Cialis fr

David Brooks joins the He-Man Glee Club

muhammad ali should have me for a dick

Following on the heels of news that Ukraine has asked America for socks (among more substantial things) to deal with its crisis, to which Jonah Goldberg reacted by claiming President Obama was waving frilly things at serial killers – or something – we have David Brooks trying to avoid embarrassing the president likewise. But failing.

Basically since Yalta we’ve had an assumption that borders are basically going to be borders and once that comes into question if in Ukraine or in Crimea or anywhere else, then all over the world all bets are off. And let’s face it, Obama, whether deservedly or not, does have a — I’ll say it crudely — but a manhood problem in the Middle East.

It’s possible that Brooks has replaced the world’s view of Obama with his own. After the Navy SEAL raid in Abbottabad I doubt too many Pakistanis – or Al Qaeda affiliates – think he’s a squish.

Is he tough enough to stand up to somebody like Assad or somebody like Putin? I think a lot of the rap is unfair but certainly in the Middle East there is an assumption that he’s not tough enough.

Most of the Middle East think any U.S. President is a mindless butcher. An invasion of Syria would be good evidence of that, so I’m not sure an American macho-thon would do us any good. Perhaps now would be a good time to remember Brooks’ oohing and aahing over the manly (ergo wise) George W. Bush administration:

On April 28, 2003, beating President Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech by three days, Brooks declared that “the war in Iraq is over.” The political and cultural implications of victory promised to be profound. A collaboration between policy makers in Washington and troops on the battlefield had removed any last doubts as to American global dominion. bushcodpieceBrooks sang the praises of “a ruling establishment that can conduct wars with incredible competence and skill.” The United States, he enthused, was an “incredibly effective colossus that can drop bombs onto pinpoints, [and] destroy enemies that aren’t even aware they are under attack.”

With Americans on the home front appropriately dazzled by what the troops had accomplished on the battlefield, Brooks’s sensitive antenna detected a decisive shift in public sentiment. “One hears,” he wrote, “of a growing distaste for the peace marchers . . . driven by bile and self-righteousness [and] fundamentally out of step” with the rest of the country. To be in step was to support the troops, which necessitated supporting the war and the larger ambitions cultivated by the war’s proponents. “Many college students seem to sense that these soldiers are accomplishing something for humanity, while all they are doing is preparing for business school.”

With the Iraq War having done so much “for humanity” the lesson in foreign policy is clear. You have to present your substantial manhood to the world before anything good can happen. This president should wave something meatier than fanciful socks at America’s enemies. It’s time he channeled himself a little Tom Friedman:

Suck. On. This.


Jonah Goldberg makes a point about socks being lame, like Obama

muhammad ali should have me for a dick

How many mirrors can a man buy on a National Review salary? Ninety-nine? A hundred? What a lucky dog. No I’m only asking. By the way, if there’s anyone who knows a wimp when he sees one it’s got to be Jonah Goldberg:

…Obama’s consequences haven’t even been inconsequential; they’ve had the opposite of their intended effect. Rather than send the Ukrainians weapons or useful intelligence, we sent them a bunch of MREs (“Meals Ready to Eat”). And even that we were unwilling to do in too provocative a way. We didn’t use Air Force cargo-planes, but rather sent the snacks in by civilian trucks.

A real man – he would parachute right into the Kremlin. He’d shotgun his way into the president’s office and shove a few tins of meatloaf up Pootie’s backside, sideways. Right? Can’t you see it? Our hero, manatee scion of Lucianne, arriving in Vlade’s office wheezing like an unknotted balloon and trumpeting his arrival through his trousers, braap. Easing himself onto the floor, he lifts his head toward the cameras with a grunt: “Sorry, pal, all we had was leftovers.”

Another thing about Jonah’s world: when MREs are not being eaten by the likes of our Navy SEALs, they’re called “snacks.” Okay, noted. Back when Ronnie Reagan carried them around in his rucksack (see: Hellcats of the Navy [lord no, unless you're a fan of granite obelisk theater, don't see Hellcats of the Navy]), they were commonly known as “Rabid Fucking Hyenas.”

On April 12, the Wall Street Journal reported that the White House was still weighing requests from the Ukrainian government for other supplies such as “medical kits, uniforms, boots and military socks.”

Oh great. Poodle Boy has got the sock in his mouth.

“You want to calibrate your chest-thumps,” a senior military official told the Journal, explaining this step-by-step approach. “He does something else in Ukraine, we release the socks.”

