Thursday, May 12, 2016

Finished: Kim R. Holmes, The Closing of the Liberal Mind

I finished The Closing of the Liberal Mind over the weekend.

The book's a quick read, but it's heavyweight in its implications. I'll be keeping my copy next to my bedside for a ready reference, and for periodic review. Especially good are Holmes' theory chapters, on the ideology of classical liberalism, and particularly on postmodern leftism and leftist authoritarianism. I can't recommend these enough, mainly because these chapters represent the best, most concise recent writings on the nature of the contemporary radical left, and the threat leftism poses to the American political and cultural order.

I have two quibbles: One, I was perturbed by Holmes' discussion of Dylann Roof, and especially how he mistakenly characterized Roof as a "white supremacist" who represents the "intolerance and bigotry" of "the right." Holmes writes that the 2015 Charleston attack "shows that a violent strain of racial hatred still exists on the far right in America." As readers may recall, I showed here that Roof isn't on the right. In fact, Roof's an "emo-prog" leftist, and frankly, the photo of Roof burning the American flag should have been enough evidence to figure that out without all of this about the "far right," a discussion which draws on leftist and MSM tropes seeking to demonize conservatives. I'll speak to Holmes about this personally if I meet him, perhaps at a book signing or something.

Two, Holmes provides a powerful explanation of why leftists are not liberals, offering a definition of what we normally refer to as "progressives" as "postmodern leftists." This is really perfect terminology, and easy to use. The problem is that Holmes, after offering these terms, in fact doesn't use them consistently himself. I didn't count, but Holmes used the term "progressive liberals" more than other other combination of terminology, which was frustrating because the whole point of his chapter 2, "The Rise of the Postmodern Left," was to reclaim "liberalism" for the classic meaning of the word as a political orientation favoring limits on government power, free exchange of ideas, free enterprise economics, and tolerance of political and religious differences. I was basically furrowing my brows throughout the book whenever Holmes abandoned his defined terminology and relapsed back into talking about postmodern radical leftists as "progressive liberals."

That's about it. As noted, I particularly enjoyed the book's parsimoniousness. It's largely a pleasure to read, and I had a couple of "aha" moments as well, always a good indicator of scholarly success.

In any case, I definitely recommend the book to my readers. It's a must-have item for your library.

Check it out at Amazon, The Closing of the Liberal Mind: How Groupthink and Intolerance Define the Left.

The Closing of the Liberal Mind photo 13119012_10209731342423304_6532273431493805090_n_zpsbmxkuoai.jpg

How Marriage Influences Male Economic Success (VIDEO)

Here's Brad Wilcox, for Prager University.



And check out his study, "For Richer, For Poorer: How Family Structures Economic Success in America."

Here Comes the Anti-Trump Summer of Hate

From the inimitable Zombie, at Pajamas, "Inside the Anti-Trump Circus: Here Comes the Summer of Hate — Protest Outside Donald Trump's Appearance at the California Republican Convention, April 29, 2016."

Trump Protest photo IMG_7922_zps42flwz1y.jpg

Trump Protest photo IMG_8156_zpsaoajwzuo.jpg

Conservative Leader Rona Ambrose Hugged by Prime Minister Trudeau After Her Speech on Fort McMurray (VIDEO)

At the CBC, "Fort McMurray wildfire: Justin Trudeau to survey damage on Friday."

And watch, "Ambrose hugged by Trudeau after speech."

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory Defends State's So-Called 'Bathroom Bill' (VIDEO)

Watch, at CNN, "North Carolina governor defends bathroom law."

And at the Charlotte Observer, "Feds enter HB2 case against North Carolina with solid record of victories: But so-called Title VII lawsuits can take years to resolve."

BONUS: From Kelsey Harkness, at the Daily Signal, "51 Families Sue Over Illinois High School’s Transgender Bathroom Policy."

The culture war's really coming to a head. Frankly, the GOP should run on culture issues and turn the left's moral degeneracy into a national referendum. We could see Houston writ large.

Pew Research Center: America's Shrinking Middle Class

At Pew:


And at the Los Angeles Times:



Well, the Democrats promised hope and change. Folks are a bit tuckered out on the hope amid all this change.

Sheldon Adelson Thinks Donald Trump 'will be good for Israel...'

I think so too.

At the New York Times:


Brittny Ward

She's a sweetie!

More, "Jenson Button’s latest model Brittny Ward shows off her impressive bodywork: Playboy bunny gets steamy in exclusive Sun photoshoot."

General Michael Hayden: The Terrorist Threat Today vs. September 11 (VIDEO)

Via the American Enterprise Institution:



Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Jackie Johnson's Morning Clouds, Afternoon Sunshine Forecast

Today was a "typically sunny" day, but it's going to warm up through the weekend.

Via CBS News 2 Los Angeles:


Assignment America: A Look at What Makes Texas Texas

At the New York Times.

Thank goodness some Americans are determined to preserve their heritage and values.



Deal of the Day: Up to 50% Off Military and Tactical Boots

At Amazon, Bates Men's Ultra-Lites 8 Inches Tactical Sport Side-Zip Boot.

And more, Military & Tactical Boots.

Also, TaoTronics LED Desk Lamp, Gooseneck Table Lamp 7W, Touch Control, 7 Brightness Levels.

Plus, Save on Kimberly-Clark Kleenex Facial Tissue, White.

Still more, Introducing Amazon Oasis - Reimagined Design. Perfectly Balanced.

Also, Fire Tablet, 7" Display, Wi-Fi, 8 GB - Includes Special Offers, Black.

BONUS: Richard Overy, Why the Allies Won.

Obama to Visit Hiroshima; Talk of Atomic Bomb Apology Stirs Controversy (VIDEO)

I swear if Obama utters even the slightest inkling of an apology I think I'll just die.

The White House denied suggestions that O would apologize, but I'm not buying it.

At USA Today, "Obama to visit Hiroshima to promote nuke-free world."



CNN's Sara Murray Reports on Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll (VIDEO)

Following up, "Donald Trump Running Neck-and-Neck with Hillary Clinton in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania."


Medieval Reenactor Brings Down Drone with Spear (VIDEO)

Heh.

This is pretty good.



Donald Trump Running Neck-and-Neck with Hillary Clinton in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania

This is freakin' awesome, heh.

At Quinnipiac, "CLINTON-TRUMP CLOSE IN FLORIDA, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA,QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY SWING STATE POLL FINDS."

And hey, the white working class voters the Democrats have consistently demonized? They're not loving Hillary at all:
Florida—Trump wins whites 52%—33%.

Pennsylvania—Trump wins whites 48%-37%.

Ohio—Trump wins whites 49%—32%.
More at Bloomberg:


I'm Going to Vote for Trump Though It Makes Me Want to Projectile Vomit (VIDEO)

Well, at least he's going to hold his nose and do the right thing. I suspect you'll see more and more so-called #NeverTrump folks do this as well. Those who don't in the end are grandstanding bitches.

From Kurt Schlichter, at Town Hall, "I intend to vote for Donald Trump, and just typing those words makes me throw up a little."



Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Hillary Clinton Crushed in Coal Country of West Virginia

Ouch.

At Instapundit, "CRACKS IN THE FOUNDATION: Clinton Faces Hard Reality Of Unity In Trump Country."

Click through for the Ruby Cramer piece at BuzzFeed.


And extra harsh piling on, from the Hill. The Democrats are going to be nominating a train wreck of a standard-bearer. I love it!


Jackie Johnson's Morning Clouds with Afternoon Sunshine Forecast

I'm forecasting some tight bright yellow dresses, heh.

