The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Did Hillary's Defeat Open the Floodgates on Bimbo Eruptions?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Warning: Mixed Metaphors Ahoy

My guess is that if Hillary had won, then we wouldn’t be seeing this landslide of revelations against key men in the most pro-Democratic industries. Harvey Weinstein, the keystone figure in all this, was a huge Clinton supporter and if his candidate had become president, that probably would have intimidated his victims for another 4 or 8 years. But with the Clintons washed up and people fearing them and their friends less these days, the dam has burst.

Keep in mind that the Clintons and Hollywood have been interconnected at covering up “bimbo eruptions” at least since early 1992 when the Clintons hired Hollywood private eye Anthony Pellicano to impugn Gennifer Flowers.

Pellicano’s specialty was bribing phone company and police department employees to wiretap the victims of powerful men in the entertainment industry so they could be blackmailed into silence.

Pellicano is currently getting close to getting out of prison. The feds have his wiretapped files, but he has refused to give up the password. It would be interesting to know who is going to pay him off for his omerta when he walks out the door of prison.

 
Hide 216 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    My guess is that if Hillary had won, then we wouldn’t be seeing this landslide of revelations against key men in the most pro-Democratic industries.

    That’s actually a very good point, not least as the MSM is possibly the most important “pro-Democratic” industry.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/did-hillarys-defeat-open-the-floodgates-on-bimbo-eruptions/#comment-2105069
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    I don’t think this is a stretch at all. The NY Times put a lot of resources into exposing Weinstein. No doubt that David Boies was putting a lot of pressure on Dean Baquet over this reporting. If Boies could have rounded up Bill Clinton and his whole crew to put the arm on Baquet, there is a pretty good chance he would have folded, as so many editors before him had done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    The New Yorker you mean?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. clyde says:

    I agree that a Bill + Hill ascension would have kept a lid on this all. Out of respect if nothing else. Plus Hollywood self-enforcement mechanisms would not have suffered meltdown. That wild pussyhat demo in DC gave off signals that Hollywood women can collectively go crazy without repercussions. It took six months before this inchoate anti- stale pale male anger boomeranged back onto the Hollywood grandee class of abusers/rapists/exhibitionists of young nubile actresses. Most being on the innocent to naive spectrum.
    And lets not forget the potted plants that got abused/ and squirted on/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. This is merely going after Trump by going after men.

    You’ll know this is a serious movement on behalf of women when they start going after the lesbians who abuse their positions of power.

    Read More
    • Agree: International Jew
    • Replies: @cliff arroyo
    Do you think that heavy boot will drop?

    On the one hand, I haven't heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.

    On the other hand when you look at the current round of defenestrations you could almost get the idea that men coflate the idea of power and prestige with access to sex.

    If women don't use power and prestige to get sex (because it's so hard for them to find willing partners otherwise?) then that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon.... it's all very confusing.
    , @Zach
    Here’s a story about female on female harassment, though the complaint comes from a female named “Timothy.”

    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/melanie-martinez-accused-sexual-assault-080129312.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Thea says:

    I’m actually concerned they aren’t being taken down for the right reasons. They promote propaganda and degeneracy that corrupts our youth. Sexual harrassment is just a made up ‘crime.’

    Now rape is a very different story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @clyde

    Sexual harrassment is just a made up ‘crime.’
    Now rape is a very different story.
     
    Real non-stop sexual harassment at the workplace is a crime for me. But violent vaginal rape (forget oral "rape") is where it gets real/ Too many date rape accounts are really regret rape and both parties were intox9oicated anyhow. Sometimes 3-4 times the legal driving limit.
    Too many of today's young women are floozies who doth protest too much at imagined violations of their imagined purity. It's a laugh really and quite pathetic until these tarts get the poor schmuck guy involved in our legal system. Where he has to spend tens of thousands on lawyers while she sits back and spends ZERO money. She watches the local DA destroy a guy she wants destroyed and often for no good reason.
    , @SimpleSong
    A great point I hadn't thought of. It's like taking down Capone for income tax evasion. I'll take it though.

    Part of me thinks this is women's revenge on the sort of people that have made the general culture so awful for them. Hell hath no fury.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. unit472 says:

    The Gennifer Flowers problem wasn’t hidden. I first saw her on the cover of the STAR tabloid during the 92 campaign and her book “Passion and Betrayal” had an honored spot in my library. Clinton’s womanizing, where it couldn’t be covered up, was treated as being unimportant. A private matter that did not effect his ability to govern or the price women would have to pay to put a Democrat in the White House.

    We tend to forget the gusher of sleaze the Clinton’s generated when they went national. In a way this was the secret of their success. When Jerry Brown raised the issue of Whitewater during a primary debate Clinton treated it as attack upon his wife’s virtue by a man who was probably a homo ( you could do that sort of thing back then). If James Riady and all these strange Asian men bringing cash to the White House was making headlines you could get it off the front pages by having Hillary’s law partner and Deputy White House counsel being found shot to death in Ft. Marcy Park! Travelgate, Troopergate, The Ron Brown Express augering into a mountain. Charlie Trie, Kathleen Wiley, Juanita Brodderick. There was always a new scandal to erase all traces of the last one. The Clinton’s were a moving target you couldn’t hit.

    Read More
    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Thea
    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Yes, it was instructive how the steady stream of Clinton scandals undermined the plausibility of any one of them. Hillary would respond along the lines of, "Our enemies in the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy come up with one phony scandal after another, hoping that one will stick. I have to laugh."

    When confronted with a scandal, the Clintons routine was first deny, then stonewall when evidence was subpoenaed, then respond "It's old news" if reporters asked about it six months later. You can get away with this if the media is on your side.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Bill Clinton's affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.

    That said, and true to form for the Clintons, she was a a tawdry gold-digger who obviously couldn't wait to capitalize on Clintons' run for President. As you said, the Clintons were (are) a veritable sewer-hose of sleaze sprayed out over the country.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    unit, I skipped Monday Night Football to watch A 2 hour special about Bill and Monica. How refreshing to see what a pair of sleaze bags the Clintons were/are. Bill was not a bad president but it was informative to hear him say , on camera, "It depends on what your definition of "is" is." Or wagging his finger at the camera and saying..."I did not have a sexual relation with that woman, Monica Lewinsky." And of course, Hillary famously saying..."I am not Tammy Wynette to stand by my man."
    , @whorefinder
    The Clintons' key was never getting indicted/arrested.

    Once indicted/arrested, you're cut off from air support. The judge, the cops, the jury, the prosecutor---all are way more sealed off from your influence, and the jury would be watched like a hawk by their enemies.

    The Clintons made sure they never panicked or ran to force an arrest. They merely delayed, delayed, delayed, obfuscated, lied, and slowed it all down as much as possible until the public got frustrated and the prosecutor gave up and the press talked about "old unproven allegations" and trash like Conyers pontificated in their defense.

    Any two-bit prosecutor alive could have gotten Bill and Hillary convicted if he'd just gotten them into court on charges. The trouble was getting them there. Comey and Lynch protected them to death in 2016 from getting in front of a jury or judge, and that was just the latest.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Svigor says:

    My guess is that if Hillary had won, then we wouldn’t be seeing this landslide of revelations against key men in the most pro-Democratic industries. Harvey Weinstein, the keystone figure in all this, was a huge Clinton supporter and if his candidate had become president, that probably would have intimidated his victims for another 4 or 8 years. But with the Clintons washed up and people fearing them and their friends less these days, the dam has burst.

    With the other half of the equation being the mob Big Media stirred up against Trump for his “boasting groping.”

    BtW, isn’t it long past time for Billy Bush to fall on his sword and retire? He never said a word about Trump until after the tape had been used in the campaign, much later; for that matter, how about his parent network for holding onto the tape for so long? They only started caring about sexual harassment once it became central to a Presidential election.

    Pellicano is currently getting close to getting out of prison. The feds have his wiretapped files, but he has refused to give up the password. It would be interesting to know who is going to pay him off for his omerta when he walks out the door of prison.

    That’s interesting; have they not been trying to crack the encryption, or have they been trying, and unable?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    That’s interesting; have they not been trying to crack the encryption, or have they been trying, and unable?
     
    Perhaps the encryption has been cracked ...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Svigor says:

    This is merely going after Trump by going after men.

    You’ll know this is a serious movement on behalf of women when they start going after the lesbians who abuse their positions of power.

    You’ll know andrism is a serious (and not, say, Jewish) movement when it starts going after homosexual predators in power. So far they haven’t impressed here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Gennifer ( as in ‘genitals’ ) Flowers posed nude in one or other of America’s pornographic magazines.
    She contributed some pretty catty comments the captions attached to the photo-set.
    ‘If Hillary was ever called to do this’ she declared, ‘then you’d need a double page spread just accommodate her ass’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    ‘If Hillary was ever called to do this’ she declared, ‘then you’d need a double page spread just accommodate her ass’.
     
    So what is your point?

    We all know that Hillary is a woman with a big ass. And we know that back in the day, Gennifer Flowers was a big ass woman. And while Bill Clinton thought he was a lesbian, his lesbian sex with Hill left him cold. So he moved on from his Lesbian liaison to a heterosexual relationship. That was what Flowers was referring to, though indirectly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. TheBoom says:

    My guess is that there was a double whammy that caused the bimbo eruption: Hillary losing and Trump winning. A lot of leftists are anxiously awaiting moving on from leftist sex scandals to using sex scandals to impeach Trump. The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don’t want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corn
    “The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don’t want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.”

    Yup. Like others have noted here and at other blogs, when these sexual harassment scandals started breaking the Dems probably figured they’d throw some Hollywood types and some local and state pols who outlived their usefulness under the bus in order to build their credibility and look fair. Then they would aim their sights on the Harasser in Chief: Drumpf

    But then Senator Franken was accused, and gee the Senate is already closely divided. Then Dean of the House John Conyers was accused, and things became problematic.

    Democratic talking heads seem to have changed their tune. In October it was “New era. Sexual harassment will not be tolerated.” Now they seem to be back to “Presumption of innocence....whaddya, whaddya.....people make mistakes...he said/she said..blah blah”
    , @MBlanc46
    That’s been my take all along. The Left are just clearing the decks before going after Trunp.
    , @Anonymous
    Trump went through this fire last year and came through, if not unscathed, then less damaged than his enemies hoped. There's not much more they can do to him with this issue.
    , @Alden
    Conyers just announced retirement and anointed a son to succeed
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. OT: the tax bill “sticks a dagger” directly into the Democrats’ patronage network. The rich and poor against the middle strategy, unless that middle happens to work for the government, may soon become more expensive. The article is unintentionally funny, complaining in the same paragraph about how house prices maybe fall *and* there will be less money for affordable housing programs. Government as middleman in all transactions has become the norm in far too many coastal cities.

    “Perhaps the biggest difference between ’85 and 2017 is the speed at which these people have worked,” Mr. Kriegel said. “There has not been time to have a serious discussion.” – Thank you Trump!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/04/business/economy/tax-bill-new-york.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    The only good thing about it is that the Right (or at least Republicans) have figured out how to use taxation to stick it to the left. Of course, it's the left that created these differential tax rates that penalize blue states.

    Of course, the bill doesn't really help the deplorables, but benefits establishment Republican donors. Those people are dead men walking: either the Party goes Trumpist and populist and pays off its base, or it loses Congress next yea and all signs of power in 2020. With the Dems getting rid of the Clintons, populism becomes possible for them. The deplorables, having found no succor on the Right, will either die off or get violent.
    , @anon
    Don't forget the requirement for grad students to pay taxes on waived tuition. I'm not sure it's a great or a terrible idea overall, but it certainly is a 4d chess move to neuter the "intellectual" cover given to progressivism for a generation.
    , @Corn
    “The article is unintentionally funny, complaining in the same paragraph about how house prices maybe fall”

    Reminds me of Steve writing a decade ago about the dirt gap and affordable family formation. I try to feel for people who have money wrapped up in their house but I’m disturbed by how “falling house prices are bad” or “high house prices are good” has become the new conventional wisdom.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @The Alarmist
    This is merely going after Trump by going after men.

    You'll know this is a serious movement on behalf of women when they start going after the lesbians who abuse their positions of power.

    Do you think that heavy boot will drop?

    On the one hand, I haven’t heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.

    On the other hand when you look at the current round of defenestrations you could almost get the idea that men coflate the idea of power and prestige with access to sex.

    If women don’t use power and prestige to get sex (because it’s so hard for them to find willing partners otherwise?) then that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon…. it’s all very confusing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker

    that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon…. it’s all very confusing.
     
    The strength/weakness of the left is the ability to hold these impossible positions. Like a one-ended see-saw or a magnet with only one pole. Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better. Ditto races and so on.

    Every single day reality imposes itself yet the left leap over it. So I won't be looking for too many people to join the dots on this issue.
    , @The Alarmist

    "... I haven’t heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings."
     
    I used to work in television, and I know at least one lesbian who did, albeit it was aways "willing" with the young producerettes throwing themselves at her. BTW, they threw themselves at the guys too. I discount half of this witch hunt owing to the fact that favours are offered in this business as least as often, if not more, than they are granted.
    , @Nico

    On the one hand, I haven’t heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.
     
    I take it you're not familiar with the term, "power dyke"?

    Granted, outside of lesbian circles the archetype you speak of is on average true, that women use their sexuality as currency to climb the ranks, whereas men use their rank to lure fulfillment of their sexual fantasies. However, there is at least some overlap between the two, and reversed cases are not unheard of. I don't think they're usually quite so caricatural and fantastic as in Oxford Blues, but a boy-toy for an older, wealthy, lonely woman can't be impossible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Thea says:
    @unit472
    The Gennifer Flowers problem wasn't hidden. I first saw her on the cover of the STAR tabloid during the 92 campaign and her book "Passion and Betrayal" had an honored spot in my library. Clinton's womanizing, where it couldn't be covered up, was treated as being unimportant. A private matter that did not effect his ability to govern or the price women would have to pay to put a Democrat in the White House.

    We tend to forget the gusher of sleaze the Clinton's generated when they went national. In a way this was the secret of their success. When Jerry Brown raised the issue of Whitewater during a primary debate Clinton treated it as attack upon his wife's virtue by a man who was probably a homo ( you could do that sort of thing back then). If James Riady and all these strange Asian men bringing cash to the White House was making headlines you could get it off the front pages by having Hillary's law partner and Deputy White House counsel being found shot to death in Ft. Marcy Park! Travelgate, Troopergate, The Ron Brown Express augering into a mountain. Charlie Trie, Kathleen Wiley, Juanita Brodderick. There was always a new scandal to erase all traces of the last one. The Clinton's were a moving target you couldn't hit.

    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.

    Read More
    • Replies: @renfro
    Depends on how you define womanizing.
    , @Stan Adams
    As long as they never catch you in bed with a dead girl or a live boy, you're good to go.
    , @David Davenport
    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.


    Why not? Please explain.
    , @Anonymous
    The 8-year tenure of Clinton despite all the scandals shows that the electorate will tolerate a scoundrel in the White House so long as he takes care of business and delivers on his campaign promises.

    Trump take note.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Sunbeam says:

    “The feds have his wiretapped files, but he has refused to give up the password.”

    I don’t know the legal ins-outs of this, but I’m fairly sure that the NSA for one could crack the encryption of whatever even a smart cookie was using circa the era Pellicano was sent up the river.

    Or, 4chan could probably do it too. Seriously that is one mega capable organization. I’m not trying to use hyperbole or anything either. But considering their exploits they sure seem a lot more capable than the FBI, CIA or any other alphabet soup organization at using computers.

    Kek and Pedo Bear are more their things, but I’m quite sure that members of 4chan either can crack those files, or know who to contact on the internet who can. All they’d need is the encrypted files.

    Read More
    • Agree: Abe, TWS
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. BenKenobi says:

    Remember Larry David on SNL: The scandal was a (((scandal))) at first.

    Now it’s like the SAMSON protocol has been engaged, and everyone is going down.

    But did we ever pin down exactly why Weinstein was originally thrown to the wolves? I recall the story knocked Vegas and Paddock from the national stage. Seems like a thousand years ago, but maybe that’s the point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rod1963
    I don't think it was co-incidental.

    Here we had the worst mass shooting in American history and it vanishes from public discussion and view in two weeks.

    No follow ups no nothing. No one even knows Paddock's motivation or what his GF told the FBI, etc. The FBI has totally stonewalled on the case, etc.

    You'd think Hollywood would make a movie about it, no dice.

    Hell at last report, the authorities can't even get the time line correct. Either the FBI and cops are totally incompetent (which is a distinct possibility) or they are covering up something. Ever notice the head sheriff body language at the press conferences - he was ready to fall apart.

    To me that is a much bigger story than a bunch of sexually deviant Jews getting their comeuppance. Everyone knew before hand they are a twisted bunch. SouthPark did a send up of the Jewish run Hollywood years back exposing them.
    , @J.Ross
    Why Weinstein?
    The real scandal that this is distracting from does not involve semi-consensual career contracting by adult women who absolutely knew the score and were looking to make money. Notice Bryan Singer's recent behavior. The potential is building for an exposure of Pedowood.
    On the East Coast there was a big revelation yesterday about Ed Rendell, who is connected to Tony Podesta. It is fascinating here to read a certain letter, made up entirely of questions, penned by the guy who sued Steven Spielberg and won. A strong man, who can kick.
    , @Dennis Dale
    I almost want that to be true. The media brings forth the Weinstein scandal to bump Las Vegas out of the news cycle and before they know it they've set off a nationwide inquisition that's taking them down too.
    We can't discount the origins of this in the "Pussy Hat" movement. If the elite hadn't pulled out all the stops to frame Trump's win as a victory for misogyny and sexual harassment it would be difficult to imagine this happening. Ashley Judd's intensely emotional poetry reading at the seminal Pussy Hat demonstration makes sense now that we know her as an accuser. She was transferring her rage to Trump, who, meanwhile, must either have been a boy scout in reality or have a lot of payoffs out there when you consider the scrutiny his history has been under for the past two years.
    , @Polymath
    "But did we ever pin down exactly why Weinstein was originally thrown to the wolves?"

    Because Ronan Farrow was very determined, with very high integrity and very high IQ. That's the main reason. Sometimes someone you think is on your side is not a hypocrite and holds you to your own standards and is capable enough to outwit your efforts to thwart him.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Glaivester says: • Website

    OT Geoffrey Hughes’ character in Keeping Up Appearances was named Onslow. I don’t see how anyone can act as if they are a KUA fan and not know that.

    I put this here because I originally put it in another post that was taken down, but this fact has nothing to do with why it was taken down, but it is still vitally important that it be said.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I was never really a 'big fan' , I just took casual notice whilst the programme 'played on in the background'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Glaivester
    OT Geoffrey Hughes' character in Keeping Up Appearances was named Onslow. I don't see how anyone can act as if they are a KUA fan and not know that.

    I put this here because I originally put it in another post that was taken down, but this fact has nothing to do with why it was taken down, but it is still vitally important that it be said.

    I was never really a ‘big fan’ , I just took casual notice whilst the programme ‘played on in the background’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Such an admission is sure to keep you off the guest list* for a waterside supper with riparian entertainments.

    * Otherwise known by the uninitiated as a "bucket list".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. It would be interesting to know who is going to pay him off for his omerta when he walks out the door of prison.

    The same people who paid off Webb Hubbell after he got out of prison and refused to talk. The same people who convinced Susan McDougal that it would be better to spend 18 months in jail on contempt of court charges rather than talk.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Anon says: • Website • Disclaimer

    I don’t think it was lack of fear of Clintons under Trump.

    After all, Clinton was helpless to stop the Lewinsky blowup.

    Rather, the feminist hatred at Trump has been transferred onto other, all, men.
    All men with abusive power now seem like Trumpoids. It doesn’t matter if most of these men are anti-Trump. It’s the logic of frenzy.

    It’s like Stalin and Mao’s anti-capitalist purges ended up destroying other communists accused of being ‘capitalist roaders’ or ‘bourgeois’. When a people have been made to HATE the bourgeois but there are none around, then communists will have to be made into ‘capitalist roaders’.

    Against Trump, the media unleashed the mother of all hysteria: A pussy-grabbing Nazi Islamophobe who colluded with new hitler Putin to destroy history and etc.

    Stupid biatches are freaking out. They totally bought the hysteria, and the frenzied mind sees Nazi Pussy-grabbers everywhere.

    Also, Weinstein story had a domino effect. Prior to him, the unspoken rule was DO NOT PUNCH TO THE LEFT. This led to a culture of entitlement among lib men, and they got away with so much bad behavior. They knew they had the prog cover. Don’t punch to the left. Being a prog men, esp Jewish, was license to pinch ass.
    It’s like feminists went easy on Clinton because he was on the right side. But with women taking over colleges and much else, feminists are less dependent on white knights and more hostile to bad behavior now.
    Anyway, Weinstein scandal had a domino effect. The fact that the media ran with that story emboldened more women to shriek. Also, women like to shriek. Men generally keep their hurt to themselves since they are expected to be tough and take the knocks of life. For a time, women wanted to be tough like men(“take it like a man” and “roll with the punches”), but this means they repressed their female nature of shrieking and seeking a shoulder to cry on. Now, they can shriek and it feels so good. It’s Lucy time.

    And there is also envy of other victims. During Obama era, homos and trannies got most attention. Feminists even had to swallow the nonsense that a tranny is a woman and can use ladies room and can play women’s sports and kick women’s butt.
    Andf then BLM got all the attention.
    Women went along with all this cuz it was supposedly ‘progressive’.
    But despite women’s consent to stuff they didn’t like, Hillary lost. In their minds, the Lib men didn’t do enough to defeat Trump. In their paranoid mind, all those libby men secretly supported Trump.

    Now, the biatches are saying “it’s our (democratic)party and we’ll cry if we want to”

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    There’s a lot of truth in what you say, but women’s hatred hasn’t suddenly turned against all men. It’s always been directed against all men.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @unit472
    The Gennifer Flowers problem wasn't hidden. I first saw her on the cover of the STAR tabloid during the 92 campaign and her book "Passion and Betrayal" had an honored spot in my library. Clinton's womanizing, where it couldn't be covered up, was treated as being unimportant. A private matter that did not effect his ability to govern or the price women would have to pay to put a Democrat in the White House.

    We tend to forget the gusher of sleaze the Clinton's generated when they went national. In a way this was the secret of their success. When Jerry Brown raised the issue of Whitewater during a primary debate Clinton treated it as attack upon his wife's virtue by a man who was probably a homo ( you could do that sort of thing back then). If James Riady and all these strange Asian men bringing cash to the White House was making headlines you could get it off the front pages by having Hillary's law partner and Deputy White House counsel being found shot to death in Ft. Marcy Park! Travelgate, Troopergate, The Ron Brown Express augering into a mountain. Charlie Trie, Kathleen Wiley, Juanita Brodderick. There was always a new scandal to erase all traces of the last one. The Clinton's were a moving target you couldn't hit.

    Yes, it was instructive how the steady stream of Clinton scandals undermined the plausibility of any one of them. Hillary would respond along the lines of, “Our enemies in the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy come up with one phony scandal after another, hoping that one will stick. I have to laugh.”

    When confronted with a scandal, the Clintons routine was first deny, then stonewall when evidence was subpoenaed, then respond “It’s old news” if reporters asked about it six months later. You can get away with this if the media is on your side.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Lurker says:
    @cliff arroyo
    Do you think that heavy boot will drop?

    On the one hand, I haven't heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.

    On the other hand when you look at the current round of defenestrations you could almost get the idea that men coflate the idea of power and prestige with access to sex.

    If women don't use power and prestige to get sex (because it's so hard for them to find willing partners otherwise?) then that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon.... it's all very confusing.

    that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon…. it’s all very confusing.

    The strength/weakness of the left is the ability to hold these impossible positions. Like a one-ended see-saw or a magnet with only one pole. Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better. Ditto races and so on.

    Every single day reality imposes itself yet the left leap over it. So I won’t be looking for too many people to join the dots on this issue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better.
     
    Oh man, Lurker, you beat me to it. This is exactly the succinct statement of the fundamental axiom of feminist ideology.
    , @Anonymous
    Or, as Orwell put it, 'we are all equal, but some are more equal than others'.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better.
     
    I think that particular line belongs to Jennifer Roback Morse, unless you can find an earlier citation.

    Oh, wait, no... She didn't add the word "where", so her version is even stronger than yours.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Anon says: • Website • Disclaimer

    There are men who don’t need to chase after women. Women are chasing after them.
    That’s been Eastwood’s theme. He has to fight them off.
    It’s surprising that Stallone has been one of the charged. I mean he would have no problem getting girls.

    But most of the accused have been dorks who never the attention in school. So, they had to use a mix of humor and pressure to get what they want. And being a proggy certainly helped in libby corners.

    So, for the most part, this is feminist crusade against ugly men. “If you’re ugly, get lost, you loser.”

    The hysteria is feminist yet a return to primal biology. Women wanna chase after a handsome guy and don’t want to be chased by ugly guy.
    Also, handsome guys don’t have to be so desperate. Dorks must use an extra something to get a piece.

    It’s all about hierarchy.

    IN THE COMPANY OF MEN captured this dynamics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That video clip is whacked. It's pure degeneracy, depicting white men as sociopaths. No one needs to see anything like this in a movie, or anywhere else. I wish I had never watched it.
    , @RonaldB
    This has very little to do with disparate power relations, which can actually be of mutual benefit and agreement.

    This is a full-blown narcissist sociopath. Part of being a full-blown narcissist, although this is not found in the diagnostic manuals, is that the narcissist goes out of his way to hurt people as a prime motivator. The manuals present a narcissist as being indifferent to the fate of other people, but it actually goes further. The real narcissist sees hurting other people as a prime motivator.

    By the way, his associate needs to watch his back. What makes him think the narcissist won't make him suffer in the same way they're discussing destroying some woman they never met?
    , @Autochthon
    Stallone's situation is an unusually sympathetic case of retroactive regret. A teen (sexually mature; please, bot with the paedophilia nonsense again...) voluntarily goes to the hunky movie-star's hotel room after already having displayed admiration for him, but it turns out sex isn't as magical as she thought, it's dirty and weird. Especially so when the creepy bodyguard is brought in whom she is not into at all.

    A really weird case that combines elements of the adventuress and the cad as the thing progressed in time over the course of the evening.

    And that only all IF the story is true as related....

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Anon says: • Website • Disclaimer

    In Niebelungen, the Rhein maidens reject Alberich for being ugly. It makes Alberich mad.

    And later, Brunnhilde turns against Siegfried because Siggy goes for another woman.

    So, women hate ugly men and hate handsome men who dump them.

    Former is revulsion, latter is revenge.

    Whine-maidens or Wein-maidens.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    A Germanophile, I'm impressed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Jake says:

    It is more than just getting even with hardcore Clinton backers who now have less power because she lost.

