Hillary’s Worldwide Blame-America Tour

Posted on | March 13, 2018 | Comments Off on Hillary’s Worldwide Blame-America Tour

People who refuse to accept responsibility for failure always require scapegoats to bear the blame. Hillary Clinton lost the election and, because this cannot be her fault — she is always blameless — she must rationalize defeat by heaping scorn on those who voted against her:

If you look at the map of the United States, there is all that red in the middle where Trump won. I won in the coasts, I win, you know, Illinois, Minnesota, places like that. But what the map doesn’t show you is that I won the places that represent two thirds of America’s gross domestic product. So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward, and his whole campaign, “make America great again,” was looking backwards. You know, “You didn’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women getting jobs, you don’t want to see that Indian American succeeding more than you are. Whatever your problem is, I’m going to solve it.”

Bitter much, ma’am? Allahpundit points out that, during the same event in Mumbai, India, Hillary also recycled a claim she’s made before, namely that married women voted against her because of . . . well, patriarchy: “Part of that is an identification with the Republican Party, and a sort of ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should.”

This is not an explanation, it’s an excuse. It is a refusal to accept failure, a selfish rationalization that allows Hillary (and other Democrats) to avoid admitting that their policy agenda isn’t popular. By the way, their policies weren’t popular during the eight years of Obama’s presidency, either; the difference was that Obama had a personal charisma that Hillary Clinton doesn’t have. Obama defeated John McCain and Mitt Romney largely on the basis of his own charisma, and also as a result of Bush-era GOP policy failures. What was Hillary’s selling point in 2016? First, that she was an experienced politician and, second, that she would continue the general direction of Obama-era policy. Trump offered voters an alternative, one untainted by association with Bush-style Republicanism, and this was enough to shift the balance in several states (including Pennsylvania and Michigan) long considered “safe” for Democrats.

In a way, however, Hillary is right. She was popular among voters in places that were “optimistic” and “moving forward” as a result of Obama-era policies intended to benefit certain people in certain places — which isn’t necessarily an argument in favor of those policies, especially if you did not benefit yourself. What did Hillary offer to working-class voters in Pennsylvania and Michigan, except a continuation of the same liberal policies that had resulted in their economic and social marginalization? For decades, going back at least as far as the early 1990s, these voters have felt neglected by the political elite, and they do not like being told that their problems are due to their being “backwards” and prejudiced.

If you habitually insult people — which is what Democrats have been doing to white voters in “all that red in the middle” for many years now — you should not be surprised when they vote against you. Elections have consequences, and Trump’s success in breaking the bipartisan elite’s stranglehold on federal policy could produce a decisive shift in American politics. If he fails, however, would it be fair for him to blame Democrat voters? Wouldn’t we laugh in scorn if Trump made such excuses?

Winners don’t need excuses. Victory is its own justification. Whatever criticism you might have of Nick Saban’s coaching strategies, you can’t deny that Alabama won the national championship, and whatever you say about Trump, he is the president, isn’t he?

Hillary travels to Mumbai, disparaging Trump voters — “all that red in the middle” of America — to the delight of her international audience. Let’s hope American voters never forget that insult.

Category: Hillary Clinton

Late Night With Rule 5 Monday: Champagne Season

Posted on | March 13, 2018 | 3 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Young people these days aren’t big on gambling in casinos, but they do like hanging out at the pool, listening to DJs play EDM, and getting wasted, and so most of the major casinos here on the Strip have “beach clubs” which give the kids the opportunity to do all these things. One of the largest beach clubs is the MGM’s Wet Republic, which features world-class DJs along with the cute girls and hideously expensive drinks, and they’re kicking off the year with “Champagne Season”.

Yep. It’s Vegas.

Ninety Miles From Tyranny leads off with Hot Pick of the Late Night, The 90 Miles Mystery Box Episode 188, Morning Mistress, and Girls With Guns; Animal Magnetism contributes Rule Five Gunsplaining Friday and the Saturday Gingermageddon.

