“. . . that it’s always 1963, because that’s the last time they can remember being the good guys,” says Professor Glenn Reynolds.
It’s not just black Republicans like Wesley Hunt who are dunking on the idiot Swalwell, who apparently has not considered the irony that the most conservative justice on the Supreme Court is Clarence Thomas, a black South Carolina native whose wife is white. Swalwell represents the 15th District of California, which is only 6.1% black, whereas South Carolina — represented in the Senate by two Republicans and in the House by six Republicans and two Democrats — is 24.8% black. The prejudices upon which the Democratic Party operates have somewhat changed since 1963, but one thing has not changed, namely the common belief of Democrats that they are The Party of Moral Virtue, engaged in a life-or-death struggle for the survival of “Our Democracy.”
My point is that, contrary to what is commonly said, there never was really a Good Old Days in which Democrats were the party of common sense, before they went drifting leftward. Go back and consider the idiocy of William Jennings Bryant’s quixotic crusade for “free coinage of silver,” or the various “progressive” whims of Woodrow Wilson, including his own quixotic crusade for the League of Nations. Even if Republicans of that era had some bad policy ideas, were Democrats a bastion of “common sense”? And then you dogtrot forward through history, with the various failed schemes of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and on through the unfortunate presidency of Harry Truman (who is ridiculously overrated by historians), the futile liberalism of Adlai Stevenson, the endless crises of JFK’s presidency and utter catstrophe of LBJ — where do we locate the Good Old Days of “common sense” Democrats?
Trust me, I’m the guy who wrote the book — well, I co-wrote it, anyway — demonstrating that the Democratic Party was rotten from the start, when Jefferson struck his deal with Aaron Burr and Tammany Hall to form the national party in opposition to John Adams, Alexander Hamilton and the Federalists. Despite my own sympathies for the Jeffersonian ideal, and my opposition to the Adams/Hamilton axis representing northeastern hegemony and centralization of power in the early Union, nevertheless the seeds of corruption were present from the conception of what eventually became the Democratic Party.
The reason why most people are unaware of this history is simply because Democrats have such overwhelming control of the education system and the media, so that from their earliest school lessons onward, most Americans are steeped in Democratic Party propaganda that celebrates the Great Myth of The Party of Moral Virtue. Some of the worst disasters inflicted on America by the Democrats came at the very apex of their power and prestige (and “common sense” reputation), as anyone who has studied the 1960s must understand. Go read David Halberstam’s The Best and the Brightest, if you want to get a glimpse of what went wrong with “The New Frontier” and “The Great Society.” It must be understood that the JFK/LBJ debacles, including failure in Vietnam, were a delayed consequence of mistakes made during the FDR/Truman era. And we had minor sequels to that episode in the presidencies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. The Great Myth that inspires the hubris of Democrats is apparent in so many things, of which Eric Swalwell’s ridiculous tweet is just one tiny star in a vast constellation of moral arrogance.
It is easy to laugh at a clown like Eric Swalwell, until you pause to consider that we may be on the brink of nuclear war with Russia, while the presidency is occupied by a notorious fool who wasn’t qualified for the office even before he began his descent into incoherent senility.
Not going to lie, the main reason I’m doing this is so my Feedly doesn’t get jammed up with almost a week’s worth of posts when I get around to doing Monday’s posts… Ceterum autem censeo Silicon Valley esse delendam.
On the one hand, the past week has been good for Russia in that they seem to have gone the past six days without having another general killed, but on the other hand, the Ukrainians have scored crucial victories around Kharkiv. The invaders have been pushed back north and east of the city, which has endured weeks of shelling from Russian artillery. The Ukrainian push eastward from Kharkiv is especially promising, as they have advanced about 40 miles, all the way to Pechenihy on their left (north) and past the MO3/P07 highway crossroads of Chuhuiv as far as Malynivka on their right (south). While the Russians have retreated behind the Donets east of Pechenihy, with the river as an obstacle to further Ukrainian advances there, the prospect for Ukraine pushing southeast from Malynivka could be crucial. They are now roughly 45 miles from Kupiansk, a crossroads on the supply line of the Russian forces at Izyum, who thus now face a threat to their flank and rear.