Now, imagine you are Vladimir Putin…

Of course.

…your aide brings in the news that a “senior military official” of the United States has announced that if you take another step toward carving up Ukraine, the U.S. will be forced to give the Ukrainians the socks they’ve been asking for.

I take it if the Ukrainians had asked for hugs, we’d be Richard Simmons. If they’d asked for prayers, we’d be Pope Francis. And if they’d asked for atomic bombs, dammit, we’d be Jonah Goldberg. Hell, yes, we’ll send them a trump card, in a red white and blue zeppelin. I can imagine the riotous reception for the equalizer landing in Kiev, at 5 miles an hour, replete with bunting, Greek wrestling, and color commentary from whoever passes for Sean Hannity on closed circuit TV. The cargo hold swings open, the cheers ring out, and the guest of honor is wheeled onto the tarmac…to the flinching of Ukraine’s generals, who see the bomb’s crackling circuits shorted with Cheetos dust. Stupid Russkies, they’ll never know it’s a dud.

Consequences that are not sufficiently painful or sufficiently scary aren’t consequences in the sense Obama means at all. They’re invitations. It’s like trying to get a bear to leave you alone by throwing salmon at it.

The Ukrainians ask for socks, and Obama is giving Putin a fish. Foreign policy, everybody.

I entirely understand that Americans are war-weary, and for good reason. But has it really gotten to the point where the U.S. military now defines “chest-thumping” as unleashing the socks of war?

The so…what! Of WAR? Did you see that? Did you just see what Jonah did there?


This week’s lesson in gun safety (#23 and #24)

lessons in gun safety

For this week’s lesson in how obviously safe guns are and how clearly responsible gun owners can be we travel to Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. Where we defer to firearms safety officer Tiffany’s son:

…Goldwire was charged on Wednesday with the involuntary manslaughter of her daughter, Jamara Stevens, police said. She is currently wanted by detectives.

Stevens was playing with her brothers and sisters inside the Goldwire’s Mantua bedroom on April 5, when her 2-year-old brother cocked the gun, pointed it at the girl and pulled the trigger. The bullet sailed through the girl’s arm and into her chest and heart.

It’s amazing the contrasts I see in these stories. If this were to happen in Oklahoma, the sheriff would take pity on the parents. He wouldn’t dream of arresting them. Hell, he’d be the first person to show up at the funeral and cry copious tears. But because the shooting went down in Philadelphia, the cops have mounted a manhunt for the mother. To be clear: This is a crime. She belongs in jail. But she certainly doesn’t deserve to go there just because she’s poor and black.

Speaking to, Goldwire said the gun had been left behind in another room by her boyfriend and was taken by the woman’s 14-year-old son. She was visibly distraught over the girl’s death.

“For all the mothers who lose their kids, I feel their pain. And to the ones that still have their children, treasure every moment with your kids because you never know when you’ll never see them again,” she said.

I understand. Your children could die at any moment, especially when you’re the type to leave loaded handguns lying around the house like Easter eggs. Sheesh. And for this week’s NEXT lesson, in how obviously safe guns are and how clearly responsible gun owners can be, we travel to Liberty County, Georgia. Where we defer to firearms safety officer Joanne’s son:

When [Officer] Mercer arrived he says he found 23-year-old Joanne Winding sitting on the front doorway, crying for help.

Two handguns were found in the woman’s bedroom on a night stand, two children were also found inside the home.

This sounds familiar.

The woman told the officers she thought she had seen a person outside of the home and that is why she had loaded one of the guns. The report says she then went to lay down and that is when she was shot once in her right arm, by her 2-year-old son.

The children are currently in the custody of a family friend.

Whaddayaknow, the ole’ switcheroo. Shot with her own gun. But of course, by all means – as surefire danger looms outside – make haste pulling the family firearm out of the closet. Be sure to load it, take the safety off, lay it on the nightstand and then go to sleep. Sweet dreams, my pistol packin’ Mama. With a little luck you’ll figure out how to shoot with your other arm. At the very least you’ll remember to stow your Ruger on the other nightstand. From this we once again conclude: The more guns you have, the safer your Karma is.


Ben Shapiro to play Amos, and Stephen Colbert to play Andy…

I do not think you are who you think you are

Stephen Colbert will take over for talk show host David Letterman in 2015, and I’m good with it. I don’t watch many talk shows but when I’m stuck with one, I like to see someone with a sharp mind handle the guests. Colbert’s as sharp as they get.

