are formed by fear and hype are so loud. But they’re the only people talking about it, the only resource people have.” With this documentary, people now have another resource based on science, a resource that is easily digestible and compelling.

The letter caught the attention of Natalie Newell, the host of “The Science Enthusiast” podcast. She contacted one of the letter’s authors. One thing led to another, and the result was this documentary.

The problem is that fears are irrational and facts aren’t. That’s two different worlds that humans seem to find difficult to move between.

Leave a Comment

Debunked? That doesn’t mean we’ll stop the harrassment

Democrats desperate to prove debunked Russian dossier’s sex charge against Trump By Rowan Scarborough – No evidence? No matter. Just think if Republicans were this persistent in chasing down the IRS, Benghazi, and other scandals over the last decade.

“The Times’ source said the bottom line is this: Mr. Schiller, who directed Oval Office operations before resigning to take higher-paying jobs, said nothing happened and denied there was any Russia-Trump collusion.

“So in the end, the Democrats shot themselves in the foot by leaking this, because the final result is a convincing denial of the dossier’s most famous and salacious report,” the source told The Times. “A huge number of the Democrats’ claims are based on the dossier, and the dossier’s credibility is in tatters.”

The FBI has maintained a wall of secrecy about how it specifically used the unsubstantiated dossier to target Mr. Trump and his people.

Public now wary of ‘unhinged’ liberal press By Jennifer Harper – “Relentless, hostile media coverage of President Trump and his administration could be reaching the saturation point.” One can hope.

“The public appears weary, wary and quite possibly ready to move on — hungry, perhaps, for credible news coverage over biased caterwaul.

“Unhinged coverage of Trump is hurting the media,” writes Kyle Smith, a columnist for the New York Post who has advice for journalists.

Some conservative analysts have suggested that unprecedented negative coverage of Mr. Trump is actually a symptom of panic in the press, now faced with the president’s accomplishments and his unexpected resilience.

The Wapo story on Roy Moore provides an illustration of just how insidious press bias can be when done with skill. There are many (e.g. Charles Hurt) who think the story “was devastatingly fair” and “thorough and balanced.” They see style but do not see substance. They do not engage critical thinking. They do not see what is missing, what is created via innuendo, or what is being done to create a narrative.

Why Ajit Pai’s decision killing Obama’s net neutrality FCC regulation is good by Washington Examiner – “Sometimes you have to wonder how sincere people are when they gnash their teeth and pull out their hair over President Trump blocking or reversing an Obama-era regulation.”

“Net neutrality’s dubious value is made obvious by the misleading way Democrats and many news outlets reported the decision … This is the Democratic line. By portraying deregulation as a bonbon for Big Business, and concealing the hit taken by some of the biggest businesses (see above), these partial accounts avoid debating the issue on its merits and dwindle into demagoguery, where they are comfortable.

Net neutrality regulation also effectively outlaws competing business models, which are good for customers and the economy as a whole. Competing business models allow experimentation, and this leads to providers serving customers better by meeting their needs more precisely.

The FCC’s move last week will leave Internet business models to compete in the marketplace rather than competing in smoke-filled rooms for the favor of regulators. This deserves applause from everyone, except for those who love regulation as a good in itself.

Why the Portuguese argument for Net Neutrality doesn’t work by Taylor Millard – This one ties the partisan misleading thing, the net neutrality thing, and the press role and responsibility thing all together.

The public knows about data throttling because the media brought it to light. It’s a lot easier holding individual companies responsible for their actions, than it is government bureaucrats. The VA has been roundly criticized for how they treated vets, yet no real changes have been made. The TSA has been criticized for groping people, yet the “blue gloves of freedom” still exist. NSA spying is still “a thing,” even if some data collection was halted.

I understand why there are people wondering what happens next, with the potential repeal of Net Neutrality. But if you’re going to complain about it, especially if you’re an elected official, don’t pass misinformation out about it. It just makes you look bad.

The legal road ahead for net neutrality and the Restoring Internet Freedom Order by Hao-Kai Pai – “The response to the RIFO has also been, in broad strokes, as anticipated, with pro–net neutrality voices taking to the media with proclamations of the internet’s impending death.”

“The interesting thing about these arguments is how familiar they sound: They are largely the same as the arguments made on the other side against the 2010 and 2015 OIOs. Needless to say, it is nice that net neutrality proponents are finally embracing the arguments that those of us who have been critical of the FCC’s Open Internet efforts have been making for nearly the past decade. This newfound concurrence, however, does raise interesting questions about how the inevitable legal challenge to the RIFO will proceed.

When it comes to the legal arguments for and against net neutrality, there really is little new under the sun. The basic issue remains that Congress has not given the Commission clear direction for how it should approach the internet.

Compared to the OIO, the RIFO has exceptionally well-developed factual basis and analysis of that factual basis. The OIO was premised on a theory of innovation that promised the increase of investment in broadband networks. It provided little beyond conjecture to support that theory. In its details, it ignored, misused, and misrepresented evidence (that is, it was an “economics free zone”), resolved contentious points by pointing to favorable comments with a cursory statement that the Commission was persuaded by them, and relied on the Commission’s own assertions of expertise.

The RIFO, on the other hand, analyzes and rejects the theory put forth in the OIO, relying on substantive analyses of data to do so.

Net neutrality isn’t so neutral and the nature of the arguments follows established patterns.

Leave a Comment

You’d think it was the battle for Berlin in 1945

DOJ ruling gives Trump upper hand in fight with Democrats over consumer bureau By Stephen Dinan – this is another example of where Antifa has the wrong target and it is Trump that restoring the power balance described in the U.S. Constitution. You want facism? Here’s how to build it:

“At stake is one of the government’s most powerful positions at the head of the CFPB, which gives its director an incredible amount of independence. Under the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that created the bureau, the director cannot be fired except for good cause, and the CFPB’s budget is entirely independent of Congress and the president, making it impossible to rein the bureau in.

Republicans, who largely voted against the Dodd-Frank law, say the CFPB is not only a bad idea but also illegal. A federal appeals court has agreed with them, ruling the overwhelming power of one individual to be unconstitutional — though that ruling is stayed pending another appeal.

Even Allahpundit gets it – “The idea that a now-former agency head can monarchically pass his scepter to a successor over the president’s objection, making the seat (temporarily) hereditary, is ludicrous.”

“It’s a pander to progressives by a guy who wants to protect his left flank in a Democratic gubernatorial primary. The surest way to earn cheap goodwill from the left is to make a showy gesture of sticking it to Trump. That’s what Cordray did by deputizing English and forcing a court battle. The fact that he’ll lose isn’t the point. The fact that he “fought” Trump is the point.

What makes this especially egregious is how Cordray himself first came to lead the CFPB. “Those defending Cordray’s action apparently believe powerful agency should be headed by someone not nominated by any President [and] not confirmed by any Congress,” tweeted Jonathan Adler this morning.

Unhinged coverage of Trump is hurting the media By Kyle Smith –

“A year ago this week, I marveled at the pot-boiling-over frenzy of Donald Trump Derangement Syndrome in the media. Well, today, the media’s kitchen is a shambles. Spaghetti sauce is splattered all over the walls, and the Fourth Estate is pouring more Prego marinara into the pot while keeping the heat turned up to the level marked “thermonuclear.”

Not only is everything (still) hyper-politicized, but the lines between news media, lifestyle media and flat-out activism have faded into irrelevance.

The culture warriors’ incessant politicization of everything has reached new levels of the ridiculous.

The unhinged coverage of all Trump scandals, real and imagined, has cost the media in the eyes of the public, among whom only 39 percent said they had a “great deal” or even “some” confidence in news outlets last November.

The media are correct in thinking they have an important duty in the Trump era. But the people are correct in noticing that the media is filtering everything through an obsessive hatred for Trump.

For the love of God, why can’t Democrats leave the Little Sisters of the Poor alone? by Nicole Russell – “In an unusual political move, Pennsylvania and California sued the Little Sisters, demanding the same group who won at the Supreme Court in Zubik v. Burwell provide contraceptives in their state.”

“Sadly Josh Shapiro and Xavier Becerra [attorneys general in Pennsylvania and California, respectively] think attacking nuns is a way to score political points. These men may think their campaign donors want them to sue nuns, but our guess is most taxpayers disagree. No one needs nuns in order to get contraceptives, and no one needs these guys reigniting the last administration’s divisive and unnecessary culture war.”

On the call, I asked how the states were even able to sue the organization, given the Supreme Court’s ruling on the matter. Rienzi said it was merely “political grandstanding.” In a follow-up email, Rienzi explained “This is a pretty unusual situation. It’s similar to a collateral attack — filing a second lawsuit to challenge what has already been decided elsewhere. The protection is, and should be, to let the people from the old lawsuit intervene and defend their rights in the new one.”

Let’s hope for the Little Sisters’ sake, these frivolous lawsuits end swiftly and decisively so they can continue their good work.

Ex-Cop Making Roy Moore Harassment Claim Is Leftist, Anti-Moore Opponent By Selwyn Duke – “Faye Gary created quite a stir last week with her comments, though she confessed to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that the claims about Judge Moore were “just rumors” and that “we never got a complaint on it.”

What didn’t come out during her media interview — in which she appeared sober and non-partisan — is that she has an ideological axe to grind with the judge.

After confirming with the City of Gadsden Personnel Office that Gary actually had served as a police officer, I contacted her via a Facebook message. The passion and anger quickly emerged, with Gary making clear she objected to Moore’s stances on homosexuality, Islam and the display of the Ten Commandments.

In fact, the venom leapt from the page. Gary insisted that Moore will, as she put it, “pay for his stance on gays, Muslims and most of all for hiding behind the Ten Commandments for his political gain.” She seemed to be implying that he’ll suffer some kind of divine retribution.

Gary also became vulgar.

Note that none of this means Gary’s claims are or aren’t true. But it hints at her motivation for coming forward and certainly makes her something less than an unimpeachable source.

In addition, the story of Moore’s most damning accuser, Beverly Young Nelson, has already unraveled. Meanwhile, rumor is helping obscure reality.

Glen Reynolds at Instapundit

“But I was pondering the weird behavior of people like Harvey Weinstein and Charlie Rose. This isn’t just about using the power of your position to get women. Instead, there was this weird stuff about walking around naked or in a bathrobe and expecting women to be impressed. So my thought: Instead of exercising traditionally male power, they were trying to exercise the traditionally female power of being desirable and desired. Maybe it’s because they were in industries where that power is especially prominent, but pathetically, they were acting like they hoped someone would find them . . . beautiful.

Also, at Instapundit, on the expression of hate in regards to net neutrality: – “Lefties will regret the precedent: Targeting Ajit Pai’s children, house. I contacted Pai, who confirms this happened, and adds: “Many other issues, too, from specific online threats to the kids to harassment of my wife on her work email accounts.”

The problem of sex By Richard Fernandez – “Commenting on the paralyzing spate of assault accusations roiling the West it seems that the sexual revolution begun in the 1960s has reached the Reign of Terror stage.”

If sex is finished it will be bad news for the human race not simply because homo sapiens, like nearly every other species, relies on it to stave off extinction but because sex has defined humanity hopes and posterity for millenia. … sex forms the bridge between a mortal individual and the immortal species. For generations there has been nothing so masculine as to die for the woman you love.

But like all powerful urges sex was dangerous. Only by taming it was civilization possible. Communities required the invention the family to form and at the family’s core lay the injunction against molesting women within it.

Suddenly a strange thing happened. The increased opportunities for sexual interaction promised by 60s prophets, rather than kicking off an endless party raised the curtain on a darker prospect. The 60s chant “if it feels good, do it” gave way to a new, more fearful phrase: rape culture.

Yale claims to have cured conservatives by turning them into liberals by Jazz Shaw – “With so many articles out there last week preparing people for the horror of having to talk to their “crazy Republican uncle” over Thanksgiving dinner, this announcement seems to have come a bit late.”

“And you wonder why people are increasingly turned off by institutes of higher education. This sort of pseudoscience doesn’t require a post-graduate degree to pick apart. Yale’s starting premise is that people who feel “unsafe” (or afraid) are more likely to adopt conservative viewpoints.

The conflation of immigration with illegal immigration is a hallmark of Democratic political speeches, not cognitive neuroscience. The study’s authors stretch the analogy from there

Putting unrelated information into the minds of survey participants prior to asking questions has a different name in political circles. It’s known as a push poll. Rather than getting an accurate impression of a person’s opinions, you’re poisoning the well in advance to sway their feelings. … This report appears to be little more than a phony attempt to festoon some bits of science onto a liberal, open borders manifesto.

Or, if they insist on traipsing down this particular path, I would suggest assembling a similar group of test subjects and showing them all a picture of Kate Steinle, followed by some grisly scenes of the handiwork of MS-13. Then ask them all about their feelings on immigration issues being sure to include the word “illegal.” Get back to us after you see how that works out. Who knows? You might even cure some liberals for a little while.

The Freddie Gray scorecard by Paul Mirengoff – “In sum, not a single officer was found by an adjudicatory body to have engaged in conduct that warranted punishment. The adjudicators who considered the matter were: a jury, an African-American judge, the police department’s administrative panel, and the police commissioner.”

The only procedure still pending in connection with the Gray case is a federal lawsuit brought by some of the officers against Marilyn Mosby, the city prosecutor, for malicious prosecution and defamation.

This is not a full accounting of the Gray matter, however. The family of Freddie Gray received $6.4 million from the city via a settlement agreed to by Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, Baltimore’s hack Democratic mayor at the time.

The settlement figure was ridiculously high. Yet, Baltimore would have gotten off cheaply if that had been the sole price. Indeed, the city would have gotten off fairly cheaply if the only other price had been the riots that Mayor Rawlings in a sense invited after Gray’s death.

Instead, Baltimore suffered a huge upswing in violent crime, thanks to the unwillingness of its Democratic politicians to stand behind the police. Baltimore’s current mayor admits that violent crime is “out of control.”

And a quarterback is teaching the NFL to kneel to refute these findings and this history.

The Ultimate In Pettiness by John Hinderaker – “Perhaps you have heard about “Piegate.” It started when Press Secretary Sarah Sanders tweeted a photo of a pie that she baked for Thanksgiving

Ryan kept the “controversy” going with numerous retweets of claims that Sanders didn’t really bake the pie. It was a stock image, or something. April Ryan’s Twitter feed is actually rather shocking. I think it is fair to describe it as a hate site. She hates President Trump, the Trump administration, and Republicans and conservatives generally.

You really have to scan Ryan’s Twitter feed to get the point. She is an ideologically committed warrior against the Trump administration and the Republican party.

That wouldn’t be shocking–some of us have relatives you could describe that way–but for the fact that CNN pays her to be a “political analyst,” and she is a member of the White House press corps. In America’s modern history, we have not seen anything like this. Certainly no one from CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, etc., declared war on the Obama administration. And when Barack Obama was president, no one started Twitter wars over the provenance of his press secretary’s Thanksgiving pies.

We are sailing in uncharted waters. The best we can say is, at least everyone knows now who our enemies are.

Elon Musk Made the Kessel Run in Less Than Twelve Parsecs by Coyote Blog – “I checked the first 10 sources in a Google search and not a single media outlet that routinely chastises climate skeptics for being anti-science seems to have questioned the oddball and nearly meaningless 100MW figure.” It was a choice between this and Mike Hughes cancels his rocket proof of Flat Earth by Luboš Motl – “Hughes would be an excellent example for the Darwin Award.” The confusion between units of power and energy wins because it is a favorite illustration of the ‘alternative energy’ fanatics’ ignorance and it is held by more people than the flat earth idea and it has a greater social adverse impact.

