The Other McCain

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

Theory 2a: #Benghazi-Bimbo Connection

Posted on | May 7, 2014 | 16 Comments

by Smitty

Referring to Ann Althouse’s post on the Zombie Bimbo Revival, of course the answer is Hillary. Vanity Fair also stands to gain from the notoriety, and those two own 70% of the poll. However, Monica’s story is the kind of thing that has probably been in the can for a while, waiting for its moment. It’s certainly the kind of story that would have to come out as part of the 2016 run, sure. But Althouse thinks it’s mostly to do with Rand:

If it’s in Hillary’s interest to bring back the Monica story, wouldn’t the Clintons have done that in 2008? As Marcus observes, the difference is that Rand Paul — a presumptive candidate in 2016 — “has already raised the question of whether Democrats in general, and Hillary Clinton in particular, should consort with a ‘sexual predator’ like Bill Clinton.” And Lewinsky’s new presentation stresses that she was a consenting adult, that her victimhood came as she “was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position” — whatever that means — and “It’s time to burn the beret and bury the blue dress.” We’re victimizing her if we remember her in the only form we would ever have known about her. So: Conversation over! Unless you’re an abuser. Rand.

I’ll give that a “yeah, maybe”. But really, wouldn’t it seem more useful to have Monica save her mouthful for a tougher target? Should the Clintons get out the cigars so early, when anything could happen over the next two years?
No, it strikes me that, for all the Benghazi email disclosure that triggered the Select Committee seems rather sudden, that too is likely orchestrated (distract from the ObamaCare implosion?) and that Monica is just another layer of damage control. . .


I’m past caring, really. My hope is that this Tower of Babel/Corruption just collapses into itself, so that we can set about clearing away the human debris that miscalls itself our leadership.

Update: KRAUTHAMMER: HILLARY COMMENTS ON BENGHAZI ‘RIDICULOUS’ If you look at her record upside down, Benghazi was clearly her chief accomplishment as SECSTATE.

Category: Ann Althouse, Democrats, Hillary Clinton

A Twitter-Length Play For Your Attention

Posted on | May 7, 2014 | 17 Comments

by Smitty

 

Category: Hillary Clinton

LIVE AT FIVE: 05.07.14

Posted on | May 7, 2014 | 16 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


TOP NEWS
Suspected Boko Haram Gunmen Abduct Eight More Girls In Nigeria

Woman holds a sign at a Lagos protest Monday

US pledges assistance in hunt for missing girls

Pro-Russian Rebels Plan Autonomy Vote For Parts Of Eastern Ukraine
Russian FM Lavrov demands end to Ukraine forces’ attacks on rebel strongholds

Rush Limbaugh: Monica Lewinsky Is Collateral Damage
Another victim of Hillary Clinton’s #waronwomen



POLITICS
Tillis, Hagan Win NC Senate Primary

Thom Tillis already being labeled “too conservative” by NC Democrats

Establishment 1, TEA Party 0?

EPA Under Fire For Allegedly Blocking Investigations

Senate Republicans Call For Secretary Shinseki To Resign From VA

Incumbent Congressmen Breeze To Victory In Indiana Primaries

Panel Urges Shift To One-Drug Lethal Injections

Members Of Pussy Riot Tell Congress About Russia’s Human Rights Abuses



THE ECONOMY, STUPID
Asian Crude Mixed On API Report: NYMEX $100.05, Brent $107.30
PRC’s Alibaba Files In US For What May Be Biggest Tech IPO
Asian Shares At One-Month Low, Yen Rises On Ukraine Crisis
Societe Generale Hurt By Writedown Of Russian Assets
Fiat Bets On Jeep, Alfa Revamp To Go Global
Whole Foods Squeezed By Competitors
Epson Challenges Google With Smart Glasses At Half The Price
Microsoft Files For Smartwatch Patent
Google Classroom Is Now In Session
ARM Expects $20 Smartphone “In A Few Months”
More Titanfall Experiences On The Way Courtesy Of EA



SPORTS
Byzgalov Saves 19 As Wild Blank Hawks 4-0

Wild defenseman Jonas Broden battles Hawks winger Brandon Bollig for the puck

Wild block Hawks from taking 3-0 lead

Kevin Durant Beats LeBron James For NBA MVP

Habs Protect Lead, Beat Bruins 4-2 For 2-1 Edge


LeBron Drops 22 As Heat Beat Nyets

Tulowitzki, Rockies Blitz Rangers Again, 12-1

Sizemore Leads Red Sox To 12th Inning Win

Padres Fall To Royals, 3-1 In 11th

Kershaw Returns, Dodgers Hold Off Nats For 8-3 Win



FAMOUS FOR BEING FAMOUS
Jessica Alba On Her No Nudity Policy: “I Don’t Want My Grandparents Seeing My Boobs”

“It would be weird at Christmas.”