EBL’s herd this week includes Krysten Ritter, Olivia De Havilland, National Oreo Day, How Long Till You Notice?, Abbie Cornish, Belorussian Honey Trap, Stormy Daniels, Star Wars Star Struck, International Womens’ Day, and What’s Really Behind The Trump/Kim Summit.

A View From The Beach brings us Lisa Marie Jaftha, Oil Company Lawsuit Goes Horribly Wrong, It’s International Women’s Day . . ., A Rousing Dose of Morning Russiagate, For Whom the Clock Tolls . . ., So You Want to Be an Internet Star?, Triple Threat – Elise Trouw, In the Know? Vote Silvio! and One Way to Increase Voter Turnout.

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Bojana Novakovic, his Vintage Babe is Catherine Moylan, and Sex in Advertising is covered by Victoria’s Secret. At Dustbury, it’s Senta Berger and Barbara Corcoran.

Thanks to everyone for all the luscious links!

Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop
Amazon Fashion – Jewelry For Women

Category: Rule 5

Are ‘Commitment-Phobic Men’ to Blame for England’s Declining Fertility?

Posted on | March 13, 2018 | Comments Off on Are ‘Commitment-Phobic Men’ to Blame for England’s Declining Fertility?

Earlier this month, the British Fertility Education Initiative (FEI) advised that sex education in schools overemphasizes contraception and fails to warn about the risks of delayed childbearing. The median age at first birth in the United Kingdom is now 30. “Fertility delayed is fertility denied,” as demographers say, and approximately one-fifth of British women are doomed never to become mothers:

The rising age of women having children is a cause of concern, the group of academics and experts said, and the pain of involuntary childlessness should not be underestimated.

This isn’t just a personal problem. In societies where birth rates decline below “replacement level” (an average of 2.1 births per woman, the rate necessary to maintain population stability), there will eventually be too many retirees dependent on government pension programs with too few workers to pay the taxes needed to support these programs. In 1999, officials in the European Union sounded the alarm about this trend, and Jim Sedlak of the American Life League warned that the U.S. could soon face similar problems:

“The ‘success’ of the population controllers in Europe is now taking its toll,” said Sedlak. “The average number of babies per woman has fallen from 1.95 to 1.65, and there is no end in sight.”
“In order to turn things around, four things are necessary,” Sedlak said. “First, the world has to understand that there is not an overpopulation problem, but a problem of too few children. Second, everyone in our society must accept large families and stop using peer pressure to convince people not to have more children. Third, governments and rich philanthropists must stop giving money to population control programs. Finally, young people getting married have to be thinking of having four or more children.”
“We have one generation to turn things around,” Sedlak said. “After that, it may be too late.”

Raising awareness of the danger of demographic decline is difficult, because the liberal elite are so committed to promoting propaganda myths about the (wholly imaginary) dangers of “overpopulation.” From the standpoint of the population-control crowd, declining fertility is good news, and what about the extreme Left? If this trend produces social and economic crises, a sort of demographic Cloward-Piven strategy could be exploited to produce radical political change. Thus, many influential forces in society have a motive to obstruct understanding of fertility-related issues, and there is widespread confusion about the causes and effects of current trends. Mary Wakefield isn’t helping this:

I have several female friends in their early thirties who’ve wanted a baby for a while. Ninety-five per cent of girls do, says the FEI. The trouble for them hasn’t been the cost of childcare or a demanding career. The trouble has been finding a man who’s even halfway keen to settle down.
All my pals looking for Mr Right report identical patterns of behaviour. Dating is now all online. So they scroll through endless profiles and eventually make contact with a promising guy. Cue weeks of pointless text-ing followed eventually by an actual date. The evening often goes well. There might be a snog, more texting and another date arranged. After that: nothing. The promising man, who’s caught wind of a woman with family plans, submerges back into the internet to scroll through the options again. . . .
If online dating turns more men into commitment-phobes, I don’t see why anyone should be surprised. It’s women for the most part who feel the urge to nest and breed — as we all once quite freely acknowledged before gender became a choice. Most men don’t feel the same need to play house. It took the threat of public shame, fear of God and the censorious tutting of mutual friends to chivy a man towards family life. Online, dating strangers, who’s to see or care? . . .

You can read the whole thing, but it doesn’t get better. It doesn’t seem to occur to Ms. Wakefield to wonder why so many of her female acquaintances waited until they were in their early 30s to get serious about trying to find a mate. What were these women doing when they were ages 18-24? Because those are, in fact, the biological prime years, when a woman has the optimal chance to attract a male partner.

What happened to Ms. Wakefield’s friends, I would imagine, is that they squandered their youth in a series of dead-end relationships, negotiating from a position of weakness despite the inherent advantages a young woman naturally has in the mating market. The simplest way to express this is to say that, in the economics of sex, men represent the demand side of the equation, and women are the supply. This perspective dictates certain strategic considerations, the kind of old-fashioned common-sense stuff your grand-grandmother understood, but which seems to have been forgotten by so many allegedly “empowered” young women.

Blaming men for the dismal prospects of the 30-something single woman is erroneous, because any woman who is still single past the age of 30 must have already made many strategic errors, otherwise she would have been married long before. Unfortunately, riding the carousel tends to inflate a young woman’s sense of her own attractiveness. She’s getting plenty of offers when she’s 21, why should she fear for the future? By the time she realizes her sexual market value is declining, she has already missed her best chance at that fairy-tale happily-ever-after ending.

Youth is a precious resource, and ought not to be wasted. Teach young people — men and women alike — to be marriage-minded from the start. Certainly my kids have been equipped with the knowledge that marriage, not mere “dating,” is the desired goal, which is why I’ve already got four grandchildren, although none of my kids are yet 30. Such outcomes are still possible, if children are correctly instructed, and it is toward the proper instruction of youth that we ought to turn our attention, rather than wringing our hands over the pathetic plight of the 30-something singles who’ve already passed their sell-by date.

Category: Marriage

In The Mailbox: 03.12.18

Posted on | March 12, 2018 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 03.12.18

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: Olivia Cooke
Twitchy: Wait, There’s More! Hillary Wasn’t Done Trashing Trump Voters!
Louder With Crowder: Parkland Student Produces Armbands To Advocate For Gun Control
Quillette: The Psychology Of Progressive Hostility (h/t NeoWayland)

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Heads She Wins Tails You Lose, also, There’s No Such Thing As Free Trade
American Power: Helen Smith, Men On Strike, also, Naomi Schaefer Riley, Be The Parent Please
American Thinker: It’s Time For Juan Williams To Go
Animal Magnetism: Goodbye, Blue Monday
BattleSwarm: Advice To California Refugees
BLACKFIVE: Phillip Margolin, The Third Victim
Bring The HEAT: X-15!
CDR Salamander: Saturday Movie Stop – Operation Red Sea, also, Midrats March Madness
Da Tech Guy: These Are Some Really Strange Bedfellows, also, Illinois Bicentennial – The Fourteen Worst Leaders From The Land of Lincoln
Don Surber: The Easily Conned National Review
Dustbury: Strange Search Engine Queries, also, Sue Storm Orders A Snack
Fred On Everything: A Gringo Loose In Cuba
The Geller Report: FBI Insiders Blow Whistle On Vegas Shooter Case And ISIS Link, also, Hungary Ready To Fight UN Mass Migration Plan
Hogewash: Yours Truly, Johnny Atsign, also, Smugness, Civility, & The Revolution, also also, Team Kimberlin Post of The Day
Joe For America: Arnold Schwartzenegger To Sue Oil Companies For First Degree Murder of The World
JustOneMinute: Go Ahead. Make My Day.
Legal Insurrection: Confirmed – Hillary Is Still Bitter, Tone-Deaf, Unwell, & Hates The Deplorables, also, Shortest Senate Race Ever – Beto O’Rourke Says AR-15s Shouldn’t Be Sold To Public
Power Line: House Intel Committee Concludes No Collusion, also, The Obama Department Of Labor In Its Tenth Year, also also, The Obama Comfort Doll Isn’t Even The Worst Of It
Shark Tank: DeSantis Believes New Florida Gun Law Will Be “Shot Down”
Shot In The Dark: Expect A Surge In The News About The “Alt-Right”
STUMP: Around The Pension-O-Sphere – Public Unions, Illinois, Connecticut, Kentucky, & More! also, Memory Monday – Pandemic Model, Quarantine Politics, & The Second Week of March 1918
The Jawa Report: TIE Fighters! 100% Proof!
The Political Hat: Republicans Should Be Terrified, also, A Paragon of Modern Academia
This Ain’t Hell: Hasta Muerte Coffee, Where Cops Aren’t Welcome, also, Lower Michigan May Be Impact Site For Falling Chinese Space Station
Victory Girls: Fauxcahontas Nixes 2020 Run And That DNA Test, Too
Weasel Zippers: Former NYT Executive Editor Keeps Obama Therapy Doll In Her Purse, also, President Trump Pardons Kristian Saucier
Megan McArdle: The Moral Hazard Of Naloxone In The Opioid Crisis
Mark Steyn: Loopy Lou, also, Hammer And Tongues

Featured Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals
St. Patrick’s Day Party Items & Decorations

Category: Linkagery

Two Killed by Bombs in Austin

Posted on | March 12, 2018 | Comments Off on Two Killed by Bombs in Austin

Obviously, Texas needs stricter bomb-control laws:

A pair of package explosions that left two people dead in Austin, Texas, over the past 10 days share similarities and authorities suspect they are connected, police said.
The latest incident occurred Monday morning; the other on March 2. In both instances, a resident retrieved a package that blew up when it was opened.
Both packages were not delivered via any mail services and both homes are those of African Americans. A 17-year-old boy died Monday and a woman was transported with non-life-threatening injuries. Another male died from his injuries in the March 2 explosion.
Authorities are looking into whether the incidents could be hate crimes, but as of now there is no evidence the victims were targeted because of their race, says the official.

It’s always best to avoid speculation about motives until police have identified a suspect. There have been cases in the past where criminals have used bombs to distract police from their other crimes.

Category: Crime, Texas

Dear GOP: No Zipper Problems, Please

Posted on | March 12, 2018 | Comments Off on Dear GOP: No Zipper Problems, Please

Last week, I got a phone call from a reporter, asking if I had contact information for a certain conservative woman. No, I did not, but the request aroused my curiosity — what’s a journalist, if not curious? — and after a bit of badgering, the reporter disclosed to me that he had obtained screen caps of text messages between this woman and a certain conservative man. Because I obtained this information under promise of confidentiality, I can’t disclose any more than this and, of course, it may be that the reporter’s inquiries will not produce an actual story.

While I cannot discuss this case specifically, however, I can articulate a general principle: If you are a conservative in public life — especially if you are a Republican politician — you have an obligation to avoid any behavior that might become a sex scandal. Or to put it another way, if you have a “zipper problem” (i.e., you’re unable to resist sexual temptation) probably you should not get into politics as a Republican.

The GOP has long suffered from a reputation as a stuffy bunch of puritanical prudes — the “No Fun Allowed” party. This was never entirely accurate, even during the heyday of the Christian Coalition, but it was exploited by Democrats who sought to create the impression (especially among young people) that Republicans were the “anti-sex” party.

Two decades after the Lewinsky scandal, however, Democrats now have a new propaganda theme: Republicans are the party of “rape culture.”

The #MeToo crusade, which took down Hollywood scumbags like Harvey Weinstein, was inspired by the rage of feminists toward Donald Trump, whose reputation as a womanizer — “grab ’em” by the you-know-what — was perceived as a vulnerability by Democrat strategists. So we might say that Weinstein and other celebrity scumbags (nearly all of whom were liberal Democrats) were destroyed as “battlespace preparation” for future efforts by Democrats to exploit feminism’s anti-Trump rage.