“A megawatt is a measure of energy production or transmission rate. As such, it is a perfectly appropriate way to size the capacity of a power plant that is assumed to have a continuous supply of fuel. However, it is an extremely odd way to size a battery. A battery has a fixed energy storage capacity, which is generally measured in watt-hours (or some conversion thereof). For example a 10 Wh battery would provide 10 watts for an hour before running out, or 5 watts for 2 hours, etc. It is not clear if this is just a typo, that they really mean 100MWh, or if 100 megawatts is the peak discharge rate and they are being silent on exactly how long this lasts (ie how long can those 30,000 homes be powered?)

I was going to compare the number on energy storage here and show that you could actually generate electricity from gas, not just store it, for well less than this. But it is sort of hard to make the calculation when they don’t get the units right.

Fear and Fantasy are tremendous motivators. Berliners, and most Germans, had a lot to fear in 1945 and that resulted in many tragedies. The Germans had good reason to fear the Russians. The Left’s fears, though, are not founded in reality and that makes them worse as the imagination can leap many boundaries.

Leave a Comment

The light of day, a time for war, the cognitive game, and growing up girl

A Time for War By David Prentice – “it was started by the hard left, and it’s a war to achieve power for them, for them to change the entire workings of our country.”

“It’s here. Now. Thankfully this is not yet the blood in the streets kind of war, but war it is. It’s a war for the soul of this country, it’s a war that will affect everyone; none will escape having to deal with it directly, or indirectly.

Examples of the current battles in the war:

  • Racialism, black lives matter, NFL kneeling, and the war on being white.
  • The new feminism, and the war on being male.
  • The new feminism, and the war on the unborn.
  • Turning sex into a cesspool. Weinstein, Hollywood, preying on children, rampant unfaithfulness, broken families, transgenderism.
  • Turning race baiting and sex allegation into weapons of mass destruction.
  • Environmental catastrophism.
  • Health care control.
  • Spending our grandchildren’s money.
  • Allowing immigration to strangle what’s left of our institutions.
  • Pretending radical Islam is okay, but Judeo-Christian culture is not.
  • Teaching that socialism is just another form of government and not a failure.
  • Teaching that our country is inherently evil, and must be changed throughout.


the important thing to understand is every one of these major battles is going on simultaneously. Our nation’s military command used to pride itself on being capable of handling two major war fronts. As you can see, we aren’t fighting two fronts at home, it’s dozens and all at the same time. And they’re hot battles, many of them being fought with the other side spending our own money to prop themselves up.

Unfortunately, we on the right haven’t had a good organization to counter the shock and awe tactics of the left. The party that is supposed to lead us doesn’t even know we’re in a war.

The left has taught the next generation white guilt. Alongside Uncle Tom guilt. Both lies. Racialism is mental slavery.

The left has convinced the next generation that socialism is good. That free enterprise is evil. That we are destroying our environment. All destructive lies.

They are lying about their own sexual moral superiority.

each battle is filled with lies from the left. It’s their MO. Tokyo Rose is their model. Hillary is their face.

Before there is bloodshed in the streets, we must beat them at their own game.

The left must be defeated before they can regroup. Bring. It. On.

Playing the Cognitive Game – The Climate Skeptic’s Guide to Cognitive Biases by John Ridgway – “I am getting pretty fed up with psychologists proclaiming the irrationality of climate change scepticism.”

“I hope to demonstrate how easy it is to conjecture upon a group’s psychological state and how easy it is to turn the tables and place the advocates of the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) hypothesis under scrutiny. The result may be so much psychological flimflam but I consider it no less worthy than the dubious speculation emanating from the supposed experts and the IPCC.

This is about bias and not about logical fallacies. A bias is often expressed as the use of logical fallacies and might be considered an interpretation of the motivation for the them. As such, the observer needs to be much more aware that a conclusion about a bias is more subjective than one about a fallacy. A fallacy is an observation of behavior that fits a category. A bias needs a case to be made to connect the behavior to a reason for its deviance from reality.

It’s great that Blue Planet II is pushing hard on plastic pollution in the oceans – but please use facts, not conjecture by Malcolm David Hudson – “Must we always talk for victory, and never once for truth, for comfort, and joy – Ralph Waldo Emerson.” This might be a story of another example of how Attenborough lost his creds. It is about propaganda by omission, by the use of partial and selected facts to make an argument. Hudson is hoping a propagandist will change his tune. Good luck with that.

“In the final set piece, narrator David Attenborough’s tone changed – as it does when he has bad news. He showed us grim images of a turtle tangled in plastic debris, a beautiful tropical fish sheltering among our waste, and most heartbreaking of all, a mother pilot whale unable to let go of her long-dead infant as the rest of her family grieved.

In the whole sequence, there was no direct link made between the death of the baby whale and the plastic debris we saw in parallel footage; no evidence that its mother’s milk actually contained contamination from plastics. Nothing.

My inner environmentalist convulsed with frustration at wildlife being killed by unnecessary human waste, but my inner scientist screamed foul at the lack of direct evidence shown on the programme.

Powerful environmental documentaries like Blue planet II can change views on the big environmental issues; just please use truth and scientific evidence.

100 years. 100 million lives. Think twice. By Mark Perry – “the title of a recent op-ed in The Harvard Crimson written by Harvard student Laura M. Nicolae, whose father at age 26 left his parents, friends, and neighbors behind when he escaped the oppressive Romanian Communist regime

Roughly 100 million people died at the hands of the ideology my parents escaped. They cannot tell their story. We owe it to them to recognize that this ideology is not a fad, and their deaths are not a joke.

Last month marked 100 years since the Bolshevik Revolution, though college culture would give you precisely the opposite impression. Depictions of communism on campus paint the ideology as revolutionary or idealistic, overlooking its authoritarian violence. Instead of deepening our understanding of the world, the college experience teaches us to reduce one of the most destructive ideologies in human history to a one-dimensional, sanitized narrative.

After spending four years on a campus saturated with Marxist memes and jokes about communist revolutions, my classmates will graduate with the impression that communism represents a light-hearted critique of the status quo, rather than an empirically violent philosophy that destroyed millions of lives.

The stories of survivors paint a more vivid picture of communism than the textbooks my classmates have read.

For an example, consider that UNR graduate who has destroyed the NFL by pushing his ignorance.

FCC net-neutrality astroturfing new analysis – and it is bad by Justin – “The FCC comment database has been analysed by someone who knows what they are doing and the comment stuffing is much more extensive than previously thought.” The conclusion is that the humans overwhelmingly supported government I’net control while automated stuffing opposed it. That should raise skepticism. The activists were for government regulation and, as seen in previous cites, quite well populated by the tech community. The implication of the conclusion is that ‘big corporations’ committed conspiracy and fraud. Such a major implication needs better evidence than innuendo. Hence, skepticism is warranted.

Thoughts From The Ammo Line – “Ammo Grrrll draws on painful personal experience to declare NOW IS THE TIME FOR ALL GOOD MEN…is not just a typing exercise!” Growing up girl presents special hazards.

“On an hourly basis, we learn of another woman making accusations of sexual harassment, assault, even outright rape. Other women claim to be “uncomfortable” or offended by a hand on a shoulder, a pat on the back, any human touch. I come from a warm “touchy” family, so I have tended to believe that a lot of those complaints are overwrought. But then I sat down and thought about my own experiences and got depressed. I wondered if ANY female person escapes unscathed? I am pretty tough, worldly, and unusually impervious to locker room talk, and still it’s not a pretty picture. I warn dear readers that what follows is a downer and I’m sorry. I will be funny again next week. And yet I feel lucky. I have seen only my husband in the shower and we own no indoor potted plants.

Can you good and decent men – whom I count in the vast majority – not somehow police the monsters? Every last lefty Hollywood “man” knew about Harvey. Every. Last. One. The moral cowards, busy Tweeting about the Republican “War on Women” stood by and were complicit for decades. Give me my “redneck” father and his shotgun any day. As Richard Pryor intoned, decrying racism by parodying a Psalm: “How long, O Lord, must this bullshit go on?”

The story she tells describes “how good and decent men” did police abuse of their daughters. The problem is that those men are under assault themselves. Society does not accept shotgun justice in any form anymore. Society is passing laws to protect and promote perverts under ‘equality’ and ‘social justice’ banners. Think about the unisex public bathroom laws controvery for an example.

One also needs to keep in mind that a traditional role of men is (or was) to protect wives and daughters – the virtue of their family. Abuse of boys has run on different standards but that is changing, too, as they are emasculated and equalized as victims. This is about the war Prentice describes above.

Leave a Comment

Indoctrination and removing the common ground

WaPo columnist: Sanders humiliates the media daily By Rebecca Savransky – Kudos to Sanders. Savaransky provides another example of a sore loser. Exposure is ‘fake news’ and the reporters’ rights to free speech are being squashed and, of course, nothing Sanders says is Truth.

“Her daily humiliation of the press, making them seem like churlish children, is a booster shot of ‘fake news’ animus that also apparently inoculates against viral truths.”

“To the media, she is the wall Trump promised to erect and, increasingly, it seems, we are the swamp he seeks to drain. Out with the media, out with free speech, out with facts!” Parker wrote.

Where Is the Common Ground Anymore? By Janice Shaw Crouse – “Is it even possible to compromise with the left?

there can be no compromise until there is agreement on “principled compromise,” where there is mutual respect for both the opposition and the process of debating differences honestly and honorably. There will be no common ground until people are willing to face the true basis of their differences – factually instead of emotionally – to face the degree to which their goals boil down the gratification of being in control, having power, or having their own way. Only then will we be able to “form a more perfect union” for the ultimate goal of preserving individuals’ freedom to hold their own beliefs – even age-old opinions as well as tried and true traditions that do not conform to the latest fad. Can we recover this hallowed principle that served us well as common ground?

Undoing the Dis-Education of Millennials By Adam J. MacLeod – “most of them cannot think, don’t know very much, and are enslaved to their appetites and feelings.”

“Before I can teach you how to reason, I must first teach you how to rid yourself of unreason. For many of you have not yet been educated. You have been dis-educated. To put it bluntly, you have been indoctrinated. Before you learn how to think you must first learn how to stop unthinking.

FCC explains why public support for net neutrality won’t stop repeal by Jon Brodkin – “Americans who support net neutrality find that their voices don’t count for much.” This is a tech groupie trying to make sense of the Left’s inability to win an argument and, in the process, demonstrating MacLeod’s education problem. A techie should realize that the ad populum argument just doesn’t mean much in establishing the quality of an argument. Bodkin identifies no other issue than the “millions of comments” and makes no attempt to address the FCC’s points except for a few derogatory comments.

“A senior FCC official spoke with reporters about Pai’s anti-net neutrality plan in a phone briefing yesterday and explained why the FCC is not swayed by public opinion on net neutrality.

The vast majority of comments consisted of form letters from both pro- and anti-net neutrality groups and generally did not introduce new facts into the record or make serious legal arguments, the official from Pai’s office said. In general, the comments stated opinions or made assertions and did not have much bearing on Pai’s decision, the official said. The official spoke with reporters on the condition that he not be named and that his comments can be paraphrased but not quoted directly.

The official noted that many of the comments are fraudulent. He said that there were 7.5 million identical comments that came from 45,000 unique names and addresses, apparently due to a scammer who repeatedly submitted the same comment under a series of different names.

FCC Releases Net Neutrality Killing Order, Hopes You’re Too Busy Cooking Turkey To Read It by Karl Bode provides another example where ad hominem and other logical fallacies are used rather than a reasoned examination of the issues and implications. Consider the inconsistency in this assertion:

“In short, the FCC’s plan to dismantle net neutrality rules is every bit as bad as most people expected it to be, and potentially a little bit worse. It opens the door to all manner of anti-competitive behavior by AT&T, Verizon, Charter and Comcast, while mindlessly dismissing the very real harms a lack of broadband competition is having on numerous industries.

Just how many competitors do you need to have? Maybe “anti-competitive behavior” is due to other factors? Bode can’t let such thoughts interfere with his fantasy and his rant shows this.

Leave a Comment

There are a lot of confused people out there.

Courts use Trump’s pontificating to rule against his policies By Stephen Dinan – it’s trying to rationalize rogue judges. It is one thing to use ‘pontificating’ to determine intent and motivation but another to use it instead of the actual order or action. The story is about the courts going from what someone actually does to what they say and think. That is a destruction of boundaries of free speech.

Trump speaks about the Alabama race by Paul Mirengoff – “Trump is right that when allegations of sexual misconduct arise, you should listen to both the accuser and the accused.” It is interesting that the President is one of the very few voices out there expressing temperance, moderation, and thoughtful consideration of reality.

Nothing in Trump’s statement today contradicts the original White House position, and Isenstadt doesn’t even attempt to explain how it might.

Trump’s enemies in the media are salivating at the opportunity to use Roy Moore, whom Trump did not support in the primary, to get at the president. Because Trump has thwarted them thus far, his media enemies have to misstate the facts.

The liberal ruse of feminism By Tammy Bruce – “The only thing that has changed for liberals is being caught as enablers and hypocrites.”

“None of these people now complaining about Mr. Clinton have had any sort of epiphany. They just realize their defense of sexual assault in the 1990s makes it impossible for them to continue the fraud of casting conservatives as the enemies of women.

Coming out over two decades after the damage is done is called being too late. It’s also a pathetic attempt to reclaim their supposed moral authority on women’s issues that the liberal establishment has claimed for generations.

What they’re doing now is worse than a simple fib.

The Illogical Attacks on Judge Moore by Jeffrey Folks – “If you thought politics couldn’t get any uglier, you were wrong.”

They play the race card. If that doesn’t stick, they toss out the gender card, as they have with Judge Moore. If the opponent survives these attacks, then it’s the class card, as it was with Mitt Romney. If none of this works, it’s the LGBT card. Then there’s the “E” card – just “too extreme,” as with Barry Goldwater and Judge Bork. When all of these fail, as they did against candidate Donald Trump – and all of them were played – the left freaks out and starts throwing things.

All of these attacks are versions of the same logical fallacy: the ad hominem argument.

Liberals are masters at using ad hominem and other cheap forms of attack. In their book, every conservative is automatically a racist, a sexist, a homophobe, or a madman ready to unleash a nuclear war until proven otherwise. Conservatives are by nature hesitant to use this kind of tactics, partly, I suppose, because they are too proud to stoop that low.

If we enter this new phase of politics, Judge Moore and Al Franken won’t be the last of it. Every candidate for public office will put his reputation at risk. Elections will be fought on the basis of who can concoct the most sensational story. We will have moved so far beyond logic that ideas will become irrelevant and character a mere figment of the imagination.

Vietnam veterans challenge Ken Burns on the accuracy of his epic documentary By Jennifer Harper – “a Texas-based interest group which includes military veterans, historians and authors in its membership — is challenging both the content and tone of the 10-episode, 18-hour epic.”

NY Times opinion: Capitalism is a threat to the world and must be replaced by John Sexton – “The NY Times published an opinion piece yesterday titled “The Climate Crisis? It’s Capitalism, Stupid” which argues that capitalism is the real threat to the environment, a threat which must be eradicated if we are to survive.”

