Sunday, October 28, 2018

You People All Suck! Also, Why Don't You People Buy My Book?!

Behold, a glimpse into the mind of a NeverTrump neocon.


Plus I like the play button on his nose.

If you don't know who Max Boot is, and I had never heard of him prior to his daily screeching about Trump, he is a "conservative" that is awfully sore at other conservatives for not nominating someone like Jeb! Bush or Marco Rubio to lose to Hillary Clinton in 2016. I say conservative in quotes because from what I can tell his "conservatism" is mostly just a particularly violent form of generic liberalism.

What is most telling is to glance through his twitter feed and also to read the replies to his tweets. The people reading his tweets and responding are about evenly split between conservatives telling him he is full of crap and liberals agreeing with him. That is true with other "conservatives" like Bill Kristol and Jennifer Rubin, they are mostly signaling to liberals and criticizing conservatives. As I have said before, if your social media is filled with liberals agreeing with you, perhaps you aren't a conservative at all.


So you have a guy who spends all day raving about Trump like a lunatic and scolding conservatives. Then you post something like this....

Without using Google, which person in this picture is a whore?
Gee, I wonder why conservatives aren't buying or discussing his book?

It is high time that the Beltway "conservatives" just stop pretending to be anything other than war-mongering liberals. The GOP has changed, for the better, and they were left behind. No one cares what Max Boot thinks about conservatism, or really about any topic.

Thursday, October 25, 2018

Trump Might Actually Be Preventing Political Violence

The news is all a-twitter about the "bombs" sent to a laundry list of leftist individuals and groups, from George Soros to the Clintons to Democrat multimedia propaganda division CNN. None of these devices detonated and probably wouldn't unless you strapped an actual explosive to them. The usual suspects in the media all provided an unbiased and totally not coordinated response. Screenshot below:

More "bombs" are being discovered this morning. And just like that the invading column of "migrants" from Honduras has disappeared from the media, a week and a half before the election. Oops, looks like we needed a narrative change!

As I said, the media response to this has been hilarious. Editorials were published, tweets were sent, all uniform as if they were written by one person, or perhaps ahead of time. The same media that looked the other way or tried to deflect blame as leftists have engaged in actual political violence for two years now suddenly is worried about inflammatory rhetoric. Calling for people to stalk and harass Republicans? No big deal. Letters of powder sent to Republicans? Squirrel! Trump supporters trying to get to campaign rallies attacked, struck with bike locks, being pelted with eggs, screamed at, intimidated and harassed? Just good harmless fun! Steve Scalise shot and almost dying? Crickets. Senator Paul being assaulted in his own yard? Maybe he was a bad neighbor.

The response from the Left was predictable but the response from the right was more interesting, and to me more encouraging. Everyone condemned the "bombs" but many, many conservatives were also immediately suspicious. People on the right have been fooled by these false flags, hoax hate crimes leading up the election, etc. for too long to automatically curl up and surrender when something like this happens. Well other than SuperGenius™ Li'l Ben Shapiro who said that being overly suspicious of these "bombings" was "deranged", thus proving again that he is little more than the court jester of conservatism. Fortunately the FBI and international police agencies are on the case...


(Security footage from CNN)

Until we hear more I am going to remain deeply skeptical. None of the "bombs" went off. They all seemed to arrive in a coordinated manner and all to people that would never be in any real danger. People like Hillary and Barack Obama and Joe Biden don't go out to the mailbox to pick up the mail, assuming they are even at their home as most of them are out campaigning. All of them are protected by professional security. In fact if I wanted to make it look like a terror campaign without actually endangering anyone, this would be the way to go. On the other hand, actually killing political opponents wouldn't be that hard as there are an almost infinite number of potential targets on both sides of the political spectrum. I spent some time around the Congress some years ago interviewing for jobs and there are plenty of people right out in the open. They are at campaign rallies, traveling or at their homes back in their districts. If I were inclined to strike out at political opponents, there are plenty of ways to do so other than this asinine "bomb" campaign, not to mention it is pretty easy to make actual working bombs.

