Posted on | December 11, 2013 | 38 Comments
Probably not, but you never know, and while I generally have zero sympathy for Anonymous, this news is rather troubling:
More than 30 Anonymous-related Twitter accounts, including @Anon_Central, one of the largest with over 150,000 followers, have been suspended by Twitter following a campaign of misogynist abuse aimed at feminist campaigners on the social network.
The four women, Labour MP Stella Creasy, Times columnist Caitlin Moran, freelance journalist Caroline Criado-Perez and campaigner Hannah Curtis, were all named in a document shared by the largest anonymous Twitter account, @YourAnonNews, which claimed that “mentioning these accounts can result in suspension and possible scrutiny for future accounts.” It also claimed that “Perez and Creasy appear to have some direct line to Twitter to get accounts suspended sooner.”
Criado-Perez, who has been the subject of campaigns of misogynist abuse before, says that those claims are nonsense. “I certainly don’t have the power to ban accounts, but I do report accounts that send threats and harass me,” she said. “Sometimes they get suspended and sometimes they don’t.
“I don’t bother reporting accounts that just call me a cunt, which is what they seem to think. Just ones that are directly threatening or are inciting harassment, like the Anonymous accounts have been.”
It’s nice to have this promise from Caroline Criado-Perez that you are free to call her the c-word without fear of being reported, eh?
I have no idea how @Anon_Central got suspended, but using “Twitter gulag” tactics to silence opposition by falsely claiming harassment is a continuing concern and, given the essentially totalitarian impulse of feminism, is this claim by Anonymous really surprising?
At the same time that the “PayPal14″ face felony charges in California for involvement in an Anonymous DDoS campaign in support of WikiLeaks, other Anonymous cells are using their hacktivist energies against feminists who report misogynist harassment on Twitter. . . .
In one document, an Anonymous cell names four women as having “pull” in getting Twitter accounts suspended; two feminist activist groups are also criticised, despite having no such power. This hints that the Anonymous cell’s problem is not feminists with influence over Twitter per se, but the feminist goal of changing attitudes to gendered hate speech. And herein lies a delicate tension: what, for some Anonymous cells, constitutes feminazis instigating an evil Trollocaust against free speech, I understand as activists working with an awareness that rape and harassment don’t happen in a vacuum, but in a cultural climate in which it is OK to intimidate women sexually.
Uh, “the feminist goal of changing attitudes to gendered hate speech“?
What can this possibly mean, except perhaps, “Be nice to girls”?
In case Emer O’Toole, Caroline Criado-Perez and other feminists haven’t noticed, conservative women online are subjected to some of the most hateful language imaginable. You could ask Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Dana Loesch or Katie Pavlich about this.
But perhaps the question you need to be asking is, “Why does Anonymous seem to have a misogyny problem?”
An answer to that question may be as simple as taking a nice long look at the mug shots of the “PayPal 14″ (click image to enlarge):
Twelve of the 14 accused hackers (86%) are male, and what a lovely bunch of fellows, eh? Between the “Living in Mom’s Basement” boys and the “Smoked Too Much Weed” weirdos, you get the general idea that maybe they haven’t enjoyed very active social lives.
Also, notice five of them have the silly “hipster goatee” look.
Of the 12 male suspects, how many of them would you guess have wives and children and mortgages and other adult responsibilities?
It’s a self-selection factor, see? Kinda like the sexual assault problem with the “Occupy” movement: Who wants to camp out in a city park with a bunch of smelly anarchist losers? Chicks don’t dig that scene, and the kind of guys who are attracted to anarchist demonstrations . . . Well, maybe they haven’t enjoyed very active social lives.
This observable pattern may also explain why feminists seem so angry all the time: They’re always hanging out with guys on the Left, who are mostly a bunch of wimps, geeks and freaks. If those creeps were your available choices, wouldn’t you be angry, too?
Posted on | December 11, 2013 | 47 Comments
Julie Eckert has written an article for Verily magazine called “The Care and Keeping of Online Personas” which is interesting in what it unwittingly conveys about the female worldview, namely their innate concern about courtesy, relationships and “popularity.”
This girlish concern for social status is something I’ve noticed since I was in elementary school. Among boys, social status is basically a matter of physical dominance: The big guys shove everybody else around, and if you’re not the biggest kid on the playground, your safety is dependent in large measure on having buddies, belonging to a gang of friends, being part of what is basically a self-defense league.