Bombshell actress and businesswoman speaks out in this month’s Glamour

Is There Life After Don Draper For Jon Hamm?

Porsha Williams Apologizes For Anti-Gay Sermon


Monica Lewinsky: “It’s Time To Bury The Blue Dress”

Billy Eichner To Star In USA Network Comedy From Amy Poehler

Gerard Butler Drops Out Of “Point Break” Remake

Jimmy Kimmel Gets Two-Year Contract Extension

LMFAO – Rick Ross Is A Fake Thug!



FOREIGNERS
Thai PM Shinawatra, Nine Ministers Removed By Constitutional Court
South Africans Vote In First “Born Free” Election
Vietnam Says It’s Prepared To Act Against PRC Oil Rig In Disputed Waters
Syrian Rebels Begin Evacuating Homs
Gang Raped Indonesian Woman Faces Caning For Adultery
Saudis Arrest Pakistani Accused Of Links To Al Qaeda Cell
Vatican Reports Over 3000 Priests Disciplined Since 2004 For Child Abuse
Boston College To Return Northern Ireland Interview Tapes
South Sudan Rebels Respond To US Sanctions, Seek Peace



BLOGS & STUFF
Proof Positive: Kirkwood
Michelle Malkin: Hollywood’s Sexual Predator Problem Explodes
Doug Powers: David Plouffe Applies Common Core Math To Benghazi – “Deluded Minority” Support Investigation
Twitchy: It Had To Happen – Sad Jay Carney Meets Sad Keanu
American Power: The Left Controversializes Benghazi
American Thinker: Muslim Illegal Immigration In India Sparks Violent Response
BLACKFIVE: Benghazi – Shut Up, They Said
Blackmailers Don’t Shoot: The Warriors – Overdue Game Reivew
Conservatives4Palin: Marc Thiessen – Release Obama’s Intelligence Briefings
Don Surber: Daily Scoreboard, May 6
Jammie Wearing Fools: Another Obamacare Success Story – Massachusetts Dumps Non-Functioning Website
Joe For America: Mexican Army Invades Arizona, Shoots Tucson Man
JustOneMinute: Post-Nuclear Winter In The Senate
Pat Dollard: Police Investigating Threats Against Trey Gowdy
Protein Wisdom: Meet The White, Male, Liberal Professors Who Kept A Black Woman From Speaking At Rutgers
Shot In The Dark: Protocols Of The Elders Of Middle School
The Jawa Report: UN Committee To Target Islamic Kidnapping, Rape, And Torture
The Lonely Conservative: Have I Mentioned That I Hate Reading Political Books
This Ain’t Hell: Mattis – Veterans Aren’t Victims
Megan McArdle: Wolves Close In On Target’s Executives


Category: Live at Five

Feminism Is a Journey to Lesbianism

Posted on | May 6, 2014 | 45 Comments

“It became obvious that men didn’t want to interact with me or with women in general on an equal level, and that what ‘attracted’ them in women was subordination to them — as soon as we wanted to be their ‘equals’ they were repelled by it, lost interest or tried to thwart the feminist drive in me some way or another.”
— Radical Wind, April 28

(WARNING: Graphic language and mature subject matter.)

Radical feminists are both (a) insane and (b) basically correct in their understanding of the psychology of sex. Which is to say, a careful study of what is today called “gender theory” does show that inequality between men and women — collectively, under the systematic male dominance that feminists call patriarchy — is inextricably linked to heterosexuality. Even if every conceivable reform were enacted that could rid women of discrimination in education or employment, male dominance would continue to be expressed through sexual intercourse, through manipulation or abuse within relationships, through pregnancy and through women’s greater burden in parenthood. Women who desire long-term male romantic companionship of any kind must do what is necessary first to attract, and then to maintain, his sexual interest.

