The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

GIRL IN CHAINS: ‘Domestic Partners’ Charged in ‘Particularly Heinous Case’

Posted on | March 23, 2014 | 51 Comments

Brutally shocking news from Salinas, California:

Three children were rescued from a Monterey County home last week after deputies discovered that two women — one a former correctional officer — had starved, chained and abused the children, officials said Friday.
Sheriff’s deputies rescued the children from the couples’ residence on Russell Road near Salinas on March 14, citing horrific conditions and an 8-year-old girl who looked “like a concentration camp victim,” said Monterey County Sheriff Scott Miller.
Also in the home were two boys, ages 3 and 5.
Miller said Eraca Dawn Craig, 31, and Christian Jessica Deanda, 44, are accused of felony child cruelty, false imprisonment and other charges. . . .
Officers said they found signs the girl had been chained to the wall about 4 feet above the floor and said she may also have been held in a closet. It appeared she had been shackled at times at the ankle and at other times by a collar around her neck.
Miller said it appeared she had “hardly eaten for months.”
The girl and a 5-year-old boy were adopted, he said, while a 3-year-old boy is the biological son of one of the women, who are domestic partners.
The girl was immediately hospitalized for around five days, he said, and appeared to be “very traumatized.”
“It was a particularly heinous case,” Miller said, adding that it appeared the women were preparing to leave the area before they were discovered.
“It seems that the little girl was the major target of this abuse,” he said. . . .

Read the whole thing at the San Jose Mercury News, via Fox News, with a major hat-tip to Matt Barber at BarbWire.com.

Let me explain — in case anyone is too thick-headed to understand — why this story, including the lesbianism of the “domestic partners,” is newsworthy: Liberal media habitually act as publicity agents for the feminist and gay-rights movements. Both of these movements frame their arguments in the context of victimhood narratives, depicting women and homosexuals as victims of societal prejudice, discrimination and oppression. This one-sided presentation is intended to solicit sympathetic support for the policy agenda of activists, and the liberal bias of media thereby constitutes a deceitful form of political propaganda. What we are told about the lives of women and homosexuals is deliberately selective, a Potemkin village depiction of their inherent wonderfulness and virtue, contrasted against a demonized scapegoating of “society” as guilty of tolerating homophobic and misogynistic victimization. The implicit messages are obvious:

“Expunge your guilt! Help the oppressed! Vote Democrat!”

Yet when anyone attempts to criticize this propaganda (or the policy agenda that the propaganda campaign is intended to advance), this media criticism is then twisted by liberal activists into “evidence” of homophobia and misogyny, thus to smear and delegitimize anyone who calls attention to the dishonesty of the propaganda.

So, when we encounter facts that do not conform to the propaganda narrative of liberal media’s dishonest activism, critics highlight aspects of the story that contradict the Potemkin village portrayal.

Are women and homosexuals victimized by “society”? Here is a story about lesbians who are not victims of abuse, but rather perpetrators of abuse, and it is important in the same way that a university “hate” hoax is important, namely in balancing the otherwise deliberately unbalanced media narrative.

Critics of liberal media bias know what we are doing, although we seldom bother to explain what we’re doing and why. Regular readers of this blog are presumed to be intelligent and informed enough to understand this, but an actual majority of Americans are too ignorant or stupid to recognize what’s actually happening: 65 million (51%) voted to re-elect Obama, a margin of victory that depended in substantial measure on the media’s purposeful promotion of “War on Women” propaganda — Obama won women voters by a 55%-44% margin — and Obama’s gay landslide. The 95% of voters who are heterosexual split evenly between Democrats and Republicans in 2012, according to exit polls, but Obama won gay voters by a nearly 4-to-1 margin, perhaps because they had become convinced by media propaganda that a vote for Mitt Romney was a vote for Taliban-style oppression.

If you are one of the thick-headed ignoramuses who can’t understand this, why? Because you haven’t paid attention, you idiots.

Go purchase and read The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy, by Thomas Sowell (1995). Unless and until you have done this, you are an ignorant fool with no standing to criticize conservatives as “haters.” If you are willing to learn the truth, however, permit me to call attention to Chapter 5 (“The Anointed versus the Benighted”) and Chapter 6 (“Crusades of the Anointed”), in which Sowell details the prejudicial selection of “targets” and “mascots.”

 

 

If you are reflexively sympathetic to “the homeless” and reflexively hostile to religion and the traditional family, but have never wondered why you have these prejudices, you obviously haven’t read The Vision of the Anointed, you ignorant fool.

“In the hands of a skillful indoctrinator, the average student not only thinks what the indoctrinator wants him to think . . . but is altogether positive that he has arrived at his position by independent intellectual exertion. This man is outraged by the suggestion that he is the flesh-and-blood tribute to the success of his indoctrinators.”
– William F. Buckley Jr., Up From Liberalism (1959)

People who have been indoctrinated, and who lack the intelligence or integrity necessary to recognize this indoctrination when it is pointed out to them, are an existential danger to our nation.

“Hate”? If hating ignorance is wrong, I don’t want to be right.

 

Category: Crime, Gays, Media Bias

Comments

51 Responses to “GIRL IN CHAINS: ‘Domestic Partners’ Charged in ‘Particularly Heinous Case’”

  1. Anamika
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 3:56 pm

    The 95% of voters who are heterosexual split evenly between Democrats and Republicans in 2012, according to exit polls, but Obama won gay voters by a nearly 4-to-1 margin,[…]

    That’s a narrow way of looking at it…the two parties’ positions on “gay issues” are influential in tilting a substantial percentage of heterosexuals’ vote towards one or the other party.

    Although gays may have split 3:1 in favor of Dems, I contend that a bigger net percentage of heterosexuals favored “anti-gay” GOP than “pro-gay” Democratic party, or at the least neutralized the 2% gay vote.

  2. K-Bob
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 3:56 pm

    One of Sowell’s best. The title alone kicks butt like no book title I’ve ever seen.

  3. robertstacymccain
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 4:07 pm

    No argument. In fact, you make my larger point: Liberal propaganda/indoctrination make many Americans think of gay people as victims of oppression. Democrats associate themselves with victims and blame Republicans for oppression. And if someone never critically examines this way of thinking — if they accept the categories as presented to them — they will vote Democrat, even if their views otherwise align with the GOP.

    The same is true on many other issues, including abortion, immigration and the environment. If your default position is to trust the media, if your education predisposes you to accept liberal explanations, then the actual facts don’t matter — you’ll vote Democrat and support liberal policies, even if these politicians and their policies don’t actually solve any problems.

  4. Kirby McCain
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 4:40 pm

    The media is no longer biased, it’s really become a propaganda apparatus for the socialist left.

  5. Anamika
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 4:49 pm

    Gay, abortion, immigration, environment….on all these issues the trend seems to be that the general electorate is becoming (correct me if I am wrong) more “pro” than “anti”, for any number of reasons (effective lib propaganda/conservatives failing to critically examine enough/society is doomed etc). The GOP is shifting its position (at the expense of agonizing their base) to be in line with the mainstream, so as to not concede more net territory to the Dems on these issues. As I see it, the only sure shot way for the GOP to keep winning is on the economic plank, most other issues are becoming electorally a no-win.

  6. RKae
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:01 pm

    That Buckley quotation is spot-on.

    Just try and find someone who will admit recently changing their mind on gay marriage. The mass of the public has been shifted and they’re all acting like “I have ALWAYS believed this my whole entire life!”

    It puts a very scary look in their eyes when they’re shouting that someone who disagrees with them is “a Nazi!” because they have that subconscious fear that someone will learn their secret: that they are recent converts and only converted out of peer pressure.

  7. Once ‘Influential’ Drudge #Pays | Regular Right Guy
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:05 pm

    […] GIRL IN CHAINS: ‘Domestic Partners’ Charged in ‘Particularly Heinous Case’ […]

  8. RS
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:18 pm

    No argument with your analysis generally, nor with this statement specifically:

    Both of these movements frame their arguments in the context of victimhood narratives, depicting women and homosexuals as victims of societal prejudice, discrimination and oppression.

    That’s why I think we’ll eventually here how these to perps were traumatized by some horrifically evil heterosexual tormentor–a Roman Catholic nun, perhaps–so that they can suck up all the victimhood from those poor children. Also, note that two of three children were adopted. How the hell did that happen.

  9. Mike G.
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:26 pm

    Yeah, I threw that link up in a comment on this… http://theothermccain.com/2014/03/21/freaks-of-the-week/#disqus_thread yesterday.

    What’s scary is a couple of more days or a week and they would have gotten away with it.

  10. Käthe
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:30 pm

    I’ve been hearing for the last 15 years, nonstop, how lesbians are the safest possible people, all soft hugs and gentle, vegan, cruelty-free sweetness. I’m sure when–in California, especially–they want to adopt, no one looks too closely at any red flags that may be present.

  11. robertstacymccain
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:33 pm

    To have denied them the “right” to adopt would have been homophobic and, in the liberal worldview, opposing homophobia trumps concern for the children.

  12. robertstacymccain
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:39 pm

    Anyone who had studied psychology understands this: People are suggestible.

    Presented with a subject where they have no previous knowledge or prejudice, people are apt to embrace the first plausible argument that agrees generally with their worldview.

    People who have been indoctrinated in a worldview where concern about Fairness and Equality are the supreme values are naturally predisposed to the accept claim that legalizing gay marriage is necessary, and that only bigots oppose this policy.

  13. Käthe
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:44 pm

    I have seen way too much of it irl, I got fed up. Too many instances where kids were literally treated worse than the average objet d’art. Something to be sold and displayed and used to validate someone’s fragile ego. I started out a lot more liberal but watching this whole line of reasoning play out here in the wild west pretty much made me a social conservative.

    ETA: And the denial, that’s what did me in. You could be standing there watching example after example roll in, perfectly in synch, and someone would be there to slap your wrist if you noticed a pattern.

  14. sarah wells
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 5:49 pm

    Don’t visit trader Joes on a busy Saturday unless you want to be halfway murdered by lesbian shopping cart macro-aggressions. Yeah I said macro.

  15. Anamika
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:01 pm

    I wouldn’t try to prevent anyone else from doing it, but I think gay marriage is a stupid idea. Many liberals think all marriage is a stupid idea so how can there be any point in supporting gay marriage for the liberal except to be sure that everyone knows you’re a liberal and not one of those “bad guys”.

  16. Käthe
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:06 pm

    About a year ago there were stories on all the usual sites (Slate, whatever) about how maybe lesbians are even the ideal parents, because they are so warm and nurturing and less likely to be rapists or have STDs and spend more time making eye contact or whatever. And, hurr hurr, they can’t get pregnant by accident so all their kids are planned and wanted. It was surprising to see it hit the mainstream but I’d been seeing and hearing the same things from friends farther left for years and years here in hippieville. It was striking to me that it was no longer good enough to claim “equality,” now they had to be *better* parents than idiots like me who, it’s implied, are simply bad at birth control.

    I still wonder where, exactly, the media is going with that narrative. Why aren’t they content with “equally as good” or “not any worse” as the narrative?

  17. GVK
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:13 pm

    I’m a rabid liberal it seems although I don’t much care what others think about it especially since there isn’t much evidence that many think at all. I think marriage is rather a good idea if children are involved otherwise I’m with the Buddhists — no “marriage’ required although a blessing is nice (best done on a beach in Cancun).

    But, yes, let the Mormon church, the hypocritical and war mongering fascist right wing fundamentalist haters, those models of righteousness and sanity, decide the fate others.

    Really, if a gay couple want to get married in a civil ceremony without any demand that the holy religious folks sully themselves or be involved in any way, what’s the big deal?

  18. Anon Y. Mous
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:19 pm

    Do you even know what the word “fascist” means?

  19. Anamika
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:20 pm

    Children raised by gays is one serious question, and one that has similar issues as children that are being raised by step-parents: if the marriage dissolves, the children nor the step-parents have any legal right to continue their relationship which might be better than with the legal parent. Basic human rights issues are avoided or buried by the nature of law being a one size must fit all by the book situation.

  20. Anamika
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:23 pm

    I’m a rabid liberal

    There is no such thing as a rabid liberal. It’s a contradiction in terms because if someone cares too much about where they stand on issues, they are not very liberal at all. There is the right/left battle but one is not really conservative (especially warmongers which is a very liberal form of behavior when you think about it) and the other is not really liberal, it just has it’s own set of ideas about the way other people should be and what gov’t should do, that happens to be at odds with the ones they call conservative.

  21. GIRL IN CHAINS: ‘Lesbian Partners’ Charged in ‘Particularly Heinous Case’ | I'm a Man! I'm 41!
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:23 pm

    […] Brutally shocking news from Salinas, California: […]

  22. Anamika
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:27 pm

    Really, if a gay couple want to get married in a civil ceremony without
    any demand that the holy religious folks sully themselves or be involved
    in any way, what’s the big deal?

    The big deal is just that it brings government and law into a relationship and government and law is sooo conservative. It is odd that such a thing even gets put on a ballot. Odd, in that it’s hard to find any legal, financial, or other effect of it on the general population except for those gays who choose to get married, so what is the point of asking the general population? It’s almost on the level of asking people to vote whether or not a man should be able to wear a dress. It’s a corruption of any normal purpose of government, imo.

  23. Randy
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:36 pm

    Civil unions don’t provide all the same rights as marriage. immigration, taxes, work/medical benefits … perhaps that needs to be addressed/brought up to speed.

    http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm

  24. Anon Y. Mous
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:36 pm

    Odd, in that it’s hard to find any legal, financial, or other effect of it on the general population except for those gays who choose to get married, so what is the point of asking the general population?

    Umm, what? It’s hard to find anything? What about SS benefits to a spouse, just for starters. Is it really necessary to list all the financial / legal ways that spouses are treated differently under the law?

  25. Kirby McCain
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:38 pm

    Gay Marriage + Adoption = food stamps and other gov’t benies. Which homos couldn’t usually get. Working like a charm too.

  26. Anamika
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 6:43 pm

    I would say that all legal issues and benefits are either trade offs or are so unevenly given as to make the issues themselves, and not marriage of any kind, the things that should be looked at.

    Marriage might be all but obsolete in that sitting down and carefully going over issues with anyone you’re going into any kind of partnership with, and seeing how much agreement there is between you, might be far more beneficial than signing a legal one size fits all document that strangers choose the detail of.

  27. richard mcenroe
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 7:00 pm

    You’re right! If we’d only make it easier for LGBTMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ couples to adopt children, they wouldn’t have to be burdened with the scrawny used-up ones. Because, FAIRNESS!

  28. Bob Belvedere
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 7:32 pm

    Fifth Columnists.

  29. Bob Belvedere
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 7:36 pm

    No surprise, as the Left values ideas more than people, who are merely eggs to broken in the making of the ideal, Utopian omelet.

  30. G Joubert
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 7:49 pm

    You know what they’ll say. You can practically already hear it: it’s a one-time occurrence in the case of a couple of outliers; and that, hey, what about all the hetero sicko couples out there who do the same sorts of things?

    Sadly, we have to wait 20, 30, or 40 years for the longitudinal studies to come in to confirm what we already intuitively know. It’s the zeitgeist. Reminds me of the 60s that way.

  31. RS
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 7:58 pm

    Trader Joe’s: Aldi with more pretense.

  32. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 8:43 pm

    Wrong on abortion, the trend is actually the other way. Immigration, people on both sides are not thrilled about illegal immigration, so it depends on how you frame the question.

  33. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 8:45 pm

    But still, thank God for 2 buck chuck. If you are on a budget, it will get the job done.

  34. RS
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 8:51 pm

    BTW, I love Aldi; in my town you can get the TJ’s stuff at lower prices.

  35. Quartermaster
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 8:54 pm

    No. That’s why he thinks it’s a right wing phenomenon.

  36. robertstacymccain
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 10:05 pm

    Reminds me of the 60s that way.

    No, it’s the ’70s again.

    The ’60s? It was the Bush years. Conservatives just didn’t realize what was happening.

  37. Kirby McCain
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 10:06 pm

    RSM wrote a piece years back about a teenage boy who was raped to death by two gay men.

  38. concern00
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 10:26 pm

    Kids of homosexual parents reflect on same-sex parenting:
    – we were taken regularly into the developing GLBT subcultures beginning when my twin brother and I were eight years old
    – I always felt that I really wasn’t loveable because I did not see the men in my life loving woman

    It’s horrible stuff that MSM like to gloss over and ignore. Part 1 of 4:
    http://englishmanif.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/la-joie-de-vivre-29-kids-of-gay-parents.html

  39. concern00
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 10:38 pm

    Former Australian prime minister, Kevin Rudd, had a remarkable epiphany on homosexual marriage weeks out from an election he was slated to lose. So you do get conversions of convenience, especially in public life. Hypocrites is another word that immediately springs to mind.

  40. concern00
    March 23rd, 2014 @ 10:44 pm

    Sexual deviancy, best summed up as the LGBTQWTF Coalition of Deviance, is a pathology. Why are we even slightly surprised that association with those so stricken results in a poor outcome for vulnerable children?

  41. Funeral guy
    March 24th, 2014 @ 12:52 am

    Agreed. Anyone who is on the fence politically must read this book. If you still become liberal after doing so you are a fool who is beyond redemption.

  42. Funeral guy
    March 24th, 2014 @ 1:05 am

    Where gays and their leftist amen corner known as the MSM have triumphed has been to change the thought process of a lot of Americans. Thanks to the extremely effective media propaganda when you say the word “gay” the image that comes to mind is the cute effeminate balding couple in their matching tuxedos standing in front of an elaborate wedding cake. Gone is the image of the writhing gay pride participant in the leather short-shorts and the studded dog collar. If most people (especially males) thought about what actually goes on in the bedroom between two men the only reaction would be profound disgust and the gay agenda would have gone nowhere.

  43. K-Bob
    March 24th, 2014 @ 1:22 am

    “Conservatives just didn’t realize what was happening.”

    There’s not enough “under” to describe how much of an understatement that is.

  44. trangbang68
    March 24th, 2014 @ 2:15 am

    So you have a fat slob degenerate and her dead eyed “partner”. Why is anyone surprised these lowlife rats abuse kids?

  45. Lazlo
    March 24th, 2014 @ 6:44 am

    Chain both of them up to a wall in the public square and let the world walk by and see them. Let them feel the chain and despair for a while.
    Those who would harm the ones who can’t fight back or escape, like Kids, the mentally ill, or animals are behaving in a Sub-Civilized manner and need to be dealt with in the same way.

  46. Frankly Bored
    March 24th, 2014 @ 8:36 am

    Maybe Nabisco can weave this into their next “This is Wholesome” advert…

  47. Bozikek
    March 24th, 2014 @ 3:44 pm

    Looking for a couple of newspaper articles, one or more might have been memory holed. They are both from an English speaking country in the pacific, most likely Australia or New Zealand.

    First article shows the boy being huged by his 2 gays dads and is about the wonders of gay adoption. Second is about 2 years later with the boys face blacked out as its about how the “dads” are facing credible charges for Child molestation.

    Bonus points for anyone who can find the articles, wayback machine/archive may be needed.

  48. Bozikek
    March 24th, 2014 @ 3:45 pm

    It means children to bring up in a “homosexual friendly method”. Its even worse then it sounds, Cash is always a welcome bonus.

  49. Käthe
    March 24th, 2014 @ 9:15 pm

    I’m pretty sure Robert Oscar Lopez has that archived on his blog (English Manif) if nothing else. Yes, that was beyond horrific, I wish I could forget it. 🙁

  50. Bozikek
    March 24th, 2014 @ 9:38 pm

    A little google-fu involving the site and I still can’t find it. I still am very thankful to have a site with so many insightful views and a place to practice my French. +2 points to Käthe.