Ben Shapiro doesn’t care much for the bonus to late night repartee. He’s shocked that Television just handed it’s second sweetest gig to the Steve Allen of Jim Crow:

Stephen Colbert’s Vile Political Blackface

It is nearly impossible to watch an episode of The Colbert Report without coming away with a viscerally negative response to conservatives.

That’s a nasty indictment: political blackface. Because all blackface is political it amounts to a double-barreled insult, and it only gets worse when you consider Colbert could be trafficking in the “vile” kind. That sounds bad. But if there’s a town in America where Republicans are denied access to the same lunch counters and water fountains we enjoy I’m not aware of it. I’m pretty sure the place would have been thoroughly shot up by now, jimmied from the dirt and loaded onto a flatbed to be paraded around as a history lesson (Fascism: Both Sides Do It). Fox News would run live remotes on the exhibit around the clock, all the while calling on the NAACP to disband. But I haven’t seen any spectacle like that, so I’m calling baloney.

Last week, after President Obama gave his highly-mockable “Mission Accomplished” speech announcing that 7.1 million Americans had selected an Obamacare plan, Comedy Central’s Stephen Colbert hit the airwaves. He did mock. But instead of mocking Obama’s laughably manipulated 7.1 million number, he did his usual routine: pretending to be a cluelessly cruel right-winger, Colbert spat, “I wish I could come to you with some good news, but the worst imaginable thing has happened: Millions of Americans are going to get healthcare.”

Cluelessly cruel? Just look at the evidence. Here’s Colbert doing his schtick: “…the worst imaginable thing has happened: Millions of Americans are going to get healthcare.” And here’s what real conservatives have been saying – Steve Forbes for example:

Obamacare Is Really, Really Bad For You

And the New York Post:

Got ObamaCare? Too bad for you

The National Republican Congressional Committee:

7 Reasons ObamaCare Needs To Be Fully Repealed

And Human Events:

Top 10 Reasons Obamacare Is Bad for America

And Alex Jones:

15 Reasons Why The Obamacare Decision Is A Mind Blowing Disaster For America

Also Ted Cruz:

49 Reasons to Stop Obamacare

And The Heritage Foundation:

900,000 Reasons Obamacare Is Bad

If you say propaganda can be clueless and cruel, I’ll agree.

And this is precisely what Colbert does with regard to politics: he engages in Conservativeface. He needs no makeup or bulbous appendage to play a conservative – after all, conservatives come in every shape and size. Instead, he acts as though he is a conservative – an idiotic, racist, sexist, bigoted, brutal conservative.

Republican heavyweights from Ted Nugent to the Koch Brothers have spent months and millions of dollars herding Americans away from Obamacare. The latter pair even produced and released an ad depicting a creepy Uncle Sam eager to part the legs of a patient lying in a gynecologist’s suite. The Koch brothers’ message was as crazy as it was clear: Here comes a nightmare. And I dare you to parody something as bizarre as that.

We harbor no illusions as to which side of the government healthcare “issue” conservatives come down on. Everybody knows they’re disappointed to see 7 million people now enrolled in Obamacare. So why is Colbert’s parody so reprehensible to Ben Shapiro? I suspect he still doesn’t know the real reason why blackface was so offensive. You ask him, he’ll tell you that white folks did their impressions too well.


You can smoke those bath salts or you can listen to Jim DeMint


Jim DeMint is president of The Heritage Foundation.

The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies…

Funny thing about that, we never hear DeMint mention that he runs an “educational institution.” Perhaps the devout Christian would not want God cleaving his forsaken skull with a lightning bolt:

Newcombe: What if somebody, let’s say you’re talking with a liberal person and they were to turn around and say, ‘that Founding Fathers thing worked out really well, look at that Civil War we had eighty years later.’

DeMint: Well the reason that the slaves were eventually freed was the Constitution, it was like the conscience of the American people.

I’d appreciate it if Jim could educate me as to how a constitution that the secessionists voided and replaced ultimately swayed their Christian consciences. Here’s the preamble to the upgrade:

“We, the people of the Confederate States, each state acting in its sovereign and independent character, in order to form a permanent federal government, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity — invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God — do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Confederate States of America.”

The part about “in order to form a permanent federal government” makes it clear the South thought the original constitution muddled and temporary. Perhaps a Foundation man gets so busy lecturing others he no longer remembers what the hell he’s talking about. More DeMint:

Unfortunately there were some court decisions like Dred Scott and others that defined some people as property, but the Constitution kept calling us back to ‘all men are created equal and we have inalienable rights’ in the minds of God.

Nice try – that equality stuff is not in the Constitution. It’s in the Declaration of Independence. And of course the slaveholders improved on it as well – oops – with their own version. Because this stuff they weren’t so hot on:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Right, no thanks. They did think the Declaration established their fundamental rights, but not by way of any of that namby-pamby crap. These were the parts they favored:

“…they are, and of right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; and that, as free and independent States, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do.”

They further solemnly declared that whenever any “form of government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government.”

So, all men being equal? I’ll pass. Violent revolt? I’ll take it.

Thus were established the two great principles asserted by the Colonies, namely: the right of a State to govern itself; and the right of a people to abolish a Government when it becomes destructive of the ends for which it was instituted.

And the former senator should know all this by heart because it was South Carolina legislators who wrote it. DeMint doesn’t come off like your typical president of a “research and educational institution,” does he? Not exactly:

But a lot of the move to free the slaves came from the people, it did not come from the federal government. It came from a growing movement among the people, particularly people of faith, that this was wrong. People like Wilberforce who persisted for years because of his faith and because of his love for people.

The great evangelist William Wilberforce. Who lived in Britain. Who died 28 years before South Carolina fired on Ft. Sumter. Very odd that Jim can’t recall someone a little more locally and temporally relevant to the Civil War, not to mention somebody who was an American. Somebody like, say, the great Fredrick Douglass. Very peculiar…

So no liberal is going to win a debate that big government freed the slaves. In fact, it was Abraham Lincoln, the very first Republican, who took this on as a cause and a lot of it was based on a love in his heart that comes from God…

What about this Lincoln fella? What did he do again? What sort of job did he have? He was a legendary right-wing orator, and a popular one at that, who by the power of his words brought down slavery. Ta-daaa. And, so, That was the end of That. As to that vestigial hurly-burly with the artillery and millions of soldiers crawling across the continent, I couldn’t really tell you what any of that was much about. But you can rest assured there were a great many silly people back then, not like today…


Baseball fan dresses up as Chief Wahoo, argues with a real Indian

aw dude

Last Friday the Cleveland Indians had their home opener at Progressive Field. As in previous seasons a Tribe fan by the name of Pedro Rodriguez came dressed as the team’s mascot Chief Wahoo, complete with red-face, headdress and all.

But the pre-game festivities this year proved to be different than in years past. There to meet the fake warrior was a Chiricahua Apache, Robert Roche, the executive director of the American Indian Education Center. Robert looked at Pedro and asked: “Dude what the hell?”

Chief Whiteass explains himself

In an interview with ESPN Cleveland on Tuesday, Mr. Roche said that during their brief conversation the fan refused to accept that his outfit and face paint was “offensive” to Native Americans. Faced with blunt criticism from the protester, Mr. Rodriguez replied: “Well, I’m just honoring you.”

Chief Whiteass heap big Douche

The fan was similarly unyielding when he called in to the same radio station to defend his costume and makeup. “I’m a tribe fan, first and foremost, and I’ve been doing this for opening day now for 10 years, and I just love the Indians” he said. “Will I wear Chief Wahoo next year? Yes I will,” he added.

A reader of Lalo Alcaraz saw that first photo and thought it looked familiar. She then tweeted this eerie comparison:

lalo alcaraz is a psychic

I think I have a clever idea. We will learn to dress up the way white people in the nineteen-forties thought a typical ‘Pedro Rodriguez’ should look like. And on Friday afternoon we’ll all stand outside of his work. When he steps outside and asks why the hell we’re all wearing zoot suits and feathered fedoras, we’ll propose that we’re paying him a great honor.


Until you predict the rain with 100% accuracy, Charles Moore is an idiot

global warming, SCIENCE

A conservative’s typical attempt to pretend that climate change is a man-made conspiracy would be to latch on to some bit of minutiae and make it definitive. Alan Caruba, among a great many other idiots, has been claiming that the Earth is now cooling. This is not remotely true:

NOAA global temperature

How can he be so stupid? Well, he’s a conservative. But here is Alan’s specific problem:


The Carubas seize on a small trend and then swear it proves global warming is entirely a hoax. This is typical of the denialists.