Radical Wind — the wacko feminist whose rant “PIV is always rape, OK?” inspired widespread mockery — is actually very close to an important truth when she describes how men were “repelled” by her “feminist drive.” We may suppose she was hanging out with a loutish crew of young left-wing idiots when she experienced this; therefore it must have been a shocking revelation when these allegedly egalitarian men expected her to enact the “subordination” of femininity.

News flash: Men are men.

“Male dominance is sexual. . . .
“A feminist theory of sexuality would locate sexuality within a theory of gender inequality, meaning the social hierarchy of men over women. . . .
“To be clear: what is sexual is what gives a man an erection. Whatever it takes to make a penis shudder and stiffen with the experience of its potency is what sexuality means culturally. . . . All this suggests that that which is called sexuality is the dynamic of control by which male dominance . . . eroticizes as man and woman, as identity and pleasure. It is also that which maintains and defines male supremacy as a political system.”
— Catharine MacKinnon, “Sexuality, Pornography, and Method: ‘Pleasure under Patriarchy'” (1989)

Yeah, baby — keep talking sexy like that and I might buy you a drink.

Isn’t it weird how we smile at such a discussion, even by an ultra-serious radical feminist like MacKinnon? Talking about the erotic nature of male dominance is enough “to make a penis shudder and stiffen with the experience of its potency,” you might say.

The arguments of radical lesbian feminists are, to me, preferable to the liberal “pro-sex” feminists like Amanda Marcotte, whose objective seems to be to defend women’s “right” to shame-free promiscuity. Radical feminists see the “pro-sex” embrace of heterosexual hedonism as a dishonest betrayal of feminism: How are women fighting the patriarchy by sucking cock? The paradox is self-evident.

The “subordination” of women in their traditional roles as wives, mothers and homemakers was the original target of the Women’s Liberation movement, but as soon as women divorced their husbands, aborted their babies and pursued careers, they discovered that this “liberation” subjected them to new forms of oppression. Made “equal” by federal laws that forbade discrimination, newly liberated women learned that the egalitarian regime did not improve the quality of their relationships with men. To the contrary, the “liberated woman” was subjected to harassment, insults and the selfish predatory sexual behavior of men whose “respect” for women as equals proved to be far crueler in practice than anything that the stereotypical 1950s suburban housewife had ever been expected to endure.

From this recognition — the misleading promise of “liberation” in a man’s world — sprang the radical feminism that identified men as the enemy, and made lesbianism a political statement, arguing that male sexuality was inherently harmful to women.

“Radical feminism has completely transformed me. . . . I have no male friends, and limit my interaction with males . . .
“With patriarchy, men are constantly dictating what women’s bodies should look like. . . . A woman’s body is meant for male viewing. He wants . . . to confirm his stupid beliefs that women are fuck objects.”
— Formulations of Oppression, April 16

Yeah, baby — keep talking sexy like that and I might buy you a drink.

The radical’s resentment of her status as “fuck object” and the perception that her body “is meant for male viewing” shows that her grievance is not with traditionalism, but rather with the hedonistic culture of “liberation” wherein women are expected to market themselves as sexual commodities. Her problem is not that men fall in love with her, want to marry her, take her to a 3BR/2BA ranch house in the suburbs and make babies together. Her problem is that none of these modes of traditional “subordination” are offered to the liberated woman, who is presumed to exist in a state of constant sexual availability, a woman to be had by many men, but never wholly possessed by any of them.

It is the absence of permanent commitment — of “happily ever after,” of complete uniting of herself with man — that inspires the liberated woman to resent not just the selfish indifference of men who desire her only as a “fuck object,” but eventually also to resent the sex act itself. And when she reaches that point, she will find feminist intellectuals ready to encourage and theorize her resentment.

“There is never a real privacy of the body that can coexist with intercourse: with being entered. The vagina itself is muscled and the muscles have to be pushed apart. The thrusting is persistent invasion. She is opened up, split down the center. She is occupied — physically, internally, in her privacy. . . . .
“There is no analogue anywhere among subordinated groups of people to this experience of being made for intercourse: for penetration, entry, occupation.”
— Andrea Dworkin, Intercourse, 1987

Yeah, baby — keep talking sexy like that and I might buy you a drink.

Most women are not radical man-haters like Dworkin and, after reading her description of intercourse — “of being  opened up, split down the center” — normal women reply: “Isn’t it awesome?”

Normal women are delighted to know they are “made for intercourse,” and if they are thereby “subordinated”? Awesome! And if her body is a delight to her man? Awesome! 