No one can go back in time and change the events of their past, and if any Republican politician or conservative spokesman has skeletons rattling around in his closet, well, that can’t be helped. On the other hand, we can say that concern for such issues is justified in an environment where Democrats (a) are eager to expose GOP sex scandals and (b) will be assisted by the liberal media in publicizing such scandals. And young people considering careers in conservative politics need to be advised to avoid behavior that might give their enemies ammunition with which to destroy or discredit them. Particularly in the era of online dating, social media and smartphones, prudence suggests that those who seek to enter the arena of politics ought to be discreet in their personal lives.

Ah, but what does “discretion” mean in the digital age? A man might believe there is no harm in exchanging flirty text messages with a woman who seems to be flattered by his attention, but we have seen (e.g., in the case of Texas Rep. Joe Barton) how easily men can be blackmailed by their formerly “consenting adult” partners. Indeed, some have perceived in such #MeToo revelations an element of “revenge porn.”

We are now less than eight months away from the midterm elections, and it certainly behooves Republicans to be on their best behavior. Otherwise, they will make it too easy for the liberal media to unleash a tsunami of coverage of GOP sex scandals. Is an overwhelming flood of such stories in the works? Was the phone call I got last week just the tip of an iceberg of journalistic inquiries into alleged misbehavior by conservatives and GOP politicians? Honestly, I don’t know, but it pays to be careful.

The Mike Pence rule is looking smarter every day.

Category: Scandal, Sex

Lauren Southern Banned from the U.K.

Posted on | March 12, 2018 | 1 Comment

Lauren Southern, a Canadian who became famous for challenging feminists in 2015, has been banned from Great Britain. She was detained by British immigration officials at the tunnel underneath the English Channel and prohibited from entering under an anti-terrorism provision, accused of “racism.” The argument apparently used to justify this prohibition was not that Southern posed any actual terrorist threat, nor that she has actually expressed any racist views, but rather because she has associated with others accused of racism.

This is a disturbing trend. Five years ago, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer were banned from the U.K. because apparently it is deemed “racist” to tell the truth about radical Islamic terrorism.

There was a famous British writer who warned about the Thought Police, but I suppose George Orwell would be banned from England now.

Canadian Conservative @Lauren_Southern detained at Calais trying to enter U.K. Truly #londonhasfallen – Lauren is recently returned from highlighting white genocide in South Africa. https://t.co/a0yKYYBDJb

— Katie Hopkins (@KTHopkins) March 12, 2018

Dear @AmberRuddHR – you have detained @Lauren_Southern in Calais and prevented her entering the U.K. She is a Christian Conservative. You have sided with Islamists of Luton. You need to make better decisions ma’am. pic.twitter.com/rpAgSEwLI3

— Katie Hopkins (@KTHopkins) March 12, 2018

They just locked me out and said “au revoir”… Officially banned from UK for “racism”.. doing fine though, all the cool people are being banned anyway ?

Need to gather my thoughts and call family. Interrogation story is pretty crazy though. Will tell it soon. pic.twitter.com/mARtkyZKFm

— Lauren Southern (@Lauren_Southern) March 12, 2018

By the way, my friend Pete Da Tech Guy informs us that Anni Cyrus, an Iranian-born critic of Sharia Law, will speak Friday in Worcester, Mass. She would probably be banned from Britain, too.

UPDATE: Thanks to the commenter who pointed out the Conservative Treehouse post linking to a story at Gateway Pundit:

Austrian activist Martin Sellner of Génération Identitaire and his girlfriend, American author and YouTuber Brittany Pettibone, have been detained by airport police in England for nearly three days.
Nobody from the US State Department or embassy contacted Pettibone’s family.
Sellner was on his way to give a speech that authorities say would cause “tension among local communities and possibly incite hatred.”

No one is more dangerous than those who insist on telling the truth in an age of lies, as Orwell himself said.

Category: Great Britain