What is no longer typical of these folks is the wielding of an analogy so broadly stupid as to be a howler. In “The game is up for climate change believers,” Charles Moore sets himself apart with this opening:

Most of us pay some attention to the weather forecast. If it says it will rain in your area tomorrow, it probably will. But if it says the same for a month, let alone a year, later, it is much less likely to be right.


There are too many imponderables. The theory of global warming is a gigantic weather forecast for a century or more.

Fucking excuse me? Ha, no.

The climate is not the weather. One is large and planetary, the other is small and local. Even knowing exactly what the larger trends are, you still can’t predict when and where it will rain. I suspect Chuck is aware of this…

However interesting the scientific inquiries involved, therefore, it can have almost no value as a prediction. Yet it is as a prediction that global warming (or, as we are now ordered to call it in the face of a stubbornly parky 21st century, “global weirding”) has captured the political and bureaucratic elites…

As for predictions, let’s say you have a pair of dice where you’ve swapped the ones with tens. You claim that you’ll be rolling bigger numbers from now on but how can you be sure? Can you really predict when a ’20′ will come up? I thought not and I see no point in continuing this argument, cough. Who does this asshole think he is? The trends:


Now I suspect you’re a pretty smart person. Look at the pretty graphs and pictures and tell me: Will it rain in Seattle tomorrow? C’mon, how could you not know? This is what Charles thinks of your SCIENCE, mister.


This week’s lesson in gun safety (#22)

lessons in gun safety

For this week’s lesson in how obviously safe guns are and how clearly responsible gun owners can be we travel to Hamilton County, Ohio. Where we defer to firearms safety officer Deandre Kelley

Prosecutors say that on Jan. 12, Shanti was having a slumber party with several friends when Kristina Lanza began arguing with Kelley about him bringing a gun into the home. Lanza ordered Kelley out of the house, but he returned drunk around 3 a.m., prosecutors said.

The children, who were downstairs watching TV while Lanza slept upstairs, opened the door for Kelley, who walked in, turned and fired a gunshot out the front door, prosecutors say.

Shanti got scared. So she…

…ran upstairs for her mother, who again ordered Kelley to leave. That’s when Kelley walked out and fired two shots into the air. One of them hit Shanti in the lung as she hid in an upstairs bedroom. She later died at a hospital.

Of course she did. Later, in court, the adults reacted predictably.

“I know Shanti would have forgave her daddy,” Lanza [Shanti's mother] told Allen. “This was a total accident.”

[Judge] Allen told Lanza that was a stupid thing to say.

“Does anybody think that guns shot in residential neighborhoods don’t go into buildings?” Allen asked Lanza, according to the Enquirer. “You’re saying things that are foolish.”

Kelley was sentenced to 6 years. That’s when it occurred to Shanti’s family – something had gone wrong.

…loud noises erupted in the hallway outside court and Shanti Lanza’s aunt, Danielle Lott, could be heard screaming, “No justice served!” according to the Enquirer.

That prompted Allen to call the Lanza family back in. She then cited Lott and Kristina Lanza for contempt and ordered them jailed, prompting another eruption of screaming from family members, the Enquirer reported.

Sent to jail. I ask you, could things have gone any worse? I can’t imagine. From this we once again conclude: The more guns you have, the safer your daughter, who is hiding in the closet from your boyfriend, is.


It’s good to be a bigot but it’s bad for Mozilla

revenge of the box turtles

The developer of JavaScript and Firefox, Brendan Eich, becomes CEO of Mozilla for a couple weeks but then he’s ousted.

Brendan Eich, the well-known techie who has gotten swept up in a controversy about his support of California’s anti-gay marriage law Proposition 8, is resigning as CEO of for-profit Mozilla Corporation and also from the board of the nonprofit foundation which wholly owns it.

Eich donated $1,000 to California’s gay marriage ban back in 2008, a fact that became the source of controversy in 2012. The question for today: Is it fair to fire him? Seeing as how the matter gets back to free speech, it’s a good question.

I think about about the issue this way. Let’s invent a second version of the KKK, one that does not extend its activism to violence. Let’s say they aren’t interested in blowing up churches. We’ll call them the White Citizens’ Council. Let’s assume they are dedicated all the same to preserving a society where blacks are not equal to whites. Would it be okay for Brendan Eich to support their activities?

In addition let’s say Mozilla and the tech community know that Brendan supported the group previously, back when he was Chief Technology Officer. Should the company be careful about choosing this guy for its CEO?