Male relationships therefore tend to be utilitarian alliances. You have your old buddies and best friends, but these friendships are absent a lot of the emotional fuss and bother that typify female friendships, because that kind of drama-queen act — the backstabbing and gossip and the “Mean Girls”-style cliqueish exclusion — would quickly be settled by physical violence among guys. Courtesy among men is basically a matter of (a) being careful not to piss off a stranger who might decide to kick your ass, and (b) being loyal to your friends, so you can count on having back-up if a fight does break out.
Female relationship are more complex and nuanced and inscrutable, and there’s always that whole “Pretty and Popular Club” thing: Keeping score of who’s friends with who, and who’s not friends with who, and did you see the hideous dress that slut Tiffany wore?
Please, ladies: Don’t give us guys any lectures about “equality,” as if we haven’t seen how you constantly scheme to enhance your own social status relative to other women, and as if we haven’t heard the workplace complaints of women about their female managers, who are in many case brutal tyrants to their female subordinates.
Anyway, Julie Eckert offers many excellent tips about maintaining decorum in the world of social media, but in a way that makes me ask: “Are women thinking way too hard about this stuff?” That is to say, have the real-life status games women play transferred themselves to the online world, where the related phenomena of judgmentalism (toward others) and self-consciousness (about how one is perceived by others) are now applied to social media?
“OMG! Did you see Tiffany’s new avatar? Isn’t it horrible? And did you see how she was tweeting to Josh? What a low-rent tramp!”
Realizing I’m at risk of sounding like Professor Henry Higgins — “Why can’t a woman be more like a man?” — I also realize there’s no point trying to change human nature. Women are women.
Posted on | December 11, 2013 | 29 Comments
It maybe be that Paul Ryan sincerely believes that Congress is EVER going to reduce spending of its own volition. In the same vein, Obama has stated that he believes his own BS. Gently as it can be put, Paul, CONSERVATIVES DO NOT. We don’t believe Obama. While some might be swayed by you confident tones, the last time a Congress successfully bound a subsequent Congress was when the follow-on Congress borrowed more money, not when that future Congress actually cut spending. All I can say is that, sometimes, you need to step away from the problem to gain some perspective.
Erick Erickson calls this budget deal the BOHICA Act of 2013.
I am old enough to remember when the GOP said not to worry about it caving on Obamacare funding because, by God, it would hold the line on sequestration.
Hell, that was a month ago.
Amazing how much can change in a month. Congressman Paul Ryan and Senator Patty Murray have decided to give up the last thing the GOP was fighting for — spending restraint. “Don’t worry,” Paul Ryan says with his boyish charm designed to induce sweats and heart palpitations among conservatives, “it’s only a little less restrained.”
The budget deal puts discretionary spending over $1 trillion, which is higher than the sequestration deal of 2011, which was at $967. This is, in fact, a spending increase.
It funds Obamacare.
It gets worse as you read RedState from there.
New rule: all talk of future spending cuts is rejected, in advance, as pure hooey. Don’t bother with it, Paul. No amount of poker face, boyish good looks, and irresistible masculine charm can sell something we know is fundamentally not gonna happen. Peddle those wares to a more gullible audience.
Going with this Jane’s Addiction cut, since “Been Caught Stealing” is probably too pejorative, if also more accurate.
Posted on | December 11, 2013 | 20 Comments
You perhaps saw the headlines:
Spies Infiltrate a Fantasy Realm of Online Games
– New York Times
World of Spycraft: NSA and CIA Spied in Online Games
– Pro Publica
Don’t believe the Greenwald/Snowden media fanboy hype, says Paul Hair at The Security and Culture Intelligencer:
Virtual worlds interest the Intelligence Community (IC). That’s the news coming from the latest leak of classified material that’s part of the Russian-backed subversion and espionage operation that Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, and the Media continue conducting against the U.S.
But this “news” isn’t news at all.
The New York Times, ProPublica, and The Guardian published their latest stories as if they were revealing to the world that virtual worlds interest the IC. They failed to make clear that the IC has long acknowledged the basic (and unclassified) information regarding its interest in virtual worlds.
The online version of WIRED published, “U.S. Spies Want to Find Terrorists in World of Warcraft,” during February 2008. WIRED published its story based on unclassified information that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) published about its data mining activity. A version of that data mining report remains available on the ODNI website.
Furthermore, the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA—a component of the ODNI) explicitly acknowledges its interest in virtual worlds with an entire program about it. The program and related documents are readily available to everyone. The specific program is called, “Reynard,” and one of the documents is a 50-page, “Reynard Proposers Day,” PDF that provides a wealth of information.
How is it that a program which was first reported by Wired more than five years ago should suddenly be treated as front-page news?
