The Other McCain

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

Is Your Far-Right Anger Stoked Yet?

Posted on | April 22, 2019 | 2 Comments

 

According to the Washington Post, you are a far-right extremist if you think blowing up a church on Easter Sunday is . . . I don’t know, wrong or something. So apparently, it’s now OK to blow up churches, because only extremists would object. The headline here could have been:

“Dead Christians? Totally Awesome and Progressive!”

 

 

Professor Glenn Reynolds:

They don’t want you to be angry, even though they know you have things to be angry about. They want you to be ashamed, all the time, for disagreeing with them about, well, anything. Meanwhile they want to keep their own base angry and inflamed 24/7. News spin revolves around this to a huge degree.

Ace of Spades:

The Washington Post is playing the typical media game: downplay the Islamist violence directed at Christians and Westerners while remaining singularly concerned about possible future “backlash” against Muslims . . .
The pace of this game has accelerated. It used to be that the media would spend a day or two at least noticing that Islamists had murdered a bunch of people again before claiming The Real Crime is any possible hypothetical speculative future side-eye a woman in a hijab might get at Wal-Mart.
Now, they start claiming that Muslims Are the Real Victims here while they’re still gathering up the limbs sheered off of the victims.

What the liberal media have done with Islam, really, is an updated version of what they did with Communism during the Cold War. According to liberals, the greatest danger facing America circa 1950 was not Stalin or Mao; no, the real danger was “McCarthyism.” Don’t worry about those totalitarians with nuclear weapons pointed at us, said the liberals, what should seriously concern Americans is that a high-school teacher in Brooklyn or a screenwriter in Hollywood might lose his job for joining the Communist Party: “What about their civil rights?” And after it was pointed out that there were no civil rights under Communism — no free speech, no free press, etc. — the liberals next switched to the game of shouting “Fascist!” at anyone who made such a point. Anyone who seriously opposed Communism was always compared to Hitler by liberal smear merchants, who accused every prominent anti-Communist — from Richard Nixon to William F. Buckley Jr. to Barry Goldwater to Ronald Reagan — of being “paranoid” or having an “authoritarian personality.”

Fast-forward to the Trump era, and you’re a white supremacist if you’re OK with Kate Smith singing “God Bless America” at a hockey game.

The Left never learns any new tricks, they just go back to the same predictable playbook — character assassination, guilt by association, moral relativism, etc. — and expect to get away with it, as if no one could ever be clever enough to reverse-engineer their racket.



 

Category: Islam, Media Bias, Sri Lanka, Terrorism

The Belated Admission of Media Error

Posted on | April 22, 2019 | 2 Comments

 

One of the things about media malpractice is, you may not notice it until the media begin reporting on a subject with which you are directly familiar. Like, have you ever seen a Nick Saban press conference? He obviously hates the media, because nobody knows Alabama football better than the coach, and their “spin” annoys him. If media bias is a problem in sports coverage — and you can ask Coach Nick about it — how much more of a problem is it in political journalism?

Another thing about media malpractice is that, by the time they admit they got the story wrong, the correction gets less coverage than their original error, and sometimes people’s lives can be wrecked by a published falsehood long before the media says, “Oops.”

Consider the case of President Trump and “Russian collusion.” Professor Glenn Reynolds reminds us that this entire narrative started with Hillary Clinton’s campaign team — specifically Robbie Mook and John Podesta — deciding immediately after her 2016 defeat “to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up . . . Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.” The hacking of Democrat emails was actually a crime for which Robert Mueller has indicted Russian military intelligence officers but (a) those emails didn’t make a decisive impact on the 2016 campaign and (b) Trump was not responsible for it. However, the media’s amplification and repetition of this simple message — “Russia stole the election” — eventually inspired the (completely unsubstantiated) suggestion that the reason Trump fired FBI Director James Comey in May 2017 was to prevent Comey from uncovering “collusion” between Russia and the Trump campaign, a suggestion that in turn led to the appointment of Mueller as special counsel. And it took nearly two years for Mueller to admit what Trump has said all along — there was no “collusion” at all. However, the media outlets that promoted the Clinton campaign’s phony Russia-stole-the-election message are now trying to spin this revelation in such a way as to conceal their role in a damaging political propaganda campaign against the President.

Now that Mueller has finished his investigation and filed his report, the New York Times is finally admitting what every Fox News viewer has known for more than a year: The Steele dossier, commissioned by the Clinton campaign and used to justify federal surveillance of the Trump campaign, was a pack of lies based on dubious Russian sources:

[T]he most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove. Mr. Mueller’s report contained over a dozen passing references to the document’s claims but no overall assessment of why so much did not check out. . . .
How the dossier ended up loaded with dubious or exaggerated details remains uncertain, but the document may be the result of a high-stakes game of telephone, in which rumors and hearsay were passed from source to source.
Another possibility — one that Mr. Steele has not ruled out — could be Russian disinformation. That would mean that in addition to carrying out an effective attack on the Clinton campaign, Russian spymasters hedged their bets and placed a few land mines under Mr. Trump’s presidency as well.

Oh, isn’t that convenient? Now that the Trump presidency has spent 22 months under the shadow of Mueller’s investigation, and after many of the president’s associates have been prosecuted on various grounds having nothing to do with Russia, the New York Times decides it’s OK to admit that the Steele dossier — the original pretext of this whole “Russian collusion” hoax — was a pile of bogus smears, possibly including disinformation from the Kremlin! This might be news to the Times readership, even though the truth about the Steele dossier been reported five nights a week, month after month, on Sean Hannity’s show.

Since I’m playing ombudsman here, allow me to enumerate the possible reasons for suspicion of “Russian collusion”:

  1. Trump’s business ties to Russia — Trump’s real-estate empire is heavily leveraged, and some of his debt is owed (mostly via German banks) to Russian investors.
  2. Trump’s “nationalism” — In contrast to the D.C. political elite in both parties, Trump is skeptical of the “globalization” consensus that has prevailed since the end of the Cold War. Trump isn’t inclined to defer to the Brussels-based European Union leadership, and seems to believe our NATO allies are not as friendly as they should be. Trump’s skepticism toward the EU and the whole “globalization” narrative makes him more sympathetic to the argument that Russia is suffering unfairly from Europe’s anti-Russian policies left over from the Cold War.
  3. Roger Stone’s fingerprints on the Wikileaks release of Democrat emails — According to Mueller’s indictment, the hacker “Guccifer 2.0” was an operative of Russian military intelligence. Stone, a notorious practitioner of political dirty tricks, was deeply interested in this, and reportedly had advance knowledge of Wikileaks obtaining the hacked emails.
  4. The Trump Tower meeting — In June 2016, “three senior members of the 2016 Trump campaign – Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort — [met with] at least five other people, including Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya,” who had promised to provide “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. However, there is evidence to suggest that this was a Clinton campaign dirty trick orchestrated by Fusion GPS, using Veselnitskaya as bait to compromise the Trump campaign.

All of this can be admitted as giving credence to suspicion that there was something going on between Trump and the Russians, but suspicion is not proof, and all of this can be defended or explained as innocent. What happened instead was that a lot of the media (especially including CNN, MSNBC, the Washington Post and the New York Times) let themselves become a conduit for the Clinton campaign’s post-election “spin” operation, depicting Trump’s presidency as illegitimate and corrupt because the election had been wrongly “stolen” with Russian assistance.

Why did the New York Times wait this long to admit that the Steele dossier was a tainted source? Because to have examined this subject earlier would have undermined Team Clinton’s narrative, which was the underlying pretext of the Mueller investigation. Now that Trump has officially been cleared of “collusion,” it is OK for the media to admit the Steele dossier was a pile of garbage, because it has already served its purpose, i.e., to damage Trump by justifying the investigation.

You see, however, that this admission by the New York Times is too late to undo the harm inflicted by the months of their dishonest reporting which ignored or downplayed the problems with the “Russian collusion” narrative. It’s sort of like the way the New York Times was happy to collect a Pulitzer for Walter Duranty’s dishonest reporting about Stalin’s Soviet regime, and then wait decades before admitting Duranty got it wrong. As long as the Soviet Union was an ongoing enterprise, the New York Times couldn’t admit the truth about how they had published Stalinist propaganda as “journalism,” but once the Berlin Wall fell and the Cold War ended: “Oops.” That they were so wrong, for so long, about some of the greatest atrocities in human history — the terror-famine in Ukraine, and Stalin’s bloody purges — ought to have forever destroyed the credibility of the New York Times, but some people keep believing them anyway. Because some people are idiots.