I don’t see much difference between the bigotry of the White Citizens’ Council and the National Organization for Marriage, whose Prop 8 was thrown out by the courts. Both groups work hard to appear civilized while pursuing a politics hell-bent on preserving inequality. I see nothing benign or mundane in their all-out efforts to maintain a second-class citizenry.

I think Eich is welcome to embrace those abhorrent views, but not without criticism. He’s been allowed to fund the activist bigotry of the National Organization for Marriage without being asked to resign, which is okay by me. But when your personal beliefs run hard up against a company’s practices, you’ve got no business running the place.

Any gay employee of Mozilla would be troubled if not horrified to have Eich making decisions that affect their lives. It’s not unreasonable for these people to think about resigning. And why wouldn’t the typical American wonder what the hell is going on at Mozilla? How many of their senior executives think like him? Why don’t they care about what millions of their users think?

There’s a great deal of cluelessness on display here, not the least of which is Brendan’s:

Ignoring the abusive comments, I’m left with charges that I hate and I’m a bigot, based solely on the donation. Now “hate” and “bigot” are well-defined words. I say these charges are false and unjust.

To prove his innocence he provides hotlinks back to the Merriam-Webster entries for “hate” and “bigot.” And when you click over, sure enough, you can’t find “Apartheid” listed below either word. There’s no mention of politics in either definition, so score one for him…

First, I have been online for almost 30 years. I’ve led an open source project for 14 years. I speak regularly at conferences around the world, and socialize with members of the Mozilla, JavaScript, and other web developer communities. I challenge anyone to cite an incident where I displayed hatred, or ever treated someone less than respectfully because of group affinity or individual identity.

You supported Proposition 8, the effort to deny gay people their equal status. You still haven’t denounced it, right?


‘Twas Perfesser Instapundit in the USA Today with the butthurt

attack of the wuss

Perfesser Emeritus of Dumbsplaining Glenn Reynolds stands at the USA Today lectern and readies himself, looking serious (turning his notes upside down, then downside up) before today’s lecture: The Media Hate Republicans.

He opens with a stab at rhetoric.

Why do organizations like CNN let Democrats’ arrested for felonies slip through the cracks?

The question sets the tone brilliantly. Isn’t the world a seesaw battle between Democrats and Republicans? And if CNN is not willing to be mean to one, aren’t they being mean to the other?

California State senator (and, until last week, candidate for secretary of state) Leland Yee was well-known as an anti-gun activist. Then, last week, he was indicted for, yes, conspiring to smuggle guns and rocket launchers between mobsters and terrorists in exchange for massive bribes…

This all sounds like news. You’ve got charges of huge bribes, rampant hypocrisy, illegal weapons and even a connection with foreign terrorists — and from a leading politician in an important state.

A ‘leading politician in an important state’ I probably would have heard about. But unless you live in Northern California, like me you’ve never heard a word about Leland Yee, the San Francisco politician who was arrested for shoplifting in 1992 and stopped for soliciting prostitutes in 1999. Gun-running sure as hell trumps those previous raps and he’s welcome to rot in jail.

But why isn’t CNN all over this story? A gun-hating Chinese Democrat from Pelositown exporting arms from the Philippines? If they’d only let the perfesser run their San Francisco bureau he’d have Nick Nolte and Eddie Murphy on this in a heartbeat.

CNN…didn’t report the story at all. When prodded by viewers, the network snarked that it doesn’t do state senators. Which is odd, because searching the name of my own state senator, Stacey Campfield, turns up a page of results, involving criticisms of him for saying something “extreme”. Meanwhile, CNN found time to bash Wisconsin state senator and supporter of Gov. Scott Walker, Randy Hopper over marital problems.

But there’s a difference. They’re Republicans. When Republicans do things that embarrass their party, the national media are happy to take note, even if they’re mere state senators.

Glenn doesn’t understand how ‘media’ work. Which is understandable since he believes all things originate from authority. CNN is failing in its role as Media Daddy, refusing to focus proper attention on Leland Yee and start a political wildfire. If the resulting scandal should burn down the White House, well that would be a fine example of balanced reporting.

But life is more complicated than that. There’s a second authority involved in the media complex: The audience. If they’re bored with a story, then they kill it. And it doesn’t matter how much indignation a perfesser manages, the controversy simply goes away.

In the case of Stacey Campfield, CNN were only taking their orders from the crowd. He’s a provocative asshole who posted an image of an “assault pressure cooker” to lob insults at gun control advocates while Boston Marathon bombing victims were still fighting to survive. The predictable and purposeful outrage landed him an interview on, yes, CNN. It shouldn’t surprise Glenn that CNN’s archives retain links going back to CNN’s interviews, but it does.