Many of my blogger friends on the Right have joined the media’s breathless enthusiasm for Edward Snowden’s leaks: “Obama’s spying on us! Big government out of control!” Excuse me for courting unpopularity by dissenting from that viewpoint. The work done by our intelligence agencies is both necessary and necessarily secretive, and we seem to be entering an era like the mid-1970s, when Watergate-era revelations created a widespread hostility toward the CIA, the FBI and the entire concept of “national security.”
I’m one of the few journalists who has consistently regarded Snowden skeptically. See my June article at Viral Read, “Who Is Edward Snowden? Background on NSA Leaker Emerges.”
America has real enemies, and don’t expect me to applaud the willful disclosure of the classified means by which we keep track of America’s enemies. It is one thing to denounce specific abuses — which, admittedly, the government tried to conceal — but there is no need to buy into the mindset of the Left, which cheers every new “leak” because the leaks hurt America and the Left hates America. Paul Hair again:
It also remains to be seen if politicians, pundits, bloggers, private citizens, alternative media outlets, the tech industry, and gamers will begin to examine the motives and veracity of Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, and the Media as they continue conducting a Russian-backed subversion and espionage campaign against the U.S.
You can follow Paul Hair on Twitter.
Posted on | December 11, 2013 | 8 Comments
– compiled by Wombat-socho
Budget replaces $63 billion in sequestration cuts with more targeted savings, more fees
BJP, AAP Prepare For Another Round Of Elections
Neither party has majority in Delhi; neither will budge from Opposition
GM No Longer Government Motors
Feds sell off last of GM shares, take $10.5 billion loss
Tea Party favorite going after Cornyn after latter undermined Ted Cruz on Obamacare
THE ECONOMY, STUPID
Brent, WTI Converge As US Crude Inventories Fall: NYMEX $98.41, Brent $109.26
Wall Street Exhales As Volcker Rule Seen Sparing Market-Making
GM To End Production In Australia, New Zealand
Asian Stocks Down On Prospect Of Fed Stimulus Cut
S&P 500 Slips From Record High
Lucky Brand Apparel Sold For $225 Million
Windows “Threshold” Leaks Point To Return Of Start Menu
Ubuntu Touch OS Wins First Smartphone Partner
Twitter Adds Photos To Direct Messages For Mobile, Web
Google Chromecast Gets Ten New Apps
Nokia Moves Ahead With Plans For Low-End Android Phone
15 of his 17 points came in second half of Pacers’ 90-84 win
FAMOUS FOR BEING FAMOUS
Rhymes With Possum…And With Awesome
The Esquire interview.
South Africa Overlooked At Mandela’s Funeral
Ukrainian Police Clash With Protesters In Kiev
Uruguay Okays First National Market For Legalized Pot
India’s Supreme Court Reinstates Ban On Gay Sex
Thai Protesters Claim Authority Over Government
Senator Schumer Bucks Secretary Kerry, White House; Will Call For Tougher Iran Sanctions
President Of Firm Responsible For Defective Breast Implants Gets Four Years
Japan Aims To Expand, Revive ASEAN Swaps At Weekend Summit
Uneasy PRC Hopes For Stability, Friendly Relations With Norks After Recent Purge
Us Pins Hopes On India To Persuade Karzai To Sign Pact
BLOGS & STUFF
The Looking Spoon: As If Obama’s Handshake With Raul Castro Wasn’t Bad Enough…
Michelle Malkin: Two Big Announcements – Book Deal And Twitchy Deal!
Twitchy: Truth-Boom! Brit Hume Crushes Obamacare With One Question, Devastating Answer
American Power: Vulgarity – The New Normal
Don Surber: Daily Scoreboard, December 10
Jammie Wearing Fools: Panetta Revealed Classified Info To “Zero Dark Thirty” Filmmaker
JustOneMinute: Income Taxes, Excluding Social Security And Medicare
Pat Dollard: Leo Tyrrell Loses His Mind On Hannity
Protein Wisdom: I Can’t
Shot In The Dark: A Memorial To Remember
The Jawa Report: Air Force Band’s Flash Mob Concert At The Air & Space Museum
The Lonely Conservative: Bipartisan Budget Deal Does Nothing To Solve Budget Problem
This Ain’t Hell: To Be…Or To Do?
Megan McArdle: GM’s First Female CEO Has An Incentive Problem
Posted on | December 10, 2013 | 56 Comments
It’s weird how easy it is to forget things. My wife and I just watched the documentary Hating Breitbart together, and the pivotal centerpiece of the movie is the claim by Rep. Andre Carson, Indiana Democrat, that Tea Party activists shouted the n-word at him and other members of the Black Congressional Caucus. Have you forgotten?
That was March 2010. What was the occasion?
Oh, yeah: It was the day of the final congressional vote on ObamaCare, and the Tea Party crowd at the Capitol was shouting, “Kill the bill!”
Andrew Breitbart offered a reward of $10,000 — subsequently raised to $20,000 and then to $100,000 — for anyone who could produce evidence that anyone shouted the n-word that day. Nobody ever collected the reward, because the narrative was a lie.
Breitbart pointed out that there was a “sea of New Media” outside the Capitol that day. Everybody had video cameras or cell-phone cameras going, and if anyone actually had shouted the n-word, certainly someone would have collected that reward.
Nobody ever did. More than three years have gone by. Now ObamaCare is law, and very unpopular, and one of the biggest lies of our time — that the Tea Party’s opposition to ObamaCare was motivated by racism — has been conclusively debunked by the shameful silence of the Democrats who could not produce the proof of their lie.
Oh, but the Democrats never apologized, did they?
The media never apologized, did they?
And what has the passage of ObamaCare meant to America?
“If you’re covered and you like your insurance, you can
keep it,” said Congressman Gary Peters in August 2009.
Gary Peters made that pitch knowing it was false, and
it cost at least 225,000 people in Michigan their
health care. Despite these facts, Gary Peters
has refused to admit his deception or
apologize to the people he hurt.
That’s just one Democrat in Michigan, but is true of all Democrats everywhere. They rammed ObamaCare through Congress on a party-line vote. Not a single Republican voted for the bill. The Democrats and their media allies lied and lied and then lied some more.
And they’re still lying now.
President Obama just brought John Podesta onto the White House staff. Andrew Breitbart despised John Podesta — if you have seen Hating Breitbart, you know how much he hated him. But maybe you’ve forgotten that there ever was a guy named Andrew Breitbart.
It would be a wonderful Christmas gift for your kids.
Posted on | December 10, 2013 | 24 Comments
Former GOP VP candidate and all-around Centrist got out the Kazoo of Compromise in attempting to sell his budget deal with Senator Patty Murray:
“In divided government, you don’t always get what you want,” he said. “We eliminate waste. We stop sending checks to criminals. We cut corporate welfare. We start making real changes to these autopilot programs that are the real drivers of our debt.” Twice, he was asked how he would defend the plan to Republicans in the House and to conservative groups.
Answer one: “As a conservative, I think this is a step in the right direction. The deficit will go down more if we pass this than if we did nothing.”
Answer two: “As a conservative, I deal with the situation as it exists. I deal with the way things are, not the way I may want them to be. I’m not going to go a mile in the direction I want to go, but I’ll take a few steps.”
The condemnations would roll in from the various good-government groups that had been demanding entitlement cuts, and from the conservatives who had attacked the idea of a budget that broke the spending caps. But first, Murray and Ryan shook hands.
For example, Senator Rubio:
“We need a government with less debt and an economy with more good paying jobs, and this budget fails to accomplish both goals, making it harder for more Americans to achieve the American Dream. Instead, this budget continues Washington’s irresponsible budgeting decisions by spending more money than the government takes in and placing additional financial burdens on everyday Americans.
“In the short run, this budget also cancels earlier spending reductions, instead of making some tough decisions about how to tackle our long-term fiscal challenges caused by runaway Washington spending. I voted against sequestration because of its effect on key programs, including the defense budget, but higher spending and more revenue are not the appropriate ways to address that problem.
“The American people should not be asked to choose between a strong military and responsible budgets that encourage job creation and reduce debt. They deserve better than this.”
Maybe Ryan just needs to study some Zappa, and get some of that tenor saxophone in his system, for better justice:
Here is the link to a summary of the deal:
FEDERAL CIVILIAN AND MILITARY RETIREMENT
These sections increase federal-employee contributions to their retirement programs by 1.3
percentage points. The proposal affects new employees hired after December 31, 2013 with
less than five years of service.
Annual adjustment of retired pay and retainer pay amounts for retired members of the
Armed Forces under age 62
This provision modifies the annual cost-of-living adjustment for working-age military retirees by
making the adjustments equal to inflation minus one percent. This change would be gradually 3
phased in, with no change for the current year, a 0.25 percent decrease in December 2014, and
a 0.5 percent decrease in December 2015. This would not affect service members who retired
because of disability or injury. Service members would never see a reduction in benefits from
one year to the next.