You can click that map to enlarge it. Having no information about the forces involved on either side, whether the Russians or Ukrainians have reserves they can throw into this action, etc., it is impossible for me to assess the likelihood of Ukraine making rapid progress toward Kupiansk. Obviously, the Russian commanders can look at a map and see this threat to their supply line as clearly as I can, so you’ve got to figure that shoring up their defenses in that area will be a major priority. Still, even if Russia is able to hold off a Ukrainian threat to Kupiansk, doing so will require a diversion of men and materiel from elsewhere, so that the mere threat has strategic value for Ukraine in terms of the disposition of forces.
The importance of this development is that Izyum represents the northern pincer of Russia’s attempt to encircle Ukrainian forces in the east. If Ukraine can force Russia to withdraw from Izyum, this will effectively prevent the Russians from achieving that strategic objective. So over the coming week, pay attention to what’s happening in this theater, which may ultimately decide the outcome of the entire war.
Following up on last week’s post (“Belichick’s Strange Choice Confounds Critics Who Don’t Understand 4D Chess”) about the New England Patriots in the NFL Draft, there was a widespread consensus among football commentators that the Patriots had a lousy 2022 draft class overall. Among the choices by Belichick that had pundits scratching their heads this year was choosing Western Kentucky quarterback Bailey Zappe in the fourth round. Why, after taking Mac Jones in the first round last year — and after a rookie season that made clear Jones is the future of the franchise — would Belichick draft another QB this year?
The first take I heard on Zappe was from Evan Lazar who called him “a poor man’s Mac Jones.” At Western Kentucky, Zappe broke every passing record — just incredible numbers — and if he’d have done that at a first-tier football school, he would have been drafted much earlier than the fourth round. A classic dropback QB, like Jones, Zappe is also super-smart, scoring the highest among this year’s quarterback prospects on the Wonderlic IQ test. Given the complexity of New England’s offensive scheme, Zappe’s brainpower will be advantageous if he is to be ready to play as a rookie. The Patriots already have two backup QBs on their roster, veteran Bryan Hoyer and 2019 fourth-round pick Jarrett Stidham. Hoyer, 36, is for all intents and purposes now an assistant coach, acting as mentor to Jones, and Stidham hasn’t lived up to expectations, so the likely scenarios is that Zappe will displace Stidham on the Patriots’ roster.
And then what? There is the possibility, of course, that Zappe could prove to be a quarterback worthy of a starting role, in which case he could provide the Patriots with trade capital. Your team’s starter isn’t getting the job done? Let’s make a deal for, say, that Pro Bowl-caliber linebacker on your roster. Even if the Patriots are certain that Mac Jones is the quarterback of their future, Zappe could add value besides being able to step in if, God forbid, Jones should get hurt. So while I have no problem with the choice of Zappe in the fourth round, I’ve got to admit some of their other choices strike me as questionable.
Two running backs? You’ve already got a tremendous one-two punch with Damien Harris and Rhamondre Stevenson, who combined for over 1,500 rushing yards and 20 touchdowns last season, so why add two running backs? It does not matter, from my perspective, how good these rookies are. Pierre Strong has blazing speed (4.37 in the 40-yard dash) and Kevin Harris was a real workhorse at South Carolina, so it’s nothing against them as individual players, it’s just that I didn’t see this position as a priority for the Patriots. The real need in New England — after they got Strange to fill their opening at offensive guard — was on defense, particularly at cornerback and linebacker.
The Patriots got two quality cornerbacks in the third round (85th pick overall) and fourth round (121st pick). But was there not a single linebacker on the board they liked with the 127th pick (4th round) or 183rd pick (6th round) they used to get Strong and Harris? Let’s grant that they added veteran linebacker Mack Wilson from the Cleveland Browns in an off-season trade, and that New England also has younger players (e.g., Cameron McGrone and Anfernee Jennings) who could step up this year. Still, it looks like the Patriots are about to lose both Jamie Collins and Dont’a Hightower from their linebacker corps in free agency, and many analysts expected them to draft a linebacker in the first round this year. Not to draft any linebackers? It doesn’t make sense.
