Monday, February 25, 2019

Lethal Ignorance

Over the last few years I have observed the sudden shift of many black evangelicals who once were considered staunch theological conservatives chucking theological orthodoxy in favor of overt racialist religion, much of it barely distinguishable from Marxist "black liberation theology", which ironically has done the opposite of liberating blacks. From Ron Burns, aka "Thabiti Anyabwile" declaring he was voting for pro-infanticide Hillary Clinton to "reformed rapper" Lecrae deciding to scold the people who buys his music, a small but significant section of the evangelical world abandoned ship all at once in favor of racialism. Among the names that pop up saying ridiculous things on a regular basis, like Jemar Tisby and Kyle Howard, is Anthony Bradley. Bradley was pretty well regarded. He is a fellow at the conservative Acton Institute and wrote a few books that sold well (presumably mostly to white evangelicals). He also said in December of 2017 that white evangelicals have never had the Gospel.  Ever. A pretty bold statement that functionally declares the vast majority of evangelicals in America to be unsaved and heretics. If what you are preaching isn't the actual Gospel, it is a false gospel and Paul declared those who preach another gospel to be anathema (see the first chapter of Galatians). Since that tweet drumming all white evangelicals out of the Kingdom, his tweets have grown more shrill and less sensible. That leads to this beauty:

Here are a couple of basic facts.

- Blacks are 13% of the population but commit over 50% of all of the murders in the United States.

- Blacks are overwhelmingly the victims of crimes by other blacks, not whites. 

Conversely, while most crime is intraracial, when it comes to interracial crime whites are far more likely to be the victims of violent crime at the hands of blacks than blacks are from whites. This in spite of whites outnumbering blacks by more than 4 to 1.

In the real world, Anthony Bradley is probably far safer in mostly white "spaces" than he is in "all black spaces". Especially somewhere like NYC where almost the only civilians with guns are gang members, who again tend to be black or Hispanic. In fact I would say that propagating this sort of misinformation is deadly dangerous to blacks who are taught to fear whites while being in more danger from fellow blacks.

According to his bio at the Acton Insitute, Anthony Bradley is a pretty well educated guy:

Dr. Bradley holds Bachelor of Science in biological sciences from Clemson University, a Master of Divinity from Covenant Theological Seminary, a Masters in Ethics and Society from Fordham University, and a Doctor of Philosophy degree from Westminster Theological Seminary.

Oddly enough, all of the universities that Mr. Bradley has attended were founded by white men, and in the case of the religious schools he attended, according to Bradley none of them had the Gospel. Ever.

In any case, Bradley is a highly educated man who is capable of doing extensive research and therefore I assume is able to research basic facts like what I referred to above. He almost certainly knows without question that a black man is overwhelmingly more likely to be the victim of a violent crime at the hands of a fellow black man than he is from a white man. He has spent most of his professional and educational career surrounded by whites that he knows pose no threat to him. He must be aware that black men are far and away more dangerous to him as a black man than any community of whites he might find himself in, especially in a liberal, disarmed place like New York City. So why would he write something that is demonstrably false and that he knows full well is the precise opposite of reality?

The only reason I can think of is that he is signaling to his fellow black religious racialists and liberal whites. What he wrote is obviously nonsense and in fact is not only a lie but would constitute bearing false witness, which is still on the Ten Commandments list of "thou shalt not" as far as I know. Either he is lying for clicks and approval or he is so self-deluded that he actually believes this. Whichever, it makes one question why the Acton Institute keeps him on staff or why he is the chair of the religious studies program at The King's College. What does it say about The King's College, a school that proclaims itself to be "firmly rooted in the great tradition of the animating ideals of Western Civilization" while employing a man that seems to hate that tradition and the people that make it up and who regularly slanders and bears false witness against his fellow believers. Presumably the founder of TKC, Percy Crawford, would also have never had the Gospel, according to Anthony Bradley but Bradley seems fine with the pay and privilege that comes from working there.

We as a people are often scolded about our failure to have an "honest conversation about race in this country" but it seems to many of us that it is pretty hard to have a conversation that consists of a one-sided scolding from people that don't seem to mind lying when it suits them. I am more than willing to have an honest conversation about race, anywhere and anytime with anyone, but I don't think a lot of people on the other side of the conversation are interested in that at all. That is too bad because we certainly could use one but I don't see one happening anytime soon.

If It Weren't For Hoax Hate Crimes....

...would there be any "hate crimes" at all?

The Left is scrambling to provide cover for Jussie Smollett. He needs mental health help, he has a drug problem, he was driven to it by Trump. Anything to distract people from the fact that the most high profile "hate crime" in recent history was a hoax. Trying to preserve the sanctity of "hate crimes" is critical for the Left because it is such an important faith affirming story in their religion. The lore of hate crimes is that "people of color", religious minorities and sexual deviants are under constant threat of being attacked in the streets or at least having someone say something mean about them. Every time it turns out that one of these "hate crimes" is a hoax, and that happens a lot, it undermines their religion.  That is why we get stuff like this:

I sort of know Chuck McKnight, we were collaborators on a book, Simple Church: Unity Within Diversity, back in 2014 but clearly we have gone on very different trajectories politically.

Obviously that statement from Chuck is false. People who assumed that Jussie was telling the truth, even as his claim was so clearly ridiculous, did so because they believe the worst about their fellow Americans of a different political persuasion. If Chuck believed Jussie, he did so because he has convinced himself that America is full of roaming hordes of Trump supporters looking for homos to beat up. "Victims" don't deserve to be believed because very often the "victims" are not victims at all. Christine Ford didn't deserve to be believed because she wasn't a victim. Jussie Smollett didn't "deserve" to be believed because he was never a victim. People making credible claims of being the victim of a crime deserve due process and to be take seriously but they don't deserve to be believed just because they say they were victimized. But to people like Chuck, anyone that fits the right profile (sexual deviant, minority, liberal woman) is automatically afforded absolute belief unless you can prove beyond any reason that they are lying. If a story of a white actor who claimed to be beaten up by two black men wearing Black Lives Matter t-shirts and screaming "This is Wakanda cracker!" were to hit the news, I very much doubt Chuck would demand they be believed. Whether you are given the benefit of belief based on a claim is entirely dependent on your identity.

We are supposed to accept that hoaxes like Jussie Smollett are not commonplace at all and that we should still believe "victims" without question but the reports keep coming out. Here is a new one just from this morning: Jackson gay rights leader accused of burning down own home. What appears to be a woman dressed as a man, Nikki Joly, is on trial for burning down her own home with five pets inside that perished. The police investigated and as is often the case the story broke down quickly. Why would this person burn down their own home? There is an answer to that:

Meanwhile, a police investigative report suggests a possible reason for the fire.

Two people who worked with Joly at St. Johns United Church of Christ, where the Jackson Pride Center was located, said he had been frustrated the controversy over gay rights had died down with the passage of the nondiscrimination law, according to the report.

The church officials, Barbara Shelton and Bobby James, when asked by police about a possible motive for the fire, said Joly was disappointed the Jackson Pride Parade and Festival, held five days before the blaze, hadn’t received more attention or protests.