Awesome. The military reserve retirement I haven’t got yet will gradually evaporate, even as I sneak up on it. Glad I’m not actually including that pension in my retirement planning.
Update: Ryan has an actual interview with Mark Levin on the topic.
Posted on | December 10, 2013 | 45 Comments
Ethel Anderson, 31, was once voted “Teacher of the Year” in Riverside, Florida. You might have thought that when prosecutors offered her a 15-year-sentence, the former language arts teacher at Mango Elementary would have known it was the best she could hope for:
A female teacher found guilty of having sex with a 12-year-old student has been sentenced to 38 years in prison . . .
Judge Chet Tharpe told Anderson in court that she manipulated the boy’s parents into believing he was safe and groomed the child for sex.
Anderson was charged with nine counts of molesting a student after it was discovered that she was having sex with a boy who was 12-years-old at the time. . . .
Anderson had denied the charges but her victim, now 14, took the stand in September to testify that the alleged abuse started four or five weeks into their tutoring sessions when she would kiss him and perform oral sex on him in her home.
He told the court: ‘I felt like she was a girlfriend, I loved her and she said that I was her boyfriend and she loved me.
‘She would rub on my legs, kiss on my ears, neck and stuff like that… We would tongue kiss.’ . . .
[T]he boy’s mother showed no signs of forgiveness.
‘Anger and hatred don’t even begin to explain how I feel about what you took from my son,’ the boy’s mother said in a statement read at the sentencing by prosecutors.
‘His innocence is lost forever.’
Thirty-eight years. Could have been just 15 years, if she had taken the plea deal, but the “Teacher of the Year” just wasn’t very smart.
Posted on | December 10, 2013 | 61 Comments
My apology for treating you to more of this kook’s kookiness, but these nutjobs just fascinate me. Mike Elk responded to Betsy Rothstein’s Monday article with a series of typically bizarre e-mails:
[C]riticize him at your own peril — he’ll charge that you’re against people with conditions like Asperger’s and write your boss and insist on your termination. He wrote in 16 times today to tell me why I’m not a journalist and he is. . . .
11:53 a.m. Mike: Reporter with tact for saying racists things against asians [sic] writes story downplaying the racist behavior of Eli Lake – no wonder it was a hit piece. Betsy: I do hope you have a Happy Holidays. And p.s. go fuck yourself. . . .
11:54 a.m. Mike: Quite the solidarity of racists Betsy. Betsy: Okay Mike. You keep believing whatever stupid shit you want.
12 p.m. Mike: [sic] Its not just me. I mean Lee Fang other asians believe it, but you downplay serious life or death issues. People like Eli Lake a racist fascists not actual reporters. Betsy: Great, strangers believe something. I don’t give a shit, Elk. Your thinking is very twisted and weird and I’ll have no part of it. . . .
Mike: Hey Betsy, There is a difference here. The difference is that I am coming after you hard over what you do, you guys mock and make fun of people over how they were born – their race, neorological impairments etc. Learn what real journalism is Betsy. melk Betsy: Interesting. You have the same pattern again and again with everyone. You are the king of journalism, of course. You are seriously demented. And no, that’s not a slam on your mental illness or your dyslexia, it’s a slam on you personally for being such an idiot. And you’re coming after me hard? Oh, also interesting. Thanks for sharing.
12:13 p.m. Mike: Betsy, You work at the Daily Caller enough said? melk Betsy: And your point is what? I’ve never read your magazine. You work at In These Times. Are we just going through our resumes now? You’ve tried to disparage and get three reporters fired in about 7 weeks. Let me fill you in … you’re not some warrior. Your thoughts and accusations don’t add up. Enough said, Mike Elk. . . .
You can read the whole thing — yes, there’s lots more crazy where that came from — and keep this in mind: I have no especial reason to like Betsy Rothstein, or Eli Lake or Rosie Gray, for that matter. It’s not as though we’re all best buddies and ideological soul mates. The story here is quite simple: Mike Elk is dangerously crazy.
But you probably figured that out by now, you racists.
Posted on | December 10, 2013 | 79 Comments
An e-mail arrived at 9:50 a.m. today:
Subject: u still sore you lost the civil war?
From: Mike Elk (email@example.com)
To: Robert Stacy McCain
Shit son, I am about to go visit some Civil War battlefields where we kicked the fuck out of you degenerate Confederate bastards. I bet you are still sore you guys lost that one Bobby.
In These Times Staff Writer
Cell: (412) 613-8423
Twitter – @MikeElk
Simple courtesy required a polite reply:
You have an obnoxious habit of making your personal superiority the point of every argument, and you always seem disappointed that others do not admire you as much as you admire yourself. Declining your invitation to join the Mike Elk Fan Club, I will also waive the opportunity to tutor you in grammar, but must make a few additions to your pathetically small store of historical knowledge.
My Alabama ancestors were not degenerate, and were certainly no less patriotic than my wife’s ancestors from Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio who fought for the Union. However — and perhaps this touches also on your erratic grammar — your first person plural pronoun would seem misplaced: “we kicked the fuck out of you,” et cetera.
To whom does your “we” refer in that context?
In an e-mail to Eli Lake, you said your grandparents were “the children of Russian Jewish immigrants.” In which Civil War regiment did your ancestors serve?
My own paternal grandmother was the daughter of Private Winston Wood Bolt, who served in the 13th Alabama Regiment, Company K. The colonel of my great-grandfather’s regiment was Birkett Davenport Fry, and they were brigaded under A.H. Colquitt (at Seven Pines, South Mountain and Sharpsburg), then under J.J. Archer at Chancellorsville and Gettysburg. Both General Archer and my great-grandfather were captured in the first day’s fight at Gettysburg when the Union’s famed “Iron Brigade” turned their right flank. I’ve walked the ground where Winston Bolt was captured — just east of Willoughby Run, a hundred yards or so from where Union General Reynolds was killed — but regret that I’ve never had an opportunity to visit Fort Delaware, where my great-grandfather spent the next two years as a prisoner of war.
At any rate, it seems quite likely your ancestors never fired a shot at any of my ancestors, and so your use of the first person plural “we” is wrong. But you’ve never let being wrong stop you before, and I doubt you’ll let it impede you in the future. All you ever do is boast and threaten and insult, then claim to be a helpless victim when someone calls attention to the symptomatic traits of your warped and sadistic personality. My confident prediction is that these habits of yours will eventually bring you unhappiness and misfortune in life, and that in the near term you will be deeply offended by anyone’s effort to counsel you against continuing in your present course of conduct. Your conceited sense of superiority has the effect of alienating you even from those would-be friends who might dissuade you from your doomed folly.
You will excuse me if I take the liberty of publishing our correspondence immediately, as I consider it a waste of time to respond privately to a deliberate insult.
Don’t expect Mike Elk to appreciate such courtesy. Fools never do.
UPDATE: It took six minutes for Elk to reply:
Subject: Re: u still sore you lost the civil war?
From: Mike Elk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To: Robert Stacy McCain
By we I mean boys from my home state of Pennsylvania. Look at this monument, those keystone boys sure cleaned up at orchad’s knob — makes me proud to be a Pennsylvanian think of the slavers ass that they kicked
Sent from my iPhone
He’s proud to be from the same state as Jerry Sandusky? The mere accident of having been born in Pennsylvania instills in Mike Elk such fierce emotion? Exactly where this “orchad’s knob” is located, I’m not sure. No photo was attached to his e-mail.
UPDATE II: A Google search for “Mike + Elk +Pennsylvania” turns up this typically demented rant against Penn State:
“As a native Pennsylvanian, I never once considered attending Penn State University. Penn State always seemed like a place full of cliquish white people recalling their glory years of making fun of the dorky kids in high school. More progressive white people and people of color went to big city state schools like Pitt or Temple while whiter, more conservative types tended to dominate the settings of the rural, fraternity-heavy Penn State campus.”
Read the whole thing to get an idea of exactly how long Mike Elk has been a blustering fool (i.e., his entire life).
Posted on | December 10, 2013 | 7 Comments
– compiled by Wombat-socho
OVER THE TRANSOM
Blackmailers Don’t Shoot: L.A. County Sheriff’s Officials Arrested In FBI Sting
Michelle Malkin: Obamacare’s Perilous Protection Plan For Debtors
Twitchy: Obamacare’s Crushing Consequences – This Doctor’s Practice-Closing Newspaper Ad Says It All
Sondrakistan: Can You Top This?
RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: State Obamacare Exchanges Vulnerable To Wi-Fi Attacks
American Thinker: The Sound Of Music And Culture Shock
Blackfive: Some Retired LTC “Strategist” Living In England Wants To Take Your Guns
The Necropolitan Sentinel: Obamacare Watch – What About Romneycare
Don Surber: Daily Scoreboard, December 9
Jammie Wearing Fools: Oh Well! Loathsome Democrat Alan Grayson Lost $18 Million To Fraud Scheme
JustOneMinute: The First Narcissist And The Challenges Of Staying On Script
Pat Dollard: Exposed – Voice Of Girl Scouts Of America Is Homocore Punk Band’s Front Man
Protein Wisdom: “Obama’s Base Crumbling Amid Obamacare Debacle”
Shot In The Dark: Since We’re All About Equality Here…
The Jawa Report: Dan Rather Still Claiming His Story Was “Fake But True”
The Lonely Conservative: Video – Dem Rep REALLY Doesn’t Want To Talk About Benghazi
This Ain’t Hell: Karzai Rails Against US “Threats”
Megan McArdle: Should DC’s Poor Get To Keep Their Housing Windfall?
Posted on | December 10, 2013 | 68 Comments
If there is one sentence which should be indelibly etched in your mind about President Obama’s bailout of General Motors, it is this:
In other words, the folks who had loaned GM money got screwed over, and the benefit went directly to Obama’s friends in Big Labor, who had done so much to destroy the company’s profitability. Delivering effective control of the company to the UAW — anybody want to guess how that deal worked out at contract negotiation time?
It makes perfect sense: Screw over the bondholders, put the UAW in charge of the company and then have the UAW negotiate with itself!
While you’re contemplating that psychotic madness, now let’s take a look at the bottom line for U.S. taxpayers:
DETROIT — The U.S. government ended up losing $10.5 billion on the General Motors bailout, but it says the alternative would have been far worse.
The Treasury Department sold its final shares of the Detroit auto giant Monday, recovering $39 billion of the $49.5 billion it spent to save the dying automaker at the height of the financial crisis five years ago.
Without the bailout, the country would have lost more than 1 million jobs, and the economy could have slipped from recession into a depression, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew said on a conference call with reporters.
Well, if Jacob Lew says the alternative was worse than losing $10.5 billion of taxpayer money, who are we to disagree? Because the effects of hypothesized alternative scenarios are always subject to speculation, officials can justify any policy by declaring that things would have been worse if we had done something different. (Let’s keep this principle of Liberal Logic™ in mind: Next time some hippie peacenik tells you that Bush’s Iraq policy was a failure, just remind him that an imaginary hypothetical alternative — e.g., Saddam Hussein’s army invading Connecticut — would have been much worse.)
“Mr. President — How could you lie to Whoopi Goldberg?
And the rest of us too . . . In 2010 President Obama
appeared on The View and promised we would get
all of our money back from the auto bailout . . .”
Remember: There are 5 A’s in “RAAAAACIST!”
Anyone who ever believed a single word Obama said — other than that promise about “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” — is neurologically impaired, mentally defective, demented, deranged, wacko, bonkers, zany and cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.
And speaking of Mike Elk . . .
Surprise, surprise union busters using mental health smears against me to question VW reporting http://t.co/oKxmYrdRkC
— Mike Elk (@MikeElk) December 10, 2013
Look, it would be cruel beyond words if we were to start funding mental health services by charging admission for spectators to visit psychiatric wards and watch the lunatics shuffle through the halls jabbering madness to themselves. Fortunately, we have the Internet, so it costs nothing to watch Mike Elk’s continuing meltdown.
What are we supposed to do with Mike Elk, who is to journalism what Amanda Bynes is to Hollywood starlets? Elk flaunts his mental illness like a badge of honor — preemptively pleading insanity, as it were — and yet if any critic should mention it, this becomes an occasion for Elk to start screaming “bully!” and then claim victimhood: Heads, he wins; tails, you’re a hateful racist wingnut.
— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) December 10, 2013
Which brings us, rather surprisingly, to the latest offering from Chattanooga Times Free Press columnist David Cook:
It’s right there on the list. Just before food and clothing. Right after the section on people being able to vote and participate in government.
“Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.”
It’s Article 23 on the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. The 30-article document was written after the horrors of World War II (one of its primary authors was Eleanor Roosevelt) and expresses an exalted vision of what’s possible for humans here on earth.
It lists the fundamental rights we should have — any and all of us — simply by virtue of being alive. . . .
(When a newspaper columnist begins by citing the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, sane readers turn the page.)
Will that happen here? Will the United Auto Workers unionize the Volkswagen plant at Enterprise South? . . .
(David Cook certainly hopes so. Did I mention that he “holds a master’s degree in Peace and Justice Studies from Prescott College“?)
The debate on the UAW and VW has reached hyperbole and rhetoric on the level of an election year. Mike Elk, a journalist with In These Times, published a story last month showing how out-of-state conservative groups have financed efforts to oppose unionization here. . . .
(You see what I mean? It’s as if there were some kind of private club where these kooks all know each other — the Marxist version of the Masonic lodge, with secret handshakes and stuff. But that would be a paranoid conspiracy theory. Speaking of which . . .)
Elk discusses the role of Matt Patterson, a consultant based in Washington, D.C., who developed a playbook on how to defeat the UAW’s efforts here.
“Within a few weeks, I had organized a coalition consisting of members of the Tea Party, Students for Liberty, former VW employees, politicians and businessmen to craft and deliver a consistent message that has shaped public opinion,” Patterson wrote in a report Elk obtained.
The funders behind Patterson’s work are of particular interest to Elk . . .
(Astonishing! Shocking! People who are opposed to labor unions have hired Matt Patterson, who is opposed to labor unions, to organize people who are opposed to labor unions. Quick — you call the FBI and I’ll e-mail the Pulitzer Prize committee!)
This Thursday, Elk comes to town, speaking at the University of Tennessee-Chattanooga’s UC Auditorium at 6 p.m. His trip is being sponsored by Chattanooga for Workers. It’s open to the public.
“Well, my, my, my!” as Lt. Joe Kenda would say. “What have we here?”
It must an evil corporate conspiracy, you see, for anyone to pay Matt Patterson — “a consultant based in Washington, D.C.” — to organize opposition to the UAW in Chattanooga and, therefore, these shadowy “funders behind Patterson’s work” must be investigated by Mike Elk who, last time I checked, was based in Washington, D.C.
Speaking of the “funders” of shadowy organizations, who do you suppose is bankrolling “Chattanooga for Workers”? Do you think there might be any overlap between (a) the money for ”Chattanooga for Workers” and (b) the people funding In These Times magazine? In other words, do you suppose that the people who (c) fund Mike Elk’s “investigation” of the opposition to the UAW would also be interested in (d) bringing Mike Elk to Chattanooga, and then (e) enlisting such of their friends as Times Free Press columnist David Cook to publicize both (f) their unionization drive, and (g) Mike Elk’s “investigation” of their opponents?
Do you need me to draw a Venn diagram to explain that there might be some substantial overlap of categories (a) through (g)?
Hey, who is this “Chattanooga Organized for Action” (COA) that’s promoting Mike Elk’s speech Thursday at UTC? Aug. 10, 2012:
A 2-year-old Chattanooga social justice and community-organizing nonprofit is hoping to expand the scope of its work after receiving a $40,000 grant from one of Chattanooga’s most prominent foundations.
Chattanooga Organized for Action announced last week it had become the newest local recipient of a Community Grant from the Benwood Foundation. Community Grants, given to groups planning to “address issues of critical concern to the future of Hamilton County,” are awarded to more than a dozen different area groups annually.
Leaders for COA, which played a role in supporting recent grassroots efforts to block a proposed redevelopment project on the Westside, along with the movement to recall Mayor Ron Littlefield, said the new funds would be put toward creating a “Justice School,” with the goal of replicating similar member-driven interventions in other Chattanooga communities. The group hopes to train individuals on organizing their own responses to their own specific issues.
Just a spontaneous grassroots thing, you see? And there’s no reason for anyone to suspect that the Benwood Foundation’s $40,000 grant to COA was coordinated with a slightly larger donation to the Benwood Foundation from someone who maybe didn’t want their fingerprints on a donation given directly to COA. Nor need anyone investigate whether the non-profit “Institute for Public Affairs” that publishes In These Times also receives funding from the same people who contributed to the Benwood Foundation in 2012.
— Chattanooga4Workers (@Chatt4Workers) December 5, 2013
Like I said, do you want me to draw you a Venn diagram?
Yeah, the 501(c)3 Benwood Foundation just randomly decided to fund COA, so that it could organize protests against McDonald’s and support a UAW unionization drive at the Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga. Nothing remotely suspicious about this coincidence.
“These aren’t the droids you’re looking for. Move along.”
Readers may go back to the top of this post if they need a reminder: Obama bailed out GM in a deal that screwed over the bondholders, protected the UAW and cost American taxpayers $10.5 billion, and now it seems as if the UAW has plenty of money to throw around for organizing drives in Chattanooga, where there’s this wonderful “grassroots” group COA that will be hosting an event Thursday featuring that courageous (but perhaps insane) investigative journalist Mike Elk.
“Well, my, my, my . . .”
What’s this at the bottom of David Cook’s column? “Contact David Cook at email@example.com or 423-757-6329.”
keep looking »