In the case of Hopper, CNN has a single four-paragraph blurb on him in Ed Hornick’s ‘Political Circus.’ And only then because Hopper was being recalled when his wife informed reporters he’d abandoned the family to live with his young mistress. Dear me the extent to which CNN will go to take down Republicans, it shocks you. But if you’re not yet full of astonishes, you can always try swallowing whatever argument Glenn cooks up next. In this dish, a turkey:

We’ve seen this before, of course: Washington Post reporter Sarah Kliff dismissed the horrific Kermit Gosnell trial as a “local crime story”, even as the press was going crazy covering another equally local crime story, the George Zimmerman trial.

Take in the warped panorama of Instapundit world, where Gosnell plays an ignoble Democrat and Zimmerman a good Republican. In George’s case, CNN had it in for the young conservative while the rest of the country couldn’t have cared less. But somebody left the TV on in the den, and then all sorts of people got angry, or at least said so, or feigned their outrage or something. And for no reason! If the media had pulled the same crap on Kermit Gosnell you’d have seen NBA players standing center court in support of the pro-life movement, sporting the same “Abort Obama” t-shirts the cool kids wear.


Proponent of nuclear war, kingmaker to the GOP, Sheldon Adelson

muhammad ali should have me for a dick

Five months ago multi-billionaire and conservative activist Sheldon Adelson spoke at Yeshiva University in New York. Asked his opinion on how we should go about negotiating with Iran, he prodded President Obama to try doing things his way:

“You pick up your cell phone and you call somewhere in Nebraska and you say ‘OK, let it go.’ And so there’s an atomic weapon goes over, ballistic missiles in the middle of the desert that doesn’t hurt a soul, maybe a couple of rattlesnakes and scorpions or whatever. And then you say, ‘See? The next one is in the middle of Tehran. So, we mean business. You want to be wiped out?’”

In return for such diplomacy there would be planetary weak-kneed wailing and tunic-tearing over an “unprovoked nuclear attack”, even though it would have been against a shifty-eyed Muslim desert, now poisoned with radioactive waste for a century or so, but, hey…Iran. Right? And because they’re jerks they probably wouldn’t immediately give in to our demands, choosing instead to file a war crimes complaint at the U.N. and The Hague so then we’d have to vaporize Tehran. Because we wouldn’t want to project any weakness, would we? Or be seen as spineless liars heavens forbid.

So I think this Sheldon Adelson, we can trust him. We should let him run the country.

It’s hard to imagine a political spectacle more loathsome than the parade of Republican presidential candidates who spent the last few days bowing and scraping before the mighty bank account of the casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. One by one, they stood at a microphone in Mr. Adelson’s Venetian hotel in Las Vegas and spoke to the Republican Jewish Coalition (also a wholly owned subsidiary of Mr. Adelson), hoping to sound sufficiently pro-Israel and pro-interventionist and philo-Semitic to win a portion of Mr. Adelson’s billions for their campaigns.

Fortunately for Sheldon, the man who donated $100 million to Republicans back in 2012, the GOP’s 2016 presidential candidates are very much willing to be his pal no matter what crazy apocalyptic thing he advocates. Willing even perhaps to run the country on his behalf. Ohio Governor John Kasich:

Kasich sat next to Adelson at lunch, and mentioned him repeatedly – and sometimes in a non-sequiturial fashion – in his speech, occasionally making it seem as if he were talking to an audience of one, while the hundreds of other RJC donors looked on.

“Sheldon and I were kind of talking about his background. I come from a little town outside of Pittsburgh called McKees Rocks – it was very blue collar,” Kasich said, as he launched into his biography. When he discussed the prescription of pain killers, he said Adelson – who once testified that he took as many as 25 medications in a day to manage pain from a neurological condition in 2001 – “is someone who knows about this.”

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker:

Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin brought up his father’s trip to Israel, and said he puts “a menorah candle” next to his Christmas tree. The name of his son, Matthew, actually comes from Hebrew, he pointed out.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie:

Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey also described his trip to Israel, but then did something unthinkable. He referred to the West Bank as the “occupied territories.” A shocked whisper went through the crowd. How dare Mr. Christie implicitly acknowledge that Israel’s presence in the West Bank might be anything less than welcome to the Palestinians? Even before Mr. Christie left the stage, leaders of the group told him he had stumbled, badly.

