Commentary and analysis on American politics, culture, and national identity, U.S. foreign policy and international relations, and the state of education
- from a neoconservative perspective! - Keeping an eye on the communist-left so you don't have to!
I've been watching a lot of long podcasts, YouTube interviews, and Bloggingheads t.v.
So much great, great stuff out there. Except for football, and streaming shows late at night, I haven't been watching ANY mainstream news programming, and I watch pretty much everything. I'm just sick of it right now.
But Gleen Greenwald's an island of reason in a sea of mental illness.
It was a call that took Diane Keaton by surprise.
Three decades after “Godfather Part III” opened to middling reviews and box office grosses, Francis Ford Coppola returned to the editing bay to tinker with a film that was largely dismissed as a disappointment. Coppola shuffled scenes around, changed music cues, and affixed a new beginning and ending to the three hour epic, now rechristened “Mario Puzo’s The Godfather, Coda: The Death of Michael Corleone.” Now, he was inviting Keaton, along with co-stars Al Pacino, Talia Shire, and George Hamilton to see the finished product at a private screening on the Paramount lot.
“It was one of the best moments of my life to watch it,” says Keaton. “To me it was a dream come true. I saw the movie in a completely different light. When I saw it way back, it was like ‘Oh, I don’t know.’ It didn’t seem to do that well and the reviews weren’t great. But Francis restructured the beginning and the end and man, I’m telling you it worked.”
It wasn’t just critics and audiences who were cool to “The Godfather Part III” when it opened in 1990. Keaton was one of the people who found the initial film lacking.
“I don’t know why people didn’t appreciate it, but I was one of them,” she admits. “What was wrong with me? Why didn’t I like this before? But I didn’t. I kind of just dismissed it and thought, ‘oh well.'”
She’s convinced that Coppola’s re-edit will make people reconsider the film, as well as one of its most maligned elements, Sofia Coppola’s performance as Michael Corleone’s daughter, Mary. The knives were out for Sofia Coppola when the movie premiered. She had barely any acting experience when she stepped in for an ailing Winona Ryder just prior to shooting, and reviewers excoriated her performance, calling it flat, amateurish and unconvincing.
“That’s not going to happen anymore,” Keaton says, arguing the new edit gives Sofia Coppola’s performance more of a chance to shine. “She’s what a daughter would be like if you had this guy as your dad, the head of a criminal organization. She was not so sure of herself and is kind of quiet. Kind of haunted. I thought she was fantastic.”
Keaton said re-watching the film reminded her of the fun she had during its production.
“It took me back,” says Keaton “At that time, I was kind of with Al. I really liked [co-star] Andy Garcia. We were shooting in Italy. It was a special time.”
The actress was even able to put aside her long-standing aversion to watching herself on screen...
I have agreed to participate in a "How to Be an Anti-Racist Book Discussion" on my campus (an event based on the currently "all-the-rage" book by Ibram X. Kendi, How to Be an Antiracist).
Here are the discussion points for the participants for the book discussion, which is to be held on Zoom:
* What did you learn from the book that will help set you on a path to be an antiracist educator? * In How to Be an Antiracist, Kendi shares his own experience with racist thinking. How does his honesty help give us space to acknowledge and name our own racist behaviors and attitudes?* Kendi writes, “The only way to undo racism is to constantly identify it and describe it—and then dismantle it.” Why does he believe we need to call out racism when we see it, even if it can be uncomfortable to identify?* The book’s central message is that the opposite of “racist” isn’t “not racist.” The true opposite of “racist” is antiracist. “The good news,” Kendi writes, “is that racist and antiracist are not fixed identities. We can be racist one minute and an antiracist the next.” What does it mean to have to constantly reaffirm your identity as an antiracist? Is there any benefit to the fact that you can’t just decide you are “not racist” or an antiracist and be done with it?