There was a more general complaint — both among fans and among league analysts — that New England “reached” with its first two draft picks, as Strange wasn’t projected as a first-round pick (some projected him going in the third round) and not many thought wide receiver Tyquan Thornton would go in the second round. However, for a team in need of a deep threat at receiver, the Patriots certainly scored big with Thornton, whose 40-yard dash time was the best of any WR at the NFL combine. And maybe those “reaches” weren’t really reaches at all:
NFL Network’s Mike Giardi suggests Bill Belichick and his staff’s insistence that neither player would’ve lasted much longer on the board might have been well-founded.
“On Cole Strange, I’ve learned, per source, there was a team in the 40s that had their eyes on Strange,” Giardi tweeted. “Would they have traded up had he began Day 2 still on the board? That part is unclear. Strange definitely was getting picked in round 2 regardless.”
Some teams, like the Los Angeles Rams, did homework on Strange as a possible third or fourth-round pick, adding fuel to the fire that the Patriots way over-drafted him.
However, it’s notable that several teams picking in the top 40 — the Vikings, Buccaneers and Seahawks — had Strange in for top-30 prospect visits before the draft.
Interestingly, the Bucs, who took defensive tackle Logan Hall with the 33rd pick, took tackle Luke Goedeke later in the second round. The Vikings, who grabbed safety Lewis Cine just after the Patriots picked Strange and also took cornerback Andrew Booth early in the second round, took offensive guard Ed Ingram later in the second as well.
Take this for what you will: Strange was a more highly graded player on NFL.com than either Goedeke or Ingram. Though we don’t know what the teams’ grades for them are, it’s conceivable the Patriots were right about Strange not lasting long (putting aside the actual value of the pick).
The Thornton pick feels harder to figure out.
Most projections suggested Thornton would still be around on Day 3 of the draft, leading to shock when he was selected ahead of seemingly better receiver prospects on Day 2.
But Giardi’s report casts doubt on that as well.
“And while we’re at it, on the Tyquan Thornton pick, league source believes there was a team lurking on the Baylor WR and perhaps a fear from the Patriots that the Steelers (at 52) were ready to pounce. So they move up 4 spots and get the speed merchant,” he wrote.
One theory: the Steelers, who grabbed Pickens at No. 52 overall, thought another team (including the Patriots) might take the Georgia product instead and had Thornton in mind as a backup option. Whether the Steelers, Colts or Chiefs, who all took receivers shortly after the Patriots got Thornton, would’ve actually taken him over the prospects they got is debatable, though.
?TYQUAN THORNTON FILM REVIEW
??Checkout @ezlazar's Film Room of newly drafted #Patriots WR Tyquan Thornton!
If Cole Strange was the best offensive guard in the draft, and the Patriots staff believed other teams might have their eye on him in the second round, taking him in the first round makes sense. Of all the wide receivers in the draft, Thornton was the fastest and New England had the need for that speed. So if there was any chance that Pittsburgh (or some other team) would take Thornton before the Patriots got their third-round pick (85th overall), then drafting Thornton in the second round makes perfect sense. Of course, objectively, I realize that I’m rationalizing here — engaged in a defensive justification of questionable behavior.
Rationalization is a universal trait, not just for football fans. Every prison is full of guys who either claim they were really innocent or else have some story to explain how they would have gotten away with it, had not this, that or the other thing gone wrong. After-the-fact explanations to defend our choices, especially when our choices are criticized or when the consequences are objectively bad, are just how the human mind operates as a default setting. So if you’re a Patriots fan, you tell yourself that Bill Belichick must know what he’s doing, even if all the commentators on ESPN are saying his draft picks were bad this year. In defending the questionable picks, you must have the self-awareness that you’re acting like a “homer,” and that your justifications are not objective, even while you marshal facts and logic to make arguments against critics.