Here's the lovely Jackie Johnson, via CBS News 2 Los Angeles:



Donald Trump Will Stop the Ongoing Destruction of Our Country

From Bruce Kesler, at Maggie's Farm, "Where does loyalty belong?":
I am from the school of loyalty belonging in God, family, country, in that order. When it comes to voting, my loyalty does not belong to any individual or political party. My vote belongs to me. And, I have an obligation to behave responsibly and sensibly with my vote.

In that vein, whether I am a lifelong Republican or conservative is important, but only in so far as my deeply held beliefs are furthered or protected. Many Republicans or conservatives are disaffected or in pique by the apparent triumph of Donald Trump. However, for me, Trump does not get my vote because I am a Republican or conservative but because the alternatives are far worse in a continuation of the Democrats' ongoing literal destruction of our ethics, our economy, and our national security, while in actuality doing relatively less to upraise the unfortunate than to tie them into being lackeys of the central government instead of their own initiative, compounded by our citizen poor being undercut by uncontrolled inflows of foreign competitors for jobs and public funds. To not vote is to vote for the continuation of the past 8-years of the outright assault on the very fiber of the United States...
Still more.

Heather Mac Donald, The War on Cops

This looks fantastic!

Heather Mac Donald has been absolutely on fire this last couple of years with her commentary and reporting on the insidious "Black Lives Matter" movement. Her new book is destined to be a blockbuster.

Awesome.

It's out June 21st.

Pre-order at Amazon, The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe.

Hillary Clinton Revives the 'War on Women'

Heh.

The Dems are attacking Donald Trump as a misogynist, so they shouldn't be surprised when husband Bill's manifold sexual predations become inflammatory campaign fodder.

At the New York Times, "Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Respond to Donald Trump's Attacks About Her Husband":

After Donald J. Trump opened a line of attack on Hillary and Bill Clinton over the former president’s conduct toward women, Mrs. Clinton made clear on Monday that she did not intend to argue with Mr. Trump over the subject.

“I’m going to let him run his campaign however he chooses,” Mrs. Clinton told reporters after a campaign event in Northern Virginia.

In recent days, Mr. Trump, now the presumptive Republican nominee, has invoked Mr. Clinton’s sexual past, describing Mrs. Clinton as an “enabler” and suggesting that she has no credibility to question his own treatment of women.

Asked on Monday if she thought she would at some point have to respond on the subject, Mrs. Clinton said, “I’m answering him on what I think voters care about.” She added that she had “been very clear that a lot of his rhetoric is not only reckless, it’s dangerous.”

“I’m running my campaign,” Mrs. Clinton said. “I’m not running against him. He’s doing a fine job of doing that himself.”
In other words, she's getting off the war on women topic, lest she gets burned.

Relatives of Top Nazi Leaders Had Themselves Sterilized to Prevent Giving Birth to 'Monsters'

Well, this is one of those times where I can't say I disagree.

My god.

Talk about a living hell, 24/7, 365 days a year, you'd never have any relief from being the offspring of the Nazis.

At London's Daily Mail, "Bad blood: Hermann Goering's niece reveals she had herself sterilised rather than risk giving birth to 'a monster' as relatives of infamous Nazis reveal how their family ties have blighted them."

And I'm reading The Order of the Death's Head: The Story of Hitler's SS, so the imagery of evil here is all the more immediate and horrifying.

'Isis' — Muslim Student, Sponsored by CAIR, Breaks Silence on Rancho Cucamonga Yearbook Mishap (VIDEO)

Bare Naked Islam reports, "In CALIPHORNIA, if you think it’s cool to dress like an ISIS jihadi bride for your yearbook photo, this is what happens."

Actually, the yearbook staff made an honest mistake, albeit unfortunate, considering.

According to ABC 7 Los Angeles:
The school district said there was a student at Rancho Cucamonga High School named Isis Phillips, but she transferred earlier this year.

School officials also confirmed Zehlif was not the only person on two pages to have the wrong name under their picture.

"We are, at this point, involved in an investigation on how this could occur," said one spokesperson.

Some students said they think the mistake was being blown out of proportion.

"The yearbook is kind of notoriously known for, you know, mixing up names, making mistakes," said Ethan Espinoza, a student at the school.

But it's an issue that Zehlif takes seriously...
Of course. She's got the CAIR litigation jihadists to shake down the school district and propagandize this case into a wildly inflated instance of "Islamophobia."

More at CBS News 2 Los Angeles, "Muslim Student Wrongly Identified in Yearbook as ‘Isis’ Says She's 'Sad,' 'Embarrassed'."

CAIR "hasn't rule out" taking legal action, naturally.

Monday, May 9, 2016

Jackie Johnson's Tuesday Clearing Forecast

The lovely Jackie Johnson's back for this week's weather reporting.

At CBS News 2 Los Angeles:



Alberta Premier Rachel Notley Moved to Tears by Fort McMurray Wildfires (VIDEO)

Well, I doubt Ezra Levant and the folks at the Rebel credit the premiere's sincerity here.

Via Telegraph UK:



PREVIOUSLY: "Eco-Freaks Exploit and Demonize Fossil Fuels During Ft. McMurray Wildfires (VIDEO)."

Natasha Oakley and Devin Brugman Black Bikinis in Miami (PHOTOS)

At Egotastic!, "Natasha Oakley and Devin Brugman Black Bikini Hotties."

Also, at London's Daily Mail, "'It's been a real struggle': Devin Brugman reveals her busty assets were the reason she and Natasha Oakley created an activewear line."

They're hot. Ms. Brugman is spectacular. Man.

FLASHBACK: "'A Bikini A Day' Founder Devin Brugman Blasts Bodacious Bikini in Miami Beach."

The 'Never Trump' Pouters

From David Horowitz, at Big Government, "The conservatives who have declared war on the primary victor are displaying a myopia that could be deadly in November when Donald Trump will lead Republicans against a party that has divided the country, destroyed its borders, empowered its enemies, and put 93 million Americans into dependency on the state":

This reckless disregard for consequences is matched only by a blindness to what has made Trump the presumptive nominee. When he entered the Republican primaries a year ago, Trump was given no chance of surviving even the first contest, let alone becoming the Republican nominee. That was the view of all the experts, and especially those experts with the best records of prediction.

Trump — who had never held political office and had no experience in any political job — faced a field of sixteen tested political leaders, including nine governors and five senators from major states. Most of his political opponents were conservatives. During the primaries, several hundred million dollars were spent in negative campaign ads — nastier and more personal than in any Republican primary in memory. At least 60,000 of those ads were aimed at Trump, attacking him as a fraud, a corporate predator, a not-so-closet liberal, an ally of Hillary Clinton, indistinguishable from Barack Obama, an ignoramus, and too crass to be president (Bill Clinton, anyone?).

These negative ads were directed at Republican primary voters, a constituency well to the right of the party. These primary voters are a constituency that may be said to represent the heart of the conservative movement in America and are generally more politically engaged and informed than most Republican voters. Trump won their support. He won by millions of votes — more votes from this conservative heartland than any Republican in primary history. To describe Trump as ignorant — as so many Beltway intellectuals have — is merely to privilege book knowledge over real-world knowledge, not an especially wise way to judge political leaders.

A chorus of detractors has attempted to dismiss Trump’s political victory as representing a mere plurality of primary voters, but how many candidates have won outright majorities among a field of seventeen, or five, or even three? When the Republican primary contest was actually reduced to three, Trump beat the “true conservative,” Ted Cruz, with more than fifty percent of the votes. He did this in blue states and red states, in virtually all precincts and among all Republican demographics. He clinched the nomination by beating Cruz with an outright majority in conservative Indiana.