“There’s nothing subtle about this piece. The author, who is a professor at Arizona State University, says capitalism is the problem and environmentalism is the movement that can supersede it

The author is describing what he sees here and I think he’s right in this sense: Climate change rhetoric is anti-capitalist, which is one reason so many people reject it. It’s not the science people don’t like, it’s the politics behind it. In Europe, critics of this connection sometimes refer to the various Green Partys as watermelons, i.e. green on the outside and red on the inside.

The author makes clear that there is no way a capitalist society can regulate (through government) or create (through private industry) a better world. The underlying system is hopeless and must be replaced with democratic socialism.

There’s a reason true socialist states become totalitarian states. With every other means of exchange and advancement gone or heavily regulated, the one place where someone can still excel is the government itself. The lure of this power will always appeal to tyrants and psychopaths and with the state in absolute control from the outset, there is no alternative power center to challenge this authority. You don’t get Utopia, you get the USSR or Mao’s China or worse yet, North Korea.

The burden of justification should not fall on the shoulders of those putting forward an alternative. For anyone who has really thought about the climate crisis, it is capitalism, and not its transcendence, that is in need of justification.

Here’s the justification: Democratic socialism is an authoritarian nightmare waiting to happen. We should avoid it at all costs.

The Corruption of the Climatisatas by Steven Hayward – “Here’s a paradox that few people in the fawning green media seem to perceive: the more serious you think the problem of global warming may be in the future, the more farcical and unserious are the policy prescriptions of the “climate change community.

In fact I’ll go further: if perchance we do experience catastrophic, man-made global warming many decades from now, historians will look back and blame the environmental community for being the chief impediment to taking serious incremental action to reduce carbon emissions in a significant way—not the so-called “climate deniers.” Today’s wind and solar racket, and all of the fancy pieces of paper UN bureaucrats sign in Paris making promises that no nation is going to keep, will be looked at with the same disdain that we today look back at the League of Nations treaty and the disarmament efforts of the 1920s and 1930s.

Nebraska’s approval of new route for Keystone XL could be oil pipeline’s death blow By Ben Wolfgang – “Owner less likely to complete project if more environmental reviews needed.” This looks to be a case study in how politicians and regulation kill progress and action by tactic, evasion, diversion, and lack of leadership.

“The current route has been studied by the federal government for eight years, produced over 800,000 pages of Obama administration [review] documents I think these guys lost sight of the big picture and got caught up in minutiae and did not have the political courage to do what’s right and instead tried to split the baby,” Mr. McCown said. “In doing so, they’ve guaranteed another two- to three-year legal battle and probably have raised the cost of the project another $1 billion or $2 billion for no reason whatsoever.”

SJW to get some justice (and she’s not going to like it) By Thomas Lifson – “Kudos to the Riverside County (California) District Attorney’s Office for bringing justice to a crime committed in the name of politics.” This is about a UC Riverside student who stole a MAGA hat and made a big deal of it.

“By stealing the hat directly off the person of her victim, Macias opened the door to serious charges. There was talk of felony charges earlier, but instead it has been classified as misdemeanor grand theft, which so far as I know usually is for the theft of particularly expensive items, not trucker hats.

In my view, crime committed in the name of political causes is a graver offense than the underlying offense would be if done out of greed. Political violence, unpunished or mildly punished, begets more political violence. And once political violence becomes the norm, the consequences can be fatal to the stability of the polity and society.

Sex, lies & excuses: Partisan madness on predators By John Podhoretz – “Some of these efforts are necessary and involve making distinctions — distinctions between, say, felonious assault, which should lead to prison, and really gross workplace behavior, which should lead to serious disciplinary action but should probably fall short of complete ruination.” He makes a good point but spoils his argument when he cites allegations against Moore as “credible” and then goes on to assume guilt. There are many reasons to question that credibility but the big issue is a moral preener tossing aside the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ value for a criminal allegation.

“Stealin’ Be Ok, No Big Deal” – LeVar Ball Showcases Mentality Behind His Son LiAngelo Ball Shoplifting in China… by sundance – “After watching this bizarro interview with his father I can completely understand why LiAngelo Ball thought it would be perfectly okay to shoplift in China and live a life beyond the boundaries of ordinary moral behavior.” If you wonder about a prison population that is disproportionate by race and why racism is a big problem, this is a clue.

The kids aren’t all right. Violent students driving teachers out of schools by Jazz Shaw – “This year the state of Pennsylvania has been hit particularly hard, with nearly four dozen teachers quitting in the Harrisburg school district alone, many complaining that violence by students in the classrooms is out of control.”

The situation sounds dire. Teachers described incidents where both they and some of their students were being, “hit, kicked, slapped, scratched, cussed at.” Others described tables and desks being flipped over, rampant property damage and one teacher even had her finger intentionally broken by one of her students. And it was a second-grade child.

For their part, the school district responded by expressing their disappointment that the teachers had gone public.

In Maryland, dozens of teachers from Baltimore County showed up this week to protest the same problem. Five teachers have been taken out of the schools there with injuries caused by students and one of them is currently still on medical leave after suffering a concussion.

The teachers can’t be expected to act as makeshift law enforcement agents against students who outnumber them by a factor of twenty to one or more and are willing to engage in violent behavior. But such suggestions are frequently met with complaints about “militarization” of the schools, racial profiling and the rest of the usual protests we hear.

Sadly, the real solution should be better parenting. Children coming from homes with proper discipline and sound moral values are far less likely to engage in such behavior, as well as being far more likely to succeed. Sadly, that ship seems to have sailed in too many of our inner cities.

More MAGAnomic Winning – NY Fed Raises GDP Forecast, DOW Closes New Record… by sundance

Almost too much winning… almost, but I think we can take it. The New York federal reserve has raised their anticipated fourth quarter GDP growth forecast to 3.8%. That’s only a week after previously raising it to 3.2%.

The Stock Market closes again at yet another all time high today:

So much of what is important seems to be invisible in the public dialog.

Leave a Comment

The judge never learns – but he isn’t alone in ignorance, either

A familiar judge wastes more of our time over sanctuary city orders by Jazz Shaw – “It’s a stretch of the imagination to declare it a coincidence that this is the same judge they found to block a different sanctuary city order back in April.”

“The decision itself remains just as dubious as the previous ruling. Orrick is claiming that the President doesn’t have the authority to repurpose funds which Congress has already authorized. That’s vague at best and seems to ignore the fact that we’re talking about money given to the Executive Branch for the purpose of issuing grants. That means there’s an application process (which we’ve covered here before) and not everyone who applies for one will receive the funding. Further, it’s the Justice Department who determines the criteria for receiving such grants. Congress simply made the funding available to set up and maintain the program.

Evacuating a nuclear disaster areas is often a waste of time and money, says study by Philip Thomas – “We calculated that the Fukushima evacuation extended the population’s average life expectancy by less than three months.”

“To work out how much a specific nuclear accident will affect life expectancy, we can use something called the CLEARE (Change of life expectancy from averting a radiation exposure) Programme. This tells us how much a specific dose of radiation will shorten your remaining lifespan by on average.

The three month average loss suggests the number of people who will actually die from radiation-induced cancer is very small. Compare it to the average of 20 years lost when you look at all radiation cancer sufferers. In another comparison, the average inhabitant of London loses 4.5 months of life expectancy because of the city’s air pollution. Yet no one has suggested evacuating that city.

To support our research, colleagues at the University of Manchester analysed hundreds of possible large nuclear reactor accidents across the world. They found relocation was not a sensible policy in any of the expected case scenarios they examined.

the World Heath Organisation has documented the psychological damage done to the Chernobyl evacuees,

Nuclear refugees can’t be expected to understand exactly how radiation works, but they know when huge amounts of money are being spent. These payments can come to be seen as compensation, suggesting the radiation must have left them in an awful state of health. Their governments have never lavished such amounts of money on them before, so they believe their situation must be dire.

But the reality is that, in most cases, the risk from radiation exposure if they stay in their homes is minimal. It is important that the precedents of Chernobyl and Fukushima do not establish mass relocation as the prime policy choice in the future, because this will benefit nobody.

There were headlines yesterday that Antartic temperature records showed that the pause in global temperatures really didn’t exist and the path to human caused climate catastrophe continues apace. Then there’s comments about the New Antarctic Temperature Reconstruction by Steve McIntyre –

“Long-time CA readers will be aware of my long-standing interest in Antarctic ice core proxies, in particular, the highly resolved Law Dome d18O series. One of my first appearances in Climategate emails was a request for Law Dome data to Tas van Ommen in Australia, who immediately notified Phil Jones in Sauron’s Tower of this disturbance in the equilibrium of Middleearth. Jones promptly consulted the fiercest of his orcs, who urged that the data be withheld as follows: ” HI Phil, Personally, I wouldn’t send him [McIntyre] anything. I have no idea what he’s up to, but you can be sure it falls into the “no good” category.” I’ve discussed incidents involving Law Dome data on several occasions in the past. This is what the data looked like as of 2004: elevated values in the early first millennium, declining up to and including the 20th century.

Communism didn’t just hurt communist countries by John Sakellariadis – “On the hundredth anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia this month, Douglas Murray points out in National Review that too many people in the West have already forgotten the crimes of communism

“In my most recent Wall Street Journal column (read it here), I argue that outside the communist world communism hurt no country more than India. If the subcontinental giant houses more poor people (268 million according to the World Bank) than any other country, it’s in part because India’s leaders — like so many others in the post-colonial world — looked upon the Russian Revolution with fondness rather than horror.

Since embracing economic reforms in 1991, India has rapidly recovered from its four-decade-long tryst with socialism. But though democratic India was lucky to escape the worst communist horrors — no gulags, no show trials, no mass starvation deaths by man-made famine — this has also meant that the country has failed to make a clean break with the past. Reforms have progressed only fitfully, and even now it’s not uncommon to read paeans to Indira Gandhi, arguably the most destructive post-colonial leader of any democracy.

 

Leave a Comment

hobgoblin of little minds

The Stupid Party gets smart By Stephen Moore – “in recent weeks the GOP is finally showing some brains and some backbone

In a more rational world, tax reform could have been bipartisan. But once Democrats declared they would be unified obstructionists on tax reform, there was never reason to throw a bone to the “resistance movement.” Playing nice with Chuck Schumer won’t buy any votes, so why bother?

Instead, it’s hard not to be impressed with how Republicans have suddenly gotten very smart on the “pay fors” in their tax bill. Three of these revenue raisers are welcome policy changes, and they help defund the left.

Start with the elimination of the state and local tax deduction. … Next is the decision by Republicans to offset the cost of the tax cut by eliminating the individual mandate tax imposed mostly on moderate-income Americans. … Finally, an idea that hasn’t gotten much attention is the tax on college endowments.

The best indication that this is all working is the rise of what I call the “tax bill cry baby caucus.”

Not only are we getting pro-growth tax policy, President Trump and the GOP are finally draining the swamp. It doesn’t get any better than this.

Progressives Whine about Obamacare Premiums by David Catron – “It would be easier to feel sympathy for these people if they admitted they were wrong about the “Affordable Care Act.” But progressives don’t do that. Instead, they blame President Trump and the GOP.” This goes back to the WaPo story cited earlier about the thousands of Trump’s “lies” that seem to ignore the so many opportunities for ‘I told you so’ moments.

“It’s wrong, of course, to revel in the misfortune of others. I nonetheless laughed aloud when I read what the editors of the New York Times imagine is a heart-rending tale of several Obamacare supporters who, having ignored years of conservative warnings about the inevitability of premium increases under Obamacare, now lament the financial difficulties they face due to the high cost of health coverage.

Now it’s time to pay for their magical thinking. Yet they still don’t want to face this undeniable reality — they got punked. Obamacare is, and always was, a scam. It’s time to wake up and smell the fair trade coffee.

Socialism’s predictable outcomes By Robert Knight – “Despite several horrifying current examples of nations in the grip of socialism, many of America’s millennials are happily skipping down the socialist Yellow Brick Road toward an Oz that could never be.”

“Socialism’s greatest outcomes are very predictable — misery, murder and refugees.

Do the millennials who were polled know these historical facts? Probably not. But if they are curious enough to find out, would fewer profess a preference for socialism?

I’d like to think so. They are the future of this country.

FBI has not verified Trump dossier by Byron York – “FBI and Justice Department officials have told congressional investigators in recent days that they have not been able to verify or corroborate the substantive allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign outlined in the Trump dossier.” … yet …

Democrats cling to dubious Russia dossier in scheme to bring Trump’s downfall By Rowan Scarborough – “hailed by liberals as evidence that the 35-page collection of memos is true. – A closer look shows the claims are debatable.”

“The dossier has become one of the most ballyhooed documents in modern U.S. politics. Republicans charge that what is essentially Democrat-paid rumors and salacious gossip may have been the catalyst for the FBI to justify launching an investigation in July into the Donald Trump campaign and suspected Russia collusion.

Some Democrats continue to bet the dossier will bring President Trump’s downfall.

House Republicans say Democrats may have violated campaign finance laws by funneling money from the national committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign through a law firm to opposition research firm Fusion GPS. From there, the money flowed overseas to former British spy Christopher Steele, the dossier writer who handed out the money to Kremlin sources to dish dirt on Mr. Trump and his people.

Mr. Steele briefed Washington reporters in September 2016 at Fusion GPS’s request. He warned them to first confirm his assertions before writing articles, according to his filing in a libel lawsuit against him in London.

The Perfumed Princes of the Pentagon By Clyde Ward – “If you’re not familiar with the term “Perfumed Prince,” take a look at Air Force LTG Jay Silveria, Commander of the Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs.”

“Silveria achieved the national spotlight by chewing out the entire class over racial slurs posted on five cadets’ quarters. Months later, it turned out that one of the targets was actually the perpetrator.

Here are some bullet points from a field manual. … General “Knee-Jerk” violated all of them. When confronted with his error, he replied that this had to be said anyway. Apparently, he was conflating the Charlottesville protests with his own command, not to mention a likely disdain for his commander in chief.

But here we have an intelligence failure. Charlottesville may well have been a false flag operation. So was the “hoax” at Silveria’s academy. Intelligence must be timely and adequate. Silveria was spot-on with time but dismally inadequate despite plenty of open source information, aka “news”.

The general ranted himself into an ambush.

Colonel David Hackworth coined the term “Perfumed Princes” to describe the leaders who sidestepped the Vietnam disaster and infested the senior ranks, playing the academic or business manager while they squeezed out soldiers on the soggy end.

But Silveria’s rant went beyond careerism.

This isn’t a matter of holding ourselves to higher standards. It’s a matter of having no standards at all. Despite having made “war on terrorism” for sixteen years, the Perfumed Princes have yet to provide guidance – neither on trying terrorists nor on how novel rules of engagement translate into traditional military jurisprudence. It’s all just fine, just the way it is, whatever it is, even with terms more generous to the enemy than to our own troops, who are just canonical cannon fodder.

Billions of dollars at stake in epic battle shaping up between University of California and two Texas Universities By Thomas Lifson – TU and A&M looking to compete for University of California’s contract with DoE’s administrative contract for the Los Alamos National Laboratory? A&M vs TU would be an epic fight and in this situation they are both up against an established big whale. This is going to be quite a struggle.

