Category: Celebrities

Michelle Malkin vs. ‘Conservatism Inc.’

Posted on Comments

 

Last year, Michelle Malkin gave a speech at CPAC in which she denounced the open-borders faction within the Republican Party, specifically making mention of “the ghost of John McCain.” A few months ago, I became aware that Michelle Malkin had offended some people by defending Nick Fuentes, who had been accused of anti-Semitism, but I somehow missed the story of what happened next. Her enemies somehow managed to get her dumped by the Young America’s Foundation, which had been sponsoring her campus appearances for 17 years.

Keep in mind that I’ve known Malkin for nearly 20 years, having first interviewed her in 2002 when she published her first book, Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists Criminals & Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores. In 2006-2007, Malkin rallied the conservative blogosphere to stop John McCain’s amnesty proposals, and in 2013, she again led the online opposition to the “Gang of Eight” amnesty plan. My point is that it has never been any secret how serious Malkin is about immigration, and no one who knows her would accuse her of racism or anti-Semitism. She is a woman of color, her parents were immigrants, and her husband is Jewish, for crying out loud. Just incidentally, Malkin also (a) created Hot Air and Twitchy, two of the most popular conservative sites on the web, (b) was instrumental in forming the Tea Party movement in 2009, and (c) has done me more than a few favors over the years, including rallying support against Brett Kimberlin in 2012. If there is a fight, you want Malkin on your side, and when she decided to defend Nick Fuentes, my advice to anyone who asked would have been, “Get out of her way. She knows what she’s doing.”

If she’s willing to vouch for this kid and his “Groyper” crew, I would assume she’s investigated enough to satisfy herself that they’re not actually Nazis, and that she has undertaken to advise them against drifting any further toward the fringe. I don’t know the background, nor do I know what happened at YAF, but like I said, when Michelle Malkin decides it’s time to fight, you don’t want to be on the other side.

So, during CPAC this year, Malkin organized a get-together of the “Groypers,” calling it AFPAC (America’s First Political Action Conference), and she gave a speech that included this:

A year ago this week, I had no idea who most of you were and most of you had no idea who I was and that’s okay–even though we have been largely, unbeknownst to each other, fighting many of the same battles against many of the same enemies, against the same fearful odds on the same rigged playing field. I did not know you then, but I did stand on that stage at CPAC in 2019 calling out the feckless organizers for barring real conservatives, immigration hawks, free thinkers and various dissidents from the conference. Meanwhile, the simulators and the saboteurs and the speech squelchers and the Soros smear merchants — like that, Jared Holt [Boos.] weasel that you chased out [of CPAC] — and of course the highest bidding sponsors who were all enjoying free rein back then in the front seats, in the VIP sections, and backstage. On stage last year, I mentioned our friends, Gavin McInnes and Laura Loomer and others who had been banned from darkening the CPAC door. But of course in a larger sense, I was talking about all of you here now and so many others who’ve been forgotten in the past. Who’ve been relegated to our motley Valley of the Banned in one way or another, either by CPAC or ConInc.
It’s an intergenerational club. Nick Fuentes, Patrick Casey, VDARE and Peter Brimelow. Faith Goldy, Milo, Frank Gaffney, Pamela Geller, Robert Stacy McCain, Dinesh D’Souza, Ann Coulter, John Derbyshire, Jason Richwine, Darren Beattie, and on and on and on.
A fury had welled up inside me a year ago that had long been simmering. There was a time when CPAC did at least give the grassroots nationalists a seat at the table. And I’ll never forget this, because this was a very pivotal moment for me in my young career. 17 years ago when I had the privilege of teaming up with the original Godmother of America First, the Catholic author, lawyer and social conservative, mom of six and grandmother of 16, Phyllis Schlafly. . . .

Thanks for the shout-out, ma’am. Being in the Valley of the Banned is a tremendous honor, and I’m sorry I missed your event.