In opposing the clear choice of the Republican primary electorate, the “Never Trump” crowd is simply displaying their contempt for the most politically active Republican voters. This contempt was dramatically displayed during a CNN segment with Trump’s spokeswoman, Katrina Pierson, and Bill Kristol, the self-appointed guru of a Third Party movement whose only result can be to split the Republican ticket and provide Hillary with her best shot at the presidency.

Pierson urged Kristol to help unify the Party behind its presumptive nominee. Kristol grinned and answered her: “You want leaders to become followers.” Could there be a more arrogant response? By what authority does Bill Kristol regard himself as a leader? Trump has the confidence of millions of highly committed and generally conservative Republican voters. That makes him a leader. Who does Bill Kristol lead except a coterie of inside-the-Beltway foreign policy interventionists, who supported the fiasco in Libya that opened the door to al-Qaeda and ISIS?

I say this as someone who has written three books supporting the intervention in Iraq and who thinks Trump is dead wrong on this issue. However, I also understand that the Bush administration did not defend the war the Democrats sabotaged, allowing its critics to turn it into a bad war in the eyes of the American people. Consequently, Trump’s attack on the intervention is a smart political move that will allow him to win over many Democrat, Independent, and even conservative voters who think Iraq was a mistake and do not appreciate the necessity of that war or the tragedy of the Democrats’ opposition to it. You can’t reverse historical judgments in election year sound bites. Understanding this, instinctively or otherwise, makes Trump politically smarter than his Washington detractors.

Conservatives like Kristol claim to oppose Trump on principles but then turn to Mitt Romney for a Third Party run. This is the same Mitt Romney who, as governor of Massachusetts, was the father of Obamacare but ran against Obamacare in 2012. So much for principles...
Keep reading.

I love David Horowitz.

I'm personally flabbergasted at how puerile and nasty these "Never Trump" pouters have become. They're off-putting, to say the very least.

Eco-Freaks Exploit and Demonize Fossil Fuels During Ft. McMurray Wildfires (VIDEO)

The sick far-left prog Elizabeth Kolbert exemplifies the leftist hatred, at the New Yorker, "Fort McMurray and the Fires of Climate Change."

And see even the mainstream (craven) take at LAT, "Wildfire at Fort McMurray quickly overtakes Canada's environmental debate."

Meanwhile, check out this killer video featuring Holly Nicholas, at the Rebel.

Facts. Those pesky facts leftists hate, lol.



Angela Davis, Freedom Is a Constant Struggle

I met Angela Davis at a book signing in Los Angeles years ago.

My older sister got to know her after attending one of her courses at San Francisco State. This was back in the 1980s. I was still a Democrat. Little did I know just how nasty a leftist Angela Davis is.

I read her autobiography at the time, but was still fawning and doe-eyed. Not so much now.

In any case, I picked up a copy of her book, Freedom Is a Constant Struggle: Ferguson, Palestine, and the Foundations of a Movement.

Know your enemies, people. If you wonder why I read these books, even pay for them. I always make it a point to know my enemies, and to have read their works. I'm usually better read on all the collectivist cant than my faculty colleagues at work, to say nothing of the idiot trolls online.

I'll have more later, as always.

Angela Davis photo Cover_zpsltflyl5z.jpg

Deal of the Day: Eton Rugged Rukus Smartphone-Charging Speaker

Solar powered. Heh, that's pretty cool.

At Amazon, Eton Rugged Rukus The solar-powered, Bluetooth-ready, smartphone-charging speaker.

Also, NeverKink 5/8-Inch by 100-Feet Series 3000 Extra Heavy Duty Garden Hose.

More, from Katie Pavlich, Assault and Flattery: The Truth About the Left and Their War on Women.

And Ann Coulter, Never Trust a Liberal Over 3-Especially a Republican.

Kate Obenshain, Divider-in-Chief: The Fraud of Hope and Change.

From Michelle Malkin, Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies.

BONUS: Jedediah Bila, Outnumbered: Chronicles of a Manhattan Conservative.

Facebook Routinely Censors Conservative Viewpoints

So what else is new?

I already hate Facebook. I use it to post links a couple of times a week, and that's it. Once my old high school classmates found me on the network, and they all turned about to be idiot progressives, that pretty much ruined the experience --- to say nothing of all the data tracking bullshit.

We're pretty much screwed in the social media age.

At Gizmodo, via Memeorandum, "Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News."

Actually, I saw this headline last night, at RWN, "BREAKING Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News."

Who Is the Mysterious Spaniard Leaking Game of Thrones Plots?

Heh.

I hate Game of Thrones spoilers!

At Heat Street, "Meet Frikidoctor, the Premiere Game of Thrones Spoiler."

Planned Parenthood Helping Transgender Patients With Sex Changes by Offering Hormone Treatment

I tweeted this story out the other day, from my iPhone.

Planned Parenthood isn't about family planning. It's about fomenting the cultural Marxist revolutionary overthrow of traditional order.

At Blazing Cat Fur.

Obama on Trump: 'This Isn't Entertainment...'

Heh.

From Ace, "Really asshole?"

Ampibia Evo Audio Bluetooth Wireless Shockproof Shower Speaker Radio: Bigger Speaker! Better Sound!

At Amazon, Ampibia Evo Audio Bluetooth Wireless Shockproof Shower Speaker Radio, IP67 Handsfree Portable 5W Speakerphone with Built in Mic, Premium Smooth Black Fully Waterproof Guaranteed!

Paul McCartney, in Interview, Compares Global Warming Skeptics to Holocaust Deniers

There's gotta be some law on celebrities that their brains go to jelly over "global warming" at some point in their careers. And I've been cutting Paul McCartney so much slack, heh.

Via Ed Driscoll, at Instapundit, "THE FOOL ON THE HILL."

Amber Lee's Monday Forecast

It's gonna be a nice day.

Via CBS News 2 Los Angeles:



Pamela Geller Will Support Donald Trump

At the Daily Beast.

Pamela knows Trump will be better than anything the Democrats put up.

White House Press Corps Asks Obama Three Questions About Trump, None About Ben Rhodes.

From Ed Driscoll, at Instapundit, "JUST THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE."

Also, from Dan Nexon, at Duck of Minerva, "The White House Pushes for its Policies, and Other Surprises from Ben Rhodes."

Postmodern foreign policy.


Sunday, May 8, 2016

Sarah Palin Endorses Paul Ryan Challenger Paul Nehlen (VIDEO)

Via Linda Suhler, on Twitter.

And on CNN this morning:



The full interview is here.

Orwell, Politics and the English Language

Everything's Orwellian these day.

Maybe folks might want to get up on the great essayist's writings.

At Amazon, George Orwell, Politics and the English Language and Other Essays.

Also, Why I Write.

BONUS: 1984. (The Erich Fromm afterword in this Signet pocket edition is excellent, reminding us that 1984 isn't just about totalitarian regimes like the Soviet Union under Stalin. It's about us too.)

Hillary Clinton Apologizes to Laid-Off Miner for Comments on Putting 'Coal Companies Out of Business...' (VIDEO)

Here's the full video, at Yahoo, "Hillary Clinton apologizes to laid-off coal miner for comments."

And at WSJ, "Laid-Off Coal Worker Wants Explanation From Hillary Clinton":

WILLIAMSON, W.Va. – When Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton said in March that she would put a lot of coal miners out of business, Bo Copley took it personally.

On Monday, the laid-off coal worker from this struggling Appalachian community came face to face with the former secretary of state and called her to account for her remarks.