* What is the first step you, personally, will take in striving to be an antiracist? How will you check yourself and hold yourself accountable if you notice you, or someone else, is being racist?* Anyone who values immigrants from European countries and devalues immigrants from Latin America is guilty of racism. Have you ever been guilty of this type of racism? Discuss the unique resilience and resourcefulness people possess if they leave everything in their native country behind and immigrate to another, as Kendi examines in the chapter on Ethnicity. * Identify two practices at the course level which present roadblocks and contribute to systemic racism.* Identify two practices at the department level which present roadblocks and contribute to systemic racism.* Identify two practices at the institutional level which present roadblocks and contribute to systemic racism.* Why do you think it is so hard for people to not assess other cultures from their own cultural standards? How does doing this trap people in racist ideas?
And I gotta say it: Don't get mad a me, bro.
I know there's a huge push on the right to actually shut down thinking, and, in a few cases, to actually completely embrace and evangelize the most wild claims and conspiracies against the radical left and the Democrats (but I repeat myself). At some point, you have to draw a line on how far you'll go to demonize and destroy the other side -- and to defend yourself against the other side. I'm a good person. I want to make things better: "Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, then dwell on these things" (Philippians 4:8).
But being good as I am means I will also defend myself. And to the death. And once again, lately, I'm defending myself against a lot of ideological hatred, obsessive leftist anti-conservative and anti-religious bias, and the once-again leftist condescension and hubris on social media that is even stronger than usual when a leftist Democrat "wins" the White House. Back in 2016, Facebook comments and posts I wrote after the election were reported to my college, and the same trolls have come back out of the woodwork this time around, now that I decided to give Facebook another try (for the new era, same as the old era, alas). But nah. Leftist are not driving me off the site this time. I'm sick and tired of their attacks. Defend against the left's hate. Defend against the left's destruction. Defend against the left's lies: "Again, the devil took Him to a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and said to Him, 'All these things I will give you if you will worship me.' Then Jesus said, "Go, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only'" (Matthew 4:8-10).
The left has abandoned the Lord and is doing the work of Satan. There's no other way, as a Christian, to understand this, and thus we must gather strength in faith and gird for the battles ahead.
So I'm defending myself. I'm holding the line for truth and facts. I mean, ask yourself: Do leftists say and advocate things that have any basis in factual reality (for example, L.A. County's latest total restaurant lockdown is entirely devoid of any basis in scientific fact)? Nah. But frankly, if I'm going to remain employed at my college, then I've (somewhat) got to go along to get along. I've got to at least be professional and collegiate, and it's hard. Longtime readers will know that I've been fighting a ten-year war against radical leftist harassment, cancelling, and multiple attempts to get me fired. And I've been fighting against a college administration that rarely, if ever, gives me the benefit of the doubt, one that in the past has investigated the most absurd claims by anonymous trolls who tagged me and my college in the same tweets (this was after I got a lot of viral coverage for my on-the-ground reporting of the ANSWER/HAMAS protest against Israel, for example, "Communists, Hamas Solidarity Protesters Demand Israel's Extermination in Los Angeles — #ANSWERLA"). It was me who was investigated. I mean,fuck! Trolls had gotten the home phone number of the vice president of academic affairs at my school. They harassed him. They claimed I was "stalking" Cassandra Fairbanks, the erstwhile militant SoCal leftist who volte-face went all Cernovich or something shortly before Trump was elected. Now she's the doyenne of the Gateway Pundit set in D.C. (Weird, I know.) In any case, I had my administration threatening me to get this trolling "stopped," even though I literally had nothing to do with these completely anonymous randos working their evil to make things bad for me. I KNOW WHAT EVIL LEFTISTS DO. Seriously. I had an attorney at one point, and I now have an accommodation with the college on my "private First Amendment activities," as my human resources department labeled my blogging and tweeting at the time.
Therefore sometimes I have to just roll my eyes at folks, on either side, who literally can't entertain an idea that contradicts their political ideology and positions. I blame the left most of all. But I see conservatives copying the left when they engage in the exact same kinds of speech suppression campaigns. (Wayne Dupree? C'mon.) It's out of control, and an honest person should and will call it out, from wherever it may come. (And one more time, it comes overwhelming from the left.)
So, yeah, I'm actually reading Kendi's book, with an open mind, for the college's Zoom book discussion, I'm gonna calling be myself an "anti-antiracist" lol.