 

Category: Media Bias, MuellerGate, New York Times

Rule 5 Sunday: Aisha Tyler

Posted on | April 21, 2019 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho

So this weekend, I’ve been decompressing from tax season, doing some catching up with a sister-in-arms I hadn’t seen in 30 years, and watching a lot of TV while doing the first two things. Part of that TV has been the second season of Archer, which is quite possibly the best spoof of James Bond and other spy thrillers out there. One of the main characters of Archer is Lana Kane, super-competent and quite sexy spy who is Archer’s former (and still occasional) girlfriend and frequent mission partner. The voice of Lana is actress Aisha Tyler, who’s rather easy on the eyes herself.

Much like the character she plays.

The first items in this week’s mission file come from Ninety Miles From Tyranny: Hot Pick of the Late Night ,The 90 Miles Mystery Box Episode #594, Morning Mistress, and Girls With Guns. At Animal Magnetism, it’s Rule Five Locked In Friday and the Saturday Gingermageddon.

EBL contributes Ghost & Rule 5, Louise Brooks, Terri Nunn, Nuns & Novices, Tina Weymouth, Ten Commandments, and Vintage Easter.  Bacon Time returns with Can You See The Real Me?

A View From The Beach reveals Ali Cobrin, Rural Folk Resent Energy Colonization, Your Unredacted Friday Monkey Dacker, Maybe it Would Just Be Easier to List What They Don’t Want to Tax, Absentee Russiagate, Well, It Never Bothered the Grateful Dead Much Either, Why You Don’t Date Crazy, Not That Bad!, Notre-Dame Cathedral Burning, Free Advice, Worth What You Pay For It, Garbage In, Garbage Out and WTF?  

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Liz Vassey, and his Vintage Babe was Rebecca Holden. At Dustbury, it’s Ellen Barkin and Eleanore Whitney.


Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop
Shop Sex & Sensuality Gifts

Category: Rule 5

Red-Pill Wisdom From the Blues

Posted on | April 21, 2019 | Comments Off on Red-Pill Wisdom From the Blues

If you don’t want me, baby,
Mama, you sure don’t got to stall.
’Cause I’ve had more pretty women
Than a passenger train can haul.
— Lynyrd Skynyrd, “T for Texas”

Last week, Professor Glenn Reynolds offered this hypothesis: “Changing society in ways that the minority of women who identify as feminists found congenial has made society worse for the large majority composed of everyone else.” And this is certainly correct, as I’ve often pointed out — including during Saturday night’s episode of “The Other Podcast” — that modern feminism did not begin in the political mainstream, but rather on the far-left fringe of 1960s radicalism. The feminist movement was not intended to increase happiness for the vast majority of women, who were not radicals; rather, like other radical movements of the 1960s, feminism was purely destructive in its goals. Deriving their ideological inspiration from Marxism, feminists identified “society” as an oppressive system of male supremacy, so that the goal of “equality” and “liberation” for women could only be achieved by destroying the social structure as it existed circa 1968. The feminist vision of “equality” was no more concerned with promoting happiness than the radical vision Pol Pot sought to implement in Cambodia. So if young women today are less happy than their grandmothers were in 1968, it’s not because of patriarchal oppression, but rather because of feminism’s destructive “success.”

In offering his hypothesis, Professor Reynolds linked to a rather weird article by feminist writer Lauren Vinopal:

Men might be the unhappiest they’ve ever been. Many causes have been cited for a recent slide in male satisfaction, evident in a number of social science data sets, everything from the 24-hour news cycle, to the economy, to the decline of sex, marriage, family, and religion respectively. The male crisis du jour, though, might have more to do with internalized attitudes than external factors. As traditional masculinity, which has historically normalized many unhealthy behaviors, demanded emotional avoidance, and stigmatized close relationships, has lost some traction, men have failed to take full advantage of new-found freedom. Instead, they have surrendered to a sort of lonely ennui, taking what was bound to be a difficult transition poorly.

What the actual f**k is she talking about? Were the troops who stormed the beaches of Normandy on D-Day — paragons of “traditional masculinity” — engaged in “unhealthy behaviors,” other than, y’know, risking death in order to free Europe from Hitler’s monstrous grasp? And what manner of “new-found freedom” have men gained, that they should “take full advantage of,” but haven’t? Never mind. She continues:

“The current focus on toxic masculinity has many men feeling consciously and unconsciously that they are toxic as individuals,” psychotherapist Carla Manly explains. “This results in a sense of wariness and constant fear. This fear — much of it unprocessed — can lead to detachment from relationships. This, of course, can lead to a sense of loneliness that feeds a general sense of unhappiness.” . . .
Toxic masculinity is often misunderstood as the notion that masculinity is inherently harmful, when the reality is that it’s inherently unstable. Unlike femininity, masculinity is regularly challenged, policed, and taken away. This causes more “toxic” men to behave badly and many other men to live unhappy lives.
The anxiety Manly describes . . . appears to be almost universal among men. Experts at the American Psychological Association suspect that male sadness, specifically male sadness derivative of anxiety about masculinity works like a snare trap. . . .
In short, even men who recognize the need to change their attitudes may not succeed in doing so and men who are being forced to change their attitudes are unlikely to succeed in doing so. . . . Equally terrified of the #MeToo movement and being misconstrued as gay, men stumble down an untenably narrow middle path.
“Although these shifts are exceedingly positive, they can be daunting and intimidating for men,” Manly says. “This is a rather off-putting shift for those who have found safety in the left-brain, ‘logic is superior’ mentality.”

You can read the rest of that, but having done a quick bit of research into Dr. Carla Manly, I’m not sure you’re going to be able to figure out what the actual f**k she’s talking about, either.  What “shifts” in masculinity does she mean have been “exceedingly positive”? For whom?

 

There is more wisdom to be found in old R&B songs than you’re ever going to get from peddlers of psychotherapeutic nonsense about men’s “unprocessed” fear, or from feminist writers who want to lecture men about what’s wrong with our masculinity, namely everything. That brought to mind the old blues lyric, written by Jimmie Rodgers in 1927: “If you don’t want me, mama, you sure don’t have to stall,” which is to say, he’s prepared to deal with rejection, but stop wasting his time, because he’s got other opportunities to pursue. And this is the proper attitude, whenever a man encounters hostility from a woman.

That’s what feminism is — hostility — and I would never dream of arguing with a feminist, because it’s a complete waste of time. Feminism is an anti-male hate movement, and why bother arguing with someone who hates you? Hate is irrational, and thus impervious to argument.

I’d rather drink your muddy water,
Sleep down in a hollow log,
Than be in Atlanta, Georgia,
Treated like a dirty dog.

Ain’t it the truth, though? Life is too short to let some evil woman treat you bad — in Atlanta or anywhere else — when you can just move along and find a woman who knows how to treat you right. Is this “emotional avoidance,” as Lauren Vinopal says of “traditional masculinity”? No, it’s a refusal to let yourself be dragged around for the sake of a cold-hearted woman who doesn’t properly appreciate your companionship. If a woman really loves you, she’s not going to be playing any games, see? She’s going to make an effort to keep you coming back for more.

Next month in Orlando, the 21 Convention will bring together some of the superstars of the “red-pill” manosphere, including Hunter Drew, Rollo Tomassi, George Bruno and Jack Murphy. I mention this for two reasons: First, because Lauren Vinopal says this in her article:

Research suggests that group therapy experiences are especially effective for men because men are generally more responsive to advice from peers than advice from authorities. . . .
“Men are desperate to be a part of groups of other men,” [psychologist John] Moore says. “The opportunities for men to bond with one another have become fewer and fewer, and so they feel more isolated and less connected, and in come cases become depressed.”

Somehow, I don’t think next month’s “red-pill” gathering in Orlando would meet with feminist approval, which brings me to my second reason for mentioning it: I’ve been invited to cover it. This isn’t going to be the “group therapy experience” Lauren Vinopal had in mind. No, it’s real men talking about real manhood. Readers can estimate my travel costs, and contribute whatever they think is appropriate, because the Five Most Important Words in the English Language are:

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!



 

Category: Sex Trouble

Radical Muslim Group Suspected in Easter Sunday Bombings in Sri Lanka

Posted on | April 21, 2019 | Comments Off on Radical Muslim Group Suspected in Easter Sunday Bombings in Sri Lanka

 

Earlier this month, intelligence agencies reported a radical Islamic group called National Thowheeth Jama’ath was planning attacks in Sri Lanka, and apparently they decided to strike on Easter morning:

At least 156 people are dead in an Easter Sunday terrorist attack targeting Christians in Sri Lanka after eight explosions ripped through high-end hotels and churches as suspected suicide bombers blew themselves up.
The initial six explosions injured as many as 500 people, including Japanese and British citizens, and 35 foreigners — from the UK, US, Netherlands and Portugal — are among the dead, sources say.
Reports now indicate a seventh explosion in the southern Colombo suburb of Dehiwala — which killed two people — and an eighth in the northern suburb of Orugodawatta, which killed three police officers during a house search.
Sri Lanka’s police chief had made a nationwide alert 10 days before today’s bombings, warning that Islamic extremists planned suicide bombings at ‘prominent churches’, sources say, but it is not yet clear who is responsible for the attacks — and no one has claimed responsibility.
Britain’s High Commissioner to Sri Lanka James Dauris said: ‘We understand that some British citizens were caught in the blasts but we are unable to say how many people are, or might have been, affected.’ . . .
State minister of defence Ruwan Wijewardene said investigators have identified the culprits behind the ‘terrorist’ attacks, and those responsible were religious extremists who would be taken into custody ‘as soon as possible’.

The choice of “high-end” hotels as targets was aimed at Sri Lanka’s flourishing international tourism industry. The former British colony of Ceylon is an island off the south coast of India. The beaches of Sri Lanka now have many resort hotels catering to sun-seeking travelers.

UPDATE: The death toll is now 207, and “expected to rise.”



 

Category: Islam, Sri Lanka, Terrorism

Violence Against Women Update: Brooklyn Woman ‘Nearly Decapitated’

Posted on | April 21, 2019 | Comments Off on Violence Against Women Update: Brooklyn Woman ‘Nearly Decapitated’

Savannah Rivera (left); Angela Valle (right).

Savannah Rivera, 20, was brutally murdered Saturday in her Brooklyn apartment and her roommate Angela Valle, 21, was seriously injured by an ax-wielding assailant. Police say Rivera was nearly decapitated in the attack, which happened while Valle’s 4-year-old daughter was asleep in a back bedroom. The suspect in the shockingly brutal crime was Valle’s boyfriend, who called himself “Grim Creepa” on his Facebook page, and who Valle called “Mr. 187” — street slang for murder.

 

Police have arrested a man over Saturday’s horrific ax attack in New York City that left one woman dead and another fighting for her life.
Jerry Brown, 34, of Brooklyn, was charged early Sunday morning with second-degree murder, attempted second-degree murder and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in relation to the incident.
He is alleged to have gone on the violent rampage in the early hours of Saturday morning while inside the eighth-floor apartment of Angela Valle, 21.
Medics arrived to find Valle outside her East Williamsburg complex shortly after 1.30am, where she was bleeding heavily with lacerations to her head and body.
She told them another female, 20-year-old Savannah Rivera, was dead upstairs.
Investigators proceeded into the apartment to find Rivera unconscious and unresponsive on the living room floor.
Police sources have reportedly told The New York Daily News that her head was ‘almost severed from her body and several of her fingers were severed.’
Rivera’s distraught family have told The New York Post that she was two months pregnant with her second child.
Rivera’s sister stated that she was nine weeks pregnant and had only begun telling friends and family about the happy news in recent days.
The deceased leaves behind a three-year-old son named Sebastian.
Meanwhile social media posts show that the suspect, who has a history of arrests for violence including for assault, robbery, burglary and strangulation, referred to himself online as the ‘Grim Creepa.’
Just six weeks before the deadly attack his then-girlfriend Valle called him ‘Mr. 187’ – street slang for murderer.
Brown is being held in a psychiatric facility, sources told the New York Post.
But social media posts show Brown was dating Valle as recently as last month.

Saturday, while the suspect was still on the loose, WPIX-TV managed to get him on the phone for an interview, during which he claimed to be suffering from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, Brown bought the ax two weeks prior to the murder, demonstrating that this was a premeditated crime, not an act of spontaneous rage.

So, a pregnant woman is dead, her 3-year-old son orphaned, and another young mother is gravely injured because New York decided they didn’t need to keep this 34-year-old career criminal in prison.

By the way, how did Angela Valle get involved with this monster? She’s a 20-year-old mom living in a Brooklyn public-housing project, and I suppose this would have limited her dating opportunities, but still you might think she could have avoided a 34-year-old lifelong felon.

Except, of course, it’s New York, a city where the voters elected Mayor Bill de Blasio, and lifelong felons are everywhere. There has been a 400% increase in murders in the 10 police precincts of North Brooklyn.

But this brutal ax-murder is just more violence against women feminists won’t notice, for some reason.

(Hat-tip: Kirby McCain on Twitter.)



 

Category: New York, Violence Against Women

FMJRA 2.0: Weak Link, Strong Link

Posted on | April 20, 2019 | Comments Off on FMJRA 2.0: Weak Link, Strong Link

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Rule 5 Sunday: Maisie Williams
Animal Magnetism
Ninety Miles From Tyranny
A View From The Beach
EBL
Proof Positive

Mueller? Mueller? Mueller?
Western Rifle Shooters
Dirt People
A View From The Beach
Pushing Rubber Downhill
EBL

Crazy People Are Dangerous: Student SJW Tasered After Disrupting Campus Speech
EBL

The Collusion Delusion Boomerang
The Pirate’s Cove
A View From The Beach
EBL

Somebody Give Breathless Conor Friedersdorf’s Breathlessness A Breath
EBL

This Abnormal Life: How a Nice Guy™ Predictably Gets Played for a Chump
The Political Hat
Dark Brightness
A View From The Beach
EBL

FMJRA 2.0: Day Late & A Dollar Short
A View From The Beach
EBL

Police Say Florida Teenagers Used Online Resale App to Lure Robbery Victim
EBL

How Bad Was Your Week?
A View From The Beach
EBL

Fire Destroys Notre Dame Cathedral
EBL

‘Fattie Goes Oink’: California Professor Performs at Academic Conference
Dirt People
EBL

Gay Teacher Steals $100,000 From Church, Murders Boyfriend, Dies in Crash
Pushing Rubber Downhill
EBL

War Between Bernie and the Clinton Machine Going Thermonuclear
Dirt People
EBL

In The Mailbox: 04.16.19
357 Magnum
A View From The Beach
EBL
Proof Positive

Police Hunt Deranged Teenage Girl Obsessed With Columbine Massacre
EBL

Who Is Funding Anti-Semitism?
357 Magnum
EBL

She Took the ‘Cool Mom’ Thing Too Far
EBL

In The Mailbox: 04.19.19
A View From The Beach
EBL
Proof Positive

Trump Trolls His Media Enemies
A View From The Beach
EBL

Friday Fiction: 100 Word Challenge
EBL

Top linkers for the week ending April 19:

  1.  EBL (18)
  2.  A View From The Beach (9)

Amazon Warehouse Deals

Try Amazon Music Unlimited Free Trial
Kindle Unlimited Membership Plans
Try Amazon Prime 30-Day Free Trial

Category: FMJRA Award

Man Arrested at St. Patrick’s Cathedral Is Chubby Incel Philosophy Professor

Posted on | April 20, 2019 | Comments Off on Man Arrested at St. Patrick’s Cathedral Is Chubby Incel Philosophy Professor

 

Marc Lamparello was arrested Wednesday as he tried to enter St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York with four gallons of gasoline. Because it was the same day Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris burned, people obviously feared some kind of terrorism, but it turns out Lamparello is from a devoutly Catholic family in New Jersey, a Boston College alumnus who was music director of a Catholic church and had taught philosophy at Seton Hall, a Catholic university. So, no “Allahu Akbar” here.

No motive is known. Lamparello tried to lie his way out of it after he was arrested, claiming his car had run out of gas (it hadn’t), and that doesn’t explain the lighters he was carrying. However, it is known that Lamparello had been arrested Monday at Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart, in Newark, N.J., after he refused to leave, which may indicate he had some kind of personal psychiatric crisis. And his postings on a Reddit forum indicate what his problem was:

In August, he wrote about his own appearance, “I’m going through a phase. After not giving a sh*t about my appearance for 20 years, I’ve swung in the opposite direction. Now, I’m very vain and appearance-obsessed. I’ve lost 70 pounds, 25 more to go. . . .”
He also wrote about struggling on a dating app, “Honestly, I’m getting murdered on Tinder. It’s a total self-esteem killer. I’m a pretty in-shape guy, and I’m going for in-shape women who are a little attractive, and have a few nice features. Not models, but just generically attractive women. I’ve ‘swiped right’ on 500+ women. So far, not a single match. Depressing. I think I should probably give up on dating for the time being, and focus really hard on school and work and saving up as much as I can for plastic surgery. Based on the consults I’ve had with my plastic surgeon, I’m confident I can go from a 4/10 to a 7.2–7.3/10. That’s what I’ll focus on now.”

So, he’s an “incel” who can’t get laid, and blames his appearance.

His mistake was so obvious, you might think a guy who graduated Phi Beta Kappa in philosophy could have figured it out, but no. His pursuit of what he calls “generically attractive women” on Tinder was an error, but he was unable to process the feedback accurately. Why do people use dating apps? Because they’re losers — nobody who knows them in real life is willing to date them. If you’re successful, popular and attractive, you don’t need Tinder (Bumble, OKCupid, etc.) to find a date. The world of online dating is composed entirely of losers, and if you encounter a woman on Tinder who is “generically attractive,” you’ve got to figure she’s damaged goods somehow, but then again, what about you?

You’re 37 years old and you’ve got no other options? L-O-S-E-R.

Forget about “generically attractive women,” a complete loser like Marc Lamparello should be grateful for any female companionship at all.

By the way, it’s not your looks to blame. Not really. However physically unattractive you might be, somewhere there is someone even uglier than you who’s managed to find somebody to date. Why? Because they were willing to accept whoever they could get, and be grateful for it. Also, they probably didn’t wait until they were in their 30s to hit the panic button.

Human mate-selection is like a game of musical chairs. Beginning around age 15, couples begin to pair up and, while these couples may break up, with the individual partners then re-entering the dating pool, even in the 21st century many people still marry their “high school sweethearts.” The median age at marriage has increased, but if you’re still unattached at 25, you should be concerned, especially if you don’t have a track record of previous romantic success. Like, it’s one thing to be a guy who had a steady girlfriend in high school, but you broke up after you went to college and met somebody new, and then that didn’t work out, so you find yourself single in your early 20s. The feedback isn’t completely negative, you’ve been successful with women in the past, and you’re still fairly young. But if you didn’t have a high school girlfriend, or if your previous relationships ended because she dumped you, rather than vice-versa, your prospects are less encouraging. And the older you get, the more your chances diminish, because the pool of available partners is continuously shrinking, with people getting married and having kids. Oh, sure, many of those marriages will end in divorce, but guess what? A divorced mother of two isn’t interested in dating a 37-year-old loser who’s living with his parents in New Jersey. Nobody is interested that guy, honestly, and so the moral of the story is, don’t be a loser.

There’s no real secret to success involved. The problem with losers like Marc Lamparello is that they miscalculate their chances, failing to properly analyze the feedback — dude, you’ve got zero chance with “generically attractive women” — so that they refuse to lower their expectations to a reasonable level. This happens to women, too, although female losers tend to have somewhat different narrative arcs. In general, however, unattractive people are likely to end up alone if they refuse to “settle” for whatever romantic opportunities they can find, because they believe they are entitled to more attractive partners.

It’s like Elliot Rodger, who became fixated on the idea that, as the “Supreme Gentleman,” he was entitled to date skinny blonde sorority girls. You don’t need a Ph.D. in psychology to understand why this is so crazy. It’s basic market economics — the supply of skinny blonde sorority girls is limited, and the demand is nearly infinite. You mighty suppose the basic principle involved would be apparent to a Phi Beta Kappa philosophy major like Marc Lamparello, so that he wouldn’t have needed to “swipe right” on more than 500 Tinder profiles to figure out he had no chance with “generically attractive women.” Young people need to be warned they are living in an age where romantic success is increasingly difficult to obtain, in large part because addiction to online media — video games, Netflix, YouTube, pornography, etc. — have caused so many people to withdraw from real-life social interaction. The less time you spend in face-to-face human contact, the more your social skills deteriorate and the more unrealistic your expectations become.

Why are so many Millennials unable to adjust to real life? Isn’t it because their parents, who didn’t grow up in the social-media universe, were not cognizant of the dangers posed by this digital vortex of craziness and isolation, and thus failed to warn their kids to avoid it?

Hey, kids, log off once in a while. Maybe go run a mile or two, hit the gym, ask your buddy to go hang out at the local sports bar for Happy Hour. Talk to some actual human beings face-to-face for a change. And stay away from the craziness out there. Crazy People Are Dangerous.



 

Category: Crime
« 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