“I just want to know how you can say you’re going to put a lot of coal miners out of jobs and then come in here and tell us how you’re going to be our friend,” Mr. Copley said.

During a roundtable discussion in a county that has been ravaged by coal-industry layoffs, Mrs. Clinton sought to make amends for remarks that sparked a furor in Appalachia. In March, she predicted that coal companies would be put out of business during a Clinton administration. She added that those workers should not be forgotten and spoke about her plans to boost the economy in coal country, but her comments landed with a thud here in Appalachia.

On Monday, the former secretary of state told Mr. Copley that she had misspoken. During a campaign stop in West Virginia, Mrs. Clinton said she meant to suggest that the area was on a path to continued job losses, but that she would act to boost the economy in this depressed region. In November, she released a $30 billion plan aimed at revitalizing communities dependent on coal production.

“What I said was totally out of context from what I meant,” Mrs. Clinton said. “It was a misstatement.”

Mr. Copley, who is 39, choked up as he showed Mrs. Clinton a picture of his family and spoke about other coal workers who have lost their livelihood.

“When you make comments like we’re going to put a lot of coal miners out jobs, these are the kind of people that you’re affecting,” he said.

Such an emotional and frank exchange is a rarity on the campaign trail, where candidates speak to friendly crowds and seldom are compelled to answer their detractors. Mrs. Clinton thanked Mr. Copley for raising the issue, saying “it’s important to put it out on the table.”

She added that regardless of whether West Virginia supports her, she would work to help the state, acknowledging that she faces a steep challenge in the Democratic primary there on May 10...
Still more.

Turn Your Desktop Computer or Laptop Into the Ultimate Sound System

At Amazon, AmazonBasics USB Powered Computer Speakers (A100).

Keep English. Vote Ron Unz!

Heh.

He's actually looking a little worse for the wear, but no doubt he's still got the fire down below.

At the San Francisco Chronicle, "Ron Unz’s U.S. Senate race raises concerns of splintered GOP vote":
Republican Ron Unz may have jumped into the high-profile race to replace retiring Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, but he’s not drafting the speech he’s planning to deliver on the Senate floor in January.

“I’m an honest person, and I say what I believe,” said Unz, a Palo Alto software developer and entrepreneur who made an unsuccessful GOP primary bid for governor in 1994. “Sure, I could say I’m going to be the next senator, but that wouldn’t be honest.”

A Field Poll earlier this month shows just how tough a road Unz and other Republicans face in the Senate race, where only the top two finishers, regardless of party, advance to the November general election.

Democrat Kamala Harris, the state attorney general, leads the field at 27 percent among likely voters, followed by Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Santa Ana, with 14 percent support. None of the top three Republicans — Unz, Walnut Creek attorney Tom Del Beccaro and Palo Alto mediator Duf Sundheim — had more than 5 percent backing.

Instead of being in it to win it, Unz is using his Senate run to battle a measure on the November ballot that would repeal much of 1998’s Proposition 227, an initiative he sponsored — and bankrolled — that banned bilingual education in California public schools.

Focusing primarily on repeal

Unz isn’t making a secret of his plan to shove aside many of the typical issues of the Senate race to focus on a measure that’s not even on the June 7 primary ballot. His campaign business card, for example, reads, “Keep English. Vote Ron Unz!”

“The overwhelming factor (for his Senate run) was the absurd effort by the Legislature to repeal Prop. 227,” Unz said.

When the Legislature overwhelmingly voted in 2014 for SB1174, which put the repeal on this November’s ballot, Unz first thought about organizing an opposition campaign.

“But I decided the best way to get focus (on the repeal) was to get into a race,” he said. “It gives me a platform.”

Unz took out papers for the Senate race on the Monday before the deadline and returned them two days later on March 16, the last day possible.

“I really had to scramble,” he said.

Unz’s spur-of-the-moment decision blew up the careful plans of the other Republicans in the race, Sundheim admitted.
Still more.

The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, 50 Years Later

Interesting.

At the New Yorker, "The Cost of the Cultural Revolution, Fifty Years Later":

In 1979, three years after the end of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, the Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping visited the United States. At a state banquet, he was seated near the actress Shirley MacLaine, who told Deng how impressed she had been on a trip to China some years earlier. She recalled her conversation with a scientist who said that he was grateful to Mao Zedong for removing him from his campus and sending him, as Mao did millions of other intellectuals during the Cultural Revolution, to toil on a farm. Deng replied, “He was lying.”

May 16th marks the fiftieth anniversary of the start of the Cultural Revolution, when Chairman Mao launched China on a campaign to purify itself of saboteurs and apostates, to find the “representatives of the bourgeoisie who have sneaked into the Party, the government, the army, and various spheres of culture” and drive them out with “the telescope and microscope of Mao Zedong Thought.” By the time the Cultural Revolution sputtered to a halt, there were many ways to tally its effects: about two hundred million people in the countryside suffered from chronic malnutrition, because the economy had been crippled; up to twenty million people had been uprooted and sent to the countryside; and up to one and a half million had been executed or driven to suicide. The taint of foreign ideas, real or imagined, was often the basis for an accusation; libraries of foreign texts were destroyed, and the British embassy was burned. When Xi Zhongxun—the father of China’s current President, Xi Jinping—was dragged before a crowd, he was accused, among other things, of having gazed at West Berlin through binoculars during a visit to East Germany.

In examining the legacy of the Cultural Revolution, the most difficult measurement cannot be quantified so precisely: What effect did the Cultural Revolution have on China’s soul? This is still not a subject that can be openly debated, at least not easily. The Communist Party strictly constrains discussion of the period for fear that it will lead to a full-scale reëxamination of Mao’s legacy, and of the Party’s role in Chinese history. In March, in anticipation of the anniversary, an editorial in the Global Times, a Party tabloid, warned against “small groups” seeking to create “a totally chaotic misunderstanding of the cultural revolution.” The editorial reminded people that “discussions strictly should not depart from the party’s decided politics or thinking.”

Nonetheless, in recent years, individuals have tried to reckon with the history and their roles in it. In January, 2014, alumni of the Experimental Middle School of Beijing Normal University apologized to their former teachers for their part in a surge of violence in August, 1966, when Bian Zhongyun, the deputy principal, was beaten to death. But such gestures are rare, and outsiders often find it hard to understand why survivors of the Cultural Revolution are loath to revisit an experience that shaped their lives so profoundly. One explanation is that the events of that period were so convoluted that many people feel the dual burdens of being both perpetrators and victims. Earlier this year, Bao Pu, a book publisher raised in Beijing and now based in Hong Kong, said, “Everyone feels he was a victim. If you look at them, you wonder, What the fuck were you doing in that situation? It was everyone else’s fault? You can’t blame everything on Mao. He was responsible, he was the mastermind, but in order to reach that level of social destruction—an entire generation has to reflect.”

China today is in the midst of another political fever, in the form of an anti-corruption crackdown and a harsh stifling of dissenting views. But it should not be mistaken for a replay of the Cultural Revolution. Even with thousands under arrest, the scale of suffering is of a different order, and shorthand comparisons run the risk of relieving the Cultural Revolution of its full horror. There are tactical differences as well: instead of unleashing the population to attack the Party, as Mao did in his call to “bombard the headquarters,” Xi Jinping has swung in the direction of tighter control, seeking to fortify the Party and his own grip on power. He has reorganized the top leadership to put himself at the center, suffocated liberal thinking and the media, and, for the first time, pursued critics of his government even when they are living outside mainland China. In recent months, Chinese security services have abducted opponents from Thailand, Myanmar, and Hong Kong...
What a terrible country.

