The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Harvey Monahan
🔊 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

Commenter Irish Paleo writes:

The damage done to the Dems’ control of its coalition of the fringes (as laid bare by Trump’s victory in 2016) has been deep. At the heart of the sexual politics of the Democratic Party is a chasmic faultline, namely the fact that their coalition includes Marcusian feminists whose obsession with perceived male violence and sexual predation is becoming more hysterical with every passing week, supporters who themselves include a disproportionate number of male sexual predators amongst their number (black football players, Hollywood moguls, Bill Clinton etc.) and others who harbour thinly veiled aspirations to inflict violence on women (Muslims, Trannies etc.). Weinstein shows how quickly these troops start turning the guns on each other (instead of Haven Monahan or George Zimmerman) and how increasingly sketchy is the centralised command and control over them.

Watch this space…

 
Hide 182 CommentsLeave a Comment
182 Comments to "Harvey Monahan"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Maj. Kong says:

    I am not so optimistic here, unless we start seeing more dominoes fall in the Hollyweird power structure.

    The left can point out three names: Roger Ailes, Bill O’Reilly and Donald Trump. The first two are document as having paid out millions in settlements. The third is no paragon of virtue, even if probably all of the sexual assault claims are false.

    They will predictably claim that the problem is men, and that the solution is more feminism. The obvious ethnic issue will be swept under the rug, just as the issue of gay priests was suppressed.

    Read More
    • Agree: Thea
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Who CARES if the "Left can point at three names"? There's been no convictions, just accusations. No one has fled the country.

    Here we get the classic boomercuck method of assuming the position of defeat AND ceding moral authority to the Left.
    , @Hibernian
    The issue of gay priests is widely talked about, but nothing is done about it.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    The third is no paragon of virtue, even if probably all of the sexual assault claims are false.
     
    So Trump loses even if he has done nothing more that make wild, and unsubstantiated claims, about what he can do with a certain class of women. Because, you know, Jack D says Trump screwed a contractor back when that contractor was hanging drywall while Trump was sexually harassing somebody within earshot of said harassment.

    Well, to quote Jack D, Trump is our bastard. And as our bastard, he could be doing worse.
    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/harvey-monahan/#comment-2040903
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Beene says:

    Isn’t it Donald Monahan? If Harvey Weinstein has to resign or be fired from his own company, shouldn’t Donald Trump have to resign or be fired for basically the same accusations? (I support both resignations).

    Read More
    • Replies: @fish
    Has Trump been accused of multiple coercive sexual incidents or merely making the statement that on the NY party circuit it was no big deal to grab a woman by her thinking parts?
    , @MBlanc46
    Roll back the clock to 1998 and get Bill to resign, and I’ll sign on.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Beene, when the feminists, wearing their pink vagina hats, march nationwide against Harvey and his left leaning ilk, I'll agree with your statement about Trump.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Investment opportunity: popcorn.

    Read More
    • Agree: AM
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you’re not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition. I don’t get why there are so many people that think being really feminist about Hollywood amounts to some kind of debilitating take down of liberalism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paul Yarbles
    Next shoe to drop: Powerful Hollywood gays preying on young males. You want to see some Hollywood destruction? Grab the popcorn. You're in for a treat!
    , @27 year old

    You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you’re not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition.
     
    I thought a lot about this. You have a good point, that a lot of people seem to be cucking about this and doing a "Dems R Real Misogynist" thing and we need to avoid that. I think there really isn't a critique per se. The situation just validates the reality-based anti-feminist view and illustrates how the world really works: men and women both want things from eachother and they each use whatever advantages they have to get what they want.

    Harvey offered a trade, and lots of women took the deal. If he could have bothered to spend some time in the gym to not look so disgusting and read a few vintage 2008 Roissy posts to not come off like a whiny creep, probably way more of them would have taken the deal. This is how hollywood has always been. I read that one of the Warner brothers (ever heard of them?) made a pass at a 13 year old Shirley Temple, while the other brother kept her mother occupied by trying to get in her pants.

    Women trading sex for (fill in the blank) and men offering (fill in the blank) for sex, is the way of the world. We want women to trade sex for marriage + family life.

    The critique of (((Weinstein))), same as all liberals, is that they use feminism as a weapon to beat up regular Whites.

    Now getting back around -- I think that strengthening the feminist bloc relative to the hollywood mogul bloc maybe does weaken the coalition as a whole. Anything that increases friction between the blocs will decrease their operational effectiveness. But more importantly, I think the more power feminists have in the coalition the weaker they are because feminism is a loser position (at the end of the day, fraternizing with the enemy, etc etc) and because feminists are way less competent than hollywood moguls.

    , @Lagertha
    well, as far as your point, Georgina confuses me. Why would a successful fashion designer who is absolutely gorgeous, marry Harvey in 2007? She certainly did not need his money, as she was already dressing wealthy women and stars in Hollywood with her Marchesa line. She represents feminism: built her business, was scandal free, and was not dependent on any man. There has not been one piece on Georgina (other than she filed for divorce last week). I have always been confused that she would share her life with Harvey - she is a nice woman who designs incredibly beautiful clothes.

    She linked up with Huma, recently, to commiserate over sex-crazed husbands...kid you not. So, there could be a counterattack that feminist women are too busy having it all that they don't know if their marriage is actually bullshit. Yet, they will have some serious 'splainin' to do with their kids when their kids ask: "what is wrong with Daddy/why is Daddy in jail?" I don't understand how Georgina could have ignored Harvey's reputation, the rumors. Because, if she really felt all his predatory behavior was 12-20 years ago, she would not file for divorce in a New York minute following Farrow's story. I'm just confused that successful women marry men whose creepy reputations are already out there. It smells of women being bad at picking men for just sheer companionship! And, why not have children just in vitro - sperm bank? skip the man and his weird appetites.

    , @vx37
    No, you need to openly question why Jews are allowed to practice open racial discrimination in the media industries, why are they allowed to be super citizens with special rights to ignore the anti-discrimination laws the rest of us have to live under. How was democracy warped to make that happen. And how much does the Jewish racism that permeates Hollywood contribute to these sexual assaults. Shiksa, after all, means whore.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. gwood says:

    Crabs in a bucket…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. It’s true that the Democrats are a basket case. On the other hand, there’s the GOP, fearlessly led by a random-aim Tweeter. Good thing we have organized-crime-type ballot access rules. Can you imagine how well an actual, serious, principled political party could do?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Coemgen

    Can you imagine how well an actual, serious, principled political party could do?
     
    One man's principled-person is another man's ideologue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Tiny Duck says:

    white men in power have always gotten away with it.

    Whether it’s show biz, politics, academia, tech—it still happens with regularity when there’s a power differential. Some white men feel their worldly success means they can take whatever they see/want.

    Glad to see Harvey taken down and women saying No More. But patriarchy is the rule in our society in spite of lip service to the contrary. Women that are not famous –say on campus–still may not be taken seriously when reporting assault; a videotaped rapist gets probation as judge doesn’t want to harm his bright future for one mistake; rape kits not processed or lost.

    These things are deeply embedded in our culture and need full airing and purging. this is why demographic change is so crucial and title IX was so important

    Read More
    • Replies: @fish

    Oh Tinys….they got yo meds right. You can spells again.

    - Leonard Pitts
     

    , @Karl
    7 Tiny Duck > and women saying No More


    Leave to a black guy to not even see, the color of money.

    The recorded-entertainment industry can operate anywhere in the world that is most convenient, just as the telephone call-center business can.

    Let's suppose that 0.01% of Indian sub-continent women can "pass" for the "Iowa girl next door"

    that's already a thousand percent more actresses than are required to support an recorded-entertainment industry

    If NY-Jew moguls can feel that it's ok to schtupp their Mexican maid...... they can probably learn to feel that it's ok to schtupp their Marathi maid.
    , @iffen
    rape kits not processed or lost.


    Detroit is starting to sort through thousands of boxes of potential evidence in rape cases that have been left unprocessed. The 11,000 "rape kits" were discovered in 2009, and Wayne County prosecutor Kym Worthy has been leading the effort to process them.
     
    Detroit. Something about Detroit. Can't get it into focus.
    , @DJohn1
    A brilliant parody troll. Kudos.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn’t either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that’s the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I’m let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I’d love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM’s agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won’t hold my breath waiting for it to happen…

    Read More
    • Replies: @blaster
    Obama's daughter is not nearly as attractive as Hollywood starlets. She was very safe. Better fish to catch and fry.
    , @Barnard

    Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?
     
    Harvey wasn't going to make a pass at Malia Obama for several reasons including:

    A. She isn't his type
    B. Her father was President of the United States

    Weinstein doesn't do this stuff in front of everybody in the company, Malia was very unlikely to witness any of it. Obama let her take the internship probably because she really wanted to do it, most daughters have a way of getting what they want from dear old dad. He knew Harvey wasn't going to harass her and she was very unlikely to witness him going after anyone else.

    , @Evocatus
    Maybe they knew ol' Harvey wasn't into black girls.
    , @27 year old

    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?
     
    Why do people keep asking this like its a gigantic mystery?

    Any or all of the below:

    1. Nobody ever told Obama, he didn't know Weinstein's reputation

    2. Obama had a realistic understanding of his daughters attractiveness relative to hollywood talent -- she not a high value target.

    3. Obama figured (correctly) that he's the goddamn president of the United States and Harvey was not going to try anything with her. It's not like Weinstein is a rabid dog inherently dangerous to any woman within radius. He's just a physically repulsive jew trying to leverage his SMV to the best of his ability.

    4. Obama doesn't think the way a normal man thinks about protecting his daughter, he's thinking about her having her own lived experience and making her own choices and growing as a human being or whatever progressive bullshit.

    , @Harry Baldwin
    Doesn't Obama's daughter have Secret Security protection? I don't think the big guy with the SIG Sauer P229 is going to let Malia be alone with Weinstein.
    , @anon
    Just a guess-
    All these sorts of people, Obama included, have been raised in a milieu where this type of behaviour is the norm.
    They can't understand why certain things are either frowned upon, or illegal, because it's all they've ever known.
    , @EdwardM
    Maybe Obama knew that Weinstein doesn't go for black girls? Of the 33 accusers who have come out of the woodwork so far, are any black?
    , @Meretricious
    Obama desperately wants Malia to succeed as a blame-whitey filmmaker. Simple as that
    , @International Jew
    Malia was perfectly safe there, as she'll be anywhere else she goes, because she doesn't need guys like Harvey Weinstein to give her any career opportunities; her dad's patronage eclipses anything she could get from almost anyone else.

    In the patronage market, she's going to be on the supply side, not the demand side, anywhere she goes.

    That and her plain looks.
    , @Neuday
    Perhaps Obama knows Weinstein so well that he was certain his daughter isn't the right type. #AspiringActressesSoWhite
    , @JimB
    Obama’s children are safe because they belong to the predator class. Predators eat only animals lower on the trophic pyramid.
    , @dr kill
    The question recurring to me is different, I wonder why now, why Teh NYT picks this time to run this story. Any time in the past 20 years it could have run, or any time in the coming 20 years. If anyone understands why, please shout it out.
    , @Inquiring Mind
    JimB is only partly right.

    " boys (the Jonas Brothers, musicians, I guess https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Brothers, of whom Mr. Obama's daughters are fans?), don't get any ideas. Two words for you: predator drones. You will never see it coming"

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/05/obama-drone-joke-was-it-offens.html

    C'mon, people, try and keep up!

    , @jimbojones
    Because only yesterday, Harvey Weinstein was a legendary Hollywood boss of immense influence and prestige. He could make things happen. His tough-guy reputation only added to his mystique.

    By the way, regarding the Weinstein story, I think there are a few questions worth asking that are not being asked enough:
    - Why didn't the women he groped go to the police? If he really is a predator/rapist/misogynist/worse-than-Hitler etc, fight him to the end and NAIL him. Don't take his money.
    - There is a difference between accepting a payoff before putting out and after having been groped; but how great is that difference, and is it a difference in kind or in degree?
    - What kind of a disgusting person turns on his or her erstwhile friend when he is down the way Hollywooders have turned on Weinstein?
    - What will it take for Hollywood to face its hypocrisy? Ditto the liberal media.

    Weinstein appears to be a run-of-the-mill mogul womanizer with tendencies toward voyeurism. I think he should've stuck to mistresses and call girls rather than starlets - and he probably thinks the same now. So I wouldn't judge Weinstein too harshly. Groping is not rape. Hollywood's personalities and the mainstream media, however, have fallen even further in my eyes.
    , @Stan d Mute

    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?
     
    Two words:

    Secret Service
    , @Cornbeef
    He knew she was safe. He only preys on the pale goyim.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. fish says:
    @Beene
    Isn't it Donald Monahan? If Harvey Weinstein has to resign or be fired from his own company, shouldn't Donald Trump have to resign or be fired for basically the same accusations? (I support both resignations).

    Has Trump been accused of multiple coercive sexual incidents or merely making the statement that on the NY party circuit it was no big deal to grab a woman by her thinking parts?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beene
    (actually meant to reply to fish)

    Yes. Donald Trump has been accused by over 15 women of groping them and or engaging in behavior similar to some of the Weinstein accusations (i.e. hotel room invitations). He was also accused of raping a 14 year-old girl in a lawsuit. You can read the full list here.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

    Donald Trump’s response was, of course, that none of those women were good-looking enough to sexually molest. At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”
    , @LondonBob
    The left's bizarre attempt to conflate Trump and Weinstein is another fail. Trump is better looking and genuinely attracts women, as well as Democrat inspired smear jobs. Thankfully the police know the difference between actual harassment or rape and Democrat smear jobs. How clean Trump is is has always impressed me, would have thought he would have picked up more dirt over the years.

    Apparently Weinstein's wife comes from a broken home, albeit a wealthy broken home, so that explains her to some extent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. JimB says:

    Funny how La La Land contained no references to the casting couch.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Jason Liu says:

    The biggest cultural fault line on the left is between white urban feminists+college ideologues vs traditional minorities+working class men (what’s left of them). The two sides are very different.

    The manosphere made a big mistake going all-in on white interests, when it had a good opportunity to use gender as a wedge between male/female Democrats. Since the ratio of male to female always hovers around 50-50, a cultural platform based on gender would automatically have a built-in minimum floor of support much greater than what radical political ideologies can muster.

    Leftists understand this, and use feminism to create the same minimum support floor, which lets them spew rhetoric like “Why did most white women vote Trump?”, implying they weren’t suppose to because they’re female. Can the right confidently ask “Why did most black men vote Hillary?” on the basis that they’re betraying their masculinity?

    Masculinity and tribalism are basically inseparable, but gender-based politics is still a strategy worth considering on the right. Most men on the right understand and accept a reasonable amount of tribalism, even from our enemies. But men on the right are also prone to giving insults and taking offense. A balance needs to be created to form a working right wing coalition.

    Read More
    • Replies: @midtown
    To ask "Why did most white women vote Trump?" is to acknowledge that the gender argument didn't and doesn't work. The racial dynamics are far stronger than gender.
    , @MBlanc46
    Leftist men are worse than the women. They’re irredeemable.
    , @Thea
    The manosphere did not go all in on white nationalism. Some popular men's rights blogs have said nothing or opposed it.
    , @scrotus
    You say that you can break it down by sex? But how? At least for whites, women vote liberal, then move conservative when they have kids. Are you going to try and offend your nieces and your daughter's friends? This is the problem with attacking too much on sex: you live with the people you are attacking.

    The reasons the Alt Right maybe works is because it introduces ideas at the fringe. The "bleed off" then shifts the general population's overton window slightly. A big social problem is that so much discourse is simply verboten, so the window has to be shifted. The fringe is possibly where that shift happens.
    , @Desiderius

    The manosphere made a big mistake going all-in on white interests
     
    The manosphere didn't.

    Among those who did, a significant proportion were not operating in good faith.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Paleo calls it about right. I would add that if you peak under the covers you’ll find that most of The Coalition consists of superficially educated, insecure lemmings clueless to the reality that they are making their way to the edge of the abyss.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. blaster says:
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Obama’s daughter is not nearly as attractive as Hollywood starlets. She was very safe. Better fish to catch and fry.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Don't judge actresses and models by what you see when they are in full make up and carefully photographed. Obama's daughter is attractive enough. Men like Weinstein will go after anything female unless she has more power than he.

    Weinstein knew not to go after the Princess. Treason you know
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. fish says:
    @Tiny Duck
    white men in power have always gotten away with it.

    Whether it's show biz, politics, academia, tech---it still happens with regularity when there's a power differential. Some white men feel their worldly success means they can take whatever they see/want.

    Glad to see Harvey taken down and women saying No More. But patriarchy is the rule in our society in spite of lip service to the contrary. Women that are not famous --say on campus--still may not be taken seriously when reporting assault; a videotaped rapist gets probation as judge doesn't want to harm his bright future for one mistake; rape kits not processed or lost.

    These things are deeply embedded in our culture and need full airing and purging. this is why demographic change is so crucial and title IX was so important

    Oh Tinys….they got yo meds right. You can spells again.

    - Leonard Pitts

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

    Has the number of “seminar callers” posting comments increased?

    If so – what are the implications?

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

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-human-stain-why-the-harvey-weinstein-story-is-worse-than-you-think/article/2009995

    Rebecca Traister says the stories are coming out now because “our consciousness has been raised.” Between Bill Cosby and Roger Ailes, Bill O’Reilly, and Donald Trump, argues Traister, people are now accustomed to speaking and hearing the truth about famous, sexually abusive men.

    This is wrong. It has nothing to do with “raised consciousness”—or else she wouldn’t have left off that list the one name obviously missing. It’s not about raised consciousness or else the Democratic party’s 2016 presidential campaign would not have been a year-long therapy session treating a repressed trauma victim with even its main slogan—“I’m with her”—referencing a muted plea for sympathy for a woman who’d been publicly shamed by a sexual predator.

    Which brings us, finally, to the other reason the Weinstein story came out now: Because the court over which Bill Clinton once presided, a court in which Weinstein was one part jester, one part exchequer, and one part executioner, no longer exists.

    A thought experiment: Would the Weinstein story have been published if Hillary Clinton had won the presidency? No, and not because he is a big Democratic fundraiser. It’s because if the story was published during the course of a Hillary Clinton presidency, it wouldn’t have really been about Harvey Weinstein. Harvey would have been seen as a proxy for the president’s husband and it would have embarrassed the president, the first female president.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. Barnard says:
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?

    Harvey wasn’t going to make a pass at Malia Obama for several reasons including:

    A. She isn’t his type
    B. Her father was President of the United States

    Weinstein doesn’t do this stuff in front of everybody in the company, Malia was very unlikely to witness any of it. Obama let her take the internship probably because she really wanted to do it, most daughters have a way of getting what they want from dear old dad. He knew Harvey wasn’t going to harass her and she was very unlikely to witness him going after anyone else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Patrick Harris
    Would Obama even be the kind of person who would know a lot more about Weinstein's bad reputation than the general public? Sure, he gets to hobknob with celebrities now and then, but he has no background in showbiz.
    , @Bill Jones
    She's black.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Add to this: Jewish contributors (Jews give up to 50% of Democratic funding) and anti-Zionist Muslims and SJWs (and many Muslims openly hate Jews, not just Zionists). That won’t continue. Haim Saban is not going to stand on a platform with Linda Sarsour.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Media fights and media "reality" usually revolve around the petty differences (deep-pocketed Jews vs. deep-pocketed Muslims is an example). The structural forces that will maintain the new-wave (Social) Democrat caucus as "the mommy party" and its generic opposite as "the daddy party."