Cruising the Web by Betsy Newmark once again illustrates a blindness in a ‘both sides are the same’ logical fallacy; conflating assault, harassment, and talk; and falling into other problems that neo-neocon has highlighted. She shows that she is also got a ‘hobgoblin of little minds’ problem when it comes to Trump and Moore. Presumption of guilt just because you hate is never a good starting point. Here’s where that leads:

“And now some Republicans have absorbed the same who-cares attitude when accusations appear about one of their heroes. Donald Trump was elected despite very credible accusations of his groping women and he was caught on tape bragging about it. Yet the same sorts of people who were shocked and disgusted by Clinton’s behavior decided to turn a blind eye to his immorality. And quite a few Alabamians have adopted the same attitude toward Roy Moore. We’ve become an ugly place when political advantage trumps principle. Principled consistency has truly become the hobgoblin of little minds.

Does the Administrative Procedure Act authorize national injunctions? By Sam Bray – “Traditionally, injunctions have protected the plaintiff, but only the plaintiff — injunctions haven’t protected people who aren’t parties to the case.”

“But federal judges now sometimes give “national injunctions.” National injunctions prohibit the federal government from enforcing a law or regulation against anyone, not just against the plaintiff. Examples include the national injunctions against President Barack Obama’s signature immigration initiative and against President Trump’s order restricting travel from certain countries. National injunctions are becoming routine in the federal courts.

A mere statute cannot grant to the courts a power that lies beyond the “judicial Power.” … Article III of the Constitution of the United States confers the “judicial Power.” … Article III gives the judiciary authority to resolve the disputes of the litigants, not the disputes of others. Article III gives the judiciary authority to remedy the wrongs done to those litigants, not the wrongs done to others.

There is a problem when judges take it upon themselves to solve society’s problems en masse.

Leave a Comment

It’s getting very, very ugly

Robert Mueller Is the Cover-Up By James Lewis – “Friendship is a beautiful thing, and it’s really good to know that Robert Mueller, Comey, Brennan, and Clapper have known each other for many years.”

“The single most important fact is that nobody has ever been prosecuted for these crimes. That fact by itself throws serious doubts on the entire justice system of the United States.

Democrat Fundraising Letter Tied Tax Cuts To Neo-Nazis by Alex Pfeiffer – “Democrats certainly don’t appear to have an issue with using fear to fundraise.”

“A Senate Majority PAC mailer with an enclosed letter from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer tied together the Kremlin and neo-Nazis with corporate tax cuts.

“This Must Stop,” the mailer says above the words, “Corporate Tax Cuts. Discrimination. Kremlin. Medicaid Cuts. Bribes. Repealing Health Care. Neo-Nazis.”

Mitch McConnell Camp Planted Roy Moore Story To Help Clear Path For Trump Impeachment Attempt In 2018 from DC Whispers – “Mitch McConnell who, according to longtime political activist, Ned Ryun, was a primary source of the anti-Roy Moore stories that are now attempting to sway the upcoming Alabama special election and help clear the path for a Trump impeachment attempt in 2018.”

All the News You Are Glad You Missed By Irwin M. Stelzer – “A climate circus, a butter shortage, and Holocaust revisionism.”

“In Bonn the 25,000 delegates gathered to consider the next step in implementing the Paris agreement to reduce CO2 emissions didn’t have Donald Trump to kick around anymore—he was busy trying to avoid a nuclear clash with North Korea and anyhow doesn’t agree with Ivanka that the globe is heating up.

So a quartet of politicians became “Next in Line to Lead on Climate Change,” as the New York Times put it.

There has been other news, too.

Why no one is talking about Trump’s game-changing deal By Salena Zito – “Last weekend in Beijing, as part of his 12-day trip to Asia, President Trump announced that the US and China had signed an $83.7 billion deal to create a number of petrochemical projects in West Virginia over the next 20 years.”

“One would have suspected that the prospect of an investment this large — nearly three times the total annual budget for the department of energy — would have been front-page news,” said Paul Sracic, political-science professor at nearby Youngstown State University.

This deal suggests that Trump hasn’t forgotten what really matters to his base, but few are giving him props for it.

Once again, the media is missing a story that matters to the American people outside the liberal echo chamber.

On the difference between the military refusing and “resisting” a nuke order by Jazz Shaw – “I turned on CNN this morning and one of the hottest topics they kept coming back to was a comment from a STRATCOM Air Force General regarding a potential presidential order to launch tactical nuclear weapons. The reason for the media’s obsession will become obvious in a moment

“First, let’s at least acknowledge why the MSM is in such a tizzy over a story which involves nothing more than a public conversation on a completely hypothetical topic. (There hasn’t even been so much as a suggestion that such an order was ever received by General Hyten or given to anyone by Trump.) It ties into two of the media’s favorite themes which they frequently seek to reinforce. The first is the idea that Trump is a “dangerous madman” who has access to nuclear weapons. That was one of the key messages in Tom Styer’s hyperbolic impeachment advertisement…. an “unstable president with access to nuclear weapons.”

The second is the idea that Trump is so incredibly dangerous that the military should be ready to thwart him or, if need be, to remove him. (You can find several examples of people actually talking about the concept here.) The left side of the print and cable television world has been bringing up such ideas on a regular basis as a way of softening up the ground for a Democrat in 2020.

With that out of the way, listening to the full remarks of Hyten rather than just the money clips, you can get a sense of what he’s talking about.

In the end, as I said at the top, this was a hypothetical conversation which probably never should have been taken up on the public stage. And it’s almost entirely being used as a tool to paint the President in a bad light rather than any serious discussion of foreign policy or military procedures.

Evaluating sexual offenses: Part I by neo-neocon – “I’ve been reading a bunch of opinions on the subject from the left and right sides of the web, and everything in-between, and I’ve come to the conclusion that I have a rather idiosyncratic and unusual take on this.”

“Here are just some of the elements I think people ought to take into consideration in terms of seriousness and/or truthfulness (most of these relate more to adult victims than to children):

Was the coercion overt? What was the age of the victim? Was “no” communicated by the victim (for adult victims only; for a child it’s irrelevant)? Was it just a verbal proposition by the accused with no behavioral follow-up? Was the offender a therapist or teacher or priest or parent? When did the victim report it—was there an enormous time lag? Does the victim have a separate grudge against the accused that might have motivated a false accusation? Is there any other evidence to back up the victim’s report? If so, how persuasive is that evidence? Was there any violence involved? Is the accused a politician who is currently running for office—and has the revelation come out right before the vote, with very little time to evaluate its truth or falsehood? Does the accuser have a history that indicates she/he is a habitual liar? Does the accused have such a history? Are there other alleged victims, and (this next part is very important and not often taken into account) did all the other victims tell their stories only after the initial accusations got a lot of publicity, or had their stories been told earlier? If the latter, was the story told to the police or other authorities, or to some friend or relative whose word we have to take for it? If we have one or more very credible accusations and then a new accusation comes out, is the new one in the mold of the old ones or does it up the ante dramatically? Has each accuser’s story remained consistent, or has it morphed?

There’s much more, but I think you get the idea. Since we don’t usually have a smoking gun (Anthony Weiner’s emailed photos, for example), we have to rely on this sort of thing.

I hate to see abusers go undetected and unpunished, free to continue their abuse with others. But I also hate to see people empowered to make false accusations that are insufficiently scrutinized and could ruin the life of a possibly innocent person. I’ve described the best way I know to try to figure out how to minimize both of these occurrences. Despite its flaws, I can’t think of a better way.

Colin Kaepernick Needs the Truth by Trevor Thomas – “Instead of trying to “understand” a lie, Mr. Kaepernick’s Christian friends should tell him the truth.”

“On the same day that GQ — sometimes known as Genuflecting Quarterbacks — named Colin Kaepernick as its “Citizen of the Year,” several mainstream media outlets — including Christian websites — reported that some Christian players in the NFL who support Kaepernick’s protest of “systemic oppression and… police brutality toward black people” are frustrated at the criticism directed at Mr. Kaepernick. They are especially frustrated that the out-of-work quarterback isn’t getting more support from the Christian community within the NFL.

For example, when it comes to “What Would Jesus Do?” in this situation, of course, I can’t say for sure how Jesus would deal with a modern-day millionaire “social justice warrior,” but from what Scripture reveals, I imagine He would begin and end with what He always did: the truth.

Again, Kaepernick kneels for a lie and is living his life according to multiple lies. Instead of trying to “understand” a lie, Mr. Kaepernick’s Christian friends should tell him the truth.

Plato’s Cave and Our Current Reality by Earick Ward – “What we see playing out in America and throughout the world is two starkly different worldviews: Freedom and the State.”

“What is reality? Do you we think we know what is true today?

What if I told you, that what you think you know of our [current] reality is but a lie? A series of images projected upon a wall in a cave.

Plato wrote of such a thing in his “prisoners in a cave” allegory.

Today, we are increasingly faced with a contrived reality.

What is truth? Let me suggest that truth, increasingly, is a byproduct of force. Are any important matters reasoned true today, or are we stuck in a battle of messaging wills? In this, let me suggest, the Left are winning, as we’ve abandoned reason, and are left with, whatever message can be advanced enthusiastically enough, to run roughshod over the other.

What we see playing out in America, and throughout the world, is two starkly different worldviews: Freedom and the State (bondage). Of course, bondage isn’t being sold as such. It’s being sold as “free stuff” and “safety and security” from the ravages of hatred. Who doesn’t want free stuff and safety and security? Of course, reason informs us that there is no such thing as free stuff, and that safety and security for some, demands that freedom for others must be infringed upon and/or suppressed.

What is truth, if we no longer live in an age of reason?

Let us appoint a new leader and return to Egypt (or the cave). In the end, the people (the mob) will accept the comfort of lies (bondage), over the reality of truth (freedom). Our efforts to free our fellow captors are being met with fear and anger. As Plato suggests, they will fight to the death, to maintain their belief that what they’re seeing on the cave wall is true.

People will fight to extreme ends for unfathomable motivations and the more distant that motivation is from reality, the more extreme the fight is likely to be. That is the danger in today’s society.

Leave a Comment

Concerns are creeping in

#MeToo has lumped trivial in with legitimate sexual assault By Andrea Peyser – “It’s gone far enough. What started as a necessary mass-rejection of sexual harassment and assault is sliding into absurdity and irrelevance.”

“A backlash is looming against the very people the spontaneous battle against sexual villainy was meant to help: powerless women and men.

How long before we stop taking victims seriously?

I don’t think confusing childish, even lewd, behavior with clear, intimate violations helps anyone. Rather, it threatens to make accusers, many of them women, appear unserious. Or “hysterical,’’ to use a term commonly wielded against humans bearing XX chromosomes.

How Anita Hill Betrayed Feminism By Paul Mirengoff – “Feminists (except those who knew Thomas personally) believed Hill’s claims.”

“And they argued (just as they do today) that, ordinarily, female accusers should be believed.

But when Bill Clinton became the subject of serious sexual harassment allegations, feminists refused to credit the claims or, when forced to do so, discounted them as irrelevant. They also attacked the accusers. Consequently, the heightened consciousness of the problem of sexual harassment that existed following the Thomas-Hill hearings subsided after Clinton’s presidency.

In this post, I want to focus on one of the feminists who defended President Clinton. That feminist is Anita Hill.

Sexual harassment allegations, then, are a means to an ends — the end being political power.

Why the Roy Moore Accusations Terrify Me as a Wife and Mother By Megan Fox – “Watching Roy Moore go through the current media circus has made me fear for the future of these men whom I love.”

“The idea that someone can lose a career, his reputation, and the public trust over accusations of events that happened decades ago — that no one was witness to, saw, heard, reported, or acknowledged in any significant way— is terrifying. Let me remind you of something that Americans hold sacred: the presumption of innocence.

It should disquiet you that this tenet of our belief system is being overwhelmed by Gloria Allred and her gaggle of female accusers that she drags out every election cycle.

Finding desperate women to pay off to sling mud at political candidates is the oldest trick in the Democrat playbook.

The message is clear. Your husbands and sons are not safe from Gloria Allred and her attack squads should they rise too high. … No one cares about the men involved or what the accusations will do to their families and lives as long as Gloria Allred and the Democrats come out on top. Is this really the future we want for the men in our lives? If not, it’s time to insist that we revert to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. If Moore accusers want justice, then they should press charges and go to court. I would support them 100 percent in that effort. But accusing people on camera with no legal recourse for the accused ought to be illegal.

Mall Never Banned Moore and Other Lies By Daniel John Sobieski – “The rush to judgment by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, and others was premature, but the facts about Judge Roy Moore may be unraveling the fiction as we speak

The legacy media ran with the unverified story by a mall worker that Moore had been banned and Sen. Graham even repeated it on Fox News. … But, as President Ronald Reagan used to say, facts are stubborn things, and the fact is Roy Moore was not banned from the Gadsden Mall for predatory activities

Then there’s the issue of the yearbook which Nelson and Allred claim Moore signed, which Allred has thus far refused to have examined by independent experts who can verify the age of the ink and whether in fact the handwriting is Moore’s, that is, until she can milk it for more camera time as the election clock runs down

There’s a principle in law which says that if a witness is caught lying about the littlest thing then all of that witness’ testimony can be discarded. There is another principle that guilt should be determined in a criminal case beyond a reasonable doubt. There is plenty of reasonable doubt here – decades-old accusations unmentioned during Roy Moore’s political career until now, only to be resurrected by celebrity lawyer and serial accuser Gloria Allred.

Here Are Some Revelations From New Book About The Steele Dossier by Chuck Ross – “A new book out by Guardian journalist Luke Harding provides previously unknown details about the Trump dossier and its author, former British spy Christopher Steele.”

Harding offers a sympathetic and largely uncritical look at Steele and the dossier, which was commissioned by opposition research firm Fusion GPS and funded by the Clinton campaign and DNC.

Steele’s 35-page report remains largely uncorroborated, and Trump and members of his campaign have denied the most salacious allegations laid out in the report.

It’s another case of unsupported allegations with the Left attempting to put the onus on proving innocence when there is no credible evidence of guilt. That is a demand for a logical fallacy – see wikipedia on argument from ignorance.

Note that the fallacies in the original Wapo story on Moore did take hold. The number of accusers comes up repeatedly to establish credibility via an M.O. despite the fact that most did not allege wrongdoing. The pretense of authority is also used to explain credibility when it was a constructed artifact of writing and filling in irrelevant data to add heft. This is like a story about buying a HiFi in the seventies where manufacturers were often more concerned about the heft and weight of equipment than its ability to accurately reproduce sound. Most customers couldn’t discriminate by sound quality so ‘feel good’ equipment was a major purchase decision.

Another example of trying to prove a negative is glyphosate. Large U.S. farm study finds no cancer link to Monsanto weedkiller By Kate Kelland – “A large long-term study on the use of the big-selling weedkiller glyphosate by agricultural workers in the United States has found no firm link between exposure to the pesticide and cancer” — an allegation (it causes cancer) with no evidence means a lot of looking for what isn’t there.