Still more, FWIW.

Saturday, May 7, 2016

Apple EarPods with Remote and Mic: Enhanced Bass Response, Resistant to Sweat and Water Damage

At Amazon, 100% Genuine Apple OEM EarPods with Remote and Mic with TrendON Headphone cell phone pouch case - Retail Packaging.

Blacks in Chicago See Neighborhoods Beset by Crime, Isolation, and Worry

Well, once again, to slightly paraphrase Glenn Reynolds, "WHY ARE DEMOCRAT-RUN CITIES SUCH CESSPITS OF OFFICIAL FEAR, CRIME, AND NEIGHBORHOOD INSECURITY?"

Seriously, this is just terrible.

At the New York Times, "For Black Chicagoans, Isolation, Frustration and Worry":

Chicago, unsettled by a crime wave and a troubling police shooting, is in a grim mood. The outlook is clearly bleaker in some areas than others. African-Americans, especially, see their neighborhoods as beset by crime, bad schools and a host of obstacles to a better life for their children.

A survey of 1,123 Chicagoans from April 21 to May 3 found a majority of every race agreeing that the city has veered off course and that the mayor is not addressing their needs.

But when it comes to life in their neighborhoods, people in different groups describe substantially different experiences. Crime, for instance, is a greater concern for blacks in particular.

And in a city with a history of racial segregation, blacks see their neighborhoods as more isolated than people of other races do.

But the worst thing about their neighborhoods, and one of the biggest contrasts between blacks and other races in the poll, had to do with children.

When it comes to raising children, blacks and Hispanics see obstacles that most whites aren’t worried about.

Blacks and Hispanics are more likely to say they want to get out of their neighborhoods, and indeed, out of Chicago entirely.
Click through to view all the graphic data.

Donald Trump Supporters Rally in Temecula (VIDEO)

They've got a lot of great conservative folks out that way. Murrieta's right next door, where we had the huge immigration protests a couple of years back.

Watch, via CBS News 2 Los Angeles:



Peggy Noonan Rips the #NeverTrump Movement

Former Ted Cruz staffer Amanda Carpenter, now at CNN, wasn't taking Noonan's piece too well. She was even lashing out at the Wall Street Journal.

Actually, I think Noonan gets it, and I say this in full knowledge that she's a stuffy elitist in her own right.

See, "Trump Was a Spark, Not the Fire":
God bless our beloved country as it again undergoes one of its quiet upheavals.

Donald Trump will receive the Republican nomination for the presidency and nothing will be the same. How we do politics in America is changed and will not be going back. The usual standards and expectations have been turned on their head, and more than one establishment has been routed.

A decent interval should be set aside for sheer astonishment.

We face six months of what will be a historically hellacious campaign. Yes, we picked the wrong time to stop taking opioids.

Before I go to larger issues I mention how everyone, especially the media, is blaming the media for Donald Trump’s rise. I hate to get in the way of their self-flagellation but that’s not how I see it. From the time he announced, they gave Mr. Trump unprecedented free media in long, live interviews, many by phone, some possibly from his bathtub. We’ll never know. It was a great boon to him and amounted, by one estimate, to nearly $2 billion worth of airtime.

But the media did not make Donald Trump’s allure, his allure made for big ratings. Mr. Trump was a draw from the beginning. If anyone had wanted to listen to Jeb Bush, cable networks would have been happy to show his rallies, too.

When Mr. Trump was on, ratings jumped, but it wasn’t only ratings, it was something else. It was the freak show at its zenith, it was great TV—you didn’t know what he was going to say next! He didn’t know! It was better than everyone else’s boring, prefabricated, airless, weightless, relentless word-saying—better than Ted Cruz, who seemed like someone who practiced sincere hand gestures in the mirror at night, better than Marco the moist robot, better than Hillary’s grim and horrifying attempts to chuckle like a person who chuckles.

And it was something else. TV producers were all sure he’d die on their show. They weren’t for Mr. Trump. By showing him they were revealing him: Look at this fatuous dope, see through him! They knew he’d quickly enough say something unforgivable, and if he said it on their air he died on their show! They took him down with the question! It was only after a solid six months of his not dying that they came to have qualms. They now understood they were helping him. Nothing he says is unforgivable to his supporters! Or, another way to put it, his fans would forgive anything so long as he promised to be what they want him to be, a human bomb that will explode by timer under a bench in Lafayette Park and take out all the people but leave the monuments standing.

In this regard today’s television producers remind me of the producers of 1969 who heard one day that Spiro Agnew, the idiotic new Republican vice president, was going to make a big speech lambasting the media for its liberal bias. They knew Agnew was about to make a fool of himself. Who would believe him? So they covered that speech all over the place, hyped it like you wouldn’t believe—no one in America didn’t hear about it. It made Agnew a sensation. The American people—“the silent majority”—saw it as Agnew did. “Nattering nabobs of negativism,” from the witty, alliterative pen of William Safire, entered the language.

The producers had projected their own loathing. They found out they and America loathed different things.

That’s a little like what happened this year with TV and Mr. Trump.

My, that wasn’t much of a defense, was it?

The Trump phenomenon itself would normally be big enough for any political cycle, but another story of equal size isn’t being sufficiently noticed and deserves mention. The Democratic base has become more liberal—we all know this part—but in a way the Republican base has, too. Or rather it is certainly busy updating what conservative means. The past few months, in state after state, one thing kept jumping out at me in primary exit polls. Democrats consistently characterize themselves as more liberal than in 2008, a big liberal year. This week in Indiana, 68% of Democratic voters called themselves liberal or very liberal. In 2008 that number was 39%. That’s a huge increase.

In South Carolina this year, 53% of Democrats called themselves very or somewhat liberal. Eight years ago that number was 44%—again, a significant jump. In Pennsylvania, 66% of respondents called themselves very or somewhat liberal. That number eight years ago was 50%.

The dynamic is repeated in other states. The Democratic Party is going left.

But look at the Republican side. However they characterize themselves, a majority of GOP voters now are supporting the candidate who has been to the left of the party’s established thinking on a host of issues—entitlement spending, trade, foreign policy. Mr. Trump’s colorfully emphatic stands on immigration have been portrayed as so wackily rightist that the nonrightist nature of his other, equally consequential positions has been obscured.

In my observation it is a mistake to think Mr. Trump’s supporters are so thick they don’t know his stands. They do.

It does not show an understanding of the moment to say Donald Trump by himself has changed the Republican Party. It is closer to the mark to say the base of the party is changing and Mr. Trump’s electric arrival on the scene made obvious what was already happening...
Keep reading.

Noonan basically says that voters gave Amanda Carpenter the boot along with all the other #NeverTrump ghouls. That's why Carpenter's dissing Noonan. And why Stephen Hayes is too, apparently, heh:


We live interesting times, that's for sure.

Kristen Keogh's Saturday Forecast

It's actually lovely weather today, especially for an outdoor workout.

At ABC 10 News San Diego:



Professor Robert J. Gordon, The Rise and Fall of American Growth

It's not on my short list, but it's definitely on my list.

Lots of buzz about this book, from Professor Robert J. Gordon, The Rise and Fall of American Growth: The U.S. Standard of Living since the Civil War.
Rise and Fall of American Growth photo BN-LZ627_Gordon_FR_20160106185410_zpsy0fu5mut.jpg

History's Not on Hillary Clinton's Side

From Matt Bai, at Yahoo News, "Clinton has the map on her side, but history working against her":
If you want to experience the full-on contempt of the leftist intelligentsia right now, go on social media and suggest, as I did this week, that Donald Trump isn’t certain to get crushed in November. (Trump, in case you hadn’t noticed, brings out pretty much the worst in everybody.)

The way a lot of partisan Democrats see it, Hillary Clinton — despite a loss to Bernie Sanders in Indiana Tuesday — will soon lock down her party’s nomination, and the only way she finds herself even threatened by Trump is if the media decides to legitimize him so we all have something to talk about. The word I keep hearing from liberals is “layup.”

Clinton does, in fact, enter the general election season with some serious structural advantages. Having analyzed trends from the past six elections and factored in demographic shifts, Third Way, the leading centrist Democratic group, concluded that Clinton starts the campaign virtually assured of 237 electoral votes — 46 more than Trump and just 33 short of a majority.

And as you’ve probably heard, no candidate has ever overcome — or even tried to overcome — the kind of ugly impressions Trump has made on women and minority voters to this point. Next to him, Clinton polls like Santa Claus.

But if history is any guide, Clinton comes to the campaign with a structural disadvantage, too, and one that shouldn’t be overlooked. It may explain why she can’t seem to put Bernie Sanders away — and why the outcome in November is hardly assured.

I’ve gone through this history once or twice before, but it bears repeating: In 1947, Congress passed the 22nd Amendment, which said no one could be elected to the presidency more than twice.

In the 65 years since the last state ratified that amendment — comprising 16 elections, and six elections following an eight-year presidency — only one nominee has managed to win a third consecutive term for his party. That was George H.W. Bush, who overcame a double-digit deficit late in the campaign, thanks in part to one of the most ineffectual Democratic campaigns in history.

(And before you start with me, I know, Al Gore actually won, and in an alternate universe somewhere they are building his monument on the Tidal Basin in a climate that is, on average, four degrees cooler than the one we inhabit, but for purposes of this discussion, let’s just live in the here and now.)

The important question is why it’s proved so difficult for either side to win third terms. The most common explanation has to do with voter fatigue. Essentially, we’re told that voters get sick of having one party in office for eight years, and so the pendulum swings back.

I don’t find this theory especially persuasive. I’ve met an awful lot of voters over the years, and rarely have I heard anyone make the case that it was time for the other party to get a turn. It seems to me voters focus a lot more on the candidates themselves than on the parties they represent.

And this may get to the truer cause of the third-term conundrum. If you look back at elections over the past half century, what you find is that the parties of two-term incumbents almost always nominate the candidate who is nominally next in line. Of the six candidates who have sought third terms since 1960, five had previously served as either president or vice president. (The president was Gerald Ford, who ran for election in 1976 after having held the job for two-plus years.)

The outlier was John McCain, who, like Clinton, had been the runner-up in the last open election, and who ran in a year when the incumbent vice president was sitting it out.

It’s not hard to see how this happens. A two-term president has both the time and the muscle to set up someone who will carry on his legacy — while effectively boxing out challengers.

And because presidents almost always lose congressional seats and governorships in off-year elections, an eight-year presidency tends to decimate the ranks of worthy, younger successors from outside the establishment, anyway.

In other words, by the time a president gets done slogging his way through the peaks and troughs of eight years on the job, there aren’t a lot of new, exciting alternatives to whichever former rival or loyal No. 2 has been patiently waiting on the edge of the stage...
Well, Clinton would certainly have to defy historical trends going back to the 1990s, but I actually do think voter burnout with the party in power plays a key role here --- voter enthusiasm is almost always more fervent among partisans of the out party, and 2016 will showcase more partisan fever than we've seen in a long time, heh.

But keep reading, in any case.

We'll know how well all these election theories hold up this November. Nothing's locked down. Nothing's written in stone. It's going to be awesome, lol.

Conner Eldridge for U.S. Senate Offers Preview of Democrat Attacks to Come (VIDEO)

Heh.

It's gonna be an election for the ages. Seriously, this is going to be the most bitter, bruising, and abusive election in generations, and not just at the top of the ticket. Down-ballot races are going to be nasty!

At the New York Times, "In Arkansas, a Preview of Democratic Attacks to Come" (via Memeorandum):

It has not yet been seen on television, but the early notices for a digital advertisement from a Democratic candidate for the Senate from Arkansas, Conner Eldridge, suggest it could well become a blueprint for how other Democrats — incumbents and challengers alike — attack their Republican opponents by linking them to Donald J. Trump.

THE AD Highlighting some of Mr. Trump’s most misogynistic remarks, the ad alternates between those quotations and slowly spelling out the definition of the ad’s title: “Harassment.”

A white, blinking cursor on a black screen begins to peck out a dictionary’s entry for “harassment,” before the screen cuts to video and audio clips of Mr. Trump: “She ate like a pig.” “I’d look her right in that fat ugly face of hers.” The cursor continues typing the definition — “To subject someone to hostility” — before cutting again to the voice of Mr. Trump opining about a woman’s cosmetic surgery: “The boob job is terrible.”

This continues for a full minute before the cursor blinks ahead of a new phrase: “Trump enabler: Arkansas Senator John Boozman,” who is shown in a black-and-white photo as he is heard saying he will support the Republican nominee, “regardless of who we pick,” even if it is Mr. Trump.

THE IMPACT The two-minute ad was instantly seen as a preview of general-election attacks on down-ballot Republican candidates with Mr. Trump at the top of the ticket. It received even more attention on the right than on the left: “This is brutal,” wrote Erick Erickson, a conservative writer who opposes Mr. Trump’s candidacy. He called it a road map for how Democrats “are going to take back the Senate.”

THE TAKEAWAY Mr. Trump’s victory in the primary campaign has created a sense of worry and uncertainty for lower-level Republican candidates, unsure if he will drag them down or if they will need to hold onto his avid supporters to have a chance in November. The threat contained in this ad — effectively using Mr. Trump’s and Mr. Boozman’s own voices against them — could well prompt some Republicans to try to distance themselves from their presumptive nominee...
I think Republicans should just say bring it.

I mean, as much as leftists can smear Trump for misogyny, racism, Islamophobia, or whatever other slur-of-the-day, there's ten times the material available from Hillary and Bill Clinton's decades-long careers in the public eye. Just Hillary's years in the Obama State Department will provide so much brutal attack material, it's going to make the Democrat Party look like the key state-sponsor of Islamic State.

And Bill Clinton's misogyny can't be topped. Yeah, Hillary enabled it, despite her lies to the contrary. It's going to be mud-slinging and nasty all the way down. What a hoot. I can't wait for the fall campaign!

More.

Deal of the Day: KitchenAid PRO 500 Series 5-Quart Lift Style Stand Mixer

That's a nice mixer!

At Amazon, KitchenAid PRO 500 Series 5-Quart Lift Style Stand Mixer All Metal (SILVER).

Also, Hanover Outdoor Strathmere 6-Piece Lounge Set, Silver Lining.

More, Save on Outdoor Patio Furniture by Hanover.

And, Save $15 on Fire TV – Now with 4K Ultra HD and Alexa.

Plus, Fire Tablet, 7" Display, Wi-Fi, 8 GB - Includes Special Offers, Black.

And from Kim R. Holmes, The Closing of the Liberal Mind: How Groupthink and Intolerance Define the Left.

More, from Roger Kimball, Tenured Radicals: How Politics Has Corrupted Our Higher Education.

And Barry Rubin, Silent Revolution: How the Left Rose to Political Power and Cultural Dominance.

Michael Walsh, The Devil's Pleasure Palace: The Cult of Critical Theory and the Subversion of the West.

Peter Collier and David Horowitz, Destructive Generation: Second Thoughts About the Sixties.

