The Other McCain

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

The $100 Trillion Woman

Posted on | March 19, 2019 | Comments Off on The $100 Trillion Woman

 

Elizabeth Warren wants to spend, spend, spend:

Sen. Warren believes she knows the way into Americans’ hearts: Lots of government spending.
In her CNN townhall Monday night, Sen. Warren responded to almost every question with a proposed new government program.
Over the course of the 80 minute forum, Sen. Warren endorsed Medicare-for-All, slavery reparations, universal childcare, universal pre-K, “universal pre-pre-K,” the creation of 3 million new federal housing units, increasing infrastructure spending several times, forgiveness of student loan debt, and the Green New Deal.
Add it all up, and it’s more than $100 trillion.
Estimates range on Warren’s proposed spending plans, but the Green New Deal has alone been projected to cost at least $93 trillion; slavery reparations have previously been pegged at upward of $14 trillion; and Warren says her universal child care, universal pre-K, and universal pre-pre-K programs can be done for $3 trillion.

That bitch is crazy.

 

Category: Election, Elizabeth Warren

Reading Samizdat

Posted on | March 19, 2019 | Comments Off on Reading Samizdat

This morning, I answered an email from a reader disappointed that I had linked the pickup artist (PUA) site Chateau Heartiste in my post about feminist Sophie Vershbow. The content of the post at Chateau Heartiste is anti-Semitic, and the comments on the post are even worse, and I replied to the reader’s email explaining that of course I do not endorse such sentiments. That post was linked on a “credit-where-credit-is-due” basis, because that’s where I’d learned of Ms. Vershbow’s existence, after searching for a certain PUA slang term. As I explained in my email: “The thing about Internet discourse is, if you don’t ban anti-Semitism in any particular forum, you’ll find the anti-Semites take over and hound everybody else out. We have never tolerated it in our comments, and I’m sorry that you were offended by the Chateau Heartiste link, but I also occasionally link CNN and the NY Times, you know.”

A link is not an endorsement, nor is a quote an endorsement. I’ve linked and quoted dozens of feminists here in the course of criticizing feminism; you cannot criticize ideas second-hand, but must wrangle with them directly, and I trust that my readers are sufficiently intelligent to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff. As I said, anti-Semitism is banned in the comments here because the alternative is to have every post hijacked by anti-Semites, but this rule doesn’t prevent me (or anyone else) from reading outside the limits of permitted discourse.

Here’s an example of why that matters: Professor Kevin MacDonald has been accused of anti-Semitism, and is considered untouchable by mainstream journalists. Yesterday, however, Professor MacDonald published “The Role of Empathy in Moral Communities: Altruism and Pathological Altruism,” which is worth reading. What caught my attention in this was a quote from a 2015 article by British liberal journalist David Goodhart:

There has been a huge gap between our ruling elite’s views and those of ordinary people on the street. This was brought home to me when dining at an Oxford college and the eminent person next to me, a very senior civil servant, said: ‘When I was at the Treasury, I argued for the most open door possible to immigration [because] I saw it as my job to maximise global welfare not national welfare.’ I was even more surprised when the notion was endorsed by another guest, one of the most powerful television executives in the country. He, too, felt global welfare was paramount and that he had a greater obligation to someone in Burundi than to someone in Birmingham. … [The political class] failed to control the inflow more overtly in the interests of existing citizens.

What this quote by Goodhart shows is that the intellectual elite in England (and in America, too) have adopted a cosmopolitan worldview — citoyens du monde — that leads them to deny any patriotic obligation to their own country and their own people, instead devoting themselves to “global welfare,” i.e., advancing the interests of foreigners. This attitude, Professor MacDonald argues, is symptomatic of pathological altruism.

Why is it that, to find such arguments, one must read beyond the range of what is considered acceptable mainstream discourse? Isn’t it because Cultural Marxism has advanced so far that the only people able to think freely are Thought Criminals? While I don’t want to get tangled up in the arguments about Professor MacDonald’s alleged anti-Semitism, I’m willing to read forbidden authors — like dissidents in the Soviet Union reading samizdat — if they write something that will help me understand our current political predicament. It should be obvious that we cannot solve our problems if we allow the Thought Police to decide for us what we are allowed to read or if, adopting the guilt-by-association tactics of the SPLC, we make it impossible for people to think freely, because so many people have been labeled proponents of “hate.”

The Third Reich built the autobahn and the Volkswagen; does that make you a neo-Nazi when you drive your VW on the freeway?

UPDATE: Dear God . . .

Criminalizing opinions?



 

Category: Intellectuals

Totalitarian Twitter Tactics

Posted on | March 19, 2019 | Comments Off on Totalitarian Twitter Tactics

 

Rep. Devin Nunes has filed a $250 million lawsuit against Twitter, and it’s time to have a conversation about the silencing of dissent:

Does anyone remember “GamerGate”? In October 2014, a friend named Beth Haper urged me to pay more attention to the controversy that erupted over accusations of unethical favoritism by journalists covering the videogame industry. “Stacy, you need to talk to Adam Baldwin about this,” Beth told me, and I immediately called the actor, whom I’d met a few years earlier in California while visiting his friend Andrew Breitbart. Over the phone, Baldwin explained that “GamerGate” had awakened videogame enthusiasts to the menace that feminists and other “social justice warriors” (SJWs) posed to their pastime. Because I was then working on a book about radical feminism, this was of interest to me and I began paying closer attention to “GamerGate” with the eventual result that in February 2016 my popular @rsmccain account was banned from Twitter. Although no one at Twitter would ever explain exactly why I was banned (a company spokesman told Debra Saunders that “privacy” concerns prevented such an explanation), many observers noted that I was banned shortly after feminist ideologue Anita Sarkeesian, a key figure in the “GameGate” controversy, was announced as a member of Twitter’s “Trust & Safety Council.”
No less an authority than feminist author Amanda Marcotte has claimed that understanding “GamerGate” is crucial to explaining how Donald Trump was elected president and, while my views are diametrically opposed to Marcotte’s, I cannot deny the possibility she is correct about this, although perhaps not in the way she intends. What happened in “GamerGate,” from my perspective, is that the Left exploited the political prejudices of liberal journalists in order to redefine disagreement as “hate,” and to prohibit criticism as “harassment.” In the three years since I was banned from Twitter, the use of these tactics to silence conservative voices online — to “de-platform” and “de-monetize” the Left’s opponents — has escalated to the point that some have suggested anti-trust regulation be invoked against companies like Twitter, Facebook and Google. Beyond the First Amendment issues concerning online free speech, however, the Left’s increasingly common tactic of smearing their enemies with the “hate” label has important ramifications for every sphere of public-policy debate. . . .

You can read the rest of my column at The American Spectator.



 

Category: Media Bias

Robert Francis ‘Beto’ O’Rourke

Posted on | March 18, 2019 | Comments Off on Robert Francis ‘Beto’ O’Rourke

 

Shane Ryan is the kind of Democrat who feels that Barack Obama was insufficiently progressive, and he won’t get fooled again:

What, exactly, is Beto O’Rourke’s appeal?
It’s not policy-oriented, and it’s not identity-based. He’s independently rich, and despite his grab at exoticism by transforming “Robert” into “Beto,” he’s white. As the Vanity Fair piece noted, he won his first House race by “drawing a large number of white Republican voters to his cause, which deepened suspicion from left-leaning Chicano activists.” Representing a safe Democratic district, he nevertheless voted with Republicans 167 times in six years. . . .
Let’s state it plainly: If you like Beto O’Rourke, you like him because he seems cool, and you think the fact that he seems cool means he’s going to bring everyone together under the banner of good feelings and become the next Obama. . . .
His appeal is the appeal of the surface, of the pathetic yearning to feel good without fixing anything.

(Hat-tip: Stephen Green at Instapundit.)

O’Rourke raised more than $6 million right out of the gate and he’s in the top five in recent polls, which means that he’s likely to be in the race a while. Between O’Rourke, Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden, that means three of the leading candidates for the Democrat nomination are white males. So the identity-politics crowd, who insist that white males are the root of all evil, are increasingly unlikely to be excited by the result.

“Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen . . .”



 

Category: Democrats, Election

In The Mailbox: 03.18.19

Posted on | March 18, 2019 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
357 Magnum: Chicago & Corrupt Politicians
EBL: Nebraska Flooding, also, Dick Dale RIP
Twitchy: @redsteeze Torches Tom Nichols For Embracing Democrats To “Purify Conservatism”
Louder With Crowder: New Poll Shows Half Of Americans Think Trump Is Victim Of Mueller Probe Witch Hunt

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: The War On Protein
American Power: Punk Cracks Egg On Head of Aussie Senator, Gets Smacked
American Thinker: Is America Headed For A Wave Of Political Violence?
Animal Magnetism: Goodbye, Blue Monday
Babalu Blog: Castro’s Regime Used Cuban Doctors To Intimidate Venezuelans Into Supporting Maduro, also, Colombia Captures Cuban Spying On Military Base, Deports Him
BattleSwarm: The Unbearable Whiteness Of Beto, also, Democratic Presidential Clown Car Update
CDR Salamander: Germany Won’t Lead Anything, also, Build A Few Unmanned Surface Vehicles, Test A Little, Learn A Lot
Da Tech Guy: Tales From The Illinois Exodus, Part 1, also, Something To Look Forward To
Don Surber: The Perfect Democrat Nominee, also, A Government Out Of Control
Dustbury: The Usual Wailing, also, Strange Search Engine Queries
First Street Journal: The WaPo Tries To Use The NZ Shootings To Overturn American Immigration Policy
The Geller Report: Another Ten Christians Killed As Jihadi Carnage Continues In Nigeria, also, Jihadi Who Opened Fire On Dutch Train Fought In Chechnya, Had Links To ISIS
Hogewash: Democrats & New Deal Principles, also, Team Kimberlin Post of The Day
Hollywood In Toto: How Cultural Appropriation Crushes Hollywood
Joe For America: Occasional Cortex Flips Out After New Polls Show Most People Don’t Like Her, also, Obama Family Linked To College Bribery Scandal?
JustOneMinute: The Red Guard Gets Results!
Legal Insurrection: Sanders -I’ll Do A Better Job Of Explaining What We Mean By Socialism, Democratic Socialism, also, Pelosi – “I Myself Have Always been For Lowering The Voting Age To 16”
The PanAm Post: Ecuador Withdraws From Unasur In Stinging Rebuke To Socialism, also, The Raging Media War Ignores Starving Venezuelans
Power Line: President Trump Saves Thousands Of Lives, also, Epstein-Acosta Deal Was Even Sweeter Than We Thought
Shark Tank: Scott “Disappointed” With Everglades Restoration Budget
Shot In The Dark: If Justice Exists
The Political Hat: Lights Out In Venezuela
This Ain’t Hell: 1st Ranger Battalion Kills, Captures 1900 Terrorists In Latest Deployment, also, Another Disturbance In The Farce
Victory Girls: Congress Wants A Pay Raise, also, America, Don’t Become Seattle
Volokh Conspiracy: Does The Constitution Require Unanimous Jury Verdicts In Criminal Cases?
Weasel Zippers: Bill Introduced To Establish Firearms Registry In Pennsylvania, also, Homeland Security Releases Almost 85,000 Illegal Aliens Into US Over Two Months
Megan McArdle: The College Admissions Scam Reveals A Truth About Our Self-Perpetuating Elites
Mark Steyn: Beto Goes Bovine, also, Batman At Eighty


Featured Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals
H&R Block Deluxe Tax Software With Refund Bonus

Category: Linkagery

Dutch Police Seek Turkish Suspect in Utrecht Shooting That Killed Three

Posted on | March 18, 2019 | Comments Off on Dutch Police Seek Turkish Suspect in Utrecht Shooting That Killed Three

 

The latest story:

Police have named the suspect in a shooting attack on a tram in the central Dutch city of Utrecht which has left three people dead and nine injured.
Officers identified Turkish-born Gokmen Tanis, 37, in connection with the incident. The public have been urged not to approach him.
Authorities immediately raised the terror alert for the area to the maximum level and said they are considering the possibility of a “terrorist motive” in the attack.
Utrecht mayor Jan van Zanen confirmed the number of people killed and injured in the incident, saying the authorities were likely to “assume a terror motive”.
The suspect reportedly opened fire at passengers on a tram in the area of 24 Oktoberplein.

It is not yet clear whether this actually is a terrorist attack, but let’s engage in unsubstantiated speculation anyway:

If Trump inspired the New Zealand shooter, as the media alleges, did the media inspire this guy? How about Ilhan Omar? Or is Trump the only person on earth with the charisma to inspire people?

Personally, I blame Beto O’Rourke because why not?

UPDATE: The suspect has reportedly been arrested after an eight-hour manhunt. He had a previous criminal record, and the tram shooting may have resulted from a personal quarrel, rather than terrorism. Still, I blame Beto O’Rourke.

 

Category: Netherlands, Terrorism

Feminism, Darwinism, and the Extinction of Women Like Sophie Vershbow

Posted on | March 18, 2019 | 2 Comments

 

“Adaptive behavior refers to behavior that enables a person . . . to get along in his or her environment with greatest success and least conflict with others. . . .
“In contrast, maladaptive behavior is a type of behavior that is often used to reduce one’s anxiety, but the result is dysfunctional and non-productive.”

Has it ever occurred to any feminist that her ideology is self-destructive? That whatever emotional benefit she gains from the sense of collective solidarity comes at the cost of her long-term happiness as an individual? Does any feminist have the objectivity necessary to step back from herself and evaluate whether the alleged “oppression” she has devoted her life to battling really exists? Can an intelligent woman ever examine the feminist movement critically and ask herself, “Cui bono?”

Sophie Vershbow is the senior social media manager for Random House who, in October 2018, unleashed an anti-Kavanaugh rant that went viral.

 

That tweet inspired an online backlash that Sophie described last month in a Huffington Post column, but I’d never heard of her until I was researching a certain phrase used by the pickup artist (PUA) community, which led me to a post about Sophie at Chateau Heartiste. (Sophie, if you’re reading this, don’t click that link.) Whenever I encounter such a person, I become curious: Who is this? What’s their backstory? What makes them tick? Twitter infamy is like mass murder. A person doesn’t suddenly one day erupt in an act of senseless violence (or Internet stupidity). No, there are always warning signs that foreshadow the catastrophic incident. Every time some deranged wackjob commits an atrocity, TV reporters interview the neighbors, who always say the same thing: “He was a quiet guy. Kept to himself a lot. Kind of a loner.” But then the police report finding a massive stash of neo-Nazi literature in the guy’s trailer or somebody identifies his Reddit profile where he’s raving about the CIA or the Rothschilds or whatever, and the mystery of the mass murderer’s motive becomes slightly less mysterious. And the same is true when a young woman ruins her life with an idiotic feminist rant.

Make no mistake — becoming notorious as a feminist lunatic had disastrous consequences for Sophie Vershbow’s romantic life. Six weeks after her anti-Kavanaugh tweet went viral, she got dumped by the boyfriend she had been dating since 2014. Coincidence? I think not.

 

Since then, her Twitter feed has regularly featured Sophie’s snarky putdowns of the men she encounters via dating apps, none of whom is good enough for her. “All these men are inferior” — thus does the rejected 29-year-old rationalize her inability to find a replacement for the cute, fun boyfriend with whom she wasted her best years.

Let me explain, for anyone who may need this explanation, why FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER is not a good look for any woman who is not a lesbian employed by a left-wing 501(c)3. Like, if you’re on the payroll at Planned Parenthood and have zero interest in male companionship, you can rant in capital letters to your heart’s content, but if you’re a heterosexual woman employed in the private sector . . . Well, it’s not a good look. Maybe because she works for a major publisher and lives in Manhattan, this isn’t so apparent to Sophie Vershbow. Random House publishes a lot of books by feminists (e.g., Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie) and never publishes any anti-feminists, so that Sophie works inside an echo chamber where feminism is not controversial. In fact, feminism is more or less mandatory in Sophie’s workplace, because if any man employed at Random House ever said anything vaguely sexist, he’d be fired for harassment in a heartbeat.

 

This is why Sophie is trolling for Tinder trash. People use dating apps because fear of a harassment accusation now makes it impossible for people to date anyone they work with. There may be guys at Random House who think Sophie’s cute, but none of them would ever ask her for a date, because asking a woman for a date could be “unwanted sexual advances” and — boom! — your career at Random House is over, sir.

By the way, this is why your college daughter doesn’t have a boyfriend. Heterosexuality is now more or less illegal on college campuses, thanks to the “rape culture” hysteria. Any guy smart enough to attend college is smart enough to understand that if he hooks up with a girl at a party and she later feels remorse over their hook-up, she can accuse him of rape and he’ll be expelled by one of the kangaroo-court campus tribunals that exist for no other purpose but to find male students guilty of sexual assault, no matter what actually happened. The smart thing for a college boy to do nowadays is to avoid any social interaction with his female classmates, who have been indoctrinated to believe that every male on campus is a rapist. This anti-male attitude, instilled in the minds of every college girl by feminist “consent workshop” instructors on Day One of freshman orientation, makes dating impossible on the 21st-century university campus, and this attitude gets carried over into the workplace where any male expression of romantic interest in a female co-worker could result in an accusation of “sexual harassment.” This means Sophie can’t date any guy she works with, which is why she’s swiping through profiles on Tinder, Bumble, OKCupid, whatever. But I digress . . .

FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER is not a good look in a world where any guy Sophie Vershbow meets can Google her name and avoid the risk of getting involved with a man-hating lunatic. Did I mention that Sophie has a history of eating disorders, depression and anxiety? Like, she once starved herself down to 98 pounds and then, a few years later, ballooned up to 140, then went through a phase of bulimia, and is apparently still in therapy, but despite all her psychiatric baggage, she was able to find a tall, muscular, blond boyfriend and for her to let him slip through her grasp — whoa, foolish blunder.

 

Oh, yeah — so “empowered”! You’re five months away from your 30th birthday and if you think your chances of happily-ever-after are going to improve after you hit the big three-oh, you’re deluded. All these losers from dating apps you mock on Twitter? A couple of years from now, even those losers will be swiping left on you. Your tall, muscular, blond ex-boyfriend probably won’t have any problems finding someone new and your FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER certainly won’t change the odds in your favor. On the contrary, that’s like the third strike against you. Guys might tolerate a certain amount of craziness in a girlfriend, but when you add in the anti-male ideology? Scratch.

In 2015, when she was already a year into her relationship with blond muscle guy, Sophie Vershbow wrote a column at a feminist site explaining why she would never date a Republican, concluding thus:

No matter how pro-choice you claim to be, it’s all just meaningless words if you vote for a candidate who is willing to rid millions of women of the right to control their own bodies, or to defund organizations like Planned Parenthood that support reproductive health.
Living in liberal New York City, it’s easy to take access to safe, legal abortion for granted. But for millions of women in the United States, it’s a very different story. Every vote affects people across the entire country, and being supportive of just your girlfriend’s right to choose does not make you pro-choice. It’s about supporting every woman’s right to choose.
My mid-20s dating is, at its core, an audition process for the role of my “life partner.” And I’m not interested in casting a man who puts his wallet in front of his morals. So gentlemen, remember: If you want to have sex with me, then you need to get in bed with a candidate who supports my right to choose.

Well, how did that “audition process” work out for you, ma’am?

The plural of “anecdote” is data, as they say, and it’s actually not difficult to explain why feminism is making life worse, rather than better, for women like Sophie. Take a look at the 2016 exit polls for Pennsylvania, a state that swung from blue to red for Trump. In Pennsylvania, white men preferred Trump over Hillary Clinton 2-to-1 — 64% to 32%.

“Well,” you scoff, “that doesn’t mean anything. That’s just because white guys in Pennsylvania are a bunch of ignorant, unemployed losers.”

Nope — Trump got an 17-point margin (56%-39%) over Hillary among college-educated white men in Pennsylvania. Explain that any way you want, but the reality is that Hillary’s feminist-themed campaign drove male voters into the Republican column in large numbers. The numbers may be different in “liberal New York City,” but the general trend is clear: Men don’t like feminism, because feminism is an anti-male ideology.

This is why I think it’s not a coincidence that Sophie Vershbow’s boyfriend dumped her on Nov. 12, which was 38 days after her Oct. 5 FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER outburst against men who supported Bret Kavanaugh. Any reasonably intelligent and objective observer of Kavanaugh’s confirmation process had to conclude that all of his accusers, including Christine Blasey Ford, were lying. Everything known about Kavanaugh’s character prior to his nomination to the Supreme Court contradicted the portrait of him as a teenage gang-rapist, and once Michael Avenatti proved (unintentionally) how easy it was to find women willing to lie about a Republican, reasonable observers concluded that the whole thing had been a dishonest partisan smear from beginning to end. Even if you were willing to stipulate that maybe there had been some unpleasant encounter between Kavanaugh and young Christine Blasey circa 1982, there certainly wasn’t enough evidence to justify making this accusation the subject of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Kavanaugh was treated unfairly, and while we have become accustomed to such brass-knuckles tactics in politics, it is wrong to disparage those who objected to the lynch-mob treatment Democrats inflicted on Kavanaugh, whose reputation was previously impeccable.

Thirty-eight days later, Sophie gets dumped by Will, the tall, muscular, blond guy she’s been dating since 2014. Not a coincidence.

My hunch is your boy Will got red-pilled, the hard way.

Like any young guy in New York City, Will was able to tolerate a certain amount of feminism from his girlfriend. It comes with the territory. Hillary got 87% of the vote in Manhattan, so a guy in that dating scene has either got to adjust to the political climate or do without. It’s like, if a guy is living in small-town North Alabama, he must either adjust to dating redneck girls or do without. For more than three years, Will was OK with dating Sophie, who didn’t seem much worse than any other woman in Manhattan until the Kavanaugh thing happened and she suddenly turned into the FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER, and then he was like, “Wait a minute . . .”

Given the self-evident unfairness of how Democrats treated Kavanaugh, don’t you suppose Sophie’s maniacal anti-Kavanaugh screed gave Will a frightening glimpse of his own possible future? What would happen to Will if he married this woman? What would it be like if she ever aimed this sadistic, vindictive rage against him? A scary thought!

He wasted little time making his exit from that death trap, and I suspect Sophie will have difficulty finding volunteers to replace Will.

Insofar as Sophie values intelligence in her male companions, she has given those men every reason to avoid her. Only a stupid man would date the FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER.

From a Darwinian perspective, such women are facing extinction. It’s not just that Sophie is pushing 30, but that she has publicly devoted her life to feminism, an ideology that is not only anti-male, but also anti-marriage and anti-motherhood. Even if her likelihood of finding a replacement for Will were good — and it’s not — what are the chances that Sophie will ever produce offspring? Even in the best-case scenario, by the time she could wrangle a man to the altar, she’d be 32 or 33, and would the newlyweds wish to procreate immediately? So she’s maybe 34 or 35 before they’re even ready to start trying to have a baby, and reproductive biology is not your friend at that point.

 

Did I mention that Sophie is an only child? That her parents are 66?

One might imagine that atheists, who profess Darwinian evolution as their substitute for religious belief, would be more mindful of the danger of their own extinction, but generally they are oblivious. In general, the more devoutly religious people are, the higher their birth rates, and vice-versa — atheists seem to be anti-parenthood.

 

How weird is it that Sophie Vershbow feels “constantly accosted by religion” in America, without considering whether religious people feel “constantly accosted” by her atheism? Which side is the aggressor in the Culture War? Since the 1960s, our public institutions have become entirely secular, if not indeed anti-religious, yet those who advocate the eradication of Christianity feel they are being “accosted.”

Like her feminism, Sophie Vershbow’s atheism is maladaptive. Her beliefs and behaviors may be emotionally comforting to her, but “the result is dysfunctional and non-productive.” She depicts herself as a victim, harassed by “Trump’s army of Twitter champions” who interpreted her FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER outburst “as a personal attack on them and their values” — but wasn’t that exactly what she intended it to be? Hasn’t Sophie made it clear that she hates every one of the 63 million Americans who voted for Trump?

This is why Sophie’s dating life is likely to get worse, not better. Even in Manhattan, how easy will it be for her to find a bachelor who shares her hateful anti-Trump rage? Her ex-boyfriend Will wasn’t any kind of right-winger, but even a liberal guy couldn’t deal with having an enraged FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER girlfriend.

Say what you will about the Trump era, but it’s pushed feminists over the edge, like mastodons trapped in the La Brea Tar Pits.



 

Category: Sex Trouble

Competing Worldviews

Posted on | March 18, 2019 | Comments Off on Competing Worldviews

Conservatives face a tough fight
as Big Tech’s censorship expands
— Donald Trump Jr., The Hill

The internet is radicalizing white men.
Big tech could be doing more
— Alex Koppelman, CNN

Here’s a question: Do you think that censoring conservatives on the Internet will reduce extremist violence or increase it?

Much of what New Zealand mass-murderer Brenton Tarrant wrote about in his manifesto, “The Great Replacement,” echoed themes about demographic trends in, for example, Mark Steyn’s America Alone. The difference is that Steyn advocates public policy changes to address these problems, whereas Tarrant engaged in terroristic violence. Conservatives are against terroristic violence, and it is absurdly false to suggest that all critics of mass immigration are complicit in Tarrant’s criminal deeds.

Alex Koppelman now professes to be concerned that online discussions are “radicalizing white men,” but CNN didn’t show much concern when its coverage provoked riots in Ferguson, Missouri. Radicalizing black men — like the gunman who opened fire on cops in Dallas — is evidently acceptable to Alex Koppelman, because he expects that such radicalism will benefit the Democrat Party. It’s only the possible radicalism of white men that concerns him, for some reason. Nobody at CNN advocates censorship of the anti-white rhetoric of Sarah Jeong or the anti-Jewish rhetoric of Ilhan Omar, but this lone gunman’s massacre in New Zealand inspires CNN to demand a “Big Tech” crackdown on white men.

It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

 

Category: Media Bias, Racism
« go back — keep looking »