 




 

Never Trust a Bisexual

Posted on Comments

 

In 2010, when she was 24, actress Amber Heard publicly “came out” as a lesbian. but a year later seemed to reconsider her identity, saying “I don’t label myself one way or another.” Gosh, what could have prompted such a reconsideration? Heard had been in a relationship with an older woman, Tasya van Ree, since 2008, so why did she suddenly become uncomfortable with the word “lesbian”? Ah, she had a target in her sights: Johnny Depp, with whom she co-starred in The Rum Diary. At the time Heard expressed her disdain for labels, Depp was 47 and in a relationship with Vanessa Paradis, with whom he had two children. Depp was also one of the most successful actors in Hollywood, the star of Disney’s lucrative Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. In 2012, Heard dumped her girlfriend, Depp split with the mother of his children, and they became a couple, marrying in 2015.

This would prove to be the worst mistake of Johnny Depp’s life.

NEVER TRUST A BISEXUAL!

How many times do I have to explain this? Barely a year after their wedding, Heard filed for divorce, then filed for a restraining order, accusing Depp of domestic abuse, and I wrote at the time:

Anyone who was surprised by this simply hasn’t been paying attention to the many omens of doom surrounding their relationship. . . . 
Three words: Borderline personality disorder.
It was my lesbian friend Cynthia Yockey who pointed out the substantial overlap between bisexuality and borderline personality disorder. People with BPD notoriously have “boundary issues.” They can’t stand to be told “no,” and don’t think the rules should apply to them. They love to cause drama, and would rather have negative attention than to be ignored. BPD is “characterized by extreme fear of abandonment; unstable relationships with other people, sense of self, or emotions; feelings of emptiness; frequent dangerous behavior; and self-harm.”
Does that fit Amber Heard? I’m not qualified to offer a clinical diagnosis, but her “no labels” attitude struck me as symptomatic, and it seems as if the “unstable relationships” factor was evident in her marriage to Johnny Depp. There are reports that Ms. Heard never fully let go of her relationship with Tasya van Ree, and that this created problems.
Depp’s friend Doug Stanhope says he never liked Ms. Heard, and accuses her of blackmailing Depp. We cannot know the whole truth of two people’s private relationship, so I’ll reserve judgment as to the details, but let me say this in general: I don’t trust bisexuals.

If Johnny Depp had asked for my advice, I’d have told him not to go near that dangerous lunatic, nor any other “bisexual,” for that matter. But he made a fool of himself, as I wrote in June 2018:

He’s wrecked. He’s ruined. The Pirates of the Caribbean star has utterly destroyed his career and reputation, and is rapidly approaching financial ruin. The drug-addled 55-year-old actor is living out a 21st-century version of Hogarth’s A Rake’s Progress.
Do you realize that the five Pirates films grossed a combined $4.5 billion? And that Depp’s cut of that gold mine was $600 million? Basic arithmetic tells you that Depp was making $40 million a year — about $750,000 a week — for more than a decade, and there is no logical explanation for why he should be teetering on the brink of bankruptcy now, except for the unfortunate fact that Johnny Depp is a fool.

Depp has pursued a defamation suit against his “bisexual” ex-wife, and last week, after audio emerged of Heard admitting she had hit Depp, the hashtag #JusticeForJohnnyDepp trended on Twitter. Alas, the damage  Amber Heard inflicted on Depp’s reputation and finances cannot be undone, and guess what she’s up to nowadays?

 

Yep, got herself a 38-year-old lesbian girlfriend. She just destroys a man’s life and moves on, because that’s what bisexuals do.

Of course, you guys are free to do whatever you want to do, but don’t say nobody warned you. Leave those crazy bisexual women alone.




 

DNC Sold Out to Bloomberg ‘Because He’s Got a Billion F***ing Dollars!’