But a more important question to ask, as many others have pointed out, is "why". Why would anyone on the right do this with no chance of success and a decent chance of spending the rest of your life in the SuperMax? Republicans are surging in races around the country. Attention and a lot of anger was focused on the invading column marching through Mexico and that just energizes a Republican base already fired up about Kavanaugh. Trump's popularity is up. With momentum on their side, the right is looking like it has the chance to buck historical precedent and not only not take significant losses in Congress in an off year election but actually increase their majority margin in the Senate. That this is the act of someone trying to advance a right-wing political cause defies reason. That doesn't mean it couldn't be some random nutcase of course. It also doesn't mean that this couldn't be a false flag operation designed to draw attention away from the invading horde heading toward our southern border or to give the Left something to talk about to get their people to the polls since their entire political philosophy now is "Orange Man Bad". I am far from unbiased but I put the odds at better than 80% that this was coordinated by someone on the Left to be a distraction and the odds that anyone gets caught for this are pretty slim unless the bomber left finger prints on the envelopes or something else dumb.

The lack of any facts and the awfully suspicious nature of these "bombs" hasn't stopped the media from once again refusing to act like journalists and instead to immediately point the finger at Trump, thus proving for the one millionth time that his accusations against them are completely accurate. Trump isn't causing anyone to send "bombs" or be violent, at least not on the right. The opposite is actually true.

Trump isn't the cause of the super heated rhetoric and the vitriolic political rhetoric, he is the result of it. Most pundits remained baffled as to what happened in 2016 other than mumbling about angry white men but what we saw was the result of decades of pressure building. The anger and resentment has been building for years and it was accelerated by Obama, who took the opportunity to be a unifying force and instead became divisive. People in this country didn't suddenly become angry when Trump came down that escalator, they were already on their way. After years of seeing unrestrained illegal immigration, factories closing down, accusations of "white privilege", being told that we are ignorant rubes that cling to our guns and religion, cops assassinated, gay "marriage" forced on us by judicial fiat, schools bullied into letting boys into girl's locker rooms and our communities ravaged by the opiod crisis, many of us were completely fed up. Obama, a man that didn't accomplish anything noteworthy in his life until he was elected President and who never built anything in his life, stood in front of America and wagged his finger at us declaring that "you didn't build that". Trump came along and said that we did indeed build something great here in America and he would make America great again. He gave a voice to the voiceless masses and hope to people that had been scorned and hectored by their President for 8 years. He provided a sliver of hope that we could turn this thing around and I believe that temporarily avoided something ugly. People can only get crapped on for so long.

The Trump election was a release valve for vast numbers of Americans that had simultaneously been left behind and blamed for all of the problems of the country. What would have happened if Hillary had won? I don't know for sure but I can't imagine that the discontented tens of millions of people who voted for Trump would have shrugged and gone back to being ground into the dirt. The very serious division in this country didn't spring forth when Trump took office, it has been festering for a very long time. I am of the opinion that we have been in a cultural cold civil war for decades, but only one side seemed to realize it, and what we are seeing now is the manifestation of a new political struggle that has been building for many years: elites versus regular folks, urban versus rural, religious versus secular, men versus women, and yes even the shrinking white majority versus the coalition of non-whites. We are seeing the old political alliances collapse as big business sells out for the Democrats and working class whites abandon the Dems and vote Republican. Our politics now are populist, nationalist versus elitist, globalist. The division in this country is at levels I have not seen in my lifetime.

Trump is not the cause of this new, far more stark division in this country. He simply exposed it by giving voice to Middle America. In doing so I believe he might have delayed something far worse than intemperate tweeting.

Tuesday, October 23, 2018

Trump Fires A Shot Across The Bow Of The S.S. Neocon

Uh oh, Trump used the "N" word!

Watch this snippet from Trump's campaign rally for Ted Cruz.



Nationalist is supposed to be a bad word, one not used in polite company. As someone that used to buy into the standard "conservative" rhetoric, I always tried to avoid the word or having any appearance of being nationalistic. We were told that more globalism would magically make the American economy stronger when all of our factory workers and blue collars laborers suddenly became computer programmers and mechanical engineers. In return for giving the Wall Street globalists what they wanted, we were promised what we wanted. We were played for suckers.

There is no free trade, and there hasn't been in my lifetime. There are no truly free markets on any scale, and there hasn't been in my lifetime. There is no international community, just a bunch of countries that work against the interests of American tax-payers while profiting by and being protected by those same American tax-payers. We were told to invite the world to come to America, cuz Statue of Liberty!, and that diversity would be out greatest strength but as we became more diverse, we became more conflicted and divided. At the same time we have been propagandized endlessly to defer or eschew entirely having children. My wife and I rejected that advice but a lot of others didn't and now we are facing a demographic crisis. Oops, now we have to bring in more immigrants or you won't get that Social Security you paid into your entire adult life. More on that later.