And with that, here's Glenn Loury and John McWhorter at the Bloggingheads video. McWorther name-drops Coleman Hughes, at City Journal, "How to Be an Anti-Intellectual," and Kelefa Sanneh, at the New Yorker, "The Fight to Redefine Racism."
Well, for one, she's Australian, and shes shared a photo of herself wearing an American flag bikini, and, as she's apparently a Biden supporter, her Trump-back fans weren't pleased.
Stanley's the bestsellng author of How Propaganda Worksand How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them. I haven't read his work, mainly because I'm constantly reading REAL experts of fascism and Nazi Germany, which is one of my research and teaching specialties in international relations and comparative politics. In short, Jason Stanely doesn't rate except as a bloviating academic nincompoop who's recently made some of the "hawt" progressive book lists and who's been feted endlessly at the New York Times for his conformity to current left-wing trends in illiberalism and ideological projection.
Gawd these people are idiots.
I don’t know who needs to hear it, but Angela Davis is one of the most impactful US intellectuals of the last half century. Watching the intellectual midgets and half-wits yell “communism!” at her, as they did at Du Bois, is beyond cringeworthy.
And I wrote: "Dude, you teach history wtf?!! She literally the ran on the Communist Party U.S.A.’s presidential ticket in 1980 and 1984. She’s in fact exactly a “communist”."
The papers of Angela Davis, just acquired by Harvard, trace her transformation from an obscure philosophy professor to an icon of the global left https://t.co/YpAetgW11H
In 2006, Proposition 209 passed 55 percent to 45 percent (a 10-point) margin. It banned racial preferences in the state.
In 2020, Proposition 16, which would have restored affirmative action in California, was defeated 57 percent to 43 percent (a 14-point margin).
In 1990, ethnic whites were 60 percent of the state's population. In 2020, ethnic whites are 40 percent of the population. Hispanics now comprise more than 40 percent of the state's population, and we have a "majority-minority" demographic.
And Democrats still couldn't get race quotas approved by the voters? Maybe the problem's the Democrat Party and not the voters. Even in the bluest of states, race-neutral public policies command huge support. I mean Proposition 20, the left's "defund the police" and "abolish prisons" initiative was shot down by a whopping 62 percent to 38 percent, a 24-point margin).
So, racial justice reform in California isn't going anywhere for now. Good thing, sheesh.
Widespread skepticism in Latino and Asian communities and tepid support among younger Black residents combined with opposition from most whites to doom the effort this year to revive affirmative action in California, according to a new postelection survey.
The failure of Proposition 16, which voters rejected by 57% to 43%, marked a significant defeat for the state’s Democratic political leadership and many activist groups, which backed the Legislature’s move to put the proposal on this year’s ballot.
The findings of the survey provide the clearest evidence so far of the disconnect between those political leaders and many of their ostensible followers on an issue that has been a touchstone in the state’s political debates for years.
The survey, conducted by a coalition of community organizations, shows widespread support across racial and ethnic lines for diversity in education, public employment and contracting. At the same time, it showed broad skepticism about allowing government officials to use race, ethnicity or gender in making decisions.
On two other topics, the survey showed how attitudes toward the COVID-19 pandemic have grown more politically divided as the state heads into a period of renewed restrictions designed to limit the spread of the disease.
And it indicated that awareness and concern about racial and ethnic discrimination in the state has receded since reaching a high point this summer.
Asked how often they personally felt discriminated against because of their race or ethnicity, about one-third of Latino respondents said they experienced discrimination “frequently” or “sometimes.” That’s down from nearly half when the poll asked the same question in July.
The finding “reaffirms that these issues are difficult and complicated, and people just don’t have the bandwidth” to focus constantly on discrimination, especially when the impact of COVID dominates so many peoples’ lives, said Helen Torres, executive director of Hispanas Organized for Political Equality (HOPE), one of the sponsors of the survey.
“It’s hard to sustain for the long term,” she said.