Posted on

 

Michael Moore at a Bernie Sanders rally Friday in Iowa:

They are removing the rule to be on the debate stage, where it says you have to have so many people donating to you — otherwise instead of 27 people on the stage we’d have 270 people on the stage. You had to show you had a certain number of Americans that would give you a buck, that’s all the rule said, to show you have support. And that’s how they determine who would be on the debate stage.
Today they removed that rule because Mike Bloomberg, the billionaire, the Republican Mayor of New York City . . . They removed it so that he could be in the next debate. He doesn’t have to show he has any support among the American people, he can just buy his way onto the debate stage, and I’m going to tell you what’s so disgusting about this.
I watched the debate in Iowa here two weeks ago — the all-white debate — and the fact that . . . the DNC will not allow Cory Booker on that stage, will not allow Julian Castro on that stage, but they are going to allow Mike Bloomberg on the stage? Because he’s got a billion f***ing dollars!
I’m sorry. Those days are over. Those days are over.

 

The question of why the DNC suddenly decided to change its debate rules has a couple of answers: First, and most obviously, Bloomberg has given big money to the DNC and has promised to spend as much a billion dollars of his own money to beat Trump, no matter who gets the Democratic nomination. Allahpundit explains the second answer:

There’s a chance that Bernie wins easily in Iowa and New Hampshire, with Biden underperforming dismally. If that happens the media will be ruthless in attacking Biden as a chronic underachiever in presidential contests, the guy who just can’t get it done. The stink of campaign death will be on him even though he’ll limp on to Nevada and South Carolina. But establishment Dems will be panicking and looking for a longshot centrist option who might somehow be able to hold off Sanders. That’s Bloomberg, a guy who’s already bought his way into the top tier nationally and who seems willing to pay any price to promote himself. He may well be the only Democrat who can outspend the Sanders money machine, and he can do it by an order of magnitude. If Biden flames out early Bloomy may be the only game in town for centrist Democrats on Super Tuesday. Go figure that the DNC wants to start introducing him to the primary electorate as soon as possible at the debates.

In other words, Bloomberg is the fallback candidate for the “Anybody But Bernie” Democrats, who cheated Sanders out of the 2016 nomination, and are determined to cheat him again in 2020. As we discussed Saturday night on The Other Podcast, there is a parallel between the left-wing populism of Sanders and the right-wing populism of Trump. Both candidates ran against the party establishment — Bernie against the Clinton machine, Trump against the Bush/RINO/neoconservative crowd — and it’s possible that some “Bernie bros” hated Clinton so much they actually voted for Trump in November 2016.

Populism, rooted in a belief that the elite are decadent and depraved, is a powerful force in a society where political authority appears to be controlled by a corrupt cabal of insiders. As much as I abhor Sanders’ socialism, I am very sympathetic to his supporters in their resentment of the DNC establishment. Really, what are Democrat insiders so afraid of? Is it just because they think Sanders will lose? As if Biden would win? The idea that Creepy Uncle Joe would be a formidable opponent to Trump is a dubious proposition, and I think Democrats are more afraid that nominating Sanders would cost them the support of the fat-cat lobbyists who provide so much of the DNC’s revenues.

(Hat-tip: Instapundit.)




 

The Duchess of Sussex Is a Nasty Whore, and Prince Harry Is a Hopeless Fool

Posted on Comments

 

Meghan Markle is doing to the British royal family what Yoko Ono did to the Beatles. Prince Harry married a trashy celebrity, who is now starring in her own reality show, Real Housewives of Buckingham Palace or maybe Keeping Up With the Windsors. Harry is being humiliated by his wife who seems determined to make a mockery of the title, Duchess of Sussex, she obtained by marriage. What stupendous ignorance must exist in the mind of this minor American actress, best known for her role as Rachel Zane in seven seasons of the cable-network drama Suits, not to understand that her new role came with certain obligations, chief among them maintaining the dignity of the House of Windsor? Grant that their royal reputation has been tarnished by the Prince of Wales, who divorced Harry’s mother and finally married his mistress, to say nothing of the stain acquired by Uncle Andrew’s association with Jeffrey Epstein (who did not kill himself). Despite such scandals, the royal family has remained generally popular, and Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth has never herself done anything that would detract from that popularity.

Now, however, the 93-year-old Queen might be smeared by the Duchess whom Rod Dreher calls “A Yankee Yoko In Queen Elizabeth’s Court”:

According to the Daily Mail, Meghan fled to Canada, leaving her husband to deal with his family. The Queen asked them not to go public with this stuff yet, but Harry and Meghan defied her. The appalling pair plans to live in Los Angeles eventually, but only after Donald Trump is no longer president (second term!). And — this is the kicker — if they don’t get what they want, including the right to capitalize on their royal status, even though they are bailing on their royal duties, they’re threatening blackmail:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could give a tell-all interview to their friend Oprah Winfrey if they do not get their way in showdown talks with the royal family at Sandringham, palace aides fear.
Meghan’s US PR team is thought to already be in contact with Oprah, as well as several American TV networks for a potential no-holds barred interview.
Tom Bradby, the ITV journalist who spoke to the Sussexes in their bombshell documentary last year, has already warned that a ‘no-holds barred’ interview could be in the offing.
As well as Oprah, Meghan’s team is believed to have contacted the television networks ABC, NBC and CBS.  Meghan’s mother Doria has also been seen leaving Oprah’s home.
Now, a royal source said: ‘Harry and Meghan’s people have been reaching out to all the big US networks to explore the possibilities of a sit-down warts-and-all interview.
‘Meghan feels she’s been silenced and is no longer prepared to be muted. She and Harry feel the royals have been racist and sexist.’

(Hat-tip: Ed Driscoll at Instapundit.) Imagine going on TV to denounce your own grandmother as a racist. Now imagine being married to the kind of woman who thinks this threat of a “warts-and-all” interview with Oprah is a clever move. This is all on Harry, you see. As I always say when some man grumbles that his ex-wife is an evil crazy bitch, well, what does that say about you? A man who marries an evil crazy bitch is self-evidently lacking in good judgment. So it is not accurate to say the Duchess of Sussex is making a fool of Harry — he was already a fool.

As to the accusation of royal racism, Professor Reynolds is correct: “If you start with the assumption that charges of racism are usually self-serving twaddle, you’ll usually be right.” Beyond that, however, the very idea of royalty is inherently racist, since it assumes that some people are born with a hereditary superiority. It has always amused me how so many American liberals — especially women — who would never be caught in the same room with a right-winger (because we are all so “racist”), nevertheless often display a starstruck admiration for the British royals. Remember all the emotional gush over Princess Diana’s death? Or what about the media’s fascination with Kate Middleton? Do the American women who fawn over the Windsors not see the contradiction between their hatred of “racism” and their love of British nobility?

Of course, liberals are always contradicting themselves this way. Liberalism is really an expression of ambition, a desire for the kind of elite social status which in a democratic polity can only be obtained by advocating egalitarianism. The American liberal aspires to live like a Kennedy, with guaranteed admission to Harvard as an inherited birthright, but they expect us plebs not to notice the double standard — one rule for them, another rule for the rest of us. The blessings of Equality that liberals promise never seem to materialize, while the liberal elite send their kids to private schools that your kids could never get into (even if you could afford the tuition, which you can’t).

By the way, did you know that Meghan Markle’s parents are divorced, her grandparents were divorced, and both her half-siblings (from her father’s first marriage) are divorced? Meghan herself has already divorced one husband, and if Harry thinks he’s not headed for divorce, he should think again. He is making a public spectacle of himself, and bringing disgrace upon his family, for the sake of a woman who is just using him temporarily — a plaything with which she’ll soon grow tired.

Harry should have read The Rational Male.