Trump's statement last night had the predictable response from Leftists, namely breathless hysteria and obligatory ominous talk about 1930's Germany (from people that couldn't find Germany on a bet). But it also ruffled the feathers of the small group of Beltway "conservatives" who hate Trump, and truth be told hate most actual conservatives. They have tolerated us for a while and even pretended to like us because they needed our votes but when we rejected the cast of clowns that they preferred in 2016 (Jeb!, Fiorina, Rubio, Kasich), they turned on their erstwhile "allies" with a vengeance and a viciousness that makes a lot of liberals look like lapdogs. Here is the chief among them, Bill Kristol, with what I guess he thinks is a terribly profound and clever tweet in response to Trump's use of the "N" word....


Kristol and his ilk, Jennifer Rubin, David Frum, Max Boot, etc. still pretend to be "conservatives" but when you look at what they are saying and who is agreeing with them....well this is what I said about that.

So there is that.

Trump's line in that speech was, whether he even realized it or not, a direct slap in the face of the disloyal opposition in the Republican party that prefers losing gracefully to winning because what they really care about is selling books, being on TV and getting invites to the best cocktail parties in D.C. and New York. Those are the conservatives that see Americans outside of their little urban enclaves as nothing more than interchangeable units of production and consumption. They very nobly permit us to buy their books and magazines but in return they expect us to shut up and do as they tell us.

Part of the great re-alignment we are seeing politically is between the elites and their oppressed allies/useful idiots and the non-elites that make up the rest of the country. Trump once again declared which side he is on and the responses from the elites leaves no room for misinterpretation. This is a winner-takes-all, existential struggle and there is no room for compromise. Not anymore.

Roving Bands Of Guns Are Roaming The Streets Of Detroit And Shooting Young Black Men

I saw this the other day from the Detroit News, Detroit grapples with 'devastating' impact of black male homicides, and it is so typical of the conversation about the murder rate among blacks: it is all about who is getting shot and not about who is doing the shooting. Here is a perfect example (emphasis mine):

And for younger African-American males, the numbers are even more startling. As of Aug. 1, 64 African-American men between the ages of 18-35 had lost their lives to gunfire in Detroit, out of 175 homicides in the first seven months of this year, according to figures from the Detroit Police Department. 

During all of last year, 107 African-American males in the same age group were killed by gunfire in Detroit, out of 267 total homicides, and in the first seven months of 2016, 133 young black men were shot to death.

Killed by gunfire. Lost their lives to gunfire. It sounds like guns are running around the streets of Detroit and randomly shooting innocent black men. Young black men in Detroit are not being killed by "gunfire", they are being killed by other young black men. That is true in Detroit and Baltimore and St. Louis and Chicago, everywhere that there is a high level of black homicide. Whites are not killing young black men. Cops are rarely killing young black men and in almost every case when they do it is justified. Simply put, the problem of black homicide and the ongoing killing in huge numbers of young black men is almost entirely an interracial issue. But the response is always the same. From the same article:

“The daily toll of gun violence in communities of color is a major failing by our elected officials and society," said Nick Wilson of States United to Prevent Gun Violence. "No one law is going to end gun violence in America, but this report demonstrates the urgency to research and address why black men are needlessly dying at such elevated rates.

"In addition to closing loopholes in our current gun laws, we must invest in community-based prevention and collaborative policing programs," he said.

Detroit's police chief points to historic socioeconomic problems plaguing black communities such as poverty, joblessness, lack of opportunity and lack of stable male role models for the high homicide rate among African-American males.

The same tired rhetoric. We need more gun laws, even though Michigan is a state with a high rate of gun ownership but a murder problem only in the black community. We need more programs, which translates to government funding for community organizers that reap the rewards and show no results. We need more jobs even though the unemployment rate and especially among blacks is plummeting and there are tons of good paying jobs sitting vacant right now.

What never seems to be mentioned is that there is a cultural problem among blacks. There are lots of poor whites in this country but they don't kill each other at even a fraction of the rate black men do. There are poor Asians and they have a negligible homicide rate. Even Hispanics have a much lower homicide rate than blacks, although it is still much higher than the rate for whites and Asians. The problem of young black men "dying to gunfire" in Detroit is entirely a problem of young black men pulling triggers whether in the commission of a crime, in gang related violence or just someone mad at someone else and settling a beef with a gun.

This is another example of the media willfully twisting language and shifting focus to avoid reporting on the actual problem and instead pushing a particular and partisan agenda. Yet they get irate when they are called fake news.

Focusing on just the victim side of the equation and not the perpetrator side is a certain recipe for seeing this plague of murder among young black men continuing indefinitely.

Saturday, October 20, 2018

White Women As Oppressors

The news came out last week that Fauxcahontas Elizabeth Warren allegedly took a DNA test and is somewhere between 1/64th and 1/1,024th American Indian (I refuse to use the PC term "Native American", as someone born in America I am as much a native as anyone else). Her identification as an Indian was useful in the past because she could claim to be a minority and get preference in job applications but today her insistence on publishing these ludicrous results (almost any white person will show up with this level of Indian-ness) has a more serious  logic to it. It is her prelude to announcing she is running for President in 2020 and trying to eliminate Trump's attacks on her silly Indian background claim up front, although it won't stop Trump from using it. South Park predicted this day...



What Warren is really up to is signaling to the leftist base in the Democratic party that votes in the primaries and are overwhelmingly far left and charging more to the left at breakneck speed. It is going to be tough to be a garden variety white liberal and win national elections in the Democratic party. While conservatives are laughing at her on social media, her test results provide some cover to her supporters.

Being a woman used to be enough to give you some street cred with the left. Women are oppressed, women make less than men (even though everyone knows that is bogus), women are always just a hair away from losing their "right" to murder their child in the womb. But then a funny thing happened. In 2016 white women voted by a slim margin for Trump over The Anointed One Hillary. That made a lot of people quite upset but then there was the "pussy hat" (liberal) women's march and lots of white women showed up to that so they could listen to Linda Sarsour rant, never once wondering what would happen to women's rights if Sarsour's co-religionists become a majority. All seemed to be OK until the Kavanaugh hearings where a lot of white women suddenly seemed to realize that the same sort of baseless, no-proof accusations that almost derailed Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court could be leveled against their husband or son or brother or nephew. It suddenly became real to them. Just like that, regular white women moved from the oppressed category to the oppressor class.

A few weeks ago a black man, Jamal Simmons, wrote a piece for The Hill titled: Understanding ‘the white women thing’. Think about the arrogance of that. Then think about what the response would be to a conservative white man writing an article titled "Understanding the black women thing". Of course those sorts of blatant double standards never get much attention. Other similar article are springing up. White women as a group are being blamed for all sorts of stuff, like this tweet demonstrates:


White women tend to marry white men. Well duh, that is true for all races. Black men tend to marry black women, Asian men tend to marry Asian women, etc. We share a race and often cultures, and we tend to associate largely with our own race so it makes sense that people tend to marry within their own race. But white women marrying WHITE MEN is cause for concern because white men are The Source Of All Evil™. Apparently when white women marry white men it changes how they think. I would simply say that is obvious and desirable. A man of any race that gets married should shift his thinking away from what is good for me and toward what is good for my wife and my children. Likewise a woman of any race that gets married should shift her thinking away from what is good for me and toward what is good for my husband and my children. That is natural and it is part of what preserves each successive generation. But in the case of white women this is bad because aligning yourself with white men is Always Bad, even if they are your husband, because everything white men want is inherently awful. Read between the lines and what you find is that we should encourage white women to not marry, or at least not marry white men. The hostility toward white women, and even white feminists, is getting more vocal. As a group they are losing their utility in advancing the progressive agenda and thus are finding themselves more often than not on the outside looking in.

This is what Senator Warren is up against. Looking at the 2020 field you see a lot of people like Kamala Harris and Cory "I am Spartacus!" Booker. Senator Harris is bi-racial, Indian and Jamaican. Cory Booker is black. There are others on the early list, like Eric Holder who is also black. They get bonus points for oppression categories and that is going to play well in the Dem primary voting population. Warren? She is just a garden variety white liberal. She doesn't have much to set her apart except her alleged "Indian" ancestry so she takes a DNA test (also allegedly) and trumpets that she is at least a tiny part American Indian. The fact that she is potentially less American Indian than every other average white person is lost on her. She got scorched on social media, the memes were brutal but she keeps doubling-down on her claims. Why would she keep on promoting this charade? Again, to signal the liberal base.