The share of Asian and Pacific Islander respondents who reported feeling discriminated against showed a similar decline since July. The share of Black respondents who reported feeling discriminated against did not significantly decline.
The California Community Poll, conducted online Nov. 4-15, was designed to provide a more detailed view of the state’s racial and ethnic diversity than is typically possible. It surveyed 1,300 adult California citizens, with over-samples of Black, Latino and Asian Pacific Islander respondents in order to ensure enough in each group to allow analysis by age, gender and other characteristics.
The margin of error is estimated at 2.7 percentage points for the full sample. The poll is sponsored by three community organizations — the Center for Asian Americans United for Self Empowerment (CAUSE), the Los Angeles Urban League and HOPE.
California banned most government affirmative action programs nearly a quarter century ago, in 1996, when voters approved Proposition 209. Since then, overturning the ban has been a major goal for many Democratic lawmakers and state officials, especially at the University of California, where deans and chancellors have repeatedly said that their inability to take race into account in admissions has kept the number of Latino and Black students well below their share of high school graduates who meet UC eligibility standards.
But as the poll showed, many Californians have more mixed feelings on the subject than their elected officials do.
The results show “a limit on California’s liberalism” that “requires some examination of the progressive base,” said Drew Lieberman, senior vice president of Strategies 360, the polling firm that conducted the survey.
Two-thirds of the California adults surveyed said they believe “diverse representation based on race, gender, ethnicity and national origin” is important, with about 4 in 10 calling it “very important.”
That’s true across major ethnic and racial groups and among both voters and nonvoters, the survey found. About 6 in 10 white respondents said they considered diversity important, along with about 7 in 10 who identify as Latino or Asian or Pacific Islanders. Among Black respondents, the share rose to more than 8 in 10.
But that didn’t translate into support for affirmative action. Among Latino respondents, for example, only 30% said Proposition 16 was a good idea, compared with 41% who called it a bad idea and 29% who said they were unsure. The division was similar among Asian and Pacific Islander respondents, with 35% calling the proposition a good idea, 46% saying it was a bad idea and 20% unsure.
White respondents were slightly more opposed, with 32% calling the measure a good idea, 53% a bad idea and 15% unsure.
Only among Black respondents did the proposition get majority support, with 56% calling it a good idea, 19% a bad idea and 25% unsure.
The views of voters and nonvoters were very similar, suggesting that higher turnout would probably not have changed the results.
Roughly a third of those polled could be characterized as solid supporters of affirmative action — people who said that diversity is important and the ballot measure was a good idea. On the other side, just over 1 in 5 say diversity is not important to them and that the ballot measure was a bad idea.
Another 1 in 5 say diversity is important but that the proposal was a bad idea. The members of that swing group are more likely than others to describe themselves as moderates and to be suburbanites.
Since the election, some supporters of the ballot measure have speculated that voters may have been confused about its potential impact. The survey does not support that. After asking people their opinion, the survey gave a more extensive description of the ballot measure and retested people’s feelings on it. The additional information did not significantly change people’s views.
Everyone --- and I mean, amazingly, everyone --- is outraged by this video.
Leftist government politicians the world over are saying the lad had it coming, of course. But the rest of us see the curtain of "compassionate" progressivism coming down.
They kicked him out of the pub for being "too loud." Right. So he climbed the fence, strolled back in to join his friends, and poured himself another. Then gurgle, gurgle whack!
Well, despite corona, it's a bountiful holiday season, dang!I love Ms. Lindsey!
THE WAIT IS OVER! My 2021 GIRL ON GIRL Calendar is available now at https://t.co/C6dWlrJDup and it's FIREEE 🔥💣 Subscribe to my FREE Only Fans for a special $5 OFF CODE :) Can't wait to spend another year with you! Xoxo 💕 pic.twitter.com/yP9XZx4ePw
I've never heard of this lady until today, but I can see why she's a sensation. Watch: "I'M BACK -belle delphine."
She's a 21-year-old South African-born British fashion model, social media celebrity (influencer), and banned YouTuber with an "Only Fans" nude page. She's also posted nude videos to Porn Hub.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites. Thank you for shopping through my links.