Since the story got out they are now backtracking on their statements but that has the ring of truth to it. People like Ms. Joly are mentally ill and desperate for attention and when they don't get enough, they act out like a small child that feels that mommy and daddy are ignoring them. Why do little kids do naughty stuff that they know they are going to get punished for? Because they crave attention more than they fear punishment. Jussie Smollett seems to be a similar story of a man who was desperate for attention and driven by hatred of President Trump and white people in general. The "church" mentioned above still managed to raise $58,000 and I doubt they will be sending that money back now that it is clear this is a hoax.

According to the story, it took 13 months for Ms. Joly to be charged. Thirteen months of wasting time and police resources. Thirteen months of work that could have been focused on actual crimes. But instead they were chasing down bogus leads even though it seems the police figured out who the real culprit was very early on. But even now, some people don't believe it.

Joly’s arrest hasn’t necessarily settled the issue.

Some residents refuse to entertain the notion he could be guilty.

“There’s no path for me to believe it could ever be true,” said Elody Samuelson, a bisexual who raised money for Joly after the fire. “There’s no way he did it, not a bit, not a chance.”

Read that again. There is nothing that could be shown that would convince this individual that this was a hoax. They won't believe it because they can't believe it. Their whole religious outlook depends on stories like this being true so even in the face of overwhelming evidence, they refuse to believe it was a hoax. People like this put even the most ardent Christian fundamentalist to shame.

There are certainly actual "hate crimes", or criminal acts motivated by racism or "homophobia" or antisemitism or whatever. But very often these cases are hoaxes and a this is well documented (here is a list of over 400 cases). That is why we should prosecute crimes of all kinds in the same manner: with due process, depending on evidence and with a presumption of innocence for the accused. That is the only way we can have a functioning justice system. When we arbitrarily demand that "victims" automatically be believed, it skews our justice system and upends the rule of law.

We should always rely on facts and evidence. Period.

Sunday, February 24, 2019

A Cursory Study Of History Would Tell Them How This Ends

I started calling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez the dumbest person ever elected to national office as soon as she was elected but I am not sure that was fair as it seems that Ilhan Omar is at least as dumb and probably even more so. Even if she is only the second dumbest person ever elected to national office, that still makes her pretty dumb and in some rather dubious company alongside Maxine Waters and Dan Quayle. What makes AOC even worse is that she harbors some pretty serious delusions of grandeur. She is completely lacking in the self-awareness to realize she is a 29 year old kid that was a tavern wench this time last year but has decided that as she has been elected as one of 435 representatives in the U.S. House, along with people like my congressman Jim Banks and guys like Iowa's Steve King, she is now "in charge" of America and you all better just shut up and listen to your betters.

Notice that there is no room for questioning the very existence of man-made "climate change". You are obligated to either propose a sweeping "on-scale" seizure of the entire economic system of America to be remade in her image or you just shut the hell up. She is in charge. The "little people", in other words the American people, are just "shouting from the cheap seats". Then she doubled down by screeching that "I'm the boss"

Any parent will recognize this as the rant of a petulant middle-school girl. Her voice is screechy and high pitched and she looks like she is about 30 seconds away from going to her room and slamming the door after screaming "I hate you!" at the American people. Or maybe holding her breath and rolling on the floor kicking and screaming until she turns blue in the face and/or passes out.

She is absolutely outraged at the nerve of people to not immediately let a barkeep with no experience running anything other than a beer tap suddenly declare herself the dictator for life of America. James Woods had a pretty solid response to her arrogant screeching:

You will recall that the Left often murmurs ominously about Trump being a wannabe dictator, a modern day Caesar just waiting to happen, but oddly enough it is loons on the Left that seem to be declaring themselves to be in charge of the entire nation based on being elected for just a single term so far by a handful of people in a section of New York.

In spite of all of the chatter from the progressives about egalitarianism and expanding the electorate, the reality is quite different. The Left only really wants people voting that vote the right way. All of the yammering about the unfairness of bedrock principles like the electoral college and the two Senate seats per state regardless of population is about their general disdain for the American system of government. The idea that plebs from Wyoming and Indiana get a say in the government sticks in their collective craws. They don't mind low-income and low-education minorities voting because they vote the proper way but those damnable working class Republicans voting as they see fit? How dare they!

What Ocasio-Cortez and her ilk want is a form of oligarchy where we are given the impression that we vote for our leaders but the truth is that we get to pick from only a select group of puppets selected and controlled by the oligarchy. I finally started reading Tucker Carlson's new book Ship of Fools and while it has been out since the beginning of October of last year, he was pretty prescient in seeing the attitude of Alexandia Ocasio-Cortez:

All your fears are real. You may have suspected our democracy was actually an oligarchy. Now you know for sure. You can vote all you want, but voting is a charade. Your leaders don’t care what you think. Shut up and obey.

Carlson, Tucker. Ship of Fools: How a Selfish Ruling Class Is Bringing America to the Brink of Revolution (p. 16). Free Press. Kindle Edition.

Shut up and obey or as AOC states: We're in charge, I'm the boss and you peasants are just shouting from the cheap seats. Pretty classist from a self-proclaimed democratic socialist.

Or as many have put it....
Hat tip: WRSA

My general sense of things is that the anger that led to the election of Donald Trump in 2016 has not abated in the least and if anything is rapidly ramping up. The last year was full of open assaults on traditional America from the endless Russia-collusion "investigation" that seeks to disenfranchise tens of millions of Americans to the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings to the slander of the Covington Catholic kids to the obvious Jussie Smollett hoax. In many corners of the internet people are talking about civil war and are preparing for it. I don't think even the most ardent gun control advocate realizes the sheer volume of firearms and ammunition flowing into the hands of the general population in this country. If they could see the promotional emails I get every day from gun sellers, they would be terrified. Many Americans are in possession of not a deer rifle or maybe a hunting shotgun but a dozen or more firearms and hundreds or thousands of rounds of ammunition.

History is replete with examples of arrogant elites coming to a bad end. What is happening now is many traditional liberals as well as many traditional conservatives turning their focus and their ire toward the ruling elite. Jeff Bezos might think he is insulated from this anger but when the dam breaks there won't be any place for the billionaires to hide from the floodwaters. Living in a gated community with a couple of rent-a-cops will dissuade casual criminals but an angry crowd of hundreds? Do you think a rent-a-cop making $15/hour is going to die to protect some arrogant member of the home owner's association living in a million dollar house? They will more likely take off their fake badges and join the crowd.

Our nation is a giant powder keg and people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez arrogantly add power to the mix and keep lighting matches, never seeming to realize that they are at ground zero when the flames of resentment they keep stoking hit the powder and things go up. I suspect she will still be screaming about being in charge and telling the crowd that she is the boss when they tie the blindfold on her.

She's Baaack!

Last July we were treated to the spectacle of a Congolese woman clambering up the base of the Statue of Liberty to protest what a horrible country America is. You know, the America that gave her shelter when she fled from her fellow Congolese. The name of this ungrateful wretch is Therese Patricia Okoumou and I wrote about her last year: The Gratitude Is Heartwarming. In part I wrote:

So a Congolese woman flees a nation full of other Congolese people and leaves behind an incredibly violent and backward nation where murder and rape is common. She comes to the United States and even though we are under no obligation to do so, we welcome her in and she gets to become a citizen of the U.S.. She then spends the next ten years protesting against the nation that took her in and gave her shelter, breaking the law on at least three occasions that we know of during that time. Instead of being grateful to the nation that gave her shelter and provided her with the opportunity to be a personal trainer for Manhattan's elites, she instead spends her time telling us what we are doing wrong. I would imagine that most people saw right through her publicity stunt and are less than impressed.

As I wrote, ingratitude is such an ugly emotion but it is a common one. Immigrants in the late 19th and early 20th century seemed to love their new nation and were grateful for the opportunities afforded them. Many immigrants today, the ones who wave little American flags at their naturalization ceremonies, also seem quite grateful but an awful lot of them are not. They come to America and then promptly start bitching about the things they hate about America and about Americans. Of course they have the right to express their opinion but it seems like there is a huge disconnect when people who benefit enormously from the society built by Americans seem to loathe and hate those same Americans, while at the same time fleeing from their own people. I don't blame Ms. Okoumou for fleeing the Congo, between the civil war, primitive living conditions and the added bonus of ebola outbreaks periodically it sounds like a craphole of a country. It would just be nice if she didn't act superior to the people that built an actual, functioning society that she chose to live in.

She apparently didn't learn any gratitude the last time she was arrested because she just got arrested again, this time in Austin, Texas, for climbing the Southwest Key Building.

The latest bug up her butt is the "detention" of illegal alien kids. After she got down from the building, apparently jumping off the second floor, she was taken to the hospital to get checked out and then arrested. How awful we are that we provide medical care to idiots that climb up and then jump off buildings. I wonder what they do with law-breaking people in the Congo?

How much are we going to spend on law-enforcement and court costs to deal with this lady every time she decides to tell us what awful people we are?

From Do We Really Need These People? Congolese Lady Launches Another Anti-American Protest:

No self-respecting country, let alone a "superpower," would import people who not only bring nothing to the country, but actively hate the people who live here. Why isn't this woman deported? Why aren't foreigners who openly declare their hatred for the nation sent away? After all, Congo is no longer under the rule of Belgium, so why did she deliberately come here to live under the rule of the white people she evidently hates so much?

That sounds a little harsh but I don't think it is wrong. We are endlessly lectured about how diversity is our greatest strength but what exactly is it about Therese Patricia Okoumou that her presence in America, getting regularly arrested, that makes our nation stronger? How are we made stronger by having Somali ghettos in Minneapolis sending fools like Ilhan Omar to Congress? Just having more people that are not of white, European descent is not an immediate positive and it often is a negative. Our immigration policy should be entirely a function of strengthening our nation and benefiting the American people, not turning our nation into a giant couch where people from around the world can crash and then complain that we are out of Doritos.

The next time Therese Patricia Okoumou is arrested she should be stuck on the next flight to the Congo with a one-way ticket and be forced to surrender her U.S. passport. Maybe spending a few years among her fellow Congolese will remind her of how good she had it in America.

Friday, February 22, 2019

Why Do They Call Us Fake News, Episode 1,966

There was a brief flurry recently of news-blurbs featuring people confused about getting a smaller tax refund than in years past. The media painted this as Trump lying to people. "See, people are getting less money back from the government! Orange Man Bad!". As usual the reality of what is really happening is quite different. This succinct video from Mark Dice explains in his usual acerbic manner:

So you end up with more money in your pocket over the course of the year but the lump sum at the end of the year is not as large so you feel cheated. The media knows this, I assume at least the producer level people are intelligent enough to understand what the real story is but they are choosing to run with these fear-mongering stories anyway because their agenda is not to report news but to undermine Trump. These are the same people who get the vapors when Trump calls them fake news and the enemy of the people. Well you can't have it both ways. If you choose sides in the partisan divide and actively and openly work against the President and Republicans, you don't get to get outraged when he calls you out about it.

This is also why the whole "tax refund" thing is so awful, people lose their earnings by dribs and drabs throughout the year but then get a big chunk of money that they already earned back in February and think they struck it rich. It was always your money people!

Jussie Doesn't Get Off That Easily

Every person with two brain cells to rub together knew the Jussie Smollett thing was a hoax from the get-go. There have been way too many hoax hate crimes, it seems like the vast majority of "hate crime" claims are bogus, and his story was so over-the-top that it was unbelievable. Leave it to a gay actor to be such a drama queen that his story would be overly dramatic.

We weren't sure of ever seeing this, a mugshot of Jussie Smollett under arrest, but I am glad to see it. Now we will see if he actually serves significant jail time for this hoax and the alleged mail fraud for sending the "threatening letter" to himself.

As crisis mode is activated, the story is quickly shifting as the media and the politicized Chicago police try to spin this as just Jussie trying to leverage this "attack" into higher pay because he is reportedly bitter about getting "only" $65,000 per episode.


If a white actor had claimed to have been attacked in the middle of the night by two black men wearing Black Lives Matter t-shirts while they doused him in black paint and shouted "This is Wakanda!", but then it turned out the two black men were actually white Ukrainian brothers he had paid to stage the attack, you know full well he would not have been allowed to claim he was only motivated by making more money per episode. He would be prosecuted with every crime they could make stick, hit with hate crimes charges, and he would never set foot on a TV or movie set again. Meanwhile Jussie is back at work. Roseanne Barr lost her show for an ill-advised tweet, but Jussie gets arrested for a hoax hate crime and possible Federal mail fraud and gets to go back to playing make-believe. As an added bonus he was allowed to work through his attorney to arrange a time to surrender to Chicago police, unlike Roger Stone who got the predawn SWAT team raid with weapons out and CNN conveniently on hand to film his humiliation. Ain't white privilege grand!

His staged attack was racist. Period. He spun a story of white men attacking him and included a noose to try to make it seem like the Klan was involved. He claims these men called him a nigger and a faggot and he acted outraged when people questioned him, saying on Good Morning America:

"It's the attackers, but it's also the attacks," said Smollett, who's black and openly gay. "It's not that you don't believe this is the truth; you don't even want to see this is the truth."

He also said he believes that he would have been taken more seriously if his attackers were Muslim or minorities. 

"It feels like if I had said it was a Muslim, or a Mexican, or someone black, I feel like the doubters would’ve supported me a lot more, and that says a lot about the place that we are in our country right now,” he said. 

See, we didn't believe his initial story because we are all a bunch of racist redneck crackers who hate colored folk. It wasn't because the story was so absolutely ridiculous, it was just racism. But when it turns out that the whole story was fabricated to specifically malign white people and Trump supporters, and that if the cops had come up with a couple of white guys to pin it on Jussie would have been fine with it, now we are supposed to just chalk it up to greed. To make it even more galling, Jussie is apparently still maintaining his innocence and his lawyer is complaining about a lack of "due process" even though the Chicago police have handled this as a real complaint with kid gloves from the very start. I am sure the police knew this was a load of bullcrap all along, they hear people lying everyday, but they pretended it was real until the could build the case otherwise.

I am not having it. Jussie Smollett is a flat-out bigot. Not only did he slander tens of millions of Americans for simply being white and voting for Trump but he also exposed once again that most of the media and entertainment world, and many government officials, are not only willing but eager to believe the worst of Americans. At least white Americans. So don't tell me this was about money. This was about a man who hates a large segment of the American population for no reason other than their race and political affiliation so much that he hires two other black men to stage a hoax hate crime, files a false police report, goes on TV to weep and lie about it and still is claiming he was the "victim" of a crime. This was at least as much a racial and political act as it was a financial act.

I wish he would at least own up to it and say that he did it because he hates Trump and white people so much he was willing to plan and stage a hoax in order to slander them for profit. At least I could respect his honesty if not his motivation and planning skills.

Wednesday, February 20, 2019

Lizzie Warren Letting Her Agenda Show

Fake Indian and genuine garden variety liberal old white lady Elizabeth Warren is trying to get the Democrat nomination by playing at being a reasonable liberal-populist. Her window of opportunity closed in 2016 when Hillary won the angry old white feminist nomination but she doesn't seem to realize it yet or she is just hoping that all of the various clowns clamoring for winning the identity politics vote will cancel each other out. Her twitter feed is all full of calls for "free" daycare and increasing the minimum wage. This was my favorite tweet.

Is that true?

Elizabeth Warren was born in 1949 so let's be generous and use the minimum wage when she was 12. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the minimum wage in 1961 was $1.15.hour. See screenshot of chart below.

So working 40 hours per week at $1.15/hour works out to $46 per week or $2,392 per year. Was just shy of $2400/year considered a "living wage" for a family of three in 1961? Maybe but I kind of doubt it. If I am reading these goofy charts correctly, that would be below poverty level in 1961. That is because the minimum wage is intended for the very lowest skill jobs that require no experience. It isn't intended to be a permanent wage for adults to earn while starting and raising a family. See They Are Called Entry Level Jobs For A Reason.

By the way, I love the "mama and a baby" faux earthiness. It is like her saying "I'm gonna get me a beer" on New Years Eve. Do you think in a regular conversation Elizabeth Warren has ever referred to a mother and child as "mama and a baby"? Puh-leeze.

But what really stood out for me in that tweet is the way she (or her staff) subtly shift from "a family of three", which you could assume was a father, mother and child to "a mama and a baby", in other words a single parent home with no father/provider in sight. Who needs a dad around to provide for the family when Uncle Sam can shower you with free daycare, free food, free housing? This is the target voter for Elizabeth Warren, the single mom struggling to make ends meet because she bought into the feminist nonsense about "needing a man like a fish needs a bicycle" and now can't get ahead because, newsflash, in spite of the gurl-power superhero movies, women can't do it all on their own.

This is the vision of America for the Left (and a lot of the Wall Street Journal/Chamber of Commerce Republicans), a population made up of irresponsible fathers and single mothers all in the workforce with children being raised by overworked daycare employees who house our nation's children in feedlots until they get old enough to graduate to larger feedlots called public schools where they develop Lord of the Flies socialization while trying to avoid being molested by their teachers. The American people are just tax cattle and consumers. The last thing people like Elizabeth Warren wants are mothers staying home with their children so she focuses on hiking the minimum wage and subsidized daycare, not so "mama" can stay home with her "baby" but so mama can afford to pay for daycare for her baby. Of course people like Elizabeth Warren don't send their kids to subsidized day-care centers and public schools, they have the best private schools and in-home nannies (preferably an illegal immigrant so she can pay them less. You don't get to be a multi-millionaire in Congress by paying more for services than you have to!).

The ideal for the Left is a small upper-class concentrated in the urban centers made up of elites like Elizabeth Warren and a teeming lower class with as small a middle-class as possible. That lower class should make just enough to pay taxes (to fund the left's programs) and afford day-care with enough disposable income left over to buy the latest cheap crap from Wal-Mart (thus making establishment Republicans happy). But they need to have very limited upward mobility. The key is to balance being resentful enough to keep voting Democrat while not being so resentful that Elizabeth Warren finds her head on a spike. It is a perilous balancing act but I don't think that the liberal top 1% understand how riled up the masses are getting at people just like them. Fortunately for them, the vast majority of the resentful underclass is too weak or too busy killing each other to go after the ultra-rich and the people in this country with all of the guns don't generally reset the more successful. At least not for now. But when the bogeyman of the evil white man slips into minority status and the underclass realizes that their lives still suck, they are going to turn their attention on the fake populist millionaires that have been fanning their resentment and making empty promises for decades. When that happens the French revolution is going to look like a picnic.

Maybe instead of making it more "affordable" to put your kids in daycare and make minimum wage forever, we should encourage intact families, mothers staying at home with their children and employees striving to better their situation by working hard and getting relevant training. You can only run on bribing voters and stoking resentment for so long before it blows up. Start preparing now for the cross-fire when it all goes sideways. You've been warned.

Tuesday, February 19, 2019

The Libertarian Party Jumps The Shark

I was scrolling through my Facebook feed last night and came across this post from the national Libertarian Party:

You will immediately notice that this picture shows people that appear to be of African, Middle Eastern, East Asian, Hispanic, and Indian descent. Then way in the very back we see a white couple. This is pretty ironic as I am quite certain that the vast majority of Libertarians are white. As I pointed out in a previous post, Open Border Libertarianism Is Self-Defeating, immigrants are mostly liberal voting. Somewhere around 80% of foreign born voters vote for Democrats. Conversely, at least at the national party and think-tank level, libertarianism is an overwhelmingly white. According to this post, and I haven't had a chance to investigate it, around 94% of self-described libertarians are white (also see this video from the Brookings Institution). That means that at least for the future of libertarianism, diversity is not our strength and I would argue that the more "diverse" America becomes, the less likely it is we will ever see core libertarian principles become law. Maybe some "socially liberal" policies like drug legalization but the core of libertarianism which is fiscal conservatism and limited government will never become reality and in fact will move the opposite direction. Open borders libertarianism is really not fiscally conservative at all, it is mere libertine rather than libertarian.

People from Mexico and Somalia don't come to America because they are desperate for the chance to vote for Gary Johnson and Bill Weld. They are not starry eyed over the idea of eliminating most government programs. They are coming to America because they are trying to get away from their fellow countrymen and into a country built by European settlers because it is safer and provides a welfare system. The "non-diverse" parts of our country provide "free" public schools, food aid, unemployment, subsidized housing, and all the benefits of a pre-existing advanced civilization that they can step into and benefit from immediately. They are not coming here for political liberty and they don't vote once they are able to for political liberty.

It is just nonsensical empty virtue signaling for anyone to say "diversity is our strength". It doesn't mean anything and it is far from a strength for libertarians because the more "diverse", a code word for "less white", our nation becomes, the less libertarian it will be.

The Libertarian Party, not to be confused with general libertarian voters, has turned into a pseudo-intellectual suicide cult. It spends a great deal of time pushing self-defeating measures and haughtily claiming it's moral superiority to the two major parties. Based on where it places emphasis on social media, it is little more than a goofy reflection of cultural Marxist identity politics. Case in point, another post from the LP today:

Nelson Mandela is generally thought of as a noble freedom fighter working to end apartheid. Setting aside some serious flaws in that notion, he was also at a minimum sympathetic to socialism and outright Marxism and was likely an actual communist as heart. The political party he led, the ANC, is one of three parties in the Tripartite Alliance along with the 200,000 member strong South African Communist Party. Here is Jacob Zuma, successor to Mandela, addressing the SACP in front of their flag with the familiar hammer-and-sickle of international communism.

The ANC was once designated as a terrorist group. Mandela's former wife Winnie was infamous for promoting violent retribution against political enemies, including "necklacing" where a tire full of gasoline is placed around the neck of a person and set ablaze. She advocated this while still married to Nelson.

Yep, that Mandela was quite the friend of economic freedom!

We could really use a liberty loving viable third party in America. Sadly there are not any serious candidates right now.

Sunday, February 17, 2019

Modern Day Lynching

As the story of Jussie Smollett and his risible claims of being attacked by two white guys wearing MAGA hats continues to come apart at the seams, many liberals are frantically trying to erase the social media history of them jumping on this as a "hate crime" without a shred of evidence that this even happened. These same people are apparently unaware of the dozens of incidents of Trump supporters being attacked, in public and on camera, in politically motivated attacks. Or more likely they just don't care.

But the internet is forever. The internet remembers and now they are getting called out on it. Some are pushing back as if somehow the real problem is that conservatives will now use the Jussie Smollett hoax whenever a "hate crime" hits the news. As if this is the first fake hate crime. It isn't the first. Or the tenth, or the hundredth. There are tons of documented false hate crimes and the frequency has gone up since the election of Trump. Not the frequency of actual hate crimes, the frequency of false reports of "hate crimes". That hasn't stopped politicians from invoking the Rahm Emmanuel matra of never letting a crisis go to waste. Presidential wannabes Kamala Harris and Cory "Spartacus" Booker immediately used the hoax to push for new Federal "anti-lynching" legislation. No surprise they both tweeted (and both tweets are still up as of now) identical sounding blasts about Jussie....

Notice the tweets are from the same day (January 29th) and less than an hour and a half apart and both called it an "attempted modern day lynching". It is almost like they were coordinated or something....

Again, even the dimmest political observer knew something smelled fishy about this from the get-go. The reports were so unbelievable that at a minimum any responsible person should have waited to comment and especially should have waited before using the incident to push for a piece of new legislation. But not Spartacus and Willie Brown's mistress. Perhaps they suspected the wheels were coming off and were trying to get this pushed through before it was exposed. Too late now.

Back to the actual law. Do we need a law making lynching a Federal crime? Lynching is a terrible crime to be certain but so are a lot of things. As far as I know it is already a crime to kill, attempt to kill or assault someone in all 50 states. There hasn't been an actual lynching in America for a very long time, which hasn't stopped a new lynching memorial from going up. Why further criminalize at the Federal level a crime that already carries the most severe penalty of any crime at the state level?

The answer is simple and quite sad. It is just garden variety racial pandering by two Senators that hope to replace President Trump. Lynching is invoked as a bogeyman to frighten blacks on a regular basis even though no one has been lynched for decades. There are not roving bands of the Klan on horseback looking for black men to lynch for whistling at white women just as their aren't pairs of Trump supporting rednecks wandering the streets of Chicago looking for semi-famous homosexual black actors to attack in the middle of the night. But many black Americans seem to think there are and don't seem to understand that they are in far more mortal danger from fellow black men than they are from any whites. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker are pushing this legislation as a way to establish themselves to black and white social justice warrior primary voters. The nomination for the Democrats will likely go to the person that is the most over the top with their leftist rhetoric and an anti-lynching bill is just the sort of thing they could point to in order to cement their identity politics street cred. I am sure that they will have no crisis of conscience because they pushed this bill using a hoax hate crime. A lie that advances the agenda and reinforces the narrative is a good thing for people like Spartacus and Kamala.

I suggested on Twitter to Cory Booker that if they want new Federal legislation, how about making it a Federal crime to falsely report a hate crime and slandering tens of millions of people based on their race and political affiliation. I doubt that bill would get Cory or Kamala as a co-sponsor.

Perhaps this constant assault is having the reverse of the desired effect. It does serve to rile up the Democrat base but it also is starting to alarm middle and working class white Americans. From the Brett Kavanaugh hearings to the slanderous attacks on Covington Catholic kids to the Jussie Smollett hoax, a lot of politically disengaged white Americans are starting to realize that the Left doesn't hate just ultra-conservative whites based on their politics, they hate almost all white people just because they are white. The Left sees the heritage population of America as an impediment to achieving their goals for remaking America into the neo-Marxist utopia they dream about. That is the reason they have been discouraging child-bearing, encouraging abortion and sexual deviancy and championing replacement immigration for decades. More and more people are starting to wake up and see what is really happening in this country. Having said that, I fear it is too late to preserve the Republic.

Jussie Smollett may or may not be charged and perhaps he even might spend some time in the Cook County jail, to the delight of the inmates. But it won't stop the spread of fake news and hoax hate crimes. Lies are just too useful a tool for the Left and since there are usually no repercussions for lying, I don't expect to see them diminish. It is up to us to hold them accountable so the vast political middle, so easily swayed, can hear the truth.

Saturday, February 16, 2019

Jussie, You Got Some 'Splaining To Do

I propose that anyone that bought Jussie Smollett's ridiculous story about being attacked, with no evidence to support it, should be permanently banned from voting or holding office.

Oh, here is a prime example. A woman that whored her way into politics calling an obvious hoax an "attempted modern day lynching".....

The Mount Olympus Pantheon Of Hoax Hate Crimes Has A New Member

Martyrs are an important aspect of many religions. Christians have a book called Foxe's Book of Martyrs that details the often gruesome deaths of many Christians at the hands of Roman Catholics. Anabaptists have their own version called Martyrs' Mirror that does the same thing except that those making the martyrs include Protestants. Islam has their own "martyrs" but they tend to be killed while committing acts of violence against the infidels so not exactly the same thing.

Leftist ideology is also a religion. It is a "secular religion" but it is a religion just as much as any other religion, whether Buddhism or Scientology or Catholicism. In order for progressivism to survive it needs to maintain their mythology and sacred stories, just like most religions. In America one of the most important myths is the myth of "white supremacy" and "white privilege". According to this myth, America was entirely built by black people while white people sat around on the porch drinking Bud light and saying mean things. The pervasive "institutional racism" of America has prevented the black population from ever rising above their circumstances like European immigrants, Chinese immigrants, other Asian immigrants, have done. In order to keep this myth operating in a nation that elected and then re-elected a black man as President, there needs to be a constant stream of sacred faith affirming stories. These stories include the lore of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown.

For people like me, the story of these two young black men is very different from the sacred lore of Cultural Marxism. Trayvon Martin attacked George Zimmerman, who is obviously an jackass of the highest order but that isn't illegal. He was punching him and banging his head on the sidewalk. Photos of Zimmerman after the fact show his nose was bloodied as was the back of his head. Having a young man banging your head on the concrete could be fatal. Zimmerman pulled his gun, shot and killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense. In the leftist mythology Trayvon was just minding his own business when a white guy (Zimmerman is not white) stalked and shot him for no reason other than Trayvon being a "black body" wearing a hoody. This has led to iconography of the hooded sweatshirt representing taking a stand against oppression. He was an innocent boy. The media and the clergy of the Leftist cult usually show pictures of Trayvon as a much younger and sweet looking boy. They don't show the later pictures of Trayvon closer to his death when he was exhaling smoke, perhaps marijuana, and giving the middle finger to the camera. He wasn't a little boy, he was already 5' 11". He was in trouble on a regular basis, liked fighting and was a drug user. He was probably headed for jail or an early grave one way or the other. Again Zimmerman isn't a swell human being but no one is going to let a 5'11" guy smash their head into the sidewalk.

Then Michael Brown. The Brown incident led to the "hands up, don't shoot" liturgy even though it was proven that Michael Brown did not have his hands up and was in fact trying to take the cops gun when he was shot. Brown had just strong-armed a store clerk and then attacked a cop. While Trayvon Martin was a slender but strong 5'11", Michael Brown was enormous, 6'4" and nearly 300 pounds. That is NFL sized. If you attack a cop and go for his gun you are getting shot 100 times out of 100. But even still, years after the court proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Michael Brown was the aggressor and the cop was absolutely justified in shooting him, he is still invoked as a martyr to "police brutality".

Now along comes Jussie Smollett. I have written about this case before and I am not going to reiterate the obviously unbelievable narrative. It was clear that whatever happened to him was nothing like what he was describing and the case, which has already bled untold man-hours of Chicago police time that could have been spent investigating actual crimes that actually happened. But it seems apparent that what is going to happen now is most likely that the police drag out the "investigation", which most recently involved questioning two "persons of interest" that happened to be black Nigerian guys, until the public loses interest and then quietly let the case die without charging Smollett. Chicago is a Democrat party machine run town and always has been. No leader in the police with any aspirations wants to be the one connected with charging a black sodomite with filing a false hate crime. So I expect this to just fade away because it is pretty hard to convict someone that doesn't exist for a crime that didn't happen.

That won't stop Jussie Smollett from being elevated to sainthood. In 2019 it doesn't matter if a crime actually occurred, it only matters if people believe that it could have occurred, in "Trump's America". The people predisposed to think that it is feasible to have two white guys wearing MAGA caps, carrying a bottle of bleach and a noose, running around at 2 AM in a Chicago neighborhood described by one resident as being half black and half homosexual, are going to be convinced this happened no matter what. Jussie will join the sainted Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin as victims of white supremacist America. The facts don't matter because the falsified event advances the narrative that blacks are under constant assault from white Trump supporters even though black men are generally speaking almost 100% more likely to be killed by another black man than they are a white Trump voter. Unless Jussie is arrested, tried, convicted and jailed, his story will be repeated as if it is Gospel truth by the social justice warriors that form the core of the Leftist laity. His name will be spoken in whispered, reverent tones. "Remember what they did to Jussie!" will be the mantra.

The rest of America will soon forget Jussie Smollett and his farcical claims of being assaulted while coming home with his Subway sammich but not the Left. He will claim a spot in their pantheon of demi-gods as a Victim™ and that is all that matters. The narrative has been reinforced and a new sacred story has been added to the lore of progressivism. Until people on the Right get it in their heads that what we are fighting is not a war of ideas but a religious jihad where facts don't matter, we will keep losing.

Thursday, February 14, 2019

The People That Would Run The Green New Deal

"Red alert! A cow just farted in Iowa! Dispatch the shock troops!"
If the so-called "Green New Deal" envisioned by dimwit Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ever becomes law, it will need a whole host of disgruntled, surly Federal employees to administer it from on high in the Imperial Capitol. Just imagine entire Federal office buildings staffed with grouchy paper-pushing, over-compensated Federal "non-essential" workers receiving and filing reports on the current level of cow flatulence being emitted nationwide or the number of airliners being dismantled in favor of super affordable high speed rail. Not the planes that the Politburo Congress uses to travel, those airplanes would remain of course because the Congress is all about the people's business. Oh and celebrities could keep their planes so they can travel the world spewing exhaust from their private jets to warn the peasants about global warming. And corporate jets are OK so the CEOs can flit hither and yon. Just the planes that normal people use. Those gotta go.

So I ordered on behalf of an Amish gal three floor rugs. I ordered them at the same time from Amazon, within minutes of each other because she wanted new rugs as they are hosting church on Sunday the 17th of February. I ordered them on February 5th so we had plenty of time for them to arrive. Two of the three rugs came via UPS. I ordered them and they arrived three days later like clockwork. Alas, the third rug was sent via the United States Postal Service, run by the same profit and efficiency motivated folks that would run the New Green Deal. I live in Indiana. This rug was coming from Ohio. See map and also note the location of Detroit.

Looks pretty straightforward. Ohio borders Indiana. Easy, right?

Apparently not. We started off OK...

OK, so far, so good other than the 8th being the same day that the packages sent via UPS arrived. Next step.

OK, Pittsburgh is going the wrong direction but I assume it is a major shipping hub for the postal service. Next step.

Macomb is a suburb of Detroit. So not a direct transit to Indiana but I suppose we are sort of getting closer.

Uh. Now we are on Day 6 in transit and the rug is back in Pittsburgh where it was sent from some time over the weekend. Now granted I didn't major in geography in college but that doesn't seem to make much sense. Tick tock, church is this weekend. Now the update from Wednesday.

Oh, it is back in Detroit. Recall that on Monday it was already in a Detroit suburb before going back to Pittsburgh and now it is back in Detroit.

Fortunately at this point it left Detroit and ended up last night in the Fort Wayne postal distribution center, where it was transferred to our local post officer and delivered today with a few days to spare.

So in summary:

Ordered on the 5th

Shipped on the 7th

Two trips to Pittsburgh

Two trips to Detroit

Delivered on the 14th

Only a week later!

This wasn't sent via Amazon Prime so we needed to pay shipping for this rug. The shipping and handling cost for us was $5.49. I wonder if it cost the USPS only $5.49 to send the same rug back and forth from Ohio to Pittsburgh to Detroit to Pittsburgh to Detroit to Indiana?

Yes, I am sure that turning over all economic activity to the same people that run the Postal Service is a delightful idea.

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

They Are Called Entry Level Jobs For A Reason

There is a reason that fast food jobs are at the bottom rung of the vocational ladder. We don't expect much from the employees and fast food joints and even still our already rock-bottom expectations are usually not met. Fast food is a great place for young people to work for their first job. The jobs are designed to be idiot proof, requiring no skills or experience coming in. McDonalds has hired untold millions of teens with no job experience and taught them job basics like showing up to work, getting along with co-workers and dealing with customers. They were a great, entry level job to introduce you to the world of work. These jobs were never considered to be career positions. The vast majority of people moved out of these jobs to higher paying jobs. Some move into management at fast food joints which is a decent stepping stone to better things.

We need these sorts of jobs for people with no experience and skills. My first few jobs were in retail and I learned a ton. Sure I didn't stock dog food in most of my career working in financial services but like most people I learned about taking direction from supervisors, even when I thought they were wrong, and dealing with customers, even unreasonable and rude people.

The thing about these jobs is that in order for it to make sense to hire young people with no experience, you can't pay them much. And you shouldn't. Your pay should be commensurate with the requirements of the job and your experience. In my last corporate job my position had a salary range that was $20,000 different from top to bottom. I made the very top of the scale. Many of my co-workers made closer to the bottom. But I also had a ton of experience in the industry so I could command a higher wage (plus I came from outside the company instead of moving up which tends to get you paid better). That isn't good enough for a lot of people who think that fast food and other very low/no skill jobs should pay enough for a family to live on. Thus the ridiculous "Fight for 15" movement to demand an arbitrary raise for millions of no/low skill workers just because they thought someone should pay them more. I get wanting to make more but the way you make more is to excel in your current job, gain skills and experience and then leverage that into a better position. Such ideas seem quiant in a world where we are giving serious credence to the unicorns-and-rainbows level fantasy proposal, the so-called "New Green Deal", of jumped-up tavern wench Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Now comes a new push in Sodom New York City. This brilliant idea makes it extrememly difficult to fire fast food workers: After Winning a $15 Minimum Wage, Fast Food Workers Now Battle Unfair Firings. As is typical with the Slimes Times, the headline is designed to influence the opinion before you even start reading. Notice "Unfair Firings". What makes them unfair? Well a survey of fast food workers say it is unfair. That is a scientific process!

New York City’s fast-food industry has served as a laboratory for the nation’s labor movement for the last several years.

Its workers were the first to stage rallies demanding a minimum wage of $15 an hour. Then, they pressed for changes in the way national restaurant chains set their work schedules.

Now, they are asking the City Council to shield them from being fired without a valid reason. That protection, the sort of job security that unions usually bargain for, would be a first for a city to provide to workers in a specific industry, labor law experts said.

City Councilman Brad Lander said he planned to introduce a bill on Wednesday that would require fast-food businesses to show “just cause” for firing workers and give them a chance to appeal dismissals through arbitration.

Mr. Lander, a Democrat from Brooklyn, said he was responding to surveys of fast-food workers indicating that “there’s a substantial percentage of employees that have been fired unfairly.” One woman said she was fired from a Chipotle restaurant for not smiling enough.

In a customer service industry where you are "customer facing", in other words the customer can see you (as opposed to a call center for example), smiling and being pleasant is not incidental to the job. It IS the job. In retail we were always taught that while that customer might be the 200th you saw that day, you were the first person in your job they saw. Smiling and being pleasant is the bare minimum expectation for a customer facing employee. Here are some other examples:

Princess Wright, 22, said she had worked at a McDonald’s in Downtown Brooklyn since 2014 before she was suddenly fired in November for missing a shift. Ms. Wright, who expects to graduate from Mercy College in the spring, said she had called several hours in advance of a scheduled shift to tell her boss that she was staying home to help her landlord out of a jam by babysitting.

Why that cold hearted bastard! Only in the next paragraph you read:

She argued that she had been diligent and reliable, but he cited some tardiness that she said resulted from conflicts with her classes at Mercy College.

So it sounds like she had attendance problems and then decided to skip a shift, not to care for her own child, but to babysit someone else's child. In fast food you need a certain number of people to prepare the food, take orders, clean up, etc. so when someone doesn't show up on a regular basis it screws everyone else. Read her excuse again. She was babysitting for someone else. When you don't show up so you can babysit for your landlord to help them out of a jam, it puts your boss and your co-workers in a jam instead. No wonder she was fired. Then there is this one from the photo at the top of the article, showing a melancholy Hispanic woman staring out of a window.

Francis Gomez, 26, said she was fired without warning from a Taco Bell in Queens after she swore at a delivery driver who was harassing her.

Swearing at a delivery driver seems like a no-no. Was she really being "harassed" or was she just being rude? Had she reported the harassment to her boss or HR? Or did she just fly off the handle and start cursing at a vendor? Was this a first time offense? We don't know. Since employers are very unlikely to comment specifically about employee records for liability reasons, especially to a newspaper, we just have her story and her sad face picture. Again, pretty typical storytelling from the major media, decide on your conclusion first and then fish around for examples to support your agenda.

Most employment in America is "at-will". That means I can quit at any time and for any reason and I can be dismissed at any time and for any reason. In general if you are a decent employee, you won't be arbitrarily fired because it is a pain in the butt to recruit and hire a new person. A current employee is a known quantity, hiring someone new is a gamble. Anyone that has hired has examples of people that had great resumes and interviewed well that sucked as employees. The idea that employers are firing people for no reason at all is silly. Just yesterday my Congressman tweeted out this story: US job openings jump to record high of 7.3 million. From the story:

U.S. employers posted the most open jobs in December in the nearly two decades that records have been kept, evidence that the job market is strong despite several challenges facing the economy.

The Labor Department said Tuesday that job openings jumped 2.4 percent in December to 7.3 million. That is the most since records began in December 2000. It is also far greater than the number of unemployed, which stood at 6.3 million that month.

The number of job openings is the greatest since records were kept and is more than all of the unemployed people in America. Around here every place is desperate to hire people that will actually show up, do their jobs and not be stoned.

If you just read the New York times article, you might think there are lots of great employees that maybe swear at vendors or don't show up to work for things like missing scheduled shifts because of scheduled classes and babysitting for other people but are otherwise superstar employees being fired willy-nilly. However anyone who has ever hired people knows this is complete garbage. I am not saying it never happens but I am saying it rarely happens because the hassle and cost of hiring a replacement isn't worth it. If anything, mediocre and crappy employees keep their jobs longer than they should because it isn't worth it to replace them. Businesses exist to make money and hiring people is a giant cost that saps profits. Companies that stay in business don't do that.

This is another brilliant idea proposed by people that have no clue how the world works. It is similar to AOC and her genius plan to provide free money and "economic security" to people that are unwilling to work. How could that backfire? No one owes you a job and no one owes you more pay just because you want it and no one ought to be required to keep employing you if you suck as an employee. You work at a specific job in exchange for an agreed upon salary. If you think you ought to make more, great! I often did as well and I did what everyone should do: I took my resume to the job market and saw what happened. Many times I got a new job and made a lot more money. Often I found that I had overestimated my credentials and waited until a different job came open or I had more experience. I have never been dismissed from a job for poor performance but if I did it would have been my fault.

No one can afford to pay no skill workers the same as a skilled tradesman. Demanding that you do so by regulation is simply going to accelerate the move toward automation. You can already order fast food via touch-screen kiosks, smart phone apps and centralized call centers taking drive-thru orders. Keep making no/low skill unexperienced workers more expensive and you will continue to force companies to stop hiring them and use automation in their place. Then instead of no/low skill employees making commensurately low wages while gaining valuable experience, you will have no/low skill unemployed people not making anything and not gaining any experience. That sounds like a winning strategy for the economy.

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

Definitions Matter

Somali refugee turned U.S. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar is in deep doodoo. She has made some remarks that struck some as a little too close to oft repeated claims of Jewish/Israeli influence over the U.S. government and the sky has been raining fire and brimstone in her world ever since. Here are the offending tweets, I took screenshots as I expect she might eventually be forced to delete them:

This kerfuffle has also seen a resurgence of the use of the words "tropes" and "canards" on social media. Now Ms. Omar didn't link to The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion nor did she tweet out the "Happy Merchant" meme. But she did suggest that Republican support of Israel is because Jews are buying that support, which is part of the belief that Jews are more or less secretly running our government (and media and financial systems, etc.). The backlash has been swift and the condemnation near universal, which ironically would seem to reinforce some of the stereotypes.

Far be it from me to makes excuses for Ilhan Omar. I find her to be repulsive in no small measure because of the sheer ingratitude she shows toward the nation that took her in and the people that welcomed her when her family fled from her fellow Somalians. It should rightly concern all of us that people who hate this country are now elected officials making laws for the nation and people they hate and that they seem hell-bent on turning this nation into the very sort of country that they were forced to flee from in the first place. She is a hard-core lunatic Leftist and couples that will being an Islamist. Sure she has been married several times and gotten knocked-up out of wedlock but she also wears that hijab. The argument that she is a sort of Islamist trojan horse has some merit. In a way I kind of find this whole thing funny because it couldn't happen to a nicer gal and might wake some people up to the danger of an Islamist fifth column.

Pre-congress Ilhan Omar
But on the other hand, she grew up in and remains steeped in a culture where Muslims hate Jews with a loathing that most of us can't even comprehend. From a young age I assume Ms. Omar has been taught to blame the Jews for all of her woes, along with America and of course white people in general. In a manner similar to how American blacks are taught to focus more on wrongs committed 150 years ago and to blame any and every problem on "white supremacy" and "white privilege", Ms. Omar seems to be the product of a culture that loathes Jews and blames them for every problem in the Islamic world, even though most of the problems in the Islamic world are self-inflicted. The Muslim hatred of Jews is deeply religious as well as ingrained in their culture, and that is a lethal combination. That is why it seems so odd that so many Jews clamor the loudest for mass migration when so many of those migrating are Muslim, and then in Europe and America they are baffled as to the rise of antisemitism. There should be a warning here for our society: when you steep young people, generation after generation, with a hatred for other races and blame them for all of your problems, it creates a dangerous environment.

But is it "anti-semitic"? I am not asking if Ms. Omar is antisemitic, just asking if what she tweeted and suggested is inherently antisemitic.

Let me lay it out. One can question the role of AIPAC, a lobbying organization that advocates for a foreign nation and dispenses money to American politicians, a group that is given an enormous amount of deference for a group that lobbies on behalf of Israel, without being anti-semitic. I have frequently questioned our relationship with Israel and have unapologetically asked why a nation that is as advanced and wealthy as Israel is getting billions upon billions in "foreign aid" from a nation that is $21 trillion in debt (see my post Foreign Aid Foolishness). I have some concerns about what I see as a one way "alliance" where America pays billions a year in aid and pledges to protect a nation while getting nothing in return. Pledging to protect Israel is one thing, pretending it is an "alliance" is another. I am likewise concerned that our unquestioning support for Israel is based in bad theology and is one of the factors working in tandem to constantly get America involved in Middle Eastern wars where we have no national security interest. That is not "antisemitic", it is simply an America First nationalist foreign policy that I support returning to.

I want to be clear here. I absolutely support the right of the Jewish people to have their own homeland and to have self-determination, a right I support for all people of every ethnicity, race and religion. I just question whether we should be giving Israel $3 billion a year in perpetuity or whether we should be sending "foreign aid" money to any nation as our own nation has crumbling infrastructure, desperately needs a wall on our southern border and oh yeah is headed over the fiscal cliff like Thelma and Louise. I have come concerns over the amount of access and influence AIPAC wields, not because they are Jewish but because they lobby on behalf of a foreign nation. I also am deeply concerned about the Chinese buying influence in Washington and groups like CAIR that come barking like a junkyard dog whenever anyone Muslim is accused of a crime. Having said that, I am an NRA member and absolutely expect them to lobby Congress on my behalf in defense of my 2nd Amendment rights. So we all have our special interest groups but only some of them are off-limits for scrutiny.

Unfortunately, having someone clearly as hostile to Jews because they are Jewish like Ilhan Omar makes it nearly impossible to have a rational conversation about these issues. When you add in advocacy groups that conflate any questioning of American policy toward Israel as "anti-semitic", it makes it worse. Furthermore, it also tends to reinforce the views of those who see a Jewish conspiracy when you see the hysteria over two tweets.

Do you truly think Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat leadership cares about antisemitism or what this crackpot representing Little Mogadishu tweeted? Of course not. Protestations against antisemitic language are just a way to keep the peace between the different identity groups that make up the Democrat coalition and Jews are fairly inexplicably one of the most reliable Democrat voting blocs. What the Left cares about is power. That is why Ralph Northam, the blackface and/or KKK hood wearing Governor of Virginia and Justin Fairfax, the rapist back-stabbing Lieutenant Governor of the same, are still in office and look like they will stay there. Right now they are hunkered down hoping something draws attention away from them. The reason they are staying in office is that if they step down over these allegations, then so should next in line for the Governorship, Virginia Attorney General (and fellow Democrat) Mark Herring who has also admitted to wearing blackface. That would lead to House of Delegates Speaker Kirk Cox becoming governor and Cox is a Republican and holding a Governorship trumps hurt feelings. So at a minimum one of these three Democrats will stay in office because again what Democrats care about is not #MeToo or racism. It is only power.

Ilhan Omar will survive this kerfuffle. The point has been made. Ironically in doing so it actually reinforces the notion that Jews are an untouchable group. How dare you say that Jews control the government and media! Now to prove you are wrong we will see the entire government apparatus jump on you with both feet and coerce a lackluster apology from you while the media covers this 24-7 and publishes endless quotes from people in power denouncing you.

In a free society no one and no group is off-limits for criticism. Once you start to partition some political speech off into a forbidden category, you open up all political speech for censorship and that is something a free society cannot survive.

Monday, February 11, 2019

There Is Only One Way Out Of This

This sums it up.

HT: John Wilder with several further HTs. Also a very interesting look at the history of Chile and some interesting prophetic views of our possible future.

How Did Parents Raise Children Before Professional Daycare?

Look at this tweet from Commissar Senator Bernie Sanders and see if you can pick out what is missing:

Hmmm. If the ages from 0 to 4 are the most important years of human development, shouldn't that be the time when those children are being given the very best care? I learned to read at 4 and was an accomplished reader before I started kindergarten, giving me a huge head start. So who provides the very best care to children from ages 0-4....

Hey I know, maybe the people who care the most about those children. Like, for example, their own parents! What a crazy, novel idea!

But that isn't what Comrade Bernie wants. He wants parents to trot their babies off as early as possible to some government funded baby feed lot where the kids are warehoused until they are old enough to move onto the human veal calf factories we call public schools. So what we really need are more and more mothers in the workforce so they can pay more in taxes to subsidize child-care centers for those mothers to leave their kids at so....they can go to work. It is circular reasoning. You need to work because it is so expensive to pay for daycare but you only need daycare because you have to go to work because you have to pay for daycare....

Maybe policies that encouraged parents, hopefully mothers, to stay home and raise their own kids instead of dumping them off in an institutional feed lot with dozens of other kids, might be better? But we don't want that because people like Bernie think the very worst people to raise children are the parents of that child. I happen to think the best place for a child to be raised is by their mother in their own home but that means that kids might not get the proper indoctrination.

The Left and the globalist corporate world only see people as economic units, units of production and units of consumption. A parent that is home with their child is not producing anything and therefore is not consuming as much. We didn't spend as frivolously during the decades my wife was home with the kids as we probably would have if she worked a job. We scrimped and scraped by. We didn't buy the latest electronic gadgets or new outfits and we never went to Disney world. We took vacations to my parent's place on the lake. We were not very useful to the globalist economy.

The vision of progressives is of parents working at meaningless jobs so they can pay taxes and buy cheap crap made overseas while overwhelmed day-care workers ride herd on hordes of toddlers that really, really want to be home with mom but instead are thrown into chaotic holding pens. The American people only exist to fund the government and buy the crap they are told to buy so it doesn't matter who those Americans are, just so long as they are compliant. My vision and the vision of many others is the exact opposite. For me, a culture where parents cannot afford or at least are convinced they cannot afford, to have and raise their own children is a sick and degenerate culture that needs to be burned down, no matter how many Chinese-made baubles you can buy from Wal-Mart. The marks of a healthy society are not workforce participation, subsidized daycare and quarterly profits hitting their targets. The marks are a moral people that prioritizes having and raising the next generation with an economy that works for the people instead of the other way around.

The clash between those worldviews is going to dominate the next decade.