And sure enough, a few hours later, Mr. Christie apologized directly to Mr. Adelson for his brief attack of truthfulness.

You wonder if the GOP Daddyhammers could possibly be conflicted over offering their unwavering love and loyalty to a powerful man with his own loyalties, perhaps to a foreign country. Then you read this:

“We cannot have a world where our friends are unsure whether we will be with them and our enemies are unsure whether we will be against them,” he said. “In New Jersey no one has to wonder whether I’m for them or I’m against them.”

Says the Governor who royally fucked Fort Lee, New Jersey. So the answer is ‘no.’


I hate black people and I couldn’t be happier. Ask me how!

braying mule song

Remember Charles Murray?

“Intelligence seems to blossom in the barest ground,” he says, contesting the suggestion that the South Bronx is less nurturing than Scarsdale. “Now I know that’s an odd thing to say about the inner city, but at least they’re going to school and they have the television on all day. You couldn’t say that about blacks 50 years ago.”

The ‘social scientist’ author of The Bell Curve?

“Try to imagine a GOP presidential candidate saying in front of the cameras, ‘One reason that we still have poverty in the United States is that a lot of poor people are born lazy.’ You cannot imagine it because that kind of thing cannot be said. And yet this unimaginable statement merely implies that when we know the complete genetic story, it will turn out that the population below the poverty line in the United States has a configuration of the relevant genetic makeup that is significantly different from the configuration of the population above the poverty line. This is not unimaginable. It is almost certainly true.”

Mister IQ has just now taken to the pages of the Wall Street Journal to lend you a hand. Help you out, give you some proper guidance. Why not, since he’s really very happy and you’re not? Odd as it seems, we lesser folks rarely get the opportunity to ask a racist about the underpinnings of spiritual satisfaction. So why don’t we throw it up for grabs? Just how do you do it, Chuck? What’s the secret to enjoying both a disgraced career and an anodyne domestic life? Well, first…

1. Consider Marrying Young

The age of marriage for college graduates has been increasing for decades, and this cultural shift has been a good thing. Many 22-year-olds are saved from bad marriages because they go into relationships at that age assuming that marriage is still out of the question.

Poke yourself with a stick. Though people now avoid poking themselves, which is good.

But should you assume that marriage is still out of the question when you’re 25? Twenty-seven? I’m not suggesting that you decide ahead of time that you will get married in your 20s. You’ve got to wait until the right person comes along. I’m just pointing out that you shouldn’t exclude the possibility.

Am I saying you shouldn’t poke yourself with a stick? Pretty much. But you should do it.

Merger marriages are what you tend to see on the weddings pages of the Sunday New York Times: highly educated couples in their 30s, both people well on their way to success. Lots of things can be said in favor of merger marriages. The bride and groom may be more mature, less likely to outgrow each other or to feel impelled, 10 years into the marriage, to make up for their lost youth.

I can’t actually say that not-poking yourself is a bad idea. In fact, it’s a good one. Research shows that it’s a far better idea than poking yourself, but…

But let me put in a word for startup marriages, in which the success of the partners isn’t yet assured. The groom with his new architecture degree is still designing stairwells, and the bride is starting her third year of medical school. Their income doesn’t leave them impoverished, but they have to watch every penny.

What are the advantages of a startup marriage? For one thing, you will both have memories of your life together when it was all still up in the air. You’ll have fun remembering the years when you went from being scared newcomers to the point at which you realized you were going to make it.

Poking yourself leaves you with great memories. The sorts of memories you could never have had without being poked. Me, I remember well my ‘startup’ marriage that ended in disaster. Those were days that went by very slowly, I can tell you. In fact I’m still haunted by those times, when I couldn’t shake feelings of loneliness and despair.

Even more important, you and your spouse will have made your way together. Whatever happens, you will have shared the experience. And each of you will know that you wouldn’t have become the person you are without the other.

Myself, I couldn’t be happier for all the poking. And the tear-stained memories wrought of dreadful, awful times from which I badly needed to escape. Thankfully I, Charles, “recalled his childhood lessons on the importance of responsibility” which somehow remarkably “brought him slowly to the idea that divorce was an honorable alternative, especially with young children involved.” Which is probably the reason why I’m ecstatic today. If all this sounds non-sensical, and a cruel fate for the children I left behind, well that’s because you’re not a groundbreaking intellectual like me. You might want to write this all down if you’re perhaps genetically capable of doing such things. And you’re welcome.

« Older Posts