But people get stuck on their fantasies. Rational Wiki illustrates this in its post on Argument from ignorance where it asserts: “Common examples of this are such claims as “you can’t prove global warming is caused by humans” as an example. The problem here is a common one in the global warming argument that plays games with word definitions, issue conflation, and innuendo. The fact is that proving that A has an influence on B is not in the realm of “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” If you want to assert that A (humans) cause B (catastrophic climate change), honesty requires that evidence for this be established else it is you who is engaged in argument from ignorance. The Wiki knows this, too:

“If the only evidence for something’s existence is a lack of evidence for it not existing, then the default position is one of mild skepticism and not credulity. This type of negative proof is common in proofs of God’s existence or in pseudosciences where it is used as an attempt to shift the burden of proof onto the skeptic rather than the proponent of the idea. The burden of proof is on the individual proposing existence, not the one questioning existence.

But they are fixated on their idea about “Almost all the claims from the anti-science movement revolve around some form of personal incredulity or argument from ignorance.” and it blinds them on the AGW argument where skepticism about poor evidence and other problems are indeed a response to “an attempt to shift the burden of proof.” So they provide an example of self contradiction that cast doubts on the quality of their post.

The same wiki page also messes up the central idea behind proving a negative. A major effort in science is to take a rather general assertion that is too broad to be proved true and show that it isn’t true by finding an exception. The Wiki falls into the commutative fallacy presuming that A means B is the same as B means A.

Leave a Comment

Turning a blind eye

This Is What Anguish Looks Like: Victims of Black-on-White Violence By Colin Flaherty – “Real-life examples of real-life emotions such as despair, abandonment, anguish, and betrayal are easy to find if you know where to look – e.g., local stories of black-on-white violence.” It’s the reality about where racism is endemic and taking a toll.

People in Chicago are way past surprise at the level of black-on-white violence in their schools. Even so, on video, we can see this mother wondering how this could happen to her son – and to her.

Note the anguish, the feelings of betrayal, the knowledge that no matter what she does, no matter what police say, no matter what school officials promise, her son is a target of racial violence at his high school. And that will not change.

That is what misery looks like. This is where Method acting meets real life. Who needs Lee Strasberg to mine this dramatic gold?

Again, no surprise in Baltimore: Black-on-white crime is shrugged off as payback for 4 million years of racist mistreatment – or just another symptom of white privilege that bestows an unreasonable expectation of public safety on white people.

“Moore” is Yet to Come in 2018 By Julie Kelly – “There are already ominous clues about what 2018 will offer our hide-the-children electorate.” We can hope there is a growing awareness of just how debased the power struggle really is.

“But 2018 won’t be about justice or accountability. It will be about political power, and the Democrats understand that. As we have seen from experience, Democrats will smear any victim, protect any miscreant, justify any misdeeds, blame any outside party, and break any rules to win. Then, years later, when it doesn’t matter, when an untold number of perpetrators and victims lie in their wake, they can sit up and say, “oops, my bad.”

Republicans have never understood this game—or that it is a game—and they have no shot either at playing by the same rules or at defending their own against incoming attacks. In some instances, Republicans—including “conservatives” who oddly wear political losses as a badge of honor—have sided with the enemy in a virtue-signaling effort to brandish their principles. But when Democrats win—in part thanks to you, dear conservatives—don’t bitch to me about abortion, higher taxes, single-payer health care, and transgender teenagers.

So, if you liked this week, don’t fret. There is a lot Moore ahead in 2018.

Washington Post Offers Totally Unexpected and Novel Hot Take: Al Franken’s Sins are Just One Man’s Failings, But Republican Sins Are Borne By Each and Every Member of the Party by Ace – “But see Democrats just have a single “issue,” whereas Republicans have an “enduring problem.”

Dying In The Streets From Hitting The Glass Ceiling On The Plantation! It’s the Ammo Grrrll at Powerline – “When you hear any of these inane phrases, call bullcrap. Enough, already.”

“When I was young, Art Linkletter had a book and a show called Kids Say the Darnedest Things. Leftists say the darnedest things too, apparently in the belief that if you just say them often enough and loudly enough and with enough spittle flying from your mouth, that they will become true. For today’s Friday Fun, let’s examine just three of these moronic phrases.

Purchased Politicians, Mostly Republicans in House and Senate, Write Letters Opposing Trump on NAFTA… by sundance – “It’s generally a legal bribery business where congressional representatives get rich by selling their votes to corporations and foreign governments.”

“There are massive international corporate and financial interests who are inherently at risk from President Trump’s “America-First” economic and trade platform. Believe it or not, President Trump is up against an entire world economic establishment.

I will outline how it works below; and when you understand how it works in the modern era you will understand why the agents within the system are so adamantly opposed to U.S. President Trump.

The Coyote is up with two on life and work. Uber Is About To Become A Much Worse Place To Work – “Here are some cool things about working for Uber … All of this is going to change. Why? Due to lawsuits in most countries that seek to redefine Uber drivers as employees rather than contractors. One such suit just succeeded in England.” Then there’s Progressives Hate When You Make Job Choices That They Would Not Make Themselves – “The article was surprising because I get about 25,000 applications every year from these workampers for about 50 open job positions.”

“A few years ago one branch of the Federal government, the Department of Labor, decided that it was a morally urgent to make sure everyone working in a Federal campground operated by a private company like mine should make at least $10.15 an hour, and imposed this special minimum wage. And we complied. But then another branch of the Federal government, the US Forest Service, decided that it could now run the campgrounds cheaper themselves because they could staff it with volunteers and not pay this minimum wage. Apparently it is not morally urgent for them to pay the minimum wage. While the USFS sometimes pays hosts a stipend, this stipend, as the author notes above, is well below even state minimum wages and certainly well below the campground concessionaire minimum wage set by the DOL. I find it not at all surprising the best example of true exploitation comes from the government. However, how much do you want to bet this author asks that we rely on government to eliminate imagined exploitation in the private world?

The cite is to Nomadland by “award-winning journalist” Jessica Bruder. Maybe award winning but definitely out of touch with reality.

On the ‘false witness’ front is Samuel D. James working his cognitive dissonance about Trump. Why So Many Conservative Christians Wanted a ‘Pagan Brawler’ in the White House – “And how their choice of Trump has affected the church since last year’s election.” … “Trump sees himself as a religious man and sees his own success as the result of living out certain religious principles—just not the ones at the heart of the gospel.” Again we see vague accusation and allegation without specifics nor any attempt to support the judgment. When specifics do come up, they seldom contain any light and, instead, show the need for the accuser to consider his own problems. Airing out these principles not “at the heart of the gospels” allegation will be then next step.

Leave a Comment

Cultural rot is not thoughtful, it’s horrifying

The Thoughtfuls vs. the Roughneck-in-Chief By Austin Ruse – “the letter was quixotic at best. At worst, it was an intellectual temper tantrum.”

a group of Catholic Thoughtfuls penned a letter that March warning that the Catholic project was in “grave danger” because of Trump’s “vulgarity, oafishness, shocking ignorance and . . . demagoguery.” They made a point of emphasizing Trump’s” demagoguery,” in fact, while also charging him with making a racist appeal to voters.

One of the more shameful charges was that Trump appealed to voters along racial and ethnic lines. The Catholic Thoughtfuls offered no evidence for this.

So, how has Trump done so far? How has he done for the concerns of the Catholic Thoughtfuls?

I wonder if the essential repugnance they felt, then, was merely stylistic. They live and work in highly refined circles where Roughnecks are mostly embarrassments. Trump is the Roughneck-in-chief. I wonder if many would prefer a gentlemanly loser to a vulgar winner.

It is not thoughtful to pronounce judgment on another without evidence nor is it thoughtful to express that judgment in ugly and vulgar terms. The Catholic Thoughfuls need to look in the mirror and examine the real source of their angst.

No, Colin Kaepernick Is No Muhammad Ali by Larry Elder – “By contrast, Kaepernick wants to have it both ways.”

GQ magazine named former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick its 2017 “Citizen of the Year.” In doing so, GQ overlooked NFL Houston Texans’ J.J. Watt, who raised some $37 million for hurricane relief. Many of Kaepernick’s supporters liken his protest to that of boxer Muhammad Ali, who refused to be inducted into the military. The comparison is not well-taken.

What about the merits of Kaepernick’s argument? Is there an epidemic of police brutality against blacks? The answer is no.

As to Popovich’s assertion about the “day-to-day feeling that many black people have to deal with,” what of the 1997 Time/CNN poll that found 89% of black teens found little or no racism in their day-to-day lives? And more black teens than white teens agreed that “failure to take advantage of available opportunities” was a bigger problem than racism. And this was 20 years ago, before the election and re-election of a black President.

Kaepernick’s protest was bogus from the start, and it only helped to create greater unnecessary tension between the black community and the police. “Citizen of the Year,” indeed.

How Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch handed Jeff Sessions a huge present By Thomas Lifson – “The Obama administration may have publicly aligned itself with anti-gun activists, but it consistently turned a blind eye to prosecute known criminals who tried to buy guns.”

Start with a high-profile denunciation of the DOJ’s failure over the last 8 years to protect the public. … President Trump then directs, via an executive order, his DOJ to prioritize prosecution of violations of the background check documentation. … Following that, AG Sessions announces his decision to beef up prosecutions

This gets the Trump administration on the side of doing something about gun violence, and discrediting his predecessors. It also directs public attention and energy away from new laws.

I call that a win/win. Except for Democrats and gun grabbers.

Another Lawless Judge: Federal Government Cannot Withhold Federal Grants from Cities Just Because They Defy Federal Law on “Sanctuary Cities” by Ace – “You don’t have a country when half of the country believes it can live in open defiance of the law.”

When at least half, probably two thirds, of the current government is part of #TheResistance against the actual legally-empowered government, it’s time to confess we no longer have a shared civic culture and we are no longer one people under the law or in sentiment and take a mature attitude towards a peaceable division.

Backbearings By Richard Fernandez – “it may be profitable in real-life Washington to go back a few years, as Dana Priest in the New Yorker does, to unravel a problem similar to that which baffled Sherlock: why did the dog not bark in the night?”

There are too many coincidences for it to be just bad luck. Some journalists are belatedly realizing they are living through the aftermath of the Big Bang. A huge strike happened without them even being aware of it and the scale of it is boggling. The Obama administration failed to detect the rise of the Islamic state, was surprised by the Russian invasion of Crimea and Putin’s intervention in Syria, did not see the rapid development of Kim’s nuclear arsenal and, publicly at least, ascribed the assault on the Benghazi consulate to a video — and as the New Yorker points out, were even blindsided by Russian election interference openly happening on Facebook.

Do Trump’s liberal critics seem increasingly unhinged? By James Bovard – “Trump is supposedly the gravest threat to American democracy since the secession of the Confederacy.”

It is understandable that folks would be riled by Trump’s bluster about revoking the broadcast licenses of his critics or calling for the firing of protesting football players. His administration’s rhetoric on trade and the drug war threaten to revive moronic policies that should have been banished forever by perennial failures. But while Trump poses plenty of constitutional perils, many of his opponents are even more authoritarian.

Anti-Trump fervor is making liberals far more illiberal.

Many Democrats sound ready to rush to impeachment regardless of what Trump has actually done. They seem inspired by the Soviet secret police chief who allegedly declared: “Show me the man and I will show you the crime.”

Many Trump opponents are the same type of zealots who, in the late 1700s, proudly labeled themselves “Friends of Government.” In their eyes, Trump’s greatest sin is tarnishing the majesty of the presidency and the federal government.

Hysteria remains the 2017 political badge of honor.

Where Good Is Bad: ‘The Energy of Slaves’ (Oil as ‘servitude’?) by rbradley –

“It is as if capitalism (really industrialism) got lucky because of the mineral (dense) energies. To which I respond: we are lucky, and returning to the energy poverty of renewables is to throw our good fortune away. This is the major theme of a book coauthored by Kathleen Hartnett White (the current nominee for the Council of Environmental Quality), Fueling Freedom: Exposing the Mad War on Energy (2016).

Details in BLS report suggest that earnings differentials by gender can be explained by age, marital status, children, hours worked by Mark Perry – “Language and words can be important. And that’s why I think it’s important and more accurate to refer to a “gender earnings gap” rather than a “gender pay gap.” There are reasons and Perry uses the data to delve into them.

Reflections: on witch trials by neo-neocon – “False accusations are repulsive to me (and a constant possibility), and the willingness of so many people to jump on the bandwagon of belief without significant proof has horrified me.”

Leave a Comment

Where does it lead: gun control

The news tonight was talking about the latest Democrat efforts to get rid of a duly elected president. One of the commentators noted that the implications of the precedents that are being set are not well considered and do not bode well for the health of the country in the future. This is also happening on the Moore assault.

Gun control is another topic where satisfaction from immediate gratification is being pushed over reasoned consideration of implications. Here is a story from an Australian that illustrates just where gun control efforts can – and usually do – lead. Names have been removed but otherwise it is as sent.

The loud pounding on my front door (instead of using doorbell) yesterday as I wrote to you turned out to be to heavily equipped “anti terrorist” type policemen, so apart from having “POLICE” written across their backs they do not look, at least to me, as the police that deal with the general law abiding citizens on administrative matters. These men looked ready for “battle”!

So I was a bit taken aback.

They said “Police here, to check your firearms and storage.” So they came in and to where my storage locker is, with items of furniture resting against it and I unlocked it with the key. The police then required to examine each firearm and check the serial numbers against their list. We chatted as they did so. When that was completed I was required to answer a number of questions, including, when I had used the firearms last, where, and did I intend to continue to use them. How long since I had attended a Shooting Sports Club. There were some questions obviously intended to check my mental faculties including dates that I had carried out various things.

I was questioned, if any of my neighbours knew I owned firearms, if there was a second key, if so where is it kept, do I always retain the key on my person, etc. Does any other person have access to my firearms or knowledge of how to get access. I was then required to sign a document.

They then “advised” me that my type of metal cabinet storage is “no longer desirable” as criminals might be able to use a crowbar to buckle and force the door open. We then discussed the wording of the “Firearms Act” in regard to legal storage, and I was “advised” to get a heavy steel storage.  It was said that while I had done nothing wrong, that in a follow up inspection I should have the “stronger storage” having replaced what I currently have.

Now I have related in some detail because since back in the late 1960s, there has been this localised “interpretation” of the legal acts concerning firearms, prompted by the view of certain ranking police officers or by political or media influence, when challenged, as such interpretations have been in the past, have proved to be “non enforceable”, due to not being required by legislation.

I was not too surprised to receive an inspection as such, because due to the recent tragic events in the US, the gun control and then the media proponents in Australia have been baying like the hounds on the scent, for more stringent controls, no firearms for people who are not farmers etc etc. And due to events I have currently firearms registered in my name due to inheritance, not because I sort to own more firearms than I need.

The Governments current push, is for those firearms to be handed in for destruction, and there is a current amnesty to do that.

The two special ops, police that visited me, gave the reason it was them instead of regular police from the Firearms Registry Division was they were “helping out”????????????????

But to be fair to them they were polite courteous and one very deliberately reached back when leaving to shake hands.

The replacement gun storage if I buy one to take the present number of firearms in my possession will cost a figure more that a thousand dollars.

If this isn’t frightening, consider the deceit in the arguments advocating more control. for example: A ‘good guy’ with a gun could not stop 26 innocents from dying – LA  Times. The fact is that a good guy with a gun did stop the massacre and the residents of the area seem to think it only could have been stopped earlier if there were more people able to respond.

But if a squad of heavily equipped armed men pounding on your door just to make sure you weren’t lying to authorities doesn’t bother you, then why should any reality? Just ask the people in Venezuela, Cuba, and many other countries just how long the “it can’t happen to me” belief can last.

Leave a Comment

Climate fraud, Educator hubris, Politics as usual

Democratic governors outsource climate campaigns to activist groups, emails reveal By Valerie Richardson –

“It turns out that the governors who descended this week on the Bonn climate summit had plenty of help — not just from state aides, but also from a kind of shadow staff supplied by climate change advocacy groups and funded by liberal foundations in support of the ambitious foreign policy effort.

The relationship raises questions about whether the governors have crossed an ethical line by bringing in privately funded advocacy groups to help staff a multistate operation — apparently at no charge — and whether their time and resources constituted a gift that would need to be disclosed to the public.

Special Interest Groups get condemned for interference in government but, apparently, that is only the other guy’s SIG’s. Here’s a case of the Left’s SIG’s and what may be a massive case of corruption intended to overturn the lawful expression of U.S. foreign policy. You’d think that’d be a concern?

Scientists Say Earth Is Doomed Without ‘Urgent’ Action — Just Like They Did 25 Years Ago, an IBD Editorial – “This week, thousands of scientists issued a bleak and terrifying “second notice” to mankind about how we will destroy the planet unless we take “urgent” action”. There is a nice list provided that illustrates just how far off the doomsayers have been in reality. Just who is in denial of reality is quite clear.

“In an article published in the journal Bioscience, 15,364 scientists warned that we are “jeopardizing our future” and that “immediate action” is needed to “safeguard our imperiled biosphere.”

“Soon it will be too late to shift course away from our failing trajectory, and time is running out,” the scientists say.

The article is meant to be an update on a 1992 notice — ominously titled “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity” and signed by 1,700 leading scientists — that predicted environmental catastrophes to come if humans remained on the current course.

But the 1992 statement was wildly off the mark in its dire predictions.

What’s also interesting about the scientists’ 1992 warning is that it barely mentions global warming, which is the cause for all the current end-of-the-world predictions.

But today’s doomsday scientists are making the same fundamental mistake they made 25 years ago.

They are blind, apparently, to the fact that when people are emboldened by free-market capitalism they are amazingly innovative and will ceaselessly devise new technologies and new ways of doing things that are cheaper, less energy-intensive and less polluting. There’s no need for the massive central planning or worldwide austerity these scientists keep demanding.

Climate Change Alarmism Is Founded On Dishonesty by John Hinderaker – “I’ve said many times that I believe global warming alarmism to be the worst fraud in the history of science. What follows is just one of many illustrations of that point.”

Climate Litigation Needs to Become a Mass Movement by Ketan Jha – “Things are not going well for the Earth.” If the facts and measurements don’t sell the point; if propaganda and corruption don’t sell the point; try lawsuits. There has to be some way to force a fantasy on the public.

Democrat desperation to defeat recalls leads to lies, lawsuits By Victor Joecks – “We knew Nevada Democrats were desperate to defeat recall campaigns against three sitting state senators.”

Congressional talks on sex harassment boil with hypocrisy By Cheryl K. Chumley – it’s a part of that Matthew 7:5 problem. But then nearly all the teachings in the Bible and especially those of Jesus Christ are getting short shrift in the swamp these days.

Politics of Denunciation Will Soon Have To Stop Even If Moore Is Doomed By Conrad Black – here’s why Moore is getting the ‘treatment’ and why that treatment is more of significant issue than Moore’s behavior.

I don’t like Judge Moore as a candidate; I think it is outrageous for any candidate for a serious office to flourish about a firearm at an election meeting, and some of his comments, especially about gays, have been completely unacceptable for a candidate for the U.S. Senate. I have no problem with his putting a large and unauthorized monument to the Ten Commandments in the court-house rotunda as chief justice of Alabama, and the removal of him from that office for doing so is reprehensible.

Their application in this case is mitigated by the absence of authoritative corroboration, any seriously alleged pattern of repeated misconduct (as in the Weinstein allegations), and the fact that the alleged incident is violently denied by the former chief justice of the state, occurred 38 years ago, did not involve any direct physical grope or probe, was not reported to law authorities (and was not necessarily illegal if it happened at all and certainly is not actionable now) and was given instead to the trusty first battery of reliable Democratic artillery in the press.

As I wrote above, I don’t like Roy Moore as a candidate, but I don’t like premeditated political character assassinations either, and in a parallel of the fact that impositions on underage girls by grown men should be punished, if there is proof that they occurred, electioneering by severe partisan defamation unleashed at critically timed pre-electoral moments should not be rewarded with success. They have not been with the Steele dossier, which Kimberley Strassel correctly described in the Wall Street Journal on November 10 as the greatest political dirty trick in American history.

At some point, this practice of denunciation being insuperable and due process just an irritant and a useless antiquity, like an appendix — as it has been in the Weinstein and Moore cases — will have to stop, if the United States wishes to retain any credibility as a society of laws.

On unverifiable sexual allegations about political figures by neo-neocon – “It has become extremely common for people running for election (or newly-appointed to a political post) to be accused at the eleventh hour of sexual offenses.” This post provides a good summary of the situation and its implications.

John Podhoretz: If Roy Moore Squeaks By, It Will Be Because Of Democrats. via Instapundit – a bit of history and a bit of reality may sink in. Maybe.

Why Alabama voters must spite the experts again By Steve Flesher – “Up until one week ago, the worst thing one could claim about Judge Roy Moore was that he stood for the Ten Commandments as a judge and ticked off the ACLU.

While arguments exist constitutionally around that particular matter, Moore’s actions in doing so were certainly not indicative of a man with a weak character who would exploit young ladies. In fact, he stood for something and risked losing a political position.

This is why Alabama voters trust Moore, who has proven himself when he promises to stand on important issues: religious liberty, securing our borders (which includes building a wall), the Second Amendment, protecting the unborn, etc.

This is unlike a lot of the so-called holier-than-thou “Republicans” in Washington who had no problem working with Ted Kennedy, who left a woman to die in his car, and other liberals in Congress.

As such, we should understand why we find ourselves unfairly subjected to a brutal Catch-22 scenario concocted by the media and political establishment. Thus, we either accept the idea of a pro-abortion, open-borders liberal candidate being the better choice or resist the narrative based on our own thinking and risk being labeled as sympathizers to child-molesters.

We’ve been called lots of things that were untrue before. This, too, shall pass.

Yes, Virginia, there is vote fraud By Robert Knight – “If ever there were an election that proved the importance of accurate voter rolls, it was Virginia’s on Nov. 7.

Nobody knows how many fraudulent votes are cast in any election, but we do know that literally thousands of ineligible voters are on Virginia’s voter rolls, including illegal aliens and convicted felons.

All this to say Virginia’s voter rolls are not being maintained accurately as required by the National Voter Registration Act (Motor Voter Law).

If they are as dirty as indicated by PILF’s study, then it’s a good bet that some of these contested races were decided by fraudulent votes.

The citizens of Virginia deserve to have their votes count, not to have them canceled out because election officials refuse to obey the law.

Let Down at the Top by Victor Davis Hanson –

“The problem with a dying media is not just new social media, the Internet, or 24-hour cable news. Those are just accelerants. The culprit is mostly politically driven ignorance. Today’s journalists graduate with majors that confer thinly disguised degrees in different sorts of activism.

The unspoken fuel that drives so many protests on campus is the self-awareness that so many students simply cannot do traditional college work and desire weaker courses, personal exemptions, and time off.

Our generation also, inevitably, became divorced from both nature and the muscularity of the physical, desperate ordeal of surviving.

It is hard to destroy the NFL or to discredit a liberal-arts degree from Yale, or to turn NBC or CNN into a bastard of Pravda or to make the Hollywood of John Ford, Frank Capra, and Alfred Hitchcock into that of George Clooney. But we managed it — and more still to come before we are through.

The Shame of America’s Public High Schools by John Hinderaker – “I grew up in South Dakota in the 1950s and 1960s, when such conduct would have been unthinkable. Today, it is not only thinkable, it is considered commendable in liberal school districts like Edina’s.” Read and weep, but so many don’t and seem rather proud of behavior that destroys civilization and humanity. That is distressing.

The ivory tower contemplates the world by neo-neocon – “how on earth could a person or persons “point the way to the world as it should be” without deeply studying and “grappling”with the world as it is?

So, “higher education”–and educators–ought to tell us how the world should be (and by implication, how to get it to that point) without “grappling with the world as it is” first (or simultaneously)? That would be like repairing a refrigerator without knowing how the refrigerator works.

That’s the same hubris that Communist true believers (the idealists among them, that is—and there were and are quite a few of those) have long operated under: that they could “fix” a complex system that they don’t understand. This is a common dream on the left. Hey, it’s a common dream of humans in general, which probably explains the continual and enduring appeal of leftism.

Well, yeah … the planet may not be doomed but there seem to be an awful lot of people trying to doom civilization.

Leave a Comment

Living in a tin can.

Why I Have Given Up on Trumpism By Roger Kimball – “One factor was the increasingly surreal commentary that surrounds the whole enterprise of Trumpism. I have found that many of those discussing it would say the most bizarre things.

There are leaders who promulgate -isms or “doctrines.” The so-called Brezhnev Doctrine, for example, articulated a Soviet policy of tenacity when it came to conquered territory: no territory once brought under the Soviet sphere was to be allowed to leave the Soviet sphere. Pundits discerned in Ronald Reagan’s anti-Soviet policies the lineaments of a “Reagan Doctrine,” but I do not know that Reagan ever articulated it as such.

But when it comes to Donald Trump, pragmatism overwhelms ideology. Which is why I believe that there no such thing as “Trumpism.” Its putative author is constitutionally averse to the spirit that would give substance to the -ism.

Trump’s chief of staff John Kelly was onto something essential about his boss when, in his powerful press conference last month, he observed that Trump’s agenda was “what’s good for America.” That is to say, he has no “agenda” as that term is often used, i.e., no set of hidden or ulterior motives for his policies. He simply wants to pursue initiatives that are good for the country: policies that will “make America great again.”

From One Frenzy to the Next By Victor Davis Hanson – “Frenzy is almost a living, breathing monster. It moves from host to host, fueled by rumor, gossip, and self-righteous furor.

The Greeks knew well of the transitory nature of these mass panics. They claimed such fits were inspired by the Maniae, the three daughters of Night who were the goddesses of insanity, madness, and crazed frenzy. We’ve seen all three of them in action throughout the past year.

Pundits and talking heads without evidence echoed each other with ever more preposterous charges.

We were lectured at the height of the collusion frenzy that Trump would be 1) impeached, 2) removed by the emoluments clause, 3) forced to resign under the 25th Amendment, or 4) simply quit in shame.

The font of this 24/7 hysteria was the Clinton campaign’s purchase of a leaked smear job from an opposition research firm, which in turn had hired a disreputable former British intelligence agent, who had paid for concocted Russian slanders designed to disrupt an election.

As the collective furor grew, the net widened. More stories, but from 10, 20, 30, and 40 years past, surfaced—calibrated to the current celebrity or perceived visibility of the perpetrator.

As in the case of the other hysterias, such collective fits cool when they begin to snare the supposedly exempt

Human nature is prone to a herd mentality and the politics of excess. Groupthink offers a sense of belonging and reinforcement to most people.

In all these hysterias and frenzies, caution and moderation become proof of complicity.

History is full of such frenzies—the stasis on Corcyra, the Spanish Inquisition, the Committee of Public Safety, or the strange career of Joe McCarthy. They all can start over some legitimate grievance and all can quickly turn manic. And as we play each fit out, expect the madness to come full circle as it always does, when the spell wears off and 51 percent of people finally revolt at the very thought of tearing down Washington’s statue, or lumping together a criminal rapist with a loudmouthed sexist of 20 years past, or envisioning a multimillionaire spoiled, has-been quarterback as the next Jackie Robinson—or treating a fake-news smear document as if it were the New Testament.

President Trump has made 1,628 false or misleading claims over 298 days By Glenn Kessler, Meg Kelly and Nicole Lewis – “Trump’s most repeated claim, uttered 60 times, was some variation of the statement that the Affordable Care Act is dying and “essentially dead.” The story does more to show just how obsessed the authors are about Trump than it says about Trump … unless you’re in the anti-Trump denial camp. It would be interesting to see a comparison of Presidents using the same criteria, attitude, and perceptional bias that Kessler et al are using to judge Trump. Media stars, like Rather and Williams, might be in the study as well for a referent.

Praying for a Sessions Write-In Candidacy by Ben Shapiro – “If you say you don’t have enough evidence to make a judgment, you are judging Moore’s accusers to be not credible.” This one is good to examine for it’s flaws and that is important because flaws in the arguments are telling and critical in the Moore scandal. A first flaw is in the title. The author has an axe to grind. Another flaw is that Shapiro does not note critical differences between the accuser’s stories. Another is the attempt to simplify the issue by asserting that only certain, defined, resolutions exist. Hyperbole and exaggeration in accusation, social context then and now, what was done to surface the accusations, the selective outrage, and the sloppy use of language are all factors as well.

Did you hear about that candidate stalking young women? No… the other one by Jazz Shaw provides an example for comparison and contrast that puts the Moore scandal hyperbole and outrage in context.

Harvey Weinstein? Roy Moore? What About the Crimes of Bill Clinton and Robert Byrd? By Dov Fischer – “In this new time warp, are there not aspects of bewilderment juxtaposed amid all these unwanted-sex accusations dating back 30 and 40 years?”

And yet the allegation of the 14-year-old who asseverates that she was intimate with a Moore over 30 raises its own questions.

It is unclear whether or why some people claim things that never happened.

It turns out that sometimes people make false accusations, even placing their own morals and lifetime reputations into public disdain. But there are more questions:

The net neutrality boomerang comes full circle by Bret Swanson – “Last week, Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) fulfilled a prophecy of net neutrality critics.

From the start, one of net neutrality’s big conceptual problems was that it was not neutral — legally, technically, or economically. Its advocates insisted it should apply only to one portion of the internet and only one type of firm: those that delivered broadband connectivity in the “last mile.” But the very nature of a sprawling, dynamic, hyperconnected internet made the possibility of neatly segregating these firms unlikely.

A tale of 2 US delegations at climate talks By Conor Finnegan Stephanie Ebbs – “While the world meets in Bonn, Germany, to hammer out the final details of the historic Paris climate accord and lay the path forward on combating climate change, there may be some confusion over who speaks for America.” The fact is that there should be no question about who speaks for America and that those who participate in this usurpation of the properly elected government need to consider the implications of their actions for anarchy, especially when their rationale is based on deceit and dishonesty.

Skepticism ‘requires high cognitive ability, strong motivation to be rational’ by Anthony Watts – “Stephan Lewandowsky tried to make climate skeptics look stupid (by not even bothering to sample them, but impugning their beliefs as irrational from out of population samples), this study turns the tables on his execrable work and suggests that climate skeptics are both analytical and rational.”

The article notes that despite a century of better educational opportunities and increased intelligence scores in the U.S. population, unfounded beliefs remain pervasive in contemporary society.

Epistemic rationality: Skepticism toward unfounded beliefs requires sufficient cognitive ability and motivation to be rational

Arabella’s Gift… by sundance – “The most notable aspect amid President Trump’s granddaughter Arabella delivering a folk song in native Mandarin wasn’t the song itself, it was the response from Madame Peng Liyaun, the wife of Chinese President Xi Jinping.

If you have followed the foreign policy pattern of President Trump you immediately recognize he does not restrain himself to DC political customs or DC political norms. Indeed as Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi optimistically noted, President Trump can accomplish many things because he brings a unique perspective to the world of policy and diplomatic engagement. Later al-Sisi repeated: “He Can Do The Impossible“.

America’s warrior-monk: Right man at the right place at the right time By Russ Vaughn – “Army veteran David Brown was visiting the graves of fallen friends in Arlington National Cemetery on Veterans’ Day when he spotted a lone but familiar figure

That other visitor was secretary of defense James Mattis, a retired four-star Marine general.

… he watched Mattis “listen patiently to stories from surviving friends and family members. An old man visiting his Marine son’s grave told Mattis that he was his boy’s hero; the Warrior Monk smiled sadly and said that the old man’s son was one of his.”

That put a lump in the throat of this old Vietnam vet, and I silently thanked Donald Trump for selecting this tough but eloquent warrior to lead our military forces. In my 76 years, I have never heard a similar vignette about any other SecDef. This one is, in my opinion, most assuredly, the right man in the right place at the right time.

Why do people do what they do? Why have so many allowed aberrant behavior to escape? Why can’t they see?

Leave a Comment

False gods and so-called science

Here are a few more stories for a Monday overload. These look at the ideologies and fantasies behind the behavior.

The Media Doesn’t Want to Talk about the 26th Victim of the Texas Church Massacre By Paula Bolyard – “Media outlets across the country are apparently having difficulty counting. They can’t seem to get the number of victims right in last week’s horrific Texas church massacre.”

While many correctly reported that 26 people were killed during Devin Patrick Kelley’s maniacal rampage, many others went to great pains to avoid reporting that an unborn child died at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, last Sunday. Or, if they did report the baby’s death, they reported it as a footnote, careful to separate the unborn child from other victims.

Why can’t these media outlets simply say that 26 people — human beings — were killed in the attack? The answer should be obvious to anyone who’s been paying attention to the culture wars for the last 40 years. They can’t say it because they’re so firmly tethered to their lie — that the unborn child in his mother’s womb has no personhood and no rights.

The tragedy in Texas exposes their deception — and their desperation — as more an more Americans understand that abortion is the intentional killing of a human being made in the image of God.

The Wages of Social Justice Is Death By Michael Walsh – “In the aftermath of the Ferguson riots in Missouri and the Freddie Gray fiasco in Baltimore, the decriminalization of crime in the name of “social justice” — long a goal of the cultural-Marxist Left — got fully underway. The result was exactly what anyone not fully invested in Critical Theory would have expected.”

Baltimore, a city whose best years ended more than a century ago, is a prime example of what happens when citizens are categorized by skin color or cultural background, and then have differing standards of behavior applied to them by what should be an impartial justice system. Instead of “social justice,” the outcome is social disruption, mistrust, resentment, lawlessness and, if left unchecked, anarchy and civil war. The Marxists not only know this, they desire it, which is why they press so hard for it.

the “social justice” and “political correctness” mentality gripping so many elected or appointed officials– not to mention the entire American media — prevents them from taking the kind of direct action that’s needed to solve the problem. Until Real Americans cast off the foreign-import dictates of the cultural Marxist Left, cities like Baltimore will continue to suffer. And so will we all.

Trump Shines in Foreign Policy By James Lewis – “The U.S. media just rolled its eyes and yawned, but the Muslim world got the message loud and clear.”

Obama would never even name the enemy, and most importantly, under Obama the United States lost the moral high ground against child-murdering sadists; we started to support Sunni killer cults in Syria.

If ISIS is just a minor nuisance, as Obama tried to tell us, that would make the genocides of history meaningless.

Obama never, ever seemed to get that basic point of morality, nor did Hillary, nor did any other Democrat. Trump and Mattis obviously understand it,

Obama seemed to take the side of the enemy, and Bush just called the whole thing “the War on Terror,” totally ignoring the monstrous doctrine that runs Al Qaida and ISIS and other jihad killer cults. American military who were on the ground in Syria and Afghanistan were tremendously demoralized by U.S. failure to cast this war in the proper moral terms. Mattis in particular emphasizes morality in war, a concept liberals can’t even imagine. You kill people because they are beyond evil. You don’t kill innocents. Somehow the Democrats can’t seem to remember that.

Trump is supposed to be an idiot, but this idiot has been a success in the international hotel business for years, and people like that have to know about currencies and commodities.

The Wap-NYTs have always whipped up fear about strong U.S. presidents, never about foreign throwbacks like Kim III threatening us with nuclear weapons. They don’t care if it’s the Soviet Union, or the Nazis way back then, or Stalin, or the 9/11/01 Wahhabi killers. Our enemies are all victims of U.S. Imperialism, and if they’re mad at us we gotta just take the punishment we deserve.

This is a form of liberal insanity, of course, but the one positive is that the voters understand it all. The Trump voters include tens of millions of Americans who love their country, and wanted Obama and Hillary out of their lives.

The Democrats will lose as long as the current inner cult stays in charge. All we can do is encourage them to get as infantile as possible, and hope they’ll never bring in any adults.

Trump might just achieve that all on his own.

The Dark Side of Science By Robert Arvay – “Science has bestowed enormous benefits on mankind. But it has a dark side as well.”

What is most remarkable about science is not its gadgetry, but rather, what it tells us about ourselves, who we are, what is our purpose and destiny. Do we have inherent value? Or are we just another species of animal?

In other words, there is a powerful philosophy that underpins science. It affects us all.

Science is based on the premise that the universe has rules, unbreakable laws that do not depend on our opinion, but which are revealed to us by observation and reason. As far as we can tell, the universe is orderly; it has structure and hierarchy. Is that all just meaningless coincidence?

Until recent times, nature was correctly seen to be the work of a divine designer whose purpose, plan and meaning are revealed to us in the wonders of Creation.

Science is only as valuable as its foundation. If that foundation is not faith, then science is a house built upon shifting sand, and must collapse. Let’s stop worshipping the false gods of so-called science, before they demand the sacrifice of all that is truly sacred.

Science and God are on the same page and Arvay isn’t. That page is the matter of the ninth commandment (wikipedia). Arvay is not engaging in true witness in his conclusions about what science tells us. There are no “false gods of so-called science” by definition. Science is about true witness to what God lays in front of us whether that be a geological record or the structure of living beings. It is not about “purpose and destiny.”

Many current issues from vaccinations to anthropogenic climate catastrophe to alternative energy have people chasing false gods and trying to use science as their excuse. What they are doing is “so-called science” and not true witness to what science actually is. The problem Arvay highlights is about the nature of humanity that God gave us, not the nature of human inquiry into the Word of God that He placed in front of us and that we often call nature. Much as the commandments God gave Moses are understandable rules, true science accepts the concept that God is not irrational, perverse, or unreasonable as would be the case without rules. Science is about exploring what he gave us to better understand his Word.

Where Arvay should focus is on how he and many others have lost focus on the first of the commandments where they have enshrined a graven image of their favored ideology to place before the “Lord your God.”

Leave a Comment

The art of the smear

Another overload: There is hate and that generates all sorts of irrational behavior. Stories today include an academic supporting racism in the name of racism, law enforcement trying to figure out how to ameliorate a state law advocating lawlessness, Democrat obstruction in Congress,  honoring the dishonorable, smearing the honorable, chasing geese when all it’s getting you is slipping and falling in the droppings they leave, sexual innuendo via presumption of guilt and mental constructions, silencing opponents via boycott, using tragedy for political opportunism, inability to learn from recent experience about using government to spend other people’s money, and media blindness. Whew!

They Hate Us. They Really Hate Us by Alicia Colon – “The anger and disappointment over Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss is not only unprecedented, it’s inexplicable.”

These are supposedly intelligent, educated professionals and yet their anguish has in some cases turned to unbridled hatred towards the voters who dared to think for themselves.

We have been labeled deplorable, moronic, racists and despicable even though these so-called failed political prognosticators have no idea who we really are.

It’s a good thing we do our own research because we certainly aren’t getting the truth from the mainstream media’s fake news. As for those ridiculous conspiracies on the web, nobody views them as credible only the liberal left wing that probably created them for Media Matters and other Soros inspired groups.

It certainly did bring on the revolution in the resistance movement of paid militant protesters trashing and burning buildings while beating Trump supporters. Hate spread and created a fake anti-fascist movement that is the epitome of fascism.

Now that Harvey Weinstein and other Hollywood icons are finally having their sins exposed, I think back to that effort to scald candidate Trump with that ‘pussy’ tape and why it failed. At the time Trump used that locker room language with Billy Bush, he was a billionaire playboy who was in fact acknowledging that there were women who would let him do anything and he was right.

Hate is soul corrosive and an emotion I have avoided in many of my decades of life. I never hated Barack Obama or wished him ill. I did loathe his policies which I found destructive and recognized them as Marxist as soon as he started appointing Czars to his administration.

Those media meltdowns may be very amusing to some but I find them cringing because they prove that the Fourth Estate has lost the essence of journalistic ethics.

Letting go of this hate should be their first step to recovery. We deplorables need to stop laughing at them and pray that they do.

Professor pens op-ed in support of segregation for children by Karen Townsend – “That’s right. The 1960s are back and it isn’t any prettier than it was back then.”

California sheriffs still fighting new sanctuary state law by Jazz Shaw – “In less than fifty days, on January 1st, California’s new sanctuary state law goes into effect.”

As we discussed last month, the police unions were finally convinced to endorse the new law after some changes were made, but most of the sheriffs across the state were protesting it. Not much has changed since then, with the more rural county sheriffs in particular remaining firm in their belief that the new laws are going to make California residents less safe. Also, those hoping to hinder the activities of ICE in their communities are likely to be quite disappointed in the results.

This has led at least some sheriffs to begin working on new, creative policies which will allow them to continue supporting immigration enforcement officials while not running afoul of the law. Needless to say, this has the state’s Democratic legislators in a bit of a foul mood. (LA Times)

The Bergdahl liberals By Robert Knight – “I’m minding my own business in a bookstore near the University of Maine’s campus here when I hear two women talking. One of them is trashing Donald Trump as the other sagely nods.”

While driving back, a number of snappy one-liners came to mind. But none would have done any good. Progressivism and its cousin, atheism, often are practiced with unacknowledged religious fervor. One-liners cannot penetrate devotees’ armor any more than opposite sentiments should undermine the faith of a devout Christian, Jew or Muslim.

The proffered solution of the Bergdahl progressives to any and all inequality is to make America more like the rest of the world, not less.

It means blurring the line between honor and dishonor. And confusing traitors with victims or heroes.

And it means elevating the most un-American president in history to a higher place than the 43 presidents before him.

The Blue Slip Variations by Scott Johnson – “Although the Democrats have now gone to absurd lengths to throw sand in the gears of the confirmation process under President Trump, the pace has finally picked up.”

Goose chase? Schiff unrelenting in quest to hunt down proof from Russia dossier By Rowan Scarborough – “In the investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election last year, Mr. Schiff and his Democratic colleagues since January have been more than willing to cite the dossier’s paid unidentified Kremlin sources to attack the Trump administration.”

Mr. Steele’s Kremlin spy and government sources took Mr. Page’s well-publicized Moscow visit and turned it into one of the great conspiracy theories of modern presidential politics.

At no time during the hearing did Mr. Schiff provide evidence, outside the dossier, that Mr. Page met secretly with either Mr. Sechin or Mr. Diveykin.

But as The Washington Times later pointed out, that number was released publicly by the Russian government in July, three months earlier.

Mr. Schiff presented no proof, outside of the dossier, that Mr. Page discussed a brokerage fee or met with Mr. Sechin.

Mr. Cohen has shown associates his passport, which shows no Czech Republic visits. He has produced an itinerary that showed he was visiting his son in California at the time.

But Mr. Schiff continues to hunt for improper Cohen ties to Eastern Europe.

Liberal bloggers have woven a web of conspiracies around any Trump-connected person who has ever visited Hungary, which is friendly toward Mr. Putin.

To date, there has not been official public confirmation of any of Mr. Steele’s core accusations against those people.

In a London court filing, Mr. Steele says he warned Washington reporters that they should confirm his accusations and not quote his dossier. He acknowledged that computer hacking charges he made against Mr. Gubarev were not verified.

Did dossier trigger the Trump-Russia probe? by Byron York – “What congressional investigators want to know is whether that was a coincidence or not.”

The challenge — for Steele and for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired him with funding from the Clinton campaign — was to get the dossier’s charges out in public, where they might influence the presidential race.

The allegations in the dossier were basically impossible for journalists to verify. Most of the publications did not report the information. But on September 23, Yahoo’s Michael Isikoff reported that “U.S. officials” had “received intelligence reports” from a “well-placed Western intelligence source” that Carter Page had met with Sechin and Divyekin during Page’s July trip to Moscow.

Now, with multiple investigations underway, some officials are trying to reconstruct the events of June through October 2016. Were the allegations in the dossier accurate in the first place? If they were, did involvement go to the highest levels of the Trump campaign? But if they weren’t, was it a situation in which the Clinton campaign, through its hired foreign agent Steele, fed the FBI bad information for the purpose of having it leaked to the press in time to hurt Trump before the election?

Ultimately more will become public. But if the past months have shown anything, it is that the FBI will not reveal its secrets, even to its legitimate congressional overseers, without a fight.

The Three Festering Wounds of 2016 by Jed Babbin – “James Comey is central to all of them.”

Don’t get me wrong: 2016 wasn’t 1860. But we have to realize that we went into 2016 more divided, more balkanized than we had been in generations. In eight years, Barack Obama had not only divided the nation, he had seeded every part of the government with loyalists. From the judiciary to the Pentagon and the intelligence community, people dedicated to Obama’s radical left agenda were put in place.

What’s more, the entrenched bureaucracy — it’s called the “deep state” in current lingo — had its natural cravings for power unleashed, its denizens herded — faster and faster — to achieve his agenda.

Three wounds, created or revealed in 2016, have become infected, and the infections are not yet cured. First is the so-called “Russia dossier,” which became the basis for the Robert Mueller investigation that is running away in the manner that Lawrence Walsh’s “Iran Contra” investigation did. The second is the “Uranium One” scandal, which the media still try to bury. And the third is the fact that Hillary Clinton and her closest staff, such as Huma Abedin, committed felonies in handling classified information. The then-FBI Director James Comey saw the proofs of their actions and nevertheless decided to protect them from punishment.

the three all flow together in a symphony of corruption, misgovernment, and media misbehavior that cannot be ignored.

Trump is the Next Target after Roy Moore By Cliff Kincaid – “Trump knows that if they get rid of Moore, using charges that obviously cannot be proven, he’s their next target. Sex-gate will follow Russia-gate.”

In this atmosphere, women charging sexual harassment are easy to find, even if their charges cannot be proven. The men are assumed to be guilty as charged.

One can argue that everything but the kitchen sink has already been thrown at Trump and he has survived nonetheless. But since the election we have seen that the allegations of sexual harassment have been cast as a major blight on American society, making it more likely that “new” accusers against Trump will be found and that a new variation of the “scandal” will be used to cast a pall over the presidency. The same members of the GOP establishment lined up against Moore will be called upon to dump Trump.

The media playbook consists of reporting damaging charges against a conservative figure and then getting members of the conservative and GOP establishments to pile on. If it works against Moore this time, you have to know they will be used once again, with brand new accusers, against Trump.

The Washington Post, the source of the charges, is not only dishonest but downright weird.

Roy Moore For Senate? by John Hinderaker –

I agree with Paul that the Washington Post’s allegation that Moore tried to seduce a 14-year-old girl 38 years ago is more likely false than true, particularly given the gaping hole in the accuser’s story that has been attested to by her own mother. Beyond that, I question whether a newly-surfaced, 38-year-old allegation should ever–short of murder or something nearly as heinous–be grounds for defeating a political candidate.

There is a reason why our criminal laws include statutes of limitation. After decades have gone by, it is often impossible to prove (or disprove) an allegation.

Some say that Moore’s case is different, because he is a Republican, and Republicans are held to a higher standard. That is true as a statement of fact, but it is not a principle to which Republicans should stipulate.

Paul had noted The bedroom phone that wasn’t in the WaPo story as being strange – “As one woman of my acquaintance who lived in the deep South during that era guaranteed, 14 year-old girls in Alabama didn’t have phones in their rooms back then.”

In Defense of Judge Roy Moore By Frank J. Tipler – “If one reads the original Washington Post article on Judge Moore’s supposed harassment of underage “girls” with an open mind, one will conclude that Judge Moore is completely innocent, and that he is the victim of Fake News.”

Notice the differences between this single claim and the other three reports: In a single case, Moore, a trained lawyer, dated jailbait. In this single case, Moore behaved in a dishonorable manner to a girl, not a woman. In this single case, we have reasons, given in the Post article, to doubt the claim: the accuser has been married three times, and has been in bankruptcy twice.

A commonsense view of human behavior is that bad guys repeat their MOs.

The Real Scandal in the Alabama Senate Race By Selwyn Duke – this one is about the issue positions of the candidates and may be evidence that the assault on Moore is an attempt to avoid the real scandal in the issues the Left, such as Moore’s opponent advocates.

Sean Hannity is fighting for his survival By Peter Barry Chowka – “Sean Hannity reignited efforts by enemies of his on the left to take him off the air via putting pressure on his advertisers to dump his show.”

His telephone interview with Senate nominee Roy Moore, broadcast live on his radio show and replayed later on his nightly Fox News Channel program, actually won more praise than might have been expected from a variety of analysts.

Almost immediately, his enemies, in particular Media Matters for America, struck. … Media Matters for America (MMFA), the far-left group founded by David Brock to attack conservative media, is behind the boycott Hannity campaign. In fact, Keurig tweeted a thank you to MMFA’s president, Angelo Carusone, for calling Hannity’s coverage of the Moore case to the company’s attention

On Sunday, a counter campaign among Hannity’s supporters to boycott the boycotting advertisers – Keurig in particular – quickly took off on social media.

The stakes in this emerging fight couldn’t be higher. Sean Hannity, and a handful of other high profile conservative hosts on Fox News, represent the last thin line in the mainstream media that is left standing against the almost universal fake news onslaught by the MSM aimed at taking down President Donald Trump. Last April, advertisers who deserted Fox News’ #1 program at the time, The O’Reilly Factor, after allegations of sexual harassment by host Bill O’Reilly resurfaced in the media, got the host of that program summarily fired in less than three weeks.

Democrats using Texas tragedy to advance agenda By Charles Hurt – “What kind of heartless monster instantly seizes on such senseless tragedy to advance a personal political agenda?”

Ms. Warren, who is gearing up to run for president, also blamed God for not answering prayers as she sees fit. Talk about sick and deranged. At least you cannot blame her for not seizing an opportunity.

Such is the state of politics in America today that one entire wing of elected politicians is dominated by people who eagerly salivate every time a whacko gunman goes on some senseless rampage.

And it is not just daffy fringe candidates, like Ms. Warren, who think they are God grasping at every opportunity for personal political gain amid suffocating misery.

Former President Barack Obama, whose political legacy is in tatters, sprang to cash in on the tragedy as well.

If politicians, such as Mr. Obama and Ms. Warren, are serious about curbing this kind of violence, they would channel all of their political energies into enforcing current gun laws already on the books and doggedly striving to prevent criminals from illegally getting their hands on guns.

This sort of disdain for existing federal gun laws suggests that Ms. Warren placed responsibility on the wrong politicians when she blamed Republicans for the Texas church massacre.

Sutherland Springs: more guns, not more restrictions by Taylor Millard – “One thing the people of Sutherland Springs have been pretty consistent on, as well, is their belief more guns are the solution, not gun control laws.”

This shouldn’t be a shock to anyone who lives in Texas, specifically small town Texas. Sutherland Springs has only 700 residents, and no police force. The Wilson County Sheriff’s Office handles law enforcement in town, and there are agreements with nearby Schertz for some services. But people are mostly left to themselves, relying on individuals to protect themselves from harm, should something happen. One friend of mine mentioned he thought it was crazy Sutherland Springs didn’t have a police force, but it makes sense. When you live in a small town, with nearby cities which actually respect property lines and don’t try to annex for tax dollars, it doesn’t make sense to spend the money to create a police force. Texas has dozens of regulations for police forces, including training programs and benefits, which would cost towns even more cash. It makes much more sense to partner up with a Sheriff’s Office for help, when the biggest issue the town typically faces is probably a public intoxication or dumb kids doing stupid stuff.

It’s easy to try to rely on some entity like a police force or government to provide safety. We see that debate every day in America, whether it involves police shootings or violence in general. Sutherland Springs has it right: people should rely on individuals for protection. That could take the form of more guns, more swords, or simply looking out for your neighbors. It doesn’t have to mean more government.

Where Did All The Public School Money Go? Paper-Pushers, an IBD Editorial – “The education system in this country is overdue for shake-up because it has for years been grossly mismanaging taxpayer money.”

The National Education Association blasted the GOP tax reform plan saying that eliminating the state and local tax deduction for those who itemize taxes would be a severe blow to schools, putting 250,000 education jobs at risk.

Why? Because getting rid of it might force high-tax states — which benefit the most from the deduction — to cut taxes and rein in their own spending.

Per-pupil spending in public schools climbed 121%, after adjusting for inflation, from 1980 to 2014 — the last year for which the Department of Education has statistics. … Does anyone think children are getting twice as good an education?

Where has that money gone? Not much of it went to teachers. While enrollment in public schools climbed 23% over those years, the number of teachers climbed 43%.

But the ranks of public school administrators shot up 88% over those years. And the number of people performing other jobs in public schools — janitors, librarians, teachers’ aides, principals, etc. — climbed 56%.

What’s needed to improve education in the U.S. isn’t more money, it’s more efficient, more accountable and higher performing schools. A good way to achieve that is to inject more competition into the system. To the extent that the GOP tax plan moves in this direction, it will be a win for education and a win for students.

Maine, Medicaid, and the Gruber Principle by David Catron – “Maine experimented with Medicaid expansion 15 years ago, and it took the state a decade to recover from the hangover.” Deja vu but here it is again. It’s all about ‘other people’s money’ and not learning even from recent experience.

And it is no exaggeration to say that it took Maine 10 years to recover from its last Medicaid expansion. That debacle, initiated in 2002 by former Governor Angus King — who has since fled to D.C. where he now “serves” as a U.S. Senator — damaged Maine’s finances so badly that there was no money to pay hospitals for services rendered to Medicaid patients. It wasn’t until 2013 that the state was able to pay off that debt, whereupon Obamacare advocates began pimping expansion again.

As it happens, the program and the promises were virtually identical to the bill of goods sold to the voters this time around. Last time, the state expanded Medicaid eligibility to adults earning up to 125 percent of Federal Poverty Guidelines (this time it’s 138%). Maine’s voters were promised that expansion would lead to augmented economic growth, reduce the uninsured rate, and bolster the state’s medical infrastructure by reducing the amount of uncompensated care borne by its 39 hospitals. It goes without saying, of course, that not one of these implausible outcomes ever materialized.

The only new item added this time around to the 2002 list of pie-in-the-sky promises was the claim that Medicaid expansion will somehow ameliorate the opioid epidemic.

The Speaker of the Maine House of Representatives, Sara Gideon, vows that “Any attempts to illegally delay or subvert this law will not be tolerated and will be fought with every recourse at our disposal.” Governor LePage vows to do nothing at all on Medicaid until the legislature fully funds the expansion. The “news” media is predictably promulgating the claim that Governor LePage is flouting the will of the voters.

The Mealy Mouth NFL by: Misanthropic Humanitarian – “A Moron submitted the following letter he sent to Green Bay Packer President Mark Murphy and Mr. Murphy’s response to him.”

Chris Wallace: Trump is right about ‘media unfairness’ By Jennifer Harper – “I’m sure some of you hear those comments and think they’re spot on. But ask yourself honestly. Do they belong on the front page of the paper, or as the lead of the evening news?”

Leave a Comment

The issue of ignorance

The triumph of Bill Ayers by Monica Showalter – “Disillusion with free markets and capitalism is often cited as the reason for this phenomenon.”

“The problem with that statement is that none of those complaints have anything to do with capitalism, they are byproducts of creeping socialism. Rents are high because leftist NIMBYs refuse to allow housing to be built. Student loan debt is a direct function of government funds freely available to universities for loans, which gives them every incentive to raise prices sky high. Obamacare speaks for itself, there’s no freedom of choice in its mandates for insurance companies and no willing-buyer, willing seller dynamic for consumers. All of these are full blown byproducts of socialism. Want more of these horrors? By all means elect more socialists.

And that’s where the issue of ignorance rolls in. Millennials have no education to speak of on the horrors of socialism. That may well be the triumph of the influence of President Obama’s mentor, Bill Ayers, who made it his lifework to destroy America as a free society.

Those ethics are out on full display in the nightmare of Venezuela,

Ayers wasn’t the only one who ruined the education of the young and filled it with leftist propaganda, but he found a welcoming environment in academia, and from there, went on to influence elementary education as one of its brightest lights.

The results are now in these attitudes and these election results. Bill Ayers has succeeded in his long march through the institutions and now his successors are beginning to take power.

The *ACTUAL* 2016 FBI Report on “Russian Hacking” Does Not Show What Media Claim It Does… by sundance – “President Obama’s administration released the ‘Joint Analysis Report’ which various politicians and media claimed to outline details of Russia’s involvement hacking into targeted data, computer systems, and political networks during the election.”

“The “Russian Malicious Cyber Activity – Joint Analysis Report” (full pdf below) is pure nonsense. It outlines nothing more than vague and disingenuous typical hacking activity that is no more substantive than any other hacking report on any other foreign actor.

This report might as well be blaming Nigerian fraud phone solicitors for targeting U.S. phone numbers. Just because your grandma didn’t actually win that Nigerian national lottery doesn’t mean the Nigerian government, or representative of the Nigerian government were targeting grandma.

This FBI report is, well, quite simply, pure nonsense, that’s why NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers refused to endorse it.

The proof is in their own action: Remember CIA Director John Brennan got caught, and later apologized, for using his agency to spy on congress (SEE HERE), for political purposes. Then there’s the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, who admitted to lying to congress (SEE HERE) for political purposes. Lastly, FBI Director James Comey who admitted to leaking his memo content to the New York Times for political purposes. … Their admitted use of their intelligence positions for political reasons.

You Have to Hand It to Hillary – the Girl Can Smear by Clarice Feldman – “Hillary pulled off what Kimberly Strassel rightly calls “one of the dirtiest tricks in U.S. political history.”

Read it all, and tell me why Black isn’t absolutely correct to tag this “bunk, rubbish, a Babylonian ziggurat of pompous and officious suppositions and confections that, when explained in its correct sequence… no sane person could take seriously.”

Of course, it should be shut down. It’s a disgrace and an embarrassment that our top legal officials and intelligence operations could be so stupid or corrupt.

It’s good to remember that once upon a time in a country called the USA we had people with enough courage and wit to know how to do the right thing.

If you think Roy Moore did it or you think he didn’t, you’re doing it wrong by Jazz Shaw – “Watching the lava flow of hot takes breaking out on social media, in the papers and on cable news over the past day or so, there seems to be a common theme emerging (or, rather, a pair of them) which is distressing to say the least.”

“We have one camp of people who claim that the original Washington Post story, combined with a few bits of follow-up material, are sufficient for a conviction in the court of public opinion and Roy should be run out of town on a rail, preferably covering in roofing material and chicken plumage. Another group has already determined that this was a politically motivated hit job by the WaPo, the accuser is lying and everyone should get behind Moore on this.

Both of these positions have a series of glaring flaws in them which I’m seriously hoping can be at least acknowledged, allowing a bit of reason to prevail.

Can we all pause for a moment, re-read that last statement from Max and be just a little bit… horrified? The presumption of innocence is indeed a cornerstone in criminal cases, but his conclusion means that any accusation which isn’t immediately refutable with solid evidence which would stand up in court is sufficient to derail a political campaign, end someone’s career, wreck their marriage or any of the other penalties which arise from a conviction in the court of public opinion. Is that truly the standard we’re going to aspire to?

And if it is, and we’re going to apply it to Roy Moore, will we also apply it to George Takei? As Rachel wrote this morning, he’s been accused of awful things by a male model and actor. Much like Moore, this is a single accuser who provided very detailed accounts of when, where and how it happened. (And many are saying those details lend credence to the accusations against Moore.) But he has flatly denied the claims, similarly saying that he has no memory of meeting the actor. And yet that interview he did with Howard Stern (which is available in Rachel’s article) certainly makes it sound as if forced, unwanted sexual contact was nothing new for him. Shall we convict Takei now as well?

The Prophet of Affirmative Action by John Hinderaker – “California appellate judge Macklin Fleming, a Yale Law graduate, wrote a letter to Dean Louis Pollak questioning the wisdom of the new quota system. Reading the letter nearly 50 years later, one can only marvel at how prescient Judge Fleming was.”

“Judge Fleming went on to articulate and rebut the various rationales for race discrimination in admissions. This paragraph is a relic of a better time:

The American creed, one that Yale has proudly espoused, holds that an American should be judged as an individual and not as a member of a group. To me it seems axiomatic that a system which ignores this creed and introduces the factor of race in the selection of students for a professional school is inherently malignant, no matter how high-minded the purpose nor how benign the motives of those making the selection.”

Fleming also pointed out that discrimination in favor of one group necessarily means discrimination against others

McCarthy compares and contrasts by Scott Johnson – “If you seek to understand the deep meaning of the Mueller investigation, the whole thing is must reading. It takes a look back in anger at the phoniness of the Clinton investigation. It also serves as a preview of coming attractions with respect to which we will look back in anger before too long.”

HT Instapundit: 5 things Trump did this week while you weren’t looking By Danny Vinik – “It was a big week in politics. But there was a lot of policy news as well.” The end of ignorance sometimes requires an effort to be informed.

Vox: Conservatives Can’t be Persuaded About Climate Change by Eric Worrall – “Vox reporter David Roberts thinks Conservatives can’t be persuaded to change their minds about climate change because we’ve been instructed to ignore climate facts by our “elites”.

“I always find it entertaining to read green analysis of Conservative thinking. Such analysis tend to reveal far more about the way the green left thinks, than any deep insight into the thought processes of Conservatives.

We don’t follow our elites.

Limbaugh’s Mind Numbed Robots?

Leave a Comment