 

Ricky Gervais Burns Hollywood: ‘You Know Nothing About the Real World’

Posted on Comments

 

Everybody on Twitter was talking about this Sunday night:

Host Ricky Gervais used his opening remarks at the 77th annual Golden Globe Awards Sunday night to scold his celebrity audience for hypocritically promoting progressive ideas despite the skeletons in their own industry’s closet.
“You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything,” said Gervais. “You know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg.”
Gervais alluded to several of the various scandals that have rocked Hollywood in the past few years. He warned movie executives that Ronan Farrow “is coming for you,” and joked that Felicity Huffman—who served time for her role in the college admissions fraud—was busy making license plates.
Gervais also referenced Epstein’s suicide, which prompted some boos from the audience. But the comedian didn’t miss a beat. “Shut up,” said Gervais. “I know he’s your friend, but I don’t care.”
Speaking for the millions of people who would rather not be lectured about climate change by a bunch of movie stars and their private jets, Gervais concluded his remarks by warning the night’s award winners not to make any obnoxiously woke political statements.
“Come up, accept your little award, thank your agent and your god, and f–k off,” he said.

 

Most Americans have stopped watching these award shows. The ratings are in the toilet because network TV is dying, the victim of Internet streaming. A “celebrity” is now any cute 19-year-old girl with a YouTube channel and an Instagram account. Every so often, Twitter erupts in a firestorm of messages declaring that some allegedly “famous” person (e.g., James Charles) has been “cancelled,” and the first thing I have to do is figure out who this “famous” person is. Excuse me if I descend into Boomer nostalgia here, but before the Internet, and before there were 220 cable TV channels, we had exactly three networks, and if you weren’t on NBC, ABC or CBS, you weren’t famous. Now?

Gregory Daniel Jackson, a/k/a “Onision,” is a YouTube personality with about 2 million subscribers who was originally famous for a silly performance called “I’m a Banana.” Now 33 years old, Onision has been called “YouTube’s most troubled star” because of his “bizarre and disturbing” content and his habit of provoking controversy. He is militant about veganism, for example, calling meat-eaters “murderers,” and despises Christianity, calling the Bible “a book of hate.”

Two million YouTube subscribers is a pretty big audience, but I never heard of this guy until he was accused of being a creep. Certainly, in the days of three networks, there were TV stars who were creeps, but now you’ve got random creeps becoming “famous” on the Internet — two million subscribers! — without any adult ever knowing who they are.

My point is . . . Well, I’m sure there must be a point in all this, but I don’t have time to think about it now because we might be at war with Iran by the time I could finish explaining why life was better when we only had three TV networks and no Internet. If you’re old enough to know what I mean, you’re probably eligible for a senior citizen discount — $7.59, drinks included! — at the Golden Corral buffet.

If you’ll hit the freaking tip jar for $7.59, I’ll post a picture of my buffet plate on my Instagram account. Because I’m celebrity, too . . .



 

Michael Moore Humbly Declares Himself the Only Good Kind of White Guy

Posted on Comments

 

His ego is nearly as bloated as his belly:

Michael Moore declared that white people “are not good people” and that you should “be afraid” of them in an interview on “The Rolling Stone” podcast “Useful Idiot.” Moore warned people that if they see a group of 3 white men approaching them that they should cross the street because at least 2 of them voted for Trump.
“I refuse to participate in post-racial America,” Moore said. “I refuse to say because we elected Obama that suddenly that means everything is okay, white people have changed. White people have not changed.”
“Two-thirds of all white guys voted for Trump. That means anytime you see three white guys walking at you, down the street toward you, two of them voted for Trump. You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people that are walking toward you. You should be afraid of them,” Moore warned.
Moore joked that the “other guy” with the group of three whites are people “like him” that didn’t vote for Trump.
“We’re traitors to our race, that’s how they see us,” Moore said of pro-Trump white people.

Republican voters — all 62.9 million of us — are so dangerous you should cross the street to avoid us, but Michael Moore? Oh, he’s a saint!

Remember when Michael Moore’s ex-wife sued him claiming he swindled her out of millions of dollars? Yeah, he’s such a class act.



 

Why Do Democrats Hate Jesus?

Posted on Comments

 

It’s Thanksgiving Day. Our two youngest sons, Jefferson and Emerson, are home from college, while my wife is roasting a turkey and preparing all the other delicious food for our afternoon feast. Meanwhile, Democrats are mad because a popular rapper is praising God:

An atheist group has gone on the attack against rapper Kanye West for performing his Sunday Service at a Texas prison claiming that the event was an “egregious” violation of the U.S. Constitution.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) blasted Texas Sheriff Ed Gonzalez for allowing the “Jesus Walks” rapper to appear at the Harris County Jail in Houston, Texas, on November 17 in a four-page letter.
Kanye West performed his weekly Sunday Service before more than 500 inmates, both male and female, in two different services at the county jail facilities. The performance was given high praise by Texas Governor Greg Abbott who tweeted out his compliments saying, “If he moves just one person closer to God the world will be a more peaceful place.”
But the FFRF was far less pleased with the rapper’s church service.
In its letter, the atheist group demanded that the county cease any other efforts to “organize or promote worship services in the future.”
However, a representative of the First Liberty Institute told Fox News that there is no reason that Kanye West should be barred from conducting a service in a county jail.
“Kanye West visited the Harris County Jail to offer hope and encouragement,” said Mike Berry, First Liberty chief of staff. “The last time I checked, you can do that in this country. If every sheriff in America invited Kanye West to visit their jails, we might have less need for jails.”

Let’s not pretend that we don’t know what who these atheists are, or what they’re really about. They are Democrats, who hate God for the same reason Democrats hate motherhood and patriotism — because they hate America, and anything that is good for America, Democrats are against.




 

Anti-Trump Book Is Spectacular Flop

Posted on Comments

 

Book sales nowadays are often a reflection of celebrity: If you’ve got a hit TV show, a publisher will pay you big bucks in advance for a book and hire a ghostwriter to put it together for you, on the theory that your fans will all pay $24.95 for anything with your picture on the cover. So what happens after a celebrity loses their TV platform?

Disgraced former MSNBC analyst Mark Halperin’s book How to Beat Trump: America’s Top Political Strategists On What It Will Take sold 502 copies during its first week, according to NPD BookScan’s Wednesday report.
Not many Americans purchased Halperin’s book this week despite the description on Amazon that claims, “more than 100 million anxious Americans want to know: how can Donald Trump be beaten in 2020 and evicted from the White House?”
Just six reviews of the book have been posted to Amazon, one of which is titled “Write what you know, Mark.” In it, user Ball Student wrote, “He’d be better off avoiding speculation and sticking to areas he has extensive experience in: groping female employees.”
Halperin has faced numerous allegations of sexual harassment and assault, and the news of his book contract with Regan Arts has drawn a substantial backlash. CNN reported that 12 women came forward publicly to accuse Halperin of sexual harassment or assault, which he denied.
Journalist Emily Miller, who worked with Halperin at ABC News, criticized anyone aiding him because she said it undermines the victims who came forward.
“Every person who’s helping him regain power and a public platform is complicit in re-traumatizing all the victims,” Miller said.
“Men like him don’t change,” she said. “He spent decades using his position of power in the media to sexually assault women. He hasn’t even apologized to his victims.”
Former CNN producer Eleanor McManus, who also said she was victimized by Halperin, criticized Regan Arts for signing him to a book deal despite his refusal to apologize.
“He has yet to take responsibility for his actions by apologizing to his victims or demonstrating genuine contrition,” McManus said. “Giving him a book once again puts him in a position of authority and that is a slap to all the women that he has victimized.”
NBC News terminated Halperin in light of the allegations. He has since started his own political blog.

Do you think a big New York publisher would give me a book deal? I’ve never been on MSNBC, but at the same time, I haven’t been accused of groping a dozen women. Not yet, anyway. But I digress . . .

My point, however, is that when Mark Halperin became a New York Times bestselling author in 2010, he was a member in good standing of the liberal media and a regular guest on Morning Joe. Then the #MeToo movement destroyed his reputation and now? Welcome to Flop City.

Sic transit gloria mundi.