Honestly, it’s like Jen Psaki standing at the lectern in the White House briefing room, saying everything Biden does is just awesome.
Do you see why football is a great hobby for a politics junkie? Hunter S. Thompson always thought so, and I share his belief that being a football fan is kind of a methadone treatment, a substitute for the heroin-like addiction of politics. You need something to focus your mental energies on, some obsession that distracts you from the madness of politics, or else you’ll turn into one of those deranged dingbats who think it’s cool to go protest at a Supreme Court justice’s home.
For most of us, our ability to influence politics is nearly as limited as our ability to persuade Belichick to pick a linebacker in the first round. Our inability to change events — our sense of powerlessness, because the important decisions are being made for us, contrary to our own inclinations or opinions — produces a sense of frustration. This frustration is intensified because we are dreadfully impatient. Inside each of us is a bit of Veruca Salt: “I want it now!” Football season doesn’t start until September, and the election is not until November, and we’re enduring the agony of the off-season — a lot of talk, talk, talk from the pundits on TV, when what we crave is the thrill of victory. Triumph over our foes, complete vindication: “To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.”
When my brother Kirby talks about anything — politics, football, the war in Ukraine, whatever — he always annoys me by discussing speculative contingencies: “If X happens, then either Y or Z.” This annoys me, as I say, because there is no way to know if X will happen or not. Will Putin go nuclear in Ukraine? Lots of smart people say it’s a real possibility, even though I can’t imagine such a nightmare scenario. Why even bother discussing it? If it happens, it happens, and all the choices are beyond my control, so what is to be gained by a moot court deliberation of the possible consequences of a madman dictator’s actions?
So let’s talk about football instead, but the same problem arises: Kirby always wants to talk about what Alabama should do — as if Coach Saban were going to heed our advice, which is always, “Run the damn ball!” — but exploring the limitless field of imaginative speculation frustrates me. There’s no point to it, and such discussions intensify my feelings of powerlessness. Ultimately, as fans and spectators, we just have to wait until they kick off and then watch what happens.
National Championship for ’Bama, Mac Jones takes the Patriots to the Super Bowl and Republicans win a landslide in the November midterms. And then we’ll enjoy listening to the lamentations of their women.
Just got home from Las Vegas, and my arms aren’t the only thing that’s tired…so I’m going to bed and will most likely wake up very early Saturday morning to do the last link dump of the week. It was an interesting morning at the dentist and an equally interesting afternoon at the credit union.
There’s a possibility that I may not be attending Balticon over Memorial Day weekend, since they have an absurd COVID policy in place and I’m not interested in putting up with that bullshit. Anyone up for a Smittypalooza Friday or Saturday somewhere in Northern Virginia or Frederick County? What say, honored Elder Sidekick?
One point I’ve not seen raised as we move toward a possible abortion of Roe/Casey is this pertains to the “If you don’t have a uterus, you cannot speak” argument. Whether one can speak has nothing to do with whether the plumbing is “indoor” or “outdoor”, because this is fundamentally a family, not an individual argument.
This is where the Left (credit where due) has expertly played the individual liberty card as a trump against conservatives. Because we do care about individual liberty. I, for one, am not here to boss anyone around. Bossing people around triggers that “Newton’s 3rd Law of Humans” rebellion. Perhaps you’ve noticed.
But.
Let me address my “team” directly here: if she’s not your wife, you’ve no business trading protein with her. And if God has joined you, let no man (to include you behaving like a boy) put that divine appointment asunder.
— I Came?I Saw?I Got Over Macho Grande (@smitty_one_each) April 23, 2022
Once a man is married (take your time, this is not a decision to be taken lightly), he needs to stay that way. We all look the same in the dark, and everyone’s feet stink. Don’t let the testosterone lead you to cheapen the sacrament. We can continue to prize our individual liberty as a political matter (I certainly do) but your spiritual growth as a man involves treating your marriage as a spiritual castle, just as your home is your physical castle.
Yet, political Libertarianism is orthogonal to your spiritual oath to the marriage and the ensuing family.
Thus, we are right, correct, and proper when we stomp this “no uterus, no voice” argument into the mud. It is a foul deceit intended to (and quite successful at) cratering our society and reducing us to thralls of a Socialist state controlled by globalists.
Therefore, it is my hope that the Pro Life movement morphs into a Pro Family movement, and we continue to reject the parade of follies that have plagued us since the Summer of Love.
Again, I’m not here to boss anyone around. I understand that there are plenty of people for whom “Form Follows Function” is too complex a concept to grasp, like the truth that a dog has four legs, no matter how we label the tail. Lord, have mercy.
But for those of us men who are not confused about manhood, it is time to step up to the plate, love our families as the Lord has loved us, and rebuild a collapsed culture.
The brother of the man arrested for the onstage assault of Dave Chappelle at the Hollywood Bowl says he’s stunned by the incident — and he wants people to know his younger sibling has struggled with mental health issues and being unhoused.
Police say Isaiah Lee, 23, stormed the stage Tuesday night at the Netflix Is a Joke festival and tackled the comedian before security intervened. Lee had a replica gun that could eject a knife blade in his possession when he was arrested and later booked on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon, authorities allege.
Lee’s brother Aaron Lee tells Rolling Stone that Isaiah has been in and out of shelters in Hollywood, California, for much of the last decade and has lots of friends in the transgender community. Still, Aaron doesn’t believe his brother would “lash out” as an act of activism against Chappelle, who recently drew ire from the LGBTQ community for jokes about trans people.
“I don’t have anything negative to say about Isaiah. He’s a performing artist who tries to stay as positive as possible. He does have a history of mental health issues. He does take medicine. Maybe he missed out on taking his prescription. But he’s not the type to just lash out. I don’t understand,” Aaron, 31, says.
The younger Lee has rapped under the name Noname Trapper and posted a song online two years ago titled “Dave Chappell.” His brother says Isaiah only picked that title to get search engine hits. Aaron says he never heard his brother express any ill will toward the comedian.
“That song wasn’t even about Dave Chappelle. It’s just that Dave Chappelle has a world-recognized name. People are searching Dave Chappelle all the time, so he hoped it would help him get more attention, more attraction, so people could find it,” Aaron says. “He doesn’t have any type of animosity toward him that I know about.”
Aaron says he hasn’t seen his brother recently and thought he was staying with another family member, “getting better.”
“He does take psych medicine, and that probably was a factor. And then maybe something triggered him acting like that. I don’t know,” he says. “He’s not the type of person to attack you for no reason. But if he’s not on his medication, and if he feels everyone is against him, maybe that’s it.”
As for speculation that the assault caught on video may have been tied to Chappelle’s controversial comments about the transgender community, Aaron was unsure. “He does have a connection with the transgender community,” Aaron tells Rolling Stone. “He used to stay at a shelter that helps transgender people. He’s been homeless since 11. He came out to California [from New York] after our grandmother died, and basically was in the streets getting help from different programs in Hollywood, like My Friend’s Place. He went to a lot of different organizations out there that help transgender people. Yeah, it could have definitely been a factor, but I really don’t know.”
You will perhaps not be surprised to learn that, because this happened in George Gascón’s district, the attacker will not be charged with a felony. Basically nothing is a felony in L.A. anymore, except voting Republican.
Making light of a scary situation. After an audience member recently attacked Dave Chappelle on stage, the comedian claimed that a few of his celebrity friends broke the man’s arm — but the quip was just part of his routine. “I felt good my friends broke his arm. I felt good,” the Chappelle’s Show alum, 48, said at the afterparty for the “Netflix Is A Joke” event on Tuesday, May 3, per an audio recording obtained by TMZ. He also quipped — in addition to his claims that Jamie Foxx and Busta Rhymes assisted with beating up the attacker — “How bad does a [N-word] have to be that Jon Stewart would stomp him?”