From Daniel Flynn, Why the Left Hates America: Exposing the Lies That Have Obscured Our Nation's Greatness.

BONUS: Richard Bernstein, Dictatorship of Virtue: How the Battle over Multiculturalism Is Reshaping Our Schools, Our Country, and Our Lives.

Tomorrow's Mother's Day

It's not too late to pick up some gifts for moms, at Amazon.

See, Mother's Day Gift Guide.

GOP Leaders Fear Party's on Cusp of Epochal Split Between Traditional Conservatism and Atavistic Nationalism (VIDEO)

That's because it is on the cusp of an epochal split. Frankly, the Republican Party's on the verge of a permanent collapse.

From Jonathan Martin, at the New York Times, "Republican Party Unravels Over Donald Trump’s Takeover":


By seizing the Republican presidential nomination for Donald J. Trump on Tuesday night, he and his millions of supporters completed what had seemed unimaginable: a hostile takeover of one of America’s two major political parties.

Just as stunning was how quickly the host tried to reject them. The party’s two living former presidents spurned Mr. Trump, a number of sitting governors and senators expressed opposition or ambivalence toward him, and he drew a forceful rebuke from the single most powerful and popular rival left on the Republican landscape: the House speaker, Paul D. Ryan.

Rarely if ever has a party seemed to come apart so visibly. Rarely, too, has the nation been so on edge about its politics.

Many Americans still cannot believe that the bombastic Mr. Trump, best known as a reality television star, will be on the ballot in November. Plenty are also anxious about what he would do in office.

But for leading Republicans, the dismay is deeper and darker. They fear their party is on the cusp of an epochal split — a historic cleaving between the familiar form of conservatism forged in the 1960s and popularized in the 1980s and a rekindled, atavistic nationalism, with roots as old as the republic, that has not flared up so intensely since the original America First movement before Pearl Harbor.

Some even point to France and other European countries, where far-right parties like the National Front have gained power because of the sort of resentments that are frequently given voice at rallies for Mr. Trump.

Mr. Trump, with his steadfast promises to deport immigrants who are in the country illegally and to build a wall with Mexico, may have done irreversible damage to his general election prospects. But he quickly earned the trust that so many of those voters had lost in other fixtures of America — not just in its leaders, but in institutions like Congress, the Federal Reserve and the big-money campaign finance system that Mr. Trump has repudiated, as well as in corporations, the Roman Catholic Church and the news media.

And he has amplified his independent, outsider message in real time, using social media and cable news interviews — and his own celebrity and highly attuned ear for what resonates — to rally voters to his side, using communication strategies similar to those deployed in the Arab Spring uprising or in the attempts by liberals and students to foment a similar revolution in Iran.

“Trump leveraged a perfect storm,” said Steve Case, the founder of AOL, in an email message. “A combo of social media (big following), brand (celebrity figure), creativity (pithy tweets), speed/timeliness (dominating news cycles).”

Mr. Trump is an unlikely spokesman for the grievances of financially struggling, alienated Americans: a high-living Manhattan billionaire who erects skyscrapers for the wealthy and can easily get politicians on the phone. But as a shrewd business tactician, he understood the Republican Party’s customers better than its leaders did and sensed that his brand of populist, pugilistic, anti-establishment politics would meet their needs.

After seething at Washington for so long, hundreds or thousands of miles from the capital, many of these voters now see Mr. Trump as a kind of savior...
That's a surprisingly good analysis, especially for the far-left New York Times, heh.

More:
Mr. Trump now feels so empowered that he does not think he needs the political support of the party establishment to defeat the likely Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton. He is confident that his appeal will be broad and deep enough among voters of all stripes that he could win battleground states like Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania without the support of leaders like Mr. Ryan, Mr. Trump said in an interview on Saturday.
That's going to be quite a test, the defining test of this campaign. Can he really win these states without establishment backing, or even some of the establishment? It's going to be an epic campaign! I love this.

Keep reading.

Hatred of Israel and Jews Can't Be Separated

From Melanie Phillips, at the Times of London (via Mick Hartley):

The current uproar over antisemitism is truly a wonder to behold. For the past three decades and more, antisemitism was the prejudice that dared not speak its name. It was deemed to have been stamped out, other than among cranks on the far right.

Anyone rash enough to protest that the anti-Israel animus in progressive circles was a mutation of ancient Jew-hatred was told they were “waving the shroud of the Holocaust” to sanitise the crimes of Israel. There could be no connection. The left was institutionally anti-racist, wasn’t it?

On the contrary, the left is institutionally anti-Israel and the connection is irrefutable. For sure, many who loathe Israel may not be hostile to Jews as people. Nevertheless the narrative of Israel to which they subscribe is inescapably anti-Jew....

Among the educated classes, Israel, the target of decades of Arab exterminatory aggression, is almost universally presented as the villain and the Palestinians as its victims. Israel is held to be responsible for the absence of a Palestine state and thus the obstacle to solving the Middle East conflict.

The fact that the Arabs turned down proposals or offers of a Palestine state alongside Israel in 1937, 1947, 2000 and 2008, responding instead with terrorism or war, is ignored. The repeated statements of the Palestinian leadership that its real aim is to capture all of Israel are also ignored. It is never reported how the Palestinian Authority-controlled media and educational materials routinely incite Palestinian children to hate Jews, murder Israelis and capture every Israeli city.

Instead, Britain is told that the Israelis are child-killers. During the 2014 war in Gaza, when Israel finally responded to years of rocket attacks by launching airstrikes against Hamas, broadcast and print media claimed Israel was recklessly or deliberately killing hundreds of Palestinian children and other civilians.

In fact, as the High Level Military Group of western top brass told the UN last year, the lengths to which Israel went to try to protect Gaza’s civilians far exceeded the requirements of the Geneva Conventions, even at the cost of its own soldiers’ and civilians’ lives, and going further than any other nation’s army would ever do.

Yet the British public had been told, virtually without contradiction, that Israel had wantonly killed hundreds of children. Among those on the left now vowing to root out antisemitism, I didn’t notice any of them rushing to condemn that particular blood libel.

Last year, the Islamic adviser to Mahmoud Abbas taught on Palestinian Authority TV that Jews throughout history have represented “falsehood . . . evil . . . the devils and their supporters . . . the satans and their supporters”. The Palestinian Authority daily published an opinion article claiming that Jews “are thirsty for blood to please their god (against the gentiles), and crave pockets full of money”. Children were shown on TV reciting poems portraying Jews as “most evil among creations”, “barbaric monkeys” and “Satan with a tail”.

Progressive Britain never reports any of this. Instead, it amplifies the hate in its own intellectual, cultural and media echo-chamber.

Denying the legal and historical rights of the Israeli “settlers” to the land, it demonises and dehumanises them. When they are murdered by Palestinians, this is rarely reported on the grounds that they had it coming to them. Dehumanisation of the “settlers” leads inexorably to the dehumanisation of all Jews...
Hat Tip: EOZ.

Friday, May 6, 2016

Bill O'Reilly's Talking Points: Handicapping the Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump Presidential Race (VIDEO)

This is interesting, especially the snippet of Glenn Beck going off on Donald Trump included there. He argues that if Hillary Clinton wins in November, Republicans will be shut out of the White House forevermore, since the Democrats will legalize everybody and that'll be the end of the ballgame, heh.

Watch, via Fox News, "Bill O'Reilly Handicapping the Clinton, Trump Race."

Sara Sampaio is Maxim's May 2016 Cover Girl (VIDEO)

She's nice!