    The Dem establishment cheated Hillary to get the nomination for Obama: Bros befo’ Hos. When that same Dem establishment failed to get Hillary back into the White House, a host of Feminazis decided to get even with white men who had allowed Bros befo’ Hos.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    This may be true. I know a lot of Hillary supporters view the Bernie bros as traitors. I'm sure the Hillary crowd thinks that if they got the vote of more Bernie supporters on election day, she would have won. She may be right about that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Tulip says:

    I wonder how much of this is sublimation of aggression that Trump won, so now there needs to be an outlet to make people pay. Since Trump’s public persona is more or less of a horn dog, let’s round up some of the usual suspects and make an example.

    I think rather than a function of Hillary losing, it is more about Hillary losing to THAT MAN.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    The rule goes, SJWers always project. This is why they're so quick to take offense and perceive microaggressions everywhere.
    , @Anonym
    I think we need to look at how the story actually broke with Weinstein, why it broke, and why the Weinstein effect continued.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Weinstein_sexual_abuse_allegations

    It seems the NYT and New Yorker originally broke the stories? I am surprised it fit the narrative tbh. I don't know if it was intended as a triple bank shot method of impeaching Trump, but Harvey I thought would have been untouchable.

    It seems that Harvey was just out of control and got more bold and less careful as time went on. Eventually he gambled, lost, and the weight of circumstantial evidence and testimony became too much.

    Since then it has shown other women that if they want their 15 minutes of fame for whatever reason, or they want to get even with a powerful figure, or both, then they can do what was done to Weinstein. So there has been the Weinstein effect. Would it have happened without Trump? I am not sure. I don't think it hurt to have the left somewhat demoralized, especially in the fake news media. And the anger at the (perfectly truthful IMO) "grab 'em by the pussy" statement by Trump.

    Historically people who desire to get away with crime or immorality will choose public personas, politics, religion, profession etc in order to make themselves out to be beyond rapproach. Think Ted Bundy and working on a suicide hotline. Or any communist leader - let's kill all the rich and powerful so that I can be ruler of the country, so, uh, I can help the oppressed worker! Or any of these creeps and womanizers who profess to be feminists. So it's not an accident that these supposedly caring lefties turn out to be major sexual predators.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @cliff arroyo
    Do you think that heavy boot will drop?

    On the one hand, I haven't heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.

    On the other hand when you look at the current round of defenestrations you could almost get the idea that men coflate the idea of power and prestige with access to sex.

    If women don't use power and prestige to get sex (because it's so hard for them to find willing partners otherwise?) then that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon.... it's all very confusing.

    “… I haven’t heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.”

    I used to work in television, and I know at least one lesbian who did, albeit it was aways “willing” with the young producerettes throwing themselves at her. BTW, they threw themselves at the guys too. I discount half of this witch hunt owing to the fact that favours are offered in this business as least as often, if not more, than they are granted.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @Chief Seattle
    OT: the tax bill "sticks a dagger" directly into the Democrats' patronage network. The rich and poor against the middle strategy, unless that middle happens to work for the government, may soon become more expensive. The article is unintentionally funny, complaining in the same paragraph about how house prices maybe fall *and* there will be less money for affordable housing programs. Government as middleman in all transactions has become the norm in far too many coastal cities.

    “Perhaps the biggest difference between ’85 and 2017 is the speed at which these people have worked,” Mr. Kriegel said. “There has not been time to have a serious discussion.” - Thank you Trump!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/04/business/economy/tax-bill-new-york.html

    The only good thing about it is that the Right (or at least Republicans) have figured out how to use taxation to stick it to the left. Of course, it’s the left that created these differential tax rates that penalize blue states.

    Of course, the bill doesn’t really help the deplorables, but benefits establishment Republican donors. Those people are dead men walking: either the Party goes Trumpist and populist and pays off its base, or it loses Congress next yea and all signs of power in 2020. With the Dems getting rid of the Clintons, populism becomes possible for them. The deplorables, having found no succor on the Right, will either die off or get violent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    "Without the Clintons, the Dems can go populist."

    What are you even talking about? Bill Clinton, master politician, was making noises about needing white Democrats only to get overruled by a political neophyte who wanted to pander to the coalition of the fringes.

    Nah, the Left is going to ride this communist train to the end, whether the result is Cambodia or Chile.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Anon says: • Website • Disclaimer

    I think one crucial difference between Bimbombs and what is happening today is the type of ‘victims’.

    Feminists could laugh at those low-IQ ‘white trash’ types that Clinton exploited. I mean them girls were a bunch of lowly sluts. So, what did it matter? Elite feminists felt closer to elite lib men than to low class whores.

    But many who are coming forward now are not bimbos. They are not low IQ and low status and low class. They went to good schools and/or work in ‘edgy’ industries. They’ve been told over and over and over that
    1. Sexual beasts are conservatives
    2. All progs must unite against Emperor Haven Monhan.

    So, even though these girls met with Libby men lechers in the workplace, they pretended they were all on the same boat hunting for Moby Dick.
    It’s like what Gus Savage once said to a black woman who resisted his charms: She was not being with the Black ‘Movement’ .

    https://www.politico.com/story/2011/06/sex-scandals-that-still-haunt-house-056548?o=1

    In a way, the career collisions we are seeing today are somewhat akin to rise of Alt Right.

    American Right was told that Neocons are pro-American and looking out for American Interests, and etc. But all this time, Neocons were stabbing White America in the back while pushing Israel First policy. So, Alt Right rose to point this out. The very people at the heart of American Conservatism have been abusing and exploiting American Patriots. So, there has been much infighting and insurgency within the American Right against the Establishment. Trump rode to victory on this energy. Though Alt Right articulated it most clearly, even non-Alt Right patriots began to feel that something isn’t right. They responded to Trump’s talk of useless wars and need for America First.

    Likewise, these women are realizing that all these powerful Libby men(a good number of them Jewish) have been saying one thing while carrying on with the same Old Boys Network or New Boys Network(that is even more vulgar and pornier than Old Boys Network. After all, I doubt if Walter Cronkite passed out sex toys to female employees). They feel that so much of Libby world says one thing but does another. In a way, BLM also blew up because of Liberal urban policies. Though BLM has been blamed on police brutality, it was Libs who cranked up police power to control blacks. Notice how BLM went craziest in blue cities and lib college campuses.
    And there was the socialist Bernie Bro rebellion against Hillary the Mother Hen of the Globo-Wall Street-Deep-State matrix. We are seeing systems crack up from the inside because the fissures are growing too great. Too much contradiction between what it said and what is done.

    Also, even though Libby men officially and ideologically welcome ‘more women’ in the workplace, their male psychology kicks into fear and they fear threatened by castrating female power. So, in order to bolster their sense of manhood, they feel a need to make moves on women to show that they are still the MEN AROUND HERE. It could be subconscious.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    We are seeing systems crack up from the inside because the fissures are growing too great. Too much contradiction between what it said and what is done.
     
    There are some real cracks showing here:

    - With almost 100% media backing and vast electoral spending, Hillary still lost.

    - Immigration was never supposed to be a public issue, but it is.

    - The public were supposed to back the "War on Terror", but instead focus on what it costs ($ 6 trillion and counting), the lousy "investment" that they are paying for.

    - They were supposed to accept the 9/11 media story but 50%+ of them consider it a deceptive lie (along with WMD).

    - The public are comparing decades of stagnant wages and outsourced jobs with the unbelievable wealth of the new SJW/Billionaire Aristocracy.

    - They know that they are regarded with contempt as "Deplorables".

    - Even the dumbest members of the public can see that the Cultural Marxist Aristocracy are trashing Anglo American culture.

    Trump has sold them out, so what happens next is anyone's guess - but buildings this badly cracked, are usually beyond repair and get demolished.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Corn says:
    @TheBoom
    My guess is that there was a double whammy that caused the bimbo eruption: Hillary losing and Trump winning. A lot of leftists are anxiously awaiting moving on from leftist sex scandals to using sex scandals to impeach Trump. The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don't want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.

    “The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don’t want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.”

    Yup. Like others have noted here and at other blogs, when these sexual harassment scandals started breaking the Dems probably figured they’d throw some Hollywood types and some local and state pols who outlived their usefulness under the bus in order to build their credibility and look fair. Then they would aim their sights on the Harasser in Chief: Drumpf

    But then Senator Franken was accused, and gee the Senate is already closely divided. Then Dean of the House John Conyers was accused, and things became problematic.

    Democratic talking heads seem to have changed their tune. In October it was “New era. Sexual harassment will not be tolerated.” Now they seem to be back to “Presumption of innocence….whaddya, whaddya…..people make mistakes…he said/she said..blah blah”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    But then Senator Franken was accused, and gee the Senate is already closely divided. Then Dean of the House John Conyers was accused, and things became problematic.
     
    I don't think the Democratic leadership and their donor-backers have any real problem with getting rid of Conyers. They view blacks as the hired help. It's just that he and his followers seem determined to hang on to his office.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. eah says:

    Hillary’s Defeat

    Speaking of which: it seemed to open other “floodgates” — how much money is all this Russia nonsense costing? — how much national energy is it absorbing?

    Read More
    • LOL: Luke Lea
    • Replies: @eah
    https://twitter.com/westland_will/status/938124482534952960
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Chief Seattle
    OT: the tax bill "sticks a dagger" directly into the Democrats' patronage network. The rich and poor against the middle strategy, unless that middle happens to work for the government, may soon become more expensive. The article is unintentionally funny, complaining in the same paragraph about how house prices maybe fall *and* there will be less money for affordable housing programs. Government as middleman in all transactions has become the norm in far too many coastal cities.

    “Perhaps the biggest difference between ’85 and 2017 is the speed at which these people have worked,” Mr. Kriegel said. “There has not been time to have a serious discussion.” - Thank you Trump!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/04/business/economy/tax-bill-new-york.html

    Don’t forget the requirement for grad students to pay taxes on waived tuition. I’m not sure it’s a great or a terrible idea overall, but it certainly is a 4d chess move to neuter the “intellectual” cover given to progressivism for a generation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JimS
    This is an interesting point. Grad schools have been getting away with charging tuition to grad students whose only classes are research hours. This greatly benefits the universities, as the NSF/NIH/NASA/DOE/(insert federal or foundational funding program here) grants which pay for the vast majority of the grad student researchers have to give a cut - typically over 50% of the student's grant, but depending on in-state public vs. out-of-state vs. private considerations - to the university in the name of tuition and fees. It creates yet another incentive for universities to raise their tuition. Making grad students pay taxes is really the first move toward reining in out of control tuition costs.

    What grad student could afford to pay $10k in taxes on a <$30k stipend? Grad students will leave unless the universities make it affordable. No school wants to be without grad students and lose the prestige of being a "R1" research university. It's your move, academia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. How did we all miss this, a new Frontlash:

    Sheryl Sandberg Warns Of #MeToo Backlash Against Women

    The Facebook executive is hearing people say this is why you shouldn’t hire women. Actually this is why you should.

    Facebook executive Sheryl Sandberg warned Sunday morning about the potential for women to wind up on the losing end of what seems like a watershed moment in feminism.

    The Lean In author is cheering women on, but she writes in a lengthy Facebook post, “I have already heard the rumblings of a backlash.”

    Over the last two months, every day has seemed to bring new allegations of sexual misconduct against powerful men, who are facing real consequences for their actions. And people are already saying, “‘This is why you shouldn’t hire women,’” Sandberg writes.

    “Actually, this is why you should,” she continues. Hiring, mentoring and promoting women is the only long-term solution to sexual harassment, which is all about power, according to Sandberg. …

    The solution certainly isn’t the so-called Pence rule…

    https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a22c2a5e4b03350e0b710eb

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thea
    Ivanka supports 'Lean in.'

    I hope I live to see the day when feminists push men too far. It will be lovely to watch them eating their just desserts.
    , @anon
    Hiring, mentoring and promoting women is the only long-term solution to sexual harassment, which is all about power, according to Sandberg.

    That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Unless you promote every single woman over every man, there will always be women who are powerless.

    I get that she's not being sincere, but has the left in general just lost all capacity for critical thought?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Corn says:
    @Chief Seattle
    OT: the tax bill "sticks a dagger" directly into the Democrats' patronage network. The rich and poor against the middle strategy, unless that middle happens to work for the government, may soon become more expensive. The article is unintentionally funny, complaining in the same paragraph about how house prices maybe fall *and* there will be less money for affordable housing programs. Government as middleman in all transactions has become the norm in far too many coastal cities.

    “Perhaps the biggest difference between ’85 and 2017 is the speed at which these people have worked,” Mr. Kriegel said. “There has not been time to have a serious discussion.” - Thank you Trump!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/04/business/economy/tax-bill-new-york.html

    “The article is unintentionally funny, complaining in the same paragraph about how house prices maybe fall”

    Reminds me of Steve writing a decade ago about the dirt gap and affordable family formation. I try to feel for people who have money wrapped up in their house but I’m disturbed by how “falling house prices are bad” or “high house prices are good” has become the new conventional wisdom.

    Read More
    • Agree: 27 year old
    • Replies: @EriK

    I’m disturbed by how “falling house prices are bad” or “high house prices are good” has become the new conventional wisdom.
     
    Yeah, this bit of conventional wisdom drives me nuts.
    , @Carbon blob
    Yep, when home equity becomes the dominant share of a community's wealth, it is in their interest to enact extremely antisocial policies to preserve their wealth -- zoning laws, keeping immigrants and poor people out of their towns/schools, etc.

    The 1:3 ratio for rent/mortgage payment as a fraction of take-home pay has been blown out of the water in liberal coastal cities -- are there charts anywhere displaying the ratio of home equity to net wealth anywhere?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Anon says: • Website • Disclaimer

    Bitchforks against Pinchdorks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. When a dam bursts, you do get a landslide of material that washes up along the pathway.

    This is actually not a mixed metaphor when it comes to the Clinton edifice. It is exactly what happened.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. One element is the changing newspaper business. Compared to twenty years ago, nominally respectable papers publish a lot more National Enquirer-style sordidness, but they still have to come up with high-minded justifications for doing so. I’m reminded of a time thirty years ago catching up with a high school friend. One job he’d had involved couriering legal papers around Las Vegas, and a National Enquirer writer hired him to locate some documents related to Liberace’s death. My friend was amazed to learn that a National Enquirer article was actually researched, but it was still an article about Liberace for the National Enquirer, so no, he definitely did not wish to be credited for his role in researching it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CJ

    My friend was amazed to learn that a National Enquirer article was actually researched ...
     
    He shouldn't have been. The Enquirer and the Wall Street Journal were known for many years as the most carefully researched print media outlets. They were also known as the best-paying firms in the business.

    While we're at it, when Matt Drudge's Drudge Report appeared he was criticized for mashing up politics and Hollywood. Now it's obvious he was right; they really are one interconnected blob.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Mr. Anon says:
    @unit472
    The Gennifer Flowers problem wasn't hidden. I first saw her on the cover of the STAR tabloid during the 92 campaign and her book "Passion and Betrayal" had an honored spot in my library. Clinton's womanizing, where it couldn't be covered up, was treated as being unimportant. A private matter that did not effect his ability to govern or the price women would have to pay to put a Democrat in the White House.

    We tend to forget the gusher of sleaze the Clinton's generated when they went national. In a way this was the secret of their success. When Jerry Brown raised the issue of Whitewater during a primary debate Clinton treated it as attack upon his wife's virtue by a man who was probably a homo ( you could do that sort of thing back then). If James Riady and all these strange Asian men bringing cash to the White House was making headlines you could get it off the front pages by having Hillary's law partner and Deputy White House counsel being found shot to death in Ft. Marcy Park! Travelgate, Troopergate, The Ron Brown Express augering into a mountain. Charlie Trie, Kathleen Wiley, Juanita Brodderick. There was always a new scandal to erase all traces of the last one. The Clinton's were a moving target you couldn't hit.

    Bill Clinton’s affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.

    That said, and true to form for the Clintons, she was a a tawdry gold-digger who obviously couldn’t wait to capitalize on Clintons’ run for President. As you said, the Clintons were (are) a veritable sewer-hose of sleaze sprayed out over the country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    When Gennifer Flowers finally got to expound on the topic of Bill Clinton years later, she was pretty insightful and affectionate.
    , @renfro
    A friend best described the Clintons as Arkansas grifters
    , @Anon
    "She was a a tawdry gold-digger who obviously couldn’t wait to capitalize on Clintons’ run for President."

    This applies to Hillary Clinton herself. She was always nothing more than a higher class version of Gennifer Flowers. Hillary is basically a Madame de Pompadour who is in over her head politically and who makes stupid judgment calls, but who craves power, influence, and money for their own sake, and she'll do anything to get them, including trying to sic segments of the electorate against each other like dogs fighting in a pit while taking advantage of their animosity to line her purse. She's fundamentally selfish, self-centered, and bad for the country. This is why she's never been anything like Margaret Thatcher. Thatcher had an actual vision of what needed to be done for the good of the country and stuck to it.
    , @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Bill Clinton’s affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.
     
    We don't know much about Bill's post-White House philandering except for whispers of rumors and odd pictures of Blythe with Hollywood actresses and Porn Stars. I've surmised that the Press had resolved not to report on the Clintons' living almost wholly separate lives.

    I think Flowers was by far the most conventionally attractive of the women he's been linked to pre-2000, so it's probably likely that she was the one for him though they were separated by circumstance and one really awful Harpy. You can imagine that if Blythe had not been a Boomer and had been in the immediately preceding generation she'd have been his choice for Partner/Arkansas First Lady etc. She'd have probably made a better and more conventional political spouse for a Southern politician and maybe even better during his first Presidential run although the "2 for 1" campaign seemed to have traction with working Boomer women.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Mr. Anon says:

    Did Hillary’s Defeat Open the Floodgates on Bimbo Eruptions?

    An ejaculation of sordid allegations into the potted-plant of national consciousness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. MBlanc46 says:
    @TheBoom
    My guess is that there was a double whammy that caused the bimbo eruption: Hillary losing and Trump winning. A lot of leftists are anxiously awaiting moving on from leftist sex scandals to using sex scandals to impeach Trump. The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don't want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.

    That’s been my take all along. The Left are just clearing the decks before going after Trunp.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jim jones
    I assume Trump has some stuff held in reserve, a Nuclear Option if you like
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Mr. Anon says:
    @Corn
    “The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don’t want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.”

    Yup. Like others have noted here and at other blogs, when these sexual harassment scandals started breaking the Dems probably figured they’d throw some Hollywood types and some local and state pols who outlived their usefulness under the bus in order to build their credibility and look fair. Then they would aim their sights on the Harasser in Chief: Drumpf

    But then Senator Franken was accused, and gee the Senate is already closely divided. Then Dean of the House John Conyers was accused, and things became problematic.

    Democratic talking heads seem to have changed their tune. In October it was “New era. Sexual harassment will not be tolerated.” Now they seem to be back to “Presumption of innocence....whaddya, whaddya.....people make mistakes...he said/she said..blah blah”

    But then Senator Franken was accused, and gee the Senate is already closely divided. Then Dean of the House John Conyers was accused, and things became problematic.

    I don’t think the Democratic leadership and their donor-backers have any real problem with getting rid of Conyers. They view blacks as the hired help. It’s just that he and his followers seem determined to hang on to his office.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. MBlanc46 says:
    @Anon
    I don't think it was lack of fear of Clintons under Trump.

    After all, Clinton was helpless to stop the Lewinsky blowup.

    Rather, the feminist hatred at Trump has been transferred onto other, all, men.
    All men with abusive power now seem like Trumpoids. It doesn't matter if most of these men are anti-Trump. It's the logic of frenzy.

    It's like Stalin and Mao's anti-capitalist purges ended up destroying other communists accused of being 'capitalist roaders' or 'bourgeois'. When a people have been made to HATE the bourgeois but there are none around, then communists will have to be made into 'capitalist roaders'.

    Against Trump, the media unleashed the mother of all hysteria: A pussy-grabbing Nazi Islamophobe who colluded with new hitler Putin to destroy history and etc.

    Stupid biatches are freaking out. They totally bought the hysteria, and the frenzied mind sees Nazi Pussy-grabbers everywhere.

    Also, Weinstein story had a domino effect. Prior to him, the unspoken rule was DO NOT PUNCH TO THE LEFT. This led to a culture of entitlement among lib men, and they got away with so much bad behavior. They knew they had the prog cover. Don't punch to the left. Being a prog men, esp Jewish, was license to pinch ass.
    It's like feminists went easy on Clinton because he was on the right side. But with women taking over colleges and much else, feminists are less dependent on white knights and more hostile to bad behavior now.
    Anyway, Weinstein scandal had a domino effect. The fact that the media ran with that story emboldened more women to shriek. Also, women like to shriek. Men generally keep their hurt to themselves since they are expected to be tough and take the knocks of life. For a time, women wanted to be tough like men("take it like a man" and "roll with the punches"), but this means they repressed their female nature of shrieking and seeking a shoulder to cry on. Now, they can shriek and it feels so good. It's Lucy time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysyalHb9Vxo

    And there is also envy of other victims. During Obama era, homos and trannies got most attention. Feminists even had to swallow the nonsense that a tranny is a woman and can use ladies room and can play women's sports and kick women's butt.
    Andf then BLM got all the attention.
    Women went along with all this cuz it was supposedly 'progressive'.
    But despite women's consent to stuff they didn't like, Hillary lost. In their minds, the Lib men didn't do enough to defeat Trump. In their paranoid mind, all those libby men secretly supported Trump.

    Now, the biatches are saying "it's our (democratic)party and we'll cry if we want to"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PXIui8sa2U

    There’s a lot of truth in what you say, but women’s hatred hasn’t suddenly turned against all men. It’s always been directed against all men.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    It’s always been directed against all men.

    Nah, some women just love certain kind of men. The homme fatales.

    It's like femme fatales in noir movies. The men know them gals are NO GOOD and will likely lead to their ruin, but they just can't resist.

    I think there is a way out of this problem. The grading system.

    At a workplace, all men should be graded from 10 to 1, 10 being super-handsome and 1 being pug-ugly.

    So, men will have to go around wearing a badge from 10 to 1. It'd be like the military.

    As for the women, they must sign a questionnaire during hiring.
    Do they want to be approached by men, yes or no.

    If no, they get to wear a badge that signifies 'no attention'. And men better leave them alone.

    If yes, the women must choose what level of men can approach them. So, 5 and up would mean any man rated 5 or higher can approach them. A woman may choose only 10,and then only guys rated 10 can approach them. There will be different badges for different tastes.

    Also, women get to choose the kind of approaches men may make.

    Nice Words Only means a guy may flirt in a very gentle way, like asking out for cup of coffee.

    Suggestive Words means a guy can be anything from nice to subtly boing.

    Slut Talk means a guy can openly discuss sexual matter with the woman

    Skank Talk means a guy can talk totally raunchy with the woman

    Groping Okay means a guy may grope or pinch a woman.

    Slap Okay means a guy a slap a woman's behind.

    Squeeze Okay means a guy can grab a woman's boobs and her buns.

    So, suppose a woman goes around with wearing a Yes with 7 up and Groping Okay badge.

    That means any guy who is rated 7 or higher can approach her with anything ranging from nice talk to groping. But nothing beyond that.

    That way, it's all clarified.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Anon
    I don't think this is a stretch at all. The NY Times put a lot of resources into exposing Weinstein. No doubt that David Boies was putting a lot of pressure on Dean Baquet over this reporting. If Boies could have rounded up Bill Clinton and his whole crew to put the arm on Baquet, there is a pretty good chance he would have folded, as so many editors before him had done.

    The New Yorker you mean?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Is she woman number one?

    The name indicates a WOC so….. circular firing squad time?

    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/melanie-martinez-accused-sexual-assault-080129312.html

    My first thought is it that it sounds like a lesbian breakup which can turn very vicious very quickly. But again, I don’t think feminists are much into admitting unpleasant facts about ‘their’ side.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  44. @Mr. Anon
    Bill Clinton's affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.

    That said, and true to form for the Clintons, she was a a tawdry gold-digger who obviously couldn't wait to capitalize on Clintons' run for President. As you said, the Clintons were (are) a veritable sewer-hose of sleaze sprayed out over the country.

    When Gennifer Flowers finally got to expound on the topic of Bill Clinton years later, she was pretty insightful and affectionate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @David In TN
    I read the first book Gennifer Flowers produced. and she indicated a liking for Bill Clinton. Of his wife, she said people around Little Rock disliked Hillary for her "arrogant Yankee attitude." And Flowers loved to ridicule Hillary Clinton's looks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. whorefinder says: • Website

    I’ve said it before: the “bimbo eruptions” now are an intra-Democratic power struggle. The Hate Whitey and Bernie Bros are ganging up on the Clinton/Old Guard and flushing them. They’re taking big name Clinton-Old Guard supporters/donors/protectors/pols and using the scandals to kick them out of power. The big names here—Weinstein, Spacey, Franken, Conyers,—all protected and helped Hillary. (Yes, Conyers, despite being black, wasn’t a Hate Whitey—he has protected Clinton from day one).

    Tom Perez narrowly edging Hate Whitey Keith Ellison for DNC chair was a major catalyst. The Hate Whiteys wanted control and the Clinton-Old-Guard stuck one of their own (Perez) in. When that happened, the Hate Whiteys decided a purge was in order to make sure the next time they got the chairmanship. And the Bernie Bros gleefully joined in, irate at Clinton fixing the primaries.

    So, all in all, yeah, had Hillary won, we wouldn’t see this hysteria happening. The Hate Whiteys and Bernie Bros would be placated with the victory and paid off with positions and wouldn’t want to damage their own party while in power. But now out of power, the long knives have come out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Nah, disagree. Otherwise Franken would have been forced out.

    This is why having an outsider like Trump was so dangerous in DC. This sex stuff was MAD: You tell on me and Ill tell on you.

    However Trump's persona has been alpha Don Juan so its not a surprise that Trump likes beautiful women. The thing that was hilarious was thinking anyone but true cultists would believe a man worth millions who repeatedly dated supermodels would try to fingerbang a soft 5 flight attendant in coach.

    So now you got all these greasy weirdos getting outed. No, this comes from outside the swamp.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Yes, Conyers, despite being black, wasn’t a Hate Whitey—he has protected Clinton from day one
     
    His mentor, of all people, was John Dingell. Who was to "jackbooted thugs" what Al Gore was to Willie Horton-- the blameless originator.

    Conyers, of course, would have a completely different view of the NRA than Dingell would. Because he'd have a completely different view from the campaign podium!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. jim jones says:
    @MBlanc46
    That’s been my take all along. The Left are just clearing the decks before going after Trunp.

    I assume Trump has some stuff held in reserve, a Nuclear Option if you like

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    I wouldn’t know, but they don’t need much. All they’ve got to do is provide enough cover to Repub congresscritters who already hate him to vote to impeach and remove.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Svigor says:

    The strength/weakness of the left is

    Money and power. Oligarchs. The egalitarian/dogooder veneer helps, but it’s really about the oligarchs.

    My guess is that there was a double whammy that caused the bimbo eruption: Hillary losing and Trump winning. A lot of leftists are anxiously awaiting moving on from leftist sex scandals to using sex scandals to impeach Trump. The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don’t want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.

    The problem seems to be that the accusers and accusations they had against Trump, who and which were presumably the best available, weren’t even up to current, lowered standards, or even close. They seem to have melted away, even without anyone having thrown water on them. And I haven’t heard a whisper about any subsequent accusers coming forward. Big Media pretty much dropped the whole thing right after the election (though at the grass-roots level, leftists are very fond of referring to them); if there was any fire, they probably wouldn’t have.

    OT: the tax bill “sticks a dagger” directly into the Democrats’ patronage network.

    One thing I like a lot is ending the deduction for state taxes. Let high-tax blue states fund their own communism.

    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.

    I’d like the voters, and not Big Media, to decide on the issue.

    “The feds have his wiretapped files, but he has refused to give up the password.”

    I don’t know the legal ins-outs of this, but I’m fairly sure that the NSA for one could crack the encryption of whatever even a smart cookie was using circa the era Pellicano was sent up the river.

    I’ve read of several cases where judges ordered defendants to unlock their encrypted files, and the latter refused and were prosecuted for refusing. Seems like a waste of time if the gov’t can just crack all encryption at will. The math of encryption is simple; it’s a lot harder to break encryption than it is to encrypt something. Meaning, ceteris paribus, encryption wins (except over a long enough timeline; there’s only so much computing power to go around). The rub is that the highest levels of encryption tech may not be available to the public.

    That’s been my take all along. The Left are just clearing the decks before going after Trunp.

    It’s got everything but plausibility.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. Pericles says:

    OT: Where did this headline appear? Donald Trump’s Little Boy Is a Gay Half-Jew With Jungle Fever

    The answer might surprise you. Steve originally led me to the publication, and now (((Tablet Magazine))) apparently is doing alt-right week.

    Read More
    • LOL: fish
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. Svigor says:

    Chief Seattle, thanks for that link. I really enjoyed reading that. The New York Times’ bad news is a freedom fighter’s good news, I guess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @TheBoom
    My guess is that there was a double whammy that caused the bimbo eruption: Hillary losing and Trump winning. A lot of leftists are anxiously awaiting moving on from leftist sex scandals to using sex scandals to impeach Trump. The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don't want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.

    Trump went through this fire last year and came through, if not unscathed, then less damaged than his enemies hoped. There’s not much more they can do to him with this issue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Anon says: • Website • Disclaimer
    @MBlanc46
    There’s a lot of truth in what you say, but women’s hatred hasn’t suddenly turned against all men. It’s always been directed against all men.

    It’s always been directed against all men.

    Nah, some women just love certain kind of men. The homme fatales.

    It’s like femme fatales in noir movies. The men know them gals are NO GOOD and will likely lead to their ruin, but they just can’t resist.

    I think there is a way out of this problem. The grading system.

    At a workplace, all men should be graded from 10 to 1, 10 being super-handsome and 1 being pug-ugly.

    So, men will have to go around wearing a badge from 10 to 1. It’d be like the military.

    As for the women, they must sign a questionnaire during hiring.
    Do they want to be approached by men, yes or no.

    If no, they get to wear a badge that signifies ‘no attention’. And men better leave them alone.

    If yes, the women must choose what level of men can approach them. So, 5 and up would mean any man rated 5 or higher can approach them. A woman may choose only 10,and then only guys rated 10 can approach them. There will be different badges for different tastes.

    Also, women get to choose the kind of approaches men may make.

    Nice Words Only means a guy may flirt in a very gentle way, like asking out for cup of coffee.

    Suggestive Words means a guy can be anything from nice to subtly boing.

    Slut Talk means a guy can openly discuss sexual matter with the woman

    Skank Talk means a guy can talk totally raunchy with the woman

    Groping Okay means a guy may grope or pinch a woman.

    Slap Okay means a guy a slap a woman’s behind.

    Squeeze Okay means a guy can grab a woman’s boobs and her buns.

    So, suppose a woman goes around with wearing a Yes with 7 up and Groping Okay badge.

    That means any guy who is rated 7 or higher can approach her with anything ranging from nice talk to groping. But nothing beyond that.

    That way, it’s all clarified.

    Read More
    • Replies: @clyde
    Plug Uglies - Wikipedia
    The Plug Uglies were an American Nativist criminal street gang, sometimes referred to loosely as a political club, that operated in the west side of Baltimore ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug_Uglies
    , @Anonymous
    Do the women need to wear a badge indicating whether or not they're willing to give action to get action? (See Swimming with Sharks, starring Kevin Spacey.) This could be helpful to the men in the company, as well as the women, who might benefit from knowing which of their fellow female coworkers are actually whores.
    , @MBlanc46
    Humorous, but don’t hold your breath.
    , @Wade

    As for the women, they must sign a questionnaire during hiring.
    Do they want to be approached by men, yes or no.

    If no, they get to wear a badge that signifies ‘no attention’. And men better leave them alone.
     

    Ok stop yourself right there. This would never work. 99% of the women would choose to wear the 'no attention' badge so as not to appear too easy at work leaving one to assume "no attention" doesn't necessarily mean "no attention" and only a real man with game can know the difference! Don't have game? Well it's off to HR with you, buddy! Didn't you notice her "no attention" badge?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Thea says:
    @27 year old
    How did we all miss this, a new Frontlash:

    Sheryl Sandberg Warns Of #MeToo Backlash Against Women

    The Facebook executive is hearing people say this is why you shouldn’t hire women. Actually this is why you should.
    ...

    Facebook executive Sheryl Sandberg warned Sunday morning about the potential for women to wind up on the losing end of what seems like a watershed moment in feminism.

    The Lean In author is cheering women on, but she writes in a lengthy Facebook post, “I have already heard the rumblings of a backlash.”

    Over the last two months, every day has seemed to bring new allegations of sexual misconduct against powerful men, who are facing real consequences for their actions. And people are already saying, “‘This is why you shouldn’t hire women,’” Sandberg writes.

    “Actually, this is why you should,” she continues. Hiring, mentoring and promoting women is the only long-term solution to sexual harassment, which is all about power, according to Sandberg. ...

    The solution certainly isn’t the so-called Pence rule...

    https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a22c2a5e4b03350e0b710eb

     

    Ivanka supports ‘Lean in.’

    I hope I live to see the day when feminists push men too far. It will be lovely to watch them eating their just desserts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    "I hope I live to see the day when feminists push men too far. It will be lovely to watch them eating their just desserts."

    I'd rather the defeated distaff side was out of sight, in the kitchen making sandwiches for the menfolk.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Rod1963 says:
    @BenKenobi
    Remember Larry David on SNL: The scandal was a (((scandal))) at first.

    Now it's like the SAMSON protocol has been engaged, and everyone is going down.

    But did we ever pin down exactly why Weinstein was originally thrown to the wolves? I recall the story knocked Vegas and Paddock from the national stage. Seems like a thousand years ago, but maybe that's the point.

    I don’t think it was co-incidental.

    Here we had the worst mass shooting in American history and it vanishes from public discussion and view in two weeks.

    No follow ups no nothing. No one even knows Paddock’s motivation or what his GF told the FBI, etc. The FBI has totally stonewalled on the case, etc.

    You’d think Hollywood would make a movie about it, no dice.

    Hell at last report, the authorities can’t even get the time line correct. Either the FBI and cops are totally incompetent (which is a distinct possibility) or they are covering up something. Ever notice the head sheriff body language at the press conferences – he was ready to fall apart.

    To me that is a much bigger story than a bunch of sexually deviant Jews getting their comeuppance. Everyone knew before hand they are a twisted bunch. SouthPark did a send up of the Jewish run Hollywood years back exposing them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. clyde says:
    @Thea
    I'm actually concerned they aren't being taken down for the right reasons. They promote propaganda and degeneracy that corrupts our youth. Sexual harrassment is just a made up 'crime.'

    Now rape is a very different story.

    Sexual harrassment is just a made up ‘crime.’
    Now rape is a very different story.

    Real non-stop sexual harassment at the workplace is a crime for me. But violent vaginal rape (forget oral “rape”) is where it gets real/ Too many date rape accounts are really regret rape and both parties were intox9oicated anyhow. Sometimes 3-4 times the legal driving limit.
    Too many of today’s young women are floozies who doth protest too much at imagined violations of their imagined purity. It’s a laugh really and quite pathetic until these tarts get the poor schmuck guy involved in our legal system. Where he has to spend tens of thousands on lawyers while she sits back and spends ZERO money. She watches the local DA destroy a guy she wants destroyed and often for no good reason.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. George says:

    Hey I steve, I tried to send you $20 of bitcoins but got some error message.

    NamePay to Steve Sailer: iSteve (enter any amount of Bitcoins you wish)Item DescriptionBitcoins (not U.S. Dollars)Price1.0000 BTCStatusMispaid Confirmed Has mispayments

    Did you get my bitcoin funny money?

    BTW, the real reason for Weinstein getting busted is probably NetFlixAmazon. “You will never work in this town again” maybe doesn’t work when the guys down the street are a corporation that and the casting department is a couchless in house HR department that answers to the NetFlixAmazon compliance officer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  56. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    It sounds conspiratorial and nonsensical but I keep getting some paranoid fantasy that in some way Trump has pulled some strings to bring all this to the fore and make it a public issue. Almost all of these people are anti-Trump culture warriors who’ve been hostile to him and contributed to the current air pollution of hatred aimed at the deplorables. The rug has been pulled out from underneath them. Where are all the stupid pussyhat marchers now? Either that or it’s just another case of Trump’s luck. Or perhaps it’s da Rooskies since everything here is controlled by them through telepathic mind control.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    I think Trump has cleaned house internally and is now, as someone who is not touched by this, kicking over rocks and seeing what is underneath.

    However, I know Trump isn't as smart as the Big Brain niqqas here who post on a niche blog versus being a real estate tycoon in one of the most vicious markets in the world, flies everywhere in a jet with 24k seatbelts, and destroyed America's leading political dynasties, so its probably just Trump slipping and landing in a pile of supermodels wearing bikinis made of precious gems for the umpteenth time.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. JimS says:
    @anon
    Don't forget the requirement for grad students to pay taxes on waived tuition. I'm not sure it's a great or a terrible idea overall, but it certainly is a 4d chess move to neuter the "intellectual" cover given to progressivism for a generation.

    This is an interesting point. Grad schools have been getting away with charging tuition to grad students whose only classes are research hours. This greatly benefits the universities, as the NSF/NIH/NASA/DOE/(insert federal or foundational funding program here) grants which pay for the vast majority of the grad student researchers have to give a cut – typically over 50% of the student’s grant, but depending on in-state public vs. out-of-state vs. private considerations – to the university in the name of tuition and fees. It creates yet another incentive for universities to raise their tuition. Making grad students pay taxes is really the first move toward reining in out of control tuition costs.

    What grad student could afford to pay $10k in taxes on a <$30k stipend? Grad students will leave unless the universities make it affordable. No school wants to be without grad students and lose the prestige of being a "R1" research university. It's your move, academia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Yeah, a lot of the academic community is up in arms about it, but you'd expect them to be. In addition to the (possibly) salutary effects on tuition, there's a supply and demand problem: for many fields in the humanities, there's an absurd number of Ph.D.'s for each academic job available, and the number of man-years being wasted is kind of a tragedy. I don't know if fixing that is worth blowing a crater in the STEM pipeline though.

    But as a way to stick it to the grievance industry, it's ingenious.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. clyde says:
    @Anon
    It’s always been directed against all men.

    Nah, some women just love certain kind of men. The homme fatales.

    It's like femme fatales in noir movies. The men know them gals are NO GOOD and will likely lead to their ruin, but they just can't resist.

    I think there is a way out of this problem. The grading system.

    At a workplace, all men should be graded from 10 to 1, 10 being super-handsome and 1 being pug-ugly.

    So, men will have to go around wearing a badge from 10 to 1. It'd be like the military.

    As for the women, they must sign a questionnaire during hiring.
    Do they want to be approached by men, yes or no.

    If no, they get to wear a badge that signifies 'no attention'. And men better leave them alone.

    If yes, the women must choose what level of men can approach them. So, 5 and up would mean any man rated 5 or higher can approach them. A woman may choose only 10,and then only guys rated 10 can approach them. There will be different badges for different tastes.

    Also, women get to choose the kind of approaches men may make.

    Nice Words Only means a guy may flirt in a very gentle way, like asking out for cup of coffee.

    Suggestive Words means a guy can be anything from nice to subtly boing.

    Slut Talk means a guy can openly discuss sexual matter with the woman

    Skank Talk means a guy can talk totally raunchy with the woman

    Groping Okay means a guy may grope or pinch a woman.

    Slap Okay means a guy a slap a woman's behind.

    Squeeze Okay means a guy can grab a woman's boobs and her buns.

    So, suppose a woman goes around with wearing a Yes with 7 up and Groping Okay badge.

    That means any guy who is rated 7 or higher can approach her with anything ranging from nice talk to groping. But nothing beyond that.

    That way, it's all clarified.

    Plug Uglies – Wikipedia
    The Plug Uglies were an American Nativist criminal street gang, sometimes referred to loosely as a political club, that operated in the west side of Baltimore …

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug_Uglies

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. My take on this is that we are witnessing the end of second wave feminism. Hillary Clinton’s failed Presidential attempt was both a tangible and symbolic smack down of women’s bid for hard power. Not only did she / they fail to hold the reigns of power but liberals have lost control the government bureaucracy that was the wellspring of their “independence” from men. On the other side, women’s hold on soft power has never been weaker. Marriage, family, and sex only buys so much these days and it is becoming harder to use as leverage against men who are poorer, less gullible, and more red-pilled. Women are in no-man’s land. This is one reason for all the lurid outings 35 years later. That is all you can do if you are a single 55 year old woman.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    I find that to the extent feminism is failing to achieve the politics goals the more radical feminists desire, race is used as a substitute to get what they want. Basically white women using black and brown bodies to attack white men.
    , @Ivy

    That is all you can do if you are a single 55 year old woman.
     
    Those cats aren't going to feed themselves.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    My take on this is that we are witnessing the end of second wave feminism... Not only did she / they fail to hold the reigns of power...
     
    We are also witnessing the end of equestrian and other horse culture, hippophilia, if you will. You're at least the third commenter on here who's misspelled "reins of power" in the last week or two.

    Well, at least it's a smart person's error. You see a lot worse on Truth Revolt and Yahoo News.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. J.Ross says: • Website

    Not against

    against key men in the most pro-Democratic industries

    which I am strongly tempted to think is a reaction to the laughably fake accusations against Roy Moore, and connected to Bannon’s movements (Bannon in the long long ago was a business partner of Harvey Weinstein’s).
    But that would hardly matter, because a Hillary victory would embolden feminist behavior worthy of a small Massachusetts town. At the very least they would actuate the “believe her” insanity by doing an end run around rules of evidence with something like civil penalties. As was Obama’s style, they wouldn’t change the law, they’d just render it moot with a baseless superstructure supported by Constitution-hating kritarchs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. @Thea
    I'm actually concerned they aren't being taken down for the right reasons. They promote propaganda and degeneracy that corrupts our youth. Sexual harrassment is just a made up 'crime.'

    Now rape is a very different story.

    A great point I hadn’t thought of. It’s like taking down Capone for income tax evasion. I’ll take it though.

    Part of me thinks this is women’s revenge on the sort of people that have made the general culture so awful for them. Hell hath no fury.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    Part of me thinks this is women’s revenge on the sort of people that have made the general culture so awful for them. Hell hath no fury.
     
    I agree.

    Being a gentleman, not to be confused with "nice guy", is coming back into style.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. With the Clintons there are many ways to pay a person off. Also, would think that the Feds have computers that can eventually “hack” into the files or at least figure out the password on its own.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. J.Ross says: • Website
    @BenKenobi
    Remember Larry David on SNL: The scandal was a (((scandal))) at first.

    Now it's like the SAMSON protocol has been engaged, and everyone is going down.

    But did we ever pin down exactly why Weinstein was originally thrown to the wolves? I recall the story knocked Vegas and Paddock from the national stage. Seems like a thousand years ago, but maybe that's the point.

    Why Weinstein?
    The real scandal that this is distracting from does not involve semi-consensual career contracting by adult women who absolutely knew the score and were looking to make money. Notice Bryan Singer’s recent behavior. The potential is building for an exposure of Pedowood.
    On the East Coast there was a big revelation yesterday about Ed Rendell, who is connected to Tony Podesta. It is fascinating here to read a certain letter, made up entirely of questions, penned by the guy who sued Steven Spielberg and won. A strong man, who can kick.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. renfro says:
    @Thea
    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.

    Depends on how you define womanizing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. renfro says:
    @Mr. Anon
    Bill Clinton's affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.

    That said, and true to form for the Clintons, she was a a tawdry gold-digger who obviously couldn't wait to capitalize on Clintons' run for President. As you said, the Clintons were (are) a veritable sewer-hose of sleaze sprayed out over the country.

    A friend best described the Clintons as Arkansas grifters

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    There are men who don't need to chase after women. Women are chasing after them.
    That's been Eastwood's theme. He has to fight them off.
    It's surprising that Stallone has been one of the charged. I mean he would have no problem getting girls.

    But most of the accused have been dorks who never the attention in school. So, they had to use a mix of humor and pressure to get what they want. And being a proggy certainly helped in libby corners.

    So, for the most part, this is feminist crusade against ugly men. "If you're ugly, get lost, you loser."

    The hysteria is feminist yet a return to primal biology. Women wanna chase after a handsome guy and don't want to be chased by ugly guy.
    Also, handsome guys don't have to be so desperate. Dorks must use an extra something to get a piece.

    It's all about hierarchy.

    IN THE COMPANY OF MEN captured this dynamics.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnQl6vCDrhQ

    That video clip is whacked. It’s pure degeneracy, depicting white men as sociopaths. No one needs to see anything like this in a movie, or anywhere else. I wish I had never watched it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    I watched In the Company of Men when it first came out on video. IIRC, it contains one slap, nothing else. But I was shaken for two days after watching it. I thought it was the most violent movie I'd ever seen.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Wally says:
    @Anon
    In Niebelungen, the Rhein maidens reject Alberich for being ugly. It makes Alberich mad.

    And later, Brunnhilde turns against Siegfried because Siggy goes for another woman.

    So, women hate ugly men and hate handsome men who dump them.

    Former is revulsion, latter is revenge.

    Whine-maidens or Wein-maidens.

    A Germanophile, I’m impressed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. I think Steve is a talented and very thought-provoking writer, but I think he is at least 80-90% wrong here.

    The sh*t started to hit the fan a while back.

    There were the Bill Cosby rapes and sexual harassment charges. There were spousal and child abuse charges (and rape charges) against prominent NFL players. There were charges against Trump.

    I think the dam was at its breaking point before the election. The election results might’ve sped things up 10-20% at most.

    As for the New York Times, that paper was never nearly as pro-Clinton as many folks seem to think. Back in 1992, the NY Times HATED Bill Clinton, because Clinton had supposedly offended Mario Cuomo because Gennifer Flowers compared Cuomo to a Mafia Godfather and Clinton laughed at the comment. That’s how petty the NYT was. The NYT spent the entire Clinton administration trying to drum up some fake charge or another against Clinton. Nor did the NYT ever forgive Hillary for running against Obama.

    Maybe the NYT hates Trump as much, or even more, than they hate the Clintons. But they have always hated the Clintons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    Agreed. However popular he might have been with CNN and the newer media oligarchs, for the rather effete, nebbishy types that ran and still run the Grey Lady, Bill was a sleazy redneck usurper trampling on the legacy of Stevenson and Kennedy, who failed to "know his place"-the facts that he pretty much revived the party after the repeated debacles of the 80s, and that Carter was the first Southern economic technocrat to come to power nearly two decades earlier be damned. The animus only increased as he further embraced right-wing political positions, especially on hot-button issues like the death penalty.

    Their siding with the White House over the various scandals of the 1990s can be more attributed to an "enemy of my enemy" situation than any affection for Clinton. Think the National Review's support of Richard Nixon in 1972 in reverse.

    , @nebulafox
    Forgot to add: for the aforementioned NYT types, Clinton loyalists like Krugman excepted, Obama might have been the first President they really, really emotionally identified with since JFK. Ever since JFK, the only Democrats they had in the White House were all Southern, and even worse, either unashamed rednecks/good 'ol boys (LBJ, Clinton) or openly socially conservative evangelicals (Carter).

    Obama made quite a contrast. Exotic background, Harvard education, eloquent speechmaker, a "new man" in his personal tastes, impeccably bien-pensant in his beliefs and his ideal social norms, unoffensively corporate and comfortable with social hierarchy while still interested (again, unoffensively to upper-middle class tastes) in social justice... he pretty much epitomized their vision for the ideal citizen of 21st Century America. That explains their orgasmic coverage of him in 2008.

    Also partially explains why those who loathed Obama, in contrast, detested him so much. It wasn't about race so much (not to say it didn't matter, but not to the same extent as Obama-ites and the press often claimed) as it was the pseudo-meritocratic 21st Century American version of blue blood-I'm pretty sure Collin Powell wouldn't have had a problem picking up Alabama.

    , @anon
    As for the New York Times, that paper was never nearly as pro-Clinton as many folks seem to think.

    Maybe it wasn't always, but you're insane if you're claiming that they weren't pro-Clinton in the past election cycle at the very least.

    There were spousal and child abuse charges (and rape charges) against prominent NFL players.

    That's because those women went to the police and not to the media.

    Maybe the NYT hates Trump as much, or even more, than they hate the Clintons.

    Yeah, maybe. It's possible. Something to consider, anyway.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/opinion/fascism-arpaio-pardon-trump.html

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/16/opinion/republicans-president-donald-trump.html

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @TomSchmidt
    The only good thing about it is that the Right (or at least Republicans) have figured out how to use taxation to stick it to the left. Of course, it's the left that created these differential tax rates that penalize blue states.

    Of course, the bill doesn't really help the deplorables, but benefits establishment Republican donors. Those people are dead men walking: either the Party goes Trumpist and populist and pays off its base, or it loses Congress next yea and all signs of power in 2020. With the Dems getting rid of the Clintons, populism becomes possible for them. The deplorables, having found no succor on the Right, will either die off or get violent.

    “Without the Clintons, the Dems can go populist.”

    What are you even talking about? Bill Clinton, master politician, was making noises about needing white Democrats only to get overruled by a political neophyte who wanted to pander to the coalition of the fringes.

    Nah, the Left is going to ride this communist train to the end, whether the result is Cambodia or Chile.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That's right. A lot of people have nostalgic feelings for the Clinton era, particularly the prosperity of the later years. Hillary would have won handily if she had presented herself as a continuation of that. She should have praised Bill often, brought him along with her on campaign, and courted his old voters. Instead she had to do it her own way, on her own, and duly lost.
    , @TomSchmidt
    We can hope. I suspect the Bernie wing sees the votes in populism, and Bernie wasn't so bad with Ezra Klein on immigration.

    The Republican Congress just passed a donors-only tax bill, like Trump never happened. Those voters will be back in play again. Maybe the Dems want them?

    You're right about them riding the train to the end. They cannot stop it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @whorefinder
    I've said it before: the "bimbo eruptions" now are an intra-Democratic power struggle. The Hate Whitey and Bernie Bros are ganging up on the Clinton/Old Guard and flushing them. They're taking big name Clinton-Old Guard supporters/donors/protectors/pols and using the scandals to kick them out of power. The big names here---Weinstein, Spacey, Franken, Conyers,---all protected and helped Hillary. (Yes, Conyers, despite being black, wasn't a Hate Whitey---he has protected Clinton from day one).

    Tom Perez narrowly edging Hate Whitey Keith Ellison for DNC chair was a major catalyst. The Hate Whiteys wanted control and the Clinton-Old-Guard stuck one of their own (Perez) in. When that happened, the Hate Whiteys decided a purge was in order to make sure the next time they got the chairmanship. And the Bernie Bros gleefully joined in, irate at Clinton fixing the primaries.

    So, all in all, yeah, had Hillary won, we wouldn't see this hysteria happening. The Hate Whiteys and Bernie Bros would be placated with the victory and paid off with positions and wouldn't want to damage their own party while in power. But now out of power, the long knives have come out.

    Nah, disagree. Otherwise Franken would have been forced out.

    This is why having an outsider like Trump was so dangerous in DC. This sex stuff was MAD: You tell on me and Ill tell on you.

    However Trump’s persona has been alpha Don Juan so its not a surprise that Trump likes beautiful women. The thing that was hilarious was thinking anyone but true cultists would believe a man worth millions who repeatedly dated supermodels would try to fingerbang a soft 5 flight attendant in coach.

    So now you got all these greasy weirdos getting outed. No, this comes from outside the swamp.

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder

    Otherwise Franken would have been forced out.
     
    They tried with Franken, and are still trying. It takes a while.

    Remember that Conyers just retired TODAY though the revelations about him came out a few weeks ago, and would were more serious than Franken's (payoff settlements, showing up in his underwear, females stating they were to avoid being in an elevator alone with him).

    But a few more women dominating the news cycle and saying that Franken molested them and he'll go down.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Dennis Dale says: • Website
    @BenKenobi
    Remember Larry David on SNL: The scandal was a (((scandal))) at first.

    Now it's like the SAMSON protocol has been engaged, and everyone is going down.

    But did we ever pin down exactly why Weinstein was originally thrown to the wolves? I recall the story knocked Vegas and Paddock from the national stage. Seems like a thousand years ago, but maybe that's the point.

    I almost want that to be true. The media brings forth the Weinstein scandal to bump Las Vegas out of the news cycle and before they know it they’ve set off a nationwide inquisition that’s taking them down too.
    We can’t discount the origins of this in the “Pussy Hat” movement. If the elite hadn’t pulled out all the stops to frame Trump’s win as a victory for misogyny and sexual harassment it would be difficult to imagine this happening. Ashley Judd’s intensely emotional poetry reading at the seminal Pussy Hat demonstration makes sense now that we know her as an accuser. She was transferring her rage to Trump, who, meanwhile, must either have been a boy scout in reality or have a lot of payoffs out there when you consider the scrutiny his history has been under for the past two years.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @anonymous
    It sounds conspiratorial and nonsensical but I keep getting some paranoid fantasy that in some way Trump has pulled some strings to bring all this to the fore and make it a public issue. Almost all of these people are anti-Trump culture warriors who've been hostile to him and contributed to the current air pollution of hatred aimed at the deplorables. The rug has been pulled out from underneath them. Where are all the stupid pussyhat marchers now? Either that or it's just another case of Trump's luck. Or perhaps it's da Rooskies since everything here is controlled by them through telepathic mind control.

    I think Trump has cleaned house internally and is now, as someone who is not touched by this, kicking over rocks and seeing what is underneath.

    However, I know Trump isn’t as smart as the Big Brain niqqas here who post on a niche blog versus being a real estate tycoon in one of the most vicious markets in the world, flies everywhere in a jet with 24k seatbelts, and destroyed America’s leading political dynasties, so its probably just Trump slipping and landing in a pile of supermodels wearing bikinis made of precious gems for the umpteenth time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vinteuil
    "I think Trump has cleaned house internally and is now, as someone who is not touched by this, kicking over rocks and seeing what is underneath."

    Well, one hopes so. Time will tell.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Jack D says:

    The feds have his wiretapped files, but he has refused to give up the password.

    Whatever form of encryption he put on the files is now 10 or more years old. Chance are the feds could break it if they wanted to. The NSA sure could. The FBI could probably hire an Israeli firm to do the same.

    BTW, Google is getting very close to commercializing quantum computing, which will make most current forms of encryption breakable. Most encryption relies on the fact that certain math problems are very hard to solve. They could be solved on your laptop but it would take 1,000 years or something like that. On a quantum computer, the same problem might take a few minutes to solve because rather than solving for each point of a function one by one, a quantum computer solves all of them at the same time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Robert Hume
    I believe that even a quantum computer can be defeated by generating a truly random very long key, perhaps by monitoring emissions from a radioactive material, and sending a copy of it to the expected recipient by some secure means, such as a courier.
    , @res

    Whatever form of encryption he put on the files is now 10 or more years old. Chance are the feds could break it if they wanted to. The NSA sure could. The FBI could probably hire an Israeli firm to do the same.
     
    I wish someone crypto-knowledgeable would do a write up about this situation. Supposedly Pellicano had been a cryptographer at one point: http://articles.latimes.com/1993-09-11/news/mn-34044_1_anthony-pellicano
    and used PGP for his encryption: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5527045
    The encryption of his hard drive as well as separate encryption of specific files is an interesting wrinkle. That and the later decryption of his HD only are probably a sign of encrypting everything with a shorter key but using a separate longer key for sensitive files.

    Here is a brief history of PGP: http://www.lugod.org/presentations/pgp/history.html
    IIRC even back in the day it supported key lengths which are still (relatively) secure today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Teddy Kennedy, MLK, John Conyers, Teddy Kennedy—What is it about Liberal Icons and sexual degeneracy?

    Read More
    • Replies: @biz

    Teddy Kennedy, MLK, John Conyers, Teddy Kennedy—What is it about Liberal Icons and sexual degeneracy?
     
    Conyers isn't exactly a liberal icon. Who heard of the guy before last week?

    Was MLK really a "sexual degenerate?" He basically had the standard mistress on the side, as far as I'm aware. No kinky stuff, no harassment, no underage stuff.

    Not sure why Ted Kennedy merits mentioning twice.

    It seems like JFK and Clinton fit the mold of liberal icons who were sexual degenerates better. They both had an insatiable appetite and strove to satisfy it.

    On the other hand, for a while there you couldn't swing a cat in Congress without hitting a Republican Representative or Senator who was secretly gay on the side, and into really kinky stuff like bathroom sex, 'rent boys,' and in the case of Denny Hastert, actual boys.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Prof. Woland
    My take on this is that we are witnessing the end of second wave feminism. Hillary Clinton's failed Presidential attempt was both a tangible and symbolic smack down of women's bid for hard power. Not only did she / they fail to hold the reigns of power but liberals have lost control the government bureaucracy that was the wellspring of their "independence" from men. On the other side, women's hold on soft power has never been weaker. Marriage, family, and sex only buys so much these days and it is becoming harder to use as leverage against men who are poorer, less gullible, and more red-pilled. Women are in no-man's land. This is one reason for all the lurid outings 35 years later. That is all you can do if you are a single 55 year old woman.

    I find that to the extent feminism is failing to achieve the politics goals the more radical feminists desire, race is used as a substitute to get what they want. Basically white women using black and brown bodies to attack white men.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. RonaldB says:
    @Anon
    There are men who don't need to chase after women. Women are chasing after them.
    That's been Eastwood's theme. He has to fight them off.
    It's surprising that Stallone has been one of the charged. I mean he would have no problem getting girls.

    But most of the accused have been dorks who never the attention in school. So, they had to use a mix of humor and pressure to get what they want. And being a proggy certainly helped in libby corners.

    So, for the most part, this is feminist crusade against ugly men. "If you're ugly, get lost, you loser."

    The hysteria is feminist yet a return to primal biology. Women wanna chase after a handsome guy and don't want to be chased by ugly guy.
    Also, handsome guys don't have to be so desperate. Dorks must use an extra something to get a piece.

    It's all about hierarchy.

    IN THE COMPANY OF MEN captured this dynamics.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnQl6vCDrhQ

    This has very little to do with disparate power relations, which can actually be of mutual benefit and agreement.

    This is a full-blown narcissist sociopath. Part of being a full-blown narcissist, although this is not found in the diagnostic manuals, is that the narcissist goes out of his way to hurt people as a prime motivator. The manuals present a narcissist as being indifferent to the fate of other people, but it actually goes further. The real narcissist sees hurting other people as a prime motivator.

    By the way, his associate needs to watch his back. What makes him think the narcissist won’t make him suffer in the same way they’re discussing destroying some woman they never met?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Abe says: • Website

    Gorgeousness and gorgeousity, oh my brothers! If Hilary were a true bearded* dyke, with all the dour and drab styling of a real post-menopausal, Melissa Ethridge-loving, Indigo Girls-listening, Michigan Womyn’s Fair-attending lesbian, she likely would now be President. Shrillness, humorlessness, even not-so-subtle man-hating the electorate could overlook if it were wedded to a principled and public minded Barabara Jordan-type persona. But Hilary is a bi-sexual glamourpuss with all the expensive tastes of any normal upper-class heterosexual woman, and so that made her greedy, and so that made her corrupt, and so that made her unelectable.

    My initial theory was that the Clintons got a big cash advance from their Inner Party puppetmasters based on the inevitability of another 8 years in the White House, and that the Weinstein liquidation was part of that loan being called in.

    However, as great generals from Sun Tzu to Ulysses S. Grant have always known, victory is a series of hammerblows to your enemy’s weakspots, and the seemingly unstoppable POZ monolith (Hollywood, academia, “news”, Silicon Valley) is fatally vulnerable to the fact it is composed, for the most part, of psychologically-damaged and fragile individuals. So when the pink pussyhat failed to be Trump’s kryptonite, I think a lot of those “I’m with Her” Murphy Browns lost it, and so the avalanche of accusations. Could it be that Trump’s chadish remarks about Mika Brzezinski’s plastic surgery tears was the straw that broke the (post-menopausal) camel’s back? If that is “buffoonery”, please give me more!

    Another thing that confirms this for me, to paraphrase Steve- what do women want? What every other woman wants, only better. Conversely, what do women hate-hate-hate? To be silent in the face of every other woman talking about the same thing. “Me too!” “I’ll have what she’s having.” This flood (heh) of accusations is I think strongly driven by the need of the accusers to have a reason to open their mouths and join in this latest national “conversation”.

    *in the sense of married to Bill

    Read More
    • Replies: @clyde
    I never heard of the Michigan Wymyn's Fair.....Seems it had a 39 year run until some Trans wreckers came along and shamed them for catering only to women born as women. Lesbians etc. The Trannys put them out of business. IOW dudes dressed as women, who took a few hormone shots, with their intact junk still a swinging, put the lesbians out of business.

    The Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, often referred to as MWMF or Michfest, and called the "Original Womyn's Woodstock",[1] was an international feminist music festival held every August from 1976 to 2015 in Oceana County, Michigan, USA, near Hart Township, in a small wooded area known as "The Land". The event was completely built, staffed, run and attended by women. The 40th Festival, in August 2015, was the last one.[2] The Festival, throughout its 40-year history, occupied a central and powerful place in lesbian history,

    Lisa Vogel referred to the (Tranny inspired) boycott as "McCarthy-era blacklist tactics".[9] Shortly after joining the boycott, NCLR and The Task Force withdrew their support,[10] followed by the resignation from Equality Michigan by Executive Director Emily Dievendorf.[11]

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    It’s always been directed against all men.

    Nah, some women just love certain kind of men. The homme fatales.

    It's like femme fatales in noir movies. The men know them gals are NO GOOD and will likely lead to their ruin, but they just can't resist.

    I think there is a way out of this problem. The grading system.

    At a workplace, all men should be graded from 10 to 1, 10 being super-handsome and 1 being pug-ugly.

    So, men will have to go around wearing a badge from 10 to 1. It'd be like the military.

    As for the women, they must sign a questionnaire during hiring.
    Do they want to be approached by men, yes or no.

    If no, they get to wear a badge that signifies 'no attention'. And men better leave them alone.

    If yes, the women must choose what level of men can approach them. So, 5 and up would mean any man rated 5 or higher can approach them. A woman may choose only 10,and then only guys rated 10 can approach them. There will be different badges for different tastes.

    Also, women get to choose the kind of approaches men may make.

    Nice Words Only means a guy may flirt in a very gentle way, like asking out for cup of coffee.

    Suggestive Words means a guy can be anything from nice to subtly boing.

    Slut Talk means a guy can openly discuss sexual matter with the woman

    Skank Talk means a guy can talk totally raunchy with the woman

    Groping Okay means a guy may grope or pinch a woman.

    Slap Okay means a guy a slap a woman's behind.

    Squeeze Okay means a guy can grab a woman's boobs and her buns.

    So, suppose a woman goes around with wearing a Yes with 7 up and Groping Okay badge.

    That means any guy who is rated 7 or higher can approach her with anything ranging from nice talk to groping. But nothing beyond that.

    That way, it's all clarified.

    Do the women need to wear a badge indicating whether or not they’re willing to give action to get action? (See Swimming with Sharks, starring Kevin Spacey.) This could be helpful to the men in the company, as well as the women, who might benefit from knowing which of their fellow female coworkers are actually whores.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Russ
    Groupies (about whom Trump in his old money but new celebrity appeared to be speaking with Billy Bush lo that decade-plus ago) are exclusively female. As such, the sisters in the pink, anatomically suggestive hats must account for why some of them are fully willing to bare teat at rock concerts (or even Mardi Gras parades) and then indulge in competitively depraved intercourse just to keep attention off rival groupies. Hard to indulge the Estrogen Roar with that sort of depravity concurrently occurring.
    , @MBlanc46
    They already know which of their female colleagues are whores: All of them. They just don’t know their prices.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. CJ says:
    @John Mansfield
    One element is the changing newspaper business. Compared to twenty years ago, nominally respectable papers publish a lot more National Enquirer-style sordidness, but they still have to come up with high-minded justifications for doing so. I'm reminded of a time thirty years ago catching up with a high school friend. One job he'd had involved couriering legal papers around Las Vegas, and a National Enquirer writer hired him to locate some documents related to Liberace's death. My friend was amazed to learn that a National Enquirer article was actually researched, but it was still an article about Liberace for the National Enquirer, so no, he definitely did not wish to be credited for his role in researching it.

    My friend was amazed to learn that a National Enquirer article was actually researched …

    He shouldn’t have been. The Enquirer and the Wall Street Journal were known for many years as the most carefully researched print media outlets. They were also known as the best-paying firms in the business.

    While we’re at it, when Matt Drudge’s Drudge Report appeared he was criticized for mashing up politics and Hollywood. Now it’s obvious he was right; they really are one interconnected blob.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Kylie says:
    @Thea
    Ivanka supports 'Lean in.'

    I hope I live to see the day when feminists push men too far. It will be lovely to watch them eating their just desserts.

    “I hope I live to see the day when feminists push men too far. It will be lovely to watch them eating their just desserts.”

    I’d rather the defeated distaff side was out of sight, in the kitchen making sandwiches for the menfolk.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Miro23 says:
    @Anon
    I think one crucial difference between Bimbombs and what is happening today is the type of 'victims'.

    Feminists could laugh at those low-IQ 'white trash' types that Clinton exploited. I mean them girls were a bunch of lowly sluts. So, what did it matter? Elite feminists felt closer to elite lib men than to low class whores.

    But many who are coming forward now are not bimbos. They are not low IQ and low status and low class. They went to good schools and/or work in 'edgy' industries. They've been told over and over and over that
    1. Sexual beasts are conservatives
    2. All progs must unite against Emperor Haven Monhan.

    So, even though these girls met with Libby men lechers in the workplace, they pretended they were all on the same boat hunting for Moby Dick.
    It's like what Gus Savage once said to a black woman who resisted his charms: She was not being with the Black 'Movement' .

    https://www.politico.com/story/2011/06/sex-scandals-that-still-haunt-house-056548?o=1

    In a way, the career collisions we are seeing today are somewhat akin to rise of Alt Right.

    American Right was told that Neocons are pro-American and looking out for American Interests, and etc. But all this time, Neocons were stabbing White America in the back while pushing Israel First policy. So, Alt Right rose to point this out. The very people at the heart of American Conservatism have been abusing and exploiting American Patriots. So, there has been much infighting and insurgency within the American Right against the Establishment. Trump rode to victory on this energy. Though Alt Right articulated it most clearly, even non-Alt Right patriots began to feel that something isn't right. They responded to Trump's talk of useless wars and need for America First.

    Likewise, these women are realizing that all these powerful Libby men(a good number of them Jewish) have been saying one thing while carrying on with the same Old Boys Network or New Boys Network(that is even more vulgar and pornier than Old Boys Network. After all, I doubt if Walter Cronkite passed out sex toys to female employees). They feel that so much of Libby world says one thing but does another. In a way, BLM also blew up because of Liberal urban policies. Though BLM has been blamed on police brutality, it was Libs who cranked up police power to control blacks. Notice how BLM went craziest in blue cities and lib college campuses.
    And there was the socialist Bernie Bro rebellion against Hillary the Mother Hen of the Globo-Wall Street-Deep-State matrix. We are seeing systems crack up from the inside because the fissures are growing too great. Too much contradiction between what it said and what is done.

    Also, even though Libby men officially and ideologically welcome 'more women' in the workplace, their male psychology kicks into fear and they fear threatened by castrating female power. So, in order to bolster their sense of manhood, they feel a need to make moves on women to show that they are still the MEN AROUND HERE. It could be subconscious.

    We are seeing systems crack up from the inside because the fissures are growing too great. Too much contradiction between what it said and what is done.

    There are some real cracks showing here:

    – With almost 100% media backing and vast electoral spending, Hillary still lost.

    - Immigration was never supposed to be a public issue, but it is.

    - The public were supposed to back the “War on Terror”, but instead focus on what it costs ($ 6 trillion and counting), the lousy “investment” that they are paying for.

    - They were supposed to accept the 9/11 media story but 50%+ of them consider it a deceptive lie (along with WMD).

    - The public are comparing decades of stagnant wages and outsourced jobs with the unbelievable wealth of the new SJW/Billionaire Aristocracy.

    - They know that they are regarded with contempt as “Deplorables”.

    - Even the dumbest members of the public can see that the Cultural Marxist Aristocracy are trashing Anglo American culture.

    Trump has sold them out, so what happens next is anyone’s guess – but buildings this badly cracked, are usually beyond repair and get demolished.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Anon says: • Website • Disclaimer

    Another case of Planet of the Apu.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  83. Eagle Eye says:
    @Svigor

    My guess is that if Hillary had won, then we wouldn’t be seeing this landslide of revelations against key men in the most pro-Democratic industries. Harvey Weinstein, the keystone figure in all this, was a huge Clinton supporter and if his candidate had become president, that probably would have intimidated his victims for another 4 or 8 years. But with the Clintons washed up and people fearing them and their friends less these days, the dam has burst.
     
    With the other half of the equation being the mob Big Media stirred up against Trump for his "boasting groping."

    BtW, isn't it long past time for Billy Bush to fall on his sword and retire? He never said a word about Trump until after the tape had been used in the campaign, much later; for that matter, how about his parent network for holding onto the tape for so long? They only started caring about sexual harassment once it became central to a Presidential election.

    Pellicano is currently getting close to getting out of prison. The feds have his wiretapped files, but he has refused to give up the password. It would be interesting to know who is going to pay him off for his omerta when he walks out the door of prison.
     
    That's interesting; have they not been trying to crack the encryption, or have they been trying, and unable?

    That’s interesting; have they not been trying to crack the encryption, or have they been trying, and unable?

    Perhaps the encryption has been cracked …

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Jack D

    The feds have his wiretapped files, but he has refused to give up the password.
     
    Whatever form of encryption he put on the files is now 10 or more years old. Chance are the feds could break it if they wanted to. The NSA sure could. The FBI could probably hire an Israeli firm to do the same.

    BTW, Google is getting very close to commercializing quantum computing, which will make most current forms of encryption breakable. Most encryption relies on the fact that certain math problems are very hard to solve. They could be solved on your laptop but it would take 1,000 years or something like that. On a quantum computer, the same problem might take a few minutes to solve because rather than solving for each point of a function one by one, a quantum computer solves all of them at the same time.

    I believe that even a quantum computer can be defeated by generating a truly random very long key, perhaps by monitoring emissions from a radioactive material, and sending a copy of it to the expected recipient by some secure means, such as a courier.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    There are a number of proposals for what is called post-quantum cryptography:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

    Merely increasing the key length using the current algorithms would not help and the requirement to physically deliver a key is a non-starter, but there are other approaches at least one of which is likely to be successful. The problem is not what to do going forward but that everything that has been sent in the past (meaning up until this moment), which was thought to be secure, will become decipherable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. OT:

    Sweden child migrant tests ‘reveal many adults’

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42234585

    84 % of migrant children who are assessed for age in Sweden are actually adults. They’ve assessed about 10 % of the total number of migrant children, so the minimum prevalence of fraud is >8 %.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    And the likely %age of fraud is >80%.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Anon says: • Website • Disclaimer
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  87. Zach says:

    Off-topic: Christiane Amanpour is replacing Charlie Rose at PBS. Amanpour solidified her career by marrying assistant sec. of state Jamie Rubin. Take that, Rose! That’s how sexual politics and career advancement is done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Zach:

    You stated that Christine Amanpour solidified her career by marrying some State Department functionary.

    Maybe so.

    All I know that this oftentimes unbalanced out-of-this world shrew must have something else going for her since her rise certainly can not be attributed to balanced competence!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. clyde says:
    @Abe
    Gorgeousness and gorgeousity, oh my brothers! If Hilary were a true bearded* dyke, with all the dour and drab styling of a real post-menopausal, Melissa Ethridge-loving, Indigo Girls-listening, Michigan Womyn’s Fair-attending lesbian, she likely would now be President. Shrillness, humorlessness, even not-so-subtle man-hating the electorate could overlook if it were wedded to a principled and public minded Barabara Jordan-type persona. But Hilary is a bi-sexual glamourpuss with all the expensive tastes of any normal upper-class heterosexual woman, and so that made her greedy, and so that made her corrupt, and so that made her unelectable.

    My initial theory was that the Clintons got a big cash advance from their Inner Party puppetmasters based on the inevitability of another 8 years in the White House, and that the Weinstein liquidation was part of that loan being called in.

    However, as great generals from Sun Tzu to Ulysses S. Grant have always known, victory is a series of hammerblows to your enemy’s weakspots, and the seemingly unstoppable POZ monolith (Hollywood, academia, “news”, Silicon Valley) is fatally vulnerable to the fact it is composed, for the most part, of psychologically-damaged and fragile individuals. So when the pink pussyhat failed to be Trump’s kryptonite, I think a lot of those “I’m with Her” Murphy Browns lost it, and so the avalanche of accusations. Could it be that Trump’s chadish remarks about Mika Brzezinski’s plastic surgery tears was the straw that broke the (post-menopausal) camel’s back? If that is “buffoonery”, please give me more!

    Another thing that confirms this for me, to paraphrase Steve- what do women want? What every other woman wants, only better. Conversely, what do women hate-hate-hate? To be silent in the face of every other woman talking about the same thing. “Me too!” “I’ll have what she’s having.” This flood (heh) of accusations is I think strongly driven by the need of the accusers to have a reason to open their mouths and join in this latest national “conversation”.

    *in the sense of married to Bill

    I never heard of the Michigan Wymyn’s Fair…..Seems it had a 39 year run until some Trans wreckers came along and shamed them for catering only to women born as women. Lesbians etc. The Trannys put them out of business. IOW dudes dressed as women, who took a few hormone shots, with their intact junk still a swinging, put the lesbians out of business.

    The Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival, often referred to as MWMF or Michfest, and called the “Original Womyn’s Woodstock”,[1] was an international feminist music festival held every August from 1976 to 2015 in Oceana County, Michigan, USA, near Hart Township, in a small wooded area known as “The Land”. The event was completely built, staffed, run and attended by women. The 40th Festival, in August 2015, was the last one.[2] The Festival, throughout its 40-year history, occupied a central and powerful place in lesbian history,

    Lisa Vogel referred to the (Tranny inspired) boycott as “McCarthy-era blacklist tactics”.[9] Shortly after joining the boycott, NCLR and The Task Force withdrew their support,[10] followed by the resignation from Equality Michigan by Executive Director Emily Dievendorf.[11]

    Read More
    • Replies: @2Mintzin1
    Yup. I worked with a lady of the lesbovian persuasion (a very nice lady, actually) who used to attend that almost every year with her significant other of the moment. She mentioned the public nudity, which surprised me...I did not know that so many women were cool with walking around naked/topless in public.
    I can see, though, how tranny guys wearing wigs, and exhibiting the full set of "wedding tackle", as the British call it, would freak out the sistas.
    , @Mr. Anon
    The Michigan Womyn's Music Festival? That sounds like as much fun as a barrel of lesbians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. eah says:
    @eah
    Hillary's Defeat

    Speaking of which: it seemed to open other "floodgates" -- how much money is all this Russia nonsense costing? -- how much national energy is it absorbing?

    https://twitter.com/Lizzy_OMalley/status/938054493320699904
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack Hanson
    "Without the Clintons, the Dems can go populist."

    What are you even talking about? Bill Clinton, master politician, was making noises about needing white Democrats only to get overruled by a political neophyte who wanted to pander to the coalition of the fringes.

    Nah, the Left is going to ride this communist train to the end, whether the result is Cambodia or Chile.

    That’s right. A lot of people have nostalgic feelings for the Clinton era, particularly the prosperity of the later years. Hillary would have won handily if she had presented herself as a continuation of that. She should have praised Bill often, brought him along with her on campaign, and courted his old voters. Instead she had to do it her own way, on her own, and duly lost.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Tbqh, I don't think she could have.

    Bill Clinton deported Elian Gonzalez. Sent BORTAC to raid the house.

    Can you imagine Hillary getting within a mile of supporting that today?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Steve Sailer
    When Gennifer Flowers finally got to expound on the topic of Bill Clinton years later, she was pretty insightful and affectionate.

    I read the first book Gennifer Flowers produced. and she indicated a liking for Bill Clinton. Of his wife, she said people around Little Rock disliked Hillary for her “arrogant Yankee attitude.” And Flowers loved to ridicule Hillary Clinton’s looks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Benjaminl says:

    Off-topic:

    Urgent Co-Ed Cultural Appropriation Problem at Yale

    https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2017/12/05/anaay-blasts-dance-group/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  93. @Jack Hanson
    "Without the Clintons, the Dems can go populist."

    What are you even talking about? Bill Clinton, master politician, was making noises about needing white Democrats only to get overruled by a political neophyte who wanted to pander to the coalition of the fringes.

    Nah, the Left is going to ride this communist train to the end, whether the result is Cambodia or Chile.

    We can hope. I suspect the Bernie wing sees the votes in populism, and Bernie wasn’t so bad with Ezra Klein on immigration.

    The Republican Congress just passed a donors-only tax bill, like Trump never happened. Those voters will be back in play again. Maybe the Dems want them?

    You’re right about them riding the train to the end. They cannot stop it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Bernie wasn’t so bad with Ezra Klein on immigration.

    Correct, but he turned on a dime to get with the current party line once he was schooled. That incident showed me that Bernie Sanders has no integrity.
    , @Jack Hanson
    Nah, Bernie was going to lose and lose big against Trump. Trump would have boxed him into a corner and he would have either had to go full blown SJW with Hillary constantly to his Left demanding she replace him as the candidate, or tried to outpopulist Trump and won the 10% of Democrats who aren't SJW communists or in it for the identity gimmedats. There was no way in Hell Bernie was going to out populist Trump. I really think you would have seen a 40+ state blowout in Trump's favor against Bernie.

    Identity politics is a drug with a nasty addiction cycle. You gotta keep juicing or else you lose it all, but America isn't even a quarter insane pussy hat wearing types. Like any other junkie, the Left picked up the needle and said "okay, only this time cause we really have to win". Whoops, now they don't even have a chance of winning without having some Pardo retard screaming about whites must die.

    That was the real fallout. The mask didn't slip, it was taken off and stomped on. Even around here as recent as 2015 you had people around here saying how the Left "wasn't serious" about shit like trannies, race replacement, or amnesty 24/7. That's their high canon now, brother, and people realise that yes: they are serious. Anyone arguing otherwise is a liar, plant, or unserious enough to be a danger.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Nico says:
    @cliff arroyo
    Do you think that heavy boot will drop?

    On the one hand, I haven't heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.

    On the other hand when you look at the current round of defenestrations you could almost get the idea that men coflate the idea of power and prestige with access to sex.

    If women don't use power and prestige to get sex (because it's so hard for them to find willing partners otherwise?) then that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon.... it's all very confusing.

    On the one hand, I haven’t heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.

    I take it you’re not familiar with the term, “power dyke”?

    Granted, outside of lesbian circles the archetype you speak of is on average true, that women use their sexuality as currency to climb the ranks, whereas men use their rank to lure fulfillment of their sexual fantasies. However, there is at least some overlap between the two, and reversed cases are not unheard of. I don’t think they’re usually quite so caricatural and fantastic as in Oxford Blues, but a boy-toy for an older, wealthy, lonely woman can’t be impossible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    I don’t think they’re usually quite so caricatural and fantastic as in Oxford Blues, but a boy-toy for an older, wealthy, lonely woman can’t be impossible.
     
    Impossible no, common? Not at all.

    Not at all.

    There just aren't that many old women that are horny and wealthy as well, if they are just lonely they hang out with cats, clergymen or homosexuals. And for those who are, there are always plenty of Mexican gardeners who aren't too fussy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Dan Hayes says:
    @Zach
    Off-topic: Christiane Amanpour is replacing Charlie Rose at PBS. Amanpour solidified her career by marrying assistant sec. of state Jamie Rubin. Take that, Rose! That’s how sexual politics and career advancement is done.

    Zach:

    You stated that Christine Amanpour solidified her career by marrying some State Department functionary.

    Maybe so.

    All I know that this oftentimes unbalanced out-of-this world shrew must have something else going for her since her rise certainly can not be attributed to balanced competence!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jake
    It is more than just getting even with hardcore Clinton backers who now have less power because she lost.

    The Dem establishment cheated Hillary to get the nomination for Obama: Bros befo' Hos. When that same Dem establishment failed to get Hillary back into the White House, a host of Feminazis decided to get even with white men who had allowed Bros befo' Hos.

    This may be true. I know a lot of Hillary supporters view the Bernie bros as traitors. I’m sure the Hillary crowd thinks that if they got the vote of more Bernie supporters on election day, she would have won. She may be right about that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Russ says:
    @Anonymous
    Do the women need to wear a badge indicating whether or not they're willing to give action to get action? (See Swimming with Sharks, starring Kevin Spacey.) This could be helpful to the men in the company, as well as the women, who might benefit from knowing which of their fellow female coworkers are actually whores.

    Groupies (about whom Trump in his old money but new celebrity appeared to be speaking with Billy Bush lo that decade-plus ago) are exclusively female. As such, the sisters in the pink, anatomically suggestive hats must account for why some of them are fully willing to bare teat at rock concerts (or even Mardi Gras parades) and then indulge in competitively depraved intercourse just to keep attention off rival groupies. Hard to indulge the Estrogen Roar with that sort of depravity concurrently occurring.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Tulip
    I wonder how much of this is sublimation of aggression that Trump won, so now there needs to be an outlet to make people pay. Since Trump's public persona is more or less of a horn dog, let's round up some of the usual suspects and make an example.

    I think rather than a function of Hillary losing, it is more about Hillary losing to THAT MAN.

    The rule goes, SJWers always project. This is why they’re so quick to take offense and perceive microaggressions everywhere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. nebulafox says:
    @Paleo Liberal
    I think Steve is a talented and very thought-provoking writer, but I think he is at least 80-90% wrong here.

    The sh*t started to hit the fan a while back.

    There were the Bill Cosby rapes and sexual harassment charges. There were spousal and child abuse charges (and rape charges) against prominent NFL players. There were charges against Trump.

    I think the dam was at its breaking point before the election. The election results might've sped things up 10-20% at most.

    As for the New York Times, that paper was never nearly as pro-Clinton as many folks seem to think. Back in 1992, the NY Times HATED Bill Clinton, because Clinton had supposedly offended Mario Cuomo because Gennifer Flowers compared Cuomo to a Mafia Godfather and Clinton laughed at the comment. That's how petty the NYT was. The NYT spent the entire Clinton administration trying to drum up some fake charge or another against Clinton. Nor did the NYT ever forgive Hillary for running against Obama.

    Maybe the NYT hates Trump as much, or even more, than they hate the Clintons. But they have always hated the Clintons.

    Agreed. However popular he might have been with CNN and the newer media oligarchs, for the rather effete, nebbishy types that ran and still run the Grey Lady, Bill was a sleazy redneck usurper trampling on the legacy of Stevenson and Kennedy, who failed to “know his place”-the facts that he pretty much revived the party after the repeated debacles of the 80s, and that Carter was the first Southern economic technocrat to come to power nearly two decades earlier be damned. The animus only increased as he further embraced right-wing political positions, especially on hot-button issues like the death penalty.

    Their siding with the White House over the various scandals of the 1990s can be more attributed to an “enemy of my enemy” situation than any affection for Clinton. Think the National Review’s support of Richard Nixon in 1972 in reverse.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. nebulafox says:
    @Paleo Liberal
    I think Steve is a talented and very thought-provoking writer, but I think he is at least 80-90% wrong here.

    The sh*t started to hit the fan a while back.

    There were the Bill Cosby rapes and sexual harassment charges. There were spousal and child abuse charges (and rape charges) against prominent NFL players. There were charges against Trump.

    I think the dam was at its breaking point before the election. The election results might've sped things up 10-20% at most.

    As for the New York Times, that paper was never nearly as pro-Clinton as many folks seem to think. Back in 1992, the NY Times HATED Bill Clinton, because Clinton had supposedly offended Mario Cuomo because Gennifer Flowers compared Cuomo to a Mafia Godfather and Clinton laughed at the comment. That's how petty the NYT was. The NYT spent the entire Clinton administration trying to drum up some fake charge or another against Clinton. Nor did the NYT ever forgive Hillary for running against Obama.

    Maybe the NYT hates Trump as much, or even more, than they hate the Clintons. But they have always hated the Clintons.

    Forgot to add: for the aforementioned NYT types, Clinton loyalists like Krugman excepted, Obama might have been the first President they really, really emotionally identified with since JFK. Ever since JFK, the only Democrats they had in the White House were all Southern, and even worse, either unashamed rednecks/good ‘ol boys (LBJ, Clinton) or openly socially conservative evangelicals (Carter).

    Obama made quite a contrast. Exotic background, Harvard education, eloquent speechmaker, a “new man” in his personal tastes, impeccably bien-pensant in his beliefs and his ideal social norms, unoffensively corporate and comfortable with social hierarchy while still interested (again, unoffensively to upper-middle class tastes) in social justice… he pretty much epitomized their vision for the ideal citizen of 21st Century America. That explains their orgasmic coverage of him in 2008.

    Also partially explains why those who loathed Obama, in contrast, detested him so much. It wasn’t about race so much (not to say it didn’t matter, but not to the same extent as Obama-ites and the press often claimed) as it was the pseudo-meritocratic 21st Century American version of blue blood-I’m pretty sure Collin Powell wouldn’t have had a problem picking up Alabama.

    Read More
    • Agree: Abe, Jim Don Bob, Vinteuil
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Obama made quite a contrast… he pretty much epitomized their vision...
     
    So was he Zelig, Forrest Gump, or Chance the Gardener?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. @unit472
    The Gennifer Flowers problem wasn't hidden. I first saw her on the cover of the STAR tabloid during the 92 campaign and her book "Passion and Betrayal" had an honored spot in my library. Clinton's womanizing, where it couldn't be covered up, was treated as being unimportant. A private matter that did not effect his ability to govern or the price women would have to pay to put a Democrat in the White House.

    We tend to forget the gusher of sleaze the Clinton's generated when they went national. In a way this was the secret of their success. When Jerry Brown raised the issue of Whitewater during a primary debate Clinton treated it as attack upon his wife's virtue by a man who was probably a homo ( you could do that sort of thing back then). If James Riady and all these strange Asian men bringing cash to the White House was making headlines you could get it off the front pages by having Hillary's law partner and Deputy White House counsel being found shot to death in Ft. Marcy Park! Travelgate, Troopergate, The Ron Brown Express augering into a mountain. Charlie Trie, Kathleen Wiley, Juanita Brodderick. There was always a new scandal to erase all traces of the last one. The Clinton's were a moving target you couldn't hit.

    unit, I skipped Monday Night Football to watch A 2 hour special about Bill and Monica. How refreshing to see what a pair of sleaze bags the Clintons were/are. Bill was not a bad president but it was informative to hear him say , on camera, “It depends on what your definition of “is” is.” Or wagging his finger at the camera and saying…”I did not have a sexual relation with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.” And of course, Hillary famously saying…”I am not Tammy Wynette to stand by my man.”

    Read More
    • Agree: whorefinder
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. MBlanc46 says:
    @Anon
    It’s always been directed against all men.

    Nah, some women just love certain kind of men. The homme fatales.

    It's like femme fatales in noir movies. The men know them gals are NO GOOD and will likely lead to their ruin, but they just can't resist.

    I think there is a way out of this problem. The grading system.

    At a workplace, all men should be graded from 10 to 1, 10 being super-handsome and 1 being pug-ugly.

    So, men will have to go around wearing a badge from 10 to 1. It'd be like the military.

    As for the women, they must sign a questionnaire during hiring.
    Do they want to be approached by men, yes or no.

    If no, they get to wear a badge that signifies 'no attention'. And men better leave them alone.

    If yes, the women must choose what level of men can approach them. So, 5 and up would mean any man rated 5 or higher can approach them. A woman may choose only 10,and then only guys rated 10 can approach them. There will be different badges for different tastes.

    Also, women get to choose the kind of approaches men may make.

    Nice Words Only means a guy may flirt in a very gentle way, like asking out for cup of coffee.

    Suggestive Words means a guy can be anything from nice to subtly boing.

    Slut Talk means a guy can openly discuss sexual matter with the woman

    Skank Talk means a guy can talk totally raunchy with the woman

    Groping Okay means a guy may grope or pinch a woman.

    Slap Okay means a guy a slap a woman's behind.

    Squeeze Okay means a guy can grab a woman's boobs and her buns.

    So, suppose a woman goes around with wearing a Yes with 7 up and Groping Okay badge.

    That means any guy who is rated 7 or higher can approach her with anything ranging from nice talk to groping. But nothing beyond that.

    That way, it's all clarified.

    Humorous, but don’t hold your breath.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. MBlanc46 says:
    @jim jones
    I assume Trump has some stuff held in reserve, a Nuclear Option if you like

    I wouldn’t know, but they don’t need much. All they’ve got to do is provide enough cover to Repub congresscritters who already hate him to vote to impeach and remove.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Mr. Anon
    Bill Clinton's affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.

    That said, and true to form for the Clintons, she was a a tawdry gold-digger who obviously couldn't wait to capitalize on Clintons' run for President. As you said, the Clintons were (are) a veritable sewer-hose of sleaze sprayed out over the country.

    “She was a a tawdry gold-digger who obviously couldn’t wait to capitalize on Clintons’ run for President.”

    This applies to Hillary Clinton herself. She was always nothing more than a higher class version of Gennifer Flowers. Hillary is basically a Madame de Pompadour who is in over her head politically and who makes stupid judgment calls, but who craves power, influence, and money for their own sake, and she’ll do anything to get them, including trying to sic segments of the electorate against each other like dogs fighting in a pit while taking advantage of their animosity to line her purse. She’s fundamentally selfish, self-centered, and bad for the country. This is why she’s never been anything like Margaret Thatcher. Thatcher had an actual vision of what needed to be done for the good of the country and stuck to it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. MBlanc46 says:
    @Anonymous
    Do the women need to wear a badge indicating whether or not they're willing to give action to get action? (See Swimming with Sharks, starring Kevin Spacey.) This could be helpful to the men in the company, as well as the women, who might benefit from knowing which of their fellow female coworkers are actually whores.

    They already know which of their female colleagues are whores: All of them. They just don’t know their prices.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. Travis says:

    if Hillary had won Harvey Weinstein would be sleeping in the Lincoln bedroom again and Matt Lauer would still be the anchor at the Today show and Kevin Spacey would still be making films…the Women’s March in Washington and other cities across America would never have existed…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  107. donut says:

    The Democrats have reaped what they sowed . I think of Nixon’s silent majority , the same majority that elected the current President of the United States . I pray that it continues to grow while we can still muster a majority .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  108. @Mr. Anon
    Bill Clinton's affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.

    That said, and true to form for the Clintons, she was a a tawdry gold-digger who obviously couldn't wait to capitalize on Clintons' run for President. As you said, the Clintons were (are) a veritable sewer-hose of sleaze sprayed out over the country.

    Bill Clinton’s affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.

    We don’t know much about Bill’s post-White House philandering except for whispers of rumors and odd pictures of Blythe with Hollywood actresses and Porn Stars. I’ve surmised that the Press had resolved not to report on the Clintons’ living almost wholly separate lives.

    I think Flowers was by far the most conventionally attractive of the women he’s been linked to pre-2000, so it’s probably likely that she was the one for him though they were separated by circumstance and one really awful Harpy. You can imagine that if Blythe had not been a Boomer and had been in the immediately preceding generation she’d have been his choice for Partner/Arkansas First Lady etc. She’d have probably made a better and more conventional political spouse for a Southern politician and maybe even better during his first Presidential run although the “2 for 1″ campaign seemed to have traction with working Boomer women.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    She’d have probably made a better and more conventional political spouse for a Southern politician and maybe even better during his first Presidential run although the “2 for 1″ campaign seemed to have traction with working Boomer women.
     
    It's possible that Hillary helped Bill with leftists and feminists. It's also possible that she was almost entirely a liability and that, as you speculate, Clinton would have done better with a more traditional political wife. Her personality certainly never did her own political career any favors.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. a more interesting question is: who’s the 12 year old girl writing steve’s blog recently?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  110. EriK says:
    @Corn
    “The article is unintentionally funny, complaining in the same paragraph about how house prices maybe fall”

    Reminds me of Steve writing a decade ago about the dirt gap and affordable family formation. I try to feel for people who have money wrapped up in their house but I’m disturbed by how “falling house prices are bad” or “high house prices are good” has become the new conventional wisdom.

    I’m disturbed by how “falling house prices are bad” or “high house prices are good” has become the new conventional wisdom.

    Yeah, this bit of conventional wisdom drives me nuts.

    Read More
    • Agree: Autochthon
    • Replies: @Anon
    High house prices are good for people who have expensive houses in the suburbs as a major investment asset. One wonders if there is any overlap between these people and the ones who write this sort of article.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. anonguy says:
    @SimpleSong
    A great point I hadn't thought of. It's like taking down Capone for income tax evasion. I'll take it though.

    Part of me thinks this is women's revenge on the sort of people that have made the general culture so awful for them. Hell hath no fury.

    Part of me thinks this is women’s revenge on the sort of people that have made the general culture so awful for them. Hell hath no fury.

    I agree.

    Being a gentleman, not to be confused with “nice guy”, is coming back into style.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Vinteuil says:
    @Jack Hanson
    I think Trump has cleaned house internally and is now, as someone who is not touched by this, kicking over rocks and seeing what is underneath.

    However, I know Trump isn't as smart as the Big Brain niqqas here who post on a niche blog versus being a real estate tycoon in one of the most vicious markets in the world, flies everywhere in a jet with 24k seatbelts, and destroyed America's leading political dynasties, so its probably just Trump slipping and landing in a pile of supermodels wearing bikinis made of precious gems for the umpteenth time.

    “I think Trump has cleaned house internally and is now, as someone who is not touched by this, kicking over rocks and seeing what is underneath.”

    Well, one hopes so. Time will tell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @JimS
    This is an interesting point. Grad schools have been getting away with charging tuition to grad students whose only classes are research hours. This greatly benefits the universities, as the NSF/NIH/NASA/DOE/(insert federal or foundational funding program here) grants which pay for the vast majority of the grad student researchers have to give a cut - typically over 50% of the student's grant, but depending on in-state public vs. out-of-state vs. private considerations - to the university in the name of tuition and fees. It creates yet another incentive for universities to raise their tuition. Making grad students pay taxes is really the first move toward reining in out of control tuition costs.

    What grad student could afford to pay $10k in taxes on a <$30k stipend? Grad students will leave unless the universities make it affordable. No school wants to be without grad students and lose the prestige of being a "R1" research university. It's your move, academia.

    Yeah, a lot of the academic community is up in arms about it, but you’d expect them to be. In addition to the (possibly) salutary effects on tuition, there’s a supply and demand problem: for many fields in the humanities, there’s an absurd number of Ph.D.’s for each academic job available, and the number of man-years being wasted is kind of a tragedy. I don’t know if fixing that is worth blowing a crater in the STEM pipeline though.

    But as a way to stick it to the grievance industry, it’s ingenious.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carbon blob
    Pretty sure we have a glut of science Ph.Ds as well. We definitely need more quality coders (which requires nothing beyond a BA, if that) and fewer washed-up scientists turning into mediocre coders.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. whorefinder says: • Website
    @Jack Hanson
    Nah, disagree. Otherwise Franken would have been forced out.

    This is why having an outsider like Trump was so dangerous in DC. This sex stuff was MAD: You tell on me and Ill tell on you.

    However Trump's persona has been alpha Don Juan so its not a surprise that Trump likes beautiful women. The thing that was hilarious was thinking anyone but true cultists would believe a man worth millions who repeatedly dated supermodels would try to fingerbang a soft 5 flight attendant in coach.

    So now you got all these greasy weirdos getting outed. No, this comes from outside the swamp.

    Otherwise Franken would have been forced out.

    They tried with Franken, and are still trying. It takes a while.

    Remember that Conyers just retired TODAY though the revelations about him came out a few weeks ago, and would were more serious than Franken’s (payoff settlements, showing up in his underwear, females stating they were to avoid being in an elevator alone with him).

    But a few more women dominating the news cycle and saying that Franken molested them and he’ll go down.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Or maybe Franken's just an obnoxious guy but not really in the same class with Weinstein?
    , @Jack Hanson
    Nah, disagree man. Here's why.

    Franken resigning doesn't put the seat up for grabs. Govenor puts in a Dem, and the Communists get to try and throw brickbats at Roy Moore regarding crazy ass 40 year old accusations from insane menopausal women.

    There's SOMEONE in the RNC with nuts + brains cause they saw that the left was playing "one rule for me, another for thee" and decided to go back to Moore. This occurred because it was so blatantly obvious that the Dems had a double standard with Franken.

    "Yeah but Conyers" you say. Conyers is old and dumb. Yeah, his son will probably win re-election (unless you get some wildass black Ho-Tep in there who's ready to throw down about Dems becoming the illegal-homo party), but the shit about "Keeping the seat in the Conyers family" is totally fucking alienating to fence straddling Whites, Pardos and Asians. Even the MSM gets it, which is why you gotta look for the quotes on Alt Light media.

    No, this is coming from outside the DNC and is likely coming from Trump.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Alden says:
    @TheBoom
    My guess is that there was a double whammy that caused the bimbo eruption: Hillary losing and Trump winning. A lot of leftists are anxiously awaiting moving on from leftist sex scandals to using sex scandals to impeach Trump. The problems the left is encountering are that there seems to be no end in sight to the leftist scandals and they really don't want the leftist national politicians to leave office over them, something that would be very helpful in going after Trump with trumped up sex crimes.

    Conyers just announced retirement and anointed a son to succeed

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. whorefinder says: • Website
    @unit472
    The Gennifer Flowers problem wasn't hidden. I first saw her on the cover of the STAR tabloid during the 92 campaign and her book "Passion and Betrayal" had an honored spot in my library. Clinton's womanizing, where it couldn't be covered up, was treated as being unimportant. A private matter that did not effect his ability to govern or the price women would have to pay to put a Democrat in the White House.

    We tend to forget the gusher of sleaze the Clinton's generated when they went national. In a way this was the secret of their success. When Jerry Brown raised the issue of Whitewater during a primary debate Clinton treated it as attack upon his wife's virtue by a man who was probably a homo ( you could do that sort of thing back then). If James Riady and all these strange Asian men bringing cash to the White House was making headlines you could get it off the front pages by having Hillary's law partner and Deputy White House counsel being found shot to death in Ft. Marcy Park! Travelgate, Troopergate, The Ron Brown Express augering into a mountain. Charlie Trie, Kathleen Wiley, Juanita Brodderick. There was always a new scandal to erase all traces of the last one. The Clinton's were a moving target you couldn't hit.

    The Clintons’ key was never getting indicted/arrested.

    Once indicted/arrested, you’re cut off from air support. The judge, the cops, the jury, the prosecutor—all are way more sealed off from your influence, and the jury would be watched like a hawk by their enemies.

    The Clintons made sure they never panicked or ran to force an arrest. They merely delayed, delayed, delayed, obfuscated, lied, and slowed it all down as much as possible until the public got frustrated and the prosecutor gave up and the press talked about “old unproven allegations” and trash like Conyers pontificated in their defense.

    Any two-bit prosecutor alive could have gotten Bill and Hillary convicted if he’d just gotten them into court on charges. The trouble was getting them there. Comey and Lynch protected them to death in 2016 from getting in front of a jury or judge, and that was just the latest.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Anonym says:
    @Tulip
    I wonder how much of this is sublimation of aggression that Trump won, so now there needs to be an outlet to make people pay. Since Trump's public persona is more or less of a horn dog, let's round up some of the usual suspects and make an example.

    I think rather than a function of Hillary losing, it is more about Hillary losing to THAT MAN.

    I think we need to look at how the story actually broke with Weinstein, why it broke, and why the Weinstein effect continued.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Weinstein_sexual_abuse_allegations

    It seems the NYT and New Yorker originally broke the stories? I am surprised it fit the narrative tbh. I don’t know if it was intended as a triple bank shot method of impeaching Trump, but Harvey I thought would have been untouchable.

    It seems that Harvey was just out of control and got more bold and less careful as time went on. Eventually he gambled, lost, and the weight of circumstantial evidence and testimony became too much.

    Since then it has shown other women that if they want their 15 minutes of fame for whatever reason, or they want to get even with a powerful figure, or both, then they can do what was done to Weinstein. So there has been the Weinstein effect. Would it have happened without Trump? I am not sure. I don’t think it hurt to have the left somewhat demoralized, especially in the fake news media. And the anger at the (perfectly truthful IMO) “grab ‘em by the pussy” statement by Trump.

    Historically people who desire to get away with crime or immorality will choose public personas, politics, religion, profession etc in order to make themselves out to be beyond rapproach. Think Ted Bundy and working on a suicide hotline. Or any communist leader – let’s kill all the rich and powerful so that I can be ruler of the country, so, uh, I can help the oppressed worker! Or any of these creeps and womanizers who profess to be feminists. So it’s not an accident that these supposedly caring lefties turn out to be major sexual predators.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Polymath says:
    @BenKenobi
    Remember Larry David on SNL: The scandal was a (((scandal))) at first.

    Now it's like the SAMSON protocol has been engaged, and everyone is going down.

    But did we ever pin down exactly why Weinstein was originally thrown to the wolves? I recall the story knocked Vegas and Paddock from the national stage. Seems like a thousand years ago, but maybe that's the point.

    “But did we ever pin down exactly why Weinstein was originally thrown to the wolves?”

    Because Ronan Farrow was very determined, with very high integrity and very high IQ. That’s the main reason. Sometimes someone you think is on your side is not a hypocrite and holds you to your own standards and is capable enough to outwit your efforts to thwart him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Because Ronan Farrow was very determined, with very high integrity and very high IQ.

    He was just doing his job and we do not know who put him on this job and who was giving him leads. The real question is who decided to unprotect Weinstein? Weinstein had Mossad outfit Black Cube on recommendation of former Israel's prime minister working for him or so he thought. Black Cube had everything on Weinstein that was needed to bring him down. NYT and New Yorker knew what they were doing, the caliber of the affair and the ramifications of their action. There are no dummies. And somehow they knew when to launch the first salvos. They must have gotten a green light and/or prodding from somebody. Did Netanyahu decide to give some help to Trump? Obviously not for nothing. Also the possibility that the timing was determined by Vegas shooting should not be dismissed. Was their hand pushed by Vegas?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Zach says:
    @The Alarmist
    This is merely going after Trump by going after men.

    You'll know this is a serious movement on behalf of women when they start going after the lesbians who abuse their positions of power.

    Here’s a story about female on female harassment, though the complaint comes from a female named “Timothy.”

    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/melanie-martinez-accused-sexual-assault-080129312.html

    Read More
    • Agree: Glaivester
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. donut says:

    Sown

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  121. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Slight OT: Norman Lebrecht, in his book The Maestro Myth, published back in 2001, discussed a conductor who had been banned in various countries and told not to come back by the police for having sex with minors. I’d always wondered who it was, and it never occurred to me it might be James Levine.

    However, it’s entirely possible it was someone else besides Levine. At any rate, Lebrecht’s heard rumors about this individual probably going back 20 years or so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Commenters on classical music sites say Lebrecht was talking about Levine. The Levine thing is on about the same scale as the Weinstein thing, maybe relatively bigger, but in a smaller field. Also, no Clinton connection.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. @Thea
    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.

    As long as they never catch you in bed with a dead girl or a live boy, you’re good to go.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article188153344.html

    Teachers are suing the state of California over how terrible the school system is. Over half the students from 3rd to 5th grade cannot read at a basic level. Immigration is not mentioned once in the article, but the pictures do not show a single white kid. Aren’t we always hearing the left attack Trump supporters as uneducated?

    Oh, and the comment section is full of posts about immigration being the primary cause along with the teacher unions. I found this to be an interesting contrast:

    “Of the 26 lowest-performing districts in the nation, 11 are in California, according to the lawsuit. Texas, the largest state after California, has only one district among the 26.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  124. OT: Here’s a good one. Remember how everything is turtles all the way down? Diversity instructors all the way down? Etc.? Well, our president has been sold an idea on how to fight the good fight against the Deep State: create a private spy network to spy on the spies.

    Does this remind anyone on Nixon’s plumbers?

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-considering-spy-network-to-combat-deep-state-enemies-intercept/ar-BBGgHsD

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  125. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    Me on this question last month:

    I wonder to what extent this purge is a knock-on effect of Hillary losing the election.

    With the Clinton juggernaut stopped, donations to the Clinton foundation dried up. That meant fewer sinecures available for left-leaning pundits. That made high-level journalism gigs even more precious, and guys like Charlie Rose and Mark Halperin were hogging multiple, lucrative gigs each.

    Plus, with the Clintons brought low, it was open season on Weinstein, and with Weinstein felled, his hush money to journalists must have dried up too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  126. OT: Looks like Conyers will be replaced by either his son or his somewhat white-looking great nephew.

    Time to stop saying that we’re heading toward becoming a Banana Republic. I think that we’ve arrived. But then, why should lower level politicians be any different from the top dogs. Since 1988, the presidents have been: Bush-Clinton-Bush (who beat the son of a powerful senator)-AA Empty suit-nearly Clinton.

    Seriously, it only took 50 years to go from a true country to what we are now. What will the next 50 years look like? The decline seems to be accelerating.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Time to stop saying that we’re heading toward becoming a Banana Republic.
     
    More like a plantain republic. Much bigger and starchier. Needs some time in the oven.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. donut says:

    I’ve posted this before but tis the season ,

    This is almost the past . It is the past . History leaves us the writings of random men . The value of which I cannot comment on . It leaves us monuments and inscriptions , ruins and bones . History is remembered for me at least , in black and white . We know our own times . Damn the smug judgements of our posterity .

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    Oh , this too :
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5bKtRU0Q6c

    Seasons greetings .

    You and your little bunny too Steve .

    , @donut
    The Greatest :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6Xv9sfWm04
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Now they’re coming for Dylan Howard, top editor at American Media (National Enquirer, US Weekly):

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/ct-gossip-editor-dylan-howard-accused-of-sexual-misconduct-20171205-story.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  129. Wade says:
    @Anon
    It’s always been directed against all men.

    Nah, some women just love certain kind of men. The homme fatales.

    It's like femme fatales in noir movies. The men know them gals are NO GOOD and will likely lead to their ruin, but they just can't resist.

    I think there is a way out of this problem. The grading system.

    At a workplace, all men should be graded from 10 to 1, 10 being super-handsome and 1 being pug-ugly.

    So, men will have to go around wearing a badge from 10 to 1. It'd be like the military.

    As for the women, they must sign a questionnaire during hiring.
    Do they want to be approached by men, yes or no.

    If no, they get to wear a badge that signifies 'no attention'. And men better leave them alone.

    If yes, the women must choose what level of men can approach them. So, 5 and up would mean any man rated 5 or higher can approach them. A woman may choose only 10,and then only guys rated 10 can approach them. There will be different badges for different tastes.

    Also, women get to choose the kind of approaches men may make.

    Nice Words Only means a guy may flirt in a very gentle way, like asking out for cup of coffee.

    Suggestive Words means a guy can be anything from nice to subtly boing.

    Slut Talk means a guy can openly discuss sexual matter with the woman

    Skank Talk means a guy can talk totally raunchy with the woman

    Groping Okay means a guy may grope or pinch a woman.

    Slap Okay means a guy a slap a woman's behind.

    Squeeze Okay means a guy can grab a woman's boobs and her buns.

    So, suppose a woman goes around with wearing a Yes with 7 up and Groping Okay badge.

    That means any guy who is rated 7 or higher can approach her with anything ranging from nice talk to groping. But nothing beyond that.

    That way, it's all clarified.

    As for the women, they must sign a questionnaire during hiring.
    Do they want to be approached by men, yes or no.

    If no, they get to wear a badge that signifies ‘no attention’. And men better leave them alone.

    Ok stop yourself right there. This would never work. 99% of the women would choose to wear the ‘no attention’ badge so as not to appear too easy at work leaving one to assume “no attention” doesn’t necessarily mean “no attention” and only a real man with game can know the difference! Don’t have game? Well it’s off to HR with you, buddy! Didn’t you notice her “no attention” badge?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. donut says:
    @donut
    I've posted this before but tis the season ,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obyGrvkENOo

    This is almost the past . It is the past . History leaves us the writings of random men . The value of which I cannot comment on . It leaves us monuments and inscriptions , ruins and bones . History is remembered for me at least , in black and white . We know our own times . Damn the smug judgements of our posterity .

    Oh , this too :

    Seasons greetings .

    You and your little bunny too Steve .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Oh, the band The Band.

    I first thought it was the band Christmas Must Be Tonight. That's no weirder than Stone the Crows or It's a Beautiful Day, the latter of which formed 50 years ago.

    Hey, will "Bombay Calling" have to be renamed now?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. We know that Roman Polanski had sex with a thirteen year old.

    A former pimp, Charles Manson, with two prior convictions for having run prostitutes, rides herd over a bevy of young and underaged teenagers at Spahn Ranch, a mere 37 mile drive from Hollywood.

    Here’s Wiki on 25 year old Charlie:

    “Manson received five years’ parole in September 1958, the same year in which Rosalie [his wife] received a decree of divorce. By November, he was pimping a 16-year-old girl and was receiving additional support from a girl with wealthy parents. In September 1959, he pleaded guilty to a charge of attempting to cash a forged U.S. Treasury check, which he claimed to have stolen from a mailbox; the latter charge was later dropped. He received a 10-year suspended sentence and probation after a young woman with an arrest record for prostitution made a “tearful plea” before the court that she and Manson were “deeply in love … and would marry if Charlie were freed”.[3]:137–146 Before the year’s end, the woman did marry Manson, possibly so testimony against him would not be required of her.[3]:137–146
    The woman’s name was Leona. As a prostitute, she had used the name Candy Stevens. After Manson took her and another woman from California to New Mexico for purposes of prostitution, he was held and questioned for violation of the Mann Act. Though he was released, he correctly suspected that the investigation had not ended. When he disappeared in violation of his probation, a bench warrant was issued. An indictment for violation of the Mann Act followed in April 1960.[3]:137–146 When one of the women was arrested for prostitution, Manson was arrested in June in Laredo, Texas and was returned to Los Angeles. For violation of his probation on the check-cashing charge, he was ordered to serve his 10-year sentence.”

    Other Hollywood types remark that Polanski’s parties are known for the presence of “strange” friends of Polanski.

    Charles Manson is always rolling in money, but never holds a job.

    According to the testimony of friends, Sharon Tate is angry with husband Roman Polanski for his womanizing during their marriage. She says, “We have a good arrangement, Roman lies to me and I pretend to believe him”.

    And today, revelations put Hollywood on trial for sex with unwilling victims, young and younger.

    Putting 2 and 2 together; was Sharon Tate aware of Polanski’s diddling underage girls that Charlie Manson procured for not only him but his friends and other Hollywood actors as well? Did she, herself an honorable person according to friends and co-workers, threaten to bust Manson if Polanski didn’t stop seeing underage chicks? Did Manson hear about this threat to his gig and deciding that there was no way he was going back to jail for another 10 year stretch…..?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. 2Mintzin1 says:
    @clyde
    I never heard of the Michigan Wymyn's Fair.....Seems it had a 39 year run until some Trans wreckers came along and shamed them for catering only to women born as women. Lesbians etc. The Trannys put them out of business. IOW dudes dressed as women, who took a few hormone shots, with their intact junk still a swinging, put the lesbians out of business.

    The Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, often referred to as MWMF or Michfest, and called the "Original Womyn's Woodstock",[1] was an international feminist music festival held every August from 1976 to 2015 in Oceana County, Michigan, USA, near Hart Township, in a small wooded area known as "The Land". The event was completely built, staffed, run and attended by women. The 40th Festival, in August 2015, was the last one.[2] The Festival, throughout its 40-year history, occupied a central and powerful place in lesbian history,

    Lisa Vogel referred to the (Tranny inspired) boycott as "McCarthy-era blacklist tactics".[9] Shortly after joining the boycott, NCLR and The Task Force withdrew their support,[10] followed by the resignation from Equality Michigan by Executive Director Emily Dievendorf.[11]

    Yup. I worked with a lady of the lesbovian persuasion (a very nice lady, actually) who used to attend that almost every year with her significant other of the moment. She mentioned the public nudity, which surprised me…I did not know that so many women were cool with walking around naked/topless in public.
    I can see, though, how tranny guys wearing wigs, and exhibiting the full set of “wedding tackle”, as the British call it, would freak out the sistas.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    A bit OT, but I’ve been thinking, now since the cat is out of the bag on Charlottesville, and it’s clear that the Antifa, the police, and the local gov’t are to blame instead of the peaceful right wing whites there protesting the erasure of their heritage; shouldn’t we be demanding that the local governments around the US that hastily pulled down Confederate and Revolutionary war monuments (not to mention Rizzo, Columbus, etc) put them back up again? Charlottesville, the Charlottesville PD, and Antifa should be required to foot the bill.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  134. biz says:
    @Malcolm X-Lax
    Teddy Kennedy, MLK, John Conyers, Teddy Kennedy—What is it about Liberal Icons and sexual degeneracy?

    Teddy Kennedy, MLK, John Conyers, Teddy Kennedy—What is it about Liberal Icons and sexual degeneracy?

    Conyers isn’t exactly a liberal icon. Who heard of the guy before last week?

    Was MLK really a “sexual degenerate?” He basically had the standard mistress on the side, as far as I’m aware. No kinky stuff, no harassment, no underage stuff.

    Not sure why Ted Kennedy merits mentioning twice.

    It seems like JFK and Clinton fit the mold of liberal icons who were sexual degenerates better. They both had an insatiable appetite and strove to satisfy it.

    On the other hand, for a while there you couldn’t swing a cat in Congress without hitting a Republican Representative or Senator who was secretly gay on the side, and into really kinky stuff like bathroom sex, ‘rent boys,’ and in the case of Denny Hastert, actual boys.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    People with minimal awareness knew who Conyers was before last month. Pelosi referred to him as an "icon" a week or so ago. He was even on Nixon's Enemies List with the following prescient annotation: "Has known weakness for white women". MLK's offical biographer Taylor Branch chronicled King's predilection for prostitutes and orgies. And Branch was admirer! I imagine the reality was even worse and there are indeed stories that he was physically abusive. The second reference to Kennedy was meant to be Bill Clinton. Happy Hanukkah.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. anonguy says:

    Victor David Hanson parrots the situational alpha meme, the guy could be writing on Heartiste. Ripped straight from the pages of iSteve…..

    Kind of a remarkable piece in its demonstrating what concepts are now mainstream:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454345/cruel-sexual-harassment-premodern-men-no-repercussions

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  136. @Anon
    Slight OT: Norman Lebrecht, in his book The Maestro Myth, published back in 2001, discussed a conductor who had been banned in various countries and told not to come back by the police for having sex with minors. I'd always wondered who it was, and it never occurred to me it might be James Levine.

    However, it's entirely possible it was someone else besides Levine. At any rate, Lebrecht's heard rumors about this individual probably going back 20 years or so.

    Commenters on classical music sites say Lebrecht was talking about Levine. The Levine thing is on about the same scale as the Weinstein thing, maybe relatively bigger, but in a smaller field. Also, no Clinton connection.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @nebulafox
    Forgot to add: for the aforementioned NYT types, Clinton loyalists like Krugman excepted, Obama might have been the first President they really, really emotionally identified with since JFK. Ever since JFK, the only Democrats they had in the White House were all Southern, and even worse, either unashamed rednecks/good 'ol boys (LBJ, Clinton) or openly socially conservative evangelicals (Carter).

    Obama made quite a contrast. Exotic background, Harvard education, eloquent speechmaker, a "new man" in his personal tastes, impeccably bien-pensant in his beliefs and his ideal social norms, unoffensively corporate and comfortable with social hierarchy while still interested (again, unoffensively to upper-middle class tastes) in social justice... he pretty much epitomized their vision for the ideal citizen of 21st Century America. That explains their orgasmic coverage of him in 2008.

    Also partially explains why those who loathed Obama, in contrast, detested him so much. It wasn't about race so much (not to say it didn't matter, but not to the same extent as Obama-ites and the press often claimed) as it was the pseudo-meritocratic 21st Century American version of blue blood-I'm pretty sure Collin Powell wouldn't have had a problem picking up Alabama.

    Obama made quite a contrast… he pretty much epitomized their vision…

    So was he Zelig, Forrest Gump, or Chance the Gardener?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    OT: Looks like Conyers will be replaced by either his son or his somewhat white-looking great nephew.

    Time to stop saying that we're heading toward becoming a Banana Republic. I think that we've arrived. But then, why should lower level politicians be any different from the top dogs. Since 1988, the presidents have been: Bush-Clinton-Bush (who beat the son of a powerful senator)-AA Empty suit-nearly Clinton.

    Seriously, it only took 50 years to go from a true country to what we are now. What will the next 50 years look like? The decline seems to be accelerating.

    Time to stop saying that we’re heading toward becoming a Banana Republic.

    More like a plantain republic. Much bigger and starchier. Needs some time in the oven.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    It’s a dumb lie of omission that this business started with Weinstein.

    It started with:

    1. Ailes
    2. O’Reilly
    3. The host of The Five

    Boom boom boom. Three big players at Fox news went down. And yet we get the repeated claim that it started with Harvey.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    But that was just the usual to get Republicans, like Clarence Thomas in 1991. Recall how boring and trivial were the allegations against Thomas.

    From Weinstein onward, it's political cannibalism, which is ... interesting.

    , @Reg Cæsar

    It started with:

    1. Ailes
    2. O’Reilly
    3. The host of The Five
     
    Dave Clark's, or Ben Folds's?

    Who's playing Clark in Bryan Singer's flick?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @donut
    Oh , this too :
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5bKtRU0Q6c

    Seasons greetings .

    You and your little bunny too Steve .

    Oh, the band The Band.

    I first thought it was the band Christmas Must Be Tonight. That’s no weirder than Stone the Crows or It’s a Beautiful Day, the latter of which formed 50 years ago.

    Hey, will “Bombay Calling” have to be renamed now?

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    Have you been drinking ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. donut says:
    @donut
    I've posted this before but tis the season ,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obyGrvkENOo

    This is almost the past . It is the past . History leaves us the writings of random men . The value of which I cannot comment on . It leaves us monuments and inscriptions , ruins and bones . History is remembered for me at least , in black and white . We know our own times . Damn the smug judgements of our posterity .

    The Greatest :

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    I was just watching YT clips of The Honeymooners the other day. Ralph and Ed doing the mambo and the huckleberry. Fun and funny without the vulgarity or ironic condescension that makes today's comedy unwatchable to me.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Anonymous
    It's a dumb lie of omission that this business started with Weinstein.

    It started with:

    1. Ailes
    2. O'Reilly
    3. The host of The Five

    Boom boom boom. Three big players at Fox news went down. And yet we get the repeated claim that it started with Harvey.

    But that was just the usual to get Republicans, like Clarence Thomas in 1991. Recall how boring and trivial were the allegations against Thomas.

    From Weinstein onward, it’s political cannibalism, which is … interesting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Recall how boring and trivial were the allegations against Thomas.
     
    From Hollywood Squares way back when:

    Peter Marshall: This is the most abused and neglected part of the body. What is it?

    Paul Lynde: Mine may be abused, but it certainly isn't neglected.


    Thomas may be boring, but he certainly isn't trivial.

    (BTW, the answer was the feet.)
    , @The Last Real Calvinist

    From Weinstein onward, it’s political cannibalism, which is … interesting.

     

    Agreed. There is something qualitatively different going on.
    , @Dennis Dale
    Right. The comparison is lame.
    Weinstein's scandal launched the present inquisition overnight, whereas those other guys--political figures always at such risk--all fell in typical if spectacular fashion.

    As a putatively non-political but powerful figure, Weinstein enjoyed as we see a much higher degree of license, despite the open secret of his behavior and his connection to the Clintons. They're reporting today about warnings HRC's campaign received regarding Weinstein, with Lena Dunham claiming to have told them he's a "rapist."

    Weinstein's transitioning into politics would be expected to raise this risk for him. Dunham and others were operating on this reasonable assumption. Having a cable news network at his disposal didn't save Ailes, but Harvey had the Clintons. More importantly he had a movie studio.

    So the guy who's been getting away with murder all of a sudden goes down and the damn bursts, sexual offense is redefined and broadened, applied retroactively and sparing no one.

    The original take-down of Weinstein may have happened simply because his rival/brother saw he was weak after studio revenue started falling off (and Hillary lost the election) and struck. Now this thing is out of anyone's control.

    I'm less interested in why Weinstein now than why the sexual inquisition now, only after Weinstein. Have we simply reached a tipping point? Or, were women primed for it by the "pussy hat" hysterics in response to Trump? I don't see how they could not have been. Still, O'Reilly and Ailes went down as one-offs. And Harvey sparked a conflagration. Maybe it's just because Hollywood is the more combustible part of the media, as his antics and energy demonstrate. He went down in the middle of that and it wasn't very far to the next randy abuser or patsy as the case may be.

    And, Hollywood being Hollywood, for nearly every one of these charges there's a play at work, someone settling a score or someone being taken down. The rules changed overnight and all of these people are armed with bludgeon. Further there's the encouraging effect of all those examples. Once it gets going and women see they don't have anything to fear and maybe something to gain (aside from whether or not their charges are genuine) it feeds on itself.

    Once Weinstein fell it was as if an ogre had been toppled. They must've thought this guy invincible (including Hillary). There's a "look, it bleeds" aspect to the reaction, cowed people suddenly liberated and running rampant.

    That needed to happen in Hollywood, and for it to happen Trump had to happen--specifically, the epic own goal that is the "pussy hat" movement in reaction to--what?--Trump's tape revealing the depravity and sexual license of show business.

    And they say there's no God!

    , @Reg Cæsar

    From Weinstein onward, it’s political cannibalism, which is … interesting.
     
    When your enemy is committing suicide, don't interfere. Just keep enough free space on your smartphone, and push RECORD.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. @Anonymous
    It's a dumb lie of omission that this business started with Weinstein.

    It started with:

    1. Ailes
    2. O'Reilly
    3. The host of The Five

    Boom boom boom. Three big players at Fox news went down. And yet we get the repeated claim that it started with Harvey.

    It started with:

    1. Ailes
    2. O’Reilly
    3. The host of The Five

    Dave Clark’s, or Ben Folds’s?

    Who’s playing Clark in Bryan Singer’s flick?

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    I'm sorry buddy the references are lost on me . I just really like the song .
    , @donut
    I'm sorry buddy the references are lost on me . I just really like the song .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. donut says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    It started with:

    1. Ailes
    2. O’Reilly
    3. The host of The Five
     
    Dave Clark's, or Ben Folds's?

    Who's playing Clark in Bryan Singer's flick?

    I’m sorry buddy the references are lost on me . I just really like the song .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @whorefinder

    Otherwise Franken would have been forced out.
     
    They tried with Franken, and are still trying. It takes a while.

    Remember that Conyers just retired TODAY though the revelations about him came out a few weeks ago, and would were more serious than Franken's (payoff settlements, showing up in his underwear, females stating they were to avoid being in an elevator alone with him).

    But a few more women dominating the news cycle and saying that Franken molested them and he'll go down.

    Or maybe Franken’s just an obnoxious guy but not really in the same class with Weinstein?

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    Franken wrote a book abt. 10 ? ten years ago mocking the future Nazi/racists . In that book he describes an "encounter" , I would say it verges on harassment , with Barbara Bush , that little vignette tells you all you need to know about Senator Golem .

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iz-8CSa9xj8

    As far as the picture goes "school boy pranks" , 9th grade humor .
    , @whorefinder
    ....and yet today they finally get Franken to resign.

    Can I get a little credit here about being right, Steve?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. donut says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    It started with:

    1. Ailes
    2. O’Reilly
    3. The host of The Five
     
    Dave Clark's, or Ben Folds's?

    Who's playing Clark in Bryan Singer's flick?

    I’m sorry buddy the references are lost on me . I just really like the song .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. @Steve Sailer
    But that was just the usual to get Republicans, like Clarence Thomas in 1991. Recall how boring and trivial were the allegations against Thomas.

    From Weinstein onward, it's political cannibalism, which is ... interesting.

    Recall how boring and trivial were the allegations against Thomas.

    From Hollywood Squares way back when:

    Peter Marshall: This is the most abused and neglected part of the body. What is it?

    Paul Lynde: Mine may be abused, but it certainly isn’t neglected.

    Thomas may be boring, but he certainly isn’t trivial.

    (BTW, the answer was the feet.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @whorefinder
    I've said it before: the "bimbo eruptions" now are an intra-Democratic power struggle. The Hate Whitey and Bernie Bros are ganging up on the Clinton/Old Guard and flushing them. They're taking big name Clinton-Old Guard supporters/donors/protectors/pols and using the scandals to kick them out of power. The big names here---Weinstein, Spacey, Franken, Conyers,---all protected and helped Hillary. (Yes, Conyers, despite being black, wasn't a Hate Whitey---he has protected Clinton from day one).

    Tom Perez narrowly edging Hate Whitey Keith Ellison for DNC chair was a major catalyst. The Hate Whiteys wanted control and the Clinton-Old-Guard stuck one of their own (Perez) in. When that happened, the Hate Whiteys decided a purge was in order to make sure the next time they got the chairmanship. And the Bernie Bros gleefully joined in, irate at Clinton fixing the primaries.

    So, all in all, yeah, had Hillary won, we wouldn't see this hysteria happening. The Hate Whiteys and Bernie Bros would be placated with the victory and paid off with positions and wouldn't want to damage their own party while in power. But now out of power, the long knives have come out.

    Yes, Conyers, despite being black, wasn’t a Hate Whitey—he has protected Clinton from day one

    His mentor, of all people, was John Dingell. Who was to “jackbooted thugs” what Al Gore was to Willie Horton– the blameless originator.

    Conyers, of course, would have a completely different view of the NRA than Dingell would. Because he’d have a completely different view from the campaign podium!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. @Steve Sailer
    But that was just the usual to get Republicans, like Clarence Thomas in 1991. Recall how boring and trivial were the allegations against Thomas.

    From Weinstein onward, it's political cannibalism, which is ... interesting.

    From Weinstein onward, it’s political cannibalism, which is … interesting.

    Agreed. There is something qualitatively different going on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. donut says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Or maybe Franken's just an obnoxious guy but not really in the same class with Weinstein?

    Franken wrote a book abt. 10 ? ten years ago mocking the future Nazi/racists . In that book he describes an “encounter” , I would say it verges on harassment , with Barbara Bush , that little vignette tells you all you need to know about Senator Golem .

    As far as the picture goes “school boy pranks” , 9th grade humor .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Jack D says:
    @Robert Hume
    I believe that even a quantum computer can be defeated by generating a truly random very long key, perhaps by monitoring emissions from a radioactive material, and sending a copy of it to the expected recipient by some secure means, such as a courier.

    There are a number of proposals for what is called post-quantum cryptography:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

    Merely increasing the key length using the current algorithms would not help and the requirement to physically deliver a key is a non-starter, but there are other approaches at least one of which is likely to be successful. The problem is not what to do going forward but that everything that has been sent in the past (meaning up until this moment), which was thought to be secure, will become decipherable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Kylie says:
    @Anonymous
    That video clip is whacked. It's pure degeneracy, depicting white men as sociopaths. No one needs to see anything like this in a movie, or anywhere else. I wish I had never watched it.

    I watched In the Company of Men when it first came out on video. IIRC, it contains one slap, nothing else. But I was shaken for two days after watching it. I thought it was the most violent movie I’d ever seen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. @Corn
    “The article is unintentionally funny, complaining in the same paragraph about how house prices maybe fall”

    Reminds me of Steve writing a decade ago about the dirt gap and affordable family formation. I try to feel for people who have money wrapped up in their house but I’m disturbed by how “falling house prices are bad” or “high house prices are good” has become the new conventional wisdom.

    Yep, when home equity becomes the dominant share of a community’s wealth, it is in their interest to enact extremely antisocial policies to preserve their wealth — zoning laws, keeping immigrants and poor people out of their towns/schools, etc.

    The 1:3 ratio for rent/mortgage payment as a fraction of take-home pay has been blown out of the water in liberal coastal cities — are there charts anywhere displaying the ratio of home equity to net wealth anywhere?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Ivy says:
    @Prof. Woland
    My take on this is that we are witnessing the end of second wave feminism. Hillary Clinton's failed Presidential attempt was both a tangible and symbolic smack down of women's bid for hard power. Not only did she / they fail to hold the reigns of power but liberals have lost control the government bureaucracy that was the wellspring of their "independence" from men. On the other side, women's hold on soft power has never been weaker. Marriage, family, and sex only buys so much these days and it is becoming harder to use as leverage against men who are poorer, less gullible, and more red-pilled. Women are in no-man's land. This is one reason for all the lurid outings 35 years later. That is all you can do if you are a single 55 year old woman.

    That is all you can do if you are a single 55 year old woman.

    Those cats aren’t going to feed themselves.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @Anon
    There are men who don't need to chase after women. Women are chasing after them.
    That's been Eastwood's theme. He has to fight them off.
    It's surprising that Stallone has been one of the charged. I mean he would have no problem getting girls.

    But most of the accused have been dorks who never the attention in school. So, they had to use a mix of humor and pressure to get what they want. And being a proggy certainly helped in libby corners.

    So, for the most part, this is feminist crusade against ugly men. "If you're ugly, get lost, you loser."

    The hysteria is feminist yet a return to primal biology. Women wanna chase after a handsome guy and don't want to be chased by ugly guy.
    Also, handsome guys don't have to be so desperate. Dorks must use an extra something to get a piece.

    It's all about hierarchy.

    IN THE COMPANY OF MEN captured this dynamics.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnQl6vCDrhQ

    Stallone’s situation is an unusually sympathetic case of retroactive regret. A teen (sexually mature; please, bot with the paedophilia nonsense again…) voluntarily goes to the hunky movie-star’s hotel room after already having displayed admiration for him, but it turns out sex isn’t as magical as she thought, it’s dirty and weird. Especially so when the creepy bodyguard is brought in whom she is not into at all.

    A really weird case that combines elements of the adventuress and the cad as the thing progressed in time over the course of the evening.

    And that only all IF the story is true as related….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Similar to a lot of college football rape scandals involving teammates.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Dennis Dale says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    But that was just the usual to get Republicans, like Clarence Thomas in 1991. Recall how boring and trivial were the allegations against Thomas.

    From Weinstein onward, it's political cannibalism, which is ... interesting.

    Right. The comparison is lame.
    Weinstein’s scandal launched the present inquisition overnight, whereas those other guys–political figures always at such risk–all fell in typical if spectacular fashion.

    As a putatively non-political but powerful figure, Weinstein enjoyed as we see a much higher degree of license, despite the open secret of his behavior and his connection to the Clintons. They’re reporting today about warnings HRC’s campaign received regarding Weinstein, with Lena Dunham claiming to have told them he’s a “rapist.”

    Weinstein’s transitioning into politics would be expected to raise this risk for him. Dunham and others were operating on this reasonable assumption. Having a cable news network at his disposal didn’t save Ailes, but Harvey had the Clintons. More importantly he had a movie studio.

    So the guy who’s been getting away with murder all of a sudden goes down and the damn bursts, sexual offense is redefined and broadened, applied retroactively and sparing no one.

    The original take-down of Weinstein may have happened simply because his rival/brother saw he was weak after studio revenue started falling off (and Hillary lost the election) and struck. Now this thing is out of anyone’s control.

    I’m less interested in why Weinstein now than why the sexual inquisition now, only after Weinstein. Have we simply reached a tipping point? Or, were women primed for it by the “pussy hat” hysterics in response to Trump? I don’t see how they could not have been. Still, O’Reilly and Ailes went down as one-offs. And Harvey sparked a conflagration. Maybe it’s just because Hollywood is the more combustible part of the media, as his antics and energy demonstrate. He went down in the middle of that and it wasn’t very far to the next randy abuser or patsy as the case may be.

    And, Hollywood being Hollywood, for nearly every one of these charges there’s a play at work, someone settling a score or someone being taken down. The rules changed overnight and all of these people are armed with bludgeon. Further there’s the encouraging effect of all those examples. Once it gets going and women see they don’t have anything to fear and maybe something to gain (aside from whether or not their charges are genuine) it feeds on itself.

    Once Weinstein fell it was as if an ogre had been toppled. They must’ve thought this guy invincible (including Hillary). There’s a “look, it bleeds” aspect to the reaction, cowed people suddenly liberated and running rampant.

    That needed to happen in Hollywood, and for it to happen Trump had to happen–specifically, the epic own goal that is the “pussy hat” movement in reaction to–what?–Trump’s tape revealing the depravity and sexual license of show business.

    And they say there’s no God!

    Read More
    • Agree: ic1000
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. @anon
    Yeah, a lot of the academic community is up in arms about it, but you'd expect them to be. In addition to the (possibly) salutary effects on tuition, there's a supply and demand problem: for many fields in the humanities, there's an absurd number of Ph.D.'s for each academic job available, and the number of man-years being wasted is kind of a tragedy. I don't know if fixing that is worth blowing a crater in the STEM pipeline though.

    But as a way to stick it to the grievance industry, it's ingenious.

    Pretty sure we have a glut of science Ph.Ds as well. We definitely need more quality coders (which requires nothing beyond a BA, if that) and fewer washed-up scientists turning into mediocre coders.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Simple coders are common enough. You need software architects: people who have low level skills but also see the big picture.

    Dennis Ritchie's famous 'Anti-Foreword' is well worth reading in this regard. The problem with GNU and Linux is that fundamentally, they wanted to give the world what the world already had, only under terms their creators found palatable. But it was a case, as Ritchie writes, of a prisoner wanting to build himself another prison, just more comfortable and secure.

    By contrast, Steve Jobs, who had no coding skills at all, had a vision of something very different and to him better. As with Enzo Ferrari, Panavision, and Western Electric's ERPI operation, he wanted it on his terms: wealth beyond the dreams of avarice sounded OK to him.


    Anti-Foreword
    By Dennis Ritchie
    From: dmr@plan9.research.att.com
    Date:
    Tue, 15 Mar 1994 00:38:07 EST
    Subject: anti-foreword
    To the contributors to this book:

    I have succumbed to the temptation you offered in your preface: I do
    write you off as envious malcontents and romantic keepers of memo-
    ries. The systems you remember so fondly (TOPS-20, ITS, Multics,
    Lisp Machine, Cedar/Mesa, the Dorado) are not just out to pasture,
    they are fertilizing it from below.

    Your judgments are not keen, they are intoxicated by metaphor. In
    the Preface you suffer first from heat, lice, and malnourishment, then
    become prisoners in a Gulag. In Chapter 1 you are in turn infected by
    a virus, racked by drug addiction, and addled by puffiness of the
    genome.

    Yet your prison without coherent design continues to imprison you.
    How can this be, if it has no strong places? The rational prisoner
    exploits the weak places, creates order from chaos: instead, collectives like the FSF vindicate their jailers by building cells almost compatible with the existing ones, albeit with more features. The
    journalist with three undergraduate degrees from MIT, the researcher
    at Microsoft, and the senior scientist at Apple might volunteer a few
    words about the regulations of the prisons to which they have been
    transferred.

    Your sense of the possible is in no sense pure: sometimes you want
    the same thing you have, but wish you had done it yourselves; other
    times you want something different, but can't seem to get people to
    use it; sometimes one wonders why you just don't shut up and tell
    people to buy a PC with Windows or a Mac. No Gulag or lice, just a
    future whose intellectual tone and interaction style is set by Sonic the
    Hedgehog. You claim to seek progress, but you succeed mainly in
    whining.

    Here is my metaphor: your book is a pudding stuffed with apposite
    observations, many well-conceived. Like excrement, it contains
    enough undigested nuggets of nutrition to sustain life for some. But
    it is not a tasty pie: it reeks too much of contempt and of envy.

    Bon appetit!
     
    , @anon
    Hey, it's not so bad being a washed-up scientist turned mediocre coder...!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. @Autochthon
    Stallone's situation is an unusually sympathetic case of retroactive regret. A teen (sexually mature; please, bot with the paedophilia nonsense again...) voluntarily goes to the hunky movie-star's hotel room after already having displayed admiration for him, but it turns out sex isn't as magical as she thought, it's dirty and weird. Especially so when the creepy bodyguard is brought in whom she is not into at all.

    A really weird case that combines elements of the adventuress and the cad as the thing progressed in time over the course of the evening.

    And that only all IF the story is true as related....

    Similar to a lot of college football rape scandals involving teammates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. @TomSchmidt
    We can hope. I suspect the Bernie wing sees the votes in populism, and Bernie wasn't so bad with Ezra Klein on immigration.

    The Republican Congress just passed a donors-only tax bill, like Trump never happened. Those voters will be back in play again. Maybe the Dems want them?

    You're right about them riding the train to the end. They cannot stop it.

    Bernie wasn’t so bad with Ezra Klein on immigration.

    Correct, but he turned on a dime to get with the current party line once he was schooled. That incident showed me that Bernie Sanders has no integrity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Correct, but he turned on a dime to get with the current party line once he was schooled. That incident showed me that Bernie Sanders has no integrity.
     
    His moving to Vermont after a decade in the civil rights movement 45+ years ago was an earlier sign of this. Nobody on either side brings this up, though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. utu says:
    @Polymath
    "But did we ever pin down exactly why Weinstein was originally thrown to the wolves?"

    Because Ronan Farrow was very determined, with very high integrity and very high IQ. That's the main reason. Sometimes someone you think is on your side is not a hypocrite and holds you to your own standards and is capable enough to outwit your efforts to thwart him.

    Because Ronan Farrow was very determined, with very high integrity and very high IQ.

    He was just doing his job and we do not know who put him on this job and who was giving him leads. The real question is who decided to unprotect Weinstein? Weinstein had Mossad outfit Black Cube on recommendation of former Israel’s prime minister working for him or so he thought. Black Cube had everything on Weinstein that was needed to bring him down. NYT and New Yorker knew what they were doing, the caliber of the affair and the ramifications of their action. There are no dummies. And somehow they knew when to launch the first salvos. They must have gotten a green light and/or prodding from somebody. Did Netanyahu decide to give some help to Trump? Obviously not for nothing. Also the possibility that the timing was determined by Vegas shooting should not be dismissed. Was their hand pushed by Vegas?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Maybe this: Trump gives Netanyahu a green light to do what he wants in the Middle East, but there's a price. Trump wants the head of Weinstein the big Democratic donor. So the deal is, the Israeli government, which has old ties to Jewish reporters at the New York Times and other places, commands that they investigate and bring down Weinstein. Not all the reporters will go along, but you only need a few. In other words, Netanyahu is Trump's back door into the New York Times.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @Prof. Woland
    My take on this is that we are witnessing the end of second wave feminism. Hillary Clinton's failed Presidential attempt was both a tangible and symbolic smack down of women's bid for hard power. Not only did she / they fail to hold the reigns of power but liberals have lost control the government bureaucracy that was the wellspring of their "independence" from men. On the other side, women's hold on soft power has never been weaker. Marriage, family, and sex only buys so much these days and it is becoming harder to use as leverage against men who are poorer, less gullible, and more red-pilled. Women are in no-man's land. This is one reason for all the lurid outings 35 years later. That is all you can do if you are a single 55 year old woman.

    My take on this is that we are witnessing the end of second wave feminism… Not only did she / they fail to hold the reigns of power…

    We are also witnessing the end of equestrian and other horse culture, hippophilia, if you will. You’re at least the third commenter on here who’s misspelled “reins of power” in the last week or two.

    Well, at least it’s a smart person’s error. You see a lot worse on Truth Revolt and Yahoo News.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    Yes, well, you know there are reins of power, but also reigns of power. Obama held the reins of power. But the reign of Lincoln was a reign of power. Unless you object to the description of the regal nature of the presidency as a reign of power, in which case you might want to replace 'power' with something pejorative.
    , @Prof. Woland
    I always mistake rouge for rogue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. @Steve Sailer
    But that was just the usual to get Republicans, like Clarence Thomas in 1991. Recall how boring and trivial were the allegations against Thomas.

    From Weinstein onward, it's political cannibalism, which is ... interesting.

    From Weinstein onward, it’s political cannibalism, which is … interesting.

    When your enemy is committing suicide, don’t interfere. Just keep enough free space on your smartphone, and push RECORD.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @Thea
    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.

    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.

    Why not? Please explain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thea
    Powerful men attract many women. It's often the incentive for seeking power. As long as it's done discretely and without humiliating the women, it should be treated as a private sin. Some very intellegent leaders who helped their people thrive have been famous for numerous affairs. If their people flourish, personal failings aren't so important.

    It shouldn't be held up as a role model behavior or bragged about. I'd rather we return to a society based on public morality and modesty but I'm afraid that ship has sailed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. donut says:

    BTW Sailer , thanks ,

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  165. Hibernian says:
    @Kyle Searle
    OT:

    Sweden child migrant tests 'reveal many adults'

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42234585

    84 % of migrant children who are assessed for age in Sweden are actually adults. They've assessed about 10 % of the total number of migrant children, so the minimum prevalence of fraud is >8 %.

    And the likely %age of fraud is >80%.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Anonymous
    Gennifer ( as in 'genitals' ) Flowers posed nude in one or other of America's pornographic magazines.
    She contributed some pretty catty comments the captions attached to the photo-set.
    'If Hillary was ever called to do this' she declared, 'then you'd need a double page spread just accommodate her ass'.

    ‘If Hillary was ever called to do this’ she declared, ‘then you’d need a double page spread just accommodate her ass’.

    So what is your point?

    We all know that Hillary is a woman with a big ass. And we know that back in the day, Gennifer Flowers was a big ass woman. And while Bill Clinton thought he was a lesbian, his lesbian sex with Hill left him cold. So he moved on from his Lesbian liaison to a heterosexual relationship. That was what Flowers was referring to, though indirectly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @Reg Cæsar

    My take on this is that we are witnessing the end of second wave feminism... Not only did she / they fail to hold the reigns of power...
     
    We are also witnessing the end of equestrian and other horse culture, hippophilia, if you will. You're at least the third commenter on here who's misspelled "reins of power" in the last week or two.

    Well, at least it's a smart person's error. You see a lot worse on Truth Revolt and Yahoo News.

    Yes, well, you know there are reins of power, but also reigns of power. Obama held the reins of power. But the reign of Lincoln was a reign of power. Unless you object to the description of the regal nature of the presidency as a reign of power, in which case you might want to replace ‘power’ with something pejorative.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. @Lurker

    that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon…. it’s all very confusing.
     
    The strength/weakness of the left is the ability to hold these impossible positions. Like a one-ended see-saw or a magnet with only one pole. Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better. Ditto races and so on.

    Every single day reality imposes itself yet the left leap over it. So I won't be looking for too many people to join the dots on this issue.

    Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better.

    Oh man, Lurker, you beat me to it. This is exactly the succinct statement of the fundamental axiom of feminist ideology.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dennis Dale
    Works for minority groups, especially blacks, as well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @biz

    Teddy Kennedy, MLK, John Conyers, Teddy Kennedy—What is it about Liberal Icons and sexual degeneracy?
     
    Conyers isn't exactly a liberal icon. Who heard of the guy before last week?

    Was MLK really a "sexual degenerate?" He basically had the standard mistress on the side, as far as I'm aware. No kinky stuff, no harassment, no underage stuff.

    Not sure why Ted Kennedy merits mentioning twice.

    It seems like JFK and Clinton fit the mold of liberal icons who were sexual degenerates better. They both had an insatiable appetite and strove to satisfy it.

    On the other hand, for a while there you couldn't swing a cat in Congress without hitting a Republican Representative or Senator who was secretly gay on the side, and into really kinky stuff like bathroom sex, 'rent boys,' and in the case of Denny Hastert, actual boys.

    People with minimal awareness knew who Conyers was before last month. Pelosi referred to him as an “icon” a week or so ago. He was even on Nixon’s Enemies List with the following prescient annotation: “Has known weakness for white women”. MLK’s offical biographer Taylor Branch chronicled King’s predilection for prostitutes and orgies. And Branch was admirer! I imagine the reality was even worse and there are indeed stories that he was physically abusive. The second reference to Kennedy was meant to be Bill Clinton. Happy Hanukkah.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    MLK routinely gave a good beating to white hookers and groupies. It's extraordinarily well documented. By contrast, Chuck Berry just pissed and shit on them. And watched them shitting in the women's room via video camera in his Southern Air Restaurant.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Nico

    On the one hand, I haven’t heard of many women (lesbian or not) using their position to get sex (willing or not) from underlings.
     
    I take it you're not familiar with the term, "power dyke"?

    Granted, outside of lesbian circles the archetype you speak of is on average true, that women use their sexuality as currency to climb the ranks, whereas men use their rank to lure fulfillment of their sexual fantasies. However, there is at least some overlap between the two, and reversed cases are not unheard of. I don't think they're usually quite so caricatural and fantastic as in Oxford Blues, but a boy-toy for an older, wealthy, lonely woman can't be impossible.

    I don’t think they’re usually quite so caricatural and fantastic as in Oxford Blues, but a boy-toy for an older, wealthy, lonely woman can’t be impossible.

    Impossible no, common? Not at all.

    Not at all.

    There just aren’t that many old women that are horny and wealthy as well, if they are just lonely they hang out with cats, clergymen or homosexuals. And for those who are, there are always plenty of Mexican gardeners who aren’t too fussy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. Mr. Anon says:
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Bill Clinton’s affair with Gennifer Flowers might have been the most wholesome relationship he ever had with a woman.
     
    We don't know much about Bill's post-White House philandering except for whispers of rumors and odd pictures of Blythe with Hollywood actresses and Porn Stars. I've surmised that the Press had resolved not to report on the Clintons' living almost wholly separate lives.

    I think Flowers was by far the most conventionally attractive of the women he's been linked to pre-2000, so it's probably likely that she was the one for him though they were separated by circumstance and one really awful Harpy. You can imagine that if Blythe had not been a Boomer and had been in the immediately preceding generation she'd have been his choice for Partner/Arkansas First Lady etc. She'd have probably made a better and more conventional political spouse for a Southern politician and maybe even better during his first Presidential run although the "2 for 1" campaign seemed to have traction with working Boomer women.

    She’d have probably made a better and more conventional political spouse for a Southern politician and maybe even better during his first Presidential run although the “2 for 1″ campaign seemed to have traction with working Boomer women.

    It’s possible that Hillary helped Bill with leftists and feminists. It’s also possible that she was almost entirely a liability and that, as you speculate, Clinton would have done better with a more traditional political wife. Her personality certainly never did her own political career any favors.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Carbon blob
    Pretty sure we have a glut of science Ph.Ds as well. We definitely need more quality coders (which requires nothing beyond a BA, if that) and fewer washed-up scientists turning into mediocre coders.

    Simple coders are common enough. You need software architects: people who have low level skills but also see the big picture.

    Dennis Ritchie’s famous ‘Anti-Foreword’ is well worth reading in this regard. The problem with GNU and Linux is that fundamentally, they wanted to give the world what the world already had, only under terms their creators found palatable. But it was a case, as Ritchie writes, of a prisoner wanting to build himself another prison, just more comfortable and secure.

    By contrast, Steve Jobs, who had no coding skills at all, had a vision of something very different and to him better. As with Enzo Ferrari, Panavision, and Western Electric’s ERPI operation, he wanted it on his terms: wealth beyond the dreams of avarice sounded OK to him.

    Anti-Foreword
    By Dennis Ritchie
    From: dmr@plan9.research.att.com
    Date:
    Tue, 15 Mar 1994 00:38:07 EST
    Subject: anti-foreword
    To the contributors to this book:

    I have succumbed to the temptation you offered in your preface: I do
    write you off as envious malcontents and romantic keepers of memo-
    ries. The systems you remember so fondly (TOPS-20, ITS, Multics,
    Lisp Machine, Cedar/Mesa, the Dorado) are not just out to pasture,
    they are fertilizing it from below.

    Your judgments are not keen, they are intoxicated by metaphor. In
    the Preface you suffer first from heat, lice, and malnourishment, then
    become prisoners in a Gulag. In Chapter 1 you are in turn infected by
    a virus, racked by drug addiction, and addled by puffiness of the
    genome.

    Yet your prison without coherent design continues to imprison you.
    How can this be, if it has no strong places? The rational prisoner
    exploits the weak places, creates order from chaos: instead, collectives like the FSF vindicate their jailers by building cells almost compatible with the existing ones, albeit with more features. The
    journalist with three undergraduate degrees from MIT, the researcher
    at Microsoft, and the senior scientist at Apple might volunteer a few
    words about the regulations of the prisons to which they have been
    transferred.

    Your sense of the possible is in no sense pure: sometimes you want
    the same thing you have, but wish you had done it yourselves; other
    times you want something different, but can’t seem to get people to
    use it; sometimes one wonders why you just don’t shut up and tell
    people to buy a PC with Windows or a Mac. No Gulag or lice, just a
    future whose intellectual tone and interaction style is set by Sonic the
    Hedgehog. You claim to seek progress, but you succeed mainly in
    whining.

    Here is my metaphor: your book is a pudding stuffed with apposite
    observations, many well-conceived. Like excrement, it contains
    enough undigested nuggets of nutrition to sustain life for some. But
    it is not a tasty pie: it reeks too much of contempt and of envy.

    Bon appetit!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Dennis Dale says: • Website
    @AnotherDad

    Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better.
     
    Oh man, Lurker, you beat me to it. This is exactly the succinct statement of the fundamental axiom of feminist ideology.

    Works for minority groups, especially blacks, as well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @utu
    Because Ronan Farrow was very determined, with very high integrity and very high IQ.

    He was just doing his job and we do not know who put him on this job and who was giving him leads. The real question is who decided to unprotect Weinstein? Weinstein had Mossad outfit Black Cube on recommendation of former Israel's prime minister working for him or so he thought. Black Cube had everything on Weinstein that was needed to bring him down. NYT and New Yorker knew what they were doing, the caliber of the affair and the ramifications of their action. There are no dummies. And somehow they knew when to launch the first salvos. They must have gotten a green light and/or prodding from somebody. Did Netanyahu decide to give some help to Trump? Obviously not for nothing. Also the possibility that the timing was determined by Vegas shooting should not be dismissed. Was their hand pushed by Vegas?

    Maybe this: Trump gives Netanyahu a green light to do what he wants in the Middle East, but there’s a price. Trump wants the head of Weinstein the big Democratic donor. So the deal is, the Israeli government, which has old ties to Jewish reporters at the New York Times and other places, commands that they investigate and bring down Weinstein. Not all the reporters will go along, but you only need a few. In other words, Netanyahu is Trump’s back door into the New York Times.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Weinstein didn't call Netanyahu to get an introduction to Black Cube, he called Bibi's old rival Ehud Barak.

    So maybe Trump is getting certain Deep State services from Bibi like access to Mossad files on Hillary's allies? I would imagine that the Israeli intelligence services hoover up news of important Americans, like Weinstein, with ties to potential Presidents like Hillary, in case Israel would someday need to bring pressure to bear on a President Hillary. But maybe Bibi concluded that Hillary will now never be President, so he can afford to do Trump a favor by humiliating her via Weinstein.

    Israel probably has lots of files on what Bill Clinton has been up to, but Trump maybe wouldn't want his golf club member burned quite so bad as Weinstein is getting burned? Taking down Weinstein is a way to tarnish Hillary while not crushing Bill.

    But, on the other hand, there's no evidence of an Israel connection.

    , @utu
    The price is recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital and probably moving against Iran.
    , @ThreeCranes
    The Art of the Deal.
    , @Anon
    As an enemy or a 'message', Weinstein is political peanuts. It would be a clumsy way of getting some breathing space from the daily Trump bashing. Puts no pressure on his true political enemies.

    What is true is that many people smeared belong to the liberal anti-Trump camp, for now. Something changed in allowed editorial lines.

    Cui bono? Those who have the megaphone.
    What precedent is set? The how, the why, the fruits gained?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Malcolm X-Lax
    People with minimal awareness knew who Conyers was before last month. Pelosi referred to him as an "icon" a week or so ago. He was even on Nixon's Enemies List with the following prescient annotation: "Has known weakness for white women". MLK's offical biographer Taylor Branch chronicled King's predilection for prostitutes and orgies. And Branch was admirer! I imagine the reality was even worse and there are indeed stories that he was physically abusive. The second reference to Kennedy was meant to be Bill Clinton. Happy Hanukkah.

    MLK routinely gave a good beating to white hookers and groupies. It’s extraordinarily well documented. By contrast, Chuck Berry just pissed and shit on them. And watched them shitting in the women’s room via video camera in his Southern Air Restaurant.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. Kylie says:
    @Anonymous
    I was never really a 'big fan' , I just took casual notice whilst the programme 'played on in the background'.

    Such an admission is sure to keep you off the guest list* for a waterside supper with riparian entertainments.

    * Otherwise known by the uninitiated as a “bucket list”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Lurker

    that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon…. it’s all very confusing.
     
    The strength/weakness of the left is the ability to hold these impossible positions. Like a one-ended see-saw or a magnet with only one pole. Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better. Ditto races and so on.

    Every single day reality imposes itself yet the left leap over it. So I won't be looking for too many people to join the dots on this issue.

    Or, as Orwell put it, ‘we are all equal, but some are more equal than others’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Mr. Anon says:
    @clyde
    I never heard of the Michigan Wymyn's Fair.....Seems it had a 39 year run until some Trans wreckers came along and shamed them for catering only to women born as women. Lesbians etc. The Trannys put them out of business. IOW dudes dressed as women, who took a few hormone shots, with their intact junk still a swinging, put the lesbians out of business.

    The Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, often referred to as MWMF or Michfest, and called the "Original Womyn's Woodstock",[1] was an international feminist music festival held every August from 1976 to 2015 in Oceana County, Michigan, USA, near Hart Township, in a small wooded area known as "The Land". The event was completely built, staffed, run and attended by women. The 40th Festival, in August 2015, was the last one.[2] The Festival, throughout its 40-year history, occupied a central and powerful place in lesbian history,

    Lisa Vogel referred to the (Tranny inspired) boycott as "McCarthy-era blacklist tactics".[9] Shortly after joining the boycott, NCLR and The Task Force withdrew their support,[10] followed by the resignation from Equality Michigan by Executive Director Emily Dievendorf.[11]

    The Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival? That sounds like as much fun as a barrel of lesbians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Kylie says:
    @donut
    The Greatest :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6Xv9sfWm04

    I was just watching YT clips of The Honeymooners the other day. Ralph and Ed doing the mambo and the huckleberry. Fun and funny without the vulgarity or ironic condescension that makes today’s comedy unwatchable to me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. donut says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    Oh, the band The Band.

    I first thought it was the band Christmas Must Be Tonight. That's no weirder than Stone the Crows or It's a Beautiful Day, the latter of which formed 50 years ago.

    Hey, will "Bombay Calling" have to be renamed now?

    Have you been drinking ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @Anon
    Maybe this: Trump gives Netanyahu a green light to do what he wants in the Middle East, but there's a price. Trump wants the head of Weinstein the big Democratic donor. So the deal is, the Israeli government, which has old ties to Jewish reporters at the New York Times and other places, commands that they investigate and bring down Weinstein. Not all the reporters will go along, but you only need a few. In other words, Netanyahu is Trump's back door into the New York Times.

    Weinstein didn’t call Netanyahu to get an introduction to Black Cube, he called Bibi’s old rival Ehud Barak.

    So maybe Trump is getting certain Deep State services from Bibi like access to Mossad files on Hillary’s allies? I would imagine that the Israeli intelligence services hoover up news of important Americans, like Weinstein, with ties to potential Presidents like Hillary, in case Israel would someday need to bring pressure to bear on a President Hillary. But maybe Bibi concluded that Hillary will now never be President, so he can afford to do Trump a favor by humiliating her via Weinstein.

    Israel probably has lots of files on what Bill Clinton has been up to, but Trump maybe wouldn’t want his golf club member burned quite so bad as Weinstein is getting burned? Taking down Weinstein is a way to tarnish Hillary while not crushing Bill.

    But, on the other hand, there’s no evidence of an Israel connection.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Israel probably has lots of files on what Bill Clinton...

    Sure they have.

    Lewinsky testified under oath that after a session of heavy petting and oral sex in the White House, Clinton told her that a foreign embassy was tapping the two phone lines in her D.C. apartment.
     
    What about Linda Tripp being activated again?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. This may explain some of the recent cases in the New York Times but we already know this wave of harassment cases wasn’t started by the liberal left, it was started by the right-liberal Daily Mail. They are ones who got the ball going by backing that recently off the boat Italian model who accused Weinstein of being a sex pest. The big theme of the Daily Mail is that liberals are being hypocrites for attacking the right over gender issues while ignoring sexual harassment in Hollywood. And the Daily Mail is still going on about Weinstein, their latest headline on Harv is:

    “How Harvey made Hollywood Complicit: The Shameful web of deceit by Weinstein that ensnared everyone from Disney to Hillary.”

    The question then is why the liberal left has joined the liberal right in going after progressives white males. It could just be because they don’t want to be left out of the male-bashing, rating-boosting action, or it may be as you’re suggesting they are using the opportunity to settle some scores while the iron is hot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Totem Pole - basically explains the modern 'west'.

    Women 'trump' men every time.
    Blacks 'trump' all - the 'ace of trumps'.
    , @Simon in London
    It was the NYT that started/legitimated the story in the eyes of the Establishment. They don't care how much evidence is in the Daily Mail. If it appears in the NYT it becomes real - it becomes what the right people think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. Interesting thought (that without Hillary’s loss we would not be experiencing this entertaining moral panic), but I am not convinced. I think Rush tried to make a similar case (that Trump was somehow responsible for this mostly intra-progressive purge), but I wasn’t convinced by him either.

    I think this moral panic is simply part of the ongoing march of the social justice warriors through the institutions, in this case entertainment (including its subset, news media). Because the institution in this case is so heavily leftist, we have the entertaining spectacle of the left eating its own. And of course, part of the entertainment is the conflict between the essentially Puritan SJWs and the atheistic libertinism of the left generally.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  184. @whorefinder

    Otherwise Franken would have been forced out.
     
    They tried with Franken, and are still trying. It takes a while.

    Remember that Conyers just retired TODAY though the revelations about him came out a few weeks ago, and would were more serious than Franken's (payoff settlements, showing up in his underwear, females stating they were to avoid being in an elevator alone with him).

    But a few more women dominating the news cycle and saying that Franken molested them and he'll go down.

    Nah, disagree man. Here’s why.

    Franken resigning doesn’t put the seat up for grabs. Govenor puts in a Dem, and the Communists get to try and throw brickbats at Roy Moore regarding crazy ass 40 year old accusations from insane menopausal women.

    There’s SOMEONE in the RNC with nuts + brains cause they saw that the left was playing “one rule for me, another for thee” and decided to go back to Moore. This occurred because it was so blatantly obvious that the Dems had a double standard with Franken.

    “Yeah but Conyers” you say. Conyers is old and dumb. Yeah, his son will probably win re-election (unless you get some wildass black Ho-Tep in there who’s ready to throw down about Dems becoming the illegal-homo party), but the shit about “Keeping the seat in the Conyers family” is totally fucking alienating to fence straddling Whites, Pardos and Asians. Even the MSM gets it, which is why you gotta look for the quotes on Alt Light media.

    No, this is coming from outside the DNC and is likely coming from Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @unpc downunder
    This may explain some of the recent cases in the New York Times but we already know this wave of harassment cases wasn't started by the liberal left, it was started by the right-liberal Daily Mail. They are ones who got the ball going by backing that recently off the boat Italian model who accused Weinstein of being a sex pest. The big theme of the Daily Mail is that liberals are being hypocrites for attacking the right over gender issues while ignoring sexual harassment in Hollywood. And the Daily Mail is still going on about Weinstein, their latest headline on Harv is:

    "How Harvey made Hollywood Complicit: The Shameful web of deceit by Weinstein that ensnared everyone from Disney to Hillary."

    The question then is why the liberal left has joined the liberal right in going after progressives white males. It could just be because they don't want to be left out of the male-bashing, rating-boosting action, or it may be as you're suggesting they are using the opportunity to settle some scores while the iron is hot.

    Totem Pole – basically explains the modern ‘west’.

    Women ‘trump’ men every time.
    Blacks ‘trump’ all – the ‘ace of trumps’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Yes, I think you’re right that the Clinton defeat made this possible. Of course it is not the case that those doing the revelations supported Trump, the media only ‘listens and believes’ fellow Liberals. So this is primarily an internal spasm within the US Liberal establishment as scores are settled and perhaps a little justice achieved. Conceivably if they clean house of sexual corruption enough they could come back stronger, but it doesn’t do much to help them regain their white working class base that still voted Obama, but abandoned Hillary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  187. @unpc downunder
    This may explain some of the recent cases in the New York Times but we already know this wave of harassment cases wasn't started by the liberal left, it was started by the right-liberal Daily Mail. They are ones who got the ball going by backing that recently off the boat Italian model who accused Weinstein of being a sex pest. The big theme of the Daily Mail is that liberals are being hypocrites for attacking the right over gender issues while ignoring sexual harassment in Hollywood. And the Daily Mail is still going on about Weinstein, their latest headline on Harv is:

    "How Harvey made Hollywood Complicit: The Shameful web of deceit by Weinstein that ensnared everyone from Disney to Hillary."

    The question then is why the liberal left has joined the liberal right in going after progressives white males. It could just be because they don't want to be left out of the male-bashing, rating-boosting action, or it may be as you're suggesting they are using the opportunity to settle some scores while the iron is hot.

    It was the NYT that started/legitimated the story in the eyes of the Establishment. They don’t care how much evidence is in the Daily Mail. If it appears in the NYT it becomes real – it becomes what the right people think.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @TomSchmidt
    We can hope. I suspect the Bernie wing sees the votes in populism, and Bernie wasn't so bad with Ezra Klein on immigration.

    The Republican Congress just passed a donors-only tax bill, like Trump never happened. Those voters will be back in play again. Maybe the Dems want them?

    You're right about them riding the train to the end. They cannot stop it.

    Nah, Bernie was going to lose and lose big against Trump. Trump would have boxed him into a corner and he would have either had to go full blown SJW with Hillary constantly to his Left demanding she replace him as the candidate, or tried to outpopulist Trump and won the 10% of Democrats who aren’t SJW communists or in it for the identity gimmedats. There was no way in Hell Bernie was going to out populist Trump. I really think you would have seen a 40+ state blowout in Trump’s favor against Bernie.

    Identity politics is a drug with a nasty addiction cycle. You gotta keep juicing or else you lose it all, but America isn’t even a quarter insane pussy hat wearing types. Like any other junkie, the Left picked up the needle and said “okay, only this time cause we really have to win”. Whoops, now they don’t even have a chance of winning without having some Pardo retard screaming about whites must die.

    That was the real fallout. The mask didn’t slip, it was taken off and stomped on. Even around here as recent as 2015 you had people around here saying how the Left “wasn’t serious” about shit like trannies, race replacement, or amnesty 24/7. That’s their high canon now, brother, and people realise that yes: they are serious. Anyone arguing otherwise is a liar, plant, or unserious enough to be a danger.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    My assumption is that both parties serve a globalist elite who try to keep political interference at a low level. Trump was clearly a threat to this elite and continues to be so, even if he has done little to upset their apple carts, except canceling TPP. He's not controllable.

    Identity politics is a psy ops tool to keep the right rabble off balance, and to help divide and keep the population focused elsewhere. It's not a bad way to rule when there are benefits to be distributed. When America was 10% black and 90% white, it was possible to run a policy taxing the latter to give to the former, using underhanded methods like affirmative action where the marginal white guy, not the elite at the top of the pile, has to lose his opportunity to make up for past wrongs, instead of passing a broad wealth tax and having elite whites also pay for the affirmative action policies. As the numbers of minorities have increased and the white exploitable class has run out of money to steal, it has become impossible to offer payoffs in cash that wouldn't start to threaten the globalist elite dollars.

    White working and middle class resistance to expropriation is one form of anti-globalist politics. Real socialism (which eventually devolves to all pigs being equal, some more equal than others) is another. As another commenter pointed out, Bernie talked civil rights but moved to lily-white Vermont; he talked socialism, language of the common man, but his wife got a crony capitalist deal from a college in Vermont. Don't be so sure that a real socialist wouldn't win, since it would likely be an improvement over crony capitalism, despite being a long-run disaster. If it's the only way to stick it to the globalist elite, people will take it.

    Bernie (not the SJW-converged Bernie you've posited; he would lose as me-too and not a woman) might lose NH to Trump, but I think takes Michigan, maybe Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, too. Not as much chance to flip Florida, and I don't think any other Trump state flips with Bernie instead of Hillary. What Dem states flip, if they were deranged enough to vote for Hillary in the first place?

    The Dems are about power. They're going to win quite a few contests against republicans because Trump motivates their base in a way I've not seen. But Trump has shown some class-based cracks in their coalition. He won 20% of black men, indicating that there's an opportunity to gain votes by delivering benefits. His tax bill will do that for the short term, even if it screws the Deplorables long term. The Dems' addiction isn't identity politics, but power. They'll drop the trannies et al if doing so is the cost of returning to power.
    , @Ivy
    Bernie's wimp-out in Seattle with those BLM gals would have been shown repeatedly by Trump to drive home to potential voters that Sanders was not Presidential timber. In the sound-bite and short attention span era, a few showings of that scene would've buried him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. utu says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Weinstein didn't call Netanyahu to get an introduction to Black Cube, he called Bibi's old rival Ehud Barak.

    So maybe Trump is getting certain Deep State services from Bibi like access to Mossad files on Hillary's allies? I would imagine that the Israeli intelligence services hoover up news of important Americans, like Weinstein, with ties to potential Presidents like Hillary, in case Israel would someday need to bring pressure to bear on a President Hillary. But maybe Bibi concluded that Hillary will now never be President, so he can afford to do Trump a favor by humiliating her via Weinstein.

    Israel probably has lots of files on what Bill Clinton has been up to, but Trump maybe wouldn't want his golf club member burned quite so bad as Weinstein is getting burned? Taking down Weinstein is a way to tarnish Hillary while not crushing Bill.

    But, on the other hand, there's no evidence of an Israel connection.

    Israel probably has lots of files on what Bill Clinton…

    Sure they have.

    Lewinsky testified under oath that after a session of heavy petting and oral sex in the White House, Clinton told her that a foreign embassy was tapping the two phone lines in her D.C. apartment.

    What about Linda Tripp being activated again?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. utu says:
    @Anon
    Maybe this: Trump gives Netanyahu a green light to do what he wants in the Middle East, but there's a price. Trump wants the head of Weinstein the big Democratic donor. So the deal is, the Israeli government, which has old ties to Jewish reporters at the New York Times and other places, commands that they investigate and bring down Weinstein. Not all the reporters will go along, but you only need a few. In other words, Netanyahu is Trump's back door into the New York Times.

    The price is recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and probably moving against Iran.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @27 year old
    How did we all miss this, a new Frontlash:

    Sheryl Sandberg Warns Of #MeToo Backlash Against Women

    The Facebook executive is hearing people say this is why you shouldn’t hire women. Actually this is why you should.
    ...

    Facebook executive Sheryl Sandberg warned Sunday morning about the potential for women to wind up on the losing end of what seems like a watershed moment in feminism.

    The Lean In author is cheering women on, but she writes in a lengthy Facebook post, “I have already heard the rumblings of a backlash.”

    Over the last two months, every day has seemed to bring new allegations of sexual misconduct against powerful men, who are facing real consequences for their actions. And people are already saying, “‘This is why you shouldn’t hire women,’” Sandberg writes.

    “Actually, this is why you should,” she continues. Hiring, mentoring and promoting women is the only long-term solution to sexual harassment, which is all about power, according to Sandberg. ...

    The solution certainly isn’t the so-called Pence rule...

    https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a22c2a5e4b03350e0b710eb

     

    Hiring, mentoring and promoting women is the only long-term solution to sexual harassment, which is all about power, according to Sandberg.

    That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Unless you promote every single woman over every man, there will always be women who are powerless.

    I get that she’s not being sincere, but has the left in general just lost all capacity for critical thought?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Paleo Liberal
    I think Steve is a talented and very thought-provoking writer, but I think he is at least 80-90% wrong here.

    The sh*t started to hit the fan a while back.

    There were the Bill Cosby rapes and sexual harassment charges. There were spousal and child abuse charges (and rape charges) against prominent NFL players. There were charges against Trump.

    I think the dam was at its breaking point before the election. The election results might've sped things up 10-20% at most.

    As for the New York Times, that paper was never nearly as pro-Clinton as many folks seem to think. Back in 1992, the NY Times HATED Bill Clinton, because Clinton had supposedly offended Mario Cuomo because Gennifer Flowers compared Cuomo to a Mafia Godfather and Clinton laughed at the comment. That's how petty the NYT was. The NYT spent the entire Clinton administration trying to drum up some fake charge or another against Clinton. Nor did the NYT ever forgive Hillary for running against Obama.

    Maybe the NYT hates Trump as much, or even more, than they hate the Clintons. But they have always hated the Clintons.

    As for the New York Times, that paper was never nearly as pro-Clinton as many folks seem to think.

    Maybe it wasn’t always, but you’re insane if you’re claiming that they weren’t pro-Clinton in the past election cycle at the very least.

    There were spousal and child abuse charges (and rape charges) against prominent NFL players.

    That’s because those women went to the police and not to the media.

    Maybe the NYT hates Trump as much, or even more, than they hate the Clintons.

    Yeah, maybe. It’s possible. Something to consider, anyway.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/opinion/fascism-arpaio-pardon-trump.html

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/16/opinion/republicans-president-donald-trump.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @Anonymous
    That's right. A lot of people have nostalgic feelings for the Clinton era, particularly the prosperity of the later years. Hillary would have won handily if she had presented herself as a continuation of that. She should have praised Bill often, brought him along with her on campaign, and courted his old voters. Instead she had to do it her own way, on her own, and duly lost.

    Tbqh, I don’t think she could have.

    Bill Clinton deported Elian Gonzalez. Sent BORTAC to raid the house.

    Can you imagine Hillary getting within a mile of supporting that today?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @Harry Baldwin
    Bernie wasn’t so bad with Ezra Klein on immigration.

    Correct, but he turned on a dime to get with the current party line once he was schooled. That incident showed me that Bernie Sanders has no integrity.

    Correct, but he turned on a dime to get with the current party line once he was schooled. That incident showed me that Bernie Sanders has no integrity.

    His moving to Vermont after a decade in the civil rights movement 45+ years ago was an earlier sign of this. Nobody on either side brings this up, though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    Maybe it means he saw no chance for Socialism in a multicultural society, which will always have an extractive elite exploiting differences. Traditional Labour-type parties have disappeared with multiculturalism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @Lurker

    that might suggest sexual differences between men and women which is not exactly modern feminist canon…. it’s all very confusing.
     
    The strength/weakness of the left is the ability to hold these impossible positions. Like a one-ended see-saw or a magnet with only one pole. Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better. Ditto races and so on.

    Every single day reality imposes itself yet the left leap over it. So I won't be looking for too many people to join the dots on this issue.

    Men and women are exactly the same except where women are better.

    I think that particular line belongs to Jennifer Roback Morse, unless you can find an earlier citation.

    Oh, wait, no… She didn’t add the word “where”, so her version is even stronger than yours.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @EriK

    I’m disturbed by how “falling house prices are bad” or “high house prices are good” has become the new conventional wisdom.
     
    Yeah, this bit of conventional wisdom drives me nuts.

    High house prices are good for people who have expensive houses in the suburbs as a major investment asset. One wonders if there is any overlap between these people and the ones who write this sort of article.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. @Anon
    Maybe this: Trump gives Netanyahu a green light to do what he wants in the Middle East, but there's a price. Trump wants the head of Weinstein the big Democratic donor. So the deal is, the Israeli government, which has old ties to Jewish reporters at the New York Times and other places, commands that they investigate and bring down Weinstein. Not all the reporters will go along, but you only need a few. In other words, Netanyahu is Trump's back door into the New York Times.

    The Art of the Deal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @Jack Hanson
    Nah, Bernie was going to lose and lose big against Trump. Trump would have boxed him into a corner and he would have either had to go full blown SJW with Hillary constantly to his Left demanding she replace him as the candidate, or tried to outpopulist Trump and won the 10% of Democrats who aren't SJW communists or in it for the identity gimmedats. There was no way in Hell Bernie was going to out populist Trump. I really think you would have seen a 40+ state blowout in Trump's favor against Bernie.

    Identity politics is a drug with a nasty addiction cycle. You gotta keep juicing or else you lose it all, but America isn't even a quarter insane pussy hat wearing types. Like any other junkie, the Left picked up the needle and said "okay, only this time cause we really have to win". Whoops, now they don't even have a chance of winning without having some Pardo retard screaming about whites must die.

    That was the real fallout. The mask didn't slip, it was taken off and stomped on. Even around here as recent as 2015 you had people around here saying how the Left "wasn't serious" about shit like trannies, race replacement, or amnesty 24/7. That's their high canon now, brother, and people realise that yes: they are serious. Anyone arguing otherwise is a liar, plant, or unserious enough to be a danger.

    My assumption is that both parties serve a globalist elite who try to keep political interference at a low level. Trump was clearly a threat to this elite and continues to be so, even if he has done little to upset their apple carts, except canceling TPP. He’s not controllable.

    Identity politics is a psy ops tool to keep the right rabble off balance, and to help divide and keep the population focused elsewhere. It’s not a bad way to rule when there are benefits to be distributed. When America was 10% black and 90% white, it was possible to run a policy taxing the latter to give to the former, using underhanded methods like affirmative action where the marginal white guy, not the elite at the top of the pile, has to lose his opportunity to make up for past wrongs, instead of passing a broad wealth tax and having elite whites also pay for the affirmative action policies. As the numbers of minorities have increased and the white exploitable class has run out of money to steal, it has become impossible to offer payoffs in cash that wouldn’t start to threaten the globalist elite dollars.

    White working and middle class resistance to expropriation is one form of anti-globalist politics. Real socialism (which eventually devolves to all pigs being equal, some more equal than others) is another. As another commenter pointed out, Bernie talked civil rights but moved to lily-white Vermont; he talked socialism, language of the common man, but his wife got a crony capitalist deal from a college in Vermont. Don’t be so sure that a real socialist wouldn’t win, since it would likely be an improvement over crony capitalism, despite being a long-run disaster. If it’s the only way to stick it to the globalist elite, people will take it.

    Bernie (not the SJW-converged Bernie you’ve posited; he would lose as me-too and not a woman) might lose NH to Trump, but I think takes Michigan, maybe Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, too. Not as much chance to flip Florida, and I don’t think any other Trump state flips with Bernie instead of Hillary. What Dem states flip, if they were deranged enough to vote for Hillary in the first place?

    The Dems are about power. They’re going to win quite a few contests against republicans because Trump motivates their base in a way I’ve not seen. But Trump has shown some class-based cracks in their coalition. He won 20% of black men, indicating that there’s an opportunity to gain votes by delivering benefits. His tax bill will do that for the short term, even if it screws the Deplorables long term. The Dems’ addiction isn’t identity politics, but power. They’ll drop the trannies et al if doing so is the cost of returning to power.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    No, he doesn't take Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

    Blacks weren't going to turn out for a socialist jew, especially with Hillary pouting in the media. Trump appeals to black men so much more. You cannot get WCWs (working class whites) and SJWs in any sort of coalition together that's going to produce victory. You think the ideological purists in that are running the Dems now were going to hold their nose and vote for Bernie if he made any overtures to whites?

    Have you been under a rock for the last nine months and missed all the anti white animus news stories that came out?

    No, Bernie gets crushed cause you can't have the coalition of the fringes AND the devil of that pantheon in the same party.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @Reg Cæsar

    Correct, but he turned on a dime to get with the current party line once he was schooled. That incident showed me that Bernie Sanders has no integrity.
     
    His moving to Vermont after a decade in the civil rights movement 45+ years ago was an earlier sign of this. Nobody on either side brings this up, though.

    Maybe it means he saw no chance for Socialism in a multicultural society, which will always have an extractive elite exploiting differences. Traditional Labour-type parties have disappeared with multiculturalism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Traditional Labour-type parties have disappeared with multiculturalism.
     
    Yet multiculturalism grew out of those very parties.

    As for labor advocates, as Viki Knox or Jane Wood Allen what the teachers' union they paid dues to did to protect their jobs.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. res says:
    @Jack D

    The feds have his wiretapped files, but he has refused to give up the password.
     
    Whatever form of encryption he put on the files is now 10 or more years old. Chance are the feds could break it if they wanted to. The NSA sure could. The FBI could probably hire an Israeli firm to do the same.

    BTW, Google is getting very close to commercializing quantum computing, which will make most current forms of encryption breakable. Most encryption relies on the fact that certain math problems are very hard to solve. They could be solved on your laptop but it would take 1,000 years or something like that. On a quantum computer, the same problem might take a few minutes to solve because rather than solving for each point of a function one by one, a quantum computer solves all of them at the same time.

    Whatever form of encryption he put on the files is now 10 or more years old. Chance are the feds could break it if they wanted to. The NSA sure could. The FBI could probably hire an Israeli firm to do the same.

    I wish someone crypto-knowledgeable would do a write up about this situation. Supposedly Pellicano had been a cryptographer at one point: http://articles.latimes.com/1993-09-11/news/mn-34044_1_anthony-pellicano
    and used PGP for his encryption: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5527045
    The encryption of his hard drive as well as separate encryption of specific files is an interesting wrinkle. That and the later decryption of his HD only are probably a sign of encrypting everything with a shorter key but using a separate longer key for sensitive files.

    Here is a brief history of PGP: http://www.lugod.org/presentations/pgp/history.html
    IIRC even back in the day it supported key lengths which are still (relatively) secure today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Carbon blob
    Pretty sure we have a glut of science Ph.Ds as well. We definitely need more quality coders (which requires nothing beyond a BA, if that) and fewer washed-up scientists turning into mediocre coders.

    Hey, it’s not so bad being a washed-up scientist turned mediocre coder…!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. Thea says:
    @David Davenport
    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.


    Why not? Please explain.

    Powerful men attract many women. It’s often the incentive for seeking power. As long as it’s done discretely and without humiliating the women, it should be treated as a private sin. Some very intellegent leaders who helped their people thrive have been famous for numerous affairs. If their people flourish, personal failings aren’t so important.

    It shouldn’t be held up as a role model behavior or bragged about. I’d rather we return to a society based on public morality and modesty but I’m afraid that ship has sailed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @Reg Cæsar

    My take on this is that we are witnessing the end of second wave feminism... Not only did she / they fail to hold the reigns of power...
     
    We are also witnessing the end of equestrian and other horse culture, hippophilia, if you will. You're at least the third commenter on here who's misspelled "reins of power" in the last week or two.

    Well, at least it's a smart person's error. You see a lot worse on Truth Revolt and Yahoo News.

    I always mistake rouge for rogue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I always mistake rouge for rogue.
     
    And these days, even the rogue roués are in rouge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. @TomSchmidt
    Maybe it means he saw no chance for Socialism in a multicultural society, which will always have an extractive elite exploiting differences. Traditional Labour-type parties have disappeared with multiculturalism.

    Traditional Labour-type parties have disappeared with multiculturalism.

    Yet multiculturalism grew out of those very parties.

    As for labor advocates, as Viki Knox or Jane Wood Allen what the teachers’ union they paid dues to did to protect their jobs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Yet multiculturalism grew out of those very parties.
     
    Multiculturalism was pushed pretty hard by all mainstream political parties.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Thea
    To be fair, womanizing should not prohibit someone from holding public office.

    The 8-year tenure of Clinton despite all the scandals shows that the electorate will tolerate a scoundrel in the White House so long as he takes care of business and delivers on his campaign promises.

    Trump take note.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The silence on the Las Vegas massacre is indeed strange. Normally when a crazy white guy kills a bunch of people the left and the media won’t ever shut up about it.

    Do we know yet what was in the shooter’s suicide note?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  207. @Prof. Woland
    I always mistake rouge for rogue.

    I always mistake rouge for rogue.

    And these days, even the rogue roués are in rouge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Reg Cæsar

    Traditional Labour-type parties have disappeared with multiculturalism.
     
    Yet multiculturalism grew out of those very parties.

    As for labor advocates, as Viki Knox or Jane Wood Allen what the teachers' union they paid dues to did to protect their jobs.

    Yet multiculturalism grew out of those very parties.

    Multiculturalism was pushed pretty hard by all mainstream political parties.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Multiculturalism was pushed pretty hard by all mainstream political parties.
     
    Indeed. The 19th-century Democrats even made young men die for it. As did the newborn Republicans. Neither took the Colonization Society's advice to heart.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Ivy says:
    @Jack Hanson
    Nah, Bernie was going to lose and lose big against Trump. Trump would have boxed him into a corner and he would have either had to go full blown SJW with Hillary constantly to his Left demanding she replace him as the candidate, or tried to outpopulist Trump and won the 10% of Democrats who aren't SJW communists or in it for the identity gimmedats. There was no way in Hell Bernie was going to out populist Trump. I really think you would have seen a 40+ state blowout in Trump's favor against Bernie.

    Identity politics is a drug with a nasty addiction cycle. You gotta keep juicing or else you lose it all, but America isn't even a quarter insane pussy hat wearing types. Like any other junkie, the Left picked up the needle and said "okay, only this time cause we really have to win". Whoops, now they don't even have a chance of winning without having some Pardo retard screaming about whites must die.

    That was the real fallout. The mask didn't slip, it was taken off and stomped on. Even around here as recent as 2015 you had people around here saying how the Left "wasn't serious" about shit like trannies, race replacement, or amnesty 24/7. That's their high canon now, brother, and people realise that yes: they are serious. Anyone arguing otherwise is a liar, plant, or unserious enough to be a danger.

    Bernie’s wimp-out in Seattle with those BLM gals would have been shown repeatedly by Trump to drive home to potential voters that Sanders was not Presidential timber. In the sound-bite and short attention span era, a few showings of that scene would’ve buried him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    My point exactly. That was the crux on which his campaign turned. It was his Access Hollywood if you will, and Bernie flubbed it huge.

    If he had taken a strong stance he could have very well have united the WCWs and the saner portions of the Democratic Party if he had kept the course on that and immigration as well. Thing was he turned out to be a less well known, less qualified version of Hillary with even less of the patronage she had.

    Now, if Bernie had shown that spine and lost all the same to HRC cause of shenanigans, it woud have been a 5d chess by Trump to have brought Bernie on as VP. However this ignores all the reasons he brought Pence on (ideological, untouchable failsafe in case something happens to Trump) and is getting into alt history territory.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    Maybe this: Trump gives Netanyahu a green light to do what he wants in the Middle East, but there's a price. Trump wants the head of Weinstein the big Democratic donor. So the deal is, the Israeli government, which has old ties to Jewish reporters at the New York Times and other places, commands that they investigate and bring down Weinstein. Not all the reporters will go along, but you only need a few. In other words, Netanyahu is Trump's back door into the New York Times.

    As an enemy or a ‘message’, Weinstein is political peanuts. It would be a clumsy way of getting some breathing space from the daily Trump bashing. Puts no pressure on his true political enemies.

    What is true is that many people smeared belong to the liberal anti-Trump camp, for now. Something changed in allowed editorial lines.

    Cui bono? Those who have the megaphone.
    What precedent is set? The how, the why, the fruits gained?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. @TomSchmidt
    My assumption is that both parties serve a globalist elite who try to keep political interference at a low level. Trump was clearly a threat to this elite and continues to be so, even if he has done little to upset their apple carts, except canceling TPP. He's not controllable.

    Identity politics is a psy ops tool to keep the right rabble off balance, and to help divide and keep the population focused elsewhere. It's not a bad way to rule when there are benefits to be distributed. When America was 10% black and 90% white, it was possible to run a policy taxing the latter to give to the former, using underhanded methods like affirmative action where the marginal white guy, not the elite at the top of the pile, has to lose his opportunity to make up for past wrongs, instead of passing a broad wealth tax and having elite whites also pay for the affirmative action policies. As the numbers of minorities have increased and the white exploitable class has run out of money to steal, it has become impossible to offer payoffs in cash that wouldn't start to threaten the globalist elite dollars.

    White working and middle class resistance to expropriation is one form of anti-globalist politics. Real socialism (which eventually devolves to all pigs being equal, some more equal than others) is another. As another commenter pointed out, Bernie talked civil rights but moved to lily-white Vermont; he talked socialism, language of the common man, but his wife got a crony capitalist deal from a college in Vermont. Don't be so sure that a real socialist wouldn't win, since it would likely be an improvement over crony capitalism, despite being a long-run disaster. If it's the only way to stick it to the globalist elite, people will take it.

    Bernie (not the SJW-converged Bernie you've posited; he would lose as me-too and not a woman) might lose NH to Trump, but I think takes Michigan, maybe Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, too. Not as much chance to flip Florida, and I don't think any other Trump state flips with Bernie instead of Hillary. What Dem states flip, if they were deranged enough to vote for Hillary in the first place?

    The Dems are about power. They're going to win quite a few contests against republicans because Trump motivates their base in a way I've not seen. But Trump has shown some class-based cracks in their coalition. He won 20% of black men, indicating that there's an opportunity to gain votes by delivering benefits. His tax bill will do that for the short term, even if it screws the Deplorables long term. The Dems' addiction isn't identity politics, but power. They'll drop the trannies et al if doing so is the cost of returning to power.

    No, he doesn’t take Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

    Blacks weren’t going to turn out for a socialist jew, especially with Hillary pouting in the media. Trump appeals to black men so much more. You cannot get WCWs (working class whites) and SJWs in any sort of coalition together that’s going to produce victory. You think the ideological purists in that are running the Dems now were going to hold their nose and vote for Bernie if he made any overtures to whites?

    Have you been under a rock for the last nine months and missed all the anti white animus news stories that came out?

    No, Bernie gets crushed cause you can’t have the coalition of the fringes AND the devil of that pantheon in the same party.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. @Ivy
    Bernie's wimp-out in Seattle with those BLM gals would have been shown repeatedly by Trump to drive home to potential voters that Sanders was not Presidential timber. In the sound-bite and short attention span era, a few showings of that scene would've buried him.

    My point exactly. That was the crux on which his campaign turned. It was his Access Hollywood if you will, and Bernie flubbed it huge.

    If he had taken a strong stance he could have very well have united the WCWs and the saner portions of the Democratic Party if he had kept the course on that and immigration as well. Thing was he turned out to be a less well known, less qualified version of Hillary with even less of the patronage she had.

    Now, if Bernie had shown that spine and lost all the same to HRC cause of shenanigans, it woud have been a 5d chess by Trump to have brought Bernie on as VP. However this ignores all the reasons he brought Pence on (ideological, untouchable failsafe in case something happens to Trump) and is getting into alt history territory.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. @dfordoom

    Yet multiculturalism grew out of those very parties.
     
    Multiculturalism was pushed pretty hard by all mainstream political parties.

    Multiculturalism was pushed pretty hard by all mainstream political parties.

    Indeed. The 19th-century Democrats even made young men die for it. As did the newborn Republicans. Neither took the Colonization Society’s advice to heart.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. whorefinder says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    Or maybe Franken's just an obnoxious guy but not really in the same class with Weinstein?

    ….and yet today they finally get Franken to resign.

    Can I get a little credit here about being right, Steve?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    No.

    Franken says he will resign "in the coming weeks".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @whorefinder
    ....and yet today they finally get Franken to resign.

    Can I get a little credit here about being right, Steve?

    No.

    Franken says he will resign “in the coming weeks”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?