Radical feminists perceive everything, including happiness, as a zero-sum game: Anything that makes men happy can only be obtained by a process of subtraction from the happiness of women. This is even true — indeed, it is especially true — when it comes to PIV (penis-in-vagina, i.e., intercourse), as Radical Wind explains:

Separatism started for me in a crossroads of circumstances. It started in part when I decided that I wouldn’t date any men because dating with them had been so painful and traumatising and I wanted to protect myself from that. I was already feminist, had almost perceived that PIV was inherently violent and a way to humiliate women, and that all men wanted was to use us as receptacles for their dicks. So I first thought that if I wanted to date a man, a way to prevent being used by them as their dick-socket to be thrown away the minute after, I’d have to choose one I knew for a long time and could trust he wouldn’t abuse me, had already built an equal, friendly, respectful relationship with him which stood the test of time, and especially, they would have to understand feminism and i should be able to be feminist with them without feeling uncomfortable about it.
Well I very quickly realised that this standard was totally impossible! Once I held this standard for interacting with men, they all disappeared out of my life very quickly. It became obvious that men didn’t want to interact with me or with women in general on an equal level, and that what “attracted” them in women was subordination to them — as soon as we wanted to be their “equals” they were repelled by it, lost interest or tried to thwart the feminist drive in me some way or another. This was a major eye-opener. I’ve said this before in various comments but I found this experience really amazing — just setting the bar high for men made them disappear out of my life.
Also once I saw how everything men do is always directly or subliminally a rape threat and reminds us of our penetrable caste, I couldn’t bear being exposed to anything male, either in physical presence or in mediated ways (religion, ideology, media, art, etc, etc,). It re-triggers unconscious or conscious defence mechanisms to rape, PIV and sexualised invasion. It’s stressful and traumatising.

From this feminist perspective, men pursue intercourse strictly as “a way to humiliate women” by reducing them to the status of “receptacles for their dicks,” so that intimate relationships with men mean “being used by them as their dick-socket.” When she decided to avoid this “subordination,” the radfem found it made men “disappear out of my life.” She finds herself traumatized by exposure “to anything male,” because their mere presence is “subliminally a rape threat,” a reminder of her membership in the “penetrable caste.”

Thus does the experience of the liberated woman — often had, yet never possessed — lead her to radicalism, toward hatred of men who have treated her as just another “dick-socket.” Being unloved by men has destroyed her ability to love them . . .

“She had never been with another woman before, but Draga knew her attraction to women was real. So, she yielded her lovely, long-legged girlishness to a passion she had never before experienced.”
— Carol Emery, Queer Affair (1957)

A lifestyle once marginalized, depicted as strangely exotic — the steamy stuff of dancer Draga Hamilton’s “passion” with Jo Stanhope in the 1957 pulp novel Queer Affair — lesbianism is nowadays far more common, especially among young women who have grown weary of pervasive disappointment, exploitation and abuse in the “liberated” world of heterosexual hedonism.

Lesbianism as a political expression of feminist consciousness is less interesting than lesbianism as an exotic perversion. To be honest, radical politics doesn’t induce the kind of “shuddering and stiffening” reaction described by MacKinnon. Thus it is that feminists ruin everything: Having first ruined marriage by convincing women they were oppressed as suburban housewives, next they ruined fornication by their idiotic talk about “empowerment” and “liberation” until now, at last, they have even ruined lesbianism, which used to be weird, wild and sexy, but has become just another tedious political pose.

Hey, did I mention it’s National Offend a Feminist Week?

 





 

\

Category: Feminism, National Offend a Feminist Week

Beltway Hypnosis Syndrome

Posted on | May 6, 2014 | 31 Comments

Larry O’Connor nails it:

I hear it from half the callers on my talk radio shows. I read it in the comment sections of my favorite blogs. I see it from some of the most well-respected pundits on cable news.
Every time the discussion turns to anything outside the Washington Beltway or to any topic not related to the Democrat vs. Republican horserace narrative of “Who’s up and who’s down” political gamesmanship I hear “It’s not important. We need to get back to the real issues America cares about.”
With all due respect, I have to ask, “Are you high?”

Read the whole thing. Having often attempted to persuade conservatives to take seriously stories outside the “horserace narrative of . . . political gamesmanship,” I know the frustration Larry describes. Part of the problem is the Right’s epidemic Obamamania, with which I have never been afflicted, understanding that a fixation on presidential politics means the trivialization of everything else. Here we are, in the fifth year of the Obama presidency, his 2012 re-election disappearing in the rear-view mirror and the crucial 2014 mid-term elections just six months away and . . . Obama! Obama! Obama!

Day after day, ad infinitum, ad tedium.

 

Category: Journalism

The #RapeCulture of Planned Parenthood

Posted on | May 6, 2014 | 33 Comments

Enabling rapists because . . . choice!

Planned Parenthood abortion clinics have come under fire countless times over the years for not reporting cases of statutory rape to authorities as required by state law. Now, in Arizona, officials says the abortion giant failed again to provide the proper report to authorities about a victim of a young man who is a serial rapist.
Not only did Planned Parenthood intentionally fail to report the rape but, in so doing, it allowed the rapist to rape as many as 18 or more teenage girls, authorities say, making it so the abortion company is partially responsible for victimizing them as well.

This is insane:

Tyler Kost, 18, is accused of raping or molesting at least 18 girls, most of them fellow classmates at Poston Butte High School. He is being held without bond in the Pinal County jail.
In forensic interviews with Sheriff’s Office sex crime detectives, a girl who says she became pregnant after Kost raped her last year visited a Planned Parenthood clinic with her mother on New Year’s Eve. According to the report, her mom told the staffer about the sexual assault during the visit.
“The counselor intentionally miscoded the assault as a consensual encounter,” the PCSO report states. “The counselor told them that they did not want the hassle of having to report the assault to law enforcement as they were a mandatory reporter.”
That’s a violation of Arizona law, which requires all suspected sexual abuse incidents be reported to law enforcement.

How did this kid become a serial rapist before he was old enough to vote? Maybe the backstory has been published somewhere.

If you can find the details on Tyler the Teenage Booty Bandit, please link/quote news articles in the comments.

 

Category: Abortion, Crime, Planned Parenthood, Sex

A. Ejaculating on a Fat Girl

Posted on | May 6, 2014 | 21 Comments

Q. What was Bill Clinton’s most famous accomplishment as president?

Monica Lewinsky has opened up about her infamous presidential affair to reveal that she turned down offers that would’ve amounted to $10million because she ‘didn’t feel like the right thing to do’.

(Perhaps if she had been worried about “the right thing to do” before she fellated the President of the United States . . .)

Lewinsky, now 40, has penned a tell-all essay for Vanity Fair . . .
‘Sure, my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship. Any ‘abuse’ came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position,’ she wrote in the essay. . . .

(Being used as a taxpayer-provided semen receptacle? That was “a consensual relationship” and OK. Being exposed for doing so — and for filing a perjurious affidavit in a federal civil rights lawsuit — is, however, “abuse.” If Clinton had not been in “his powerful position,” Lewinsky would not have been so eager to suck him off, but when the administration’s defenders, including its hired liars in the press corps, predictably circled the wagons to defend The Big He, Lewinsky seemed surprised to learn that her fate was incidental to process. But I could go on all day about this. Back to the story . . .)

‘Sure, my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship. Any ‘abuse’ came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position,’ she wrote in the essay.
‘The Clinton administration, the special prosecutor’s minions, the political operatives on both sides of the aisle, and the media were able to brand me. And that brand stuck, in part because it was imbued with power.’
She went on to say that she is fully aware of the impact of the relationship and she is coming clean with her full feelings. . . .

(Yes, “she’s coming clean.” He, on the other hand . . .)

 

Category: Bill Clinton, National Offend a Feminist Week

When Lies Succeed

Posted on | May 6, 2014 | 14 Comments

Has America become indifferent to truth?

The events in Benghazi seem to fit the description of a general-interest non-partisan disaster for the Administration. But, for now at least, as galling as it is, it’s hard not to give the Obama Administration (and the other villain of the tale, Hillary Clinton) points for managing the public’s reaction to the (possibly preventable) murder of a United States ambassador and the flurry of lies that followed it.
Why does this work? Or, alternatively, does it work?
My concern here is that our side tends to look at something utterly indefensible like this — “controversializing” a genuine news story — and say, “This won’t work.” Or: “This shouldn’t work.” Or: “This wouldn’t work if we all kept Tweeting about it.” But for now, at least, it’s working. Why? . . .

(Hat-tip: Ed Driscoll at Instapundit.)

 

Category: Libya
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin