FMJRA 2.0: High Energy Protons

I spent some time on Twitter today doing something wildly unusual for me: defending Senator John McCain over the (as yet unproven) allegation that McCain caused the USS Forrestal disaster. I’m no fan of the old war horse, and wish he’d retired a couple decades back.

Yet, Senior Chief, your sanctimonious denunciation of veterans who support Trump was a completely unimpressive strawmanning operation. No one is accusing Trump of being any more of a war hero than Obama, nor are any veterans admiring of Trump’s personal non-prowess, despite your implications. I hope that you were paid handsomely for your activities. Meanwhile, the bad guys are getting wrecked in ways that Trump’s no-talent rodeo clown predecessor could, apparently, not envision. That, for veterans (not on the take from #FakeNews outlets), is enough.

Don’t make me send Allen West over there to help you get your mind right.

Category: Uncategorized

‘A Particularly Non-Self-Aware Man’

Posted on | May 12, 2018 | 1 Comment

Online dating is a bad idea. Every time I repeat this warning, someone in the comments will say, “But I met my [husband or wife] on [name of online dating site] and everything was awesome,” as if this anecdotal exception disproves the rule that online dating is a bad idea.

People who engage in online dating are self-selected. What they all have in common is, nobody they know in real life wants to date them. Think about that — if a guy is on OKCupid or Tinder, the one thing you know about him is, he couldn’t find a girlfriend any other way. Simply by signing up for a site, he’s advertising the fact that he’s a loser.

Why do losers lose? In 2009, Christian Rudder did an analysis of OKCupid users and found that two-thirds of messages from men go to just one-third of women on the site, i.e., the most attractive. A very good-looking woman “gets nearly 5 times as many messages as a typical woman and 28 times as many messages” as a woman rated in the lower 20% by looks: “So basically, guys are fighting each other 2-for-1 for the absolute best-rated females, while plenty of potentially charming, even cute, girls go unwritten.” Female preferences were even more remarkable: Women on OKCupid rate “an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium.” Was this because the OKCupid dating pool is mostly ugly guys, or because women on the site judge men by an unrealistic standard? Without going any further in our analysis of why these patterns exist, we can nevertheless say that the results shown by the OKCupid study demonstrate typical patterns of losers — men who waste their time in a futile pursuit of beautiful women, and ordinary-looking women who foolishly imagine that Handsome Princes are as common in reality as they are in Disney fairy-tale cartoons. (Hat-tip: Badger Pundit.)

Overestimating your chances is a basic trait of losers. An unrealistically high self-appraisal — a misguided belief that you deserve better romantic partners than are actually available to you — is one obvious reason why people engage in online dating. And it evidently does not occur to these people that the online dating pool is polluted with people just like themselves, because another basic trait of losers is a lack of self-awareness. That is to say, the loser is seldom aware of why he is losing and, indeed, may refuse to recognize that he is a loser. Read more

Late Night With In The Mailbox: 05.11.18

Posted on | May 12, 2018 | Comments Off on Late Night With In The Mailbox: 05.11.18

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: One Person Can Make A Difference…
Twitchy: It’s Now Standing Room Only In Hillary’s Basket of Deplorables
Louder With Crowder: Black Voters In Santa Clarita Blast California’s Sanctuary State Policy
According To Hoyt: We Can’t Afford Socialism
Monster Hunter Nation: May Update Post
Vox Popoli: They Conserve Nothing

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: 2018 Nobel Prize In Literature Canceled Amid Sexual Assault Furor, also, Did The FBI Spy On Trump’s Campaign?
American Thinker: Incivility, Media, And The Left
Animal Magnetism: Rule Five Fourth Annual Commencement Speech Friday
BattleSwarm: LinkSwarm For May 11
BLACKFIVE: Alex & Eliza , Love & War
CDR Salamander: Fullbore Friday
Da Tech Guy: I’m Old Enough To Remember When The MSM & Mueller Thought The Russia Indictments Were A Big Deal
Don Surber: Google Ignores Richard Feynman’s 100th Birthday
Dustbury: Lucky King
The Geller Report: UK Proposes Seven Years In Jail For Criticizing Islam, also, Former Obama Administration Officials Suggest Euro Nations Expel U.S. Ambassadors Over Iran Deal Pullout
Hogewash: Blognet, also, Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day, also also (Bonus!) Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day
Joe For America: Ending Secret Science At The EPA
Legal Insurrection: Merkel Teams Up With Putin To Save Iran Deal, also, Why Is Stacy’s Crazy Cousin John Opposing Haspel After Voting For Brennan?
Michelle Malkin: Daniel Holtzclaw Update – Innocence Community In NY Speaks Out
Power Line: An FBI Informant In The Trump Campaign? Part 1 and Part 2, also, Sarah Sanders Responds To Iran Critics
Shark Tank: New Poll Suggests Scott Will Defeat Nelson
Shot In The Dark: Graceless
STUMP: Happy Idea – Moving From Defined Benefit To “Defined Ambition”
The Political Hat: Women Living Longer Than Men Is Now Considered Misogyny
This Ain’t Hell: Happy Birthday, Richard Overton, also, Friday Morning Feelgood Stories
Victory Girls: Remember, This Is What Single Payer Looks Like
Weasel Zippers: Emails Show Comey Coordinated His Russia Testimony With Mueller, also, New Tom Steyer PAC Ad Compares Republicans To White Nationalists
Mark Steyn: Eat Your Heart Out, Alec Baldwin, also, The Interrogator

Featured Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals

Category: Linkagery

‘The Immature, Demagogic Phase’

Posted on | May 11, 2018 | Comments Off on ‘The Immature, Demagogic Phase’

Who is J.J. McCullough? Never heard of him before yesterday, when someone called my attention to his latest National Review column:

I doubt that many Americans would disagree that the country’s conversation about gay rights is far more mature and considered than it was two decades ago. . . .
Today, there exists broad understanding that homosexual people are unavoidable and common, present in all corners and demographics of American life. Through education, and especially exposure, homosexuality is no longer regarded as bizarre, threatening, or mysterious. . . .
Looking at the state of America’s transgender debate, I often wonder if things are destined to unfold in a similar way.
At present, it feels we’re still in the immature, demagogic phase. In some quarters, it remains fashionable to act theatrically repulsed by transgender people, emphasize their weirdness, and make populist appeals to the preposterousness of women asking to be called “him” or surgeons amputating penises and so forth. Yet this seems more cathartic than anything, in the same way that showy judgment of gays did a generation earlier. As with homosexuality in the 1980s and ’90s, the loud revulsion of critics conceals a fading interest in actually attempting to “solve” transgenderism, as even those most offended by it seem to quietly regard purported cures as quackish and authoritarian. . . .

When he posted this column to Twitter, Mr. McCullough predicted it was “bound to be contentious,” and he was right. His column inspired rejoinders from both Michael Brendan Dougherty and David French at National Review, and I don’t think either of them can be accused of immature demagoguery in this matter. What’s wrong with Mr. McCullough’s argument, for the most part, is that he is young — about 25 years younger than me — and is therefore ignorant of how we got here.

Let anyone answer this question: Where were you when the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision was announced? At the time, I was 43 and working as an assistant national editor at The Washington Times, and was aware that activists in Massachusetts had prepared in advance to make this decision the basis of legalizing same-sex marriage. Because of the “full faith and credit” clause of the Constitution, the act of Massachusetts immediately provoked the question of whether the same-sex marriages recognized in that state would be considered valid in other states. In his dissent in the Lawrence case, Justice Scalia indicated he had foreseen such developments, and he also noted how little concern for stare decisis the Court majority showed in overturning the 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick decision. Well, as it happens, 1986 was the year I began my journalism career in a small town in Cobb County, Georgia. Michael Bowers was Attorney General of Georgia, and this 1986 decision upheld our state’s law against sodomy. Take my word for it when I say that sodomy was not a rare practice in Georgia at the time, and that few of its practitioners even realized they were engaged in a crime. Nevertheless, while this statute was rarely enforced, its existence in Georgia law served valid social purposes, and was of ancient origin, dating back through centuries of Anglo-American common law. The Lawrence decision was therefore of greater importance than most people realized at the time, but I was not most people, and had been warned in advance (thank you, Cheryl Wetzstein) that the Court was opening Pandora’s Box, from which a nightmare of chaos would predictably emerge.

Where was J.J. McCullough in 2003? He would have been about 18 at the time, and almost certainly has no understanding of How We Got Here. So I felt it might be a good idea to send him a courteous email:

Dear Mr. McCullough:
Has the possibility occurred to you that what you call “the loud revulsion of critics” toward the gay-rights movement in the 1980s and ’90s was correct? Your problem, sir, is that you are very young and did not live through the era which you are describing.
I graduated high school the same year (1977) that Anita Bryant made headlines for her opposition to the gay-rights measure then recently enacted in Miami. I was not then (and never was, during my youth) a “young conservative,” and did not really care about politics, still less about the issues that concerned what came to be called the Religious Right.
“Who cares?” That was my basic reaction to much of the sturm und drang of the incipient Culture War at the time, when I was a dangerously reckless young man with hair down to his shoulders, immersed in the “sex, drugs and rock-and-roll” way of life. Looking back on my wild youth, it has often occurred to my how miraculous it is that I survived it all. It certainly did not cross my mind at the time — for I was a particularly heedless hedonist — that there was anything political about my pursuit of pleasure. Circa 1984, when I voted for Walter Mondale for president, nobody could have predicted how powerful the LGBT lobby would eventually become. The Cold War was still the major focus of American politics, and the Democrat Party had not yet gone all-in on Cultural Marxism; Mondale was an old-fashioned AFL-CIO Democrat, and if anyone in 1984 accused him of advocating the abolition of laws against sodomy, I must have missed that.
In the 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Georgia’s sodomy law, which of course was so seldom enforced that the illegality of sodomy was important mainly because it permitted police occasionally to crack down on gay “cruising” in public parks, charging people with solicitation of sodomy, a crime unto itself. This was not evident to me at the time, as I had no reason to pay attention to such matters, nor did most other people. We had no Internet, no blogs, no social media, and because young people couldn’t just log on and constantly blab their opinions for an international audience, it was easy to ignore politics, except at election time. And it was not until the mid-1990s, by which time I was a married father of three and working as assistant to the editorial page editor of the Rome (Ga.) News-Tribune, that I began reconsidering my indifference to the issues of the Culture War.
Fatherhood tends to change a man’s perspective on such things. Would I want my own children to be exposed to the dangerous hedonism that I’d pursued in my youth? No, sir, I would not. Some of my former dope buddies ended up in prison, including one who was sentenced to Georgia’s Death Row, and a few of my high school classmates died of AIDS. If there was “loud revulsion” toward the gay-rights movement in the 1990s, the deadly plague of AIDS was a major factor in that. You could benefit from reading Destructive Generation by Peter Collier and David Horowitz, particularly Chapter 9, “AIDS: The Origins of a Political Epidemic.” One might be sympathetic toward homosexuals, yet still recognize that the ideological idolatry of “equality” and “sexual liberation” on the Left has had catastrophic consequences.
What I have noticed, and frequently written about in recent years, is the fanatical intolerance of the LGBT movement, an attitude I’ve described as the Compulsory Approval Doctrine. It is now considered “hate” for anyone to criticize any policy advocated by LGBT activists, let alone to express disapproval of homosexuality, per se. This intolerant attitude necessarily infringes the religious liberty of Bible-believing Christians, who can cite chapter and verse on the subject of sin.
It would behoove young conservatives who blab their opinions on the Internet to study the actual history of the phenomena about which they so confidently opine. Have you, Mr. McCullough, carefully read the late Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinions in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), U.S. v. Windsor (2013) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)? Justice Scalia stated with great clarity the principles of a conservative opposition to gay rights, as a general matter and, if you are a conservative, you ought to consider how those principles might apply specifically to the transgender issue on which you advocate “compromise.”
Young people naturally want to be popular among their peers, to be one of the “cool kids,” to follow the fashionable trend. This is understandable — if only you could have seen me at 19! — but it is the sacred duty of adults to steer young people away from danger, to warn them against following the path that leads to destruction (Matthew 7:13-14). Do conservatives “act theatrically repulsed by transgender people [and] emphasize their weirdness”? Do you suppose, sir, it is merely an “act”? Insofar as the conservatives you describe are adults, it is likely that they are also parents, and do you think sensible parents are not authentically horrified by the thought of their children being sucked into the vortex of the Transgender Cult? You should spend some time (as I have) talking to parents whose teenagers succumbed to “Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria.” This phenomenon wasn’t originally identified by right-wingers or fundamentalist Christians, but rather by radical feminists (many of them militant lesbians) who have become profoundly concerned about the way Internet activism has helped foment what they describe as a “social contagion” of transgenderism among young people.
Do you think that the “weirdness” in the transgender community is something conservatives have imagined? Are you familiar with “Zinnia Jones” (a/k/a Zachary Antolak, a/k/a “Lauren McNamara,” a/k/a “Satana Kennedy”)? Or have you investigated “Char Vortryss” (a/k/a Clinton James Crawford, a/k/a “Char the Butcher)? Perhaps you should do some more research before you go blabbing your opinion about this; I could refer you to my friend Cynthia Yockey, a conservative lesbian who is writing a book on the subject. We seem once again to be living through the kind of era Buffalo Springfield sang about in 1967: “There’s something happening here. What it is ain’t exactly clear.” A few years ago, almost no one could have imagined Donald Trump becoming president, nor could it have been predicted that social conservatives would find common cause with radical feminists in opposing transgender activists. Yet here we are, in this moment of unexpected weirdness, and I should hope a young person like yourself, who aspires to be considered an intellectual, would be more thoughtful about the causes and potential consequences of this uncanny convergence.
Sincerely,
Robert Stacy McCain

Do I think this will change Mr. McCullough’s mind? No, young fools are not apt to admit error or to acknowledge the value of experience when their elders seek to correct the untutored errors of youth. However, I felt it important to suggest to him the nature of his error, so that if he ever repents his folly, he might have some idea of why he was wrong.

Category: The Transgender Cult

The Profound Sadness of Christine Emba

Posted on | May 11, 2018 | 1 Comment

by Smitty

Don’t know who this lady is, but she excels at missing the point, emphasis mine:

But that doesn’t mean Peterson is harmless. At times, he leans into an oddly conspiratorial obsession with “neo-Marxist” liberal professors meaning to march us to the gulag via the gender equity in the classroom .?.?. or something. And his interpretations of certain principles — that “loving your neighbor as yourself” should be a utilitarian act, for instance — lend themselves all too well to the right-wing ideology that would pretend structural issues such as racism don’t exist and that people should, and must, care for themselves alone.

Peterson (and I may be personalizing his view too heavily here) seems to strongly reject the Postmodern lies, “gender equity” among them. Emba’s short piece, itself, is an example of Postmodern living in the present tense. JP’s best-seller can be seen as sad in the sense of a comment on a culture that has listened to too many of Emba’s ilk, driving the need to write it.

The Jordan Peterson phenomenon calls to mind recent research, from scholars such as Richard Reeves and Robert Putnam, about an America dividing into social haves and have-nots. There are those lucky few for whom these rules to an orderly, productive life are inculcated from youth. And there are the rest, left to scavenge meaning for themselves, who will have to rely on Jordan Peterson.

Orderly, productive lives are the result of ignoring dreck like “gender equity”.

Our culture is beset by false prophets who have preyed upon our good nature, and assumed that we’d meekly submit to Leftist tyranny. Sorry, Emba: 2008 did not fundamentally transform the United States of America to the extent you’d like. It’s too early to tell if the Trump election means that the political Pearl Harbor that was the Obama Administration has awakened the Sleeping Giant or not, but that giant is certainly rustling about. And we hope to make your sadness over the death of your Postmodern daydreams more profound.

Category: Uncategorized

In The Mailbox: 05.10.18

Posted on | May 10, 2018 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 05.10.18

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: Welcome Home – Freed American Prisoners Thankful Upon Release
Twitchy: Ellen Producer Craps On Release Of American Prisoners By North Korea
Louder With Crowder: Sexuality Expert Claims Parents Need Babies’ Consent To Change Diapers

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Podcast #83 – The Group Think Episode
American Power: Robert Service, The Last Of The Tsars
American Thinker: Despite The Media, Trump Pulling Down Wins For We The People
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily Good News For Once
BattleSwarm: Israel, Iran, & Syria Throw Down
CDR Salamander: Fitzgerald‘s OOD Pleads Guilty
Da Tech Guy: Day Three Of Fasting & Prayer – Take Yes For An Answer
Don Surber: If The FBI Doesn’t Have To Comply With A Subpoena, Why Should The President?
Dustbury: Beyond Mere Hyperinflation
The Geller Report: Iran’s Supreme Leader Says He Can’t Wait For Trump To Die, also, Catholic St. Ambrose U. Opens Gender-Separated Prayer Space For Muslims
Hogewash: Not a Slow News Day, also, Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day
Joe For America: Gasoline Prices Expected To Climb This Summer
JustOneMinute: Drain The Cohen, also, Blue On Blue At Yale
Legal Insurrection: California Senators’ Tortuous Exchanges With CIA Nominee, also, Michael Cohen’s Lawyers Ask Court To Compel Avenatti To Reveal Source Of Bank Records
Power Line: NYT Embarrasses Itself With Pompeo Hit Piece, also, California’s Suicide Attempt, Part 6 – Let’s Make Housing More Expensive!
Shark Tank: Puerto Rico, The Island Of Massive Debt
Shot In The Dark: The Solid Mathematical Case…
STUMP: Banning All Things Gun – It’s A Poor Weapon That Points Only One Way
The Political Hat: Textbook Social Justice – Sexual Orientation As History, Tokenistic Minorities, And Misogynistic Economics
This Ain’t Hell: MDMA Provides PTSD Relief For Vets, also, What Fools These Liberals Be
Victory Girls: ISIS Leaders Captured By Coalition Troops
Weasel Zippers: Blue States Rally To Upend Electoral College, also, Surprise – Stacy’s Crazy Cousin John Opposes Haspel For CIA

Featured Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals – Up To 25% Off On Spring Things

Category: Linkagery

The Rocky Horror Family Show

Posted on | May 10, 2018 | 1 Comment

It’s astounding. Time is fleeting. Madness takes its toll:

A Michigan mother of five decided she wants to be a man, and now she’s opening up about how much she loves when her kids call her both mom and dad.
Formerly Erica Maison, the 40-year-old mother now goes by Eric Maison, and began her social transition in 2015. She began her medical transition in 2016, according to ABC News.
The Michigan mother, who has been undergoing hormone treatment for 25 months and had an operation to remove her breasts, told ABC News that her kids still call her “mom” but sometimes call her “Daddy Mom” or “Mommy Dad,” which she loves. It’s “absolutely adorable,” she said.
“It has been great watching him [Eric] finally find himself and be free to live his authentic truth,” Les Maison, Eric’s husband, told ABC News.
Eric told the outlet she was inspired to transition after her 16-year-old son decided he wanted to be a girl. Eric fully supports her son going through hormone therapy to become a female, ABC News reported. Maison alleges that her son Corey has identified as female since he was two years old. Corey has been receiving hormone therapy for two and a half years and hopes to soon have surgery to remove his male genitalia.
Corey told ABC News that the family will still celebrate Eric on Mother’s Day Sunday.

So, Mom is now “Dad” and her/“his” son is now her/“his” “daughter”? Life was much simpler when we kept the lunatics in the asylum.

Let’s do the Time Warp again . . .

Category: The Transgender Cult

« 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.

The Other McCain

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

FMJRA 2.0: High Energy Protons

Get Stuffed, Senior Chief @MalcolmNance

‘A Particularly Non-Self-Aware Man’

Late Night With In The Mailbox: 05.11.18

‘The Immature, Demagogic Phase’

The Profound Sadness of Christine Emba

In The Mailbox: 05.10.18

The Rocky Horror Family Show

THE FULL METAL JACKET REACH-AROUND AWARD

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!

Search

Recent Posts

RSS reader subscription

MEMEORANDUM

Recent Comments

THE AMAZING GONZO FEED

Major Leagues

Archives

Free Agents

SHAMELESS CAPITALISM

Triple-A Franchises

Blogroll

About

Subscribe to our feed

Search

Admin