An awful lot of white feminist women are going to be in for a rude awakening when they discover that they are no longer considered a preferred identity group. As Kyle Smith, writing for National Review (Welcome to the party pal!), states: ‘White Women’ Becomes a Disparaging Term. Here is a snippet:

Today, white women are being lumped together into a giant bloc subject to absurdly broad stereotyping and vitriolic condemnation. They’re being told to step back and know their place by writers in the New York Times (“white women benefit from patriarchy by trading on their whiteness to monopolize resources for mutual gain”), The New Yorker (“despite the enduring legacy of testimony by black women, white women have often played the protagonists in the history of sexual violence, and black women have been relegated to the supporting cast”) and NBC News (“white women who voted for Trump . . . clearly have no issue with the president’s openly misogynistic behavior, his demeaning of female reporters and his mocking of [Christine Blasey] Ford”).

So give Elizabeth Warren a break. She is simply trying to distance herself from her obvious racial heritage in order to preserve her political future.

Thursday, October 11, 2018

Sneak Off The Plantation And Boom You Are A "Token Negro"

Watch this panel on CNN calling Kanye West a "token Negro"



"Kanye West is what happens when Negroes don't read". I am not sure if he said "nigro" instead of "negro", which is some sort of slang blend of "nigger" and "negro" but maybe not, I have watched it several times and I can't tell. Then after he said that the other two black talking heads smirked and guffawed while the liberal "token honky" sat there looking terribly uncomfortable. "Um, can I laugh? Is it racist if I laugh? Is it racist if I don't laugh? What should I do?!". Ironically it is Democrats that demand tokenism and froth at the mouth when Trump says Maxine Waters is a really low IQ person, which she clearly is.

Depending on the poll, black support for Trump is actually quite high relatively speaking. That might have something to do with the really low black unemployment rate or it might have to do with a lot of black voters realizing that mass immigration hurts their job prospects. I don't expect to see some massive wave of black voters voting for the GOP in 2018 but if Trump's numbers among blacks stays strong or climbs, it could help propel him to re-election in 2020. While guilty white liberals are fixated on "sexual assault" claims from 35 years ago, most people in this country are more worried about jobs and immigration.

Liberals hate a lot of people. Trump voters, white people in general, business owners, gun owners, religious people, etc. but there is no category of people liberals hate more than black people that stray from the plantation.

Monday, October 8, 2018

We Can't Just Return To Normal

Last week was perhaps the ugliest political week I can remember. More so than the Bork hearings, more than the Clarence Thomas hearings, more than the aftermath of the 2000 election and "hanging chads". A fairly pedestrian fight over a judicial nominee morphed into something ugly and awful. A man was nearly destroyed, his family was threatened and the nation's division became worse than ever. To most of the nation, either a man was rightly confirmed after being unfairly smeared by Democrats or a serial rapist was elevated to the highest court in the nation. There aren't many people in-between. How can we continue to live together with such dissonance in our worldview?

As for me, I don't have any reason to doubt Justice Kavanaugh's word when he says that he is innocent of these charges and the longer this was dragged out, the less credible the charges became. Just as importantly, even if he had done what he was accused of it would not rise to the level of sexual assault and would in no way be disqualifying for a Supreme Court nomination 35 years later. In 1982 a handful of teens at a small party where no adults were present, engaging in underage drinking, and a boy getting a little overly enthusiastic with a girl would not have drawn any police scrutiny other than for underage drinking. Was Ms. Ford "assaulted"? I have no way of knowing and neither do you. I am not even sure that Ms. Ford is sure. She struck me as a little unhinged and mentally unhealthy, and I really think she was a useful patsy for Democrats to try to derail Kavanaugh. But then Trump backed him up, Kavanaugh refused to follow the script as a white man in 2018 America and immediately buckle and all of a sudden this took on a life of it's own.

In spite of the smear attempts, efforts at intimidation and the screeching of deranged women in the Senate chamber, Brett Kavanaugh was duly confirmed by the U.S. Senate in keeping with their Constitutional right and obligation of "advice and consent". Shortly afterward he was sworn in and starting on Tuesday will begin hearing arguments as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. May he rule on cases justly and within the boundaries of the Constitution as written and intended.

Saturday and to a lesser extent Sunday was a day where a lot of conservatives took a social media victory lap. It is kind of petty but after that fiasco you can understand being a little smug and lapping up some liberal tears. It is the world we live in. Today most of us are going back to our lives, work and family and whatever else.

Don't.

I know that is the easy impulse. We have real lives and other things to worry about other than the latest outrage of the day but the Left lives in a constant state of fevered make-believe where it is always a good time to march in the streets. They don't think about anything else because they have nothing else in their lives. Even before the vote on Saturday they were scheming ways to "impeach" Justice Kavanaugh if they retake the House or to add a bunch of Supreme Court Justices and pack the court with liberals to offset the current conservative majority. They are talking about eliminating the electoral college or changing the way Senate seats are apportioned to states, and not just whack-a-doodle loons but "respectable" legacy media "journalists" are pondering this stuff on social media. From the moment they wake up until they go to bed, many "progressives" think of nothing other than how to undermine the foundations of this country. They remind me how Kyle Reese describes the Terminator from the original movie:

Listen, and understand! That Terminator is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop... ever, until you are dead!



We cannot "come together" and reconcile with them. There is no middle ground to be found. The Left has already enshrined the Kavanaugh confirmation in their lore, the latest outrage against women by the white male patriarchy. It is holy writ to them now in the same way that the tale of Mohammad receiving the Koran from Allah is holy writ for Muslims. It will be spoken of in hushed voices and reverent tones when they gather. I wouldn't be surprised to see progressives gather on the anniversary of Kavanaugh's confirmation to light candles and scream at the sky. These are the same people trying to claw their way through the 13 ton bronze doors of the U.S. Supreme Court building while chanting "shut it down" (on a day it was out of session anyway).

We can't just go back to our normal lives. They will not let us. They will not let up now, just the opposite. The Left counts on the passivity of the Right in this country outside of times of high crisis like the Kavanaugh hearings. I know it is exhausting but the clock is ticking and the American experiment is on life support. We need the sort of commitment and fervor that we had during World War II. That is not hyperbole, this state of affairs is that serious. On every front Western civilization is under assault and once it departs this world, darkness and chaos will reign.

There is no normal to return to. Not anymore.

Saturday, October 6, 2018

It Is Terrifying That These People Vote

People in this country have lost their minds. What is worse, they are being encouraged in this madness. How can any sane person think this? I am surprised she didn't claim that Trump would organize rape concentration camps or something like that.


Wednesday, October 3, 2018

I Believe Facts And Evidence

If you needed further proof that the Brett Kavanaugh fiasco is about a lot more than just a single court nomination, you need look no father than the new mantra that is going around: "Believe women". We are told that women never, ever lie and not only do they never, ever lie they especially never, ever lie about sexual assault and if you point out the high profile cases where they did just that, well then you are just a misogynist. We are supposed to believe that human nature doesn't exist and that half of the population is faultlessly honest, something that would be a major surprise to all human beings since there have been human beings.

"Believe women" is a nonsensical phrase by any measure. Believe them when? Always? Only in cases of alleged sexual assault? What if two women are giving contradictory accounts of the same event, who do we believe? Believe them why? Because they are women? Because women don't lie (as a brother, son, husband and father of girls, I can attest that is not true)? Because a woman would never lie specifically about sexual assault even though there are lots of high profile cases of that very thing happening?

The thing is, it is not supposed to make sense and it is not supposed to stand up to examination. It is something you just have to say or you are a bad person. Just like "Black Lives Matter" is a mantra you have to agree with without asking any irritating clarifying questions, "Believe Women" is your pass-phrase that signifies you are acceptable for polite, sophisticated company. It also is incredibly dangerous and contrary to the fundamental principles that guide a free society. It is a perilous comparison to make but we already have had situations where the word of some people was given more credence than the words of others. After the Civil War it was not uncommon for allegations leveled against a black man by a white person, especially a white woman, to be automatically given more credence. If you are not familiar with the Tulsa race riots in 1921, you should familiarize yourself with them. Perhaps the quintessential American novel, Harper Lee's To Kill A Mockingbird, deals with the same situation where a black man is presumed guilty because of course a white woman would never lie.

The accusations of sexual assault in the Kavanaugh confirmation circus were chosen for a reason. Sexual assault accusations have been weaponized for decades by the Left. Actual rape is abhorrent to all of us. It is grotesque because it typically pits a much stronger man against a weaker woman. Men are supposed to protect women, not abuse them. It also takes what is a natural and wonderful aspect of humanity and turns it into something ugly. The same act that creates children in a loving family can also destroy the life of a woman. It is a more visceral, more personal crime than shoplifting or stealing a car or dealing drugs and that is why it carries heavy penalties, penalties that I would favor increasing in almost all cases.

But...

Sexual assault is also one of the most difficult crimes to prove. Accusations of sexual assault are notoriously hard to prove because of the nature of the allegations. I am not a cop or a prosecutor but I am quite certain that sexual assault cases are some of the worst to try to deal with.

In general, at least speaking for me and the people I know, sexual encounters are almost always a) behind closed doors and b) a private encounter between two and only two people. I know, that is terribly prudish of me. But what that means is that except in the circumstances of obvious cases like a man abducting a woman at knife-point and raping her, many accusations of sexual assault boil down to a "he said, she said" situation. When a man and woman go behind closed doors, there are no witnesses. There is often little physical evidence that is damning unless a woman is bruised or otherwise shows signs of being forced and even then it can be dismissed as "rough sex". The easiest defense in the world is to simply claim that a sexual encounter was consensual and unless we assign a higher value on the testimony of women, that is a pretty hard defense to get around because of the nature of these encounters. It is worth noting that in the Kavanaugh case there were other people present and they do not support his accusers story, so that makes it even less credible. So my advice to women is this: it is far better to avoid situations where you might become a victim than to put yourself in sketchy situations in the first place. More on that in a moment.

Then there is the nature of contemporary human sexual interaction, especially outside of marriage. I am not sure what it is like today, and I find it terrifying to even consider, but for most of my life a boy and a girl/man and a woman would go out on some dates. Maybe he kisses her, maybe she lets him. Maybe he tries a little more. Maybe on early dates she pushes his hand away but then on future dates she doesn't. It is a horribly awkward dance that has gone on for a very long time but it was part of the teen and young adult dating scene. If a boy and a girl are making out and he "makes a move" and she let's him but then he makes another escalating move and she stops him, did he sexually assault her? If so, most of us are going to jail. Sex between two people outside of marriage is a very emotionally fraught thing. Emotions are invested and often they are crushed. It doesn't help things at all when you let a tiny mentally unstable minority turn an already confusing and awkward process into a politically charged and quite possibly criminal activity.

So you have a situation where there are often no witnesses and no evidence and where the nuances of human sexual behavior leave an enormous amount of room for confusion.

However, and this is so critically important: just because an allegation is difficult to prove does not mean that we should lower the standard for evidence. If anything we should raise the standard because it is so easy to falsely accuse someone of this crime. Here is a very recent example: Woman says lawmaker raped her the night she graduated Georgetown. Here is the gist. A woman by the name of Candace Faber claims that a man who is now a Washington state Senator named Joe Fain, raped her on the night of her college graduation. She claims she was inspired by the Kavanaugh case to "come forward". These are the salient facts:

  • Ms. Faber met Mr. Fain on the night she graduated.
  • By her own account she and Mr. Fain spent the night drinking heavily, dancing and kissing.
  • She accompanied Mr. Fain to his hotel room apparently voluntarily.
  • At this point, behind closed doors, she claims he pinned her down, pulled down her dress and raped her.
  • She claims she "told him to stop and put her foot on his head to push him away"
  • Finally, and this is where it gets a little weird, "After the man raped her, she wrote, she asked him for a kiss goodbye before leaving the room."

Ms. Faber spent the night with a man she had just met, dancing and drinking and making out with him, before walking with him to his hotel and then going up to his room. She told her mom and a co-worker afterward that she had been raped, although the co-worker concedes that at the time she "was struggling with her mental health", whatever that means.

So should we "believe women" in this case? She says she told him no and put her foot on his head to shove him away. On the other hand she says she was drinking heavily with him, had been making out with him, went willingly to his hotel room and after he supposedly raped her, asked him for a kiss. Now I have never been raped or assaulted but that seems to be an odd response. I would imagine that if the police investigate this allegation, prosecutors will not press charges based on the "he said, she said" nature of the encounter and her odd behavior of asking him for a kiss after he allegedly raped her.

Can I at this point suggest that while I don't know if Mr. Fain raped Ms. Faber or if they just had sloppy drunk one-night-stand sex and he never called her again or somewhere in between, perhaps it would have been wiser for Ms. Faber, a graduate of a prestigious university, to not get really drunk and go to the hotel room of a man she had just met that evening after spending that evening making out with him.

You're victim blaming! REEEEEEE!!!!

That is another dumb phrase that needs to die a quick and painful death. It is not "victim blaming" to point out simple common sense. If you park your brand new Mercedes in Detroit with the windows down, the key in the ignition, the doors unlocked and the engine running with the radio blaring country music and come back the next morning to find it gone, would anyone be surprised? That doesn't make stealing it less of a crime but it is basic common sense that you wouldn't do that. We tell kids to not talk to strangers and never, ever get in a car with strangers. Is it then "victim blaming" if a child ignores those precautions and is abducted? Of course not. So the message to our daughters and female loved ones should be this:

Sexual assault is real and all too common. It is very hard to prove but if it ever happens to you please come to us and we will go together to the police. We love you and would never want anything like this to happen to you so to reduce the chance of getting into a bad situation, don't drink to excess and don't go alone with a man you aren't married to somewhere out of sight, especially when one or both of you has been drinking. When people drink, their inhibitions loosen and their decision making skills plummet. That is why you are not allowed to drive a car while inebriated. So please use common sense and good decision making to avoid situations where you might find yourself in an uncomfortable or dangerous position. You can't avoid every circumstance where you might get in trouble but you should avoid the ones you can.

Those sort of cautions were part of parenting young women for centuries and no one thought it was odd. It was simply being aware of human nature.

Today it is considered preferable to demand that we "Believe Women" after any accusation of sexual assault instead of counseling common sense precautions that would help girls and young women avoid these situations in the first place. Even if you for some reason believe her story, it remains an irrefutable fact that if Christine Ford had not gone to a house with a bunch of boys that she didn't know when there were no parents around and underage kids were drinking, then none of these alleged events would have happened. "Well girls should be able to go wherever they want without fear of consequences!". That sounds lovely but in real life we all know better. Go walk around an inner city this weekend wearing a white hood and see what happens. Sure you should be able to do so without fear of consequences but in the real world that isn't what would happen. Heck, wearing a MAGA hat or an American flag t-shirt can get you assaulted in a lot of zip codes in this country and that is First Amendment protected political speech. You are free to do whatever you want but you are not free of the consequences of your actions.

As for me, I believe in facts and evidence. I believe in due process and presumption of innocence and just because this isn't a court of law doesn't mean basic principles like that no longer apply. The reason we have things like due process, evidence and witness based trials and presumption of innocence in courts of law is not because they are some esoteric legal constructs but because they are foundational to a functioning society. I believe women when their accusations are credible, defined as being provable. In the case of Ms. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, I believe him as of now because her accusations are not credible as she lacks any sort of evidence or proof.

I don't believe women just because they are women, or men because they are men. I don't automatically believe accusations of sexual assault just because other people have been actual victims of sexual assault. I believe in facts and evidence. We live in dangerous times when saying that is controversial.

Scratch A Beltway NeverTrump NeoCon...

....and you find a garden variety liberal. The latest from Bill Kristol....


Keep in mind that at one time Kristol was considered to be a legitimate conservative. As it turns out, he is just a war-mongering liberal that latched onto the Republican party to push for wars.

Millions of us have dutifully been taking our marching orders from people like this, voting for whatever lackluster establishment empty suit they demanded we support. They promised us that this time would be different, once the candidates they allowed us to vote for got elected they would totally be on board with overturning Roe or protecting marriage. Instead what we got were a bunch of new wars that people like Kristol didn't fight but were happy to send the sons and daughters of middle America to bleed and die in. Oh and as a bonus tax cuts that benefited the donors that prop up the neocon think tanks and of course trade and immigration policies that gutted the middle America economy but made a handful of donors rich.

So please Bill, fee free to leave the Republican party. Feel free to follow other limp-wristed, bow-tie wearing, Nancy-boys like George Will in abandoning any pretense of conservatism. Go hook up with the Jennifer Rubins and David Brooks of the world and see what a powerful coalition you can form with a handful of urban neocons. We don't need you and we don't want you or your pompous smirk. Quit pretending and unleash the "inner liberal". We all see through you anyway.

Monday, October 1, 2018

You Can't Reason With Jihadi

In case you still think you can convince the Left through persuasion, facts, reason and arguments, watch this brief video of Turning Point USA's Charlie Kirk trying to have a civil conversation with some screaming women.



Notice that they shout him down, hold signs in front of his face, interrupt him and are generally rude and uncivil. He is trying to politely answer questions but they don't care what he is saying. They are just infuriated that he dares to say something they disagree with. I don't think they are mad at what he is saying, they are just mad that he is speaking.

They don't care about facts.

They don't care about the rule of law.

They don't care about reason.

They openly reject civil debate.

Stop thinking that the problem is that we aren't getting our message out. The problem is that we are trying to debate political philosophy with a violent fundamentalist religion. If you have ever tried to have a reasonable conversation with a KJV-Only type, you know what I am talking about. Now multiply that times a million and instead of being some obscure Baptist church now you are dealing with millions of people itching for an excuse to get violent.

That is what we are dealing with.