Here, "Watch: Sara Sampaio Sizzles Behind the Scenes of Her Maxim Cover Shoot!"

Environmental Wackos Cheer Canada's Fort McMurray Fires (VIDEO)

Following-up from the other day, "Canada's Fort McMurray Engulfed in Flames (VIDEO)."

Here's Ezra Levant:



Fear and Loathing on the 2016 Campaign Trail

Heh.

You gotta love this piece from Professor Larry Sabato, at Sabato's Crystal Ball, "The Fall Outlook: Fear and Loathing on the 2016 Campaign Trail":
Our views on the Electoral College outcome of a Clinton-Trump match-up haven’t changed since we published our “Trumpmare” map a month ago. If anything, we wonder whether our total of 347 EVs for Clinton to 191 EVs for Trump is too generous to the GOP.

Still, party polarization will probably help Trump. In the end, millions of Republicans will hold their nose and vote against Hillary and for Trump, just as millions of Democrats will put aside their hesitations about Clinton to stop Trump. Negative partisanship — casting a ballot mainly against the other party’s nominee rather than for your party’s candidate — will be all the rage in November. This will be especially likely after the vicious scorched-earth campaign on both sides that is coming. Someone could make a fortune at polling places selling clothespins for the nostrils.

However, we do recognize at least some upset potential in Trump. Third terms for the White House party are difficult to secure. President Obama is, more or less, at 50% job approval — pretty good, in fact, for this president. But an unexpected economic plunge, major terrorist success, international crisis, or serious scandal could subtract critical percentage points from Clinton. Voters are not inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt, so intertwined is her fate with Obama’s, and so fixed is her scarred image after decades in the hothouse of politics.

Just as important, Clinton can lose if she and her team smugly take victory for granted. You are halfway to losing when you think you can’t lose. Students of President Lyndon Johnson’s campaign against the doomed Barry Goldwater recognize that LBJ wouldn’t let his lieutenants rest on favorable polls; he ran a superb if brutal effort against Goldwater, and never let up. Much the same was true for President Richard Nixon in 1972. While he and his team schemed to insure George McGovern became his opponent, using dirty tricks against some of McGovern’s Democratic foes, Nixon had tasted defeat and near-defeat too often in his career to rest easy for even a day. Will overconfidence generated by favorable surveys cripple the Clinton campaign?

Trump has forced the political world to ingest a sizable dose of humility. Even many of political science’s much-vaunted statistical models that attempt to predict election results cannot account for a candidate like Trump — either because he overrides or suspends some of the normal “rules” of politics, or because he proves that parties do not always nominate electable candidates...
Interesting.

RTWT.

I think it's advantage Democrats, but I wouldn't count out Donald Trump for a second. It's going to be the most interesting presidential campaign in my lifetime.

Donald Trump Needs Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin to Win the Electoral College Vote (VOTE)

The New York Times had this piece the other day, "Electoral Map Looks Challenging for Trump."

We're going to see lots of different "hot" takes on how the Electoral College will shape up for November, but for now just remember, it's a long way off until the general election. A lot can happen before then.

In any case, here's John King's argument, at CNN:


'When traditional religion is rejected, the odds are pretty good that something cultish will be chosen to replace it...'

Heh. So true.

From Ed Driscoll, at Instapundit, "CALIFORNIA VEGANS ASSEMBLE THE CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD: Top L.A. Vegan Restaurant Owners Receiving Death Threats for Slaughtering Animals."

Anne De Paula Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Casting Call 2017 (VIDEO)

More, early prep for next year!


Deal of the Day: Lenovo ThinkCentre Tiny Desktop Computer

This is pretty cool.

At Amazon, Lenovo ThinkCentre M93p Desktop Computer - Intel Core i5 i5-4570T 2.90 GHz - Tiny - Business Black 10AA002CUS.

Also, Intex Pillow Rest Raised Airbed with Built-in Pillow and Electric Pump, Queen, Bed Height 16 1/2".

More, Yamaha NS-AW570BL Speaker (Black).

Plus, from Yuval Levin, The Great Debate: Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine, and the Birth of Right and Left, and The Fractured Republic: Renewing America’s Social Contract in the Age of Individualism.

Daron Acemoglu, Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty.

Still more, from Don Watkins and Yaron Brook, Equal Is Unfair: America's Misguided Fight Against Income Inequality.

BONUS: John Micklethwait ane Adrian Wooldridge, The Fourth Revolution: The Global Race to Reinvent the State.

Mother's Day in Home, Garden, and Kitchen

At Amazon, Mother's Day Gift Guide.


Republican Field Began with 17 Candidates, and Trump's Branding of His Opponents Helped Knock Them Out of the Race (VIDEO)

Heh.

This is killer, lol.



 Is the American Party System About to Crack Up?

Here's Danielle Allen, at the Nation, "Communications Breakdown":
In 1999, the libertarian party helped transform American politics by launching a campaign that ultimately sent hundreds of thousands of e-mails to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to protest its proposed “know your customer” banking regulations. The FDIC withdrew the rules, and the era of digital politics was born. Roughly a decade later, social media propelled “birtherism” to the forefront of the national conversation, reinstating nativism as an active ideology in the United States. In 2009 came the Tea Party movement, followed by Occupy Wall Street in 2011, both of which drew on new online organizing mechanisms to build solidarity networks around a particular analysis of social reality. The question for students of American politics now is whether these changes can drive a fundamental realignment of our political parties.

Transformations in communications technology have made it more possible than ever before for dissenters from the Democratic and Republican parties to find one another and to form sizable communities of interest. The result is lowered barriers to entry for the work of political organization, with consequences announced daily in headlines about the 2016 presidential campaign. Insurgent candidates in both parties have drawn on the organizational power that has developed over the past decade within ideologically defined communities: Donald Trump has summoned the anger and xenophobia of the birthers, Bernie Sanders has channeled Occupy’s critique of rampant inequality, and Ted Cruz has marshaled the forces of the Tea Party universe. By attaching other groups of voters to their original, more ideologically concentrated constituencies, these candidates have achieved greater success in their respective primary campaigns than anyone thought possible just one year ago.

Regardless of whether they succeed in taking over their parties, these new coalitions have the potential to remake American politics if either the insurgents or the party faithful are driven to seek refuge in existing third parties or to create entirely new ones. For the 2016 campaign at least, that latter possibility is already foreclosed, so a takeover (hostile or otherwise) of a third party seems more likely—both the Libertarian Party and the Green Party can place candidates on the ballot in a significant number of states. Even so, our first-past-the-post electoral system makes it very hard for third parties to challenge the top two. Barring the emergence of new habits of collaboration and alliance formation among small parties, only a fundamental change to our system of voting—the introduction of proportional representation, for example—would allow for a more fluid political system to develop.

 Speculating on what the future holds for America’s political alignment requires thinking through a complex array of factors: voting rules, political egos, the time horizons of charismatic leaders, questions of succession, the intensity of various ideological commitments, and a famously mutable public opinion. What we are most likely to see is more of the new normal: incredibly bitter fights among plurality-sized groups for total—if temporary—control of one of the major parties. Will this also worsen gridlock at the national level, thereby exacerbating the intensity of those intraparty battles and further destabilizing our political system overall? If these dynamics play out simultaneously in both parties, the most unified side will triumph.
There's more, FWIW, from Rick Perlstein and Daniel Schlozman at the link.

Thursday, May 5, 2016

Jackie Johnson Forecasts Possible Showers and Thunderstorms

Well, it was pretty lovely weather today, mostly overcast but cool and pleasant.

Here's the forecast though, via CBS News 2 Los Angeles: