The Other McCain

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

In The Mailbox: 09.08.16

Posted on | September 8, 2016 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: The Commander-In-Chief Forum Last Night Was A Preview Of The General Election Debates To Come
Michelle Malkin: Sicko Terrorist Lynne Stewart – Still Hating Cops
Twitchy: Rep. Flores Says IRS Commissioner Koskinen’s Got To Go


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: What Happens When Society Puts The Pussy On A Pedestal
American Power: An Emerging Alliance Between Neocons And Hillary?
American Thinker: Obama’s Iranian Cash Laundromat
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily News
Da Tech Guy: A Conservative Respite In Flyover Country
Don Surber: Trump May Dump Three Cabinet Positions
Dustbury: One Minute To Autodestruct
Fred On Everything: Darwin Unhinged – The Bugs In Evolution
Jammie Wearing Fools: NYPD Says Hillary Was Wearing “Invisible” Earpiece To Get Coaching During Live NBC Town Hall
Joe For America: If Hillary Is So Healthy, Why Is She Traveling With A Neurologist?
JustOneMinute: A Climate Change Tour De Force At The Times
Pamela Geller: Cruz Accuses Obama Of Laundering Money For Iran
Power Line: Director Comey’s Strange Memo To FBI Employees
Shark Tank: Veteran Calls Out Clinton On Her Handling Of Classified Info
Shot In The Dark: The Diversity Scam
The Jawa Report: Another Chapter In The Epic Struggle Of Muslims To Decide Who Is The Wrong Kind Of Muslims
The Lonely Conservative: Changing Things Up A Bit
The Political Hat: The Ultimate Tool Of Oppression For The Gender Binary? Zoos!
This Ain’t Hell: Khalimov Becomes ISIS Minister Of War
Weasel Zippers: Starbucks CEO Says Hillary Needs To Be The Next President
Megan McArdle: Don’t Make Colleges Pay For Student Loan Defaults


Today’s Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals: Great Deals On Used & Open-Box Products
Shop Amazon Devices – All-New Fire HD 8

Category: Linkagery

Woman Killed After Being Assaulted by Heterosexual White Male. No, Wait …

Posted on | September 8, 2016 | 1 Comment

Reginald Moise (left) is charged with killing Tiarah Poyau (right).

The feminist narrative that blames sexual violence on white male “privilege” doesn’t match the latest evidence in New York City:

An all-American college student was fatally shot in the face at the J’Ouvert festival in Brooklyn for having the nerve to tell a man to stop grinding against her, police sources said Tuesday.
St. John’s University student Tiarah Poyau, 22, was walking the pre-West Indian Day Parade route with three pals early Monday when she was accosted and told the man, “Get off me,” according to a source.
Her friends, who were walking ahead of her around 4:15 a.m., then heard a shot and saw her fall at Empire Boulevard and Franklin Avenue. Poyau had been shot in the eye “at close range,” the source said. . . .
The boozed-up 20-year-old thug who shot her was nabbed Tuesday morning while drunkenly driving on three wheels and with a Caribbean flag wrapped around his bloody hand, according to police.
Before his bust, suspect Reginald Moise told pals, “I think I shot somebody on the parade route. I didn’t know the gun was loaded,” sources said.
Moise, who has five sealed prior arrests, first fled to his girlfriend’s Crown Heights apartment after shooting Poyau, according to police sources. . . .

Black Lives Matter doesn’t care about Tiarah Poyau, because she wasn’t shot by a white cop, and Reginald Moise isn’t a “privileged” Ivy League frat boy, so the feminists don’t care, either. Progressives only care about certain victims of certain crimes, and this isn’t one of those crimes.

(Via Memeorandum.)

 

Category: Crime, Feminism, Racism

How Does Hillary Plan to Defeat ISIS Without Using U.S. Combat Troops?

Posted on | September 8, 2016 | 3 Comments

 

During a “Commander-in-Chief” forum Wednesday with Matt Lauer, Hillary Clinton claimed U.S. troops won’t be needed to defeat ISIS:

“We are not putting ground troops into Iraq ever again and we are not putting ground troops into Syria,” the Democratic presidential nominee, who has consistently said she does not want to put ground troops into Iraq, said during a forum on national security on NBC News.
“We’re going to defeat ISIS without committing American ground troops.”
Clinton’s remark came in response to a question from an Army veteran who asked the former secretary of state how she would determine when and where to deploy troops overseas, particularly when it comes to fighting ISIS.
“We have to defeat ISIS,” Clinton said. “That is my highest counterterrorism goal. And we’ve got to do it with air power, we’ve got to do it with much more support for the Arabs and the Kurds who will fight on the ground against ISIS.
“We have to squeeze them by continuing to support the Iraqi military. They’ve taken back Ramadi, Fallujah, they’ve got to hold them. They’ve got to now get into Mosul. We’re going to work to make sure that they have the support, they have special forces, as you know, they have enablers, they have surveillance intelligence, reconnaissance help.”

There are currently about 300 U.S. Special Forces in Syria, and about 4,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, so let’s not pretend that we don’t already have Americans in harm’s way, OK? The way Hillary just casually mentions “support,” “surveillance,” etc., ignores this reality. Likewise, her vague assurance that “the Arabs and the Kurds” and “the Iraqi military” will suffice to defeat ISIS raises the question, “Why haven’t they already defeated them?” It’s been nearly three years since ISIS established its Islamic “caliphate” in northern Syria, and they’re still there. While ISIS has suffered recent defeats in Iraq, they maintain their stronghold in Raqqa and — contrary to Hillary’s assertion — President Obama and Turkey’s President Erdogan recently discussed the possibility of a joint U.S.-Turkey operation to destroy ISIS in Raqqa.

Well, it depends on what your definition of “ground troops” is, perhaps. Hillary probably means to say we won’t be committing entire Army corps or Marine divisions against ISIS, but we definitely have troops on the ground — in May, some of our Special Forces were spotted with Kurdish forces within 18 miles of Raqqa. Honestly, if Obama would commit a battalion of Army Rangers to the fight, I’d bet they could capture Raqqa in a matter of weeks, if not days. I’m sure Col. Evans and his boys would enjoy a nice “live-fire” exercise, wiping out ISIS in one quick operation.

Excuse my nitpicky criticism of Hillary’s no-ground-troops talk, but as the father of a soldier, I resent the implication that U.S. Special Forces — the finest soldiers on the planet — are not “ground troops.”

Meanwhile, as a matter of mere politics, Donald Trump totally won Wednesday’s forum, and Hillary looked like an idiot, as usual.




 

Category: Hillary Clinton, Iraq, Military, Syria

In The Mailbox: 09.07.16

Posted on | September 7, 2016 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
First Street Journal: CNNMoney Says The General Public Doesn’t Know WTF About The Job Market And Labor Force
Proof Positive: 50 First Press Conferences
Louder With Crowder: MOST (Inadvertently) OFFENSIVE VIDEO EVER!
EBL: Terrorist Lawyer Lynne Stewart – Out Of Prison Early, Still Hates Cops, Still Calling For Revolution
Michelle Malkin: Got National Anthem Hypersensitivity Syndrome?
Twitchy: Donald Trump Jr. Trolls Hillary With A Visit To Her Super-Secure IT Provider


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: It Doesn’t Matter If Trump Wins Or Loses
American Power: Glenn Greenwald Complains That Leftist Media Protect Hillary Clinton
American Thinker: Sharia USA
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Hump Day News
Da Tech Guy: Baldilocks – Wasted Days
Don Surber: They Know Her Crimes, But Do Nothing To Stop Her
Dustbury: Collateral Damage, You Are
Jammie Wearing Fools: Why Hillary Clinton Can’t Close
Joe For America: Wikileaks Reveals New Hillary Bombshell To Drop Next Week
JustOneMinute: Buyers And Sellers
Pamela Geller: Leaked Documents Show Soros Group Spent $600K To Mainstream Pro-Refugee Attitudes
Power Line: How Left-Wing Is Facebook?
Shark Tank: Senate Democrats Block Zika Virus Funding – Again
Shot In The Dark: Wetterling
STUMP: Public Pensions Issues – Volatility Kills
The Jawa Report: Questions To Ponder, also, War Porn! Turkish Boomerang Edition
The Political Hat: Barack Obama Is A Foreign Policy Pantywaist
The Quinton Report: Bacon Fire Shuts Down Interstate
This Ain’t Hell: Mayor Rahm Emanuel Thinks Chicago Needs Tougher Laws
Weasel Zippers: Amy Schumer Boosts Trump – Promises To Move To Spain If The Donald Elected
Megan McArdle: Amazon Wants To Deliver Stuff Too? That’s Weird


Kindle Daily Deals
Digital Music Deals
Shop Amazon Fashion – Men’s Suits Under $100

Category: Linkagery

Update From The Patriarchy™

Posted on | September 6, 2016 | 1 Comment

The Patriarchy™ had a busy day, as today was grandson Alexander’s first birthday, which he spent with me. My daughter-in-law is back in college pursuing her nursing degree, and now her oldest boy (James, who will soon turn 3) is old enough for the preschool program at the college, so it’s just me and Alexander four days a week. Today I had him for almost eight hours, but he took a nap for two of those. Here’s a little video — nothing in particular happening, just him playing on the living room floor:

Is that an explanation for my lack of blogging today, or just an excuse? Never mind.  While I was busy today with McCain 3.0, Ace of Spades was absolutely destroying Lena Dunham in a rant so brutally hard you could cut diamonds with it. Really, I don’t want to spoil it for you by quoting too much, but at one point, Ace calls feminism “a self-justifying, ego-stroking fake ‘politics’ which is no politics or philosophy at all but just a series of wildly inconsistent self-validations, a pseudopolitical hash of self-justifications united only by the basic theme that they should have whatever they want and should not have whatever they don’t want.”

To which I can only add, “Amen! Preach it, brother!”

The proximate cause of Ace’s glorious rant was, of course, the ridiculous reaction of Lena Dunham to being seated next to New York Giants wide receiver Odell Beckham Jr. at a celebrity event in New York. Beckham was busy looking at his phone and ignoring her and so, in her warped mind, Dunham decided this NFL superstar was dissing her.

 

Let’s just state the obvious: Odell Beckham Jr. is 100% USDA Prime Beef. He was a first-round draft pick in 2014, and in each of his first two NFL seasons, he had more than 90 catches with total receiving of more than 1,300 yards. Against the Cowboys in 2014, Beckham had a Dallas safety hanging all over him when he made an absolutely insane one-handed catch for a touchdown that was instantly acclaimed “Catch of the Year.” The man is a phenomenal athletic specimen and there are probably no less than half a million women in New York City who, if they ever got within arm’s length of this 23-year-old millionaire, would strip naked and break down in tears begging him, “Do me, Odell! Do me right here, right now! I want to have your babies!” Lena Dunham, by contrast . . .

Well, she bears an unfortunate resemblance to a potato.

Don’t accuse me of “fat-shaming” here, because (a) being a Southern boy, I don’t mind a gal with some more cushion for the pushin’ as they say down home, and (b) losing weight wouldn’t solve Lena’s problem.

The girl is just psychologically damaged, and even if she looked as good as Kate Upton, she’d be nothing but a nuisance to any man who ever became involved with her. On the other hand, if she looked like Kate Upton, some guys might put up with it, but Lena Dunham doesn’t have what it takes to make guys tolerate her craziness. Not only is she ugly, but she’s also bitter about her ugliness, and if you were Odell Beckham Jr., you wouldn’t bother talking to Lena Dunham, either. Read more

Category: Sex Trouble

In The Mailbox: 09.06.16

Posted on | September 6, 2016 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 09.06.16

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
First Street Journal: Single-Payer Health Care Is Just So Wonderful!
EBL: Phyllis Schlafly, RIP
Michelle Malkin: LOSS Of Labor Day – Let’s Put Worker-Sabotaging Politicians And Open-Borders CEOs On The Grill
Twitchy: Hillary Polling Behind Trump? No Problem! MSNBC’s Got Her Back
Mad Genius Club: Dragon On The Carpet
Vox Popoli: Congratulations, Dragon Award Winners!
Monster Hunter Nation: Son of The Black Sword Wins First Annual Dragon Award For Best Fantasy


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: The Type Of Woman You Want To Marry
American Power: Rise Of The Populists – A Problem For Merkel And Germany
American Thinker: How To Be A Liberal
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily News
Da Tech Guy: Question For NBC News And The Clinton Campaign – Where Are All The Other Coughers?
Don Surber: Sean “Diddy” Combs – Let’s Not Coronate Hillary Just Yet
Dustbury: Lest We Forget
Jammie Wearing Fools: Woman Now Protesting National Anthem Sure Loved Wrapping Herself In The Flag Last Month
Joe For America: “Shut It Down!” Reuters Panics, Orders Cameramen To Hide Trump Footage
JustOneMinute: Trouble In Paradise – FBI File Dump Edition
Pamela Geller: Sharia In The West – Principal Under Investigation For Truthful Posts Muslims Found Offensive
Power Line: Green Weenie Of The Week – Barbecue Deniers
Shark Tank: Charlie Crist Reminds Floridians Of His Hypocritical Ways
Shot In The Dark: “You Are A Horrible Person,” She Explained
STUMP: Let’s Get Ready for An Actuarial Rumble!
The Jawa Report: A Word From Rochester
The Political Hat: Let Them NOT Eat Cake
The Quinton Report: Slate Covers Quinton Report Story
This Ain’t Hell: Phony Army Captain Kelly Clay Withers
Weasel Zippers: Clinton Collaborated With Democrat Senator To Rig Benghazi Hearing Questions – “We Wired It”
Megan McArdle: Competition Works Best To Control Drug Prices


Today’s Digital Deals
Kindle Daily Deals
Shop Amazon Prime Exclusive Phone – Moto G Play $50 Off

Category: Linkagery

Occidental Professor @LisaWade: Heterosexual Men Are Predators

Posted on | September 5, 2016 | 2 Comments

“Heterosexuality in the U.S. is gendered: women are expected to attract, men are supposed to be attracted. Men want, women want to be wanted. Metaphorically, this is a predator/prey type relationship. . . . Accordingly, women know what it feels like to be prey.”
— Professor Lisa Wade, 2014

No one has ever accused Professor Lisa Wade of being heterosexual. It’s difficult to imagine why anyone would even suspect her of such a thing, since her entire career has been built on anti-male hatred.

Professor Wade was among the faculty at Occidental College (annual tuition $49,278) who claimed the college administration was engaged in a conspiracy to cover up the prevalence of rape on campus. After complaints about a delay in reporting a sexual assault accusation, the college president, Jonathan Veitch, issued a statement in which he wrote: “In the first few hours, days or even weeks, it is not always clear what has happened in incidents like these. Investigators need time to sort through conflicting accounts in order to provide a clear narrative of what took place.” Professor Wade accused President Veitch of “reproducing a bias against sexual assault victims that feminists have been trying to eradicate for decades.” In other words, Occidental’s president is anti-woman and pro-rape — but he’s a man, of course, and Professor Wade believes all men are rapists, which is what she means by condemning heterosexuality as “a predator/prey type relationship.” If you believe Professor Wade and her feminist faculty colleagues like Professor Caroline Heldman, the only reason boys go to Occidental is to rape the girls who go to Occidental.

Becoming notorious as the Rape Capital of America™ might not be the kind of publicity Occidental College wants. When you’re asking parents to fork over $49,278 a year to send their kids to your prestigious elite private liberal arts school, it’s probably not good for recruitment to have professors claiming rape is the most popular sport on campus. Occidental’s crappy Division III football team went 5-4 last year, losing to such obscure opponents as Claremont-Mudd-Scripps and University of La Verne, but when it comes to rape, Occidental is the undisputed national champion, according to Professor Wade and her fellow feminists.

$100,527,120

That number is what you get when you multiply $49,278 (annual tuition at Occidental) by 2,040, the college’s reported enrollment. A college with annual revenue of more than $100 million (and an endowment of more than $400 million) is an inviting target for political racketeers trying to run a shakedown operation: “Nice reputation you got there, Occidental. Sure would be a shame if something bad happened to it.”

 

The feminist faculty helped stir up a climate of fear on campus with a group called Oxy Sexual Assault Coalition, and pretty soon there were more than 50 Title IX complaints against Occidental, with big-money lawyer Gloria Allred holding a press conference to announce a lawsuit. Naturally, the college paid up rather than risk a trial:

Occidental College has quietly reached a monetary settlement with at least 10 current and former students who have alleged that the Eagle Rock liberal arts school repeatedly mishandled sexual assault accusations, according to three sources with knowledge of the agreement.
During confidential settlement talks last week, senior Occidental officials agreed to pay the women an undisclosed sum to avoid a lawsuit.
Under the terms of the pact, they are barred from discussing publicly the college’s handling of their cases and participating in the Occidental Sexual Assault Coalition, a campus advocacy group of students and faculty that over the last year has been battling fiercely with the college administration over its handling of sex assault allegations.

Ah, but once you start paying the Dane-geld, you never get rid of the Dane, and the more college administrators try to satisfy campus feminist demands, the more demanding campus feminists become. One wonders if Occidental College’s president knows what is being taught in the school’s Gender, Women, & Sexuality Studies program. Does he not realize that Professor Wade, for example, is against marriage?

I’m not married because the history of marriage is ugly and anti-woman . . .
I’m not married because I don’t want to support a discriminatory institution that has and continues to bless some relationships, but not others, out of bigotry. . . .
I don’t believe that a state- or church-endorsed heterosexual union between two and only two people is superior to other kinds of relationships.

Unlike Professor Wade, Occidental’s president does support the “anti-woman . . . discriminatory institution.” Jonathan Veitch and his wife have three children from their state-endorsed heterosexual union.

Professor Wade is co-author of a 2014 textbook, Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions, a 400-page elaboration of the postmodern theory that there are no such things as men and women, only the gender binary, which is socially constructed by the heterosexual matrix. Feminists generally believe there is no such thing as “human nature.” According to feminist gender theory, human beings are the only mammals on the planet without any kind of instinct that might be involved in the reproduction of the species. The traits we call “masculinity” and “femininity” are an illusion, according to feminists. The “performance of phallic power” is “the essence of hegemonic masculinity,” as Professor Carol Harrington (Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand) has explained, and “widespread heterosexuality among women is a highly artificial product of the patriarchy,” as Professor Marilyn Frye said, because “most women have to be coerced into heterosexuality.”

You might not be surprised to learn that Professor Wade considers beauty standards to be a manifestation of patriarchal oppression:

The sexualization of girls and the infantilization of adult women are two sides of the same coin. They both tell us that we should find youth, inexperience, and naivete sexy in women, but not in men. This reinforces a power and status difference between men and women, where vulnerability, weakness, and dependency and their opposites are gendered traits: desirable in one sex but not the other. . . .
What does it mean that feminine beauty is conflated with youthfulness, but masculine beauty is not — that we want women to be both cute and sexual? It means that we feel comfortable with women who seem helpless and require taking care of, perhaps we even encourage or demand these traits from women. . . .
It’s about infantilizing adult women . . . as a way to remind women of their prescribed social position relative to men.

There is nothing natural about male admiration of “feminine beauty,” according to Professor Wade. Feminists do not believe any hard-wired animal instincts are involved in men’s preferences. Instead, all human sexual behavior is interpreted as an expression of “power and status” under the regime of patriarchy. This is the only explanation for why men prefer supermodel Kate Upton to feminist Jaclyn Friedman.

Jaclyn Friedman, feminist (left); Kate Upton, supermodel (right).

“A steady diet of exploitative, sexually provocative depictions of women feeds a poisonous trend in women’s and girl’s perceptions of their bodies, one that has recently been recognized by social scientists as self-objectification — viewing one’s body as a sex object to be consumed by the male gaze. . . . Perhaps the most striking outcome of self-objectification is the difficulty women have in imagining identities and sexualities truly our own.”
— Professor Caroline Heldman, 2008

You see that any depiction of women that men actually enjoy looking at is “exploitative,” because women are objectified by “the male gaze,” according to Occidental College Professor Caroline Heldman who, not coincidentally, co-founded the groups Oxy Sexual Assault Coalition, End Rape on Campus (EROC) and Faculty Against Rape (FAR), and is “a visible figure in the campus anti-rape movement.” Feminism’s “rape culture” discourse is a form of anti-male hate propaganda. By demonizing college boys as rapists, feminists like Professor Heldman and Professor Wade teach college girls to hate and fear their male classmates. Likewise, Professor Heldman and Professor Wade portray normal male behavior as pathological. Their students at Occidental are being taught that it is wrong for men to admire beauty, that it is predatory for men to be attracted to women, that marriage is “anti-woman,” and that heterosexuality is inherently harmful to women. If a man even looks at a woman, she is victimized by his “sexually objectifying, predatory, always potentially threatening gaze,” according to Professor Wade:

I study sex on campus, where sexual violence is perpetrated disproportionately by “high-status” men — fraternity men and certain male athletes in particular. These men are more likely than other men to endorse the sexual double standard, believing that they are justified in praising sexually active men, while condemning and even abusing women who are less sexually active.
They are also more likely to promote homophobia, hypermasculinity and male dominance; tolerate violent and sexist jokes; endorse misogynistic attitudes and behaviors; and endorse false beliefs about rape. Accordingly, athletes are responsible for an outsized number of sexual assaults on campus, and women who attend fraternity parties are significantly more likely to be assaulted than those who attend other parties with alcohol and those who don’t go to parties at all.

It is “high status” that makes college boys rapists, according to Professor Wade. Therefore, it might be argued, colleges should deprive males of status — ending athletic programs for men and abolishing fraternities, for example — if they are really serious about preventing rape. Or perhaps Professor Wade means that Occidental College President Jonathan Veitch is also a rapist. Being president of the college is a rather “high-status” position on campus, after all, and you can’t be too careful, especially considering President Veitch’s known history of heterosexuality.

Professor Wade’s next book, to be published in January, is entitled American Hookup: The New Culture of Sex on Campus, and in an article for the Guardian, she previews her attack on the usual suspects:

Hookup culture prevails, even though it serves only a minority of students, because cultures don’t reflect what is, but a specific group’s vision of what should be. The students who are most likely to qualify as enthusiasts are also more likely than other kinds of students to be affluent, able-bodied, white, conventionally attractive, heterosexual and male. . . .
Hookup culture, then, isn’t what the majority of students want, it’s the privileging of the sexual lifestyle most strongly endorsed by those with the most power on campus, the same people we see privileged in every other part of American life. These students, as one Latina observed, “exude dominance”. On the quad, they’re boisterous and engage in loud greetings. They sunbathe and play catch on the green at the first sign of spring. At games, they paint their faces and sing fight songs. They use the campus as their playground. Their bodies — most often slim, athletic and well-dressed — convey an assured calm; they move among their peers with confidence and authority.

So, according to Professor Wade, it is rich, good-looking, heterosexual white males whose “privilege” is expressed in “hookup culture.” Probably there are some of those guys at Occidental College, where their parents pay $49,278 a year so they can “use the campus as their playground.”

It’s wrong for girls to hook up with “slim, athletic and well-dressed” rich boys at an elite private college, according to Professor Wade. Why are “affluent, able-bodied, white, conventionally attractive, heterosexual and male” students even allowed to attend Occidental College? Everybody on the Occidental faculty hates white male heterosexuals, and yet these rich boys keep showing up on campus with their boisterous loud greetings, their “assured calm . . . confidence and authority,” etc. Gosh, why does this sound strangely familiar?

Good grades, good home
gets college student profiled
as rapist, claims lawsuit
Being a valedictorian from a “good family” helped get a California student blamed for an alleged rape by a bizarre, college tribunal that critics claim is part of an overzealous culture of blaming men for hookups that go awry, according to a lawsuit.
A former Occidental College student known only as “John Doe” has sued the Los Angeles school after it found him “responsible” for an alleged Sept. 8, 2013, rape local police could not substantiate ever happened. The student was expelled after the liberal arts school’s investigation, despite offering strong text message evidence that the encounter with another first-year Occidental student was consensual. . . .
The suit, which claims John Doe’s due process rights were violated, charges that a faculty member and anti-rape activist coaxed the alleged victim into making baseless accusations.
“[John Doe] fits the profile of other rapists on campus in that he had a high GPA in high school, was his class valedictorian, was on [a sports] team, and was from a good family,” the suit quotes Occidental Sociology Prof. Danielle Dirks, who co-founded the school’s Sexual Assault Coalition, telling the woman, who was initially reluctant to accuse the man of rape.

If a boy is a valedictorian and an athlete, he’s a rapist, according to feminist professors at Occidental College. Parents definitely should not pay $49,278 a year to send their sons to Occidental College, which pays these professors to encourage girls to accuse their sons of rape:

John Doe’s Title IX complaint, alleging gender discrimination against himself as a male, argues that the female complainant (Jane Doe) was counselled by Professor Danielle Dirks and Movindri Reddy to convince her that she had indeed been raped, despite her initial protestations that her consensual sex ‘didn’t feel like rape.’ . . .
Jane Doe spent many hours with Professor Reddy. According to her testimony: “She said that Professor Reddy put her in touch with Professor Danielle Dirks. On Tuesday night, Jane Doe said, she met with Professor Dirks for three hours, and told her the entire story…. During this period, Jane Doe stated, she went to see Professor Reddy every day to talk about what had happened, and how she was dealing with it.”
Professor Reddy went on to become Jane Doe’s advocate/advisor through the internal Occidental hearing process. . . .
In Professor Dirk’s testimony, in her discussions with Ms. Doe, she repeatedly profiled John Doe as a rapist. . . .
Dirks stated that she believed that Jane Doe was experiencing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
Dirks stated that Jane Doe appeared to be “in a strong state of denial” about the events, and told her at one point that she was not yet able to call the incident “rape….” Dirks noted that Jane Doe’s reluctance to call what had happened to her “rape” was consistent with other victims of sexual assault whom Dirks has talked to on campus.

Doesn’t it sound like John Doe was the victim of a conspiracy? What actually happened was that John Doe was drunk in his room when Jane Doe, who was also drunk, texted him she wanted to come have sex with him, then showed up and, among other things, performed oral sex him. Unlike so many other cases like it, John Doe v. Occidental is not even a “he-said/she-said” story — there is no dispute about the basic facts, and nothing about these facts can be construed as rape. Both students were freshmen, both were equally drunk, and she was the one who initiated their sexual encounter. Yet on a campus where hatred of males is encouraged by feminist professors who denounce heterosexuality as “a predator/prey type relationship,” facts don’t matter.




 

Category: Education, Sex Trouble

Polls Show Hillary Slipping: Is It Because Black People Don’t Like Her Very Much?

Posted on | September 5, 2016 | Comments Off on Polls Show Hillary Slipping: Is It Because Black People Don’t Like Her Very Much?

 

In recent days, Hillary Clinton’s poll lead over Donald Trump has begun shrinking again. In two recent polls — by Investors Business Daily and Reuters — Hillary led by just one point, and in the latest L.A. Times poll, Trump is actually leading by 2 points, 45%-43%. The trend in the Real Clear Polls average of national polls is clear — Hillary’s lead, which was nearly 8 points just three weeks ago, has now been cut in half.

The Clinton campaign’s “run-out-the-clock” strategy, which was based on confidence in Hillary’s frontrunner status, has become a subject of increasing criticism. Part of the problem, it turns out, is that young black voters aren’t really excited about a 68-year-old white woman:

When a handful of liberal advocacy organizations convened a series of focus groups with young black voters last month, the assessments of Donald J. Trump were predictably unsparing.
But when the participants were asked about Hillary Clinton, their appraisals were just as blunt and nearly as biting.
“What am I supposed to do if I don’t like him and I don’t trust her?” a millennial black woman in Ohio asked. “Choose between being stabbed and being shot? No way!”
“She was part of the whole problem that started sending blacks to jail,” a young black man, also from Ohio, observed about Mrs. Clinton.
“He’s a racist, and she is a liar, so really what’s the difference in choosing both or choosing neither?” another young black woman from Ohio said.
Young African-Americans, like all voters their age, are typically far harder to drive to the polls than middle-aged and older Americans. Yet with just over two months until Election Day, many Democrats are expressing alarm at the lack of enthusiasm, and in some cases outright resistance, some black millennials feel toward Mrs. Clinton.
Their skepticism is rooted in a deep discomfort with the political establishment that they believe the 68-year-old former first lady and secretary of state represents.

(Via Memeorandum.) This “discomfort with the political establishment” is a bipartisan phenomenon, transcending the check-the-box categories that dominate the thinking of pundits, strategists and consultants.

Donald Trump got a standing ovation at a black church in Detroit last week, and what was his message to Detroit?

“Our nation is too divided. We talk past each other, not to each other and those who seek office do not do enough to step into the community and learn what is going on,” Trump told the church-goers from the podium, where he briefly spoke about why he was there. “They don’t know. They have no clue. I’m here today to learn. So that we can together remedy injustice, in any form. And so that we can also remedy economics so that the African-American community can benefit economically through jobs and income and so many other different ways.”

The Democrats are running the same playbook they have been running for years — call Republicans “racist” and rely on this smear to win 95% of the black vote — as if black people are too stupid to see through this tactic. What does it matter whether or not Donald Trump is “racist” if Democrat policies do not actually improve the lives of black citizens?

Look at what Democrats have done to Detroit: The city is bankrupt, and Detroit’s population, which was 1.4 million in 1970, has declined to less than 700,000. The claim that electing Democrats is good for black people because Republicans are “racist” never really made sense, but how can anyone look at the situation in Detroit and believe that voting for Hillary Clinton is vital to the interests of black Americans? Detroit is the most dangerous city in America; 38% of the population lives below the poverty line and the violent crime rate is 2,072 per 100,000.

These are simply facts. Is it “racist” to mention the facts? How long can Democrats expect to keep winning elections by ignoring the facts, pointing the finger of blame at Republicans and yelling “racist”?

Leaked Hillary Video Shows Her
Telling Black Man, “I Will
Only Talk to White People”

How much more condescending and insulting can she get?




 


Category: Donald Trump, Election, Hillary Clinton, Polls, Racism
« go back — keep looking »