    The 20th C phenomenon of poorwhites being shoved out to make room for entertainment/tech billionaires (who choose the Democrats' side for ethno-signalling) only reinforces this modern dynamic. Both sides have been feminized/shifted toward girlyness as an aggregate. But of course most of the aggrieved cry-bully billionaires as a class are still opportunistically "on the right"

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. njguy73 says:

    So, I’m let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    A man who, if his daughter is touched in any way, can make the toucher disappear completely.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. Thea says:

    On the other hand, the stupid party is mostly an uneasy marriage between pathologically Zionist evangelicals and economic libertarians plus a sprinkling of alt right whom they don’t love.

    The ability of the GOP to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is uncanny. Paul Ryan would love to hand our heritage over to a globalists for a mess of pottage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    I’m guessing that there aren’t very many here who identify with the Repubs. Some may vote for Repub candidates, faute de mieux. Some may think that the Repubs are ripe for taking over. But I suspect that there are precious few who think of the Repubs as anything but the lesser of two evils.
    , @Boethiuss

    On the other hand, the stupid party is mostly an uneasy marriage between pathologically Zionist evangelicals and economic libertarians plus a sprinkling of alt right whom they don’t love.
     
    The other hand is that there are millions of Nice White Ladies from Kansas who have been voting Republican since Alf Landon ran for President. And so far at least, the Trump/Bannon/iSteve commentariat strategy is simply to call them all cucks and hope they go away.

    As if. Like who created 52 GOP Senators, 250 GOP Congressmen (and President Trump for that matter)? But that's ok. Like other Darwin Award Winners, there's nothing stopping us from stupiding ourselves out of existence.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. On first glance of the headline I was thinking at last Haven Monahan had been found, oh well one go always keep hoping ;-)

    Here in Colorado, the Dem’s keep promoting Governor John Hickenloope (Whitest of White guys) as a presidential hopeful. Then there’s other White guys like Sen. Tim Kaine, Joe Biden……etc. and then realize not one of these guys has a chance in hell in the current dem party order of “it” who has the most social justice victim Pokemon points wins. If Oprah step’s in it’s all over.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. Evocatus says:
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Maybe they knew ol’ Harvey wasn’t into black girls.

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

    Some men say things so patently ridiculous that the only reasonable explanation is that it is an attempt to get inside feminists’ pants. Good evidence for the evolutionary theory of politics.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. Karl says:
    @Tiny Duck
    white men in power have always gotten away with it.

    Whether it's show biz, politics, academia, tech---it still happens with regularity when there's a power differential. Some white men feel their worldly success means they can take whatever they see/want.

    Glad to see Harvey taken down and women saying No More. But patriarchy is the rule in our society in spite of lip service to the contrary. Women that are not famous --say on campus--still may not be taken seriously when reporting assault; a videotaped rapist gets probation as judge doesn't want to harm his bright future for one mistake; rape kits not processed or lost.

    These things are deeply embedded in our culture and need full airing and purging. this is why demographic change is so crucial and title IX was so important

    7 Tiny Duck > and women saying No More

    Leave to a black guy to not even see, the color of money.

    The recorded-entertainment industry can operate anywhere in the world that is most convenient, just as the telephone call-center business can.

    Let’s suppose that 0.01% of Indian sub-continent women can “pass” for the “Iowa girl next door”

    that’s already a thousand percent more actresses than are required to support an recorded-entertainment industry

    If NY-Jew moguls can feel that it’s ok to schtupp their Mexican maid…… they can probably learn to feel that it’s ok to schtupp their Marathi maid.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?

    Why do people keep asking this like its a gigantic mystery?

    Any or all of the below:

    1. Nobody ever told Obama, he didn’t know Weinstein’s reputation

    2. Obama had a realistic understanding of his daughters attractiveness relative to hollywood talent — she not a high value target.

    3. Obama figured (correctly) that he’s the goddamn president of the United States and Harvey was not going to try anything with her. It’s not like Weinstein is a rabid dog inherently dangerous to any woman within radius. He’s just a physically repulsive jew trying to leverage his SMV to the best of his ability.

    4. Obama doesn’t think the way a normal man thinks about protecting his daughter, he’s thinking about her having her own lived experience and making her own choices and growing as a human being or whatever progressive bullshit.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Perhaps because he'd seen his Justice department figures where white ( and probably Jewish) men raping black women were such a rare occurrence that they statistically round down to zero.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Coemgen says:
    @Reactionary Utopian
    It’s true that the Democrats are a basket case. On the other hand, there’s the GOP, fearlessly led by a random-aim Tweeter. Good thing we have organized-crime-type ballot access rules. Can you imagine how well an actual, serious, principled political party could do?

    Can you imagine how well an actual, serious, principled political party could do?

    One man’s principled-person is another man’s ideologue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Doesn’t Obama’s daughter have Secret Security protection? I don’t think the big guy with the SIG Sauer P229 is going to let Malia be alone with Weinstein.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stealth
    I always thought the worst part of being in the Secret Service would be to have to fire that loud-ass cartridge if the need arose. Getting shot by an assassin would be bad, too, I guess.
    , @gp
    Why did the Secret Service allow Malia to toke on passed pot at concert(s)? Joint could easily have been full of polonium.

    Why did the Secret Service allow Malia to roll around in the dirt at Lollapalooza, and didn't know a guy who recently bought dozens of rifles booked a room overhead?

    Why didn't the Secret Service veto Malia's 2012 spring break Mexico trip? No honest operator would claim to be able to absolutely protect kid tourists in Mexico. That's nuts.

    Why do Secret Service agents seem to spend their free time whoring and hard-drinking, esp. overseas?

    Competence is a vanished artifact of old western civ.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Marcusian feminists whose obsession with perceived male violence… supporters who themselves include a disproportionate number of male sexual predators amongst their number (black football players, Hollywood moguls, Bill Clinton etc.) and others who harbour thinly veiled aspirations to inflict violence on women (Muslims, Trannies etc.).

    ROTFL. True enough…

    But womenfolks are strange in many ways. My sister is a libby-dibber living in the West Coast with her Jewish Hubber, but guess what movies she used to watch obsessively as a girl?

    AFRICAN QUEEN(the Deliverance of its day), TAMING OF THE SHREW, and SWEPT AWAY(which made her crack up).
    What do those three films have in common? A proud, conceited, or stuckup woman is ‘tamed’ by reality and comes to appreciate a ‘real man’. She read GONE WITH THE WIND back to back and love the movie too. I couldn’t get past 50 pgs of that silly novel. And to this day, I’ve seen no more than 15 min of that silliness.

    And I knew some feminists in college who loved Sam Peckinpah. No surprise that Lena Dunham picked STRAW DOGS as one of her favorites.

    So, these feminists never know what they want. They bitch about white patriarchy and blah blah but then bitch about who wussy and weak white males are and make alliances with Negroes and Muslims and Latin punks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Just a guess-
    All these sorts of people, Obama included, have been raised in a milieu where this type of behaviour is the norm.
    They can’t understand why certain things are either frowned upon, or illegal, because it’s all they’ve ever known.

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

    > So, I’m let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    Didn’t he work in Hollywood while the Obama daughter was at a NY office? Either way, she probably had Secret Service detail.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. EdwardM says:
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Maybe Obama knew that Weinstein doesn’t go for black girls? Of the 33 accusers who have come out of the woodwork so far, are any black?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Obama desperately wants Malia to succeed as a blame-whitey filmmaker. Simple as that

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    Agreed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Malia was perfectly safe there, as she’ll be anywhere else she goes, because she doesn’t need guys like Harvey Weinstein to give her any career opportunities; her dad’s patronage eclipses anything she could get from almost anyone else.

    In the patronage market, she’s going to be on the supply side, not the demand side, anywhere she goes.

    That and her plain looks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Meretricious
    wrong re Dad's patronage--many creative ppl hv no respect for him--NONE
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Orthodox says:

    This is exactly why junking DACA would be a big win for Trump and big trouble for the Democrats. The coalition of the fringes is a spoils system. Taking from the other side means more for everyone. When the other side finally decides to stop paying into the Democrats’ spoils system, they have to take from each other. Down goes the ship.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    Alas, Pres. Trump apparently doesn’t see things as clearly as you do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Neuday says:
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Perhaps Obama knows Weinstein so well that he was certain his daughter isn’t the right type. #AspiringActressesSoWhite

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

    Last night with the help of a friend and my wife, I developed a Grand Unified Answer to the question “Why now?”

    Working backwards from the idea that the NYT broke their story in order not to be scooped by The New Yorker, one starts to wonder why The New Yorker was so eager to break the story anyway. Isn’t this more The New Yorker‘s Condé Nast stablemate Vanity Fair‘s turf?

    Yes: yes, it is. But of course in recent days, Graydon Carter had announced his plans to retire as head of Vanity Fair, because he was about to have to suffer massive staffing cuts imposed by Condé Nast, throwing things into turmoil. (Carter was very likely instrumental in protecting Weinstein over the years for a number of reasons including continuing access journalism, The Oscar Party, etc.)

    The New Yorker, seeing where things are headed and that maybe only one of the two magazines will ultimately survive, starts getting nervous.

    Then Condé Nast boss Si Newhouse goes and dies, leaving a vast power vacuum, and The New Yorker speeds up its scheming to eat Vanity Fair‘s lunch. And NYT does what it did, and we’re off to the races.

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    My guess is that it was Ronan Farrow who drove this process. He's been on this case for many months. I don't have the sense it was otherwise being pursued actively in recent times. He must have been shopping it around for a number of months as well, since NBC rejected it. One expects that the Times got wind of the story, directly from Farrow or from the people he must have spoken to about it, and did what they could to scoop him. (I seem to remember someone in a position to know saying in a tweet, right after the Times story came out, that the Times was trying to beat another publication to the punch.)
    , @Thomas
    The thing that strikes me is how brazen Weinstein was with all this. Potentially career-killing sex scandals have been a public issue nearly since Miramax was bought by Disney a quarter-century ago. Harvey's fate was basically in the hands of the first journalist and set of sources who didn't have reason to be afraid to let the whole story out. He apparently hadn't even slowed down much into the current decade.

    I suppose his little media empire (well recounted in that Weekly Standard piece, http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-human-stain-why-the-harvey-weinstein-story-is-worse-than-you-think/article/2009995) really had fallen on hard times, probably doubly so as a vassal of the fallen House of Clinton.

    And now, Amazon Studios, the latest new, big player in the industry, has got problems of its own. (http://deadline.com/2017/10/roy-price-amazon-sexual-harassment-claim-man-in-the-high-castle-producer-1202187548/) This story isn't about to end yet.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Ahem

    1a/ On the opening page of Unz.com right now is an article called ‘The elites have no credibility” with a photo of the NYT.

    Huh? Isn’t it the NYT that broke the story? That is, isn’t it the Chris Hedge-less NYT that broke the story?

    1b/ http://www.unz.com/article/an-obituary-of-the-new-york-times/

    Um, maybe not.

    2/ I recall lots of criticism of Sabrina Rubin Erdely here. And applause here for Jodi Cantor and Megan Twohey? Not so much.

    3/ There’s been a lot written here about the importance of unions and how their fall has hurt American workers. But I don’t recall as single instance of the Actors union doing a single thing over the years about the casting couch.

    4/ Harvey Weinstein was an alpha male. Aren’t alpha males wonderful? This is just the way things are. It’s nature and genes. Aychbeedee!

    5/ Yet another way the US is better than Russia. Do powerful Russians, at least since the staretz, ever get in trouble for this behavior? Personal loutish, thuggish behavior-what’s wrong with that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @sabril

    Yet another way the US is better than Russia.
     
    I read somewhere that Russian employment ads frequently have something like "no hangups" in them, which is a polite way of saying that servicing the boss is part of the deal.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4973678/Weinstein-s-wife-reaches-Huma-Abedin-support.html

    Harvey Weinstein’s wife reaches out to Huma Abedin for support

    Bill’s legacy?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. JimB says:
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Obama’s children are safe because they belong to the predator class. Predators eat only animals lower on the trophic pyramid.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Has any woke writer noticed yet that all of Harvey’s women are white? There is another fault line between white women and black women in the coalition too. The latter constantly gripe about how the former think feminism is all about themselves. In this scandal, all of the attention is going to rich, attractive white women, both the victims (Judd, Paltrow), the almost-victims (Beckinsale) and the wise elders (Emma Thompson). I bet that starts to grate on some people in the near future, if it doesn’t already.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I think it's totally possible Harv pawed and slobbered on and maybe violated black, AZN, "Latina" and other royal-sampler chickadees-- in addition to the lion's share, who were white. Technically it's not his fault that most women remunerated for staring in a lens & looking pretty are pale.

    Nevertheless, I'm sure his rapid-response team has workshopped the "Not a racist" tactical defense and he'll be photographed with the many colors of the rainbow from here on. Considering the Miramax connection I'd be fascinated to hear the opinions or findings of Ms. Mundo Hispanico herself, Salma Hayek
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Maj. Kong
    I am not so optimistic here, unless we start seeing more dominoes fall in the Hollyweird power structure.

    The left can point out three names: Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly and Donald Trump. The first two are document as having paid out millions in settlements. The third is no paragon of virtue, even if probably all of the sexual assault claims are false.

    They will predictably claim that the problem is men, and that the solution is more feminism. The obvious ethnic issue will be swept under the rug, just as the issue of gay priests was suppressed.

    Who CARES if the “Left can point at three names”? There’s been no convictions, just accusations. No one has fled the country.

    Here we get the classic boomercuck method of assuming the position of defeat AND ceding moral authority to the Left.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. It’s interesting that Rose McGowan is leading the charge against sexism in Hollywood and celebs exploiting women. I fondly recall the dress she wore when attending the 1998 MTV awards with Marilyn Manson. Obviously she felt it displayed her talents to best advantage. (Not sure iSteve allows nudity so Google it yourself.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  43. Beene says:
    @fish
    Has Trump been accused of multiple coercive sexual incidents or merely making the statement that on the NY party circuit it was no big deal to grab a woman by her thinking parts?

    (actually meant to reply to fish)

    Yes. Donald Trump has been accused by over 15 women of groping them and or engaging in behavior similar to some of the Weinstein accusations (i.e. hotel room invitations). He was also accused of raping a 14 year-old girl in a lawsuit. You can read the full list here.

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

    Donald Trump’s response was, of course, that none of those women were good-looking enough to sexually molest. At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”

    Read More
    • Troll: Coemgen
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    And where was the real case for Trump having a long history of such accusations?

    Virtually all of these cases were from women who seemed to suddenly remember, just in time for the election, that he had harassed them, even though they couldn't seem to be able to locate credible independent witnesses whom they told of the abuse at the time it occurred.
    , @AM

    Donald Trump’s response was, of course, that none of those women were good-looking enough to sexually molest. At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”
     
    AKA - The answer you'd expect if he didn't molest them. I assume the American people understood what he meant and believed him. Donald Trump attracts supermodels. He doesn't need to hassle women who don't want him. Plenty insist that they touch them in hopes of landing something from him. We call them "gold diggers" in the old fashion parlance.

    The difference that the average working class person can look at a woman and ponder whether or not she might be lieing for her personal gain. Lefties look at weepy woman and insist whatever declarations of innocence and molestation must be true, especially if they don't like the male being accused.

    , @mobi

    At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”
     
    And he was still preferable to anything chosen by you!

    Try to imagine what that says about you.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. The existence of a golem is sometimes a mixed blessing. Golems are not intelligent, and if commanded to perform a task, they will perform the instructions literally. In many depictions Golems are inherently perfectly obedient. In its earliest known modern form, the Golem of Chełm became enormous and uncooperative. In one version of this story, the rabbi had to resort to trickery to deactivate it, whereupon it crumbled upon its creator and crushed him.

    Sourced from the wikipedia entry.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. Harvey Weinstein is Hollywood personified. Harvey Weinstein is the financial and propaganda face of the Democrat Party. Harvey Weinstein will be the end of any chance the Democrat Party had of trying to lure Whites Without College Degrees(WWCDs) back to their political coalition.

    The Democrat Party is made up of Jews, Blacks, Mestizos, Asians, some White Government Workers and White wackos. Harvey Weinstein will shine a bright spotlight on Wall Street, Hollywood, Academia and the Corporate Media. Harvey Weinstein is no longer a name, it is a brand, and it is a brand that the Republican Party must place around the neck of the Democrat Party like a half ton millstone.

    White women voters will flock to the Republican Party once the nutless pukes such as Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Jeff Flake, Ben Sasse, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and all the others are sidelined. Eventually, they must be politically defenestrated.

    White women voters want legal immigration greatly reduced and illegal alien invaders deported. White women voters want a braveheart who will smash not only the Harvey Weinstein Democrats, but the gutless, heartless Republican Party ruling class as well.

    HARVEY WEINSTEIN DEMOCRATS

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Donald Trump is the un-Weinstein. He is not from Queens. He has never been accused of sexual impropriety. He has no Jewish relatives. He was not a rich mogul involved in the entertainment business. He forms the perfect contrast to Weinstein.

    Oh, no wait...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. I think IrishPaleo’s analysis rather misses the point of what’s going on in this case, and why leftists have turned on the Hollywood establishment.

    It’s fundamentally because: the abuse is of the elite itself. It is aspiring actresses, some of whom became prominent actresses, who have been targeted by Weinstein and his ilk. These are members of the elite. Many, many woman in the elite identify with them.

    The elite can identify only with themselves, and can work themselves into a genuine outrage only over themselves. They are the picture (or is it the mirror?) of narcissism.

    I don’t expect ever to see the same sort of outrage over Muslims or blacks abusing women, because it will only very rarely be a woman in the elite who is their target. The can support Muslims and blacks forever because these groups live far away from their own circles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. @slumber_j
    Last night with the help of a friend and my wife, I developed a Grand Unified Answer to the question "Why now?"

    Working backwards from the idea that the NYT broke their story in order not to be scooped by The New Yorker, one starts to wonder why The New Yorker was so eager to break the story anyway. Isn't this more The New Yorker's Condé Nast stablemate Vanity Fair's turf?

    Yes: yes, it is. But of course in recent days, Graydon Carter had announced his plans to retire as head of Vanity Fair, because he was about to have to suffer massive staffing cuts imposed by Condé Nast, throwing things into turmoil. (Carter was very likely instrumental in protecting Weinstein over the years for a number of reasons including continuing access journalism, The Oscar Party, etc.)

    The New Yorker, seeing where things are headed and that maybe only one of the two magazines will ultimately survive, starts getting nervous.

    Then Condé Nast boss Si Newhouse goes and dies, leaving a vast power vacuum, and The New Yorker speeds up its scheming to eat Vanity Fair's lunch. And NYT does what it did, and we're off to the races.

    My guess is that it was Ronan Farrow who drove this process. He’s been on this case for many months. I don’t have the sense it was otherwise being pursued actively in recent times. He must have been shopping it around for a number of months as well, since NBC rejected it. One expects that the Times got wind of the story, directly from Farrow or from the people he must have spoken to about it, and did what they could to scoop him. (I seem to remember someone in a position to know saying in a tweet, right after the Times story came out, that the Times was trying to beat another publication to the punch.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @slumber_j

    My guess is that it was Ronan Farrow
     
    Undoubtedly. But the question is why the NY'er chose to publish Farrow's piece, which is nothing like their usual beat. That's the whole point of my explanation.

    What changed in the media climate in the previous couple of weeks to make that happen?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. For all the inside baseball shop talk, there’s been no one around here acknowledging that so far Trump’s enemies are being dealt with systematically.

    Fake news, the NFL, and now Hollywood getting the Godfather treatment. If I was an exec in charge of a social media platform in SV, I’d make sure my passport was in order in case I have to fly to a friendly country for “sex addiction therapy”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker

    For all the inside baseball shop talk, there’s been no one around here acknowledging that so far Trump’s enemies are being dealt with systematically.
     
    I so want this to be true!
    , @candid_observer
    I do get the impression that Trump is now finding his metier as President.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Boethiuss says:

    Yeah, the other side has all these structural weaknesses and we don’t so we win. Donald Trump the person is a problem but we’ll maneuver our way around that. That’s what I would have thought up until maybe three months ago.

    But I underestimated the extent to which our side wants to fight ourselves, and now I don’t think that any more. Without Hillary Clinton to coalesce against, I don’t think our command and control is any better than theirs and is probably worse.

    How many alt-rights would vote for Mitch McConnell over Richard Durbin for a generic Senate seat? How many of the iSteve commentariat?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. @Beene
    (actually meant to reply to fish)

    Yes. Donald Trump has been accused by over 15 women of groping them and or engaging in behavior similar to some of the Weinstein accusations (i.e. hotel room invitations). He was also accused of raping a 14 year-old girl in a lawsuit. You can read the full list here.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

    Donald Trump’s response was, of course, that none of those women were good-looking enough to sexually molest. At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”

    And where was the real case for Trump having a long history of such accusations?

    Virtually all of these cases were from women who seemed to suddenly remember, just in time for the election, that he had harassed them, even though they couldn’t seem to be able to locate credible independent witnesses whom they told of the abuse at the time it occurred.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beene
    Well, yes, as usual, Harvey Weinstein is totally guilty while Donald Trump is innocent, therefore, that's that. Actually, Trump was sued for groping in the late 1990s. The rape lawsuit was pre-election. Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?
    , @Rod1963
    Spot on

    The accusations were spurious and without merit this is why they faded so fast. Even the arch extortionist Gloria Allered couldn't bully Trump. They were all nothing burgers.

    Look guys like Trump don't need to grope or rape. Women come on to them. He's a billionaire and jetsetter with a charismatic personality. He's a magnet for every ex-model turned gold digger that will throw themselves at him.

    Weinstein is a serial rapist, not uncommon among Hollywood talent agents. Weinstein was also a power player in Hollywood, you either did as he said, or you didn't get the part unless you had powerful family connections in the studios. Women kept quiet because the studio system had a lot of influence in the news media as both are run by liberals. And Weinstein being a liberal gave him a automatic pass.

    And this stuff with Weinstein is nothing new. it's been a open secret for years that he was messing with the talent. it's just that now, Weinstein has outlived his usefulness as Hollywood is starting to come apart at the seams with all the bombs it's producing. He and his agency doesn't have the clout they used to.

    It's going to take other people down as well. He's not the only sexual predator and a**hole in Hollywood.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Yolo says:

    “What kind of man would do that?”

    Barry. That’s how he operates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  52. AM says:
    @Beene
    (actually meant to reply to fish)

    Yes. Donald Trump has been accused by over 15 women of groping them and or engaging in behavior similar to some of the Weinstein accusations (i.e. hotel room invitations). He was also accused of raping a 14 year-old girl in a lawsuit. You can read the full list here.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

    Donald Trump’s response was, of course, that none of those women were good-looking enough to sexually molest. At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”

    Donald Trump’s response was, of course, that none of those women were good-looking enough to sexually molest. At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”

    AKA – The answer you’d expect if he didn’t molest them. I assume the American people understood what he meant and believed him. Donald Trump attracts supermodels. He doesn’t need to hassle women who don’t want him. Plenty insist that they touch them in hopes of landing something from him. We call them “gold diggers” in the old fashion parlance.

    The difference that the average working class person can look at a woman and ponder whether or not she might be lieing for her personal gain. Lefties look at weepy woman and insist whatever declarations of innocence and molestation must be true, especially if they don’t like the male being accused.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Beene says:
    @candid_observer
    And where was the real case for Trump having a long history of such accusations?

    Virtually all of these cases were from women who seemed to suddenly remember, just in time for the election, that he had harassed them, even though they couldn't seem to be able to locate credible independent witnesses whom they told of the abuse at the time it occurred.

    Well, yes, as usual, Harvey Weinstein is totally guilty while Donald Trump is innocent, therefore, that’s that. Actually, Trump was sued for groping in the late 1990s. The rape lawsuit was pre-election. Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    I suggest you look at the very Wikipedia article you linked to to see if the accusations against Trump really hold up -- including the one (1) accusation that went to court.
    , @AM

    Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?
     
    Some of them are lieing but most of them wanted a movie career and therefore had to keep their mouths shut.

    The difference is Weinstein is somewhere in Europe under going "therapy" and Trump has laughed them off. Innocent men don't need to worry.
    , @candid_observer

    Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?
     
    You missed the point I had made earlier: Trump's accusers, in almost every case, could find no one to whom they told their story at the time of the alleged assault who would back up their stories.

    The Weinberg case couldn't be more different. The number of women who were either assaulted or harassed by him is huge, and a great many of them can produce others who back up their claim that they were told this story at the time of the incident.

    These things are important in court for a very good reason.

    What's scandalous is that the media just didn't care whether these accusations against Trump were supported by this sort of independent, timely verification. They just reported them as if they had somehow been "verified" independent of the random accuser.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Also, looks like Jeff Bezos is now under the gun for sexual misconduct.

    Yeah if I was a Trump enemy Id be very nervous right now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AM

    Also, looks like Jeff Bezos is now under the gun for sexual misconduct.
     
    I have to admit, I'm fascinated by this concept that free love lefties are eating their own over sexual misconduct. But the amount of social energy that Trump is pouring into US society is massive and unprecedented in my lifetime. We're going to get reactions that are strange - some terrible and some a sight to behold, like this.

    Anyway, is it only conservative women who presume that powerful and rich men are not living like monks? Does it take a sophisticated lefty to find a fainting couch each time it's revealed such things occur?
    , @Boethiuss

    Yeah if I was a Trump enemy Id be very nervous right now.
     
    Yeah, right. CNN, MSNBC, Mika and Joe, Colbert, all those people are surging money and ratings for wall-to-wall anti-Trump crap. The market to grok the professional liberal's hatred and disdain for Trump is rich and deep.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. midtown says:
    @Jason Liu
    The biggest cultural fault line on the left is between white urban feminists+college ideologues vs traditional minorities+working class men (what's left of them). The two sides are very different.

    The manosphere made a big mistake going all-in on white interests, when it had a good opportunity to use gender as a wedge between male/female Democrats. Since the ratio of male to female always hovers around 50-50, a cultural platform based on gender would automatically have a built-in minimum floor of support much greater than what radical political ideologies can muster.

    Leftists understand this, and use feminism to create the same minimum support floor, which lets them spew rhetoric like "Why did most white women vote Trump?", implying they weren't suppose to because they're female. Can the right confidently ask "Why did most black men vote Hillary?" on the basis that they're betraying their masculinity?

    Masculinity and tribalism are basically inseparable, but gender-based politics is still a strategy worth considering on the right. Most men on the right understand and accept a reasonable amount of tribalism, even from our enemies. But men on the right are also prone to giving insults and taking offense. A balance needs to be created to form a working right wing coalition.

    To ask “Why did most white women vote Trump?” is to acknowledge that the gender argument didn’t and doesn’t work. The racial dynamics are far stronger than gender.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. iffen says:
    @Tiny Duck
    white men in power have always gotten away with it.

    Whether it's show biz, politics, academia, tech---it still happens with regularity when there's a power differential. Some white men feel their worldly success means they can take whatever they see/want.

    Glad to see Harvey taken down and women saying No More. But patriarchy is the rule in our society in spite of lip service to the contrary. Women that are not famous --say on campus--still may not be taken seriously when reporting assault; a videotaped rapist gets probation as judge doesn't want to harm his bright future for one mistake; rape kits not processed or lost.

    These things are deeply embedded in our culture and need full airing and purging. this is why demographic change is so crucial and title IX was so important

    rape kits not processed or lost.

    Detroit is starting to sort through thousands of boxes of potential evidence in rape cases that have been left unprocessed. The 11,000 “rape kits” were discovered in 2009, and Wayne County prosecutor Kym Worthy has been leading the effort to process them.

    Detroit. Something about Detroit. Can’t get it into focus.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. My guess is that it was Ronan Farrow who drove this process.

    Maybe now Mr. Farrow can turn his attention to Woody Allen. He should feel all right about that, since it’s another open secret that his real father is Frank Sinatra, not Woody.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Barnard
    I wondered the same thing when I heard Farrow was reporting the story. Did he ever think to do a story on Woody Allen?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Barnard

    Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?
     
    Harvey wasn't going to make a pass at Malia Obama for several reasons including:

    A. She isn't his type
    B. Her father was President of the United States

    Weinstein doesn't do this stuff in front of everybody in the company, Malia was very unlikely to witness any of it. Obama let her take the internship probably because she really wanted to do it, most daughters have a way of getting what they want from dear old dad. He knew Harvey wasn't going to harass her and she was very unlikely to witness him going after anyone else.

    Would Obama even be the kind of person who would know a lot more about Weinstein’s bad reputation than the general public? Sure, he gets to hobknob with celebrities now and then, but he has no background in showbiz.

    Read More
    • Agree: Alden
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @Beene
    Well, yes, as usual, Harvey Weinstein is totally guilty while Donald Trump is innocent, therefore, that's that. Actually, Trump was sued for groping in the late 1990s. The rape lawsuit was pre-election. Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?

    I suggest you look at the very Wikipedia article you linked to to see if the accusations against Trump really hold up — including the one (1) accusation that went to court.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. sabril says:
    @anony-mouse
    Ahem

    1a/ On the opening page of Unz.com right now is an article called 'The elites have no credibility" with a photo of the NYT.

    Huh? Isn't it the NYT that broke the story? That is, isn't it the Chris Hedge-less NYT that broke the story?

    1b/ http://www.unz.com/article/an-obituary-of-the-new-york-times/

    Um, maybe not.

    2/ I recall lots of criticism of Sabrina Rubin Erdely here. And applause here for Jodi Cantor and Megan Twohey? Not so much.

    3/ There's been a lot written here about the importance of unions and how their fall has hurt American workers. But I don't recall as single instance of the Actors union doing a single thing over the years about the casting couch.

    4/ Harvey Weinstein was an alpha male. Aren't alpha males wonderful? This is just the way things are. It's nature and genes. Aychbeedee!

    5/ Yet another way the US is better than Russia. Do powerful Russians, at least since the staretz, ever get in trouble for this behavior? Personal loutish, thuggish behavior-what's wrong with that?

    Yet another way the US is better than Russia.

    I read somewhere that Russian employment ads frequently have something like “no hangups” in them, which is a polite way of saying that servicing the boss is part of the deal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    No hang-ups? And they don't do windows, either. You just can't get good help these days unless imported.
    , @Thea
    I don't think they've done that since the wild days of the 1990s. But the adds also specified youth and attractiveness
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. AM says:
    @Beene
    Well, yes, as usual, Harvey Weinstein is totally guilty while Donald Trump is innocent, therefore, that's that. Actually, Trump was sued for groping in the late 1990s. The rape lawsuit was pre-election. Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?

    Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?

    Some of them are lieing but most of them wanted a movie career and therefore had to keep their mouths shut.

    The difference is Weinstein is somewhere in Europe under going “therapy” and Trump has laughed them off. Innocent men don’t need to worry.

    Read More
    • Replies: @mobi

    The difference is Weinstein is somewhere in Europe under going “therapy” and Trump has laughed them off. Innocent men don’t need to worry.
     
    It could only get better if he makes a dash for Israel. The call of Aliya must be stronger by the day.
    , @Buzz Mohawk

    Some of them are lying but most of them wanted a movie career and therefore had to keep their mouths shut.
     
    Yes. One wonders how many said yes and kept their mouths open before they shut them.

    Now, before you tell me again to get my mind out of the gutter, just ask yourself, how many of his victims are still silent, still on the silver screen, still living happily in Malibu? How many are household names, beautiful people who will never talk because they made a deal with the devil, sold themselves out, and sold out womankind?

    There are whores in every business. They will gladly give themselves to the pastiest middle manager if they think they can move up the ladder that way. Some of us have witnessed them in the blandest of offices. There is a certain segment of our human animal family that works that way instinctively. They enable the pigs and thereby help those pigs harm all women.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Hoboken Frank Sinatra does have an uncanny resemblance to Farrow’s kid. Sinatra looks like he is wearing a rug on his head in that picture.

    Marlon Brando said this funny thing about Sinatra:

    “Frank’s the kind of guy, when he dies, he’s going to heaven and give God a bad time for making him bald.”

    http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/why-frank-sinatra-hated-marlon-brando-guts-guys-and-dolls/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. Lurker says:
    @Meretricious
    Obama desperately wants Malia to succeed as a blame-whitey filmmaker. Simple as that

    Agreed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. dr kill says:
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    The question recurring to me is different, I wonder why now, why Teh NYT picks this time to run this story. Any time in the past 20 years it could have run, or any time in the coming 20 years. If anyone understands why, please shout it out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    I agree with the analysis I saw elsewhere that this is a democratic attempt to dump the Clinton demographic.
    Time for new and younger leadership.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Guy de Champlagne
    You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you're not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition. I don't get why there are so many people that think being really feminist about Hollywood amounts to some kind of debilitating take down of liberalism.

    Next shoe to drop: Powerful Hollywood gays preying on young males. You want to see some Hollywood destruction? Grab the popcorn. You’re in for a treat!

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Thea
    Some of us have been warning for a while that this is a real danger. No one wanted to believe it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. AM says:
    @Jack Hanson
    Also, looks like Jeff Bezos is now under the gun for sexual misconduct.

    Yeah if I was a Trump enemy Id be very nervous right now.

    Also, looks like Jeff Bezos is now under the gun for sexual misconduct.

    I have to admit, I’m fascinated by this concept that free love lefties are eating their own over sexual misconduct. But the amount of social energy that Trump is pouring into US society is massive and unprecedented in my lifetime. We’re going to get reactions that are strange – some terrible and some a sight to behold, like this.

    Anyway, is it only conservative women who presume that powerful and rich men are not living like monks? Does it take a sophisticated lefty to find a fainting couch each time it’s revealed such things occur?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. MBlanc46 says:
    @Beene
    Isn't it Donald Monahan? If Harvey Weinstein has to resign or be fired from his own company, shouldn't Donald Trump have to resign or be fired for basically the same accusations? (I support both resignations).

    Roll back the clock to 1998 and get Bill to resign, and I’ll sign on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Beene
    Well, yes, as usual, Harvey Weinstein is totally guilty while Donald Trump is innocent, therefore, that's that. Actually, Trump was sued for groping in the late 1990s. The rape lawsuit was pre-election. Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?

    Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?

    You missed the point I had made earlier: Trump’s accusers, in almost every case, could find no one to whom they told their story at the time of the alleged assault who would back up their stories.

    The Weinberg case couldn’t be more different. The number of women who were either assaulted or harassed by him is huge, and a great many of them can produce others who back up their claim that they were told this story at the time of the incident.

    These things are important in court for a very good reason.

    What’s scandalous is that the media just didn’t care whether these accusations against Trump were supported by this sort of independent, timely verification. They just reported them as if they had somehow been “verified” independent of the random accuser.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    For example, a number of years ago Gwyneth Paltrow was talking about an unnamed mogul who had harassed her.

    There have been a lot of bits and pieces in the press for a long time.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    JimB is only partly right.

    ” boys (the Jonas Brothers, musicians, I guess https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Brothers, of whom Mr. Obama’s daughters are fans?), don’t get any ideas. Two words for you: predator drones. You will never see it coming”

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/05/obama-drone-joke-was-it-offens.html

    C’mon, people, try and keep up!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. MBlanc46 says:
    @Jason Liu
    The biggest cultural fault line on the left is between white urban feminists+college ideologues vs traditional minorities+working class men (what's left of them). The two sides are very different.

    The manosphere made a big mistake going all-in on white interests, when it had a good opportunity to use gender as a wedge between male/female Democrats. Since the ratio of male to female always hovers around 50-50, a cultural platform based on gender would automatically have a built-in minimum floor of support much greater than what radical political ideologies can muster.

    Leftists understand this, and use feminism to create the same minimum support floor, which lets them spew rhetoric like "Why did most white women vote Trump?", implying they weren't suppose to because they're female. Can the right confidently ask "Why did most black men vote Hillary?" on the basis that they're betraying their masculinity?

    Masculinity and tribalism are basically inseparable, but gender-based politics is still a strategy worth considering on the right. Most men on the right understand and accept a reasonable amount of tribalism, even from our enemies. But men on the right are also prone to giving insults and taking offense. A balance needs to be created to form a working right wing coalition.

    Leftist men are worse than the women. They’re irredeemable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Boethiuss says:
    @Jack Hanson
    Also, looks like Jeff Bezos is now under the gun for sexual misconduct.

    Yeah if I was a Trump enemy Id be very nervous right now.

    Yeah if I was a Trump enemy Id be very nervous right now.

    Yeah, right. CNN, MSNBC, Mika and Joe, Colbert, all those people are surging money and ratings for wall-to-wall anti-Trump crap. The market to grok the professional liberal’s hatred and disdain for Trump is rich and deep.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    You're the guy who was claiming that Trump wouldn't see the end of 2017. You have no credibility. Sit down while adults talk.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. Lurker says:
    @Jack Hanson
    For all the inside baseball shop talk, there's been no one around here acknowledging that so far Trump's enemies are being dealt with systematically.

    Fake news, the NFL, and now Hollywood getting the Godfather treatment. If I was an exec in charge of a social media platform in SV, I'd make sure my passport was in order in case I have to fly to a friendly country for "sex addiction therapy".

    For all the inside baseball shop talk, there’s been no one around here acknowledging that so far Trump’s enemies are being dealt with systematically.

    I so want this to be true!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @Barnard

    Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?
     
    Harvey wasn't going to make a pass at Malia Obama for several reasons including:

    A. She isn't his type
    B. Her father was President of the United States

    Weinstein doesn't do this stuff in front of everybody in the company, Malia was very unlikely to witness any of it. Obama let her take the internship probably because she really wanted to do it, most daughters have a way of getting what they want from dear old dad. He knew Harvey wasn't going to harass her and she was very unlikely to witness him going after anyone else.

    She’s black.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    "Mr Weinstein, will you need me to deliver the urgent documents to your room at the Beverly Hills tonight?"
    "No."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Stealth says:
    @Harry Baldwin
    Doesn't Obama's daughter have Secret Security protection? I don't think the big guy with the SIG Sauer P229 is going to let Malia be alone with Weinstein.

    I always thought the worst part of being in the Secret Service would be to have to fire that loud-ass cartridge if the need arose. Getting shot by an assassin would be bad, too, I guess.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas

    I always thought the worst part of being in the Secret Service would be to have to fire that loud-ass cartridge if the need arose. Getting shot by an assassin would be bad, too, I guess.
     
    Well, neither has happened in 36 years, so it doesn't seem like a terribly likely occurrence, though given the Secret Service's embarrassing pratfalls since 2009, that might be due to luck as much as anything. The .357 SIG has a reputation for getting the job done, at least.
    , @Alden
    I think Xpresident's kids lose it at 16 or 18. Somebody should check it out if they're interested.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. MBlanc46 says:
    @Thea
    On the other hand, the stupid party is mostly an uneasy marriage between pathologically Zionist evangelicals and economic libertarians plus a sprinkling of alt right whom they don't love.

    The ability of the GOP to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is uncanny. Paul Ryan would love to hand our heritage over to a globalists for a mess of pottage.

    I’m guessing that there aren’t very many here who identify with the Repubs. Some may vote for Repub candidates, faute de mieux. Some may think that the Repubs are ripe for taking over. But I suspect that there are precious few who think of the Repubs as anything but the lesser of two evils.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss

    I’m guessing that there aren’t very many here who identify with the Repubs. Some may vote for Repub candidates, faute de mieux. Some may think that the Repubs are ripe for taking over. But I suspect that there are precious few who think of the Repubs as anything but the lesser of two evils.
     
    I suspect that's true, and if it is it's not a good thing.

    The alt-right and the iSteve commentariat talks a big game about how there protecting Western Civilization and the rest of it. But for the most part it's just an exercise in narcissism. I want what I want, and if someone else wants anything different, they can just suck an egg.

    And that works up to a point, arguably it has worked so far for Donald Trump and Trump enthusiasts. But there's not enough Trump enthusiasts to make it work indefinitely. We need some goodwill. And Trump's ways of doing things are going to guarantee that we're not going to have it when we need.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. More news is coming out now about how Weinstein’s pals at NBC refused to use Farrow’s very well documented story, the result being that Farrow took his story to The New Yorker.

    They’ll air any unsubstantiated rumor at all that makes President Trump look bad or sews discord and spreads disinfo, but they’ll push away and ignore concrete evidence that shows what pigs their own friends are.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. MBlanc46 says:
    @Orthodox
    This is exactly why junking DACA would be a big win for Trump and big trouble for the Democrats. The coalition of the fringes is a spoils system. Taking from the other side means more for everyone. When the other side finally decides to stop paying into the Democrats' spoils system, they have to take from each other. Down goes the ship.

    Alas, Pres. Trump apparently doesn’t see things as clearly as you do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @cwhatfuture
    Add to this: Jewish contributors (Jews give up to 50% of Democratic funding) and anti-Zionist Muslims and SJWs (and many Muslims openly hate Jews, not just Zionists). That won't continue. Haim Saban is not going to stand on a platform with Linda Sarsour.

    Media fights and media “reality” usually revolve around the petty differences (deep-pocketed Jews vs. deep-pocketed Muslims is an example). The structural forces that will maintain the new-wave (Social) Democrat caucus as “the mommy party” and its generic opposite as “the daddy party.”

    The 20th C phenomenon of poorwhites being shoved out to make room for entertainment/tech billionaires (who choose the Democrats’ side for ethno-signalling) only reinforces this modern dynamic. Both sides have been feminized/shifted toward girlyness as an aggregate. But of course most of the aggrieved cry-bully billionaires as a class are still opportunistically “on the right”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @candid_observer

    Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?
     
    You missed the point I had made earlier: Trump's accusers, in almost every case, could find no one to whom they told their story at the time of the alleged assault who would back up their stories.

    The Weinberg case couldn't be more different. The number of women who were either assaulted or harassed by him is huge, and a great many of them can produce others who back up their claim that they were told this story at the time of the incident.

    These things are important in court for a very good reason.

    What's scandalous is that the media just didn't care whether these accusations against Trump were supported by this sort of independent, timely verification. They just reported them as if they had somehow been "verified" independent of the random accuser.

    For example, a number of years ago Gwyneth Paltrow was talking about an unnamed mogul who had harassed her.

    There have been a lot of bits and pieces in the press for a long time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas

    There have been a lot of bits and pieces in the press for a long time.
     
    Bits and pieces, Hell. Seth MacFarlane was making jokes about it at the Oscars four years ago.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/seth-macfarlane-harvey-weinstein-joke-oscars-2013-women-sexual-harassment-allegations-a7994506.html

    , @Brutusale
    When Courtney Love is a voice of reason willing to pay a price (which she paid) to warn women off the Miramax orca, we've reached peak insanity!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/15/courtney-love-warned-actresses-harvey-weinstein-2005/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Beene
    Isn't it Donald Monahan? If Harvey Weinstein has to resign or be fired from his own company, shouldn't Donald Trump have to resign or be fired for basically the same accusations? (I support both resignations).

    Beene, when the feminists, wearing their pink vagina hats, march nationwide against Harvey and his left leaning ilk, I’ll agree with your statement about Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @dr kill
    The question recurring to me is different, I wonder why now, why Teh NYT picks this time to run this story. Any time in the past 20 years it could have run, or any time in the coming 20 years. If anyone understands why, please shout it out.

    I agree with the analysis I saw elsewhere that this is a democratic attempt to dump the Clinton demographic.
    Time for new and younger leadership.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @27 year old

    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?
     
    Why do people keep asking this like its a gigantic mystery?

    Any or all of the below:

    1. Nobody ever told Obama, he didn't know Weinstein's reputation

    2. Obama had a realistic understanding of his daughters attractiveness relative to hollywood talent -- she not a high value target.

    3. Obama figured (correctly) that he's the goddamn president of the United States and Harvey was not going to try anything with her. It's not like Weinstein is a rabid dog inherently dangerous to any woman within radius. He's just a physically repulsive jew trying to leverage his SMV to the best of his ability.

    4. Obama doesn't think the way a normal man thinks about protecting his daughter, he's thinking about her having her own lived experience and making her own choices and growing as a human being or whatever progressive bullshit.

    Perhaps because he’d seen his Justice department figures where white ( and probably Jewish) men raping black women were such a rare occurrence that they statistically round down to zero.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Melatonin Trump
    Has any woke writer noticed yet that all of Harvey's women are white? There is another fault line between white women and black women in the coalition too. The latter constantly gripe about how the former think feminism is all about themselves. In this scandal, all of the attention is going to rich, attractive white women, both the victims (Judd, Paltrow), the almost-victims (Beckinsale) and the wise elders (Emma Thompson). I bet that starts to grate on some people in the near future, if it doesn't already.

    I think it’s totally possible Harv pawed and slobbered on and maybe violated black, AZN, “Latina” and other royal-sampler chickadees– in addition to the lion’s share, who were white. Technically it’s not his fault that most women remunerated for staring in a lens & looking pretty are pale.

    Nevertheless, I’m sure his rapid-response team has workshopped the “Not a racist” tactical defense and he’ll be photographed with the many colors of the rainbow from here on. Considering the Miramax connection I’d be fascinated to hear the opinions or findings of Ms. Mundo Hispanico herself, Salma Hayek

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Hayek doesn't have a molecule of hispanic or indian DNA. She's Czech and Arab married to a French man.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Boethiuss

    Yeah if I was a Trump enemy Id be very nervous right now.
     
    Yeah, right. CNN, MSNBC, Mika and Joe, Colbert, all those people are surging money and ratings for wall-to-wall anti-Trump crap. The market to grok the professional liberal's hatred and disdain for Trump is rich and deep.

    You’re the guy who was claiming that Trump wouldn’t see the end of 2017. You have no credibility. Sit down while adults talk.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss


    You’re the guy who was claiming that Trump wouldn’t see the end of 2017. You have no credibility.
     
    As if. You're the one who says the Border Patrol is going to prevent a coup against President Trump (after which, you also say it's the other people who are Tom Clancy wannabes).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Ronan Farrow might be up there with James O’Keefe if this stuff keeps on blowing up.

    I said earlier that if I was an SV mogul I’d be nervous. Let me add “If I was a member of the GOPe” to that as well. Trump has underlined, and the public has accepted, that Trump is not a member of the GOPe as much as he is third party president who has associations with the GOP.

    I think one good broadside on Congress (say, the Congressional Pages Program) and he cements himself as the only game in town not tainted by pedophilia or sexual abuse.

    Ben Sasse better hope he doesn’t have any Hastert sized skeletons in his closet. Ted Cruz is an afficiando of MILF porn, so he’s likely safe and in the perfect position to play willing executioner.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  86. Feminists have spent the last 50 years legally ‘weaponizing’ everything they could to leverage their historic privileges. Women now have huge legal advantages regarding the law when it comes to work place rules, criminal sentencing, discrimination, rape, assault, divorce, government benefits, and child custody. Because the laws are so stacked in their favor it has become an ace up women’s sleeves that can be played at almost any time and for any reason. Men are under the proverbial ‘shadow of the law’ and even when falsely accused of something, usually face some kind of punishment or loss. Women on the other hand rarely pay a price, even when they are caught blatantly breaking the law.

    Sexual assault is a case in point. We watched Hillary Clinton completely defend her husband’s bad behavior and ignore Harvey Weinstein’s but completely fabricate 11 assaults by Trump in her Presidential campaign. The commonality is that it suited her purposes. It did not matter to her that Weinstein was ‘harming’ women because he was an asset. However, once he became a liability, she dumped him like a sack of garbage. Same thing with Trump. Once she could not profit from the fake story it vanished like a fart in the wind.

    For political reasons, it is always preferred to use the weapons on white men but sometimes there is isn’t one, they have to find a fake one like Haven Monahan. Frequently there is collateral damage and every now and then a black man gets it in the neck. But the main rule is that eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  87. @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    Because only yesterday, Harvey Weinstein was a legendary Hollywood boss of immense influence and prestige. He could make things happen. His tough-guy reputation only added to his mystique.

    By the way, regarding the Weinstein story, I think there are a few questions worth asking that are not being asked enough:
    - Why didn’t the women he groped go to the police? If he really is a predator/rapist/misogynist/worse-than-Hitler etc, fight him to the end and NAIL him. Don’t take his money.
    - There is a difference between accepting a payoff before putting out and after having been groped; but how great is that difference, and is it a difference in kind or in degree?
    - What kind of a disgusting person turns on his or her erstwhile friend when he is down the way Hollywooders have turned on Weinstein?
    - What will it take for Hollywood to face its hypocrisy? Ditto the liberal media.

    Weinstein appears to be a run-of-the-mill mogul womanizer with tendencies toward voyeurism. I think he should’ve stuck to mistresses and call girls rather than starlets – and he probably thinks the same now. So I wouldn’t judge Weinstein too harshly. Groping is not rape. Hollywood’s personalities and the mainstream media, however, have fallen even further in my eyes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thea
    Doubt he had even one true friend.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @International Jew
    Malia was perfectly safe there, as she'll be anywhere else she goes, because she doesn't need guys like Harvey Weinstein to give her any career opportunities; her dad's patronage eclipses anything she could get from almost anyone else.

    In the patronage market, she's going to be on the supply side, not the demand side, anywhere she goes.

    That and her plain looks.

    wrong re Dad’s patronage–many creative ppl hv no respect for him–NONE

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Barnard says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    My guess is that it was Ronan Farrow who drove this process.
     
    Maybe now Mr. Farrow can turn his attention to Woody Allen. He should feel all right about that, since it's another open secret that his real father is Frank Sinatra, not Woody.

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-x6bFhJCZUNA/UwkDa9PkA6I/AAAAAAAAAZw/D3AfMjtMM5A/s1600/Ronan+Farrow+Father.jpg

    I wondered the same thing when I heard Farrow was reporting the story. Did he ever think to do a story on Woody Allen?

    Read More
    • Replies: @TGGP
    Ronan Farrow has written about his sister's accusations against Woody Allen:
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/my-father-woody-allen-danger-892572
    That's actually how I first heard about him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein’s studio?

    Two words:

    Secret Service

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. Rod1963 says:
    @candid_observer
    And where was the real case for Trump having a long history of such accusations?

    Virtually all of these cases were from women who seemed to suddenly remember, just in time for the election, that he had harassed them, even though they couldn't seem to be able to locate credible independent witnesses whom they told of the abuse at the time it occurred.

    Spot on

    The accusations were spurious and without merit this is why they faded so fast. Even the arch extortionist Gloria Allered couldn’t bully Trump. They were all nothing burgers.

    Look guys like Trump don’t need to grope or rape. Women come on to them. He’s a billionaire and jetsetter with a charismatic personality. He’s a magnet for every ex-model turned gold digger that will throw themselves at him.

    Weinstein is a serial rapist, not uncommon among Hollywood talent agents. Weinstein was also a power player in Hollywood, you either did as he said, or you didn’t get the part unless you had powerful family connections in the studios. Women kept quiet because the studio system had a lot of influence in the news media as both are run by liberals. And Weinstein being a liberal gave him a automatic pass.

    And this stuff with Weinstein is nothing new. it’s been a open secret for years that he was messing with the talent. it’s just that now, Weinstein has outlived his usefulness as Hollywood is starting to come apart at the seams with all the bombs it’s producing. He and his agency doesn’t have the clout they used to.

    It’s going to take other people down as well. He’s not the only sexual predator and a**hole in Hollywood.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @Jack Hanson
    For all the inside baseball shop talk, there's been no one around here acknowledging that so far Trump's enemies are being dealt with systematically.

    Fake news, the NFL, and now Hollywood getting the Godfather treatment. If I was an exec in charge of a social media platform in SV, I'd make sure my passport was in order in case I have to fly to a friendly country for "sex addiction therapy".

    I do get the impression that Trump is now finding his metier as President.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. gp says:
    @Harry Baldwin
    Doesn't Obama's daughter have Secret Security protection? I don't think the big guy with the SIG Sauer P229 is going to let Malia be alone with Weinstein.

    Why did the Secret Service allow Malia to toke on passed pot at concert(s)? Joint could easily have been full of polonium.

    Why did the Secret Service allow Malia to roll around in the dirt at Lollapalooza, and didn’t know a guy who recently bought dozens of rifles booked a room overhead?

    Why didn’t the Secret Service veto Malia’s 2012 spring break Mexico trip? No honest operator would claim to be able to absolutely protect kid tourists in Mexico. That’s nuts.

    Why do Secret Service agents seem to spend their free time whoring and hard-drinking, esp. overseas?

    Competence is a vanished artifact of old western civ.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    I really wish Trump had kept Keith Schiller and his operation around.
    , @Alden
    The secret service are NOT chaperones. They are body guards. They allowed JFK's pimps to bring low level street hookers to the President in out of town trips.

    Body guards spend their time looking around for any sign of trouble, blocking off intruders, not pestering the protectee to not dance in a vulgar manner or whatever.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Thomas says:
    @Steve Sailer
    For example, a number of years ago Gwyneth Paltrow was talking about an unnamed mogul who had harassed her.

    There have been a lot of bits and pieces in the press for a long time.

    There have been a lot of bits and pieces in the press for a long time.

    Bits and pieces, Hell. Seth MacFarlane was making jokes about it at the Oscars four years ago.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/seth-macfarlane-harvey-weinstein-joke-oscars-2013-women-sexual-harassment-allegations-a7994506.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Thomas says:
    @Stealth
    I always thought the worst part of being in the Secret Service would be to have to fire that loud-ass cartridge if the need arose. Getting shot by an assassin would be bad, too, I guess.

    I always thought the worst part of being in the Secret Service would be to have to fire that loud-ass cartridge if the need arose. Getting shot by an assassin would be bad, too, I guess.

    Well, neither has happened in 36 years, so it doesn’t seem like a terribly likely occurrence, though given the Secret Service’s embarrassing pratfalls since 2009, that might be due to luck as much as anything. The .357 SIG has a reputation for getting the job done, at least.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Thomas says:
    @gp
    Why did the Secret Service allow Malia to toke on passed pot at concert(s)? Joint could easily have been full of polonium.

    Why did the Secret Service allow Malia to roll around in the dirt at Lollapalooza, and didn't know a guy who recently bought dozens of rifles booked a room overhead?

    Why didn't the Secret Service veto Malia's 2012 spring break Mexico trip? No honest operator would claim to be able to absolutely protect kid tourists in Mexico. That's nuts.

    Why do Secret Service agents seem to spend their free time whoring and hard-drinking, esp. overseas?

    Competence is a vanished artifact of old western civ.

    I really wish Trump had kept Keith Schiller and his operation around.

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

    Why do people assume it was BO who approved the internship. What about MO? I’d bet on her.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. Thomas says:
    @slumber_j
    Last night with the help of a friend and my wife, I developed a Grand Unified Answer to the question "Why now?"

    Working backwards from the idea that the NYT broke their story in order not to be scooped by The New Yorker, one starts to wonder why The New Yorker was so eager to break the story anyway. Isn't this more The New Yorker's Condé Nast stablemate Vanity Fair's turf?

    Yes: yes, it is. But of course in recent days, Graydon Carter had announced his plans to retire as head of Vanity Fair, because he was about to have to suffer massive staffing cuts imposed by Condé Nast, throwing things into turmoil. (Carter was very likely instrumental in protecting Weinstein over the years for a number of reasons including continuing access journalism, The Oscar Party, etc.)

    The New Yorker, seeing where things are headed and that maybe only one of the two magazines will ultimately survive, starts getting nervous.

    Then Condé Nast boss Si Newhouse goes and dies, leaving a vast power vacuum, and The New Yorker speeds up its scheming to eat Vanity Fair's lunch. And NYT does what it did, and we're off to the races.

    The thing that strikes me is how brazen Weinstein was with all this. Potentially career-killing sex scandals have been a public issue nearly since Miramax was bought by Disney a quarter-century ago. Harvey’s fate was basically in the hands of the first journalist and set of sources who didn’t have reason to be afraid to let the whole story out. He apparently hadn’t even slowed down much into the current decade.

    I suppose his little media empire (well recounted in that Weekly Standard piece, http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-human-stain-why-the-harvey-weinstein-story-is-worse-than-you-think/article/2009995) really had fallen on hard times, probably doubly so as a vassal of the fallen House of Clinton.

    And now, Amazon Studios, the latest new, big player in the industry, has got problems of its own. (http://deadline.com/2017/10/roy-price-amazon-sexual-harassment-claim-man-in-the-high-castle-producer-1202187548/) This story isn’t about to end yet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @slumber_j

    And now, Amazon Studios, the latest new, big player in the industry, has got problems of its own.
     
    Roy Price is a good friend of mine and has been for decades. I know him very well and am sure of the spirit in which he said all that stuff.

    He made the mistake of making a dick joke to Philip K. Dick's daughter or whoever she is, who turns out to be a humorless lesbian. Then, for fun, he doubled down. She continued to be a humorless lesbian.

    Whether or not Jeff Bezos fires him at this point is a matter of what Bezos wants--not of what Roy did. It will be interesting to see how the whole thing plays out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Boethiuss says:
    @Jack Hanson
    You're the guy who was claiming that Trump wouldn't see the end of 2017. You have no credibility. Sit down while adults talk.

    You’re the guy who was claiming that Trump wouldn’t see the end of 2017. You have no credibility.

    As if. You’re the one who says the Border Patrol is going to prevent a coup against President Trump (after which, you also say it’s the other people who are Tom Clancy wannabes).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    And yet, my track record of predictions is stellar while you function as an anti-prophet.

    Tell me more about how Trump had no way of winning the nomination/general election. You were so wrong you had to change your name and hide your face around here for months until you decided it was safe to waddle back into the comments, wrong as ever.

    Sad!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Ivy says:
    @sabril

    Yet another way the US is better than Russia.
     
    I read somewhere that Russian employment ads frequently have something like "no hangups" in them, which is a polite way of saying that servicing the boss is part of the deal.

    No hang-ups? And they don’t do windows, either. You just can’t get good help these days unless imported.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Thea says:
    @Paul Yarbles
    Next shoe to drop: Powerful Hollywood gays preying on young males. You want to see some Hollywood destruction? Grab the popcorn. You're in for a treat!

    Some of us have been warning for a while that this is a real danger. No one wanted to believe it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Thea says:
    @Jason Liu
    The biggest cultural fault line on the left is between white urban feminists+college ideologues vs traditional minorities+working class men (what's left of them). The two sides are very different.

    The manosphere made a big mistake going all-in on white interests, when it had a good opportunity to use gender as a wedge between male/female Democrats. Since the ratio of male to female always hovers around 50-50, a cultural platform based on gender would automatically have a built-in minimum floor of support much greater than what radical political ideologies can muster.

    Leftists understand this, and use feminism to create the same minimum support floor, which lets them spew rhetoric like "Why did most white women vote Trump?", implying they weren't suppose to because they're female. Can the right confidently ask "Why did most black men vote Hillary?" on the basis that they're betraying their masculinity?

    Masculinity and tribalism are basically inseparable, but gender-based politics is still a strategy worth considering on the right. Most men on the right understand and accept a reasonable amount of tribalism, even from our enemies. But men on the right are also prone to giving insults and taking offense. A balance needs to be created to form a working right wing coalition.

    The manosphere did not go all in on white nationalism. Some popular men’s rights blogs have said nothing or opposed it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @Boethiuss


    You’re the guy who was claiming that Trump wouldn’t see the end of 2017. You have no credibility.
     
    As if. You're the one who says the Border Patrol is going to prevent a coup against President Trump (after which, you also say it's the other people who are Tom Clancy wannabes).

    And yet, my track record of predictions is stellar while you function as an anti-prophet.

    Tell me more about how Trump had no way of winning the nomination/general election. You were so wrong you had to change your name and hide your face around here for months until you decided it was safe to waddle back into the comments, wrong as ever.

    Sad!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss

    And yet, my track record of predictions is stellar while you function as an anti-prophet.
     
    What predictions are those? Maybe I missed them but I doubt it. Your go-to move is to say the polls are oversampling Democrats. After that, it gets pretty thin pretty quick.

    As far as changing my name, I told you before that I write as Boethiuss because that's the name where the Unz comment software will accept my comments. The idea that I went from Boethius to Boethiuss because I wanted to hide my shame for discounting Donald Trump's chances of winning, well, that's too stupid even for you Jack.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Hibernian says:
    @Maj. Kong
    I am not so optimistic here, unless we start seeing more dominoes fall in the Hollyweird power structure.

    The left can point out three names: Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly and Donald Trump. The first two are document as having paid out millions in settlements. The third is no paragon of virtue, even if probably all of the sexual assault claims are false.

    They will predictably claim that the problem is men, and that the solution is more feminism. The obvious ethnic issue will be swept under the rug, just as the issue of gay priests was suppressed.

    The issue of gay priests is widely talked about, but nothing is done about it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. scrotus says:
    @Jason Liu
    The biggest cultural fault line on the left is between white urban feminists+college ideologues vs traditional minorities+working class men (what's left of them). The two sides are very different.

    The manosphere made a big mistake going all-in on white interests, when it had a good opportunity to use gender as a wedge between male/female Democrats. Since the ratio of male to female always hovers around 50-50, a cultural platform based on gender would automatically have a built-in minimum floor of support much greater than what radical political ideologies can muster.

    Leftists understand this, and use feminism to create the same minimum support floor, which lets them spew rhetoric like "Why did most white women vote Trump?", implying they weren't suppose to because they're female. Can the right confidently ask "Why did most black men vote Hillary?" on the basis that they're betraying their masculinity?

    Masculinity and tribalism are basically inseparable, but gender-based politics is still a strategy worth considering on the right. Most men on the right understand and accept a reasonable amount of tribalism, even from our enemies. But men on the right are also prone to giving insults and taking offense. A balance needs to be created to form a working right wing coalition.

    You say that you can break it down by sex? But how? At least for whites, women vote liberal, then move conservative when they have kids. Are you going to try and offend your nieces and your daughter’s friends? This is the problem with attacking too much on sex: you live with the people you are attacking.

    The reasons the Alt Right maybe works is because it introduces ideas at the fringe. The “bleed off” then shifts the general population’s overton window slightly. A big social problem is that so much discourse is simply verboten, so the window has to be shifted. The fringe is possibly where that shift happens.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Are you going to try and offend your nieces and your daughter’s friends?
     
    Nothing offends women, especially young women, so much from men as does fecklessness.
    , @Jason Liu
    Doesn't feminism turn daughter against father, sister against brother? Fighting within the family may be hard to bear, but some pushback is necessary.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @Guy de Champlagne
    You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you're not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition. I don't get why there are so many people that think being really feminist about Hollywood amounts to some kind of debilitating take down of liberalism.

    You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you’re not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition.

    I thought a lot about this. You have a good point, that a lot of people seem to be cucking about this and doing a “Dems R Real Misogynist” thing and we need to avoid that. I think there really isn’t a critique per se. The situation just validates the reality-based anti-feminist view and illustrates how the world really works: men and women both want things from eachother and they each use whatever advantages they have to get what they want.

    Harvey offered a trade, and lots of women took the deal. If he could have bothered to spend some time in the gym to not look so disgusting and read a few vintage 2008 Roissy posts to not come off like a whiny creep, probably way more of them would have taken the deal. This is how hollywood has always been. I read that one of the Warner brothers (ever heard of them?) made a pass at a 13 year old Shirley Temple, while the other brother kept her mother occupied by trying to get in her pants.

    Women trading sex for (fill in the blank) and men offering (fill in the blank) for sex, is the way of the world. We want women to trade sex for marriage + family life.

    The critique of (((Weinstein))), same as all liberals, is that they use feminism as a weapon to beat up regular Whites.

    Now getting back around — I think that strengthening the feminist bloc relative to the hollywood mogul bloc maybe does weaken the coalition as a whole. Anything that increases friction between the blocs will decrease their operational effectiveness. But more importantly, I think the more power feminists have in the coalition the weaker they are because feminism is a loser position (at the end of the day, fraternizing with the enemy, etc etc) and because feminists are way less competent than hollywood moguls.

    Read More
    • Agree: Thea, DCThrowback
    • Replies: @mobi

    The critique of (((Weinstein))), same as all liberals, is that they use feminism as a weapon to beat up regular Whites.
     
    Or as a handy 'diversion for my own perversion'?

    How much of lefty liberal male posturing, in general, is a cynical ploy to inflate a convenient, safe target for the anger of the women they molest and abuse?

    Playing on the probability that those women would prefer to vent their rage at 'bad-whites' anyway, while at the same time not jeopardising their own path to fame and status.

    Ashley Judd said nothing about Jabba Weinstein's predations until she had no choice. But instead, turned into a shrieking lunatic, very publicly, at 'pussy-grabbing misogynist' Trump, for example.

    And as soon as Jabba came under fire, note how reflexive his 'NRA, NRA, NRA!' attempt at deflection.

    , @Anon
    You are a pretty smart guy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    There’s been a code of silence surrounding people like HW, Bill Clinton, Sandusky, Cosby, etc, presumably because they were valuable citizens beneficial to society. Until their luck ran out after becoming too brazen for too many years. Look how long all these pervs were at it before being outed, decades long careers of running over people. In addition to averted eyes and pretensions of not knowing anything they’ve all had active enablers to one degree or another. Look at our recent almost-president Hillary. This feminist icon actively went after any woman who might have uttered a peep about what sleazy Billy was up to. Quite an arrangement they had there. Yet she’s applauded by many people wherever she goes.
    This whole thing might be about more than just one individual but could widen to give the entire liberal-left culture, as embodied by Hollywood types, a drubbing as tawdry and hypocritical. The culture war is becoming more open now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  108. mobi says:
    @Beene
    (actually meant to reply to fish)

    Yes. Donald Trump has been accused by over 15 women of groping them and or engaging in behavior similar to some of the Weinstein accusations (i.e. hotel room invitations). He was also accused of raping a 14 year-old girl in a lawsuit. You can read the full list here.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

    Donald Trump’s response was, of course, that none of those women were good-looking enough to sexually molest. At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”

    At which the American people said, “Oh, so you want to be president? When can you start?”

    And he was still preferable to anything chosen by you!

    Try to imagine what that says about you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Jason Liu
    The biggest cultural fault line on the left is between white urban feminists+college ideologues vs traditional minorities+working class men (what's left of them). The two sides are very different.

    The manosphere made a big mistake going all-in on white interests, when it had a good opportunity to use gender as a wedge between male/female Democrats. Since the ratio of male to female always hovers around 50-50, a cultural platform based on gender would automatically have a built-in minimum floor of support much greater than what radical political ideologies can muster.

    Leftists understand this, and use feminism to create the same minimum support floor, which lets them spew rhetoric like "Why did most white women vote Trump?", implying they weren't suppose to because they're female. Can the right confidently ask "Why did most black men vote Hillary?" on the basis that they're betraying their masculinity?

    Masculinity and tribalism are basically inseparable, but gender-based politics is still a strategy worth considering on the right. Most men on the right understand and accept a reasonable amount of tribalism, even from our enemies. But men on the right are also prone to giving insults and taking offense. A balance needs to be created to form a working right wing coalition.

    The manosphere made a big mistake going all-in on white interests

    The manosphere didn’t.

    Among those who did, a significant proportion were not operating in good faith.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Thea says:
    @jimbojones
    Because only yesterday, Harvey Weinstein was a legendary Hollywood boss of immense influence and prestige. He could make things happen. His tough-guy reputation only added to his mystique.

    By the way, regarding the Weinstein story, I think there are a few questions worth asking that are not being asked enough:
    - Why didn't the women he groped go to the police? If he really is a predator/rapist/misogynist/worse-than-Hitler etc, fight him to the end and NAIL him. Don't take his money.
    - There is a difference between accepting a payoff before putting out and after having been groped; but how great is that difference, and is it a difference in kind or in degree?
    - What kind of a disgusting person turns on his or her erstwhile friend when he is down the way Hollywooders have turned on Weinstein?
    - What will it take for Hollywood to face its hypocrisy? Ditto the liberal media.

    Weinstein appears to be a run-of-the-mill mogul womanizer with tendencies toward voyeurism. I think he should've stuck to mistresses and call girls rather than starlets - and he probably thinks the same now. So I wouldn't judge Weinstein too harshly. Groping is not rape. Hollywood's personalities and the mainstream media, however, have fallen even further in my eyes.

    Doubt he had even one true friend.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. mobi says:
    @AM

    Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?
     
    Some of them are lieing but most of them wanted a movie career and therefore had to keep their mouths shut.

    The difference is Weinstein is somewhere in Europe under going "therapy" and Trump has laughed them off. Innocent men don't need to worry.

    The difference is Weinstein is somewhere in Europe under going “therapy” and Trump has laughed them off. Innocent men don’t need to worry.

    It could only get better if he makes a dash for Israel. The call of Aliya must be stronger by the day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    He'll fit right in with all those Russian thugs and criminals trying to pass themselves off as Jews.

    He looks no more Jewish than I do. There's no real typical jewish look, but he looks less Jewish than any other White man on earth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @scrotus
    You say that you can break it down by sex? But how? At least for whites, women vote liberal, then move conservative when they have kids. Are you going to try and offend your nieces and your daughter's friends? This is the problem with attacking too much on sex: you live with the people you are attacking.

    The reasons the Alt Right maybe works is because it introduces ideas at the fringe. The "bleed off" then shifts the general population's overton window slightly. A big social problem is that so much discourse is simply verboten, so the window has to be shifted. The fringe is possibly where that shift happens.

    Are you going to try and offend your nieces and your daughter’s friends?

    Nothing offends women, especially young women, so much from men as does fecklessness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Thea says:
    @sabril

    Yet another way the US is better than Russia.
     
    I read somewhere that Russian employment ads frequently have something like "no hangups" in them, which is a polite way of saying that servicing the boss is part of the deal.

    I don’t think they’ve done that since the wild days of the 1990s. But the adds also specified youth and attractiveness

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Maj. Kong
    I am not so optimistic here, unless we start seeing more dominoes fall in the Hollyweird power structure.

    The left can point out three names: Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly and Donald Trump. The first two are document as having paid out millions in settlements. The third is no paragon of virtue, even if probably all of the sexual assault claims are false.

    They will predictably claim that the problem is men, and that the solution is more feminism. The obvious ethnic issue will be swept under the rug, just as the issue of gay priests was suppressed.

    The third is no paragon of virtue, even if probably all of the sexual assault claims are false.

    So Trump loses even if he has done nothing more that make wild, and unsubstantiated claims, about what he can do with a certain class of women. Because, you know, Jack D says Trump screwed a contractor back when that contractor was hanging drywall while Trump was sexually harassing somebody within earshot of said harassment.

    Well, to quote Jack D, Trump is our bastard. And as our bastard, he could be doing worse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Maybe he was just holding the drywall in place while she nailed it in? Don't make remarks about the word nailed guys.
    , @Jack D
    Here is a list of all the women who have accused Trump. This is the WORST that they could come up with and God knows they tried real hard:

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/14/politics/trump-women-accusers/index.html

    On the one hand, I don't think that they are all completely lying although they may be exaggerating (and the reporter is exaggerating even more). OTOH, the nature of his conduct (stolen kisses, quick feels) is FAR FAR less serious than what Weinstein and Clinton were accused of, some of which are actual rapes that should have put these men in prison for a long time. Thank goodness that almost every fertile white female is on birth control or else there would be a lot of Clinton and Weinstein baby mommas. In fact in today's highly sexualized climate the idea of a "stolen kiss" seems almost quaintly Victorian by comparison. Trump was PG-13 and Weinstein and Clinton are X.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. mobi says:
    @27 year old

    You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you’re not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition.
     
    I thought a lot about this. You have a good point, that a lot of people seem to be cucking about this and doing a "Dems R Real Misogynist" thing and we need to avoid that. I think there really isn't a critique per se. The situation just validates the reality-based anti-feminist view and illustrates how the world really works: men and women both want things from eachother and they each use whatever advantages they have to get what they want.

    Harvey offered a trade, and lots of women took the deal. If he could have bothered to spend some time in the gym to not look so disgusting and read a few vintage 2008 Roissy posts to not come off like a whiny creep, probably way more of them would have taken the deal. This is how hollywood has always been. I read that one of the Warner brothers (ever heard of them?) made a pass at a 13 year old Shirley Temple, while the other brother kept her mother occupied by trying to get in her pants.

    Women trading sex for (fill in the blank) and men offering (fill in the blank) for sex, is the way of the world. We want women to trade sex for marriage + family life.

    The critique of (((Weinstein))), same as all liberals, is that they use feminism as a weapon to beat up regular Whites.

    Now getting back around -- I think that strengthening the feminist bloc relative to the hollywood mogul bloc maybe does weaken the coalition as a whole. Anything that increases friction between the blocs will decrease their operational effectiveness. But more importantly, I think the more power feminists have in the coalition the weaker they are because feminism is a loser position (at the end of the day, fraternizing with the enemy, etc etc) and because feminists are way less competent than hollywood moguls.

    The critique of (((Weinstein))), same as all liberals, is that they use feminism as a weapon to beat up regular Whites.

    Or as a handy ‘diversion for my own perversion’?

    How much of lefty liberal male posturing, in general, is a cynical ploy to inflate a convenient, safe target for the anger of the women they molest and abuse?

    Playing on the probability that those women would prefer to vent their rage at ‘bad-whites’ anyway, while at the same time not jeopardising their own path to fame and status.

    Ashley Judd said nothing about Jabba Weinstein’s predations until she had no choice. But instead, turned into a shrieking lunatic, very publicly, at ‘pussy-grabbing misogynist’ Trump, for example.

    And as soon as Jabba came under fire, note how reflexive his ‘NRA, NRA, NRA!’ attempt at deflection.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Boethiuss says:
    @Thea
    On the other hand, the stupid party is mostly an uneasy marriage between pathologically Zionist evangelicals and economic libertarians plus a sprinkling of alt right whom they don't love.

    The ability of the GOP to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is uncanny. Paul Ryan would love to hand our heritage over to a globalists for a mess of pottage.

    On the other hand, the stupid party is mostly an uneasy marriage between pathologically Zionist evangelicals and economic libertarians plus a sprinkling of alt right whom they don’t love.

    The other hand is that there are millions of Nice White Ladies from Kansas who have been voting Republican since Alf Landon ran for President. And so far at least, the Trump/Bannon/iSteve commentariat strategy is simply to call them all cucks and hope they go away.

    As if. Like who created 52 GOP Senators, 250 GOP Congressmen (and President Trump for that matter)? But that’s ok. Like other Darwin Award Winners, there’s nothing stopping us from stupiding ourselves out of existence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Landon ran in 1936, so the youngest of those ''millions'' is 102.
    My reading of the Darwin Awards is a Far Left attempt to belittle working men [who are mostly White].
    , @Alden
    I belong to the ADL party. It's Anti Democrat Liberal, whatever it is. I just vote the Republicans as a protest. Doesn't do much good, but it makes me feel better.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Boethiuss says:
    @Jack Hanson
    And yet, my track record of predictions is stellar while you function as an anti-prophet.

    Tell me more about how Trump had no way of winning the nomination/general election. You were so wrong you had to change your name and hide your face around here for months until you decided it was safe to waddle back into the comments, wrong as ever.

    Sad!

    And yet, my track record of predictions is stellar while you function as an anti-prophet.

    What predictions are those? Maybe I missed them but I doubt it. Your go-to move is to say the polls are oversampling Democrats. After that, it gets pretty thin pretty quick.

    As far as changing my name, I told you before that I write as Boethiuss because that’s the name where the Unz comment software will accept my comments. The idea that I went from Boethius to Boethiuss because I wanted to hide my shame for discounting Donald Trump’s chances of winning, well, that’s too stupid even for you Jack.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    You insisted throughout the election that Trump didn't stand a chance, and then made wild claims about how Trump wouldn't last to the end of 2017. This isn't even getting into your anti-prophet predictions about DACA, the wall, healthcare, and so on. But I see you are running to Talmudic obtuseness now, as per form.

    Yes, yes. I'm sure thats why you changed your name, nothing to do with the fact your predictions in the primary (Kasich is surging any day now!) were laughable as they were idiotic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. mobi says:

    By the way, is a preference for cornering female near-strangers, dropping your pants, and masturbating in front of them ‘a thing’, or just a (((thing)))?

    Let’s conduct a survey. I have three examples, so far:

    1) (((Jabba Weinstein)))

    2) an unnamed Hollywood big-wig (((producer))), targeting Kathie Lee Gifford:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4963526/Kathie-Lee-Gifford-forced-watch-producer-masturbate.html

    3) Uber-feminist liberal and bad-white mocker (((Louis CK))):

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/louis-ck-confronts-sexual-misconduct-rumors_us_59b7b3ade4b09be41657e3e9

    I have an open mind about this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  119. @AM

    Where were all these dozens of Weinstein accusers before this week, too?
     
    Some of them are lieing but most of them wanted a movie career and therefore had to keep their mouths shut.

    The difference is Weinstein is somewhere in Europe under going "therapy" and Trump has laughed them off. Innocent men don't need to worry.

    Some of them are lying but most of them wanted a movie career and therefore had to keep their mouths shut.

    Yes. One wonders how many said yes and kept their mouths open before they shut them.

    Now, before you tell me again to get my mind out of the gutter, just ask yourself, how many of his victims are still silent, still on the silver screen, still living happily in Malibu? How many are household names, beautiful people who will never talk because they made a deal with the devil, sold themselves out, and sold out womankind?

    There are whores in every business. They will gladly give themselves to the pastiest middle manager if they think they can move up the ladder that way. Some of us have witnessed them in the blandest of offices. There is a certain segment of our human animal family that works that way instinctively. They enable the pigs and thereby help those pigs harm all women.

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

    It strikes me as healthy that everyone is turning on Harvey, though unhealthy that he was able to get away with this so long despite so many being aware of it. This is not a “circular firing squad” of people pouncing on one perceived mistake, but a long accumulation of acts all coming out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  121. TGGP says: • Website
    @Barnard
    I wondered the same thing when I heard Farrow was reporting the story. Did he ever think to do a story on Woody Allen?

    Ronan Farrow has written about his sister’s accusations against Woody Allen:

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/my-father-woody-allen-danger-892572

    That’s actually how I first heard about him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    Aha. So he did write about Allen. Clearly Farrow has insight into such matters. Thanks for the link.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. mobi says:

    If the feminism of prominent Jewish females is projection, is the feminism of prominent Jewish males deflection?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  123. @TGGP
    Ronan Farrow has written about his sister's accusations against Woody Allen:
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/my-father-woody-allen-danger-892572
    That's actually how I first heard about him.

    Aha. So he did write about Allen. Clearly Farrow has insight into such matters. Thanks for the link.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Lagertha says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you're not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition. I don't get why there are so many people that think being really feminist about Hollywood amounts to some kind of debilitating take down of liberalism.

    well, as far as your point, Georgina confuses me. Why would a successful fashion designer who is absolutely gorgeous, marry Harvey in 2007? She certainly did not need his money, as she was already dressing wealthy women and stars in Hollywood with her Marchesa line. She represents feminism: built her business, was scandal free, and was not dependent on any man. There has not been one piece on Georgina (other than she filed for divorce last week). I have always been confused that she would share her life with Harvey – she is a nice woman who designs incredibly beautiful clothes.

    She linked up with Huma, recently, to commiserate over sex-crazed husbands…kid you not. So, there could be a counterattack that feminist women are too busy having it all that they don’t know if their marriage is actually bullshit. Yet, they will have some serious ‘splainin’ to do with their kids when their kids ask: “what is wrong with Daddy/why is Daddy in jail?” I don’t understand how Georgina could have ignored Harvey’s reputation, the rumors. Because, if she really felt all his predatory behavior was 12-20 years ago, she would not file for divorce in a New York minute following Farrow’s story. I’m just confused that successful women marry men whose creepy reputations are already out there. It smells of women being bad at picking men for just sheer companionship! And, why not have children just in vitro – sperm bank? skip the man and his weird appetites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    See comment 166.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    More boing.

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/xXJyt1D0_bQ/

    The media have been portraying homos as saints or poor saintly victims, but look how homos act when they got the power. They are grabbing asses and dic*s. Even grabbing Terry Crews the scary looking Negro. I mean homos must have real confidence and power to be so brazen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  126. Boethiuss says:
    @MBlanc46
    I’m guessing that there aren’t very many here who identify with the Repubs. Some may vote for Repub candidates, faute de mieux. Some may think that the Repubs are ripe for taking over. But I suspect that there are precious few who think of the Repubs as anything but the lesser of two evils.

    I’m guessing that there aren’t very many here who identify with the Repubs. Some may vote for Repub candidates, faute de mieux. Some may think that the Repubs are ripe for taking over. But I suspect that there are precious few who think of the Repubs as anything but the lesser of two evils.

    I suspect that’s true, and if it is it’s not a good thing.

    The alt-right and the iSteve commentariat talks a big game about how there protecting Western Civilization and the rest of it. But for the most part it’s just an exercise in narcissism. I want what I want, and if someone else wants anything different, they can just suck an egg.

    And that works up to a point, arguably it has worked so far for Donald Trump and Trump enthusiasts. But there’s not enough Trump enthusiasts to make it work indefinitely. We need some goodwill. And Trump’s ways of doing things are going to guarantee that we’re not going to have it when we need.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    I suspect that’s true, and if it is it’s not a good thing.
     
    Everybody who votes Republican wants the same thing............to preserve Western Civilization. It's just that most people who vote Republican do not realize that the Republican Party is not able to, and perhaps does not want to.
    , @MBlanc46
    You’re certainly right about goodwill. There’s almost none on the Left, and not much to be seen on the right, either. You may also be correct that the Left will win unless the corporate right and the nationalist right come together. The problem for some of is that a victory by the corporate right is little less disastrous than a victory by the Left.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Jason Liu says:
    @scrotus
    You say that you can break it down by sex? But how? At least for whites, women vote liberal, then move conservative when they have kids. Are you going to try and offend your nieces and your daughter's friends? This is the problem with attacking too much on sex: you live with the people you are attacking.

    The reasons the Alt Right maybe works is because it introduces ideas at the fringe. The "bleed off" then shifts the general population's overton window slightly. A big social problem is that so much discourse is simply verboten, so the window has to be shifted. The fringe is possibly where that shift happens.

    Doesn’t feminism turn daughter against father, sister against brother? Fighting within the family may be hard to bear, but some pushback is necessary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Boethiuss

    On the other hand, the stupid party is mostly an uneasy marriage between pathologically Zionist evangelicals and economic libertarians plus a sprinkling of alt right whom they don’t love.
     
    The other hand is that there are millions of Nice White Ladies from Kansas who have been voting Republican since Alf Landon ran for President. And so far at least, the Trump/Bannon/iSteve commentariat strategy is simply to call them all cucks and hope they go away.

    As if. Like who created 52 GOP Senators, 250 GOP Congressmen (and President Trump for that matter)? But that's ok. Like other Darwin Award Winners, there's nothing stopping us from stupiding ourselves out of existence.

    Landon ran in 1936, so the youngest of those ”millions” is 102.
    My reading of the Darwin Awards is a Far Left attempt to belittle working men [who are mostly White].

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss


    Landon ran in 1936, so the youngest of those ”millions” is 102.
     
    Well yeah, you gotta allow for dramatic effect here.

    My reading of the Darwin Awards is a Far Left attempt to belittle working men [who are mostly White].
     
    In this case, it's about us stupiding ourselves out of existence instead of doing what it takes to survive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Tyrion says:

    Off-topic, but interested if this is even close to true in a sobre sense.

    My instinct is that it must be hyperbole. What it describes is so ludicrously extreme!

    Students reported “[e]very teacher was crying in class, one even told the whole class ‘Trump winning is worse than 9/11 and the Columbine shooting.’” The sheer volume of “liberal propaganda that was pushed every single day in class this year was worse than it’s ever been–and you’re bullied by the teachers and every student if you dare speak against it.”

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268114/getting-them-young-matthew-vadum

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  130. PapayaSF says:

    To help create the maximum amount of SJW/feminist/Democratic Party fratricide, I recommend popularizing the phrase “Hollywood rape culture.” It’s distinct and memorable and changes the focus of the feminist term “rape culture” away from its usual absurd targets (college campuses, or the US, or Western civilization in general) and aims it at the heart of leftist cultural support and the Democratic Party coffers.

    Let’s support a good, old-fashioned witch hunt, some progressive sexual McCarthyism in the land of progressives. All victims should come forward and name names. All dirty money donations to politicians should be turned over to charity. Force the moguls to pay lawyers instead of funding leftist causes.

    #HollywoodRapeCulture #HollywoodVictimsComeForward #NameTheNames!

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

    UK TV news is obsessed with the Weinstein story.
    Half of the news bulletin is full-blown Weinstein saturation.

    Meanwhile brexit negotiations, wars, pestilence, plague, Corbyn, politics etc rolls on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. Pericles says:
    @Bill Jones
    She's black.

    “Mr Weinstein, will you need me to deliver the urgent documents to your room at the Beverly Hills tonight?”
    “No.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    Harvey reminds me of one of the loyal communist apparatchiks who found himself sitting in a dungeon in the Lubianka. He cannot believe that Stalin would have him arrested. "If only he knew" Weinstein keeps muttering. He was the one or ordered it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Boethiuss says:
    @anon
    Landon ran in 1936, so the youngest of those ''millions'' is 102.
    My reading of the Darwin Awards is a Far Left attempt to belittle working men [who are mostly White].

    Landon ran in 1936, so the youngest of those ”millions” is 102.

    Well yeah, you gotta allow for dramatic effect here.

    My reading of the Darwin Awards is a Far Left attempt to belittle working men [who are mostly White].

    In this case, it’s about us stupiding ourselves out of existence instead of doing what it takes to survive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. LondonBob says:
    @fish
    Has Trump been accused of multiple coercive sexual incidents or merely making the statement that on the NY party circuit it was no big deal to grab a woman by her thinking parts?

    The left’s bizarre attempt to conflate Trump and Weinstein is another fail. Trump is better looking and genuinely attracts women, as well as Democrat inspired smear jobs. Thankfully the police know the difference between actual harassment or rape and Democrat smear jobs. How clean Trump is is has always impressed me, would have thought he would have picked up more dirt over the years.

    Apparently Weinstein’s wife comes from a broken home, albeit a wealthy broken home, so that explains her to some extent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Bill Clinton was a good looking guy too with a pleasing personality, so he mostly did pretty well for himself with the ladies. I predicted in 1992 that President Clinton would get into a big sexual harassment scandal, but I was arguing based mostly on the statistical odds.

    One difference between Clinton and Trump is that Trump only likes extremely beautiful women -- I can remember the CEO of the company where I worked coming back from a trip to NYC around 1990 where he'd run into Marla Maples and him raving about how she was the most beautiful woman in New York (and presumably more beautiful than anybody on the Chicago nightlife scene, which he knew a lot about) -- while Clinton liked just about anything female. For example, Trump would never have married Hillary. It's an interesting difference between two guys who have a fair amount in common.

    Here's a question: Would Trump have made it to the White House _sooner_ if he'd stayed married to Ivana, the way Clinton stayed married to Hillary? Ivana is something.

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    Pictures of Georgina Chapman remind me of Tom Wolfe's "social X-rays".
    , @Jack D
    The old joke is that Washington is Hollywood for ugly people. So naturally Weinstein had access to better looking women. But is this a really important distinction? The REAL difference between Trump on the one hand and Weinstein and Clinton is that there is no proof that Trump ever forced himself on unwilling women. His famous "grab 'em" remark actually says "they let you do it" - in other words that the relationship is consensual. Weinstein and Clinton didn't worry about consent.
    , @Anonymous
    Weinstein’s wife Georgina wanted to go to all the happening Hollywood parties--be a central feature of the glitterati--and this was the way to make that happen. Simply being the wife of an extremely powerful man has also always had its appeal. In pursuit of goals like those, truly ambitious women aren't likely to be waylaid by matters which might disgust the rest of us.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @LondonBob
    The left's bizarre attempt to conflate Trump and Weinstein is another fail. Trump is better looking and genuinely attracts women, as well as Democrat inspired smear jobs. Thankfully the police know the difference between actual harassment or rape and Democrat smear jobs. How clean Trump is is has always impressed me, would have thought he would have picked up more dirt over the years.

    Apparently Weinstein's wife comes from a broken home, albeit a wealthy broken home, so that explains her to some extent.

    Bill Clinton was a good looking guy too with a pleasing personality, so he mostly did pretty well for himself with the ladies. I predicted in 1992 that President Clinton would get into a big sexual harassment scandal, but I was arguing based mostly on the statistical odds.

    One difference between Clinton and Trump is that Trump only likes extremely beautiful women — I can remember the CEO of the company where I worked coming back from a trip to NYC around 1990 where he’d run into Marla Maples and him raving about how she was the most beautiful woman in New York (and presumably more beautiful than anybody on the Chicago nightlife scene, which he knew a lot about) — while Clinton liked just about anything female. For example, Trump would never have married Hillary. It’s an interesting difference between two guys who have a fair amount in common.

    Here’s a question: Would Trump have made it to the White House _sooner_ if he’d stayed married to Ivana, the way Clinton stayed married to Hillary? Ivana is something.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AM

    Here’s a question: Would Trump have made it to the White House _sooner_ if he’d stayed married to Ivana, the way Clinton stayed married to Hillary? Ivana is something.
     
    Would Trump have run at all? Just full disclosure, I didn't follow Trump very closely until he ran as a candidate.

    I've been told that Ivana apparently is a very strong minded woman who can run a business...and she might have nixed the idea entirely. Or Trump would have been bogged down in the sort of Clinton White House with a competition between an ambitious first lady and vice president.

    I suspect Melania is equally intelligent, but she seems to want a traditional role of a wife. That makes Trump's life easier and might have made the run possible.

    It’s an interesting difference between two guys who have a fair amount in common.
     
    I admit, I'm having a hard time seeing what they do have in common. I'm getting the overall impression Marla Marples might have been his only dabble into actual infidelity, with the timeline still fuzzy in my mind.
    , @Alden
    Bill Clinton was never good looking.

    1. He was fat until he left the presidency and went on a starvation diet. Did you ever see his pictures when he was not in one of those tailored to hide the big fat belly suits? Vomit inducing. Ever see those pictures of him in a swim suit or shorts? Gross

    2. The face. He had fat cheeks, and a huge blob of a nose like a big old sweet potato and fat lips and bad skin and he was totally ugly and gross and disgusting. The face was much worse than what I could see of the body. He was ugggggllyyyyyyy. His face looks better now that it looks like a cadaver but he still has that horrible nose. Fat lips shall never touch mine.

    From pictures as a little kid to his years in college to the presidency ugly ugly ugly and sexually repulsive.

    His hair is a nice bright White though. But that's just age. I didn't like his voice either.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. LondonBob says:

    Bill certainly likes to go slumming. Trump probably has more self control too, as you expect of someone who doesn’t drink.

    Funnily enough the only film role I saw Georgina Chapman in is in The Business where she plays a gangster’s moll married to a repulsive individual for the money and power. Good film, if you like to listen to some classic 80s hit tunes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    Funnily enough the only film role I saw Georgina Chapman in is in The Business where she plays a gangster’s moll married to a repulsive individual for the money and power.
     
    Ah well good then. Life imitates art imitating life.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. slumber_j says:
    @candid_observer
    My guess is that it was Ronan Farrow who drove this process. He's been on this case for many months. I don't have the sense it was otherwise being pursued actively in recent times. He must have been shopping it around for a number of months as well, since NBC rejected it. One expects that the Times got wind of the story, directly from Farrow or from the people he must have spoken to about it, and did what they could to scoop him. (I seem to remember someone in a position to know saying in a tweet, right after the Times story came out, that the Times was trying to beat another publication to the punch.)

    My guess is that it was Ronan Farrow

    Undoubtedly. But the question is why the NY’er chose to publish Farrow’s piece, which is nothing like their usual beat. That’s the whole point of my explanation.

    What changed in the media climate in the previous couple of weeks to make that happen?

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    If you look at the full level of details of Farrow's story, it really does seem hard to see how any media organization with even the slightest hold on journalistic standards could refuse the story. It is utterly scandalous that NBC handled it as it did -- and will prove extremely damaging to them.

    Ken Auletta at the New Yorker said he had tried to pursue the story for many years, always to come up short in terms of verification. Clearly The New Yorker felt that they couldn't refuse the story, and maintain any self- respect as a publication.

    It's certainly true that in general the media is corrupted, and have vastly lowered their standards, the New Yorker included. Yet it's a mistake to think that they have no line below which they will not go. They have to live with themselves, so that line does exist.

    So, again, I would say that it was Ronan Farrow who made this all happen. He and the story he assembled were both the necessary and, given the lines I've described in (some of) the media, the sufficient conditions of the story breaking.

    I'd guess that one reason he was able to succeed when others weren't is that he could credibly claim that he saw himself as being in much the same boat as the women who were abused, given what he believed to have happened between Woody Allen and his younger sister.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. slumber_j says:
    @Thomas
    The thing that strikes me is how brazen Weinstein was with all this. Potentially career-killing sex scandals have been a public issue nearly since Miramax was bought by Disney a quarter-century ago. Harvey's fate was basically in the hands of the first journalist and set of sources who didn't have reason to be afraid to let the whole story out. He apparently hadn't even slowed down much into the current decade.

    I suppose his little media empire (well recounted in that Weekly Standard piece, http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-human-stain-why-the-harvey-weinstein-story-is-worse-than-you-think/article/2009995) really had fallen on hard times, probably doubly so as a vassal of the fallen House of Clinton.

    And now, Amazon Studios, the latest new, big player in the industry, has got problems of its own. (http://deadline.com/2017/10/roy-price-amazon-sexual-harassment-claim-man-in-the-high-castle-producer-1202187548/) This story isn't about to end yet.

    And now, Amazon Studios, the latest new, big player in the industry, has got problems of its own.

    Roy Price is a good friend of mine and has been for decades. I know him very well and am sure of the spirit in which he said all that stuff.

    He made the mistake of making a dick joke to Philip K. Dick’s daughter or whoever she is, who turns out to be a humorless lesbian. Then, for fun, he doubled down. She continued to be a humorless lesbian.

    Whether or not Jeff Bezos fires him at this point is a matter of what Bezos wants–not of what Roy did. It will be interesting to see how the whole thing plays out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @LondonBob
    The left's bizarre attempt to conflate Trump and Weinstein is another fail. Trump is better looking and genuinely attracts women, as well as Democrat inspired smear jobs. Thankfully the police know the difference between actual harassment or rape and Democrat smear jobs. How clean Trump is is has always impressed me, would have thought he would have picked up more dirt over the years.

    Apparently Weinstein's wife comes from a broken home, albeit a wealthy broken home, so that explains her to some extent.

    Pictures of Georgina Chapman remind me of Tom Wolfe’s “social X-rays”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @Boethiuss

    And yet, my track record of predictions is stellar while you function as an anti-prophet.
     
    What predictions are those? Maybe I missed them but I doubt it. Your go-to move is to say the polls are oversampling Democrats. After that, it gets pretty thin pretty quick.

    As far as changing my name, I told you before that I write as Boethiuss because that's the name where the Unz comment software will accept my comments. The idea that I went from Boethius to Boethiuss because I wanted to hide my shame for discounting Donald Trump's chances of winning, well, that's too stupid even for you Jack.

    You insisted throughout the election that Trump didn’t stand a chance, and then made wild claims about how Trump wouldn’t last to the end of 2017. This isn’t even getting into your anti-prophet predictions about DACA, the wall, healthcare, and so on. But I see you are running to Talmudic obtuseness now, as per form.

    Yes, yes. I’m sure thats why you changed your name, nothing to do with the fact your predictions in the primary (Kasich is surging any day now!) were laughable as they were idiotic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss

    You insisted throughout the election that Trump didn’t stand a chance, and then made wild claims about how Trump wouldn’t last to the end of 2017. This isn’t even getting into your anti-prophet predictions about DACA, the wall, healthcare, and so on. But I see you are running to Talmudic obtuseness now, as per form.

    Yes, yes. I’m sure thats why you changed your name, nothing to do with the fact your predictions in the primary (Kasich is surging any day now!) were laughable as they were idiotic.
     
    Jack, you are talking about things that for the most part I have no recollection of at all or are or just flat ridiculous (Talmudic obtuseness, really Jack?). Basically you're either writing knee-jerk idiocy, or just not making sense.

    So I tell you what. You go back to anything I have ever written on this site, as Boethius or Boethiuss or any other spelling, and bring it to my attention. And I'll either double down on it, retract it, or modify/clarify as the case may be.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Jack D says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    Harvey Weinstein is Hollywood personified. Harvey Weinstein is the financial and propaganda face of the Democrat Party. Harvey Weinstein will be the end of any chance the Democrat Party had of trying to lure Whites Without College Degrees(WWCDs) back to their political coalition.

    The Democrat Party is made up of Jews, Blacks, Mestizos, Asians, some White Government Workers and White wackos. Harvey Weinstein will shine a bright spotlight on Wall Street, Hollywood, Academia and the Corporate Media. Harvey Weinstein is no longer a name, it is a brand, and it is a brand that the Republican Party must place around the neck of the Democrat Party like a half ton millstone.

    White women voters will flock to the Republican Party once the nutless pukes such as Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Jeff Flake, Ben Sasse, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and all the others are sidelined. Eventually, they must be politically defenestrated.

    White women voters want legal immigration greatly reduced and illegal alien invaders deported. White women voters want a braveheart who will smash not only the Harvey Weinstein Democrats, but the gutless, heartless Republican Party ruling class as well.

    HARVEY WEINSTEIN DEMOCRATS

    Donald Trump is the un-Weinstein. He is not from Queens. He has never been accused of sexual impropriety. He has no Jewish relatives. He was not a rich mogul involved in the entertainment business. He forms the perfect contrast to Weinstein.

    Oh, no wait…

    Read More
    • LOL: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Here we go, on the precipice of becoming another thread lost to JIDF autism triggered by cohencidences.
    , @Pericles
    Yet one became president and the other the male Bubbles de Vere.

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

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Jack D says:
    @LondonBob
    The left's bizarre attempt to conflate Trump and Weinstein is another fail. Trump is better looking and genuinely attracts women, as well as Democrat inspired smear jobs. Thankfully the police know the difference between actual harassment or rape and Democrat smear jobs. How clean Trump is is has always impressed me, would have thought he would have picked up more dirt over the years.

    Apparently Weinstein's wife comes from a broken home, albeit a wealthy broken home, so that explains her to some extent.

    The old joke is that Washington is Hollywood for ugly people. So naturally Weinstein had access to better looking women. But is this a really important distinction? The REAL difference between Trump on the one hand and Weinstein and Clinton is that there is no proof that Trump ever forced himself on unwilling women. His famous “grab ‘em” remark actually says “they let you do it” – in other words that the relationship is consensual. Weinstein and Clinton didn’t worry about consent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. DJohn1 says:
    @Tiny Duck
    white men in power have always gotten away with it.

    Whether it's show biz, politics, academia, tech---it still happens with regularity when there's a power differential. Some white men feel their worldly success means they can take whatever they see/want.

    Glad to see Harvey taken down and women saying No More. But patriarchy is the rule in our society in spite of lip service to the contrary. Women that are not famous --say on campus--still may not be taken seriously when reporting assault; a videotaped rapist gets probation as judge doesn't want to harm his bright future for one mistake; rape kits not processed or lost.

    These things are deeply embedded in our culture and need full airing and purging. this is why demographic change is so crucial and title IX was so important

    A brilliant parody troll. Kudos.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. AM says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Bill Clinton was a good looking guy too with a pleasing personality, so he mostly did pretty well for himself with the ladies. I predicted in 1992 that President Clinton would get into a big sexual harassment scandal, but I was arguing based mostly on the statistical odds.

    One difference between Clinton and Trump is that Trump only likes extremely beautiful women -- I can remember the CEO of the company where I worked coming back from a trip to NYC around 1990 where he'd run into Marla Maples and him raving about how she was the most beautiful woman in New York (and presumably more beautiful than anybody on the Chicago nightlife scene, which he knew a lot about) -- while Clinton liked just about anything female. For example, Trump would never have married Hillary. It's an interesting difference between two guys who have a fair amount in common.

    Here's a question: Would Trump have made it to the White House _sooner_ if he'd stayed married to Ivana, the way Clinton stayed married to Hillary? Ivana is something.

    Here’s a question: Would Trump have made it to the White House _sooner_ if he’d stayed married to Ivana, the way Clinton stayed married to Hillary? Ivana is something.

    Would Trump have run at all? Just full disclosure, I didn’t follow Trump very closely until he ran as a candidate.

    I’ve been told that Ivana apparently is a very strong minded woman who can run a business…and she might have nixed the idea entirely. Or Trump would have been bogged down in the sort of Clinton White House with a competition between an ambitious first lady and vice president.

    I suspect Melania is equally intelligent, but she seems to want a traditional role of a wife. That makes Trump’s life easier and might have made the run possible.

    It’s an interesting difference between two guys who have a fair amount in common.

    I admit, I’m having a hard time seeing what they do have in common. I’m getting the overall impression Marla Marples might have been his only dabble into actual infidelity, with the timeline still fuzzy in my mind.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Mr. Anon says:
    @Boethiuss

    I’m guessing that there aren’t very many here who identify with the Repubs. Some may vote for Repub candidates, faute de mieux. Some may think that the Repubs are ripe for taking over. But I suspect that there are precious few who think of the Repubs as anything but the lesser of two evils.
     
    I suspect that's true, and if it is it's not a good thing.

    The alt-right and the iSteve commentariat talks a big game about how there protecting Western Civilization and the rest of it. But for the most part it's just an exercise in narcissism. I want what I want, and if someone else wants anything different, they can just suck an egg.

    And that works up to a point, arguably it has worked so far for Donald Trump and Trump enthusiasts. But there's not enough Trump enthusiasts to make it work indefinitely. We need some goodwill. And Trump's ways of doing things are going to guarantee that we're not going to have it when we need.

    I suspect that’s true, and if it is it’s not a good thing.

    Everybody who votes Republican wants the same thing…………to preserve Western Civilization. It’s just that most people who vote Republican do not realize that the Republican Party is not able to, and perhaps does not want to.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. @Pericles
    "Mr Weinstein, will you need me to deliver the urgent documents to your room at the Beverly Hills tonight?"
    "No."

    Harvey reminds me of one of the loyal communist apparatchiks who found himself sitting in a dungeon in the Lubianka. He cannot believe that Stalin would have him arrested. “If only he knew” Weinstein keeps muttering. He was the one or ordered it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Alden says:
    @blaster
    Obama's daughter is not nearly as attractive as Hollywood starlets. She was very safe. Better fish to catch and fry.

    Don’t judge actresses and models by what you see when they are in full make up and carefully photographed. Obama’s daughter is attractive enough. Men like Weinstein will go after anything female unless she has more power than he.

    Weinstein knew not to go after the Princess. Treason you know

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Alden says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Bill Clinton was a good looking guy too with a pleasing personality, so he mostly did pretty well for himself with the ladies. I predicted in 1992 that President Clinton would get into a big sexual harassment scandal, but I was arguing based mostly on the statistical odds.

    One difference between Clinton and Trump is that Trump only likes extremely beautiful women -- I can remember the CEO of the company where I worked coming back from a trip to NYC around 1990 where he'd run into Marla Maples and him raving about how she was the most beautiful woman in New York (and presumably more beautiful than anybody on the Chicago nightlife scene, which he knew a lot about) -- while Clinton liked just about anything female. For example, Trump would never have married Hillary. It's an interesting difference between two guys who have a fair amount in common.

    Here's a question: Would Trump have made it to the White House _sooner_ if he'd stayed married to Ivana, the way Clinton stayed married to Hillary? Ivana is something.

    Bill Clinton was never good looking.

    1. He was fat until he left the presidency and went on a starvation diet. Did you ever see his pictures when he was not in one of those tailored to hide the big fat belly suits? Vomit inducing. Ever see those pictures of him in a swim suit or shorts? Gross

    2. The face. He had fat cheeks, and a huge blob of a nose like a big old sweet potato and fat lips and bad skin and he was totally ugly and gross and disgusting. The face was much worse than what I could see of the body. He was ugggggllyyyyyyy. His face looks better now that it looks like a cadaver but he still has that horrible nose. Fat lips shall never touch mine.

    From pictures as a little kid to his years in college to the presidency ugly ugly ugly and sexually repulsive.

    His hair is a nice bright White though. But that’s just age. I didn’t like his voice either.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. @Jack D
    Donald Trump is the un-Weinstein. He is not from Queens. He has never been accused of sexual impropriety. He has no Jewish relatives. He was not a rich mogul involved in the entertainment business. He forms the perfect contrast to Weinstein.

    Oh, no wait...

    Here we go, on the precipice of becoming another thread lost to JIDF autism triggered by cohencidences.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Alden says:
    @Boethiuss

    On the other hand, the stupid party is mostly an uneasy marriage between pathologically Zionist evangelicals and economic libertarians plus a sprinkling of alt right whom they don’t love.
     
    The other hand is that there are millions of Nice White Ladies from Kansas who have been voting Republican since Alf Landon ran for President. And so far at least, the Trump/Bannon/iSteve commentariat strategy is simply to call them all cucks and hope they go away.

    As if. Like who created 52 GOP Senators, 250 GOP Congressmen (and President Trump for that matter)? But that's ok. Like other Darwin Award Winners, there's nothing stopping us from stupiding ourselves out of existence.

    I belong to the ADL party. It’s Anti Democrat Liberal, whatever it is. I just vote the Republicans as a protest. Doesn’t do much good, but it makes me feel better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Alden says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    The third is no paragon of virtue, even if probably all of the sexual assault claims are false.
     
    So Trump loses even if he has done nothing more that make wild, and unsubstantiated claims, about what he can do with a certain class of women. Because, you know, Jack D says Trump screwed a contractor back when that contractor was hanging drywall while Trump was sexually harassing somebody within earshot of said harassment.

    Well, to quote Jack D, Trump is our bastard. And as our bastard, he could be doing worse.

    Maybe he was just holding the drywall in place while she nailed it in? Don’t make remarks about the word nailed guys.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Nowadays drywall gets screwed instead of nailed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Alden says:
    @mobi

    The difference is Weinstein is somewhere in Europe under going “therapy” and Trump has laughed them off. Innocent men don’t need to worry.
     
    It could only get better if he makes a dash for Israel. The call of Aliya must be stronger by the day.

    He’ll fit right in with all those Russian thugs and criminals trying to pass themselves off as Jews.

    He looks no more Jewish than I do. There’s no real typical jewish look, but he looks less Jewish than any other White man on earth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    You win the Most bizarre remark of the Thread award. Congrats.

    You did know we were talking about Harvey Weinstein, right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Alden says:
    @gp
    Why did the Secret Service allow Malia to toke on passed pot at concert(s)? Joint could easily have been full of polonium.

    Why did the Secret Service allow Malia to roll around in the dirt at Lollapalooza, and didn't know a guy who recently bought dozens of rifles booked a room overhead?

    Why didn't the Secret Service veto Malia's 2012 spring break Mexico trip? No honest operator would claim to be able to absolutely protect kid tourists in Mexico. That's nuts.

    Why do Secret Service agents seem to spend their free time whoring and hard-drinking, esp. overseas?

    Competence is a vanished artifact of old western civ.

    The secret service are NOT chaperones. They are body guards. They allowed JFK’s pimps to bring low level street hookers to the President in out of town trips.

    Body guards spend their time looking around for any sign of trouble, blocking off intruders, not pestering the protectee to not dance in a vulgar manner or whatever.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. vx37 says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you're not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition. I don't get why there are so many people that think being really feminist about Hollywood amounts to some kind of debilitating take down of liberalism.

    No, you need to openly question why Jews are allowed to practice open racial discrimination in the media industries, why are they allowed to be super citizens with special rights to ignore the anti-discrimination laws the rest of us have to live under. How was democracy warped to make that happen. And how much does the Jewish racism that permeates Hollywood contribute to these sexual assaults. Shiksa, after all, means whore.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Alden says:
    @Anonymous
    I think it's totally possible Harv pawed and slobbered on and maybe violated black, AZN, "Latina" and other royal-sampler chickadees-- in addition to the lion's share, who were white. Technically it's not his fault that most women remunerated for staring in a lens & looking pretty are pale.

    Nevertheless, I'm sure his rapid-response team has workshopped the "Not a racist" tactical defense and he'll be photographed with the many colors of the rainbow from here on. Considering the Miramax connection I'd be fascinated to hear the opinions or findings of Ms. Mundo Hispanico herself, Salma Hayek

    Hayek doesn’t have a molecule of hispanic or indian DNA. She’s Czech and Arab married to a French man.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    For Hollywood purposes she is a Latinx and gets to play Mestizos like Unibrow Kahlo. Whatever part of Hayek is not Lebanese is Spanish (as in Spain) not Czech I think. Hayek may be a Czech name but it is also an Arab name and she is the Arab kind of Hayek and has no Czech blood.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Alden says:
    @Stealth
    I always thought the worst part of being in the Secret Service would be to have to fire that loud-ass cartridge if the need arose. Getting shot by an assassin would be bad, too, I guess.

    I think Xpresident’s kids lose it at 16 or 18. Somebody should check it out if they’re interested.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Cornbeef says:
    @NJ Transit Commuter
    There is one thought that keep reoccurring to me about this whole mess. Why would Obama let his daughter intern at Weinstein's studio?

    Politicians taking money from scumbags is hardly a surprise. Hollywood showing itself to be full of amoral hypocrites isn't either. However, I always thought that Obama was genuinely a decent family man. If that's the case, how could he let his daughter work around a man like Weinstein? The President of United States was unaware of the rumors about Weinstein? Hardly likely. So, I'm let to then conclusion that he knowingly allowed his teenage daughter to work for a sexual predator. What kind of man would do that?

    I'd love someone in the media to try and get an answer to this question. Since the MSM's agenda is only the secular canonization of Obama, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...

    He knew she was safe. He only preys on the pale goyim.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. @slumber_j

    My guess is that it was Ronan Farrow
     
    Undoubtedly. But the question is why the NY'er chose to publish Farrow's piece, which is nothing like their usual beat. That's the whole point of my explanation.

    What changed in the media climate in the previous couple of weeks to make that happen?

    If you look at the full level of details of Farrow’s story, it really does seem hard to see how any media organization with even the slightest hold on journalistic standards could refuse the story. It is utterly scandalous that NBC handled it as it did — and will prove extremely damaging to them.

    Ken Auletta at the New Yorker said he had tried to pursue the story for many years, always to come up short in terms of verification. Clearly The New Yorker felt that they couldn’t refuse the story, and maintain any self- respect as a publication.

    It’s certainly true that in general the media is corrupted, and have vastly lowered their standards, the New Yorker included. Yet it’s a mistake to think that they have no line below which they will not go. They have to live with themselves, so that line does exist.

    So, again, I would say that it was Ronan Farrow who made this all happen. He and the story he assembled were both the necessary and, given the lines I’ve described in (some of) the media, the sufficient conditions of the story breaking.

    I’d guess that one reason he was able to succeed when others weren’t is that he could credibly claim that he saw himself as being in much the same boat as the women who were abused, given what he believed to have happened between Woody Allen and his younger sister.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D

    Clearly The New Yorker felt that they couldn’t refuse the story, and maintain any self- respect as a publication.
     
    That doesn't make any sense - the New Yorker is a literary magazine and not a newspaper or network of record like the NYT or NBC. They can refuse to print a story for any reason at all. They are not in the business of printing "scoops" or Hollywood gossip. In fact this story is an uneasy fit for the New Yorker. The old New Yorker probably wouldn't have printed it at all and this one printed it probably only because they felt that they were on the short list for extinction and thought that this might make them relevant again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. MBlanc46 says:
    @Boethiuss

    I’m guessing that there aren’t very many here who identify with the Repubs. Some may vote for Repub candidates, faute de mieux. Some may think that the Repubs are ripe for taking over. But I suspect that there are precious few who think of the Repubs as anything but the lesser of two evils.
     
    I suspect that's true, and if it is it's not a good thing.

    The alt-right and the iSteve commentariat talks a big game about how there protecting Western Civilization and the rest of it. But for the most part it's just an exercise in narcissism. I want what I want, and if someone else wants anything different, they can just suck an egg.

    And that works up to a point, arguably it has worked so far for Donald Trump and Trump enthusiasts. But there's not enough Trump enthusiasts to make it work indefinitely. We need some goodwill. And Trump's ways of doing things are going to guarantee that we're not going to have it when we need.

    You’re certainly right about goodwill. There’s almost none on the Left, and not much to be seen on the right, either. You may also be correct that the Left will win unless the corporate right and the nationalist right come together. The problem for some of is that a victory by the corporate right is little less disastrous than a victory by the Left.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss


    You’re certainly right about goodwill. There’s almost none on the Left, and not much to be seen on the right, either. You may also be correct that the Left will win unless the corporate right and the nationalist right come together.
     
    This is exactly right. For the short or medium term at least, I suspect that between the Left and the Right, it is the one which is more cohesive and less gratuitously offensive is who will win. That was certainly how the Left won in 2008.

    The problem for some of is that a victory by the corporate right is little less disastrous than a victory by the Left.
     
    There is also the the conservative Right between the populist/nationalist Right and the corporate Right. Or more concretely, the normies also have a world. Too many of us here have deluded ourselves into believing that just because we don't live in that world any more, nothing happens there. But that's just not true. Goodwill is an important thing, within the normie world and between us and them. So let's go out and get some of it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Jack D says:
    @Alden
    Maybe he was just holding the drywall in place while she nailed it in? Don't make remarks about the word nailed guys.

    Nowadays drywall gets screwed instead of nailed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Jack D says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    The third is no paragon of virtue, even if probably all of the sexual assault claims are false.
     
    So Trump loses even if he has done nothing more that make wild, and unsubstantiated claims, about what he can do with a certain class of women. Because, you know, Jack D says Trump screwed a contractor back when that contractor was hanging drywall while Trump was sexually harassing somebody within earshot of said harassment.

    Well, to quote Jack D, Trump is our bastard. And as our bastard, he could be doing worse.

    Here is a list of all the women who have accused Trump. This is the WORST that they could come up with and God knows they tried real hard:

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/14/politics/trump-women-accusers/index.html

    On the one hand, I don’t think that they are all completely lying although they may be exaggerating (and the reporter is exaggerating even more). OTOH, the nature of his conduct (stolen kisses, quick feels) is FAR FAR less serious than what Weinstein and Clinton were accused of, some of which are actual rapes that should have put these men in prison for a long time. Thank goodness that almost every fertile white female is on birth control or else there would be a lot of Clinton and Weinstein baby mommas. In fact in today’s highly sexualized climate the idea of a “stolen kiss” seems almost quaintly Victorian by comparison. Trump was PG-13 and Weinstein and Clinton are X.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Jack D says:
    @candid_observer
    If you look at the full level of details of Farrow's story, it really does seem hard to see how any media organization with even the slightest hold on journalistic standards could refuse the story. It is utterly scandalous that NBC handled it as it did -- and will prove extremely damaging to them.

    Ken Auletta at the New Yorker said he had tried to pursue the story for many years, always to come up short in terms of verification. Clearly The New Yorker felt that they couldn't refuse the story, and maintain any self- respect as a publication.

    It's certainly true that in general the media is corrupted, and have vastly lowered their standards, the New Yorker included. Yet it's a mistake to think that they have no line below which they will not go. They have to live with themselves, so that line does exist.

    So, again, I would say that it was Ronan Farrow who made this all happen. He and the story he assembled were both the necessary and, given the lines I've described in (some of) the media, the sufficient conditions of the story breaking.

    I'd guess that one reason he was able to succeed when others weren't is that he could credibly claim that he saw himself as being in much the same boat as the women who were abused, given what he believed to have happened between Woody Allen and his younger sister.

    Clearly The New Yorker felt that they couldn’t refuse the story, and maintain any self- respect as a publication.

    That doesn’t make any sense – the New Yorker is a literary magazine and not a newspaper or network of record like the NYT or NBC. They can refuse to print a story for any reason at all. They are not in the business of printing “scoops” or Hollywood gossip. In fact this story is an uneasy fit for the New Yorker. The old New Yorker probably wouldn’t have printed it at all and this one printed it probably only because they felt that they were on the short list for extinction and thought that this might make them relevant again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    As I mentioned, Ken Auletta, who writes for The New Yorker, had, by his own account, already pursued this story for many years, though without getting enough verification to get anything published.

    So I think we can conclude that the New Yorker had been interested, independently of Farrow's story.

    And so when Farrow came knocking at their door with an explosive story already wrapped up in a bow, it would have been extremely hard for them to claim that it just wasn't in their bailiwick. It was of interest when Auletta pursued it, but having all the reportage put in place suddenly it wasn't?

    Now of course they could have lied about all this. But I think it would have looked very bad for them if it ever transpired, as well it might, that they had refused the story. They would certainly look as if they were part of the coverup.

    And I frankly think that they were actually on board with publishing the story, and didn't need to have their arms twisted.

    I don't have a high opinion of the character of the current leadership at The New Yorker, which seems terribly hackish, but even awful hacks have their lines in the sand.
    , @Meretricious
    dude, TNY is full of political stories--u obviously don't read it
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Jack D says:
    @Alden
    Hayek doesn't have a molecule of hispanic or indian DNA. She's Czech and Arab married to a French man.

    For Hollywood purposes she is a Latinx and gets to play Mestizos like Unibrow Kahlo. Whatever part of Hayek is not Lebanese is Spanish (as in Spain) not Czech I think. Hayek may be a Czech name but it is also an Arab name and she is the Arab kind of Hayek and has no Czech blood.

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

    Clearly The New Yorker felt that they couldn’t refuse the story, and maintain any self- respect as a publication.
     
    That doesn't make any sense - the New Yorker is a literary magazine and not a newspaper or network of record like the NYT or NBC. They can refuse to print a story for any reason at all. They are not in the business of printing "scoops" or Hollywood gossip. In fact this story is an uneasy fit for the New Yorker. The old New Yorker probably wouldn't have printed it at all and this one printed it probably only because they felt that they were on the short list for extinction and thought that this might make them relevant again.

    As I mentioned, Ken Auletta, who writes for The New Yorker, had, by his own account, already pursued this story for many years, though without getting enough verification to get anything published.

    So I think we can conclude that the New Yorker had been interested, independently of Farrow’s story.

    And so when Farrow came knocking at their door with an explosive story already wrapped up in a bow, it would have been extremely hard for them to claim that it just wasn’t in their bailiwick. It was of interest when Auletta pursued it, but having all the reportage put in place suddenly it wasn’t?

    Now of course they could have lied about all this. But I think it would have looked very bad for them if it ever transpired, as well it might, that they had refused the story. They would certainly look as if they were part of the coverup.

    And I frankly think that they were actually on board with publishing the story, and didn’t need to have their arms twisted.

    I don’t have a high opinion of the character of the current leadership at The New Yorker, which seems terribly hackish, but even awful hacks have their lines in the sand.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @27 year old

    You need to come up with an antifeminist critique of Weinstein or else you’re not weakening liberals at all, just strengthening the relative position of feminists relative to hollywood moguls within the liberal coalition.
     
    I thought a lot about this. You have a good point, that a lot of people seem to be cucking about this and doing a "Dems R Real Misogynist" thing and we need to avoid that. I think there really isn't a critique per se. The situation just validates the reality-based anti-feminist view and illustrates how the world really works: men and women both want things from eachother and they each use whatever advantages they have to get what they want.

    Harvey offered a trade, and lots of women took the deal. If he could have bothered to spend some time in the gym to not look so disgusting and read a few vintage 2008 Roissy posts to not come off like a whiny creep, probably way more of them would have taken the deal. This is how hollywood has always been. I read that one of the Warner brothers (ever heard of them?) made a pass at a 13 year old Shirley Temple, while the other brother kept her mother occupied by trying to get in her pants.

    Women trading sex for (fill in the blank) and men offering (fill in the blank) for sex, is the way of the world. We want women to trade sex for marriage + family life.

    The critique of (((Weinstein))), same as all liberals, is that they use feminism as a weapon to beat up regular Whites.

    Now getting back around -- I think that strengthening the feminist bloc relative to the hollywood mogul bloc maybe does weaken the coalition as a whole. Anything that increases friction between the blocs will decrease their operational effectiveness. But more importantly, I think the more power feminists have in the coalition the weaker they are because feminism is a loser position (at the end of the day, fraternizing with the enemy, etc etc) and because feminists are way less competent than hollywood moguls.

    You are a pretty smart guy.

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

    Clearly The New Yorker felt that they couldn’t refuse the story, and maintain any self- respect as a publication.
     
    That doesn't make any sense - the New Yorker is a literary magazine and not a newspaper or network of record like the NYT or NBC. They can refuse to print a story for any reason at all. They are not in the business of printing "scoops" or Hollywood gossip. In fact this story is an uneasy fit for the New Yorker. The old New Yorker probably wouldn't have printed it at all and this one printed it probably only because they felt that they were on the short list for extinction and thought that this might make them relevant again.

    dude, TNY is full of political stories–u obviously don’t read it

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @LondonBob
    The left's bizarre attempt to conflate Trump and Weinstein is another fail. Trump is better looking and genuinely attracts women, as well as Democrat inspired smear jobs. Thankfully the police know the difference between actual harassment or rape and Democrat smear jobs. How clean Trump is is has always impressed me, would have thought he would have picked up more dirt over the years.

    Apparently Weinstein's wife comes from a broken home, albeit a wealthy broken home, so that explains her to some extent.

    Weinstein’s wife Georgina wanted to go to all the happening Hollywood parties–be a central feature of the glitterati–and this was the way to make that happen. Simply being the wife of an extremely powerful man has also always had its appeal. In pursuit of goals like those, truly ambitious women aren’t likely to be waylaid by matters which might disgust the rest of us.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Boethiuss says:
    @MBlanc46
    You’re certainly right about goodwill. There’s almost none on the Left, and not much to be seen on the right, either. You may also be correct that the Left will win unless the corporate right and the nationalist right come together. The problem for some of is that a victory by the corporate right is little less disastrous than a victory by the Left.

    You’re certainly right about goodwill. There’s almost none on the Left, and not much to be seen on the right, either. You may also be correct that the Left will win unless the corporate right and the nationalist right come together.

    This is exactly right. For the short or medium term at least, I suspect that between the Left and the Right, it is the one which is more cohesive and less gratuitously offensive is who will win. That was certainly how the Left won in 2008.

    The problem for some of is that a victory by the corporate right is little less disastrous than a victory by the Left.

    There is also the the conservative Right between the populist/nationalist Right and the corporate Right. Or more concretely, the normies also have a world. Too many of us here have deluded ourselves into believing that just because we don’t live in that world any more, nothing happens there. But that’s just not true. Goodwill is an important thing, within the normie world and between us and them. So let’s go out and get some of it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    I’m happy to show goodwill to the apolitical who just don’t see what’s happening. But I have a rather short fuse for those who are willing to buy into the idea that I’m literally Hitler for not accepting the latest Leftist lunacy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Alden
    He'll fit right in with all those Russian thugs and criminals trying to pass themselves off as Jews.

    He looks no more Jewish than I do. There's no real typical jewish look, but he looks less Jewish than any other White man on earth.

    You win the Most bizarre remark of the Thread award. Congrats.

    You did know we were talking about Harvey Weinstein, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Lagertha
    well, as far as your point, Georgina confuses me. Why would a successful fashion designer who is absolutely gorgeous, marry Harvey in 2007? She certainly did not need his money, as she was already dressing wealthy women and stars in Hollywood with her Marchesa line. She represents feminism: built her business, was scandal free, and was not dependent on any man. There has not been one piece on Georgina (other than she filed for divorce last week). I have always been confused that she would share her life with Harvey - she is a nice woman who designs incredibly beautiful clothes.

    She linked up with Huma, recently, to commiserate over sex-crazed husbands...kid you not. So, there could be a counterattack that feminist women are too busy having it all that they don't know if their marriage is actually bullshit. Yet, they will have some serious 'splainin' to do with their kids when their kids ask: "what is wrong with Daddy/why is Daddy in jail?" I don't understand how Georgina could have ignored Harvey's reputation, the rumors. Because, if she really felt all his predatory behavior was 12-20 years ago, she would not file for divorce in a New York minute following Farrow's story. I'm just confused that successful women marry men whose creepy reputations are already out there. It smells of women being bad at picking men for just sheer companionship! And, why not have children just in vitro - sperm bank? skip the man and his weird appetites.

    See comment 166.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @LondonBob
    Bill certainly likes to go slumming. Trump probably has more self control too, as you expect of someone who doesn't drink.

    Funnily enough the only film role I saw Georgina Chapman in is in The Business where she plays a gangster's moll married to a repulsive individual for the money and power. Good film, if you like to listen to some classic 80s hit tunes.

    https://youtu.be/jujVQOkeTNo

    Funnily enough the only film role I saw Georgina Chapman in is in The Business where she plays a gangster’s moll married to a repulsive individual for the money and power.

    Ah well good then. Life imitates art imitating life.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Pericles says:
    @Jack D
    Donald Trump is the un-Weinstein. He is not from Queens. He has never been accused of sexual impropriety. He has no Jewish relatives. He was not a rich mogul involved in the entertainment business. He forms the perfect contrast to Weinstein.

    Oh, no wait...

    Yet one became president and the other the male Bubbles de Vere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Steve stop running cover for your fellow boomercuck boethiussssss and approve my comment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss


    Steve stop running cover for your fellow boomercuck boethiussssss and approve my comment.
     
    Yeah Steve, approve Jack's comment. I can only shudder to think of what pearls of wisdom we might be missing out on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. MBlanc46 says:
    @Boethiuss


    You’re certainly right about goodwill. There’s almost none on the Left, and not much to be seen on the right, either. You may also be correct that the Left will win unless the corporate right and the nationalist right come together.
     
    This is exactly right. For the short or medium term at least, I suspect that between the Left and the Right, it is the one which is more cohesive and less gratuitously offensive is who will win. That was certainly how the Left won in 2008.

    The problem for some of is that a victory by the corporate right is little less disastrous than a victory by the Left.
     
    There is also the the conservative Right between the populist/nationalist Right and the corporate Right. Or more concretely, the normies also have a world. Too many of us here have deluded ourselves into believing that just because we don't live in that world any more, nothing happens there. But that's just not true. Goodwill is an important thing, within the normie world and between us and them. So let's go out and get some of it.

    I’m happy to show goodwill to the apolitical who just don’t see what’s happening. But I have a rather short fuse for those who are willing to buy into the idea that I’m literally Hitler for not accepting the latest Leftist lunacy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss

    But I have a rather short fuse for those who are willing to buy into the idea that I’m literally Hitler for not accepting the latest Leftist lunacy.
     
    Well yeah those people are the Left. And it would be nicer if there were a way to dial down the antagonism and hostility, that would probably be a good thing. Unfortunately there really isn't. Their actions and their intentions toward us make it so that we are going to be fighting in the trenches against them for a while.

    What I was complaining about in prior comments was the gratuitous antagonism within the Right. We have legit beefs among ourselves as well, but we can't afford to be so single-minded about getting even with whoever to the point where we ignore the enemies who can really do us harm.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Boethiuss says:
    @Jack Hanson
    Steve stop running cover for your fellow boomercuck boethiussssss and approve my comment.

    Steve stop running cover for your fellow boomercuck boethiussssss and approve my comment.

    Yeah Steve, approve Jack’s comment. I can only shudder to think of what pearls of wisdom we might be missing out on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. Boethiuss says:
    @MBlanc46
    I’m happy to show goodwill to the apolitical who just don’t see what’s happening. But I have a rather short fuse for those who are willing to buy into the idea that I’m literally Hitler for not accepting the latest Leftist lunacy.

    But I have a rather short fuse for those who are willing to buy into the idea that I’m literally Hitler for not accepting the latest Leftist lunacy.

    Well yeah those people are the Left. And it would be nicer if there were a way to dial down the antagonism and hostility, that would probably be a good thing. Unfortunately there really isn’t. Their actions and their intentions toward us make it so that we are going to be fighting in the trenches against them for a while.

    What I was complaining about in prior comments was the gratuitous antagonism within the Right. We have legit beefs among ourselves as well, but we can’t afford to be so single-minded about getting even with whoever to the point where we ignore the enemies who can really do us harm.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thea
    Actually, it would be good politically for the alt-right if the left dials it up not down. This movement, such as it is, was forged in the fires of Obama's anti-white animus. The moderate Bush years were among the worst for Ametican nationalism.

    It works the other way as well. Nazi marchers help antifa

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Thea says:
    @Boethiuss

    But I have a rather short fuse for those who are willing to buy into the idea that I’m literally Hitler for not accepting the latest Leftist lunacy.
     
    Well yeah those people are the Left. And it would be nicer if there were a way to dial down the antagonism and hostility, that would probably be a good thing. Unfortunately there really isn't. Their actions and their intentions toward us make it so that we are going to be fighting in the trenches against them for a while.

    What I was complaining about in prior comments was the gratuitous antagonism within the Right. We have legit beefs among ourselves as well, but we can't afford to be so single-minded about getting even with whoever to the point where we ignore the enemies who can really do us harm.

    Actually, it would be good politically for the alt-right if the left dials it up not down. This movement, such as it is, was forged in the fires of Obama’s anti-white animus. The moderate Bush years were among the worst for Ametican nationalism.

    It works the other way as well. Nazi marchers help antifa

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss

    Actually, it would be good politically for the alt-right if the left dials it up not down. This movement, such as it is, was forged in the fires of Obama’s anti-white animus. The moderate Bush years were among the worst for Ametican nationalism.
     
    Absolutely right. Good for the alt-right politically, bad for us as a nation. But that's sort of an orthogonal point anyway to what I was talking about.

    We can't control what the Left does but we can control what we do. And what we need to do is dial down the hostility within the Right. Frankly the other team has got some legitimate weapons that they fully intend to use against us. Defeating the Left is going to take everything we've got, if in fact it can be done. Let's not piss away our capabilities on side issues.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Brutusale says:
    @Steve Sailer
    For example, a number of years ago Gwyneth Paltrow was talking about an unnamed mogul who had harassed her.

    There have been a lot of bits and pieces in the press for a long time.

    When Courtney Love is a voice of reason willing to pay a price (which she paid) to warn women off the Miramax orca, we’ve reached peak insanity!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/15/courtney-love-warned-actresses-harvey-weinstein-2005/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Boethiuss says:
    @Jack Hanson
    You insisted throughout the election that Trump didn't stand a chance, and then made wild claims about how Trump wouldn't last to the end of 2017. This isn't even getting into your anti-prophet predictions about DACA, the wall, healthcare, and so on. But I see you are running to Talmudic obtuseness now, as per form.

    Yes, yes. I'm sure thats why you changed your name, nothing to do with the fact your predictions in the primary (Kasich is surging any day now!) were laughable as they were idiotic.

    You insisted throughout the election that Trump didn’t stand a chance, and then made wild claims about how Trump wouldn’t last to the end of 2017. This isn’t even getting into your anti-prophet predictions about DACA, the wall, healthcare, and so on. But I see you are running to Talmudic obtuseness now, as per form.

    Yes, yes. I’m sure thats why you changed your name, nothing to do with the fact your predictions in the primary (Kasich is surging any day now!) were laughable as they were idiotic.

    Jack, you are talking about things that for the most part I have no recollection of at all or are or just flat ridiculous (Talmudic obtuseness, really Jack?). Basically you’re either writing knee-jerk idiocy, or just not making sense.

    So I tell you what. You go back to anything I have ever written on this site, as Boethius or Boethiuss or any other spelling, and bring it to my attention. And I’ll either double down on it, retract it, or modify/clarify as the case may be.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. Boethiuss says:
    @Thea
    Actually, it would be good politically for the alt-right if the left dials it up not down. This movement, such as it is, was forged in the fires of Obama's anti-white animus. The moderate Bush years were among the worst for Ametican nationalism.

    It works the other way as well. Nazi marchers help antifa

    Actually, it would be good politically for the alt-right if the left dials it up not down. This movement, such as it is, was forged in the fires of Obama’s anti-white animus. The moderate Bush years were among the worst for Ametican nationalism.

    Absolutely right. Good for the alt-right politically, bad for us as a nation. But that’s sort of an orthogonal point anyway to what I was talking about.

    We can’t control what the Left does but we can control what we do. And what we need to do is dial down the hostility within the Right. Frankly the other team has got some legitimate weapons that they fully intend to use against us. Defeating the Left is going to take everything we’ve got, if in fact it can be done. Let’s not piss away our capabilities on side issues.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thea
    We aren't a nation anymore.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Thea says:
    @Boethiuss

    Actually, it would be good politically for the alt-right if the left dials it up not down. This movement, such as it is, was forged in the fires of Obama’s anti-white animus. The moderate Bush years were among the worst for Ametican nationalism.
     
    Absolutely right. Good for the alt-right politically, bad for us as a nation. But that's sort of an orthogonal point anyway to what I was talking about.

    We can't control what the Left does but we can control what we do. And what we need to do is dial down the hostility within the Right. Frankly the other team has got some legitimate weapons that they fully intend to use against us. Defeating the Left is going to take everything we've got, if in fact it can be done. Let's not piss away our capabilities on side issues.

    We aren’t a nation anymore.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boethiuss
    Oh I think we are a nation. And more importantly, we should be hoping that we are. Otherwise Jeb et al are right, and we might as well be importing millions of Mexicans and Central Americans for the sake of the economy (and Jeb's wallet).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Boethiuss says:
    @Thea
    We aren't a nation anymore.

    Oh I think we are a nation. And more importantly, we should be hoping that we are. Otherwise Jeb et al are right, and we might as well be importing millions of Mexicans and Central Americans for the sake of the economy (and Jeb’s wallet).

    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
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation