The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Malice in Blunderland
🔊 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

From my new column in Taki’s Magazine:

Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Malice in Blunderland
by Steve Sailer
October 26, 2016

If you want to understand Hillary Clinton’s campaign for president, a good place to start is the current libel trial against Rolling Stone for publishing Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s ridiculous hate hoax article, “A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and a Struggle for Justice at UVA.” …

Yet the libeled Eramo will have a hard time getting justice because Erdely may have been a true believer in the nonsense that Jackie Coakley concocted. Here are excerpts from a taped conversation between Coakley and Erdely in which the well-matched pair egg each other on. Indeed, the coed seems like the more dominant personality, glibly validating whatever academic anti–male chauvinism the nerdier Erdely suggests.

The bigger picture is that we live in a culture where a liberal Jewish feminist journalist like Erdely is paid well to vilify as haters those she hates, and is seldom asked to recognize that she’s projecting her own racist animus upon the victims of her bigotry such as Eramo and Phi Kappa Psi.

Here’s the key thing to remember about the Haven Monahan hoax because of how much light it sheds upon Hillary Clinton’s America: Virtually every single professional journalist in the country believed (or at least submitted to) the Erdely-Coakley bad craziness.

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 232 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Rob McX says:

    When I Googled “uva rape”, the second link that came up was this Guardian piece, “UVA rape story trial highlights struggle to report on sexual assault in Trump era”, which concentrates on the equally implausible accusations against DJT.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Yes, Guardian, the existence of courts of law does make it harder to lie about Trump. Poor you.
    , @Anonymous
    DuckDuckGo.com and Bing.com bring up somewhat more accurate search results for "UVA rape".
    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/sabrina-rubin-erdelys-malice-in-blunderland/#comment-1622843
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Yep says:

    “What made Trump the GOP nominee was Obama’s decision four years ago to revive grievances against white men.”

    Excellent summation of this election but one you won’t find many other places. All this hand wringing about what caused the rise of Trump and it’s that simple.

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone’s website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought “What horse shit”. I came back a day or two later and it was still up so I read the first few paragraphs. I got to the part where Jackie said one of the frat brothers said “Grab it’s leg” and I couldn’t take anymore. It was so obviously made up. It reminded me of some of the bs Amanda Knox said the Italian police supposedly put her through. I was glad to see you take on the article Steve.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    Yet the result of the Amanda Knox case was that two white kids, one American and one Italian, were framed for the murder of a jewish/Indian kid committed by an African illegal immigrant. The Agenda™ is served!

    Yes, the African was still convicted but who in the media cares about that? Most people have no idea he even exists. We could argue that Amanda was attempting to use the anti-white male agenda to offset the white privilege agenda that was used to vilify her.
    , @Jonathan Mason

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone’s website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought “What horse shit”.
     
    Me too, and millions of others, but you have to dig deeper to make the distinction between gross exaggeration and a complete lie, and probably many people who read the story thought that there was hyperbole, but that a rape occurred. In fact "Jackie" is now retracting and saying that she was raped, but she has no memory of what actually happened. How convenient is this amnesia!

    A couple of days ago I saw a report in the Daily Mail that "Natasha Stoynoff was interviewing Trump at Mar-a-Lago back in 2005 when she claims that Trump began 'forcing his tongue down [her] throat.'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835407/His-hands-like-octopus-TWO-women-claim-Donald-Trump-touched-inappropriately.html#ixzz4OBxT5umB
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook.

    I don't think it is physiologically feasible to force one's tongue down someone's throat during an interview, so to that extent it is probably a lie, unless the word 'tongue' is being used as a euphemism for another sexual organ, but there could have been some kind of sexual overture that was perceived as forcible and not consensual. Probably Stoynoff has PTSD too, which must reduce her value to her employer as a reporter.

    We the people are used to reading between the lines. Weapons of mass destruction. When Dick Cheney said "we know he has weapons of mass destruction and we know where they are" most people will have taken that declaration as a statement of fact, and only those who thought Cheney capable of gross lies over such serious matters will have questioned the assumption further. As far as new reporters were concerned, there was little difference between saying "Vice-President Cheney says that" and "it is the case that".

    I personally was very skeptical about the weapons of mass destruction, and when I listened to Colin Powell's presentation at the UN, I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD, but I kind of assumed that Colin Powell was sufficiently intelligent and experienced in evaluating military intelligence that he would not have been fooled unless there was a reasonable amount of evidence that led him to think WMD was true. It required a further leap to come to the conclusion that he was simply lying.

    Powell has said subsequently that he "blames himself for not trusting his instinct" and making what proved to be false assertions to the United Nations about Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction.

    And we thought we were paying him for his unique skills.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "I got to the part where Jackie said one of the frat brothers said “Grab it’s leg” and I couldn’t take anymore."

    Maybe Rubin Erdely had just watched "Alfie" when she wrote that.
    , @Prof. Woland
    The UVA rape hoax and "11 women to come forward" false accusations are not unrelated either. I think that it is fitting that the first serious female Presidential candidate is trying to get into office by using this low cost, low risk, but highly treacherous technique. This is one more reason I pray Hillary Clinton does not become POTUS. We are on the verge of an era this type of sexual witch hunt against men will grow exponentially.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Great piece, Steve.

    I wondered if it could be strengthened by including more specifics of Erdely’s anti-Gentilic malice. Working in the “overwhelming blonde” comment, for example. On the other hand, the characterization of Erdely’s motivations may be based on the overall feel of the article and the cumulative effect of a number of minor details, tone, and context, and on (what I believe to be accurate) intuition. Thus, it may be understandably difficult to explain persuasively with only one or two details that characterization, especially when you are trying to keep your article fairly snappy.

    (A separate question I had was why you described yourself as “daring” to link to Bradley’s article, especially when you had already posted comment to it. Why were you reluctant?)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Yeah, I wrote several thousand words of literary analysis of the original article back in 2014, so I pretty fully explicated what Erdely was up to back then:

    http://takimag.com/article/a_rape_hoax_for_book_lovers_steve_sailer/print#axzz4NhHAKIu4

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. @Questionator
    Great piece, Steve.

    I wondered if it could be strengthened by including more specifics of Erdely's anti-Gentilic malice. Working in the "overwhelming blonde" comment, for example. On the other hand, the characterization of Erdely's motivations may be based on the overall feel of the article and the cumulative effect of a number of minor details, tone, and context, and on (what I believe to be accurate) intuition. Thus, it may be understandably difficult to explain persuasively with only one or two details that characterization, especially when you are trying to keep your article fairly snappy.

    (A separate question I had was why you described yourself as "daring" to link to Bradley's article, especially when you had already posted comment to it. Why were you reluctant?)

    Yeah, I wrote several thousand words of literary analysis of the original article back in 2014, so I pretty fully explicated what Erdely was up to back then:

    http://takimag.com/article/a_rape_hoax_for_book_lovers_steve_sailer/print#axzz4NhHAKIu4

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

    “Tom Wolfe made lots of money telling Americans the truth but Dick Wolf made even more telling them what they wished were true.”. Great line. Another great Taki’s Mag piece.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag
    Agree.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Rob McX says:

    I took a look at Rolling Stone’s site to get an idea of their agenda. At the top of the page is the article “Free Speech Might Be Another Victim of This Election”.

    Excerpt:

    The Trump campaign could end up being an Alamo for civil liberties in the same way [as 9/11]. Like al-Qaeda, Trump’s campaign has been characterized as a threat extreme enough to justify exceptions to all civil liberties concepts. He is a paradigm-changer, his possible presidency an “extinction-level event,” as Andrew Sullivan put it, against which all conceivable measures have to be contemplated.

    Clearly, the UVA fiasco isn’t putting them off their crusade against white Americans.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Questionator
    He is a paradigm-changer, his possible presidency an “extinction-level event,” against which all conceivable measures have to be contemplated.

    Wow. So no "measure" should be ruled out in the prevention of a Trump presidency.

    What does that mean is on the table? A lie, a hoax, a libel? What else?
    , @Rod1963
    That's right it's not. The thing is as Trumps campaign has shown, is that the MSM(including RS) are all part of the political establishment. Even long time political pollster Pat Caddell has stated the MSM is part of it.

    This is why the demonization of Trump has been so uniform across the media spectrum. And why the MSM has avoided mentioning Wikileaks and O'Keefe's videos at all.

    People need to understand that the MSM in whatever guise be it the NYT, RS or TNR. They are not purveyors of objective journalism but promote agenda or narrative disguised as news aimed at demonizing whites and their culture.

    Erdley is just another footsoldier promoting the narrative. Tribe members are naturals at it since they seem to be hardwired from birth to hate whites.
    , @candid_observer
    The leftist descriptions of Trump and his possible presidency invariably employ the overwrought language of classic mass hysteria.

    And hysteria, as its etymology suggests, is the right term here. If one goes down the list of major episodes of mass hysteria, one can't fail to notice that in virtually every case, it involves women or girls:

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

    Even the Salem Witch scare was, of course, instigated by a group of girls.

    It's remarkable how much the hysteria over Trump is caused by little more than his saying things that women find offensive. So many of them seem incapable of entertaining and weighing any issue other than his "offensiveness". (This is pretty much what Newt Gingrich was getting at in his recent encounter with the Megyn Kelly, the exemplar of the type.)

    Today's left has reduced itself to hysterical women of both sexes. For them indeed a Trump presidency seems like "an extinction level event."

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

    I don’t understand libel law. Why should they have to prove she did it on purpose, or had malice, or whatever? Couldn’t every journalist hereafter offer the “oops, I’m totally incompetent” defense?

    Or is that only plausible here because she is, in fact, that incompetent? Let’s pull out the last block on our Jenga tower of journalistic standards, shall we?

    Read More
    • Replies: @(((Owen)))
    Libel law is a travesty. Freedom of the press is a fundamental requirement for a free society. Nobody should have to defend what he chooses to publish in front of a jury.

    If they can punish you because they disagree with your facts, it's much easier for them to do so because you're a racist or a communist or Emmanuel Goldstein and Vladimir Putin told you what to publish. Juries must have no authority to judge journalists or we're just on a slope to tyranny.

    The correct way to punish dishonest journalists like Rubin-Eardley is in the press. More speech corrects bad speech. Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.

    Expose her and she'll be discredited.

    But don't drag her into court. It just harms the victim of her lies more. People will soon be asking Dean Eramo why, if she's not a monster, didn't she win her libel trial. The existence of libel as a cause of action creates the expectation of expensive litigation if you're wronged. And it supports the assumption that if it's in print, it must be true.

    Libel law is unwise, promotes lies, and is unconstitutional. Abolish it.
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    The "actual malice/public figure" standard is judicial gloss on the First Amendment. The Supreme Court discovered it in 1964 (NY Times v. Sullivan), after Southern sheriffs started suing Northern newspapers for libel in their coverage of the civil rights conflicts in the South. Before then, the press was subject to States' tort law like everyone else.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. guest says:
    @Rob McX
    When I Googled "uva rape", the second link that came up was this Guardian piece, "UVA rape story trial highlights struggle to report on sexual assault in Trump era", which concentrates on the equally implausible accusations against DJT.

    Yes, Guardian, the existence of courts of law does make it harder to lie about Trump. Poor you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. This election season is bringing out your best, Steve — another fantastic article.

    One note on this section:

    Here are excerpts from a taped conversation between Coakley and Erdely in which the well-matched pair egg each other on. Indeed, the coed seems like the more dominant personality, glibly validating whatever academic anti–male chauvinism the nerdier Erdely suggests.

    I listened to quite a few of the audio clips K C Johnson has posted, and I think you’ve distilled the essence of Erdely and Jackie’s relationship. Erdely comes across as not exactly submissive, but certainly deferential to the high-octane Victim Power Jackie is radiating. This seems to be a synecdoche for the broader power relations on American college campuses these days.

    Also, incidentally, it’s hard to believe two supposedly grown women could say ‘like’ as often as these two conspirators do . . . .

    Read More
    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    I have to say this: I love the word "synecdoche". I first encountered it several years ago in the AvClub's review of Andy Kaufman's "Synecdoche, New York".

    I couldn't for the life of me intuit its proper pronunciation.

    "Sign-ek-dosh"?

    "Sin-ek-doush"?

    In the end it was
    "sin-ek-do-key".

    Never would have guessed. By far my favourite English word.
    , @Anon
    "Erdely comes across as not exactly submissive, but certainly deferential to the high-octane Victim Power Jackie is radiating."

    But would Erderly have been if Jackie blabbered about Jewish or black rapists?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. G Pinfold says:

    Looks like Virginia is coming back into play. I thought it would after Tim Kaine was embarrassed by Mike Pence.
    But the Monahan Effect, should tip it over the line.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. G Pinfold says:

    O/T: but is the WSJ flipping. Rupert Murdoch became infamous when his The Sun anointed the reviled Thatcher at the Eleventh hour half a lifetime ago. Two opinion pieces in as many days have said sane business people should consider voting Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. Lurker says:
    @Yep
    "What made Trump the GOP nominee was Obama’s decision four years ago to revive grievances against white men."

    Excellent summation of this election but one you won't find many other places. All this hand wringing about what caused the rise of Trump and it's that simple.

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone's website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought "What horse shit". I came back a day or two later and it was still up so I read the first few paragraphs. I got to the part where Jackie said one of the frat brothers said "Grab it's leg" and I couldn't take anymore. It was so obviously made up. It reminded me of some of the bs Amanda Knox said the Italian police supposedly put her through. I was glad to see you take on the article Steve.

    Yet the result of the Amanda Knox case was that two white kids, one American and one Italian, were framed for the murder of a jewish/Indian kid committed by an African illegal immigrant. The Agenda™ is served!

    Yes, the African was still convicted but who in the media cares about that? Most people have no idea he even exists. We could argue that Amanda was attempting to use the anti-white male agenda to offset the white privilege agenda that was used to vilify her.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jimmyriddle
    She's a wrong'un, though. She has the cold, dead, eyes of a killer.

    That isn't exactly evidence.

    The main lesson of that case was that the Italian legal system isn't designed to deal with serious crime. They screwed everything up - the forensics, the autopsy, the interrogation of suspects.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. eah says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. BenKenobi says:
    @The Last Real Calvinist
    This election season is bringing out your best, Steve -- another fantastic article.

    One note on this section:


    Here are excerpts from a taped conversation between Coakley and Erdely in which the well-matched pair egg each other on. Indeed, the coed seems like the more dominant personality, glibly validating whatever academic anti–male chauvinism the nerdier Erdely suggests.
     
    I listened to quite a few of the audio clips K C Johnson has posted, and I think you've distilled the essence of Erdely and Jackie's relationship. Erdely comes across as not exactly submissive, but certainly deferential to the high-octane Victim Power Jackie is radiating. This seems to be a synecdoche for the broader power relations on American college campuses these days.

    Also, incidentally, it's hard to believe two supposedly grown women could say 'like' as often as these two conspirators do . . . .

    I have to say this: I love the word “synecdoche”. I first encountered it several years ago in the AvClub’s review of Andy Kaufman’s “Synecdoche, New York”.

    I couldn’t for the life of me intuit its proper pronunciation.

    “Sign-ek-dosh”?

    “Sin-ek-doush”?

    In the end it was
    “sin-ek-do-key”.

    Never would have guessed. By far my favourite English word.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Rhymes with Schenectady.
    , @guest
    "I couldn't for the life of me intuit its proper pronunciation"

    Really? It never occurred to you that, being a pun on "Schenectady, New York," it might rhyme with that word?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. The bigger picture is that we live in a culture where a liberal (…) feminist journalist like Erdely is paid well to vilify as haters those she hates,

    I would like to slightly modify this: – Could it be it was a feeling less intense than hatred, that propelled Erdely and Coakley?

    I’ve listened to the soundbites of some of the conversations between the two. I couldn’t hear any strong emotions – just a kind of trance-like babble. – This wasn’t R’n’R at play at all – it was muzac.
    The Rolling Stone not only lost it’s brain (=not checking the facts), it lost it’s taste in this case – and it’s soul – – to the devil, so to speak with Jagger Richards: Who say you should never forget: Her Satanic Majesties Request: HAVE TASTE. Since nothing else will ever prevent the troubadors from being killed – before they reach Bombay…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. BenKenobi says:

    “bad craziness” is a Hunter Thompson-ism.

    Just wanted to point that out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Erdely's entire Rolling Stone article is comprised of Hunter S. Thompsonisms. I mean, the subtitle of her article is "A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA," which is a complete Thompsonism, but nobody much noticed.
    , @Steve Sailer
    Erdely's entire Rolling Stone article is comprised of Hunter S. Thompsonisms. I mean, the subtitle of her article is "A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA," which is a complete Thompsonism, but nobody much noticed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Years ago Ta-nehisi Coates actually made a similar observation about how Erdeley’s compatriot Stephen Glass was able to get away with making up such absurd stories. Glass made up a crazy story titled “Taxi Cabs and the Meaning of Work” about an immigrant DC cab driver who becomes a vigilante meting out violent justice to black criminals who rob taxi drivers. The article concludes with Glass sitting in the back of taxi cab while it’s being robbed as he takes notes. All made up. Coates’ point was that Glass got away with such absurd lies because he appealed to the racist prejudices of Marty Peretz and his staff as well as their TNR readership.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Yes, black criminals robbing taxi drivers - absurd! Nothing like that ever happens in real life. Purely the product of Peretz's racist fantasies about black bodies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Yet the result of the Amanda Knox case was that two white kids, one American and one Italian, were framed for the murder of a jewish/Indian kid committed by an African illegal immigrant. The Agenda™ is served!

    Meredith Kercher’s mother, Arline Kercher, looks nothing like any Indian I’ve seen. Perhaps Indo-African Caribbean? I tried checking it out on Wikipedia but the edit wars on that topic are the usual Wikipedia insanity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Arline Kercher
    http://www.newsweek.com/arline-kercher-mother-limbo-62973
    Arline is a petite woman who was born in Pakistan and raised in India. She and her husband, John, divorced when their four children were young, and Arline raised the kids in the ramshackle family home in Coulsdon, Surrey—near London—where the gutters hung perilously from the roof and faded curtains adorned the windows.
    , @Jack D
    Just a bad photo. I think she's just a garden variety subcontinental woman. Here she is with her other daughter:

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/03/26/article-2299477-18EEFDD9000005DC-686_306x423.jpg

    Because the shades of brown people vary so much and we are not really sure what shade any give brown person is, when printing photos of them it is common to render them either much darker or much lighter than they really are. Obama is depicted anywhere from high yeller to darkie. The pictures of Arline on the interwebs are all over the place in terms of her coloring.

    BTW,is Kercher's father really Jewish? His name is John (not a common Jewish name) and his son is also named John (not a common Jewish naming practice).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. bomag says:
    @SnakeEyes
    "Tom Wolfe made lots of money telling Americans the truth but Dick Wolf made even more telling them what they wished were true.". Great line. Another great Taki's Mag piece.

    Agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @BenKenobi
    "bad craziness" is a Hunter Thompson-ism.

    Just wanted to point that out.

    Erdely’s entire Rolling Stone article is comprised of Hunter S. Thompsonisms. I mean, the subtitle of her article is “A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA,” which is a complete Thompsonism, but nobody much noticed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @BenKenobi
    "bad craziness" is a Hunter Thompson-ism.

    Just wanted to point that out.

    Erdely’s entire Rolling Stone article is comprised of Hunter S. Thompsonisms. I mean, the subtitle of her article is “A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA,” which is a complete Thompsonism, but nobody much noticed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @G Pinfold
    OK, but Hunter S Thompson was never meant to be written or read sober. This is not the weird turning pro, what we see here is the pro turning weird.
    When HST needed cover he said: "It's important that we drink heavily."
    Had she attempted the definitive RS interview with the ageing, trigger happy Thompson a few years ago, she would never have made it beyond the cactus patch.
    , @black sea
    Since she's evidently a fan of HST:

    “Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is a cheap catch-all for fuckoffs and misfits—a false doorway to the backside of life, a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage.”
    , @BenKenobi
    Pinfold and black sea beat me to it: I don't think Erdely quite realizes she's accidentally practicing Gonzo Journalism: drug/alcohol fueled and completely subjective.

    Brutal Assault and Struggle eh? I guess she couldn't exactly call it "Fear & Loathing at UVA: A Savage Journey into a Rape Culture Dream"
    , @Dieter Kief
    I'd assume, that this Thomsonite subtitle was written by somebody of the editorial staff at RS.

    Deconstructivism and the like have been useful for some time as anti-utopian ways of thinking, anti-totalitarian too, but that's long gone and now you have PC, sexual harrassment, microaggressions, gender-mainstreaming ... as the realms of Derrida- and Foucault- and Lyotard- and so on - pupils. A possibility of endless considerations, because there's never been a shortage of personal problems in the world. And since the West is declining (especially the economy - and this is not only happening in the US) - since the West's prospects aren't too rosy, the critical young (well, the well educated and affluent critical young) in the colleges start fights with themselves, so to speak. - That's a lot more comfortable than a look at reality at large. It's always good, and a lot less depressing, to have a personal enemy - and for shure better than to face the hardships of the - what was the number, Trump had these days: 17.000 US factories closed or shipped abroad.

    Look at what Obama was referring to, when he spoke to the young: His advice, not to study art-history - in all it's naivité - - was telling. It sounded to me like the funny guy who forbids smoking, while the ship's on fire.

    There's two big books, which both discussed such questions at length: Franzens Freedom (cf. rape at school) and Tom Wolfes I am Charlotte Simmons (cf. rape at college). The Erdely-case is part of this problem - and of this whole field of societal uncertanty. You could even add Wolfes A Man In Full - since it sheds light on Trump too. I sould have been more astonished to learn, that you were one of the first to notice the Erdely-problem (of course, a double-coded compliment - positively double-coded - if at my expense).

    Last pargraph: Franzen's last book reminded me a lot of your work since it's about Karl Kraus, who for years wrote a stunning journal of critique Die Fackel (The Torch - 20.000 pages - most of them written by Kraus) - critizising especially the media; and not shying away from the fact, that lots of the media he critizsed had been owned by jews. The big diffrence between Steve Sailer and Karl Kraus is not their workload, or that Sailer i no jew - it's the language. Kraus can't really tame his ideas, while Steve Sailer does. This diffrence resulted in Franzens and his (partly native-speaking) collaborators' difficultuies, translating Kraus.
    The other way round would be much easier.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Theory – HRC is the epitome of the semi-Scandinavian, Puritan, censorious New Englander via East Anglia of Albion’s Seed. Discuss.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Spmoore8
    Well, Hillary could play the lead in the Carrie Nation biopic.
    , @Thea
    I think the SJW phenomenon is the worst possible combination of sanctimonious, crusading New England culture mixed with what the equivalent is in Jewish culture.
    , @slumber_j
    I'm under the impression that she's actually pretty Welsh--despite her tin ear for the English language, although perhaps the Welshness does account for her purported fondness for drink. But stylistically speaking, you're certainly right.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Clyde says:

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely is married with two children. She was probably worn out and always tired from being a mother and a crusading lefty journalist. She got sloppy over the years and did rush jobs that had little fact checking. Partly due to her responsibilities as a mother. She must of had dreams of getting that big score. Movie rights for this Rolling Stone rape piece that would allow her to relax for a while.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS. That's a pretty big score, but, yeah, she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley's story would be a $500k movie deal.
    , @PiltdownMan

    She must of had dreams of getting that big score.
     
    Are big(gish) money contracts like this a standard thing in magazine journalism in our times? I thought print journalism had fallen on hard times.

    Or are these one-off situations, where the size of the payment results from the writer being connected or owed in some manner, rather than it indicating talent or star power? That is, is corruption or nepotism of some sort going on? Who is Sabrina Erdely anyway?

    I guess I'm thinking of Chelsea Clinton's $600k gig at NBC.

    , @Olorin
    Her hubby, Peter Erdely, is apparently making bank as a Center City trial lawyer, and they own a flat in the Jewelers' Row part of Philly. Or anyway did in 2014 when last I checked.

    Her entire CV is one bad Lifetime Original Movie script/Oprah theme week show after another. White suburban whores, white priests raping vulnerable boys, white mommy heroin addicts.

    Our host called this one in the air: she epitomizes absolute vehement hatred of founding stock Americans, which really has to burn when you're reminded of it everywhere you go in Philly.

    If my experience is any guide, her ilk are common in Philadelphia's upscale circles.

    She's also a sucker for the phantasms of the insane.

    http://www.newsweek.com/2016/01/29/billy-doe-altar-boy-sends-four-men-prison-philadelphia-rape-case-417565.html

    https://riversong.wordpress.com/journalistic-fabulism-and-ideological-agendas/

    Remember, she went into UPenn as a pre-med student (psychiatry) but couldn't hack it, so went into journalism. She wasn't an Annenberger, but a College grad.

    Here's a good snapshot of all that, and before you read it, order up a truckload of triple parens:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20160307_Penn_s_journalists_move_on_after_spotlight_s_glare.html

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. G Pinfold says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Erdely's entire Rolling Stone article is comprised of Hunter S. Thompsonisms. I mean, the subtitle of her article is "A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA," which is a complete Thompsonism, but nobody much noticed.

    OK, but Hunter S Thompson was never meant to be written or read sober. This is not the weird turning pro, what we see here is the pro turning weird.
    When HST needed cover he said: “It’s important that we drink heavily.”
    Had she attempted the definitive RS interview with the ageing, trigger happy Thompson a few years ago, she would never have made it beyond the cactus patch.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @guest
    I don't understand libel law. Why should they have to prove she did it on purpose, or had malice, or whatever? Couldn't every journalist hereafter offer the "oops, I'm totally incompetent" defense?

    Or is that only plausible here because she is, in fact, that incompetent? Let's pull out the last block on our Jenga tower of journalistic standards, shall we?

    Libel law is a travesty. Freedom of the press is a fundamental requirement for a free society. Nobody should have to defend what he chooses to publish in front of a jury.

    If they can punish you because they disagree with your facts, it’s much easier for them to do so because you’re a racist or a communist or Emmanuel Goldstein and Vladimir Putin told you what to publish. Juries must have no authority to judge journalists or we’re just on a slope to tyranny.

    The correct way to punish dishonest journalists like Rubin-Eardley is in the press. More speech corrects bad speech. Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.

    Expose her and she’ll be discredited.

    But don’t drag her into court. It just harms the victim of her lies more. People will soon be asking Dean Eramo why, if she’s not a monster, didn’t she win her libel trial. The existence of libel as a cause of action creates the expectation of expensive litigation if you’re wronged. And it supports the assumption that if it’s in print, it must be true.

    Libel law is unwise, promotes lies, and is unconstitutional. Abolish it.

    Read More
    • Troll: Forbes
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Untrue if the whole media is owned by a handful of corporations and leans overwhelmingly in one direction.
    , @Verymuchalive
    Libel can result in considerable harm, not only financial, to those defamed. This is a civil wrong and it is reasonable that there should be a civil remedy for those defamed.
    Secondly, exposure in the media of journalistic lies and defamation assumes the existence of a genuinely free press where mainstream journals would be willing to publish such stories. In modern America, this is no longer the case. The MSM is largely owned by a small number of very large corporations. These publish a very narrow Neocon-Neolib take on events. They can and do suppress stories which do not fit their views and interests, as the publisher of this website, Mr Unz, has repeatedly demonstrated, e.g. WTA 800.
    Without the internet, the UVA Rape Hoax would have been quickly confined to a few low circulation, non-mainstream print journals. The story would have been quickly ignored by the MSM .
    Without the libel laws, Rolling Stone and Erdely would face no penalty for their wrongdoing. They would shrug it off and continue to claim the story is correct. There would be no retraction by Rolling Stone. As Mr Sailer has written, a liberal feminist hack " like Erdely is paid well to vilify as haters those she hates." She is not going to stop until she is held legally to account. Even if she escapes liability on a technicality, this civil trial has produced enough evidence to destroy her credibility as a "journalist".
    On a more general point. Consider if there were no libel laws. The MSM would be under no obligations AT ALL to present a truthful report. They could just fabricate everything and present it as true. You may say that they are doing so already. True, but libel is an important break on this. Consider if there were no libel laws what the MSM would do concerning Trump. It would be several times worse than their present coverage.
    The power of the MSM is waning, but most people still get their "news" from it. On balance, I think the libel laws are a good thing.
    , @Anon

    Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.
     
    Indeed.

    Hence laws against questioning Holocaust narrative.
    , @Jack D
    Is this a troll? Truth has always been a defense against libel. Freedom of the press has never mean the freedom to destroy the reputation of others by printing vicious lies about them. Finding facts is exactly what juries are meant to do - they do it all the time in all sorts of cases.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Clyde
    Sabrina Rubin Erdely is married with two children. She was probably worn out and always tired from being a mother and a crusading lefty journalist. She got sloppy over the years and did rush jobs that had little fact checking. Partly due to her responsibilities as a mother. She must of had dreams of getting that big score. Movie rights for this Rolling Stone rape piece that would allow her to relax for a while.

    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS. That’s a pretty big score, but, yeah, she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley’s story would be a $500k movie deal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS.
     
    How about Rolling Stone magazine is really a website these days. Where do they get the money to pay her $300k? She was going to be their featured writer for exposes I suppose. Exposing America's fat white underbelly of racism and sexism.
    , @SFG
    I agree with the rest of it, but can you link to the part where you show this is anti-Gentilic? I'm not denying the prejudice exists or is prominent (as any glance at Slate will show you), but through this I more had the impression of feminists resenting those evil bros. I mean, Jews aren't excluded from frats these days. It *sounds* kind of like those stories they used to tell in the 50s, but it strikes me as a subtext at the most--they recycled the old stories about WASPy exclusion with new victims.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "....she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley’s story would be a $500k movie deal."

    She could still turn it into a Law & Order script.
    , @Prof. Woland
    The could have sold it to Dawson's Creek.
    , @TheJester
    There is still a movie deal in there after the lawsuits are over ... but it is about how Rolling Stone and Sabrina Rubin Erdely blundered big time in trying to put together a narrative story about evil cisgendered White males and their oppressive patriarchy.

    iSteve, on the good side, there is bound to be a walk on part for you in the movie (or someone pretending to be you) as the story-line shows how the narrative unraveled.

    As for Jackie Coakley, she appears to be one those spoiled adolescent females in the Age of Feminism mongering for the attention and status associated with having an Alpha-Male panting after her. When they don't, she makes one up. Given her deposition, she still appears to accept no responsibility for what she did nor the consequences of what she did. "I feel faint ..., I mean I'm suffering from PTSD!" How should Jackie be portrayed? There is no comedy, no tragedy, and no drama in her involvement ... only pathos.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Clyde says:
    @PiltdownMan

    Yet the result of the Amanda Knox case was that two white kids, one American and one Italian, were framed for the murder of a jewish/Indian kid committed by an African illegal immigrant. The Agenda™ is served!
     

    Meredith Kercher's mother, Arline Kercher, looks nothing like any Indian I've seen. Perhaps Indo-African Caribbean? I tried checking it out on Wikipedia but the edit wars on that topic are the usual Wikipedia insanity.

    http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/0859a5e1990145e4b8f3714006903f59/arline-kercher-mother-of-murdered-british-student-meredith-kercher-ft4j6g.jpg

    Arline Kercher

    http://www.newsweek.com/arline-kercher-mother-limbo-62973

    Arline is a petite woman who was born in Pakistan and raised in India. She and her husband, John, divorced when their four children were young, and Arline raised the kids in the ramshackle family home in Coulsdon, Surrey—near London—where the gutters hung perilously from the roof and faded curtains adorned the windows.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Ah, Newsweek inadvertently reveals something. Fatherless ingénue Kercher meets fatherless African immigrant Guede. The rest is history.

    It's almost like there is a theme here...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Clyde says:
    @Steve Sailer
    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS. That's a pretty big score, but, yeah, she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley's story would be a $500k movie deal.

    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS.

    How about Rolling Stone magazine is really a website these days. Where do they get the money to pay her $300k? She was going to be their featured writer for exposes I suppose. Exposing America’s fat white underbelly of racism and sexism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. SFG says:
    @Steve Sailer
    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS. That's a pretty big score, but, yeah, she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley's story would be a $500k movie deal.

    I agree with the rest of it, but can you link to the part where you show this is anti-Gentilic? I’m not denying the prejudice exists or is prominent (as any glance at Slate will show you), but through this I more had the impression of feminists resenting those evil bros. I mean, Jews aren’t excluded from frats these days. It *sounds* kind of like those stories they used to tell in the 50s, but it strikes me as a subtext at the most–they recycled the old stories about WASPy exclusion with new victims.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    "Overwhelmingly blond." To me that was a giveaway.
    , @syonredux

    I agree with the rest of it, but can you link to the part where you show this is anti-Gentilic?
     
    The anti-WASP dog whistles are scattered throughout the piece:

    UVA's aura of preppy success, where throngs of toned, tanned and overwhelmingly blond students fanned across a landscape of neoclassical brick buildings,
     

    Jackie had been floored by Drew's invitation to dinner, followed by a "date function" at his fraternity, Phi Kappa Psi. The "upper tier" frat had a reputation of tremendous wealth, and its imposingly large house overlooked a vast manicured field, giving "Phi Psi" the undisputed best real estate along UVA's fraternity row known as Rugby Road.
     

    "One of my roommates said, 'Do you want to be responsible for something that's gonna paint UVA in a bad light?' " says Jackie, poking at a vegan burger at a restaurant on the Corner, UVA's popular retail strip. "But I said, 'UVA has flown under the radar for so long, someone has to say something about it, or else it's gonna be this system that keeps perpetuating!' " Jackie frowns. "My friend just said, 'You have to remember where your loyalty lies.'"

     


    From reading headlines today, one might think colleges have suddenly become hotbeds of protest by celebrated anti-rape activists. But like most colleges across America, genteel University of Virginia has no radical feminist culture seeking to upend the patriarchy. There are no red-tape-wearing protests like at Harvard, no "sex-positive" clubs promoting the female orgasm like at Yale, no mattress-hauling performance artists like at Columbia, and certainly no SlutWalks. UVA isn't an edgy or progressive campus by any stretch.
     

    Prestige is at the core of UVA's identity. Although a public school, its grounds of red-brick, white-columned buildings designed by founder Thomas Jefferson radiate old-money privilege, footnoted by the graffiti of UVA's many secret societies, whose insignias are neatly painted everywhere.
     

    Partying traditions fuse the decorum of the Southern aristocracy with binge drinking: At Cavalier football tailgates, the dress code is "girls in pearls, guys in ties" while students guzzle handles of vodka. Not for nothing is a UVA student nicknamed a Wahoo, as undergrads like to explain; though derived from a long-ago yell from Cavalier fans, a wahoo is also a fish that can drink twice its own body weight.

     


    Wahoos are enthralled to be at UVA and can't wait to tell you the reasons why, beginning, surprisingly, with Thomas Jefferson, whose lore is so powerfully woven into everyday UVA life that you practically expect to glimpse the man still walking the grounds in his waistcoat and pantaloons. Nearly every student I interviewed found a way to mention "TJ," speaking with zeal about their founding father's vision for an "academical village" in the idyllic setting of the Blue Ridge Mountains.
     

    "In these situations, the one who gets the most protection is either a wealthy kid, a legacy kid or an athlete. The more privileged he is, the more likely the woman has to die before he's held accountable."
     

    All you girls from Mary Washington
    and RMWC, never let a Cavalier an inch above your knee.
    He'll take you to his fraternity house and fill you full of beer.
    And soon you'll be the mother of a bastard Cavalier!
    "Rugby Road"
     
    , @syonredux

    Wahoos are enthralled to be at UVA and can’t wait to tell you the reasons why, beginning, surprisingly, with Thomas Jefferson, whose lore is so powerfully woven into everyday UVA life that you practically expect to glimpse the man still walking the grounds in his waistcoat and pantaloons. Nearly every student I interviewed found a way to mention “TJ,” speaking with zeal about their founding father’s vision for an “academical village” in the idyllic setting of the Blue Ridge Mountains.
     
    Love the subtly of the "surprisingly." Goodthinkers know that Jefferson is in bad odor these days. But these vile WASPs are so immersed in Crimethink that they don't even know that they are supposed to feel shame and guilt about the fact that Jefferson founded their uni...

    UVA’s aura of preppy success, where throngs of toned, tanned and overwhelmingly blond students fanned across a landscape of neoclassical brick buildings,

     

    And the article gives us some nicely sinister photographs of those buildings, all shot at horror movie angles. For the interested, here's a link to the article:

    https://www.bustle.com/articles/74322-where-to-read-rolling-stone-uva-article-a-rape-on-campus-now-its-been-deleted
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Clyde
    Sabrina Rubin Erdely is married with two children. She was probably worn out and always tired from being a mother and a crusading lefty journalist. She got sloppy over the years and did rush jobs that had little fact checking. Partly due to her responsibilities as a mother. She must of had dreams of getting that big score. Movie rights for this Rolling Stone rape piece that would allow her to relax for a while.

    She must of had dreams of getting that big score.

    Are big(gish) money contracts like this a standard thing in magazine journalism in our times? I thought print journalism had fallen on hard times.

    Or are these one-off situations, where the size of the payment results from the writer being connected or owed in some manner, rather than it indicating talent or star power? That is, is corruption or nepotism of some sort going on? Who is Sabrina Erdely anyway?

    I guess I’m thinking of Chelsea Clinton’s $600k gig at NBC.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chriscom
    @PiltdowmMan, there is still a very small point at the top of the pyramid where a handful of journalists make big hauls.
    , @Clyde
    Since the once mega-profitable Rolling Stone magazine is today just a website with a small print run, where do they get the money to pay her $300,000 over two years for seven stories? It can be done cheaper, with fact checking and interviewing others close to the story.

    The founder is boy chaser Jann Wenner
    Net worth
    $700 million USD
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Like, I never, like, listened to these, like, conversations before [lilting upward].

    https://academicwonderland.com/2016/10/24/erdely-jackie-conversations/

    Like, kill me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. @SFG
    I agree with the rest of it, but can you link to the part where you show this is anti-Gentilic? I'm not denying the prejudice exists or is prominent (as any glance at Slate will show you), but through this I more had the impression of feminists resenting those evil bros. I mean, Jews aren't excluded from frats these days. It *sounds* kind of like those stories they used to tell in the 50s, but it strikes me as a subtext at the most--they recycled the old stories about WASPy exclusion with new victims.

    “Overwhelmingly blond.” To me that was a giveaway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Spmoore8 says:
    @Mr Curious
    Theory - HRC is the epitome of the semi-Scandinavian, Puritan, censorious New Englander via East Anglia of Albion's Seed. Discuss.

    Well, Hillary could play the lead in the Carrie Nation biopic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @(((Owen)))
    Libel law is a travesty. Freedom of the press is a fundamental requirement for a free society. Nobody should have to defend what he chooses to publish in front of a jury.

    If they can punish you because they disagree with your facts, it's much easier for them to do so because you're a racist or a communist or Emmanuel Goldstein and Vladimir Putin told you what to publish. Juries must have no authority to judge journalists or we're just on a slope to tyranny.

    The correct way to punish dishonest journalists like Rubin-Eardley is in the press. More speech corrects bad speech. Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.

    Expose her and she'll be discredited.

    But don't drag her into court. It just harms the victim of her lies more. People will soon be asking Dean Eramo why, if she's not a monster, didn't she win her libel trial. The existence of libel as a cause of action creates the expectation of expensive litigation if you're wronged. And it supports the assumption that if it's in print, it must be true.

    Libel law is unwise, promotes lies, and is unconstitutional. Abolish it.

    Untrue if the whole media is owned by a handful of corporations and leans overwhelmingly in one direction.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Chriscom says:
    @PiltdownMan

    She must of had dreams of getting that big score.
     
    Are big(gish) money contracts like this a standard thing in magazine journalism in our times? I thought print journalism had fallen on hard times.

    Or are these one-off situations, where the size of the payment results from the writer being connected or owed in some manner, rather than it indicating talent or star power? That is, is corruption or nepotism of some sort going on? Who is Sabrina Erdely anyway?

    I guess I'm thinking of Chelsea Clinton's $600k gig at NBC.

    @PiltdowmMan, there is still a very small point at the top of the pyramid where a handful of journalists make big hauls.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Why is this person at the top of any pyramid?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @guest
    I don't understand libel law. Why should they have to prove she did it on purpose, or had malice, or whatever? Couldn't every journalist hereafter offer the "oops, I'm totally incompetent" defense?

    Or is that only plausible here because she is, in fact, that incompetent? Let's pull out the last block on our Jenga tower of journalistic standards, shall we?

    The “actual malice/public figure” standard is judicial gloss on the First Amendment. The Supreme Court discovered it in 1964 (NY Times v. Sullivan), after Southern sheriffs started suing Northern newspapers for libel in their coverage of the civil rights conflicts in the South. Before then, the press was subject to States’ tort law like everyone else.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @(((Owen)))
    Libel law is a travesty. Freedom of the press is a fundamental requirement for a free society. Nobody should have to defend what he chooses to publish in front of a jury.

    If they can punish you because they disagree with your facts, it's much easier for them to do so because you're a racist or a communist or Emmanuel Goldstein and Vladimir Putin told you what to publish. Juries must have no authority to judge journalists or we're just on a slope to tyranny.

    The correct way to punish dishonest journalists like Rubin-Eardley is in the press. More speech corrects bad speech. Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.

    Expose her and she'll be discredited.

    But don't drag her into court. It just harms the victim of her lies more. People will soon be asking Dean Eramo why, if she's not a monster, didn't she win her libel trial. The existence of libel as a cause of action creates the expectation of expensive litigation if you're wronged. And it supports the assumption that if it's in print, it must be true.

    Libel law is unwise, promotes lies, and is unconstitutional. Abolish it.

    Libel can result in considerable harm, not only financial, to those defamed. This is a civil wrong and it is reasonable that there should be a civil remedy for those defamed.
    Secondly, exposure in the media of journalistic lies and defamation assumes the existence of a genuinely free press where mainstream journals would be willing to publish such stories. In modern America, this is no longer the case. The MSM is largely owned by a small number of very large corporations. These publish a very narrow Neocon-Neolib take on events. They can and do suppress stories which do not fit their views and interests, as the publisher of this website, Mr Unz, has repeatedly demonstrated, e.g. WTA 800.
    Without the internet, the UVA Rape Hoax would have been quickly confined to a few low circulation, non-mainstream print journals. The story would have been quickly ignored by the MSM .
    Without the libel laws, Rolling Stone and Erdely would face no penalty for their wrongdoing. They would shrug it off and continue to claim the story is correct. There would be no retraction by Rolling Stone. As Mr Sailer has written, a liberal feminist hack ” like Erdely is paid well to vilify as haters those she hates.” She is not going to stop until she is held legally to account. Even if she escapes liability on a technicality, this civil trial has produced enough evidence to destroy her credibility as a “journalist”.
    On a more general point. Consider if there were no libel laws. The MSM would be under no obligations AT ALL to present a truthful report. They could just fabricate everything and present it as true. You may say that they are doing so already. True, but libel is an important break on this. Consider if there were no libel laws what the MSM would do concerning Trump. It would be several times worse than their present coverage.
    The power of the MSM is waning, but most people still get their “news” from it. On balance, I think the libel laws are a good thing.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kylie, Coemgen
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    Many of these types of false accusations are a result of civil actions v. the other way around. False rape / DV accusations have long been a staple in the family courts as a tactic to gain alimony or custody. The UVA rape hoax was never meant to go to trial and neither were any of the "11 women to come forward". But then again, Erdely's goal was never to convict Haven Monahan, it was to get the University to kick the fraternity off of campus and to start a greater hysteria about white men. This trial is small justice but it stings like hell because it is not about Erdely having to fess up, it is about a Jewish woman who hates white men.
    , @Ivy
    Modern journalism is subject to many errors of omission and of commission, in between the occasional nuggets of truth and advertiser-provided content.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @(((Owen)))
    Libel law is a travesty. Freedom of the press is a fundamental requirement for a free society. Nobody should have to defend what he chooses to publish in front of a jury.

    If they can punish you because they disagree with your facts, it's much easier for them to do so because you're a racist or a communist or Emmanuel Goldstein and Vladimir Putin told you what to publish. Juries must have no authority to judge journalists or we're just on a slope to tyranny.

    The correct way to punish dishonest journalists like Rubin-Eardley is in the press. More speech corrects bad speech. Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.

    Expose her and she'll be discredited.

    But don't drag her into court. It just harms the victim of her lies more. People will soon be asking Dean Eramo why, if she's not a monster, didn't she win her libel trial. The existence of libel as a cause of action creates the expectation of expensive litigation if you're wronged. And it supports the assumption that if it's in print, it must be true.

    Libel law is unwise, promotes lies, and is unconstitutional. Abolish it.

    Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.

    Indeed.

    Hence laws against questioning Holocaust narrative.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    America has no such laws (because they are unconstitutional) so I guess Jews must not be a powerful elite in America.

    Liechtenstein and Bosnia OTOH both have such laws due to the powerful secret cabal of Jews who control them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. black sea says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Erdely's entire Rolling Stone article is comprised of Hunter S. Thompsonisms. I mean, the subtitle of her article is "A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA," which is a complete Thompsonism, but nobody much noticed.

    Since she’s evidently a fan of HST:

    “Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is a cheap catch-all for fuckoffs and misfits—a false doorway to the backside of life, a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage.”

    Read More
    • Agree: antipater_1
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Coemgen says:

    The radical left is anything but diplomatic. It’s their way or no way.

    We’re are going to end up on a battlefield.

    It’s no wonder that the radical left wants to “common sense” the 2nd Amendment out of existence.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. @Yep
    "What made Trump the GOP nominee was Obama’s decision four years ago to revive grievances against white men."

    Excellent summation of this election but one you won't find many other places. All this hand wringing about what caused the rise of Trump and it's that simple.

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone's website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought "What horse shit". I came back a day or two later and it was still up so I read the first few paragraphs. I got to the part where Jackie said one of the frat brothers said "Grab it's leg" and I couldn't take anymore. It was so obviously made up. It reminded me of some of the bs Amanda Knox said the Italian police supposedly put her through. I was glad to see you take on the article Steve.

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone’s website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought “What horse shit”.

    Me too, and millions of others, but you have to dig deeper to make the distinction between gross exaggeration and a complete lie, and probably many people who read the story thought that there was hyperbole, but that a rape occurred. In fact “Jackie” is now retracting and saying that she was raped, but she has no memory of what actually happened. How convenient is this amnesia!

    A couple of days ago I saw a report in the Daily Mail that “Natasha Stoynoff was interviewing Trump at Mar-a-Lago back in 2005 when she claims that Trump began ‘forcing his tongue down [her] throat.’

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835407/His-hands-like-octopus-TWO-women-claim-Donald-Trump-touched-inappropriately.html#ixzz4OBxT5umB
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook.

    I don’t think it is physiologically feasible to force one’s tongue down someone’s throat during an interview, so to that extent it is probably a lie, unless the word ‘tongue’ is being used as a euphemism for another sexual organ, but there could have been some kind of sexual overture that was perceived as forcible and not consensual. Probably Stoynoff has PTSD too, which must reduce her value to her employer as a reporter.

    We the people are used to reading between the lines. Weapons of mass destruction. When Dick Cheney said “we know he has weapons of mass destruction and we know where they are” most people will have taken that declaration as a statement of fact, and only those who thought Cheney capable of gross lies over such serious matters will have questioned the assumption further. As far as new reporters were concerned, there was little difference between saying “Vice-President Cheney says that” and “it is the case that”.

    I personally was very skeptical about the weapons of mass destruction, and when I listened to Colin Powell’s presentation at the UN, I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD, but I kind of assumed that Colin Powell was sufficiently intelligent and experienced in evaluating military intelligence that he would not have been fooled unless there was a reasonable amount of evidence that led him to think WMD was true. It required a further leap to come to the conclusion that he was simply lying.

    Powell has said subsequently that he “blames himself for not trusting his instinct” and making what proved to be false assertions to the United Nations about Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction.

    And we thought we were paying him for his unique skills.

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer

    I don’t think it is physiologically feasible to force one’s tongue down someone’s throat during an interview, so to that extent it is probably a lie, unless the word ‘tongue’ is being used as a euphemism for another sexual organ, but there could have been some kind of sexual overture that was perceived as forcible and not consensual. Probably Stoynoff has PTSD too, which must reduce her value to her employer as a reporter.
     
    This is a perfect example of people being unable to envision that someone is just outright lying -- making up a story out of whole cloth.

    Why believe that anything like what Stoynoff claimed took place?

    I realize that she finally produced some friends and fellow journalists who claimed she told her back when the episode supposedly happened, but what does that even entail? Journalists are the least trustworthy of all professions except, perhaps, for politicians. Look at how a number of them got together as a group and deliberately lied about Tim Hunt for ideological reasons.

    The basic countervailing fact against these sorts of claims about Trump is that they all arose only after the Billy Bush tape was played. The problem with that is that if Trump were so out-of-control in his sexual behavior, then he would have been so across his life, and, almost certainly, these sorts of accusations would have dogged him across his life. This is, in fact, what was true of both Bill Cosby and Bill Clinton: their accusers didn't all, or even mostly, pop up only when it was politically or otherwise expedient: their timing had a life of its own, based on the peculiarities of the women and the circumstances of the sexual assaults. It's possible that some of the accusers of Cosby and Clinton only came forward after others did, or even that a number simply made it up after others came forward, for ideology or fame. But there's a strong core of accusers who can't be put in those categories -- which is what one would expect in cases of a real sexual predator.

    In contrast, all of the current accusers of Trump can be explained by assuming they are doing so for ideology, fame, or money. It really doesn't even matter how many of them there are, because there's no way of predicting how many women across this nation of 300 million will find such motives sufficient to make up a lie; it could be zero or it could be 100 or anywhere in between.
    , @guest
    Yes, there is a perfectly obvious natural defense against tongue-forcings. They're called teeth.
    , @NOTA
    Groupthink and trusting your ingroup to be honest with you are hard to overcome. Neither intelligence nor experience is a complete defense. And you can go wrong the other direction, too--W apparently ignored a lot of internal expert opinion on the likely costs and consequences of invading Iraq.
    , @Jack D

    I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD
     
    Powell presented what appeared at the time to be persuasive evidence of chemical weapons. I was persuaded and I believe that Powell (and Cheney and Bush) were also.

    See this:

    http://www.famouspictures.org/iraqi-mobile-production-facilities/

    In the end, they captured trucks that looked very much like "the mobile biological agent factories" that Powell accused Saddam of having. But, they turned out to be devices for generating hydrogen for filling weather balloons as part of an artillery tracking system that the British had sold to Saddam.

    Similar to this Turkish system:

    http://www.ssm.gov.tr/katalog2007/data/038/urun%20ing/ASELSAN%20ingilizce/AFAMS/1.htm

    Oops. It was a stupid failure of intelligence but I don't think it was intentional. People have a way of seeing what they want to see and hearing what they want to hear. Iraqis OTOH are pathological liars so if an American intelligence officer said "we are willing to pay for intelligence regarding mobile biological agent factories", then for the right price an Iraqi will tell you all about them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Thea says:
    @Mr Curious
    Theory - HRC is the epitome of the semi-Scandinavian, Puritan, censorious New Englander via East Anglia of Albion's Seed. Discuss.

    I think the SJW phenomenon is the worst possible combination of sanctimonious, crusading New England culture mixed with what the equivalent is in Jewish culture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D

    mixed with what the equivalent is in Jewish culture.
     
    There is really NOTHING like this in traditional Jewish culture. What does exist (and is of relatively recent origin - i.e. a little over a century) is Jewish SOCIALIST culture. Jewish Communists/Socialists consciously reject Jewish religious teaching in favor of a belief in the universal brotherhood of man. Those who opposed such brotherhood are "fascists" and are hated not for their particular religion but for their rejection of universalism. Conversely, if you are a goodwhite who accepts these principles, you are acceptable even as marriage material.

    In a modern spin on this, just as in "liberation theology", certain aspects of traditional Jewish beliefs (Tikun Olam - repair the world) are twisted to mean modern SJWish things rather than bearing their traditional (spiritual) meaning, but mostly Jewish socialists have little to do with Jewish religion - Bernie Sanders wouldn't be caught dead in a synagogue.

    Modern SJWism is the marriage of Puritan do-goodism with Jewish Socialism. For WASPs, SJWism was a move to the left, but for Jewish Socialists, it was actually a (slight) move to the right - lots of today's Jewish SJWs are "red diaper babies" whose parents or grandparents were Communists or Socialists. Slight because if you look at for example, Bernie Sanders, he brought the Democrat party to his positions and didn't have to give up any part of his socialism at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Something I’ve been thinking about is how the college rape crisis story assuages the psychological needs of both the young female students and the older administrators, journalists, and professors who get involved. For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably. For the administrators, it helps them resolve the inevitable jealousy and malaise they would feel at being excluded from a culture that worships young feminine sexuality but now, with motherhood increasingly marginalized, has little use for anyone older ( One of the problems with “Girl power” is the girl part.) The rape crisis narrative addresses both of these sets of needs, giving the young women a story that acknowledged their unhappiness while still holding out the promise of free self-actualized sexuality, and allowing the older women to be needed as supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young, who are pitiable victims instead of enviable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @biz
    That is extremely insightful.

    One thing that could be added is that the fraction of female students who actually internalize that "rape culture" is a real phenomenon and a big deal seems to be small. Most go about their business with little thought to it. On the other hand, the proportion of professors and administrators and journalists who think that it is a real phenomenon and a big deal is very large. To go with your analysis, the concept is probably meeting psychological needs for older women / men a lot more than it is for younger women, typically.

    , @Almost Missouri
    Y'know, I think you're on to something here. For young, temporarily attractive women, Feminism has resulted in a culture of use-and-discard disposable hookups. For more mature women, Feminism has resulted in use-and-discard disposable marriages.

    The things that used to give women status: their youth, beauty, fertility, maternity, fidelity and care, are now, at best, natural resources to be casually mined till depletion. They gave away all the high cards they once held as Western women for the "liberation" of living as men do, and now it turns out that life as pseudo-men with ovaries is pretty crappy, almost as crappy as it is for ordinary men.

    And the women hate it. But it can't be the fault of Feminism, their jealous god(dess). So, ... whom to blame ... whom to blame ... ?
    , @Almost Missouri

    "their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably"
     
    Isn't part of the young women's inchoate anger that prior to the unhappy current sexual culture, in the culture of the earlier era, young men would have been much less likely to treat them dishonorably in the first place?
    , @Jack D
    Very astute analysis. Too bad that you've got to break some eggs to cook this omelet (if by eggs you mean young men whose lives are ruined when they get caught up in one of these tales) . Jackie's story was better than most in this regard because as a fictional creature, Haven Monahan couldn't have his life ruined by this unholy alliance.

    Men play a part on the other side as well. How can you fit someone like disbarred Duke prosecutor "Mike" Nifong into this framework? I suppose whenever a Bonfire of the Vanities is lit, ambitious men will be attracted to the flames and will scheme to profit from the suffering of others, whether it is a witch trial in Salem or the Cultural Revolution in China or our own cultural revolution.
    , @Kylie
    "For the young coeds, it[the college rape crisis story] helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably."

    More like, "the coeds' anger with themselves for behaving foolishly and regrettably".

    I think you're being way too easy on coeds whose integrity is as suspect as their chastity is absent.
    , @The most deplorable one

    For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably.
     
    This is actually a very bad analysis.

    The reality is that two things are happening here:

    1. Young women are responding to incentives around going to college, when they probably shouldn't. As a result they are in oversupply in colleges at an age when sex is on everyone's mind. Way oversupply.

    2. Young men at college are now highly in demand and young women know they need to offer sex to hook one. However, young men are in control now. They can pump and dump with abandon.

    Moreover they are away from parental restrictions and engage in alcohol fueled parties.

    The issues really are structural here.

    , @dr kill
    Men have a fight, then go out for a beer. Women have a fight and hate each other forever. I see the old, tired and bitter hags intentionally destroying the chance of a fulfilling life for the sweet young stupids. I see no evidence of the described supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. When I read the Rolling Stone article, I wondered how cut up and swollen the girl was when she supposedly had a beer bottle broken over her face. It sort of bothered me and made me suspicious that something wasn’t right. I assumed that there must be more to this since Rolling Stone would not just make stuff up. But, I am not a professional journalist or anything other than an avid reader. You would think that professional journalists would be more on the ball, but like many liberals, Erdley probably just led a very sheltered life where her only experience with fights with broken beer bottles were ones in old John Wayne or Three Stooges movies where the glass was fake.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    I know. Upon reading your post I had this flash back of No Way Out. When the Shawn Young character ( a call girl) gets hurled over the mezzanine (by bad guy Gene Hackman) and crashes onto the glass table; you just know she is dead. And, poor Kevin Costner's character sees the glass shards and bloody corpse of his lover. Maybe Jackie saw that movie too? Kevin was a prototype of Haven? Having cut myself really badly while working on a project, glass cuts are the worst and there is so much blood, and it hurts - your nerve endings are on fire. Even if you are drunk you will feel the pain, recoil and seek treatment...or you die of blood loss, possibly. Stitches are needed for most glass lacerations. It leaves ugly scars.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. SPMoore8 says:

    Not sure Sabrian Rubin Erdely’s animus is directed against non-Jews so much as it is directed against tall, fair, blond, blue eyed, and well adjusted humans, who need not be WASPs, as we have discussed before. It’s less “anti-Gentilism” or “Goyophobia” than it is “Vikingphobia”, “Scandiphobia” or something (of course as we know from Woody Allen and The Forward what you hate is also the subject of your sexual fantasies, but I will pass on that.)

    Let’s also not forget that Tom Hayden (at his son’s wedding, for Chrissake) also toasted the peaceful eradication of “white people”, in what must be considered, in context, as ruthlessly egotistical (I recently attended an interracial wedding and all anyone talked about was “Christ Jesus”). Making this into “Jews” versus “White Christians” tends to be red meat for some people but tends to support needless polarization, in my humble opinion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    liberal Jewish feminist journalist like Erdely

    What's essential here. liberal? Jewish? feminist?(3rd wave?)

    we know from Woody Allen and The Forward what you hate is also the subject of your sexual fantasies

    So, you are saying Allen hates incestuous pedophiles.
    , @Thea
    Perhaps these were the types of men she found attractive when she was young, Either they rejected her or her parents rejected them as suitable partners.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Making this into “Jews” versus “White Christians” tends to be red meat for some people but tends to support needless polarization, in my humble opinion."

    Not construing it as so seems to be mac-and-cheese for some people. What is "needless polarization"? Whose need?

    Ah, the old "red meat" trope: The point of view of those people over there is just "red meat" - i.e., they are unthinking slavering animals. My point of view however is always rational and arrived at by logical deduction.
    , @Jack D
    Sorry but I am not buying this. Just as in older racist fantasies, the "evil black rapist" is coal black with bulging white eyes:

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/sites/default/files/2015/02/the_birth_of_a_nation_still.jpg

    (on close examination, a white guy in blackface)


    and the evil Jew has a big hook nose,

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ve0rtMQ-bq4/U103KZRG8sI/AAAAAAAAaME/v3lh12QXZwU/s1600/a.jpg (caption: Scourge of Humanity)


    in Erdely's fantasies, the evil white rapist looks like a cartoon Nazi. The archetype is supposed to stand in for his entire race or group. When your heart is inflamed by seeing the archetype, you are supposed to hate all of his race, not just the ones who look just like the cartoon.

    White people are the last group that it's OK to hate on in modern America. She wrote about "overwhelmingly blond" students at UVA. Could she put any other racial adjective after "overwhelmingly" in current year America without bringing the wrath of the PC Police on her head? It wouldn't even OCCUR to her to ever write "overwhelmingly black" .

    Orwell as usual explains it perfectly:

    Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments.... and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.
     
    Virtually all of the MSM coverage of the 2016 campaign can be explained by Crimestop.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Mr. Anon says:
    @Yep
    "What made Trump the GOP nominee was Obama’s decision four years ago to revive grievances against white men."

    Excellent summation of this election but one you won't find many other places. All this hand wringing about what caused the rise of Trump and it's that simple.

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone's website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought "What horse shit". I came back a day or two later and it was still up so I read the first few paragraphs. I got to the part where Jackie said one of the frat brothers said "Grab it's leg" and I couldn't take anymore. It was so obviously made up. It reminded me of some of the bs Amanda Knox said the Italian police supposedly put her through. I was glad to see you take on the article Steve.

    “I got to the part where Jackie said one of the frat brothers said “Grab it’s leg” and I couldn’t take anymore.”

    Maybe Rubin Erdely had just watched “Alfie” when she wrote that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. The last paragraph permanently nails it to the wall.

    Thanks Steve.

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

    Didn’t know that there was this kind of money in ‘journalism’ these days. She was to bring in a hair-raising story that appealed to the prejudices of a segment of the population and that’s what she did. Like Mike Nifong found out, pick your victims carefully and don’t dump on those who might be able to defend themselves. She’s a con-artist and like all good cons she was adept at creating a barrier of deniability between herself and the story she was selling. Pretending she was gullible at this point is just playacting, all part of the con. She knew what she was doing all along. Getting paid big bucks whist being given free rein to indulge her own set of racial hatreds seems like an ideal job for someone who is greedy and unencumbered by scruples.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. slumber_j says:
    @Mr Curious
    Theory - HRC is the epitome of the semi-Scandinavian, Puritan, censorious New Englander via East Anglia of Albion's Seed. Discuss.

    I’m under the impression that she’s actually pretty Welsh–despite her tin ear for the English language, although perhaps the Welshness does account for her purported fondness for drink. But stylistically speaking, you’re certainly right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    I didn't realize the Cousin Jacks were famous for their affinity for the sauce!
    , @nspencer
    Welsh, eh? The Welsh strain in her must account for her mendacity and dishonesty...
    , @FX Enderby
    Anthony Burgess claimed that the among the Celts, the Welsh drank less and were more sexually open than the repressed hard drinking Irish and Scots. Ironic, because his 1st wife was Welsh and died young from complications of severe alcoholism. And then there was Dylan Thomas...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Mr. Anon says:
    @Steve Sailer
    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS. That's a pretty big score, but, yeah, she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley's story would be a $500k movie deal.

    “….she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley’s story would be a $500k movie deal.”

    She could still turn it into a Law & Order script.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Hunsdon says:
    @slumber_j
    I'm under the impression that she's actually pretty Welsh--despite her tin ear for the English language, although perhaps the Welshness does account for her purported fondness for drink. But stylistically speaking, you're certainly right.

    I didn’t realize the Cousin Jacks were famous for their affinity for the sauce!

    Read More
    • LOL: Coemgen
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Richard Burton. Anthony Hopkins.
    , @Coemgen
    Ha ha ha!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. iffen says:
    @SPMoore8
    Not sure Sabrian Rubin Erdely's animus is directed against non-Jews so much as it is directed against tall, fair, blond, blue eyed, and well adjusted humans, who need not be WASPs, as we have discussed before. It's less "anti-Gentilism" or "Goyophobia" than it is "Vikingphobia", "Scandiphobia" or something (of course as we know from Woody Allen and The Forward what you hate is also the subject of your sexual fantasies, but I will pass on that.)

    Let's also not forget that Tom Hayden (at his son's wedding, for Chrissake) also toasted the peaceful eradication of "white people", in what must be considered, in context, as ruthlessly egotistical (I recently attended an interracial wedding and all anyone talked about was "Christ Jesus"). Making this into "Jews" versus "White Christians" tends to be red meat for some people but tends to support needless polarization, in my humble opinion.

    liberal Jewish feminist journalist like Erdely

    What’s essential here. liberal? Jewish? feminist?(3rd wave?)

    we know from Woody Allen and The Forward what you hate is also the subject of your sexual fantasies

    So, you are saying Allen hates incestuous pedophiles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Formerly CARealist
    Liberal, Jewish, feminist. What unites all the modern manifestations of those labels?

    Hatred of Christianity.

    Also, I strongly agree with the poster who said these frat boys probably remind her of the type of guys who rejected her in high school. I sure hope this Erdely character does some real soul-searching after this is all over. She should reassess her entire worldview and start offering to help fraternities in their philanthropic endeavors. There was a fraternity/sorority fundraiser I attended in college that raised tens of thousands of dollars for a Children's Hospital. She could help out with stuff like that as acts of contrition.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Thea says:
    @SPMoore8
    Not sure Sabrian Rubin Erdely's animus is directed against non-Jews so much as it is directed against tall, fair, blond, blue eyed, and well adjusted humans, who need not be WASPs, as we have discussed before. It's less "anti-Gentilism" or "Goyophobia" than it is "Vikingphobia", "Scandiphobia" or something (of course as we know from Woody Allen and The Forward what you hate is also the subject of your sexual fantasies, but I will pass on that.)

    Let's also not forget that Tom Hayden (at his son's wedding, for Chrissake) also toasted the peaceful eradication of "white people", in what must be considered, in context, as ruthlessly egotistical (I recently attended an interracial wedding and all anyone talked about was "Christ Jesus"). Making this into "Jews" versus "White Christians" tends to be red meat for some people but tends to support needless polarization, in my humble opinion.

    Perhaps these were the types of men she found attractive when she was young, Either they rejected her or her parents rejected them as suitable partners.

    Read More
    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Jack D says:

    Steve’s 12/2014 Takimag piece (unlike most of the crap that was printed at the time by the MSM) holds up very well in light of subsequent revelations, EXCEPT for this:

    Something deeply upsetting likely happened to Jackie, too, but exactly what is a mystery.

    Jackie’s friends said the same thing (I remember an interview with the object of Jackie’s affections, Ryan Duffin (boy did he dodge a bullet), long after the truth was known, in which he said that if nothing happened that night then Jackie deserved an Academy Award for her performance), and Rolling Stone’s lawyers are STILL peddling this line at the Eramo trial. Our brain is programmed to believe hysterical sobbing young women (up to a point). We can accept that perhaps they are embellishing the truth a little, but we just can’t seem to accept that they could be total, pathological, cynical liars and manipulators who invent stories entirely out of whole cloth and gush forth fake sobs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    I think that a bias that often plagues even the best of us is our inability to imagine a world in which large swathes of people lie with reckless abandon.

    I find that such an assumption is key in rendering the world finally intelligible.
    , @Kylie
    "Steve’s 12/2014 Takimag piece... holds up very well in light of subsequent revelations, EXCEPT for this:

    'Something deeply upsetting likely happened to Jackie, too, but exactly what is a mystery.'"

    Are you kidding no question mark. Something deeply upsetting undoubtedly DID happen to Jackie. The young man she was interested in did not return that interest. If you think that wasn't sufficient for her to fabricate that whole absurd rape scenario, then you have not yet learned the most important lesson of this hideous fandango.

    There are no limits to the arrogance of the non-conservative female today. None. She is not constrained by traditional morality nor curbed by a realistic assessment of her own worth and importance. She has a sense of entitlement that amounts to divine right--with her as the divinity.

    I'm sure the only lesson Jackie Coakley has learned from this is that she had every right to behave as she did because she was the victim here. I don't see where society has given her any indication that she was wrong.
    , @dr kill
    Maybe she broke a nail.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Mr. Anon says:
    @SPMoore8
    Not sure Sabrian Rubin Erdely's animus is directed against non-Jews so much as it is directed against tall, fair, blond, blue eyed, and well adjusted humans, who need not be WASPs, as we have discussed before. It's less "anti-Gentilism" or "Goyophobia" than it is "Vikingphobia", "Scandiphobia" or something (of course as we know from Woody Allen and The Forward what you hate is also the subject of your sexual fantasies, but I will pass on that.)

    Let's also not forget that Tom Hayden (at his son's wedding, for Chrissake) also toasted the peaceful eradication of "white people", in what must be considered, in context, as ruthlessly egotistical (I recently attended an interracial wedding and all anyone talked about was "Christ Jesus"). Making this into "Jews" versus "White Christians" tends to be red meat for some people but tends to support needless polarization, in my humble opinion.

    “Making this into “Jews” versus “White Christians” tends to be red meat for some people but tends to support needless polarization, in my humble opinion.”

    Not construing it as so seems to be mac-and-cheese for some people. What is “needless polarization”? Whose need?

    Ah, the old “red meat” trope: The point of view of those people over there is just “red meat” – i.e., they are unthinking slavering animals. My point of view however is always rational and arrived at by logical deduction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian. I also doubt she would be picking on some short, dumpy white guy, regardless of coloring, and regardless of affiliation. On the other hand I'm certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation.

    White we are on the subject it would be interesting to see how the evolution of Sabrina's views has anything to do with not only Stephen Glass (already raised) but incidents during her tenure at U Penn, including hoax articles, the missing run of the college paper, and the famous "Water Buffalo" incident.

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to "destroy" them. In fact, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. I do think people like Sabrina are motivated by other resentments, but those are not based on religion or being MOT. Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that "Jews" are "out to get" "gentiles". This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. biz says:
    @Spotted Toad
    Something I've been thinking about is how the college rape crisis story assuages the psychological needs of both the young female students and the older administrators, journalists, and professors who get involved. For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably. For the administrators, it helps them resolve the inevitable jealousy and malaise they would feel at being excluded from a culture that worships young feminine sexuality but now, with motherhood increasingly marginalized, has little use for anyone older ( One of the problems with "Girl power" is the girl part.) The rape crisis narrative addresses both of these sets of needs, giving the young women a story that acknowledged their unhappiness while still holding out the promise of free self-actualized sexuality, and allowing the older women to be needed as supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young, who are pitiable victims instead of enviable.

    That is extremely insightful.

    One thing that could be added is that the fraction of female students who actually internalize that “rape culture” is a real phenomenon and a big deal seems to be small. Most go about their business with little thought to it. On the other hand, the proportion of professors and administrators and journalists who think that it is a real phenomenon and a big deal is very large. To go with your analysis, the concept is probably meeting psychological needs for older women / men a lot more than it is for younger women, typically.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes

    the fraction of female students who actually internalize that “rape culture” is a real phenomenon and a big deal seems to be small.
     
    I'd say just the opposite--the fraction of females students who reject "rape culture" is small.

    Females--especially college-age girls--are the ultimate in "go along to get along." They emotionally bond with each other in the time it takes to visit the rest room. Who the hell coined the acronym BFF--best friends forever? These creatures have a new BFF every week. They are world champions at rationalizing their behavior--irrespective of the fact their behavior is primarily driven by emotion, and is only rarely rational. Want to find unanimity of opinion amongst women? Get a group of unattached young women together and ask them about men.

    Rape culture doesn't have to be literally true for it to meet their psychological needs--it only needs to be believed for it to be real. The needs of their ego is that they are desired by men--men who will do almost anything to have them. Convenient and flattering fictions in the female mind are preferred to the truth that many of them are not desired at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Jack D says:
    @BenKenobi
    I have to say this: I love the word "synecdoche". I first encountered it several years ago in the AvClub's review of Andy Kaufman's "Synecdoche, New York".

    I couldn't for the life of me intuit its proper pronunciation.

    "Sign-ek-dosh"?

    "Sin-ek-doush"?

    In the end it was
    "sin-ek-do-key".

    Never would have guessed. By far my favourite English word.

    Rhymes with Schenectady.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    Wow, and the last pony crosses the finish line. Never realized the title was a pun. I'll have to chalk it up to my Canadian-ness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Jack D says:
    @tnc coates reader
    Years ago Ta-nehisi Coates actually made a similar observation about how Erdeley's compatriot Stephen Glass was able to get away with making up such absurd stories. Glass made up a crazy story titled "Taxi Cabs and the Meaning of Work" about an immigrant DC cab driver who becomes a vigilante meting out violent justice to black criminals who rob taxi drivers. The article concludes with Glass sitting in the back of taxi cab while it's being robbed as he takes notes. All made up. Coates' point was that Glass got away with such absurd lies because he appealed to the racist prejudices of Marty Peretz and his staff as well as their TNR readership.

    Yes, black criminals robbing taxi drivers – absurd! Nothing like that ever happens in real life. Purely the product of Peretz’s racist fantasies about black bodies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @Steve Sailer
    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS. That's a pretty big score, but, yeah, she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley's story would be a $500k movie deal.

    The could have sold it to Dawson’s Creek.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. “…Tom Wolfe made lots of money telling Americans the truth, but Dick Wolf made even more telling them what they wished were true…”

    “Lupus est homo homini, non homo, quom qualis sit non novit”

    The scan of Erdely’s lizard brain repeatedly shows only one thing:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. Steve, on top of all your other reading, did you just happen across that Shapiro “poem” you linked? Or did you google “non-rhyming anti-gentilic college hate-verse”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    A commenter linked to it.

    Thanks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Jack D says:
    @PiltdownMan

    Yet the result of the Amanda Knox case was that two white kids, one American and one Italian, were framed for the murder of a jewish/Indian kid committed by an African illegal immigrant. The Agenda™ is served!
     

    Meredith Kercher's mother, Arline Kercher, looks nothing like any Indian I've seen. Perhaps Indo-African Caribbean? I tried checking it out on Wikipedia but the edit wars on that topic are the usual Wikipedia insanity.

    http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/0859a5e1990145e4b8f3714006903f59/arline-kercher-mother-of-murdered-british-student-meredith-kercher-ft4j6g.jpg

    Just a bad photo. I think she’s just a garden variety subcontinental woman. Here she is with her other daughter:

    Because the shades of brown people vary so much and we are not really sure what shade any give brown person is, when printing photos of them it is common to render them either much darker or much lighter than they really are. Obama is depicted anywhere from high yeller to darkie. The pictures of Arline on the interwebs are all over the place in terms of her coloring.

    BTW,is Kercher’s father really Jewish? His name is John (not a common Jewish name) and his son is also named John (not a common Jewish naming practice).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil
    I've known plenty of Jewish men named John, including one of my best friends in high school.
    , @Opinionator
    BTW,is Kercher’s father really Jewish? His name is John (not a common Jewish name) and his son is also named John (not a common Jewish naming practice).

    But more common among Sephardim, who tend to be relatively more numerous in England.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Malice in Blunderland

    LOL

    –Pepe

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. @Jack D
    Steve's 12/2014 Takimag piece (unlike most of the crap that was printed at the time by the MSM) holds up very well in light of subsequent revelations, EXCEPT for this:

    Something deeply upsetting likely happened to Jackie, too, but exactly what is a mystery.
     
    Jackie's friends said the same thing (I remember an interview with the object of Jackie's affections, Ryan Duffin (boy did he dodge a bullet), long after the truth was known, in which he said that if nothing happened that night then Jackie deserved an Academy Award for her performance), and Rolling Stone's lawyers are STILL peddling this line at the Eramo trial. Our brain is programmed to believe hysterical sobbing young women (up to a point). We can accept that perhaps they are embellishing the truth a little, but we just can't seem to accept that they could be total, pathological, cynical liars and manipulators who invent stories entirely out of whole cloth and gush forth fake sobs.

    I think that a bias that often plagues even the best of us is our inability to imagine a world in which large swathes of people lie with reckless abandon.

    I find that such an assumption is key in rendering the world finally intelligible.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Jack D says:
    @(((Owen)))
    Libel law is a travesty. Freedom of the press is a fundamental requirement for a free society. Nobody should have to defend what he chooses to publish in front of a jury.

    If they can punish you because they disagree with your facts, it's much easier for them to do so because you're a racist or a communist or Emmanuel Goldstein and Vladimir Putin told you what to publish. Juries must have no authority to judge journalists or we're just on a slope to tyranny.

    The correct way to punish dishonest journalists like Rubin-Eardley is in the press. More speech corrects bad speech. Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.

    Expose her and she'll be discredited.

    But don't drag her into court. It just harms the victim of her lies more. People will soon be asking Dean Eramo why, if she's not a monster, didn't she win her libel trial. The existence of libel as a cause of action creates the expectation of expensive litigation if you're wronged. And it supports the assumption that if it's in print, it must be true.

    Libel law is unwise, promotes lies, and is unconstitutional. Abolish it.

    Is this a troll? Truth has always been a defense against libel. Freedom of the press has never mean the freedom to destroy the reputation of others by printing vicious lies about them. Finding facts is exactly what juries are meant to do – they do it all the time in all sorts of cases.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Yeah, I think people get confused about libel law. Libel law is property law, not speech law.

    A libel action is an action to recover injury against a property: your reputation. The fact that that property is intangible confuses people with the superficial fact that it involves speech. A mob boss ordering a hit uses speech too, but that doesn't make him not a murderer, nor the victim not murdered, nor "freedom of speech" (which isn't actually a law anyway) a defense.

    Of course, as Anti-Gnostic pointed out above, the Supreme Court muddied the waters further when it used the First Amendment to Federalize what had been state tort laws for centuries, because it didn't like the people in the states using them (a real Who--Whom? situation!). Like with pretty much everything the Warren Court did, the toxin keeps on seeping into our system.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Spotted Toad
    Something I've been thinking about is how the college rape crisis story assuages the psychological needs of both the young female students and the older administrators, journalists, and professors who get involved. For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably. For the administrators, it helps them resolve the inevitable jealousy and malaise they would feel at being excluded from a culture that worships young feminine sexuality but now, with motherhood increasingly marginalized, has little use for anyone older ( One of the problems with "Girl power" is the girl part.) The rape crisis narrative addresses both of these sets of needs, giving the young women a story that acknowledged their unhappiness while still holding out the promise of free self-actualized sexuality, and allowing the older women to be needed as supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young, who are pitiable victims instead of enviable.

    Y’know, I think you’re on to something here. For young, temporarily attractive women, Feminism has resulted in a culture of use-and-discard disposable hookups. For more mature women, Feminism has resulted in use-and-discard disposable marriages.

    The things that used to give women status: their youth, beauty, fertility, maternity, fidelity and care, are now, at best, natural resources to be casually mined till depletion. They gave away all the high cards they once held as Western women for the “liberation” of living as men do, and now it turns out that life as pseudo-men with ovaries is pretty crappy, almost as crappy as it is for ordinary men.

    And the women hate it. But it can’t be the fault of Feminism, their jealous god(dess). So, … whom to blame … whom to blame … ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Yep
    "What made Trump the GOP nominee was Obama’s decision four years ago to revive grievances against white men."

    Excellent summation of this election but one you won't find many other places. All this hand wringing about what caused the rise of Trump and it's that simple.

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone's website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought "What horse shit". I came back a day or two later and it was still up so I read the first few paragraphs. I got to the part where Jackie said one of the frat brothers said "Grab it's leg" and I couldn't take anymore. It was so obviously made up. It reminded me of some of the bs Amanda Knox said the Italian police supposedly put her through. I was glad to see you take on the article Steve.

    The UVA rape hoax and “11 women to come forward” false accusations are not unrelated either. I think that it is fitting that the first serious female Presidential candidate is trying to get into office by using this low cost, low risk, but highly treacherous technique. This is one more reason I pray Hillary Clinton does not become POTUS. We are on the verge of an era this type of sexual witch hunt against men will grow exponentially.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Spotted Toad
    Something I've been thinking about is how the college rape crisis story assuages the psychological needs of both the young female students and the older administrators, journalists, and professors who get involved. For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably. For the administrators, it helps them resolve the inevitable jealousy and malaise they would feel at being excluded from a culture that worships young feminine sexuality but now, with motherhood increasingly marginalized, has little use for anyone older ( One of the problems with "Girl power" is the girl part.) The rape crisis narrative addresses both of these sets of needs, giving the young women a story that acknowledged their unhappiness while still holding out the promise of free self-actualized sexuality, and allowing the older women to be needed as supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young, who are pitiable victims instead of enviable.

    “their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably”

    Isn’t part of the young women’s inchoate anger that prior to the unhappy current sexual culture, in the culture of the earlier era, young men would have been much less likely to treat them dishonorably in the first place?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thea
    Yes, both your posts are spot on.

    As a young woman in college, I asked " weren't women better off having men as husbands & fathers rather than competitors in the hook up & career olympics?"

    I was shouted down but no real coherent explanation was given as to why being pumped & dumped then getting up for work the next morning was superior.
    , @Forbes
    It's not that men started behaving dishonorably, women started giving up their modesty in their quest for empowerment by means of their sexual liberation.

    "Why buy the cow when the milk is free" is a telling aphorism.

    Women blaming men for the consequences of their poor decisions is a hardy perennial. Formerly, there were cultural guardrails that obligated men and women inside bounds of behavior that grew out of an age-old wisdom that minimized chaos and increased trust. Now, our culture having flattened the guardrails, trust has disappeared amid the reigning chaos.

    So, it's men's fault--even in light of tearing down the patriarchy that served to protect women, and men, from their worst impulses.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. WhatEvvs says:

    Very good article but there’s another aspect to this that I think deserves at least a mention: the complete Elagabalus level degeneracy of SRE’s boss, Jann Wenner. Doesn’t the buck stop in his office? From what I read, a lot of young bucks have stopped in his office. Doesn’t the closeted and then liberated homosexual have a dog in destroying trust between the sexes?

    OT: I’d be interested in your take on the current kerfuffle in the South China sea stirred up by Duterte Harry. Buchanan believes “we” should dump him. But Pat’s never rethought his support for our war in Vietnam.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  70. Kylie says:
    @Hunsdon
    I didn't realize the Cousin Jacks were famous for their affinity for the sauce!

    Richard Burton. Anthony Hopkins.

    Read More
    • Replies: @slumber_j
    Dylan Thomas. Et al.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    Anthony Hopkins has been dry for years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @Jack D
    Is this a troll? Truth has always been a defense against libel. Freedom of the press has never mean the freedom to destroy the reputation of others by printing vicious lies about them. Finding facts is exactly what juries are meant to do - they do it all the time in all sorts of cases.

    Yeah, I think people get confused about libel law. Libel law is property law, not speech law.

    A libel action is an action to recover injury against a property: your reputation. The fact that that property is intangible confuses people with the superficial fact that it involves speech. A mob boss ordering a hit uses speech too, but that doesn’t make him not a murderer, nor the victim not murdered, nor “freedom of speech” (which isn’t actually a law anyway) a defense.

    Of course, as Anti-Gnostic pointed out above, the Supreme Court muddied the waters further when it used the First Amendment to Federalize what had been state tort laws for centuries, because it didn’t like the people in the states using them (a real Who–Whom? situation!). Like with pretty much everything the Warren Court did, the toxin keeps on seeping into our system.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    I find it ridiculous to consider my reputation my property. What, I own other people's thoughts? And what about the "public figure" exception? All public figures are, really, is people with bigger reputations for than others. In what other circumstances are people with more property welcome to less legal protection?

    But a foolish consistency, blah, blah, blah. I don't want to be overly rational.

    , @Jack D
    Hard cases make bad law. The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    That being said, I think their framework (that there is there should be higher threshold for defaming "public figures", especially government officials) makes a certain amount of sense. The press is supposed to shed light on malfeasance by government officials, especially in one party strongholds where no one else will and they can't do this job if they live in fear of libels suits for the slightest error. If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction by the press (ask Trump).

    BTW, we have gone full circle where parts of the country are filled with one party (Democrat) strongholds, except now instead of the solid South, these strongholds are our big cities and northern coastal states.

    It's also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats - all those sheriffs with police dogs were Democrats.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. TheJester says:
    @Steve Sailer
    This was the first article under her two year, 7 article, $300k contract with RS. That's a pretty big score, but, yeah, she was probably thinking that Jackie Coakley's story would be a $500k movie deal.

    There is still a movie deal in there after the lawsuits are over … but it is about how Rolling Stone and Sabrina Rubin Erdely blundered big time in trying to put together a narrative story about evil cisgendered White males and their oppressive patriarchy.

    iSteve, on the good side, there is bound to be a walk on part for you in the movie (or someone pretending to be you) as the story-line shows how the narrative unraveled.

    As for Jackie Coakley, she appears to be one those spoiled adolescent females in the Age of Feminism mongering for the attention and status associated with having an Alpha-Male panting after her. When they don’t, she makes one up. Given her deposition, she still appears to accept no responsibility for what she did nor the consequences of what she did. “I feel faint …, I mean I’m suffering from PTSD!” How should Jackie be portrayed? There is no comedy, no tragedy, and no drama in her involvement … only pathos.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SnakeEyes
    Except the movie will be sympathetic to RS and will advance a narrative that the story was true. See this year's "Truth" which brazenly pushed the fantasy that the 60 Minutes GWB Air National Guard story was accurate (not even fake but accurate).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Jack D says:
    @SPMoore8
    Not sure Sabrian Rubin Erdely's animus is directed against non-Jews so much as it is directed against tall, fair, blond, blue eyed, and well adjusted humans, who need not be WASPs, as we have discussed before. It's less "anti-Gentilism" or "Goyophobia" than it is "Vikingphobia", "Scandiphobia" or something (of course as we know from Woody Allen and The Forward what you hate is also the subject of your sexual fantasies, but I will pass on that.)

    Let's also not forget that Tom Hayden (at his son's wedding, for Chrissake) also toasted the peaceful eradication of "white people", in what must be considered, in context, as ruthlessly egotistical (I recently attended an interracial wedding and all anyone talked about was "Christ Jesus"). Making this into "Jews" versus "White Christians" tends to be red meat for some people but tends to support needless polarization, in my humble opinion.

    Sorry but I am not buying this. Just as in older racist fantasies, the “evil black rapist” is coal black with bulging white eyes:

    (on close examination, a white guy in blackface)

    and the evil Jew has a big hook nose,

    (caption: Scourge of Humanity)

    in Erdely’s fantasies, the evil white rapist looks like a cartoon Nazi. The archetype is supposed to stand in for his entire race or group. When your heart is inflamed by seeing the archetype, you are supposed to hate all of his race, not just the ones who look just like the cartoon.

    White people are the last group that it’s OK to hate on in modern America. She wrote about “overwhelmingly blond” students at UVA. Could she put any other racial adjective after “overwhelmingly” in current year America without bringing the wrath of the PC Police on her head? It wouldn’t even OCCUR to her to ever write “overwhelmingly black” .

    Orwell as usual explains it perfectly:

    Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments…. and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.

    Virtually all of the MSM coverage of the 2016 campaign can be explained by Crimestop.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    "White people are the last group that it’s OK to hate on in modern America. " I agree. But saying that hating on white people is equal to "Jews hating on gentiles" is not the same thing. People like Sabrina aren't hating on the sizable number of non-white Christians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. From Steve’s article:

    the judge declared [plaintiff Eramo] to be a “limited purpose public figure.” Bizarrely, the judge also ruled that hoax artist Jackie Coakley is only to be identified by her first name, and he merely required her to give a deposition on tape

    If juxtapositions could kill …

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  75. @Verymuchalive
    Libel can result in considerable harm, not only financial, to those defamed. This is a civil wrong and it is reasonable that there should be a civil remedy for those defamed.
    Secondly, exposure in the media of journalistic lies and defamation assumes the existence of a genuinely free press where mainstream journals would be willing to publish such stories. In modern America, this is no longer the case. The MSM is largely owned by a small number of very large corporations. These publish a very narrow Neocon-Neolib take on events. They can and do suppress stories which do not fit their views and interests, as the publisher of this website, Mr Unz, has repeatedly demonstrated, e.g. WTA 800.
    Without the internet, the UVA Rape Hoax would have been quickly confined to a few low circulation, non-mainstream print journals. The story would have been quickly ignored by the MSM .
    Without the libel laws, Rolling Stone and Erdely would face no penalty for their wrongdoing. They would shrug it off and continue to claim the story is correct. There would be no retraction by Rolling Stone. As Mr Sailer has written, a liberal feminist hack " like Erdely is paid well to vilify as haters those she hates." She is not going to stop until she is held legally to account. Even if she escapes liability on a technicality, this civil trial has produced enough evidence to destroy her credibility as a "journalist".
    On a more general point. Consider if there were no libel laws. The MSM would be under no obligations AT ALL to present a truthful report. They could just fabricate everything and present it as true. You may say that they are doing so already. True, but libel is an important break on this. Consider if there were no libel laws what the MSM would do concerning Trump. It would be several times worse than their present coverage.
    The power of the MSM is waning, but most people still get their "news" from it. On balance, I think the libel laws are a good thing.

    Many of these types of false accusations are a result of civil actions v. the other way around. False rape / DV accusations have long been a staple in the family courts as a tactic to gain alimony or custody. The UVA rape hoax was never meant to go to trial and neither were any of the “11 women to come forward”. But then again, Erdely’s goal was never to convict Haven Monahan, it was to get the University to kick the fraternity off of campus and to start a greater hysteria about white men. This trial is small justice but it stings like hell because it is not about Erdely having to fess up, it is about a Jewish woman who hates white men.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    Yes you're right. This was never meant to come to a criminal court. And without the libel laws, it would never have come to a civil court. Without libel laws, Rolling Stone would further feed the press hysteria about Gentile white men and Erdely would be moving onto her next, well paid Goy rape hoax. Truly, this woman Erdely is a bloodsucking parasite.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @Lurker
    Yet the result of the Amanda Knox case was that two white kids, one American and one Italian, were framed for the murder of a jewish/Indian kid committed by an African illegal immigrant. The Agenda™ is served!

    Yes, the African was still convicted but who in the media cares about that? Most people have no idea he even exists. We could argue that Amanda was attempting to use the anti-white male agenda to offset the white privilege agenda that was used to vilify her.

    She’s a wrong’un, though. She has the cold, dead, eyes of a killer.

    That isn’t exactly evidence.

    The main lesson of that case was that the Italian legal system isn’t designed to deal with serious crime. They screwed everything up – the forensics, the autopsy, the interrogation of suspects.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. SPMoore8 says:
    @Jack D
    Sorry but I am not buying this. Just as in older racist fantasies, the "evil black rapist" is coal black with bulging white eyes:

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/sites/default/files/2015/02/the_birth_of_a_nation_still.jpg

    (on close examination, a white guy in blackface)


    and the evil Jew has a big hook nose,

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ve0rtMQ-bq4/U103KZRG8sI/AAAAAAAAaME/v3lh12QXZwU/s1600/a.jpg (caption: Scourge of Humanity)


    in Erdely's fantasies, the evil white rapist looks like a cartoon Nazi. The archetype is supposed to stand in for his entire race or group. When your heart is inflamed by seeing the archetype, you are supposed to hate all of his race, not just the ones who look just like the cartoon.

    White people are the last group that it's OK to hate on in modern America. She wrote about "overwhelmingly blond" students at UVA. Could she put any other racial adjective after "overwhelmingly" in current year America without bringing the wrath of the PC Police on her head? It wouldn't even OCCUR to her to ever write "overwhelmingly black" .

    Orwell as usual explains it perfectly:

    Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments.... and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.
     
    Virtually all of the MSM coverage of the 2016 campaign can be explained by Crimestop.

    “White people are the last group that it’s OK to hate on in modern America. ” I agree. But saying that hating on white people is equal to “Jews hating on gentiles” is not the same thing. People like Sabrina aren’t hating on the sizable number of non-white Christians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Questionator
    But saying that hating on white people is equal to “Jews hating on gentiles” is not the same thing. People like Sabrina aren’t hating on the sizable number of non-white Christians.

    And people like Sabrina aren't hating on the sizable number of non-Gentile whites either. Why didn't she do her "expose" at UPenn or Brandeis?

    You are being pedantic. Her story here (and several of her prior stories) are starkly anti-Gentilic.

    , @guest
    Would you extend the same courtesy to, say, a white, Southern advocate of segregation who wrote an article about a coal-black rapist on an "overwhelmingly negroid" campus?

    Hey let's not make this a black/white thing. He just doesn't like especially black blacks who rape.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Jonathan Mason

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone’s website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought “What horse shit”.
     
    Me too, and millions of others, but you have to dig deeper to make the distinction between gross exaggeration and a complete lie, and probably many people who read the story thought that there was hyperbole, but that a rape occurred. In fact "Jackie" is now retracting and saying that she was raped, but she has no memory of what actually happened. How convenient is this amnesia!

    A couple of days ago I saw a report in the Daily Mail that "Natasha Stoynoff was interviewing Trump at Mar-a-Lago back in 2005 when she claims that Trump began 'forcing his tongue down [her] throat.'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835407/His-hands-like-octopus-TWO-women-claim-Donald-Trump-touched-inappropriately.html#ixzz4OBxT5umB
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook.

    I don't think it is physiologically feasible to force one's tongue down someone's throat during an interview, so to that extent it is probably a lie, unless the word 'tongue' is being used as a euphemism for another sexual organ, but there could have been some kind of sexual overture that was perceived as forcible and not consensual. Probably Stoynoff has PTSD too, which must reduce her value to her employer as a reporter.

    We the people are used to reading between the lines. Weapons of mass destruction. When Dick Cheney said "we know he has weapons of mass destruction and we know where they are" most people will have taken that declaration as a statement of fact, and only those who thought Cheney capable of gross lies over such serious matters will have questioned the assumption further. As far as new reporters were concerned, there was little difference between saying "Vice-President Cheney says that" and "it is the case that".

    I personally was very skeptical about the weapons of mass destruction, and when I listened to Colin Powell's presentation at the UN, I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD, but I kind of assumed that Colin Powell was sufficiently intelligent and experienced in evaluating military intelligence that he would not have been fooled unless there was a reasonable amount of evidence that led him to think WMD was true. It required a further leap to come to the conclusion that he was simply lying.

    Powell has said subsequently that he "blames himself for not trusting his instinct" and making what proved to be false assertions to the United Nations about Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction.

    And we thought we were paying him for his unique skills.

    I don’t think it is physiologically feasible to force one’s tongue down someone’s throat during an interview, so to that extent it is probably a lie, unless the word ‘tongue’ is being used as a euphemism for another sexual organ, but there could have been some kind of sexual overture that was perceived as forcible and not consensual. Probably Stoynoff has PTSD too, which must reduce her value to her employer as a reporter.

    This is a perfect example of people being unable to envision that someone is just outright lying — making up a story out of whole cloth.

    Why believe that anything like what Stoynoff claimed took place?

    I realize that she finally produced some friends and fellow journalists who claimed she told her back when the episode supposedly happened, but what does that even entail? Journalists are the least trustworthy of all professions except, perhaps, for politicians. Look at how a number of them got together as a group and deliberately lied about Tim Hunt for ideological reasons.

    The basic countervailing fact against these sorts of claims about Trump is that they all arose only after the Billy Bush tape was played. The problem with that is that if Trump were so out-of-control in his sexual behavior, then he would have been so across his life, and, almost certainly, these sorts of accusations would have dogged him across his life. This is, in fact, what was true of both Bill Cosby and Bill Clinton: their accusers didn’t all, or even mostly, pop up only when it was politically or otherwise expedient: their timing had a life of its own, based on the peculiarities of the women and the circumstances of the sexual assaults. It’s possible that some of the accusers of Cosby and Clinton only came forward after others did, or even that a number simply made it up after others came forward, for ideology or fame. But there’s a strong core of accusers who can’t be put in those categories — which is what one would expect in cases of a real sexual predator.

    In contrast, all of the current accusers of Trump can be explained by assuming they are doing so for ideology, fame, or money. It really doesn’t even matter how many of them there are, because there’s no way of predicting how many women across this nation of 300 million will find such motives sufficient to make up a lie; it could be zero or it could be 100 or anywhere in between.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Rob McX says:

    Erdely’s article seems like a watered down piece of Stalag fiction disguised as journalism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  80. Jack D says:
    @Thea
    I think the SJW phenomenon is the worst possible combination of sanctimonious, crusading New England culture mixed with what the equivalent is in Jewish culture.

    mixed with what the equivalent is in Jewish culture.

    There is really NOTHING like this in traditional Jewish culture. What does exist (and is of relatively recent origin – i.e. a little over a century) is Jewish SOCIALIST culture. Jewish Communists/Socialists consciously reject Jewish religious teaching in favor of a belief in the universal brotherhood of man. Those who opposed such brotherhood are “fascists” and are hated not for their particular religion but for their rejection of universalism. Conversely, if you are a goodwhite who accepts these principles, you are acceptable even as marriage material.

    In a modern spin on this, just as in “liberation theology”, certain aspects of traditional Jewish beliefs (Tikun Olam – repair the world) are twisted to mean modern SJWish things rather than bearing their traditional (spiritual) meaning, but mostly Jewish socialists have little to do with Jewish religion – Bernie Sanders wouldn’t be caught dead in a synagogue.

    Modern SJWism is the marriage of Puritan do-goodism with Jewish Socialism. For WASPs, SJWism was a move to the left, but for Jewish Socialists, it was actually a (slight) move to the right – lots of today’s Jewish SJWs are “red diaper babies” whose parents or grandparents were Communists or Socialists. Slight because if you look at for example, Bernie Sanders, he brought the Democrat party to his positions and didn’t have to give up any part of his socialism at all.

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Modern SJWism is the marriage of Puritan do-goodism with Jewish Socialism.
     
    Puritan "do-goodism", such as it was, came from the tikkun-olamism of the Jewish community next door.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. SPMoore8 says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "Making this into “Jews” versus “White Christians” tends to be red meat for some people but tends to support needless polarization, in my humble opinion."

    Not construing it as so seems to be mac-and-cheese for some people. What is "needless polarization"? Whose need?

    Ah, the old "red meat" trope: The point of view of those people over there is just "red meat" - i.e., they are unthinking slavering animals. My point of view however is always rational and arrived at by logical deduction.

    Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian. I also doubt she would be picking on some short, dumpy white guy, regardless of coloring, and regardless of affiliation. On the other hand I’m certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation.

    White we are on the subject it would be interesting to see how the evolution of Sabrina’s views has anything to do with not only Stephen Glass (already raised) but incidents during her tenure at U Penn, including hoax articles, the missing run of the college paper, and the famous “Water Buffalo” incident.

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to “destroy” them. In fact, I don’t even know what that is supposed to mean. I do think people like Sabrina are motivated by other resentments, but those are not based on religion or being MOT. Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that “Jews” are “out to get” “gentiles”. This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    "Screwing the goyim," as Philip Roth put it, is always a consideration, but for dumpy Jewesses like Sabrina I think ressentiment is the bigger one: she remembers being ignored by white gentile jocks and having to settle for the Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein's of the world.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Jews are a large and extraordinarily influential part of the forces pushing the anti-white agenda - massive immigration, white privilege, punishing any form of white ethnic pride, etc. - which appears to have as its final goal the end of whites as a distinct race via miscegenation.

    Jews do everything in their power to protect Israel in order to preserve the Jewish people and their homeland. Jews also have no issue with any other race besides whites wanting to preserve itself, at least in the United States and Europe.

    It's hard to accept that at least a portion of Jews - and, importantly, the Jews that count - aren't "out to get" whites.

    The day that powerful and rich Jews start calling on Israel and Jews to accept massive 3rd world immigration, to stop showing any pride in being Jewish and to start mixing with other races, I'll believe that Jews (and, yes, if your leaders are attacking me and your not stopping them, I have to lump you all in together) aren't out to get whites.

    Until then, stop pissing on my head and telling me that it's raining.
    , @Jack D
    "Goyim" is an imperfect way of saying "badwhites". Modern Jewish SJWs have nothing against goyim who are goodwhites - many of their friends, colleagues and lovers are goodwhites, they might (more that might - in fact most likely will) marry a goodwhite. But SJW's hate hate hate badwhites (those who fit in Hillary's Basket of Deplorables) . Badwhites are not entitled to free speech, they should lose their jobs if they announce any badwhite views, they should be shunned wherever possible, etc. The "overwhelmingly blond" TJ lovers that Erdely met at UVa were badwhites, which is why it was OK to hate on them.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian."

    More likely, she is not interested in targeting any Koreans or blacks of whatever religion. Just white guys.

    "On the other hand I’m certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation."

    Really? Including tall, fair good looking jewish guys? Has she displayed any particular animus against that particular group? Has she ever investigated sexual assault at a jewish fraternity?

    "Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to “destroy” them."

    Hardly any other? Not all, sure. Not a majority - yes I'd say that too. But an insignificant number? Unlikely.

    "Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that “Jews” are “out to get” “gentiles”. This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful."

    Clearly there are a not insignificant number of gentiles who do in fact dislike Jews and think that all Jews are out to get them. Why then is it unreasonable to consider the possibility that an also not insignificant number of Jews dislike gentiles and think that all gentiles are out to get them? I think a good case can be made for exactly that proposition.

    , @ben tillman

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to “destroy” them. In fact, I don’t even know what that is supposed to mean.
     
    Ask Noel Ignatiev.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Clyde
    Arline Kercher
    http://www.newsweek.com/arline-kercher-mother-limbo-62973
    Arline is a petite woman who was born in Pakistan and raised in India. She and her husband, John, divorced when their four children were young, and Arline raised the kids in the ramshackle family home in Coulsdon, Surrey—near London—where the gutters hung perilously from the roof and faded curtains adorned the windows.

    Ah, Newsweek inadvertently reveals something. Fatherless ingénue Kercher meets fatherless African immigrant Guede. The rest is history.

    It’s almost like there is a theme here…

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

    Not to nitpick, but your second paragraph seems poorly worded.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. Jack D says:
    @Spotted Toad
    Something I've been thinking about is how the college rape crisis story assuages the psychological needs of both the young female students and the older administrators, journalists, and professors who get involved. For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably. For the administrators, it helps them resolve the inevitable jealousy and malaise they would feel at being excluded from a culture that worships young feminine sexuality but now, with motherhood increasingly marginalized, has little use for anyone older ( One of the problems with "Girl power" is the girl part.) The rape crisis narrative addresses both of these sets of needs, giving the young women a story that acknowledged their unhappiness while still holding out the promise of free self-actualized sexuality, and allowing the older women to be needed as supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young, who are pitiable victims instead of enviable.

    Very astute analysis. Too bad that you’ve got to break some eggs to cook this omelet (if by eggs you mean young men whose lives are ruined when they get caught up in one of these tales) . Jackie’s story was better than most in this regard because as a fictional creature, Haven Monahan couldn’t have his life ruined by this unholy alliance.

    Men play a part on the other side as well. How can you fit someone like disbarred Duke prosecutor “Mike” Nifong into this framework? I suppose whenever a Bonfire of the Vanities is lit, ambitious men will be attracted to the flames and will scheme to profit from the suffering of others, whether it is a witch trial in Salem or the Cultural Revolution in China or our own cultural revolution.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Marcus says:
    @SPMoore8
    Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian. I also doubt she would be picking on some short, dumpy white guy, regardless of coloring, and regardless of affiliation. On the other hand I'm certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation.

    White we are on the subject it would be interesting to see how the evolution of Sabrina's views has anything to do with not only Stephen Glass (already raised) but incidents during her tenure at U Penn, including hoax articles, the missing run of the college paper, and the famous "Water Buffalo" incident.

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to "destroy" them. In fact, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. I do think people like Sabrina are motivated by other resentments, but those are not based on religion or being MOT. Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that "Jews" are "out to get" "gentiles". This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful.

    “Screwing the goyim,” as Philip Roth put it, is always a consideration, but for dumpy Jewesses like Sabrina I think ressentiment is the bigger one: she remembers being ignored by white gentile jocks and having to settle for the Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein’s of the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Kylie says:
    @Spotted Toad
    Something I've been thinking about is how the college rape crisis story assuages the psychological needs of both the young female students and the older administrators, journalists, and professors who get involved. For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably. For the administrators, it helps them resolve the inevitable jealousy and malaise they would feel at being excluded from a culture that worships young feminine sexuality but now, with motherhood increasingly marginalized, has little use for anyone older ( One of the problems with "Girl power" is the girl part.) The rape crisis narrative addresses both of these sets of needs, giving the young women a story that acknowledged their unhappiness while still holding out the promise of free self-actualized sexuality, and allowing the older women to be needed as supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young, who are pitiable victims instead of enviable.

    “For the young coeds, it[the college rape crisis story] helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably.”

    More like, “the coeds’ anger with themselves for behaving foolishly and regrettably”.

    I think you’re being way too easy on coeds whose integrity is as suspect as their chastity is absent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    We have college-age sons, you should hear the stories about college-age women.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. syonredux says:
    @SFG
    I agree with the rest of it, but can you link to the part where you show this is anti-Gentilic? I'm not denying the prejudice exists or is prominent (as any glance at Slate will show you), but through this I more had the impression of feminists resenting those evil bros. I mean, Jews aren't excluded from frats these days. It *sounds* kind of like those stories they used to tell in the 50s, but it strikes me as a subtext at the most--they recycled the old stories about WASPy exclusion with new victims.

    I agree with the rest of it, but can you link to the part where you show this is anti-Gentilic?

    The anti-WASP dog whistles are scattered throughout the piece:

    UVA’s aura of preppy success, where throngs of toned, tanned and overwhelmingly blond students fanned across a landscape of neoclassical brick buildings,

    Jackie had been floored by Drew’s invitation to dinner, followed by a “date function” at his fraternity, Phi Kappa Psi. The “upper tier” frat had a reputation of tremendous wealth, and its imposingly large house overlooked a vast manicured field, giving “Phi Psi” the undisputed best real estate along UVA’s fraternity row known as Rugby Road.

    “One of my roommates said, ‘Do you want to be responsible for something that’s gonna paint UVA in a bad light?’ ” says Jackie, poking at a vegan burger at a restaurant on the Corner, UVA’s popular retail strip. “But I said, ‘UVA has flown under the radar for so long, someone has to say something about it, or else it’s gonna be this system that keeps perpetuating!’ ” Jackie frowns. “My friend just said, ‘You have to remember where your loyalty lies.’”

    From reading headlines today, one might think colleges have suddenly become hotbeds of protest by celebrated anti-rape activists. But like most colleges across America, genteel University of Virginia has no radical feminist culture seeking to upend the patriarchy. There are no red-tape-wearing protests like at Harvard, no “sex-positive” clubs promoting the female orgasm like at Yale, no mattress-hauling performance artists like at Columbia, and certainly no SlutWalks. UVA isn’t an edgy or progressive campus by any stretch.

    Prestige is at the core of UVA’s identity. Although a public school, its grounds of red-brick, white-columned buildings designed by founder Thomas Jefferson radiate old-money privilege, footnoted by the graffiti of UVA’s many secret societies, whose insignias are neatly painted everywhere.

    Partying traditions fuse the decorum of the Southern aristocracy with binge drinking: At Cavalier football tailgates, the dress code is “girls in pearls, guys in ties” while students guzzle handles of vodka. Not for nothing is a UVA student nicknamed a Wahoo, as undergrads like to explain; though derived from a long-ago yell from Cavalier fans, a wahoo is also a fish that can drink twice its own body weight.

    Wahoos are enthralled to be at UVA and can’t wait to tell you the reasons why, beginning, surprisingly, with Thomas Jefferson, whose lore is so powerfully woven into everyday UVA life that you practically expect to glimpse the man still walking the grounds in his waistcoat and pantaloons. Nearly every student I interviewed found a way to mention “TJ,” speaking with zeal about their founding father’s vision for an “academical village” in the idyllic setting of the Blue Ridge Mountains.

    “In these situations, the one who gets the most protection is either a wealthy kid, a legacy kid or an athlete. The more privileged he is, the more likely the woman has to die before he’s held accountable.”

    All you girls from Mary Washington
    and RMWC, never let a Cavalier an inch above your knee.
    He’ll take you to his fraternity house and fill you full of beer.
    And soon you’ll be the mother of a bastard Cavalier!
    “Rugby Road”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Agree, syonredux. The first thing I thought of RS article several years ago: hatred of all things WASP. I can assure SFG & SPMoore8 that I have felt the anti-Gentile thing for a long time.

    Since I have always been an "Overwhelmingly Blonde" woman, and having been among students like Sabrina back in our halcyon days at the elite U's we attended, I experienced many small digs ( from mostly Jewish girls) in the pretense of humor, about my looks and ethnicity (love the Vikingphobia!) Even later in life, Jewish women have commented about my looks or have said something like how overwhelming it is that Iceland or Finland are so chock-a-block full of blondes. It is always weird to me. My ancestors weren't all blondes, but they did come from a part of the world that has an "overwhelming amount of blondes." Duh.

    And, Jewish guys (fewer Haven Monahans,) chased me and obsessed over me at all parties. They were frustrated that as a "first year" I remained loyal to "hometown" boyfriend, who happened to be a college-drop-out, working heavy construction! I don't know which was worse: I wasn't into them or that I was into a college-drop out!

    We always had a lot of good laughs, and later, I had a few Jewish boyfriends. And you know what, their mothers froze me out. So, I moved on after college to work in the City, where being "overwhelmingly blonde," was still a curse and an asset of some kind. A decade later, I married a WASP. Alike Children Play Better, an old Swedish saying.

    My Jewish women friends, in our late middle age, are primarily happily married women with children, who left the professional world to stay at home. And, honestly, Waspy/Wascy and Jewish (professional) women have always sneered at us, "stay-at-home" (formerly professional) women. But, our kids have soared...and have been successfully launched - so we win, yey!. Bottom line, women hate a lot of women. And young women compete for attention from boys...make up bad stuff when it suits them. Women will throw anyone under the bus. And, now, their male contemporaries are vulnerable, so why not? Having three sons, I would personally crush these types of conniving liars, major manipulators if they hurt my boys.

    But, I do feel that Christianity, and the ole' WASP culture has been under assault for quite some time. Even when I am with atheists, they sneer at Christians (I sarcastically say, they must give up Christmas), but would never say disparaging things about Muslims and Jews. It is almost everyday that there is something said in the news about boys, fraternities, football players, athletes in general; wishing the SB terrorist was white; dumb-unwashed mid-westerners who cling to their guns and bibles; tearing down any plaques/statues of white, Christian men; renaming buildings, etc. I mean, when does it end? What is the point if history has moved on anyway, and that person died centuries ago, but yes, he did fabulous things for humanity in an imperfect time?

    Next year there will be a movement to change rename (lead by the NYTimesWaPo, no doubt) Washington DC to something palatable and multicultural. And, what about New York? Those fratty-boy, Dutch Wasps of ole' Netherlands surely must be repudiated since they duped the Natives with junk jewelry to buy Manhattan? Maybe Manhattan Times? No, the anti-Christian/anti-wasp feel is out there. Even Hamilton cast-calls basically said, "no whites," which they had to retract. I refuse to see that show until the tickets become reasonable. I mean, no theater seat in BWY is worth $2000+. If this is not liberal elitism/pretentiousness, I don't know what is.

    Lastly, when people realize I belong to a Lutheran Church, they immediately say something along the lines of "well, I didn't mean you." Fear of death is usually the only thing to keep people from dumping on religion in the end - death is a lonely business. But, I don't get why Christianity is singularly ridiculed for the later part of 25 years now. And, Christian communities that are predominantly white. The first Lutheran church we belonged to was 50-50 b& w congregation. The choir was excellent, and people volunteered a lot; there were a lot of social gatherings; there was a bowling alley in the basement! - very different from the Scandinavian churches in the 60's-'till today.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @Rob McX
    I took a look at Rolling Stone's site to get an idea of their agenda. At the top of the page is the article "Free Speech Might Be Another Victim of This Election".

    Excerpt:

    The Trump campaign could end up being an Alamo for civil liberties in the same way [as 9/11]. Like al-Qaeda, Trump's campaign has been characterized as a threat extreme enough to justify exceptions to all civil liberties concepts. He is a paradigm-changer, his possible presidency an "extinction-level event," as Andrew Sullivan put it, against which all conceivable measures have to be contemplated.
     
    Clearly, the UVA fiasco isn't putting them off their crusade against white Americans.

    He is a paradigm-changer, his possible presidency an “extinction-level event,” against which all conceivable measures have to be contemplated.

    Wow. So no “measure” should be ruled out in the prevention of a Trump presidency.

    What does that mean is on the table? A lie, a hoax, a libel? What else?

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

    Steve once again you are missing the big picture. Which is anti-White male sentiment held widely by most White women, that shapes the GoodWhite hatred against BadWhite. What is after all the audience for Dick Wolfe than middle aged White women?

    You yourself wrote his writing staff was mostly divorced White women who made their ex husbands into villains.

    Erderly is just another woman. Like Hillary. Or Fauxcahontas, Elizabeth Warren. Or the late and unlamented Jo Cox, who was murdered by some homeless mentally ill White Dude outside her house. The same Cox who crusaded for mass Third World Immigration and help for Muslims and ignoring her native mentally ill. And homeless.

    White women have had it with White men — they were promised Dambit! a bunch of hunks from Dawswon’s Creek, the Vampire Diaries, and all the other chick trash shows. And what do they get?

    ORDINARY MEN. Who are as just as stunningly ordinary as they themselves secretly know themselves to be.

    Occam’s Razor; if you remove the Jewish part, and just use the woman part, would the article be simpler and offer a greater understanding of the animus against White men?

    I think yes; the greater part of traditional Jewish Male Hollywood to use one example is not exactly a feminist hotbed, or one given to White male loathing. Rather its golf, classic cars, mansions. Michael Bay being a perfect example. How much White male loathing does his explosion heavy movies feature?

    Preordained saved vs. the damned, feeding into the real sexual resentments women have over not enough hunky Alphas to go around (and then they don’t commit damnit) is what drives 99% of this anti-White male animus by White women and their enablers. That so many are Jewish are merely a reflection of high educational achievement by Jews leading to over-representation in higher ed.

    Coakley is not Jewish. Neither is Hillary. And eating ice cream does not cause murders in Chicago; hot weather enabling Blacks to be out more does.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterike
    Occam’s Razor; if you remove the Jewish part, and just use the woman part, would the article be simpler and offer a greater understanding of the animus against White men?

    Whiskey, my friend, what you miss here is the causality. Where did this anti-male animus begin? Who was behind that? The early feminists, the vast majority of whom were Jewish academics or media types (e.g. Gloria Steinem) with the occasional loud mouth politician (e.g. Bella Abzug). No Jewish women, no anti-male feminism, plain and simple. And those Jewish Hollywood men had a bit to do with it too (recall Norman Lear's dreadful "Maude," to name just one prominent example of massive cultural anti-male conditioning -- there are countless others).

    After decades of conditioning, yes, the anti white male animus is out there in full force and MAYBE you can remove the Jewish part, since the plague has spread from the rats to the populace at large. Certainly, there are plenty of non-Jewish women now on the male-hate bandwagon. But even still, the MEDIA ones still skew very Jewish. And they started it. Hell, they're PROUD about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. BenKenobi says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Erdely's entire Rolling Stone article is comprised of Hunter S. Thompsonisms. I mean, the subtitle of her article is "A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA," which is a complete Thompsonism, but nobody much noticed.

    Pinfold and black sea beat me to it: I don’t think Erdely quite realizes she’s accidentally practicing Gonzo Journalism: drug/alcohol fueled and completely subjective.

    Brutal Assault and Struggle eh? I guess she couldn’t exactly call it “Fear & Loathing at UVA: A Savage Journey into a Rape Culture Dream”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. You say in your article:

    Back during the Clarence Thomas hearings in 1991, for example, it was mandatory to Believe the Women.

    It’s worth noting, though, that most people back then did not, in fact, Believe the Woman. Opinion polls taken at the time, just after the hearings had been televised live, showed that a large majority believed Clarence Thomas and thought Anita Hill was lying. This crossed gender, ethnic and political lines — men and women, whites and black, Republicans and Democrats — a majority of every demographic believed him, not her.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/15/us/the-thomas-nomination-most-in-national-survey-say-judge-is-the-more-believable.html?pagewanted=all

    https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/public-perspective/ppscan/31/31012.pdf

    But 25 years of non-stop feminist propaganda have done their work, and now children are taught that Hill was a brave truth-teller and Thomas a pervert.

    Read More
    • Replies: @officious intermeddler
    oops. posted an unfinished draft by mistake.
    , @Barnard

    After three days of televised inquiry into an accusation that Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed an aide, Americans still favor the judge's confirmation to the Supreme Court by a ratio of 2 to 1, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll.
     
    The public not believing Anita Hill is probably the only reason Clarence Thomas was confirmed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @SPMoore8
    Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian. I also doubt she would be picking on some short, dumpy white guy, regardless of coloring, and regardless of affiliation. On the other hand I'm certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation.

    White we are on the subject it would be interesting to see how the evolution of Sabrina's views has anything to do with not only Stephen Glass (already raised) but incidents during her tenure at U Penn, including hoax articles, the missing run of the college paper, and the famous "Water Buffalo" incident.

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to "destroy" them. In fact, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. I do think people like Sabrina are motivated by other resentments, but those are not based on religion or being MOT. Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that "Jews" are "out to get" "gentiles". This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful.

    Jews are a large and extraordinarily influential part of the forces pushing the anti-white agenda – massive immigration, white privilege, punishing any form of white ethnic pride, etc. – which appears to have as its final goal the end of whites as a distinct race via miscegenation.

    Jews do everything in their power to protect Israel in order to preserve the Jewish people and their homeland. Jews also have no issue with any other race besides whites wanting to preserve itself, at least in the United States and Europe.

    It’s hard to accept that at least a portion of Jews – and, importantly, the Jews that count – aren’t “out to get” whites.

    The day that powerful and rich Jews start calling on Israel and Jews to accept massive 3rd world immigration, to stop showing any pride in being Jewish and to start mixing with other races, I’ll believe that Jews (and, yes, if your leaders are attacking me and your not stopping them, I have to lump you all in together) aren’t out to get whites.

    Until then, stop pissing on my head and telling me that it’s raining.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FX Enderby
    That's why it is so important that Sailer specifically shines a light on the Jewish aspect of this nonsense. Anti gentile bias is pervasive among the bigfoot Jewish culture creators and gatekeepers of the current era. Yet no one publicly notices, except Steve. And where Sailer goes, others may eventually follow.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Spotted Toad
    Something I've been thinking about is how the college rape crisis story assuages the psychological needs of both the young female students and the older administrators, journalists, and professors who get involved. For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably. For the administrators, it helps them resolve the inevitable jealousy and malaise they would feel at being excluded from a culture that worships young feminine sexuality but now, with motherhood increasingly marginalized, has little use for anyone older ( One of the problems with "Girl power" is the girl part.) The rape crisis narrative addresses both of these sets of needs, giving the young women a story that acknowledged their unhappiness while still holding out the promise of free self-actualized sexuality, and allowing the older women to be needed as supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young, who are pitiable victims instead of enviable.

    For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably.

    This is actually a very bad analysis.

    The reality is that two things are happening here:

    1. Young women are responding to incentives around going to college, when they probably shouldn’t. As a result they are in oversupply in colleges at an age when sex is on everyone’s mind. Way oversupply.

    2. Young men at college are now highly in demand and young women know they need to offer sex to hook one. However, young men are in control now. They can pump and dump with abandon.

    Moreover they are away from parental restrictions and engage in alcohol fueled parties.

    The issues really are structural here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Correction: *some* men are in control. Most aren't. The average female has way, way more power than most men. But it doesn't matter to them, because all they want is to be with the men who do have control. Which is the one advantage denied them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Kylie says:
    @Jack D
    Steve's 12/2014 Takimag piece (unlike most of the crap that was printed at the time by the MSM) holds up very well in light of subsequent revelations, EXCEPT for this:

    Something deeply upsetting likely happened to Jackie, too, but exactly what is a mystery.
     
    Jackie's friends said the same thing (I remember an interview with the object of Jackie's affections, Ryan Duffin (boy did he dodge a bullet), long after the truth was known, in which he said that if nothing happened that night then Jackie deserved an Academy Award for her performance), and Rolling Stone's lawyers are STILL peddling this line at the Eramo trial. Our brain is programmed to believe hysterical sobbing young women (up to a point). We can accept that perhaps they are embellishing the truth a little, but we just can't seem to accept that they could be total, pathological, cynical liars and manipulators who invent stories entirely out of whole cloth and gush forth fake sobs.

    “Steve’s 12/2014 Takimag piece… holds up very well in light of subsequent revelations, EXCEPT for this:

    ‘Something deeply upsetting likely happened to Jackie, too, but exactly what is a mystery.’”

    Are you kidding no question mark. Something deeply upsetting undoubtedly DID happen to Jackie. The young man she was interested in did not return that interest. If you think that wasn’t sufficient for her to fabricate that whole absurd rape scenario, then you have not yet learned the most important lesson of this hideous fandango.

    There are no limits to the arrogance of the non-conservative female today. None. She is not constrained by traditional morality nor curbed by a realistic assessment of her own worth and importance. She has a sense of entitlement that amounts to divine right–with her as the divinity.

    I’m sure the only lesson Jackie Coakley has learned from this is that she had every right to behave as she did because she was the victim here. I don’t see where society has given her any indication that she was wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Don't forget that Jackie not only invented the rape story (and the beer bottle assault) in order to get attention, forgive her scholastic performance, and get street cred in the feminist community, but she also told Ryan that she was dying of a rare disease, and she started a rumor that Kathryn had syphilis. And, apparently, she has no memory of any of this because she is suffering from PTSD from the "sexual assault." Get thee behind me, Jackie!

    I have a feeling Eramo will not win her suit. The judge's decision that she is a public figure, combined with the judge's weird solicitude to Jackie, suggests that the jury will not find RS responsible, which means they will get away with this fiasco unpunished, except for legal fees.

    In that respect, Owen is right; if Eramo loses the libel suit, then someone can use that as a talking point to validate Jackie in the future.

    I still think RS should settle: not because of whether they will win or lose, but simply because it would be the honorable thing to do. I mean, if National Enquirer can settle, why not Rolling Stone?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. syonredux says:
    @SFG
    I agree with the rest of it, but can you link to the part where you show this is anti-Gentilic? I'm not denying the prejudice exists or is prominent (as any glance at Slate will show you), but through this I more had the impression of feminists resenting those evil bros. I mean, Jews aren't excluded from frats these days. It *sounds* kind of like those stories they used to tell in the 50s, but it strikes me as a subtext at the most--they recycled the old stories about WASPy exclusion with new victims.

    Wahoos are enthralled to be at UVA and can’t wait to tell you the reasons why, beginning, surprisingly, with Thomas Jefferson, whose lore is so powerfully woven into everyday UVA life that you practically expect to glimpse the man still walking the grounds in his waistcoat and pantaloons. Nearly every student I interviewed found a way to mention “TJ,” speaking with zeal about their founding father’s vision for an “academical village” in the idyllic setting of the Blue Ridge Mountains.

    Love the subtly of the “surprisingly.” Goodthinkers know that Jefferson is in bad odor these days. But these vile WASPs are so immersed in Crimethink that they don’t even know that they are supposed to feel shame and guilt about the fact that Jefferson founded their uni…

    UVA’s aura of preppy success, where throngs of toned, tanned and overwhelmingly blond students fanned across a landscape of neoclassical brick buildings,

    And the article gives us some nicely sinister photographs of those buildings, all shot at horror movie angles. For the interested, here’s a link to the article:

    https://www.bustle.com/articles/74322-where-to-read-rolling-stone-uva-article-a-rape-on-campus-now-its-been-deleted

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Wahoos are enthralled to be at UVA and can’t wait to tell you the reasons why, beginning, surprisingly, with Thomas Jefferson, whose lore is so powerfully woven into everyday UVA life that you practically expect to glimpse the man still walking the grounds in his waistcoat and pantaloons. Nearly every student I interviewed found a way to mention “TJ,” speaking with zeal about their founding father’s vision for an “academical village” in the idyllic setting of the Blue Ridge Mountains.
     
    Love the subtlety* of the “surprisingly.” Goodthinkers know that Jefferson is in bad odor these days. But these vile WASPs are so immersed in Crimethink that they don’t even know that they are supposed to feel shame and guilt about the fact that Jefferson founded their uni…

    UVA’s aura of preppy success, where throngs of toned, tanned and overwhelmingly blond students fanned across a landscape of neoclassical brick buildings,
     
    And the article gives us some nicely sinister photographs of those buildings, all shot at horror movie angles. For the interested, here’s a link to the article:

    https://www.bustle.com/articles/74322-where-to-read-rolling-stone-uva-article-a-rape-on-campus-now-its-been-deleted

    *Corrected a typo
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @SPMoore8
    "White people are the last group that it’s OK to hate on in modern America. " I agree. But saying that hating on white people is equal to "Jews hating on gentiles" is not the same thing. People like Sabrina aren't hating on the sizable number of non-white Christians.

    But saying that hating on white people is equal to “Jews hating on gentiles” is not the same thing. People like Sabrina aren’t hating on the sizable number of non-white Christians.

    And people like Sabrina aren’t hating on the sizable number of non-Gentile whites either. Why didn’t she do her “expose” at UPenn or Brandeis?

    You are being pedantic. Her story here (and several of her prior stories) are starkly anti-Gentilic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. You say in your article:

    Back during the Clarence Thomas hearings in 1991, for example, it was mandatory to Believe the Women.

    It’s worth noting, though, that most people back then did not, in fact, Believe the Woman. Opinion polls taken at the time, just after the hearings had been televised live, showed that a large majority believed Clarence Thomas and thought Anita Hill was lying. This crossed gender, ethnic and political lines — men and women, whites and black, Republicans and Democrats — a majority of every demographic believed him, not her.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/15/us/the-thomas-nomination-most-in-national-survey-say-judge-is-the-more-believable.html?pagewanted=all

    https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/public-perspective/ppscan/31/31012.pdf

    Excerpt from the New York Times article:

    Janet Seurattan of Marydell, Del., was one of the respondents to the poll who said she doubted Professor Hill’s credibility. In a follow-up interview, she said she believed that Ms. Hill had made up some of the accusations of sexual harassment. “She might have thought some of this stuff up in her head,” Ms. Seurattan, 29, said. “Women have a tendency to do that sometime.”

    Would the Times today quote a 29-year-old woman expressing that sentiment? How many women would express it any more? Decades of non-stop feminist propaganda have done their work.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Rob McX
    When I Googled "uva rape", the second link that came up was this Guardian piece, "UVA rape story trial highlights struggle to report on sexual assault in Trump era", which concentrates on the equally implausible accusations against DJT.

    DuckDuckGo.com and Bing.com bring up somewhat more accurate search results for “UVA rape”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Oh, I dunno. Among the first page of results on duckduckgo.com I found this:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/rape-at-uva-readers-say-jackie-wasnt-alone-20141121

    "I found Nicole Eramo very unfeeling as well — sociopathic, almost. She later told me she didn't believe the studies that showed rapists, in particular, were repeat offenders of this heinous crime..." [does this make ANY sense?]

    and this:

    http://time.com/3619173/uva-rape-survivor-doubt-victim-story/

    "UVA Rape Survivor: Don’t Doubt a Victim’s Story Just Because It Sounds Horrific"

    Still up to this very day with no retraction and nothing to indicate that Jackie's story was a complete fabrication. A lie goes halfway around the world before the truth can put its boots on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. guest says:
    @Almost Missouri
    Yeah, I think people get confused about libel law. Libel law is property law, not speech law.

    A libel action is an action to recover injury against a property: your reputation. The fact that that property is intangible confuses people with the superficial fact that it involves speech. A mob boss ordering a hit uses speech too, but that doesn't make him not a murderer, nor the victim not murdered, nor "freedom of speech" (which isn't actually a law anyway) a defense.

    Of course, as Anti-Gnostic pointed out above, the Supreme Court muddied the waters further when it used the First Amendment to Federalize what had been state tort laws for centuries, because it didn't like the people in the states using them (a real Who--Whom? situation!). Like with pretty much everything the Warren Court did, the toxin keeps on seeping into our system.

    I find it ridiculous to consider my reputation my property. What, I own other people’s thoughts? And what about the “public figure” exception? All public figures are, really, is people with bigger reputations for than others. In what other circumstances are people with more property welcome to less legal protection?

    But a foolish consistency, blah, blah, blah. I don’t want to be overly rational.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "I find it ridiculous to consider my reputation my property."
     
    Well, there's nothing strange or "ridiculous" about it really. In fact all property rights are actually intangible, even the most tangible of all: real property (real estate). Is there a force field over your house that prevents anyone you don't want from entering? No of course not. Your "ownership" of the house is really just an intangible concept verified by the title paper at the town office. Because there is an intangible agreement to respect that "ownership", you feel you have the "right" to "your" "property". And I agree. You do. I am part of that intangible agreement. That's why when someone starts damaging intangibles, real harm results, whether it is to your home ownership or to your reputation. Hence, law, in flavors ranging from real property law to libel law.

    It's also why, as our "Republic" enters its death spiral of corruption, you can expect that the intangible agreements that formerly made for stable, consistent and reliable property ownership will become increasingly tattered and frayed, until you won't really feel you can be confident that you still own your stuff anymore, because, increasingly, you won't. Someone better connected than you will.

    I have a Cuban friend. His family lived in Cuba after the Castro revolution. They thought it didn't apply to them since they weren't connected to the previous regime. So they just carried on living as they always had. But it turned out that even if they didn't take any interest in the new regime, the new regime took an interest in them. One by one, the things they owned, became interesting to, then the property of, people connected to the new regime: first their meager savings, then their car, then their business, then their furniture, then their house, then their land. If they had daughters, that would probably have been next. As it was, they had sons, so the next extraction was forced labor. They finally fled Cuba with a change of clothes. They consider themselves lucky to this day.

    American versions of this are increasingly happening here.

    All ownership is rights and all rights are intangible and subject to government enforcement or lack thereof. Expect a lot more lack thereof for the unconnected.
    , @Jack D
    I don't know what you do, but whatever it is, let's say I called up your employer or customers and (falsely) told them that you were a liar, drunk, thief, child molester, adulterer, etc. and should not be trusted in the future. And let's say your employer or customers believed me and fired you or quit patronizing your business as a result. Do you still find it ridiculous?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. guest says:
    @BenKenobi
    I have to say this: I love the word "synecdoche". I first encountered it several years ago in the AvClub's review of Andy Kaufman's "Synecdoche, New York".

    I couldn't for the life of me intuit its proper pronunciation.

    "Sign-ek-dosh"?

    "Sin-ek-doush"?

    In the end it was
    "sin-ek-do-key".

    Never would have guessed. By far my favourite English word.

    “I couldn’t for the life of me intuit its proper pronunciation”

    Really? It never occurred to you that, being a pun on “Schenectady, New York,” it might rhyme with that word?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Thea says:
    @Almost Missouri

    "their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably"
     
    Isn't part of the young women's inchoate anger that prior to the unhappy current sexual culture, in the culture of the earlier era, young men would have been much less likely to treat them dishonorably in the first place?

    Yes, both your posts are spot on.

    As a young woman in college, I asked ” weren’t women better off having men as husbands & fathers rather than competitors in the hook up & career olympics?”

    I was shouted down but no real coherent explanation was given as to why being pumped & dumped then getting up for work the next morning was superior.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Jack D says:
    @SPMoore8
    Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian. I also doubt she would be picking on some short, dumpy white guy, regardless of coloring, and regardless of affiliation. On the other hand I'm certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation.

    White we are on the subject it would be interesting to see how the evolution of Sabrina's views has anything to do with not only Stephen Glass (already raised) but incidents during her tenure at U Penn, including hoax articles, the missing run of the college paper, and the famous "Water Buffalo" incident.

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to "destroy" them. In fact, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. I do think people like Sabrina are motivated by other resentments, but those are not based on religion or being MOT. Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that "Jews" are "out to get" "gentiles". This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful.

    “Goyim” is an imperfect way of saying “badwhites”. Modern Jewish SJWs have nothing against goyim who are goodwhites – many of their friends, colleagues and lovers are goodwhites, they might (more that might – in fact most likely will) marry a goodwhite. But SJW’s hate hate hate badwhites (those who fit in Hillary’s Basket of Deplorables) . Badwhites are not entitled to free speech, they should lose their jobs if they announce any badwhite views, they should be shunned wherever possible, etc. The “overwhelmingly blond” TJ lovers that Erdely met at UVa were badwhites, which is why it was OK to hate on them.

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8, Nico
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @officious intermeddler
    You say in your article:

    Back during the Clarence Thomas hearings in 1991, for example, it was mandatory to Believe the Women.
     
    It's worth noting, though, that most people back then did not, in fact, Believe the Woman. Opinion polls taken at the time, just after the hearings had been televised live, showed that a large majority believed Clarence Thomas and thought Anita Hill was lying. This crossed gender, ethnic and political lines -- men and women, whites and black, Republicans and Democrats -- a majority of every demographic believed him, not her.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/15/us/the-thomas-nomination-most-in-national-survey-say-judge-is-the-more-believable.html?pagewanted=all

    https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/public-perspective/ppscan/31/31012.pdf

    But 25 years of non-stop feminist propaganda have done their work, and now children are taught that Hill was a brave truth-teller and Thomas a pervert.

    oops. posted an unfinished draft by mistake.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. guest says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone’s website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought “What horse shit”.
     
    Me too, and millions of others, but you have to dig deeper to make the distinction between gross exaggeration and a complete lie, and probably many people who read the story thought that there was hyperbole, but that a rape occurred. In fact "Jackie" is now retracting and saying that she was raped, but she has no memory of what actually happened. How convenient is this amnesia!

    A couple of days ago I saw a report in the Daily Mail that "Natasha Stoynoff was interviewing Trump at Mar-a-Lago back in 2005 when she claims that Trump began 'forcing his tongue down [her] throat.'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835407/His-hands-like-octopus-TWO-women-claim-Donald-Trump-touched-inappropriately.html#ixzz4OBxT5umB
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook.

    I don't think it is physiologically feasible to force one's tongue down someone's throat during an interview, so to that extent it is probably a lie, unless the word 'tongue' is being used as a euphemism for another sexual organ, but there could have been some kind of sexual overture that was perceived as forcible and not consensual. Probably Stoynoff has PTSD too, which must reduce her value to her employer as a reporter.

    We the people are used to reading between the lines. Weapons of mass destruction. When Dick Cheney said "we know he has weapons of mass destruction and we know where they are" most people will have taken that declaration as a statement of fact, and only those who thought Cheney capable of gross lies over such serious matters will have questioned the assumption further. As far as new reporters were concerned, there was little difference between saying "Vice-President Cheney says that" and "it is the case that".

    I personally was very skeptical about the weapons of mass destruction, and when I listened to Colin Powell's presentation at the UN, I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD, but I kind of assumed that Colin Powell was sufficiently intelligent and experienced in evaluating military intelligence that he would not have been fooled unless there was a reasonable amount of evidence that led him to think WMD was true. It required a further leap to come to the conclusion that he was simply lying.

    Powell has said subsequently that he "blames himself for not trusting his instinct" and making what proved to be false assertions to the United Nations about Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction.

    And we thought we were paying him for his unique skills.

    Yes, there is a perfectly obvious natural defense against tongue-forcings. They’re called teeth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Rod1963 says:
    @Rob McX
    I took a look at Rolling Stone's site to get an idea of their agenda. At the top of the page is the article "Free Speech Might Be Another Victim of This Election".

    Excerpt:

    The Trump campaign could end up being an Alamo for civil liberties in the same way [as 9/11]. Like al-Qaeda, Trump's campaign has been characterized as a threat extreme enough to justify exceptions to all civil liberties concepts. He is a paradigm-changer, his possible presidency an "extinction-level event," as Andrew Sullivan put it, against which all conceivable measures have to be contemplated.
     
    Clearly, the UVA fiasco isn't putting them off their crusade against white Americans.

    That’s right it’s not. The thing is as Trumps campaign has shown, is that the MSM(including RS) are all part of the political establishment. Even long time political pollster Pat Caddell has stated the MSM is part of it.

    This is why the demonization of Trump has been so uniform across the media spectrum. And why the MSM has avoided mentioning Wikileaks and O’Keefe’s videos at all.

    People need to understand that the MSM in whatever guise be it the NYT, RS or TNR. They are not purveyors of objective journalism but promote agenda or narrative disguised as news aimed at demonizing whites and their culture.

    Erdley is just another footsoldier promoting the narrative. Tribe members are naturals at it since they seem to be hardwired from birth to hate whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    We Jews do not all hate White people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. syonredux says:
    @syonredux

    Wahoos are enthralled to be at UVA and can’t wait to tell you the reasons why, beginning, surprisingly, with Thomas Jefferson, whose lore is so powerfully woven into everyday UVA life that you practically expect to glimpse the man still walking the grounds in his waistcoat and pantaloons. Nearly every student I interviewed found a way to mention “TJ,” speaking with zeal about their founding father’s vision for an “academical village” in the idyllic setting of the Blue Ridge Mountains.
     
    Love the subtly of the "surprisingly." Goodthinkers know that Jefferson is in bad odor these days. But these vile WASPs are so immersed in Crimethink that they don't even know that they are supposed to feel shame and guilt about the fact that Jefferson founded their uni...

    UVA’s aura of preppy success, where throngs of toned, tanned and overwhelmingly blond students fanned across a landscape of neoclassical brick buildings,

     

    And the article gives us some nicely sinister photographs of those buildings, all shot at horror movie angles. For the interested, here's a link to the article:

    https://www.bustle.com/articles/74322-where-to-read-rolling-stone-uva-article-a-rape-on-campus-now-its-been-deleted

    Wahoos are enthralled to be at UVA and can’t wait to tell you the reasons why, beginning, surprisingly, with Thomas Jefferson, whose lore is so powerfully woven into everyday UVA life that you practically expect to glimpse the man still walking the grounds in his waistcoat and pantaloons. Nearly every student I interviewed found a way to mention “TJ,” speaking with zeal about their founding father’s vision for an “academical village” in the idyllic setting of the Blue Ridge Mountains.

    Love the subtlety* of the “surprisingly.” Goodthinkers know that Jefferson is in bad odor these days. But these vile WASPs are so immersed in Crimethink that they don’t even know that they are supposed to feel shame and guilt about the fact that Jefferson founded their uni…

    UVA’s aura of preppy success, where throngs of toned, tanned and overwhelmingly blond students fanned across a landscape of neoclassical brick buildings,

    And the article gives us some nicely sinister photographs of those buildings, all shot at horror movie angles. For the interested, here’s a link to the article:

    https://www.bustle.com/articles/74322-where-to-read-rolling-stone-uva-article-a-rape-on-campus-now-its-been-deleted

    *Corrected a typo

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. nspencer says:
    @slumber_j
    I'm under the impression that she's actually pretty Welsh--despite her tin ear for the English language, although perhaps the Welshness does account for her purported fondness for drink. But stylistically speaking, you're certainly right.

    Welsh, eh? The Welsh strain in her must account for her mendacity and dishonesty…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. SPMoore8 says:
    @Kylie
    "Steve’s 12/2014 Takimag piece... holds up very well in light of subsequent revelations, EXCEPT for this:

    'Something deeply upsetting likely happened to Jackie, too, but exactly what is a mystery.'"

    Are you kidding no question mark. Something deeply upsetting undoubtedly DID happen to Jackie. The young man she was interested in did not return that interest. If you think that wasn't sufficient for her to fabricate that whole absurd rape scenario, then you have not yet learned the most important lesson of this hideous fandango.

    There are no limits to the arrogance of the non-conservative female today. None. She is not constrained by traditional morality nor curbed by a realistic assessment of her own worth and importance. She has a sense of entitlement that amounts to divine right--with her as the divinity.

    I'm sure the only lesson Jackie Coakley has learned from this is that she had every right to behave as she did because she was the victim here. I don't see where society has given her any indication that she was wrong.

    Don’t forget that Jackie not only invented the rape story (and the beer bottle assault) in order to get attention, forgive her scholastic performance, and get street cred in the feminist community, but she also told Ryan that she was dying of a rare disease, and she started a rumor that Kathryn had syphilis. And, apparently, she has no memory of any of this because she is suffering from PTSD from the “sexual assault.” Get thee behind me, Jackie!

    I have a feeling Eramo will not win her suit. The judge’s decision that she is a public figure, combined with the judge’s weird solicitude to Jackie, suggests that the jury will not find RS responsible, which means they will get away with this fiasco unpunished, except for legal fees.

    In that respect, Owen is right; if Eramo loses the libel suit, then someone can use that as a talking point to validate Jackie in the future.

    I still think RS should settle: not because of whether they will win or lose, but simply because it would be the honorable thing to do. I mean, if National Enquirer can settle, why not Rolling Stone?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    "I still think RS should settle: not because of whether they will win or lose, but simply because it would be the honorable thing to do. I mean, if National Enquirer can settle, why not Rolling Stone?"

    Funny guy.

    Just because the RS story wasn't true in its particulars doesn't mean something bad didn't happen to Jackie. And that something is part of the rape culture crisis on campuses everywhere.

    Seriously, RS will just double down on the narrative. There's something more important here than mere honor. It's a question of who is right. Because nowadays who is right determines what is right.

    , @Thea
    It will set a horrible precedent if Eramo loses. Like the travesty of the cake bakers being forced to make wedding cakes for sodomites. There will be more outrageous lies posing as journalism.

    The left never loses. They are some times forced to take a break but when it's over they kept pushing the world leftward into the abyss.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. NOTA says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone’s website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought “What horse shit”.
     
    Me too, and millions of others, but you have to dig deeper to make the distinction between gross exaggeration and a complete lie, and probably many people who read the story thought that there was hyperbole, but that a rape occurred. In fact "Jackie" is now retracting and saying that she was raped, but she has no memory of what actually happened. How convenient is this amnesia!

    A couple of days ago I saw a report in the Daily Mail that "Natasha Stoynoff was interviewing Trump at Mar-a-Lago back in 2005 when she claims that Trump began 'forcing his tongue down [her] throat.'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835407/His-hands-like-octopus-TWO-women-claim-Donald-Trump-touched-inappropriately.html#ixzz4OBxT5umB
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook.

    I don't think it is physiologically feasible to force one's tongue down someone's throat during an interview, so to that extent it is probably a lie, unless the word 'tongue' is being used as a euphemism for another sexual organ, but there could have been some kind of sexual overture that was perceived as forcible and not consensual. Probably Stoynoff has PTSD too, which must reduce her value to her employer as a reporter.

    We the people are used to reading between the lines. Weapons of mass destruction. When Dick Cheney said "we know he has weapons of mass destruction and we know where they are" most people will have taken that declaration as a statement of fact, and only those who thought Cheney capable of gross lies over such serious matters will have questioned the assumption further. As far as new reporters were concerned, there was little difference between saying "Vice-President Cheney says that" and "it is the case that".

    I personally was very skeptical about the weapons of mass destruction, and when I listened to Colin Powell's presentation at the UN, I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD, but I kind of assumed that Colin Powell was sufficiently intelligent and experienced in evaluating military intelligence that he would not have been fooled unless there was a reasonable amount of evidence that led him to think WMD was true. It required a further leap to come to the conclusion that he was simply lying.

    Powell has said subsequently that he "blames himself for not trusting his instinct" and making what proved to be false assertions to the United Nations about Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction.

    And we thought we were paying him for his unique skills.

    Groupthink and trusting your ingroup to be honest with you are hard to overcome. Neither intelligence nor experience is a complete defense. And you can go wrong the other direction, too–W apparently ignored a lot of internal expert opinion on the likely costs and consequences of invading Iraq.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Kylie says:
    @SPMoore8
    Don't forget that Jackie not only invented the rape story (and the beer bottle assault) in order to get attention, forgive her scholastic performance, and get street cred in the feminist community, but she also told Ryan that she was dying of a rare disease, and she started a rumor that Kathryn had syphilis. And, apparently, she has no memory of any of this because she is suffering from PTSD from the "sexual assault." Get thee behind me, Jackie!

    I have a feeling Eramo will not win her suit. The judge's decision that she is a public figure, combined with the judge's weird solicitude to Jackie, suggests that the jury will not find RS responsible, which means they will get away with this fiasco unpunished, except for legal fees.

    In that respect, Owen is right; if Eramo loses the libel suit, then someone can use that as a talking point to validate Jackie in the future.

    I still think RS should settle: not because of whether they will win or lose, but simply because it would be the honorable thing to do. I mean, if National Enquirer can settle, why not Rolling Stone?

    “I still think RS should settle: not because of whether they will win or lose, but simply because it would be the honorable thing to do. I mean, if National Enquirer can settle, why not Rolling Stone?”

    Funny guy.

    Just because the RS story wasn’t true in its particulars doesn’t mean something bad didn’t happen to Jackie. And that something is part of the rape culture crisis on campuses everywhere.

    Seriously, RS will just double down on the narrative. There’s something more important here than mere honor. It’s a question of who is right. Because nowadays who is right determines what is right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jimbojones
    "Just because the RS story wasn’t true in its particulars doesn’t mean something bad didn’t happen to Jackie. And that something is part of the rape culture crisis on campuses everywhere. "

    Lol, that's exactly what it means, as you realize full well.

    To summarize:
    - RS story complete fabrication.
    - Jackie a crazed liar unable to own up and apologize for her slanderous claims.
    - Erdely an incompetent (or a liar or both) blinded by ugly prejudice.
    - "Rape culture" a sick fantasy of sick minds.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @The Last Real Calvinist
    This election season is bringing out your best, Steve -- another fantastic article.

    One note on this section:


    Here are excerpts from a taped conversation between Coakley and Erdely in which the well-matched pair egg each other on. Indeed, the coed seems like the more dominant personality, glibly validating whatever academic anti–male chauvinism the nerdier Erdely suggests.
     
    I listened to quite a few of the audio clips K C Johnson has posted, and I think you've distilled the essence of Erdely and Jackie's relationship. Erdely comes across as not exactly submissive, but certainly deferential to the high-octane Victim Power Jackie is radiating. This seems to be a synecdoche for the broader power relations on American college campuses these days.

    Also, incidentally, it's hard to believe two supposedly grown women could say 'like' as often as these two conspirators do . . . .

    “Erdely comes across as not exactly submissive, but certainly deferential to the high-octane Victim Power Jackie is radiating.”

    But would Erderly have been if Jackie blabbered about Jewish or black rapists?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. SPMoore8 says:

    Semi O/T:

    It looks like they’ve finally found the Great White Rapist in Madison, Wisconsin.

    Although it appears that the alleged sexual assaults came nowhere near penetration. Moreover, there appear to be other things that are bothering the complainants:

    “When I saw your mug shot, my roommate and I recognized you immediately,” Grace wrote. “We remembered you from a birthday party for one [of] our good friends. We remembered how your size and booming voice allowed you to command so much space. I didn’t know then that these attributes were just weapons in your arsenal.”

    and

    The writer claimed to be “quietly afraid” of Cook at the party.
    “We never spoke or interacted, but seeing you walk back and forth, exerting your alpha male presence and mass from room to room made me stand a little closer to my boyfriend, willing you to go away,”

    Uh …..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    He looks like Jesus. Wasn't Jesus an alpha male with a booming voice and a commanding presence?

    "Empowered", like "conversation" is a word that has a new meaning in Newspeak. It means something like "given societal license to pile onto an accused witch".

    , @Kylie
    From the linked article:

    “When I saw your mug shot, my roommate and I recognized you immediately,” Grace wrote. “We remembered you from a birthday party for one [of] our good friends. We remembered how your size and booming voice allowed you to command so much space. I didn’t know then that these attributes were just weapons in your arsenal.”

    Are we sure she's writing about the long-haired frat boy? Reads more like yet another "dreamy" description of a naked, sweaty Donald Trump.
    , @Marcus
    They already found him with that swim team guy in Stanford, he got sexual assault not rape though
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Jack D says:
    @Anon

    Limited speech always ends up protecting powerful elites that benefit from lies.
     
    Indeed.

    Hence laws against questioning Holocaust narrative.

    America has no such laws (because they are unconstitutional) so I guess Jews must not be a powerful elite in America.

    Liechtenstein and Bosnia OTOH both have such laws due to the powerful secret cabal of Jews who control them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Barnard says:
    @officious intermeddler
    You say in your article:

    Back during the Clarence Thomas hearings in 1991, for example, it was mandatory to Believe the Women.
     
    It's worth noting, though, that most people back then did not, in fact, Believe the Woman. Opinion polls taken at the time, just after the hearings had been televised live, showed that a large majority believed Clarence Thomas and thought Anita Hill was lying. This crossed gender, ethnic and political lines -- men and women, whites and black, Republicans and Democrats -- a majority of every demographic believed him, not her.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/15/us/the-thomas-nomination-most-in-national-survey-say-judge-is-the-more-believable.html?pagewanted=all

    https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/public-perspective/ppscan/31/31012.pdf

    But 25 years of non-stop feminist propaganda have done their work, and now children are taught that Hill was a brave truth-teller and Thomas a pervert.

    After three days of televised inquiry into an accusation that Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed an aide, Americans still favor the judge’s confirmation to the Supreme Court by a ratio of 2 to 1, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll.

    The public not believing Anita Hill is probably the only reason Clarence Thomas was confirmed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Forbes says:
    @biz
    That is extremely insightful.

    One thing that could be added is that the fraction of female students who actually internalize that "rape culture" is a real phenomenon and a big deal seems to be small. Most go about their business with little thought to it. On the other hand, the proportion of professors and administrators and journalists who think that it is a real phenomenon and a big deal is very large. To go with your analysis, the concept is probably meeting psychological needs for older women / men a lot more than it is for younger women, typically.

    the fraction of female students who actually internalize that “rape culture” is a real phenomenon and a big deal seems to be small.

    I’d say just the opposite–the fraction of females students who reject “rape culture” is small.

    Females–especially college-age girls–are the ultimate in “go along to get along.” They emotionally bond with each other in the time it takes to visit the rest room. Who the hell coined the acronym BFF–best friends forever? These creatures have a new BFF every week. They are world champions at rationalizing their behavior–irrespective of the fact their behavior is primarily driven by emotion, and is only rarely rational. Want to find unanimity of opinion amongst women? Get a group of unattached young women together and ask them about men.

    Rape culture doesn’t have to be literally true for it to meet their psychological needs–it only needs to be believed for it to be real. The needs of their ego is that they are desired by men–men who will do almost anything to have them. Convenient and flattering fictions in the female mind are preferred to the truth that many of them are not desired at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Jack D says:
    @Almost Missouri
    Yeah, I think people get confused about libel law. Libel law is property law, not speech law.

    A libel action is an action to recover injury against a property: your reputation. The fact that that property is intangible confuses people with the superficial fact that it involves speech. A mob boss ordering a hit uses speech too, but that doesn't make him not a murderer, nor the victim not murdered, nor "freedom of speech" (which isn't actually a law anyway) a defense.

    Of course, as Anti-Gnostic pointed out above, the Supreme Court muddied the waters further when it used the First Amendment to Federalize what had been state tort laws for centuries, because it didn't like the people in the states using them (a real Who--Whom? situation!). Like with pretty much everything the Warren Court did, the toxin keeps on seeping into our system.

    Hard cases make bad law. The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    That being said, I think their framework (that there is there should be higher threshold for defaming “public figures”, especially government officials) makes a certain amount of sense. The press is supposed to shed light on malfeasance by government officials, especially in one party strongholds where no one else will and they can’t do this job if they live in fear of libels suits for the slightest error. If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction by the press (ask Trump).

    BTW, we have gone full circle where parts of the country are filled with one party (Democrat) strongholds, except now instead of the solid South, these strongholds are our big cities and northern coastal states.

    It’s also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats – all those sheriffs with police dogs were Democrats.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterike

    The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

     

    Well the alternative to the alternative would be for the major Northern newspapers to take an even-handed view of things. But I guess that's crazy talk.
    , @Nico

    Hard cases make bad law. The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.
     
    Cry me a river.
    , @Questionator
    The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    Wouldn't they be able to rely on the truth defense?
    , @Almost Missouri

    "S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it."
     
    Yet somehow, Americans great and small had managed to live and thrive for over a century without the Supreme Court's meddling. In fact, if the "paper hardly circulated in the South", then there wouldn't have been much to claim in the damage stage of the trial. If there had been colossal punitives awarded, well, the paper could just do what other businesses do today in states with notoriously windfall-happy juries: not have a local presence. If the state feels neglected, they can rein in their tort law.

    Really, the NYT just wanted to have their cake and eat it too: to have the megaphone in every state and be immune from local legal heckling. And the Warren court made their wish come true. We are all worse off for this. We should oppose national monopolies, especially on public expression. Why make an exception for the seditious shrikes at the NYT of all people? If anything, they are supposed to be professionals, so they should bear higher scrutiny, not less.


    "If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction"
     
    Wouldn't it be even more apropos to say that if you publish journalism, you should expect some skepticism to be thrown your way? After all, journalists can't shut up about their (actually non-existent) "professional standards". Yet in reality they are held to a lower standard than everyone else. In real professions (law, medicine) practitioners are held to a higher standard. The Warren court carved out a lower standard for journalists. Again they want to have their cake and eat it too: be "professionals" but be subject to diminished standards.

    "It’s also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats"
     
    Yes, you are right about this, but whenever I remind these people, they are yawningly uninterested. I have glumly concluded that all politics is now Who--Whom (or "identity politics", to give it its better known name), so this kind archaic score-keeping is just an old white guy hobby, of academic interest to me or to you perhaps, but it's not gonna swing any elections anymore.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. SPMoore8 says:

    Semi O/T …..

    A young American Jewish woman gets to tell her tale of being “sexually assaulted” by a prominent Israeli.

    YMMV.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Contrast the "photo illustration" that goes with the story (a virginal looking girl with the paw of a dirty old man on her shoulder) with Berrin's actual come hither self-presentation:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/724721123414278144/D13tQSSs_400x400.jpg

    I realize that part of "female empowerment" is that nothing short of a direct verbal command from the princess in question is sufficient to allow her Highness to be touched, but in a sane world it would appear that Berrin is playing a double game.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Jack D says:
    @SPMoore8
    Semi O/T:

    It looks like they've finally found the Great White Rapist in Madison, Wisconsin.

    Although it appears that the alleged sexual assaults came nowhere near penetration. Moreover, there appear to be other things that are bothering the complainants:

    “When I saw your mug shot, my roommate and I recognized you immediately,” Grace wrote. “We remembered you from a birthday party for one [of] our good friends. We remembered how your size and booming voice allowed you to command so much space. I didn’t know then that these attributes were just weapons in your arsenal.”
     
    and

    The writer claimed to be “quietly afraid” of Cook at the party.
    “We never spoke or interacted, but seeing you walk back and forth, exerting your alpha male presence and mass from room to room made me stand a little closer to my boyfriend, willing you to go away,”
     
    Uh .....

    He looks like Jesus. Wasn’t Jesus an alpha male with a booming voice and a commanding presence?

    “Empowered”, like “conversation” is a word that has a new meaning in Newspeak. It means something like “given societal license to pile onto an accused witch”.

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    • Replies: @res

    “Empowered”, like “conversation” is a word that has a new meaning in Newspeak. It means something like “given societal license to pile onto an accused witch”.
     
    That's part of it. Another part is something like "given societal license to never take responsibility for their own actions no matter how egregious."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Forbes says:
    @Almost Missouri

    "their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably"
     
    Isn't part of the young women's inchoate anger that prior to the unhappy current sexual culture, in the culture of the earlier era, young men would have been much less likely to treat them dishonorably in the first place?

    It’s not that men started behaving dishonorably, women started giving up their modesty in their quest for empowerment by means of their sexual liberation.

    “Why buy the cow when the milk is free” is a telling aphorism.

    Women blaming men for the consequences of their poor decisions is a hardy perennial. Formerly, there were cultural guardrails that obligated men and women inside bounds of behavior that grew out of an age-old wisdom that minimized chaos and increased trust. Now, our culture having flattened the guardrails, trust has disappeared amid the reigning chaos.

    So, it’s men’s fault–even in light of tearing down the patriarchy that served to protect women, and men, from their worst impulses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. The working class, by definition, did not go to college. That is why we are less feminized, less PC, less brain washed and far less useless than our countrymen with degrees in underwater basket weaving. The insanity gripping academia is not terribly alarming to us. For us it’s like something happening in a foreign country. If it was just campus ninnies we would shrug it off. But thanks to the Trump campaign, we are aware of the breadth and depth of the war being waged against white men by the ruling class. It has been my experience that we (white men) talk quietly together in twos and threes. When we have established that we are together in support of Trump we go about our business. This is the “murmuring in the fields” that precedes revolution. White men will not compete for victim status. White men will seek regime change.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  121. Jack D says:
    @SPMoore8
    Semi O/T .....

    A young American Jewish woman gets to tell her tale of being "sexually assaulted" by a prominent Israeli.

    YMMV.

    Contrast the “photo illustration” that goes with the story (a virginal looking girl with the paw of a dirty old man on her shoulder) with Berrin’s actual come hither self-presentation:

    I realize that part of “female empowerment” is that nothing short of a direct verbal command from the princess in question is sufficient to allow her Highness to be touched, but in a sane world it would appear that Berrin is playing a double game.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I thought the article was ridiculous, I'm just coming across various articles expanding the definition of sexual assault. The most interesting part of the article is where making a pass at someone is tied into Trump, Hitler, and exterminating minorities, and then the article goes completely off the rails:

    “It’s like that sick, sinking feeling you get walking down the street, minding your own business, and some guy yells out vulgar words about your body; or when you see that guy at work who stands just a little too close, stares a little too long and makes you feel uncomfortable in your own skin. It’s that feeling of terror and violation that too many women have felt when someone has grabbed them or forced himself on them and they’ve said no, but he didn’t listen.”
    If a candidate for president of the United States feels no compunction whatsoever about speaking and behaving this way … if the top executive of a major American news channel can get away with this kind of behavior for more than 20 years … if a young man convicted of rape gets only a slap on the wrist from our justice system — we’re not as sophisticated a society as we think we are.
    Now that we’re finally having a conversation about this, many are going to wonder what we can do about it.
    When someone alleges to have been sexually assaulted, we can give that person the benefit of the doubt and take their allegation seriously. According to a 2014 report by the FBI, a rape occurs every 4 1/2 minutes in this country. That should put to rest the idea that false allegations are rampant.
    We also can enact harsher sentencing for crimes of sexual violence.
    And we can stop protecting and excusing the perpetrators of these sins over and over again.
     
    You will notice that (a) propositioning someone, (b) propositioning someone with a $1 Million donation in the balance, (c) standing too close to someone (whatever that means), (d) ogling someone, (e) touching someone on any part of the body, and (f) violently raping someone are all being conflated into some category of "sexual assault", whereas I think only (f) applies.

    Perhaps this is a preview of coming attractions under Empress Hillary.
    , @Clyde
    Berrin wrote many guys she interviewed groped her. She mentioned Brett Ratner. If she really didn't like all these come ons why didn't she find a new line of work? The answer must be she liked some of them even with some groping on the side. Groping is a million miles from penetration and real rape.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. res says:
    @Jack D
    He looks like Jesus. Wasn't Jesus an alpha male with a booming voice and a commanding presence?

    "Empowered", like "conversation" is a word that has a new meaning in Newspeak. It means something like "given societal license to pile onto an accused witch".

    “Empowered”, like “conversation” is a word that has a new meaning in Newspeak. It means something like “given societal license to pile onto an accused witch”.

    That’s part of it. Another part is something like “given societal license to never take responsibility for their own actions no matter how egregious.”

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

    It’s telling that the glib-glob(glib globalists), who harrumphed about Bush-and-Cheney’s lies about WMD and Iraq War, are so eager to jump the gun on finding toxic WMD among The Eternal Goy.

    Haven Monahan is still on the prowl… and he’s carrying WMD secrets that can not only destroy entire nations but denude women for easy raping.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    I absolutely adore "glib-glob."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Kylie says:
    @SPMoore8
    Semi O/T:

    It looks like they've finally found the Great White Rapist in Madison, Wisconsin.

    Although it appears that the alleged sexual assaults came nowhere near penetration. Moreover, there appear to be other things that are bothering the complainants:

    “When I saw your mug shot, my roommate and I recognized you immediately,” Grace wrote. “We remembered you from a birthday party for one [of] our good friends. We remembered how your size and booming voice allowed you to command so much space. I didn’t know then that these attributes were just weapons in your arsenal.”
     
    and

    The writer claimed to be “quietly afraid” of Cook at the party.
    “We never spoke or interacted, but seeing you walk back and forth, exerting your alpha male presence and mass from room to room made me stand a little closer to my boyfriend, willing you to go away,”
     
    Uh .....

    From the linked article:

    “When I saw your mug shot, my roommate and I recognized you immediately,” Grace wrote. “We remembered you from a birthday party for one [of] our good friends. We remembered how your size and booming voice allowed you to command so much space. I didn’t know then that these attributes were just weapons in your arsenal.”

    Are we sure she’s writing about the long-haired frat boy? Reads more like yet another “dreamy” description of a naked, sweaty Donald Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    All I can say is that if I was a young guy and my GF started talking about some other guy like that my antennae would start quivering.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. SPMoore8 says:
    @Jack D
    Contrast the "photo illustration" that goes with the story (a virginal looking girl with the paw of a dirty old man on her shoulder) with Berrin's actual come hither self-presentation:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/724721123414278144/D13tQSSs_400x400.jpg

    I realize that part of "female empowerment" is that nothing short of a direct verbal command from the princess in question is sufficient to allow her Highness to be touched, but in a sane world it would appear that Berrin is playing a double game.

    I thought the article was ridiculous, I’m just coming across various articles expanding the definition of sexual assault. The most interesting part of the article is where making a pass at someone is tied into Trump, Hitler, and exterminating minorities, and then the article goes completely off the rails:

    “It’s like that sick, sinking feeling you get walking down the street, minding your own business, and some guy yells out vulgar words about your body; or when you see that guy at work who stands just a little too close, stares a little too long and makes you feel uncomfortable in your own skin. It’s that feeling of terror and violation that too many women have felt when someone has grabbed them or forced himself on them and they’ve said no, but he didn’t listen.”
    If a candidate for president of the United States feels no compunction whatsoever about speaking and behaving this way … if the top executive of a major American news channel can get away with this kind of behavior for more than 20 years … if a young man convicted of rape gets only a slap on the wrist from our justice system — we’re not as sophisticated a society as we think we are.
    Now that we’re finally having a conversation about this, many are going to wonder what we can do about it.
    When someone alleges to have been sexually assaulted, we can give that person the benefit of the doubt and take their allegation seriously. According to a 2014 report by the FBI, a rape occurs every 4 1/2 minutes in this country. That should put to rest the idea that false allegations are rampant.
    We also can enact harsher sentencing for crimes of sexual violence.
    And we can stop protecting and excusing the perpetrators of these sins over and over again.

    You will notice that (a) propositioning someone, (b) propositioning someone with a $1 Million donation in the balance, (c) standing too close to someone (whatever that means), (d) ogling someone, (e) touching someone on any part of the body, and (f) violently raping someone are all being conflated into some category of “sexual assault”, whereas I think only (f) applies.

    Perhaps this is a preview of coming attractions under Empress Hillary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D

    When someone alleges to have been sexually assaulted, we can give that person the benefit of the doubt
     
    Putting aside that what she is saying is grammatically garbled, we have an ancient common law tradition of giving the ACCUSED, not the accuser the benefit of the doubt. What she is asking is for our judicial system to flip the burden of proof whenever a woman accuses a man of sexual assault. Not only is this enshrined in common law ("Blackstone's Formulation" that it's better to let 10 guilty men go free than to convict one innocent man) but also in Jewish law - 600 years before Blackstone, Maimonides says the exact same thing in relation to capital punishment, but he upped the guilty/innocent ratio to 1,000 to 1.

    In other words, this (and the classification of everything from an unwelcome gaze to actual rape and everything in between as "sexual assault") is just muddle headed female type thinking, where you don't actually think at all but operate by feelz.

    Now the DoJ has already flipped the burden of proof in college disciplinary tribunals in its famous "Dear Comrade" (oops I mean Colleague) letter (never mind that they have no statutory power to do so) but the criminal courts are another matter.

    , @guest
    Women are very confused regarding sex. I remember listening to the radio show Loveline, and more than once a young idiot would claim to have been raped. When pressed for details it emerges they were making out or heavily petting on the bed with their boyfriend or hook-up, then as if out of nowhere "he was inside me." That's the rape part, the sudden status of insideness.

    Which gets me to wondering, what happened to her pants and panties (if she wears any)? What happened to his pants? How sudden was this,really? Had you wanted intercourse would anything have gone differently?

    Women are entitled, it would seem, to demand (without explicitly demanding it) affirmative consent for that which she doesn't want to happen, and simultaneously for nothing to be said about what she does want to happen. That's the law!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. SPMoore8 says:
    @Kylie
    From the linked article:

    “When I saw your mug shot, my roommate and I recognized you immediately,” Grace wrote. “We remembered you from a birthday party for one [of] our good friends. We remembered how your size and booming voice allowed you to command so much space. I didn’t know then that these attributes were just weapons in your arsenal.”

    Are we sure she's writing about the long-haired frat boy? Reads more like yet another "dreamy" description of a naked, sweaty Donald Trump.

    All I can say is that if I was a young guy and my GF started talking about some other guy like that my antennae would start quivering.

    Read More
    • LOL: Kylie
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I think Jesus there made something quiver on that girl, but it wasn't her antenna. Maybe something about the size of his "weapon" triggered it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    The Great White Grope

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. guest says:
    @Chriscom
    @PiltdowmMan, there is still a very small point at the top of the pyramid where a handful of journalists make big hauls.

    Why is this person at the top of any pyramid?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Jack D says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    I was actually reading Rolling Stone’s website on a semi-regular basis when this article came out. I saw the headline and read the summary below it and thought “What horse shit”.
     
    Me too, and millions of others, but you have to dig deeper to make the distinction between gross exaggeration and a complete lie, and probably many people who read the story thought that there was hyperbole, but that a rape occurred. In fact "Jackie" is now retracting and saying that she was raped, but she has no memory of what actually happened. How convenient is this amnesia!

    A couple of days ago I saw a report in the Daily Mail that "Natasha Stoynoff was interviewing Trump at Mar-a-Lago back in 2005 when she claims that Trump began 'forcing his tongue down [her] throat.'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835407/His-hands-like-octopus-TWO-women-claim-Donald-Trump-touched-inappropriately.html#ixzz4OBxT5umB
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook.

    I don't think it is physiologically feasible to force one's tongue down someone's throat during an interview, so to that extent it is probably a lie, unless the word 'tongue' is being used as a euphemism for another sexual organ, but there could have been some kind of sexual overture that was perceived as forcible and not consensual. Probably Stoynoff has PTSD too, which must reduce her value to her employer as a reporter.

    We the people are used to reading between the lines. Weapons of mass destruction. When Dick Cheney said "we know he has weapons of mass destruction and we know where they are" most people will have taken that declaration as a statement of fact, and only those who thought Cheney capable of gross lies over such serious matters will have questioned the assumption further. As far as new reporters were concerned, there was little difference between saying "Vice-President Cheney says that" and "it is the case that".

    I personally was very skeptical about the weapons of mass destruction, and when I listened to Colin Powell's presentation at the UN, I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD, but I kind of assumed that Colin Powell was sufficiently intelligent and experienced in evaluating military intelligence that he would not have been fooled unless there was a reasonable amount of evidence that led him to think WMD was true. It required a further leap to come to the conclusion that he was simply lying.

    Powell has said subsequently that he "blames himself for not trusting his instinct" and making what proved to be false assertions to the United Nations about Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction.

    And we thought we were paying him for his unique skills.

    I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD

    Powell presented what appeared at the time to be persuasive evidence of chemical weapons. I was persuaded and I believe that Powell (and Cheney and Bush) were also.

    See this:

    http://www.famouspictures.org/iraqi-mobile-production-facilities/

    In the end, they captured trucks that looked very much like “the mobile biological agent factories” that Powell accused Saddam of having. But, they turned out to be devices for generating hydrogen for filling weather balloons as part of an artillery tracking system that the British had sold to Saddam.

    Similar to this Turkish system:

    http://www.ssm.gov.tr/katalog2007/data/038/urun%20ing/ASELSAN%20ingilizce/AFAMS/1.htm

    Oops. It was a stupid failure of intelligence but I don’t think it was intentional. People have a way of seeing what they want to see and hearing what they want to hear. Iraqis OTOH are pathological liars so if an American intelligence officer said “we are willing to pay for intelligence regarding mobile biological agent factories”, then for the right price an Iraqi will tell you all about them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Agreed. Bush and company may have been wrong, but I do not think they were intentionally lying, and there is a difference. There is also the small matter of numerous trucks going to Syria in the days before the war started.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. guest says:
    @SPMoore8
    "White people are the last group that it’s OK to hate on in modern America. " I agree. But saying that hating on white people is equal to "Jews hating on gentiles" is not the same thing. People like Sabrina aren't hating on the sizable number of non-white Christians.

    Would you extend the same courtesy to, say, a white, Southern advocate of segregation who wrote an article about a coal-black rapist on an “overwhelmingly negroid” campus?

    Hey let’s not make this a black/white thing. He just doesn’t like especially black blacks who rape.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. dr kill says:
    @Jack D
    Steve's 12/2014 Takimag piece (unlike most of the crap that was printed at the time by the MSM) holds up very well in light of subsequent revelations, EXCEPT for this:

    Something deeply upsetting likely happened to Jackie, too, but exactly what is a mystery.
     
    Jackie's friends said the same thing (I remember an interview with the object of Jackie's affections, Ryan Duffin (boy did he dodge a bullet), long after the truth was known, in which he said that if nothing happened that night then Jackie deserved an Academy Award for her performance), and Rolling Stone's lawyers are STILL peddling this line at the Eramo trial. Our brain is programmed to believe hysterical sobbing young women (up to a point). We can accept that perhaps they are embellishing the truth a little, but we just can't seem to accept that they could be total, pathological, cynical liars and manipulators who invent stories entirely out of whole cloth and gush forth fake sobs.

    Maybe she broke a nail.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Jack D says:
    @SPMoore8
    I thought the article was ridiculous, I'm just coming across various articles expanding the definition of sexual assault. The most interesting part of the article is where making a pass at someone is tied into Trump, Hitler, and exterminating minorities, and then the article goes completely off the rails:

    “It’s like that sick, sinking feeling you get walking down the street, minding your own business, and some guy yells out vulgar words about your body; or when you see that guy at work who stands just a little too close, stares a little too long and makes you feel uncomfortable in your own skin. It’s that feeling of terror and violation that too many women have felt when someone has grabbed them or forced himself on them and they’ve said no, but he didn’t listen.”
    If a candidate for president of the United States feels no compunction whatsoever about speaking and behaving this way … if the top executive of a major American news channel can get away with this kind of behavior for more than 20 years … if a young man convicted of rape gets only a slap on the wrist from our justice system — we’re not as sophisticated a society as we think we are.
    Now that we’re finally having a conversation about this, many are going to wonder what we can do about it.
    When someone alleges to have been sexually assaulted, we can give that person the benefit of the doubt and take their allegation seriously. According to a 2014 report by the FBI, a rape occurs every 4 1/2 minutes in this country. That should put to rest the idea that false allegations are rampant.
    We also can enact harsher sentencing for crimes of sexual violence.
    And we can stop protecting and excusing the perpetrators of these sins over and over again.
     
    You will notice that (a) propositioning someone, (b) propositioning someone with a $1 Million donation in the balance, (c) standing too close to someone (whatever that means), (d) ogling someone, (e) touching someone on any part of the body, and (f) violently raping someone are all being conflated into some category of "sexual assault", whereas I think only (f) applies.

    Perhaps this is a preview of coming attractions under Empress Hillary.

    When someone alleges to have been sexually assaulted, we can give that person the benefit of the doubt

    Putting aside that what she is saying is grammatically garbled, we have an ancient common law tradition of giving the ACCUSED, not the accuser the benefit of the doubt. What she is asking is for our judicial system to flip the burden of proof whenever a woman accuses a man of sexual assault. Not only is this enshrined in common law (“Blackstone’s Formulation” that it’s better to let 10 guilty men go free than to convict one innocent man) but also in Jewish law – 600 years before Blackstone, Maimonides says the exact same thing in relation to capital punishment, but he upped the guilty/innocent ratio to 1,000 to 1.

    In other words, this (and the classification of everything from an unwelcome gaze to actual rape and everything in between as “sexual assault”) is just muddle headed female type thinking, where you don’t actually think at all but operate by feelz.

    Now the DoJ has already flipped the burden of proof in college disciplinary tribunals in its famous “Dear Comrade” (oops I mean Colleague) letter (never mind that they have no statutory power to do so) but the criminal courts are another matter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    When I read this kind of hyperventilated nonsense it makes me wonder sometimes if we are really that far away from another Witchcraft Mania: except that this time White Males will be targeted. It's amazing the white birthrate is anything above zero at this point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Jack D says:
    @SPMoore8
    All I can say is that if I was a young guy and my GF started talking about some other guy like that my antennae would start quivering.

    I think Jesus there made something quiver on that girl, but it wasn’t her antenna. Maybe something about the size of his “weapon” triggered it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Right: I am reminded of the quip someone made here a few weeks ago about Bill Clinton speaking to a Ladies Club and there wasn't a dry seat in the house.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. guest says:
    @SPMoore8
    I thought the article was ridiculous, I'm just coming across various articles expanding the definition of sexual assault. The most interesting part of the article is where making a pass at someone is tied into Trump, Hitler, and exterminating minorities, and then the article goes completely off the rails:

    “It’s like that sick, sinking feeling you get walking down the street, minding your own business, and some guy yells out vulgar words about your body; or when you see that guy at work who stands just a little too close, stares a little too long and makes you feel uncomfortable in your own skin. It’s that feeling of terror and violation that too many women have felt when someone has grabbed them or forced himself on them and they’ve said no, but he didn’t listen.”
    If a candidate for president of the United States feels no compunction whatsoever about speaking and behaving this way … if the top executive of a major American news channel can get away with this kind of behavior for more than 20 years … if a young man convicted of rape gets only a slap on the wrist from our justice system — we’re not as sophisticated a society as we think we are.
    Now that we’re finally having a conversation about this, many are going to wonder what we can do about it.
    When someone alleges to have been sexually assaulted, we can give that person the benefit of the doubt and take their allegation seriously. According to a 2014 report by the FBI, a rape occurs every 4 1/2 minutes in this country. That should put to rest the idea that false allegations are rampant.
    We also can enact harsher sentencing for crimes of sexual violence.
    And we can stop protecting and excusing the perpetrators of these sins over and over again.
     
    You will notice that (a) propositioning someone, (b) propositioning someone with a $1 Million donation in the balance, (c) standing too close to someone (whatever that means), (d) ogling someone, (e) touching someone on any part of the body, and (f) violently raping someone are all being conflated into some category of "sexual assault", whereas I think only (f) applies.

    Perhaps this is a preview of coming attractions under Empress Hillary.

    Women are very confused regarding sex. I remember listening to the radio show Loveline, and more than once a young idiot would claim to have been raped. When pressed for details it emerges they were making out or heavily petting on the bed with their boyfriend or hook-up, then as if out of nowhere “he was inside me.” That’s the rape part, the sudden status of insideness.

    Which gets me to wondering, what happened to her pants and panties (if she wears any)? What happened to his pants? How sudden was this,really? Had you wanted intercourse would anything have gone differently?

    Women are entitled, it would seem, to demand (without explicitly demanding it) affirmative consent for that which she doesn’t want to happen, and simultaneously for nothing to be said about what she does want to happen. That’s the law!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. SPMoore8 says:
    @Jack D
    I think Jesus there made something quiver on that girl, but it wasn't her antenna. Maybe something about the size of his "weapon" triggered it.

    Right: I am reminded of the quip someone made here a few weeks ago about Bill Clinton speaking to a Ladies Club and there wasn’t a dry seat in the house.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. SPMoore8 says:
    @Jack D

    When someone alleges to have been sexually assaulted, we can give that person the benefit of the doubt
     
    Putting aside that what she is saying is grammatically garbled, we have an ancient common law tradition of giving the ACCUSED, not the accuser the benefit of the doubt. What she is asking is for our judicial system to flip the burden of proof whenever a woman accuses a man of sexual assault. Not only is this enshrined in common law ("Blackstone's Formulation" that it's better to let 10 guilty men go free than to convict one innocent man) but also in Jewish law - 600 years before Blackstone, Maimonides says the exact same thing in relation to capital punishment, but he upped the guilty/innocent ratio to 1,000 to 1.

    In other words, this (and the classification of everything from an unwelcome gaze to actual rape and everything in between as "sexual assault") is just muddle headed female type thinking, where you don't actually think at all but operate by feelz.

    Now the DoJ has already flipped the burden of proof in college disciplinary tribunals in its famous "Dear Comrade" (oops I mean Colleague) letter (never mind that they have no statutory power to do so) but the criminal courts are another matter.

    When I read this kind of hyperventilated nonsense it makes me wonder sometimes if we are really that far away from another Witchcraft Mania: except that this time White Males will be targeted. It’s amazing the white birthrate is anything above zero at this point.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Olorin says:
    @Clyde
    Sabrina Rubin Erdely is married with two children. She was probably worn out and always tired from being a mother and a crusading lefty journalist. She got sloppy over the years and did rush jobs that had little fact checking. Partly due to her responsibilities as a mother. She must of had dreams of getting that big score. Movie rights for this Rolling Stone rape piece that would allow her to relax for a while.

    Her hubby, Peter Erdely, is apparently making bank as a Center City trial lawyer, and they own a flat in the Jewelers’ Row part of Philly. Or anyway did in 2014 when last I checked.

    Her entire CV is one bad Lifetime Original Movie script/Oprah theme week show after another. White suburban whores, white priests raping vulnerable boys, white mommy heroin addicts.

    Our host called this one in the air: she epitomizes absolute vehement hatred of founding stock Americans, which really has to burn when you’re reminded of it everywhere you go in Philly.

    If my experience is any guide, her ilk are common in Philadelphia’s upscale circles.

    She’s also a sucker for the phantasms of the insane.

    http://www.newsweek.com/2016/01/29/billy-doe-altar-boy-sends-four-men-prison-philadelphia-rape-case-417565.html

    https://riversong.wordpress.com/journalistic-fabulism-and-ideological-agendas/

    Remember, she went into UPenn as a pre-med student (psychiatry) but couldn’t hack it, so went into journalism. She wasn’t an Annenberger, but a College grad.

    Here’s a good snapshot of all that, and before you read it, order up a truckload of triple parens:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20160307_Penn_s_journalists_move_on_after_spotlight_s_glare.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Peter Erdely, yes just looked at his website. It is tough running a one man law office. Thanks for cluing me in. So they make maybe 300-500k per year. Maybe over extended with two homes? Private tuition for their two children.

    From his website:
    Extensive Jury Trial and Criminal Expertise:
    Prior to founding the firm, Peter served as a prosecutor with the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office. In eight years with the DA’s Office, Peter rose through many divisions, including the elite Repeat Offenders Unit, Federal Litigation Unit and Major Trials Units. He prosecuted over 40 major jury trials to verdict. He also tried hundreds of bench trials, and over one thousand preliminary hearings. Peter’s jury trials include winning a 65-130 year sentence against a gunman who robbed 13 women and children in a nail salon. He also won the first animal cruelty jury trial conviction in Philadelphia history, against a man who was running an extensive dog fighting ring from his home.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Jackie Coakley worked as a lifeguard while at the college? I wouldn’t trust her to save a drowning tadpole, much less a human being. But this explains her obsession. She kept staring and staring at all those blond, hunky WASPs in briefs swimming away in front of her eyes and not getting any.

    Just imagine how ticked off Coakley must have been. She’s up on a platform in a bikini striking her best poses in front of a roomful of male athletes, and they’re all avoiding her and turning her down for dates despite her best come-on, because they could tell she was, well, a nut. After being ignored one time too many, Jackie must have gone completely bananas in wacked-out, narcissistic fury. ‘I’ll show them,’ she must have been raging. ‘I’ll make all those WASP boys paaaay.’

    Lena Dunham herself could not have been more upset. Dunham took off her clothes on national TV in the world’s biggest attempt of, ‘Somebody take me, please!’ and all she landed was a weird-looking, neurotic Jewish guy Dunham ended up comparing unfavorably to a dog.

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

    I had a dream last night, and I swear it was a most horrifying dream, even more so than Dylan’s dream about St. Augustine.

    And it wasn’t just an isolated dream but a recurring one.

    In it, Hillary Clinton appeared naked. She had Stalin’s mustache, Mao’s hairstyle, a hammer & sickle armband, a Che Guevara tattoo on her ass, and letters L-E-O-N-T-R-O-T-S-K-Y marked on her forehead. She held an AK-47 in one hand and a chainsaw in the other. And she was standing there naked and growling and then cackling and then growling. At her feet was the head of Gaddafi, Assad, Putin, Trump, Joe the Plumber, Steve Sailer, Michelle Malkin, and the 500,000 children killed by Iraq sanctions, and 3.5 million dead Ukrainians during Great Famine.

    To be sure, the most frightening thing about the dream was she was naked, a sight more horrifying than any nude photo of Lena Dunham.

    Anyway, I was hoping I would wake up and be free of this terrible encounter when she began to mutter something about “White men… must be castrated. White men must be lobotomized… Burn Palestine, AIPAC forever, destroy Russia, hahahaha!!! Down with Syria. 500,000 dead Iraqi kids, hahahahaha!!!” And she put on a nurse cap like the one worn by Nurse Ratched in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. And then the room filled up with naked Bill Kristol and other neocons and they all began to have a wild orgy with Hillary like in Eyes Wide Shut to the music of Beyonce as sung by Michelle Obama riding a donkey humping an elephant.

    I woke up sweating and felt relieved… but then, my troubles weren’t over. I had to meet with some white folks, Russian friends, Palestinian student, Syrian woman. And I didn’t know how to relate this dream to them. How can I explain such a horrible dream to my friends with such tender emotions, whose peoples suffered so cruelly under globalist imperialism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  140. Marcus says:
    @SPMoore8
    Semi O/T:

    It looks like they've finally found the Great White Rapist in Madison, Wisconsin.

    Although it appears that the alleged sexual assaults came nowhere near penetration. Moreover, there appear to be other things that are bothering the complainants:

    “When I saw your mug shot, my roommate and I recognized you immediately,” Grace wrote. “We remembered you from a birthday party for one [of] our good friends. We remembered how your size and booming voice allowed you to command so much space. I didn’t know then that these attributes were just weapons in your arsenal.”
     
    and

    The writer claimed to be “quietly afraid” of Cook at the party.
    “We never spoke or interacted, but seeing you walk back and forth, exerting your alpha male presence and mass from room to room made me stand a little closer to my boyfriend, willing you to go away,”
     
    Uh .....

    They already found him with that swim team guy in Stanford, he got sexual assault not rape though

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    That wasn't great enough, because of the quality of the victim, the circumstances, and the underwhelming nature of the crime.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. @iffen
    liberal Jewish feminist journalist like Erdely

    What's essential here. liberal? Jewish? feminist?(3rd wave?)

    we know from Woody Allen and The Forward what you hate is also the subject of your sexual fantasies

    So, you are saying Allen hates incestuous pedophiles.

    Liberal, Jewish, feminist. What unites all the modern manifestations of those labels?

    Hatred of Christianity.

    Also, I strongly agree with the poster who said these frat boys probably remind her of the type of guys who rejected her in high school. I sure hope this Erdely character does some real soul-searching after this is all over. She should reassess her entire worldview and start offering to help fraternities in their philanthropic endeavors. There was a fraternity/sorority fundraiser I attended in college that raised tens of thousands of dollars for a Children’s Hospital. She could help out with stuff like that as acts of contrition.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    "I sure hope this Erdely character does some real soul-searching after this is all over."

    Assumes a soul not yet in evidence.

    "She should reassess her entire worldview and start offering to help fraternities in their philanthropic endeavors."

    Why the hell would you wish her off on any fraternity? The ones I knew of when I lived in a college town (Columbia, MO, home of Mizzou) did lots of service work without the "help" of nasty b!tches like Erderly.

    I was touched the day my homeless buddies invited me to go with them as they scavenged on Fraternity Row. Recyclable bottles were placed in boxes by the kitchen doors of the frat houses. But what really got me was usable items were very carefully placed on top of the trash in dumpsters. Never opened packages of underwear, socks and shower curtains ( which the homeless use as tarps) as well as other gently used but still usable items were waiting for my buddies.

    This happened at house after house.

    The frat boys were often loud and loutish when they partied on the weekends. But my street buddies had only good things to say about them. By contrast, the liberal students who gave nothing but tried to buddy up to my friends for street cred were regarded with contempt.

    I learned something that day.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Kylie
    "I still think RS should settle: not because of whether they will win or lose, but simply because it would be the honorable thing to do. I mean, if National Enquirer can settle, why not Rolling Stone?"

    Funny guy.

    Just because the RS story wasn't true in its particulars doesn't mean something bad didn't happen to Jackie. And that something is part of the rape culture crisis on campuses everywhere.

    Seriously, RS will just double down on the narrative. There's something more important here than mere honor. It's a question of who is right. Because nowadays who is right determines what is right.

    “Just because the RS story wasn’t true in its particulars doesn’t mean something bad didn’t happen to Jackie. And that something is part of the rape culture crisis on campuses everywhere. ”

    Lol, that’s exactly what it means, as you realize full well.

    To summarize:
    - RS story complete fabrication.
    - Jackie a crazed liar unable to own up and apologize for her slanderous claims.
    - Erdely an incompetent (or a liar or both) blinded by ugly prejudice.
    - “Rape culture” a sick fantasy of sick minds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Yes. Even the police who found no evidence she'd been a victim of a crime said that didn't mean nothing had happened to her.

    Again--because I think it bears repeating--something terrible did happen to Jackie: she was rejected by the guy she was chasing. To her, that justified any attempt to win him by any means necessary, no matter how harmful or unethical.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Lagertha says:
    @syonredux

    I agree with the rest of it, but can you link to the part where you show this is anti-Gentilic?
     
    The anti-WASP dog whistles are scattered throughout the piece:

    UVA's aura of preppy success, where throngs of toned, tanned and overwhelmingly blond students fanned across a landscape of neoclassical brick buildings,
     

    Jackie had been floored by Drew's invitation to dinner, followed by a "date function" at his fraternity, Phi Kappa Psi. The "upper tier" frat had a reputation of tremendous wealth, and its imposingly large house overlooked a vast manicured field, giving "Phi Psi" the undisputed best real estate along UVA's fraternity row known as Rugby Road.
     

    "One of my roommates said, 'Do you want to be responsible for something that's gonna paint UVA in a bad light?' " says Jackie, poking at a vegan burger at a restaurant on the Corner, UVA's popular retail strip. "But I said, 'UVA has flown under the radar for so long, someone has to say something about it, or else it's gonna be this system that keeps perpetuating!' " Jackie frowns. "My friend just said, 'You have to remember where your loyalty lies.'"

     


    From reading headlines today, one might think colleges have suddenly become hotbeds of protest by celebrated anti-rape activists. But like most colleges across America, genteel University of Virginia has no radical feminist culture seeking to upend the patriarchy. There are no red-tape-wearing protests like at Harvard, no "sex-positive" clubs promoting the female orgasm like at Yale, no mattress-hauling performance artists like at Columbia, and certainly no SlutWalks. UVA isn't an edgy or progressive campus by any stretch.
     

    Prestige is at the core of UVA's identity. Although a public school, its grounds of red-brick, white-columned buildings designed by founder Thomas Jefferson radiate old-money privilege, footnoted by the graffiti of UVA's many secret societies, whose insignias are neatly painted everywhere.
     

    Partying traditions fuse the decorum of the Southern aristocracy with binge drinking: At Cavalier football tailgates, the dress code is "girls in pearls, guys in ties" while students guzzle handles of vodka. Not for nothing is a UVA student nicknamed a Wahoo, as undergrads like to explain; though derived from a long-ago yell from Cavalier fans, a wahoo is also a fish that can drink twice its own body weight.

     


    Wahoos are enthralled to be at UVA and can't wait to tell you the reasons why, beginning, surprisingly, with Thomas Jefferson, whose lore is so powerfully woven into everyday UVA life that you practically expect to glimpse the man still walking the grounds in his waistcoat and pantaloons. Nearly every student I interviewed found a way to mention "TJ," speaking with zeal about their founding father's vision for an "academical village" in the idyllic setting of the Blue Ridge Mountains.
     

    "In these situations, the one who gets the most protection is either a wealthy kid, a legacy kid or an athlete. The more privileged he is, the more likely the woman has to die before he's held accountable."
     

    All you girls from Mary Washington
    and RMWC, never let a Cavalier an inch above your knee.
    He'll take you to his fraternity house and fill you full of beer.
    And soon you'll be the mother of a bastard Cavalier!
    "Rugby Road"
     

    Agree, syonredux. The first thing I thought of RS article several years ago: hatred of all things WASP. I can assure SFG & SPMoore8 that I have felt the anti-Gentile thing for a long time.

    Since I have always been an “Overwhelmingly Blonde” woman, and having been among students like Sabrina back in our halcyon days at the elite U’s we attended, I experienced many small digs ( from mostly Jewish girls) in the pretense of humor, about my looks and ethnicity (love the Vikingphobia!) Even later in life, Jewish women have commented about my looks or have said something like how overwhelming it is that Iceland or Finland are so chock-a-block full of blondes. It is always weird to me. My ancestors weren’t all blondes, but they did come from a part of the world that has an “overwhelming amount of blondes.” Duh.

    And, Jewish guys (fewer Haven Monahans,) chased me and obsessed over me at all parties. They were frustrated that as a “first year” I remained loyal to “hometown” boyfriend, who happened to be a college-drop-out, working heavy construction! I don’t know which was worse: I wasn’t into them or that I was into a college-drop out!

    We always had a lot of good laughs, and later, I had a few Jewish boyfriends. And you know what, their mothers froze me out. So, I moved on after college to work in the City, where being “overwhelmingly blonde,” was still a curse and an asset of some kind. A decade later, I married a WASP. Alike Children Play Better, an old Swedish saying.

    My Jewish women friends, in our late middle age, are primarily happily married women with children, who left the professional world to stay at home. And, honestly, Waspy/Wascy and Jewish (professional) women have always sneered at us, “stay-at-home” (formerly professional) women. But, our kids have soared…and have been successfully launched – so we win, yey!. Bottom line, women hate a lot of women. And young women compete for attention from boys…make up bad stuff when it suits them. Women will throw anyone under the bus. And, now, their male contemporaries are vulnerable, so why not? Having three sons, I would personally crush these types of conniving liars, major manipulators if they hurt my boys.

    But, I do feel that Christianity, and the ole’ WASP culture has been under assault for quite some time. Even when I am with atheists, they sneer at Christians (I sarcastically say, they must give up Christmas), but would never say disparaging things about Muslims and Jews. It is almost everyday that there is something said in the news about boys, fraternities, football players, athletes in general; wishing the SB terrorist was white; dumb-unwashed mid-westerners who cling to their guns and bibles; tearing down any plaques/statues of white, Christian men; renaming buildings, etc. I mean, when does it end? What is the point if history has moved on anyway, and that person died centuries ago, but yes, he did fabulous things for humanity in an imperfect time?

    Next year there will be a movement to change rename (lead by the NYTimesWaPo, no doubt) Washington DC to something palatable and multicultural. And, what about New York? Those fratty-boy, Dutch Wasps of ole’ Netherlands surely must be repudiated since they duped the Natives with junk jewelry to buy Manhattan? Maybe Manhattan Times? No, the anti-Christian/anti-wasp feel is out there. Even Hamilton cast-calls basically said, “no whites,” which they had to retract. I refuse to see that show until the tickets become reasonable. I mean, no theater seat in BWY is worth $2000+. If this is not liberal elitism/pretentiousness, I don’t know what is.

    Lastly, when people realize I belong to a Lutheran Church, they immediately say something along the lines of “well, I didn’t mean you.” Fear of death is usually the only thing to keep people from dumping on religion in the end – death is a lonely business. But, I don’t get why Christianity is singularly ridiculed for the later part of 25 years now. And, Christian communities that are predominantly white. The first Lutheran church we belonged to was 50-50 b& w congregation. The choir was excellent, and people volunteered a lot; there were a lot of social gatherings; there was a bowling alley in the basement! – very different from the Scandinavian churches in the 60′s-’till today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Jack D says:
    @Anonymous
    DuckDuckGo.com and Bing.com bring up somewhat more accurate search results for "UVA rape".

    Oh, I dunno. Among the first page of results on duckduckgo.com I found this:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/rape-at-uva-readers-say-jackie-wasnt-alone-20141121

    “I found Nicole Eramo very unfeeling as well — sociopathic, almost. She later told me she didn’t believe the studies that showed rapists, in particular, were repeat offenders of this heinous crime…” [does this make ANY sense?]

    and this:

    http://time.com/3619173/uva-rape-survivor-doubt-victim-story/

    “UVA Rape Survivor: Don’t Doubt a Victim’s Story Just Because It Sounds Horrific”

    Still up to this very day with no retraction and nothing to indicate that Jackie’s story was a complete fabrication. A lie goes halfway around the world before the truth can put its boots on.

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

    I was baffled by the lack of evidence of WMD
     
    Powell presented what appeared at the time to be persuasive evidence of chemical weapons. I was persuaded and I believe that Powell (and Cheney and Bush) were also.

    See this:

    http://www.famouspictures.org/iraqi-mobile-production-facilities/

    In the end, they captured trucks that looked very much like "the mobile biological agent factories" that Powell accused Saddam of having. But, they turned out to be devices for generating hydrogen for filling weather balloons as part of an artillery tracking system that the British had sold to Saddam.

    Similar to this Turkish system:

    http://www.ssm.gov.tr/katalog2007/data/038/urun%20ing/ASELSAN%20ingilizce/AFAMS/1.htm

    Oops. It was a stupid failure of intelligence but I don't think it was intentional. People have a way of seeing what they want to see and hearing what they want to hear. Iraqis OTOH are pathological liars so if an American intelligence officer said "we are willing to pay for intelligence regarding mobile biological agent factories", then for the right price an Iraqi will tell you all about them.

    Agreed. Bush and company may have been wrong, but I do not think they were intentionally lying, and there is a difference. There is also the small matter of numerous trucks going to Syria in the days before the war started.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Questionator
    The weight of the evidence is that they were intentionally lying. They were determined to invade Iraq one way of the other. By their strategy and reasoning, it was justified whether or not Saddam had "WMD" at that point in time.

    But by the way, since when is the possession of chemical weapons justification to invade a country and destroy it? The flimsiness of that justification--which was based on lies, I assure you--is reason enough to doubt their sincerity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. guest says:
    @The most deplorable one

    For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably.
     
    This is actually a very bad analysis.

    The reality is that two things are happening here:

    1. Young women are responding to incentives around going to college, when they probably shouldn't. As a result they are in oversupply in colleges at an age when sex is on everyone's mind. Way oversupply.

    2. Young men at college are now highly in demand and young women know they need to offer sex to hook one. However, young men are in control now. They can pump and dump with abandon.

    Moreover they are away from parental restrictions and engage in alcohol fueled parties.

    The issues really are structural here.

    Correction: *some* men are in control. Most aren’t. The average female has way, way more power than most men. But it doesn’t matter to them, because all they want is to be with the men who do have control. Which is the one advantage denied them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. peterike says:
    @Whiskey
    Steve once again you are missing the big picture. Which is anti-White male sentiment held widely by most White women, that shapes the GoodWhite hatred against BadWhite. What is after all the audience for Dick Wolfe than middle aged White women?

    You yourself wrote his writing staff was mostly divorced White women who made their ex husbands into villains.

    Erderly is just another woman. Like Hillary. Or Fauxcahontas, Elizabeth Warren. Or the late and unlamented Jo Cox, who was murdered by some homeless mentally ill White Dude outside her house. The same Cox who crusaded for mass Third World Immigration and help for Muslims and ignoring her native mentally ill. And homeless.

    White women have had it with White men -- they were promised Dambit! a bunch of hunks from Dawswon's Creek, the Vampire Diaries, and all the other chick trash shows. And what do they get?

    ORDINARY MEN. Who are as just as stunningly ordinary as they themselves secretly know themselves to be.

    Occam's Razor; if you remove the Jewish part, and just use the woman part, would the article be simpler and offer a greater understanding of the animus against White men?

    I think yes; the greater part of traditional Jewish Male Hollywood to use one example is not exactly a feminist hotbed, or one given to White male loathing. Rather its golf, classic cars, mansions. Michael Bay being a perfect example. How much White male loathing does his explosion heavy movies feature?

    Preordained saved vs. the damned, feeding into the real sexual resentments women have over not enough hunky Alphas to go around (and then they don't commit damnit) is what drives 99% of this anti-White male animus by White women and their enablers. That so many are Jewish are merely a reflection of high educational achievement by Jews leading to over-representation in higher ed.

    Coakley is not Jewish. Neither is Hillary. And eating ice cream does not cause murders in Chicago; hot weather enabling Blacks to be out more does.

    Occam’s Razor; if you remove the Jewish part, and just use the woman part, would the article be simpler and offer a greater understanding of the animus against White men?

    Whiskey, my friend, what you miss here is the causality. Where did this anti-male animus begin? Who was behind that? The early feminists, the vast majority of whom were Jewish academics or media types (e.g. Gloria Steinem) with the occasional loud mouth politician (e.g. Bella Abzug). No Jewish women, no anti-male feminism, plain and simple. And those Jewish Hollywood men had a bit to do with it too (recall Norman Lear’s dreadful “Maude,” to name just one prominent example of massive cultural anti-male conditioning — there are countless others).

    After decades of conditioning, yes, the anti white male animus is out there in full force and MAYBE you can remove the Jewish part, since the plague has spread from the rats to the populace at large. Certainly, there are plenty of non-Jewish women now on the male-hate bandwagon. But even still, the MEDIA ones still skew very Jewish. And they started it. Hell, they’re PROUD about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Moreover, the woman aspect alone wouldn't explain the "overwhelmingly blond" aspect in which the article is fairly dripping. Nor the Jefferson aspect, for that matter.
    , @Jack D
    You could just as well say that the thread that united the 2nd wave feminists was mental illness:

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/04/15/death-of-a-revolutionary

    When you read the story of Shulamith Firestone you don't know whether to laugh or cry. Maybe both.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. guest says:
    @Anon
    It's telling that the glib-glob(glib globalists), who harrumphed about Bush-and-Cheney's lies about WMD and Iraq War, are so eager to jump the gun on finding toxic WMD among The Eternal Goy.

    Haven Monahan is still on the prowl... and he's carrying WMD secrets that can not only destroy entire nations but denude women for easy raping.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgspnLq8Hpo

    I absolutely adore “glib-glob.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. guest says:
    @Marcus
    They already found him with that swim team guy in Stanford, he got sexual assault not rape though

    That wasn’t great enough, because of the quality of the victim, the circumstances, and the underwhelming nature of the crime.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Kylie says:
    @jimbojones
    "Just because the RS story wasn’t true in its particulars doesn’t mean something bad didn’t happen to Jackie. And that something is part of the rape culture crisis on campuses everywhere. "

    Lol, that's exactly what it means, as you realize full well.

    To summarize:
    - RS story complete fabrication.
    - Jackie a crazed liar unable to own up and apologize for her slanderous claims.
    - Erdely an incompetent (or a liar or both) blinded by ugly prejudice.
    - "Rape culture" a sick fantasy of sick minds.

    Yes. Even the police who found no evidence she’d been a victim of a crime said that didn’t mean nothing had happened to her.

    Again–because I think it bears repeating–something terrible did happen to Jackie: she was rejected by the guy she was chasing. To her, that justified any attempt to win him by any means necessary, no matter how harmful or unethical.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    What was it that happened to the Duke Lacrosse "victim?" She got arrested, or at least escorted to a rehab facility, or something, and she lied to escape the consequences? Was that it?

    It's always something. People like to say there's no smoke without a fire, and in these cases the fire is in the heads of these horrible women.

    By the way, the real crime in the Duke case was that these "privileged," upper-class, white, preppy jocks presumed they knew how to order strippers. What did they do, Google "stripper Durham NC?" I guarantee you I wouldn't end up with someone who looked like Crystal Mangum if I were throwing a party.

    What is higher education teaching these morons?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. peterike says:
    @Jack D
    Hard cases make bad law. The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    That being said, I think their framework (that there is there should be higher threshold for defaming "public figures", especially government officials) makes a certain amount of sense. The press is supposed to shed light on malfeasance by government officials, especially in one party strongholds where no one else will and they can't do this job if they live in fear of libels suits for the slightest error. If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction by the press (ask Trump).

    BTW, we have gone full circle where parts of the country are filled with one party (Democrat) strongholds, except now instead of the solid South, these strongholds are our big cities and northern coastal states.

    It's also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats - all those sheriffs with police dogs were Democrats.

    The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    Well the alternative to the alternative would be for the major Northern newspapers to take an even-handed view of things. But I guess that’s crazy talk.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. guest says:
    @peterike
    Occam’s Razor; if you remove the Jewish part, and just use the woman part, would the article be simpler and offer a greater understanding of the animus against White men?

    Whiskey, my friend, what you miss here is the causality. Where did this anti-male animus begin? Who was behind that? The early feminists, the vast majority of whom were Jewish academics or media types (e.g. Gloria Steinem) with the occasional loud mouth politician (e.g. Bella Abzug). No Jewish women, no anti-male feminism, plain and simple. And those Jewish Hollywood men had a bit to do with it too (recall Norman Lear's dreadful "Maude," to name just one prominent example of massive cultural anti-male conditioning -- there are countless others).

    After decades of conditioning, yes, the anti white male animus is out there in full force and MAYBE you can remove the Jewish part, since the plague has spread from the rats to the populace at large. Certainly, there are plenty of non-Jewish women now on the male-hate bandwagon. But even still, the MEDIA ones still skew very Jewish. And they started it. Hell, they're PROUD about it.

    Moreover, the woman aspect alone wouldn’t explain the “overwhelmingly blond” aspect in which the article is fairly dripping. Nor the Jefferson aspect, for that matter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. guest says:
    @Kylie
    Yes. Even the police who found no evidence she'd been a victim of a crime said that didn't mean nothing had happened to her.

    Again--because I think it bears repeating--something terrible did happen to Jackie: she was rejected by the guy she was chasing. To her, that justified any attempt to win him by any means necessary, no matter how harmful or unethical.

    What was it that happened to the Duke Lacrosse “victim?” She got arrested, or at least escorted to a rehab facility, or something, and she lied to escape the consequences? Was that it?

    It’s always something. People like to say there’s no smoke without a fire, and in these cases the fire is in the heads of these horrible women.

    By the way, the real crime in the Duke case was that these “privileged,” upper-class, white, preppy jocks presumed they knew how to order strippers. What did they do, Google “stripper Durham NC?” I guarantee you I wouldn’t end up with someone who looked like Crystal Mangum if I were throwing a party.

    What is higher education teaching these morons?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    I don't recall the details of what happened with Crystal Mangum after she cried rape. I do know nothing happened to her.

    Ugh, she's an even nastier piece of work than I realized.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_Mangum
    , @Jack D
    They apparently did order white strippers but instead Mangum and another black stripper arrived. I assume at that point there were already a bunch of guys gathered and they figured that black strippers were better than nothing. Wrong. Duke guys are usually pretty smart but admissions standards are lower for athletes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Kylie says:
    @Formerly CARealist
    Liberal, Jewish, feminist. What unites all the modern manifestations of those labels?

    Hatred of Christianity.

    Also, I strongly agree with the poster who said these frat boys probably remind her of the type of guys who rejected her in high school. I sure hope this Erdely character does some real soul-searching after this is all over. She should reassess her entire worldview and start offering to help fraternities in their philanthropic endeavors. There was a fraternity/sorority fundraiser I attended in college that raised tens of thousands of dollars for a Children's Hospital. She could help out with stuff like that as acts of contrition.

    “I sure hope this Erdely character does some real soul-searching after this is all over.”

    Assumes a soul not yet in evidence.

    “She should reassess her entire worldview and start offering to help fraternities in their philanthropic endeavors.”

    Why the hell would you wish her off on any fraternity? The ones I knew of when I lived in a college town (Columbia, MO, home of Mizzou) did lots of service work without the “help” of nasty b!tches like Erderly.

    I was touched the day my homeless buddies invited me to go with them as they scavenged on Fraternity Row. Recyclable bottles were placed in boxes by the kitchen doors of the frat houses. But what really got me was usable items were very carefully placed on top of the trash in dumpsters. Never opened packages of underwear, socks and shower curtains ( which the homeless use as tarps) as well as other gently used but still usable items were waiting for my buddies.

    This happened at house after house.

    The frat boys were often loud and loutish when they partied on the weekends. But my street buddies had only good things to say about them. By contrast, the liberal students who gave nothing but tried to buddy up to my friends for street cred were regarded with contempt.

    I learned something that day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Why do you have homeless buddies?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. guest says:
    @Kylie
    "I sure hope this Erdely character does some real soul-searching after this is all over."

    Assumes a soul not yet in evidence.

    "She should reassess her entire worldview and start offering to help fraternities in their philanthropic endeavors."

    Why the hell would you wish her off on any fraternity? The ones I knew of when I lived in a college town (Columbia, MO, home of Mizzou) did lots of service work without the "help" of nasty b!tches like Erderly.

    I was touched the day my homeless buddies invited me to go with them as they scavenged on Fraternity Row. Recyclable bottles were placed in boxes by the kitchen doors of the frat houses. But what really got me was usable items were very carefully placed on top of the trash in dumpsters. Never opened packages of underwear, socks and shower curtains ( which the homeless use as tarps) as well as other gently used but still usable items were waiting for my buddies.

    This happened at house after house.

    The frat boys were often loud and loutish when they partied on the weekends. But my street buddies had only good things to say about them. By contrast, the liberal students who gave nothing but tried to buddy up to my friends for street cred were regarded with contempt.

    I learned something that day.

    Why do you have homeless buddies?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Kylie says:
    @guest
    What was it that happened to the Duke Lacrosse "victim?" She got arrested, or at least escorted to a rehab facility, or something, and she lied to escape the consequences? Was that it?

    It's always something. People like to say there's no smoke without a fire, and in these cases the fire is in the heads of these horrible women.

    By the way, the real crime in the Duke case was that these "privileged," upper-class, white, preppy jocks presumed they knew how to order strippers. What did they do, Google "stripper Durham NC?" I guarantee you I wouldn't end up with someone who looked like Crystal Mangum if I were throwing a party.

    What is higher education teaching these morons?

    I don’t recall the details of what happened with Crystal Mangum after she cried rape. I do know nothing happened to her.

    Ugh, she’s an even nastier piece of work than I realized.

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    This article has a fuller account:

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

    The Duke lacrosse case was largely the result of overly zealous police work. Jackie knew exactly what she was doing when she created her elaborate catfishing scheme over a long period. Mangum (none too bright even when sober) mumbled something about being raped in a drug addled, muddle headed attempt to get out of trouble with the cops and they picked up the ball and ran with it and ran and ran and ran. Mangum by herself was not capable of planning more than 5 minutes ahead. The difference was black and white, if you know what I mean. The difference between an elaborate bank fraud and a mugging. Both are crimes but they are different.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Ivy says:
    @Verymuchalive
    Libel can result in considerable harm, not only financial, to those defamed. This is a civil wrong and it is reasonable that there should be a civil remedy for those defamed.
    Secondly, exposure in the media of journalistic lies and defamation assumes the existence of a genuinely free press where mainstream journals would be willing to publish such stories. In modern America, this is no longer the case. The MSM is largely owned by a small number of very large corporations. These publish a very narrow Neocon-Neolib take on events. They can and do suppress stories which do not fit their views and interests, as the publisher of this website, Mr Unz, has repeatedly demonstrated, e.g. WTA 800.
    Without the internet, the UVA Rape Hoax would have been quickly confined to a few low circulation, non-mainstream print journals. The story would have been quickly ignored by the MSM .
    Without the libel laws, Rolling Stone and Erdely would face no penalty for their wrongdoing. They would shrug it off and continue to claim the story is correct. There would be no retraction by Rolling Stone. As Mr Sailer has written, a liberal feminist hack " like Erdely is paid well to vilify as haters those she hates." She is not going to stop until she is held legally to account. Even if she escapes liability on a technicality, this civil trial has produced enough evidence to destroy her credibility as a "journalist".
    On a more general point. Consider if there were no libel laws. The MSM would be under no obligations AT ALL to present a truthful report. They could just fabricate everything and present it as true. You may say that they are doing so already. True, but libel is an important break on this. Consider if there were no libel laws what the MSM would do concerning Trump. It would be several times worse than their present coverage.
    The power of the MSM is waning, but most people still get their "news" from it. On balance, I think the libel laws are a good thing.

    Modern journalism is subject to many errors of omission and of commission, in between the occasional nuggets of truth and advertiser-provided content.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Lagertha says:
    @Mike Zwick
    When I read the Rolling Stone article, I wondered how cut up and swollen the girl was when she supposedly had a beer bottle broken over her face. It sort of bothered me and made me suspicious that something wasn't right. I assumed that there must be more to this since Rolling Stone would not just make stuff up. But, I am not a professional journalist or anything other than an avid reader. You would think that professional journalists would be more on the ball, but like many liberals, Erdley probably just led a very sheltered life where her only experience with fights with broken beer bottles were ones in old John Wayne or Three Stooges movies where the glass was fake.

    I know. Upon reading your post I had this flash back of No Way Out. When the Shawn Young character ( a call girl) gets hurled over the mezzanine (by bad guy Gene Hackman) and crashes onto the glass table; you just know she is dead. And, poor Kevin Costner’s character sees the glass shards and bloody corpse of his lover. Maybe Jackie saw that movie too? Kevin was a prototype of Haven? Having cut myself really badly while working on a project, glass cuts are the worst and there is so much blood, and it hurts – your nerve endings are on fire. Even if you are drunk you will feel the pain, recoil and seek treatment…or you die of blood loss, possibly. Stitches are needed for most glass lacerations. It leaves ugly scars.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Right on glass cuts. Every once in a while some moron tries to escape by busting through a window only to get badly sliced by the shards. It ain't like Hollywood.
    , @Coemgen
    Interesting. Haven is the pronunciation of the vocative case of Kevin akin to Seumas/Hamish.
    , @guest
    "Kevin was a prototype of Haven?"

    Maybe, since Kevin was playing a KGB spy posing as an American naval officer, or something like that. In a sense he, too, didn't exist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. Nico says:
    @Jack D
    Hard cases make bad law. The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    That being said, I think their framework (that there is there should be higher threshold for defaming "public figures", especially government officials) makes a certain amount of sense. The press is supposed to shed light on malfeasance by government officials, especially in one party strongholds where no one else will and they can't do this job if they live in fear of libels suits for the slightest error. If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction by the press (ask Trump).

    BTW, we have gone full circle where parts of the country are filled with one party (Democrat) strongholds, except now instead of the solid South, these strongholds are our big cities and northern coastal states.

    It's also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats - all those sheriffs with police dogs were Democrats.

    Hard cases make bad law. The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    Cry me a river.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Jack D says:
    @peterike
    Occam’s Razor; if you remove the Jewish part, and just use the woman part, would the article be simpler and offer a greater understanding of the animus against White men?

    Whiskey, my friend, what you miss here is the causality. Where did this anti-male animus begin? Who was behind that? The early feminists, the vast majority of whom were Jewish academics or media types (e.g. Gloria Steinem) with the occasional loud mouth politician (e.g. Bella Abzug). No Jewish women, no anti-male feminism, plain and simple. And those Jewish Hollywood men had a bit to do with it too (recall Norman Lear's dreadful "Maude," to name just one prominent example of massive cultural anti-male conditioning -- there are countless others).

    After decades of conditioning, yes, the anti white male animus is out there in full force and MAYBE you can remove the Jewish part, since the plague has spread from the rats to the populace at large. Certainly, there are plenty of non-Jewish women now on the male-hate bandwagon. But even still, the MEDIA ones still skew very Jewish. And they started it. Hell, they're PROUD about it.

    You could just as well say that the thread that united the 2nd wave feminists was mental illness:

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/04/15/death-of-a-revolutionary

    When you read the story of Shulamith Firestone you don’t know whether to laugh or cry. Maybe both.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Thea says:
    @SPMoore8
    Don't forget that Jackie not only invented the rape story (and the beer bottle assault) in order to get attention, forgive her scholastic performance, and get street cred in the feminist community, but she also told Ryan that she was dying of a rare disease, and she started a rumor that Kathryn had syphilis. And, apparently, she has no memory of any of this because she is suffering from PTSD from the "sexual assault." Get thee behind me, Jackie!

    I have a feeling Eramo will not win her suit. The judge's decision that she is a public figure, combined with the judge's weird solicitude to Jackie, suggests that the jury will not find RS responsible, which means they will get away with this fiasco unpunished, except for legal fees.

    In that respect, Owen is right; if Eramo loses the libel suit, then someone can use that as a talking point to validate Jackie in the future.

    I still think RS should settle: not because of whether they will win or lose, but simply because it would be the honorable thing to do. I mean, if National Enquirer can settle, why not Rolling Stone?

    It will set a horrible precedent if Eramo loses. Like the travesty of the cake bakers being forced to make wedding cakes for sodomites. There will be more outrageous lies posing as journalism.

    The left never loses. They are some times forced to take a break but when it’s over they kept pushing the world leftward into the abyss.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Anon
    "It will set a horrible precedent if Eramo loses."

    How could malice not have been involved when Jackie herself expressed affection-bordering-on-love for Eramo?

    Erderly cooked stuff up with maliciousness rivaling that of Lillian Hellman.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3daEC6Fbzw

    But, let us hypothetically say Erderly is really very incompetent and just messed up royally. Could she be convicted of truth-slaughter if not truth-murder(or truthcide)?

    Maybe competence is a kind of justice, and incompetence is a kind of injustice.

    No matter one's ideology, pure incompetence is injustice. It kills. During Mao's Cultural Revolution, the notion of red-over-expert led to horrors.

    Suppose there is a white conservative who is deemed 'racist' but is competent as doctor. Suppose there is a POC who is so PC but lousy as doctor.
    Is there justice in letting the POC quack operate on your child?
    Which one would you trust to operate on your child?

    While people-of-competence can be bigoted or oppressive, competence is a justice and virtue in its own right. South Africa is a good example. Sure, apartheid was racially unequal and unjust(from purely abstract point of view). But it protected white competence in constructing and maintaining a modern society. That was why even blacks from neighboring nations migrated to South Africa for jobs. White Competence meant jobs, food, money, and opportunity.

    Same thing with Hong Kong. Yes, it was a British colony created under imperialism. In that sense, it was an 'unjust' order compared to China ruled by Chinese themselves.
    One could say British privilege in HK was 'racist'. But the Brits were very competent whereas Maoist China was a hellhole of incompetence. Competence is its own justice, its own reward, and people in Hong Kong, despite the unfair colonial setting, enjoyed better lives and more legal justice. Competent British Imperialism did more good for people in Hong Kong than incompetent Social Justice Mania did for people in China.

    No amount of themes of social justice does much good without competence and truth. BLM is a mess because it doesn't address the sheer incompetence of blacks as parents, teachers, managers, and administrators. And it has zero use for truth of why the black community is the way it is.

    Now, competence isn't enough. Nazi Germans were competent in many areas but brutal and crazy in international affairs.

    But all this talk of justice without competence is just another kind of injustice. Filling up schools with idiotic incompetent teachers in the name of 'social justice' just does harm to kids. Filling up fire departments with inferior incompetent firemen can lead to deaths of innocent lives.

    "Justice" without competence is injustice:

    https://youtu.be/ZB7HYhUpDz8?t=2h47s

    If we are generous and say Erderly was just incompetent, it is still a gross miscarriage of injustice because no one so incompetent should have been paid so much by a major publication to write such total nonsense.

    What baffles me is she had a history of lying before this. But she was just slapped on the wrist. The Tribalism among journalism leads to incompetence in discerning what is true and untrue.

    Of course, I don't think Erderly's real problem was lack of competence. I'll bet she is reasonably smart. She knows the science of journalism. She knew she was writing a hit piece, and she drew inspiration from other liars in journalism.
    The most we can say for her is she is a victim of her own pathological personality, as with Lillian Hellman. Maybe like a junkie, she couldn't help it.

    Now, the most controversial topic of 21st century will be the matter of whether all races are equally competent. It could be James Watson was onto something when he said blacks, on average, are less competent than other races.

    Some peoples are higher up on the People-of-Competence scale.

    And despite PC's dichotomy of 'white privilege' and 'people of color', the real social divisions in America are between peoples-of-competence and peoples-of-incompetence.

    POCOM and POICOM.

    Look at Silicon Valley. Whites, Jews, Hindus, East Asians. POCOM.

    What is nutty about America is Jews are the most competent people who agitate the most incompetent people(mainly blacks but even Muslims) against other competent peoples.

    , @dr kill
    Eramo is one of them. I could care less if she wins or loses. I just like hearing the story. Over and over is fine with me. I do hope that the Phi Psi's crush those cockroaches at RS.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. slumber_j says:
    @Kylie
    Richard Burton. Anthony Hopkins.

    Dylan Thomas. Et al.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Yes! That's the one I couldn't remember.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. There is indeed a rape culture, and to excuse a pun, the Obama people have been “on top of this” question:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/obama-writer-apologizes-hillary-clinton-crass-act-article-1.354174

    (Dude, that chick is old enough to be your grandma and you obviously are lacking in “experience” with any “mature” women based on where you placed your hand. Don’t they have a course in Anatomy in the college you attended?)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  164. Jack D says:
    @Kylie
    I don't recall the details of what happened with Crystal Mangum after she cried rape. I do know nothing happened to her.

    Ugh, she's an even nastier piece of work than I realized.

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

    This article has a fuller account:

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

    The Duke lacrosse case was largely the result of overly zealous police work. Jackie knew exactly what she was doing when she created her elaborate catfishing scheme over a long period. Mangum (none too bright even when sober) mumbled something about being raped in a drug addled, muddle headed attempt to get out of trouble with the cops and they picked up the ball and ran with it and ran and ran and ran. Mangum by herself was not capable of planning more than 5 minutes ahead. The difference was black and white, if you know what I mean. The difference between an elaborate bank fraud and a mugging. Both are crimes but they are different.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kylie
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. Jack D says:
    @guest
    What was it that happened to the Duke Lacrosse "victim?" She got arrested, or at least escorted to a rehab facility, or something, and she lied to escape the consequences? Was that it?

    It's always something. People like to say there's no smoke without a fire, and in these cases the fire is in the heads of these horrible women.

    By the way, the real crime in the Duke case was that these "privileged," upper-class, white, preppy jocks presumed they knew how to order strippers. What did they do, Google "stripper Durham NC?" I guarantee you I wouldn't end up with someone who looked like Crystal Mangum if I were throwing a party.

    What is higher education teaching these morons?

    They apparently did order white strippers but instead Mangum and another black stripper arrived. I assume at that point there were already a bunch of guys gathered and they figured that black strippers were better than nothing. Wrong. Duke guys are usually pretty smart but admissions standards are lower for athletes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. Clyde says:
    @PiltdownMan

    She must of had dreams of getting that big score.
     
    Are big(gish) money contracts like this a standard thing in magazine journalism in our times? I thought print journalism had fallen on hard times.

    Or are these one-off situations, where the size of the payment results from the writer being connected or owed in some manner, rather than it indicating talent or star power? That is, is corruption or nepotism of some sort going on? Who is Sabrina Erdely anyway?

    I guess I'm thinking of Chelsea Clinton's $600k gig at NBC.

    Since the once mega-profitable Rolling Stone magazine is today just a website with a small print run, where do they get the money to pay her $300,000 over two years for seven stories? It can be done cheaper, with fact checking and interviewing others close to the story.

    The founder is boy chaser Jann Wenner
    Net worth
    $700 million USD

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. This is the post I made on Yahoo’s now really sucky comment section on this story.

    For those who remember the “X-Files” TV series. The Fox Mulder character as played by David Duchovny had a poster in his office that stated “I Want To Believe” The writer, Sabrina Rubin Erdely did not approach this story as a journalist but as teller of a tale she wanted to hear. “Jackie’s” story perfectly fit the narrative the Erdely has already formulated in her head, so sadly, she had no natural skepticism.

    Yahoo’s bias is obvious, but the comment section was one of last fun places to battle SJW’s, however they’ve taken away the up and down votes, boring!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  168. Clyde says:
    @Olorin
    Her hubby, Peter Erdely, is apparently making bank as a Center City trial lawyer, and they own a flat in the Jewelers' Row part of Philly. Or anyway did in 2014 when last I checked.

    Her entire CV is one bad Lifetime Original Movie script/Oprah theme week show after another. White suburban whores, white priests raping vulnerable boys, white mommy heroin addicts.

    Our host called this one in the air: she epitomizes absolute vehement hatred of founding stock Americans, which really has to burn when you're reminded of it everywhere you go in Philly.

    If my experience is any guide, her ilk are common in Philadelphia's upscale circles.

    She's also a sucker for the phantasms of the insane.

    http://www.newsweek.com/2016/01/29/billy-doe-altar-boy-sends-four-men-prison-philadelphia-rape-case-417565.html

    https://riversong.wordpress.com/journalistic-fabulism-and-ideological-agendas/

    Remember, she went into UPenn as a pre-med student (psychiatry) but couldn't hack it, so went into journalism. She wasn't an Annenberger, but a College grad.

    Here's a good snapshot of all that, and before you read it, order up a truckload of triple parens:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20160307_Penn_s_journalists_move_on_after_spotlight_s_glare.html

    Peter Erdely, yes just looked at his website. It is tough running a one man law office. Thanks for cluing me in. So they make maybe 300-500k per year. Maybe over extended with two homes? Private tuition for their two children.

    From his website:
    Extensive Jury Trial and Criminal Expertise:
    Prior to founding the firm, Peter served as a prosecutor with the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office. In eight years with the DA’s Office, Peter rose through many divisions, including the elite Repeat Offenders Unit, Federal Litigation Unit and Major Trials Units. He prosecuted over 40 major jury trials to verdict. He also tried hundreds of bench trials, and over one thousand preliminary hearings. Peter’s jury trials include winning a 65-130 year sentence against a gunman who robbed 13 women and children in a nail salon. He also won the first animal cruelty jury trial conviction in Philadelphia history, against a man who was running an extensive dog fighting ring from his home.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Olorin
    He didn't start out in individual practice.

    Caught my eye: the part where he advertises that he has helped DNA experts testify on forensics in rape trials. You'd think some of that might attention to detail/data have rubbed off on his distaff side, but apparently not.

    Did you see:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/news/special_packages/inquirer/20091214_Busy_lawyers__Balky_victims__Botched_logistics_.html

    Grounds for racial realism you'd think. Instead, we see much to suggest (at least on the wife's part) doubling down on Hate Whitey.


    So they make maybe 300-500k per year. Maybe over extended with two homes?
     
    No idea but the one $875K, five bedroom townhouse in Old Philly suggests it's possible. RS offered her a $300K contract for seven stories ($40K for the UVA piece). That's not chump change.

    She hasn't done any pieces since 10/01 that I've found on Jews selling doom for profit.

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/10/15/get-your-gas-masks-here

    As you note, individual practice trial lawyers in Center City Philly would have to work pretty hard, or anyway be well connected, to pull down half a mil after all the bills were paid. Several of the ones I knew lived outside town in the less expensive burbs...but family money can make that easier.

    Still, I don't think she did it for money.

    These folks live in an echo chamber bubble. IME they're like the shtetl Jews of the Lower East Side of Manhattan in the 19-Aughts. (I've known both of those types.) Extremely provincial and hermetic in their views, regardless of their signalling of cosmopolitanism. Stuck in a limited repertoire of stories. Under all the access-class flash, very little innovative adaptive substance.

    My sense back in the day was that part of the Hate Whitey meme was precisely that so many whites are descended from millennia of explorers who encounter the unknown on its terms and adapt just fine. I figured this is why they revile our space program, our explorers, our innovators...and demand we hold all that back for, say, black preachers in mule carts 'protesting' at the Apollo launch. (And who gave them that idea, and the funds to act out the social drama?)

    IME Jews by contrast are like barnacles. Once they plant their noggins on a rock, movement is highly traumatic. I figure that's why they're always bashing on about "diaspora" and demanding everyone give them a homeland (while surrendering ours). They don't cotton to engagement with unfamiliar places and translate this, like everything else, into neurosis around Suffering and chosenmania.

    Sabrina Rubin's pieces reek of hatred of every white/founding stock institution of social mobility for our best and brightest young people. That mindset substitutes for our genomically robust mobility a shallower type--Africans pouring out of Africa, e.g.--then inflicts it on everyone as the Law.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Lagertha
    I know. Upon reading your post I had this flash back of No Way Out. When the Shawn Young character ( a call girl) gets hurled over the mezzanine (by bad guy Gene Hackman) and crashes onto the glass table; you just know she is dead. And, poor Kevin Costner's character sees the glass shards and bloody corpse of his lover. Maybe Jackie saw that movie too? Kevin was a prototype of Haven? Having cut myself really badly while working on a project, glass cuts are the worst and there is so much blood, and it hurts - your nerve endings are on fire. Even if you are drunk you will feel the pain, recoil and seek treatment...or you die of blood loss, possibly. Stitches are needed for most glass lacerations. It leaves ugly scars.

    Right on glass cuts. Every once in a while some moron tries to escape by busting through a window only to get badly sliced by the shards. It ain’t like Hollywood.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Clyde says:
    @Jack D
    Contrast the "photo illustration" that goes with the story (a virginal looking girl with the paw of a dirty old man on her shoulder) with Berrin's actual come hither self-presentation:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/724721123414278144/D13tQSSs_400x400.jpg

    I realize that part of "female empowerment" is that nothing short of a direct verbal command from the princess in question is sufficient to allow her Highness to be touched, but in a sane world it would appear that Berrin is playing a double game.

    Berrin wrote many guys she interviewed groped her. She mentioned Brett Ratner. If she really didn’t like all these come ons why didn’t she find a new line of work? The answer must be she liked some of them even with some groping on the side. Groping is a million miles from penetration and real rape.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @Kylie
    Richard Burton. Anthony Hopkins.

    Anthony Hopkins has been dry for years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Yes. I know Anthony Hopkins has been sober for years. But he's still an alcoholic. No disrespect intended. I saw an interview in which he described drinking himself into a blackout and coming to in some other city, not knowing how he got there. That beats the story of my buddy, "Moonshine", who got drunk on New Year's Eve and came to a week later.

    Or maybe not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @Rob McX
    I took a look at Rolling Stone's site to get an idea of their agenda. At the top of the page is the article "Free Speech Might Be Another Victim of This Election".

    Excerpt:

    The Trump campaign could end up being an Alamo for civil liberties in the same way [as 9/11]. Like al-Qaeda, Trump's campaign has been characterized as a threat extreme enough to justify exceptions to all civil liberties concepts. He is a paradigm-changer, his possible presidency an "extinction-level event," as Andrew Sullivan put it, against which all conceivable measures have to be contemplated.
     
    Clearly, the UVA fiasco isn't putting them off their crusade against white Americans.

    The leftist descriptions of Trump and his possible presidency invariably employ the overwrought language of classic mass hysteria.

    And hysteria, as its etymology suggests, is the right term here. If one goes down the list of major episodes of mass hysteria, one can’t fail to notice that in virtually every case, it involves women or girls:

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

    Even the Salem Witch scare was, of course, instigated by a group of girls.

    It’s remarkable how much the hysteria over Trump is caused by little more than his saying things that women find offensive. So many of them seem incapable of entertaining and weighing any issue other than his “offensiveness”. (This is pretty much what Newt Gingrich was getting at in his recent encounter with the Megyn Kelly, the exemplar of the type.)

    Today’s left has reduced itself to hysterical women of both sexes. For them indeed a Trump presidency seems like “an extinction level event.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Newt was brilliant! I enjoyed having that smug, owned Kelly finally be bitch slapped for her hypocrisy - when she would not call Bill a predator, Newt had her at checkmate - her make-up is so thick that her flushed face didn't betray her, but her eyes were a dead give away. I had liked her in the past; now she blows-off all of Hillary's deception & machinations to get "the Precious," and I can't listen to the traitor, Kelly anymore. She has no integrity, not someone that stands for truth. She still has that ax to grind for Trump and the comments last year, I suppose, and is sour about it. She's like Erdley, unwilling to give up "the narrative," even if it's bullshit :)!
    , @Kylie
    "It’s remarkable how much the hysteria over Trump is caused by little more than his saying things that women find offensive."

    No. Things that SOME women find offensive. I'm surprised and pleased to see my conservative Facebook friends post that they simply don't care what he allegedly said or did. They still support him.

    Also no, it's not remarkable. The left loves any excuse to get hysterical over real or imagined racist and/or sexist offenses.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Jack D
    Hard cases make bad law. The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    That being said, I think their framework (that there is there should be higher threshold for defaming "public figures", especially government officials) makes a certain amount of sense. The press is supposed to shed light on malfeasance by government officials, especially in one party strongholds where no one else will and they can't do this job if they live in fear of libels suits for the slightest error. If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction by the press (ask Trump).

    BTW, we have gone full circle where parts of the country are filled with one party (Democrat) strongholds, except now instead of the solid South, these strongholds are our big cities and northern coastal states.

    It's also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats - all those sheriffs with police dogs were Democrats.

    The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    Wouldn’t they be able to rely on the truth defense?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. OT,

    but what the hell is physically wrong with this woman?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Oh my....they are "spotting her." Isn't that the same dude (2nd guy) who carried that epipen-like syringe?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Thea
    It will set a horrible precedent if Eramo loses. Like the travesty of the cake bakers being forced to make wedding cakes for sodomites. There will be more outrageous lies posing as journalism.

    The left never loses. They are some times forced to take a break but when it's over they kept pushing the world leftward into the abyss.

    “It will set a horrible precedent if Eramo loses.”

    How could malice not have been involved when Jackie herself expressed affection-bordering-on-love for Eramo?

    Erderly cooked stuff up with maliciousness rivaling that of Lillian Hellman.

    But, let us hypothetically say Erderly is really very incompetent and just messed up royally. Could she be convicted of truth-slaughter if not truth-murder(or truthcide)?

    Maybe competence is a kind of justice, and incompetence is a kind of injustice.

    No matter one’s ideology, pure incompetence is injustice. It kills. During Mao’s Cultural Revolution, the notion of red-over-expert led to horrors.

    Suppose there is a white conservative who is deemed ‘racist’ but is competent as doctor. Suppose there is a POC who is so PC but lousy as doctor.
    Is there justice in letting the POC quack operate on your child?
    Which one would you trust to operate on your child?

    While people-of-competence can be bigoted or oppressive, competence is a justice and virtue in its own right. South Africa is a good example. Sure, apartheid was racially unequal and unjust(from purely abstract point of view). But it protected white competence in constructing and maintaining a modern society. That was why even blacks from neighboring nations migrated to South Africa for jobs. White Competence meant jobs, food, money, and opportunity.

    Same thing with Hong Kong. Yes, it was a British colony created under imperialism. In that sense, it was an ‘unjust’ order compared to China ruled by Chinese themselves.
    One could say British privilege in HK was ‘racist’. But the Brits were very competent whereas Maoist China was a hellhole of incompetence. Competence is its own justice, its own reward, and people in Hong Kong, despite the unfair colonial setting, enjoyed better lives and more legal justice. Competent British Imperialism did more good for people in Hong Kong than incompetent Social Justice Mania did for people in China.

    No amount of themes of social justice does much good without competence and truth. BLM is a mess because it doesn’t address the sheer incompetence of blacks as parents, teachers, managers, and administrators. And it has zero use for truth of why the black community is the way it is.

    Now, competence isn’t enough. Nazi Germans were competent in many areas but brutal and crazy in international affairs.

    But all this talk of justice without competence is just another kind of injustice. Filling up schools with idiotic incompetent teachers in the name of ‘social justice’ just does harm to kids. Filling up fire departments with inferior incompetent firemen can lead to deaths of innocent lives.

    “Justice” without competence is injustice:

    If we are generous and say Erderly was just incompetent, it is still a gross miscarriage of injustice because no one so incompetent should have been paid so much by a major publication to write such total nonsense.

    What baffles me is she had a history of lying before this. But she was just slapped on the wrist. The Tribalism among journalism leads to incompetence in discerning what is true and untrue.

    Of course, I don’t think Erderly’s real problem was lack of competence. I’ll bet she is reasonably smart. She knows the science of journalism. She knew she was writing a hit piece, and she drew inspiration from other liars in journalism.
    The most we can say for her is she is a victim of her own pathological personality, as with Lillian Hellman. Maybe like a junkie, she couldn’t help it.

    Now, the most controversial topic of 21st century will be the matter of whether all races are equally competent. It could be James Watson was onto something when he said blacks, on average, are less competent than other races.

    Some peoples are higher up on the People-of-Competence scale.

    And despite PC’s dichotomy of ‘white privilege’ and ‘people of color’, the real social divisions in America are between peoples-of-competence and peoples-of-incompetence.

    POCOM and POICOM.

    Look at Silicon Valley. Whites, Jews, Hindus, East Asians. POCOM.

    What is nutty about America is Jews are the most competent people who agitate the most incompetent people(mainly blacks but even Muslims) against other competent peoples.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Questionator
    How could malice not have been involved when Jackie herself expressed affection-bordering-on-love for Eramo?

    Erderly cooked stuff up with maliciousness rivaling that of Lillian Hellman.


    One of the traits that enables jews to be very effective persuaders is their capacity for self-deception.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Jim Don Bob
    Agreed. Bush and company may have been wrong, but I do not think they were intentionally lying, and there is a difference. There is also the small matter of numerous trucks going to Syria in the days before the war started.

    The weight of the evidence is that they were intentionally lying. They were determined to invade Iraq one way of the other. By their strategy and reasoning, it was justified whether or not Saddam had “WMD” at that point in time.

    But by the way, since when is the possession of chemical weapons justification to invade a country and destroy it? The flimsiness of that justification–which was based on lies, I assure you–is reason enough to doubt their sincerity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    This is the turning point for me to never trust the GOP again, and, several years later, DNC is forever bad. I am partyless, and will vote for Trump, along with sooo many women here, in New England. The public trust for both parties is sooo over.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Kylie says:
    @Jim Don Bob
    Anthony Hopkins has been dry for years.

    Yes. I know Anthony Hopkins has been sober for years. But he’s still an alcoholic. No disrespect intended. I saw an interview in which he described drinking himself into a blackout and coming to in some other city, not knowing how he got there. That beats the story of my buddy, “Moonshine”, who got drunk on New Year’s Eve and came to a week later.

    Or maybe not.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. @Anon
    "It will set a horrible precedent if Eramo loses."

    How could malice not have been involved when Jackie herself expressed affection-bordering-on-love for Eramo?

    Erderly cooked stuff up with maliciousness rivaling that of Lillian Hellman.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3daEC6Fbzw

    But, let us hypothetically say Erderly is really very incompetent and just messed up royally. Could she be convicted of truth-slaughter if not truth-murder(or truthcide)?

    Maybe competence is a kind of justice, and incompetence is a kind of injustice.

    No matter one's ideology, pure incompetence is injustice. It kills. During Mao's Cultural Revolution, the notion of red-over-expert led to horrors.

    Suppose there is a white conservative who is deemed 'racist' but is competent as doctor. Suppose there is a POC who is so PC but lousy as doctor.
    Is there justice in letting the POC quack operate on your child?
    Which one would you trust to operate on your child?

    While people-of-competence can be bigoted or oppressive, competence is a justice and virtue in its own right. South Africa is a good example. Sure, apartheid was racially unequal and unjust(from purely abstract point of view). But it protected white competence in constructing and maintaining a modern society. That was why even blacks from neighboring nations migrated to South Africa for jobs. White Competence meant jobs, food, money, and opportunity.

    Same thing with Hong Kong. Yes, it was a British colony created under imperialism. In that sense, it was an 'unjust' order compared to China ruled by Chinese themselves.
    One could say British privilege in HK was 'racist'. But the Brits were very competent whereas Maoist China was a hellhole of incompetence. Competence is its own justice, its own reward, and people in Hong Kong, despite the unfair colonial setting, enjoyed better lives and more legal justice. Competent British Imperialism did more good for people in Hong Kong than incompetent Social Justice Mania did for people in China.

    No amount of themes of social justice does much good without competence and truth. BLM is a mess because it doesn't address the sheer incompetence of blacks as parents, teachers, managers, and administrators. And it has zero use for truth of why the black community is the way it is.

    Now, competence isn't enough. Nazi Germans were competent in many areas but brutal and crazy in international affairs.

    But all this talk of justice without competence is just another kind of injustice. Filling up schools with idiotic incompetent teachers in the name of 'social justice' just does harm to kids. Filling up fire departments with inferior incompetent firemen can lead to deaths of innocent lives.

    "Justice" without competence is injustice:

    https://youtu.be/ZB7HYhUpDz8?t=2h47s

    If we are generous and say Erderly was just incompetent, it is still a gross miscarriage of injustice because no one so incompetent should have been paid so much by a major publication to write such total nonsense.

    What baffles me is she had a history of lying before this. But she was just slapped on the wrist. The Tribalism among journalism leads to incompetence in discerning what is true and untrue.

    Of course, I don't think Erderly's real problem was lack of competence. I'll bet she is reasonably smart. She knows the science of journalism. She knew she was writing a hit piece, and she drew inspiration from other liars in journalism.
    The most we can say for her is she is a victim of her own pathological personality, as with Lillian Hellman. Maybe like a junkie, she couldn't help it.

    Now, the most controversial topic of 21st century will be the matter of whether all races are equally competent. It could be James Watson was onto something when he said blacks, on average, are less competent than other races.

    Some peoples are higher up on the People-of-Competence scale.

    And despite PC's dichotomy of 'white privilege' and 'people of color', the real social divisions in America are between peoples-of-competence and peoples-of-incompetence.

    POCOM and POICOM.

    Look at Silicon Valley. Whites, Jews, Hindus, East Asians. POCOM.

    What is nutty about America is Jews are the most competent people who agitate the most incompetent people(mainly blacks but even Muslims) against other competent peoples.

    How could malice not have been involved when Jackie herself expressed affection-bordering-on-love for Eramo?

    Erderly cooked stuff up with maliciousness rivaling that of Lillian Hellman.

    One of the traits that enables jews to be very effective persuaders is their capacity for self-deception.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Kylie says:
    @slumber_j
    Dylan Thomas. Et al.

    Yes! That’s the one I couldn’t remember.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. Lagertha says:
    @Questionator
    The weight of the evidence is that they were intentionally lying. They were determined to invade Iraq one way of the other. By their strategy and reasoning, it was justified whether or not Saddam had "WMD" at that point in time.

    But by the way, since when is the possession of chemical weapons justification to invade a country and destroy it? The flimsiness of that justification--which was based on lies, I assure you--is reason enough to doubt their sincerity.

    This is the turning point for me to never trust the GOP again, and, several years later, DNC is forever bad. I am partyless, and will vote for Trump, along with sooo many women here, in New England. The public trust for both parties is sooo over.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Coemgen says:
    @Hunsdon
    I didn't realize the Cousin Jacks were famous for their affinity for the sauce!

    Ha ha ha!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Lagertha says:
    @candid_observer
    OT,

    but what the hell is physically wrong with this woman?

    https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/791404620333678592

    Oh my….they are “spotting her.” Isn’t that the same dude (2nd guy) who carried that epipen-like syringe?

    Read More
    • Replies: @FX Enderby
    Looks like him. They call him "Dr Frankenstein" now. He has quickly become a minor celebrity. Many believe he is Nigerian born Oladotun Okunola. His face looks hilarious. Just looks like a clueless fool. I hope he gets his own TV show after the election.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Oh my….they are “spotting her.” Isn’t that the same dude (2nd guy) who carried that epipen-like syringe?"

    It wasn't an epipen. Who would carry that in his hand all the time? That's silly. It's not necessary, and that's what pockets are for. He was carrying a laser-pointer, which he used to direct Hillary to exits, etc.. Either because that's some kind of standard thing they do for the VIPs they protect, or because it's something they do for dotards like Clinton, or (so say some) because it's done to guide people who have neurological problems.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. Lagertha says:
    @candid_observer
    The leftist descriptions of Trump and his possible presidency invariably employ the overwrought language of classic mass hysteria.

    And hysteria, as its etymology suggests, is the right term here. If one goes down the list of major episodes of mass hysteria, one can't fail to notice that in virtually every case, it involves women or girls:

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

    Even the Salem Witch scare was, of course, instigated by a group of girls.

    It's remarkable how much the hysteria over Trump is caused by little more than his saying things that women find offensive. So many of them seem incapable of entertaining and weighing any issue other than his "offensiveness". (This is pretty much what Newt Gingrich was getting at in his recent encounter with the Megyn Kelly, the exemplar of the type.)

    Today's left has reduced itself to hysterical women of both sexes. For them indeed a Trump presidency seems like "an extinction level event."

    Newt was brilliant! I enjoyed having that smug, owned Kelly finally be bitch slapped for her hypocrisy – when she would not call Bill a predator, Newt had her at checkmate – her make-up is so thick that her flushed face didn’t betray her, but her eyes were a dead give away. I had liked her in the past; now she blows-off all of Hillary’s deception & machinations to get “the Precious,” and I can’t listen to the traitor, Kelly anymore. She has no integrity, not someone that stands for truth. She still has that ax to grind for Trump and the comments last year, I suppose, and is sour about it. She’s like Erdley, unwilling to give up “the narrative,” even if it’s bullshit :)!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Olorin says:
    @Clyde
    Peter Erdely, yes just looked at his website. It is tough running a one man law office. Thanks for cluing me in. So they make maybe 300-500k per year. Maybe over extended with two homes? Private tuition for their two children.

    From his website:
    Extensive Jury Trial and Criminal Expertise:
    Prior to founding the firm, Peter served as a prosecutor with the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office. In eight years with the DA’s Office, Peter rose through many divisions, including the elite Repeat Offenders Unit, Federal Litigation Unit and Major Trials Units. He prosecuted over 40 major jury trials to verdict. He also tried hundreds of bench trials, and over one thousand preliminary hearings. Peter’s jury trials include winning a 65-130 year sentence against a gunman who robbed 13 women and children in a nail salon. He also won the first animal cruelty jury trial conviction in Philadelphia history, against a man who was running an extensive dog fighting ring from his home.

    He didn’t start out in individual practice.

    Caught my eye: the part where he advertises that he has helped DNA experts testify on forensics in rape trials. You’d think some of that might attention to detail/data have rubbed off on his distaff side, but apparently not.

    Did you see:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/news/special_packages/inquirer/20091214_Busy_lawyers__Balky_victims__Botched_logistics_.html

    Grounds for racial realism you’d think. Instead, we see much to suggest (at least on the wife’s part) doubling down on Hate Whitey.

    So they make maybe 300-500k per year. Maybe over extended with two homes?

    No idea but the one $875K, five bedroom townhouse in Old Philly suggests it’s possible. RS offered her a $300K contract for seven stories ($40K for the UVA piece). That’s not chump change.

    She hasn’t done any pieces since 10/01 that I’ve found on Jews selling doom for profit.

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/10/15/get-your-gas-masks-here

    As you note, individual practice trial lawyers in Center City Philly would have to work pretty hard, or anyway be well connected, to pull down half a mil after all the bills were paid. Several of the ones I knew lived outside town in the less expensive burbs…but family money can make that easier.

    Still, I don’t think she did it for money.

    These folks live in an echo chamber bubble. IME they’re like the shtetl Jews of the Lower East Side of Manhattan in the 19-Aughts. (I’ve known both of those types.) Extremely provincial and hermetic in their views, regardless of their signalling of cosmopolitanism. Stuck in a limited repertoire of stories. Under all the access-class flash, very little innovative adaptive substance.

    My sense back in the day was that part of the Hate Whitey meme was precisely that so many whites are descended from millennia of explorers who encounter the unknown on its terms and adapt just fine. I figured this is why they revile our space program, our explorers, our innovators…and demand we hold all that back for, say, black preachers in mule carts ‘protesting’ at the Apollo launch. (And who gave them that idea, and the funds to act out the social drama?)

    IME Jews by contrast are like barnacles. Once they plant their noggins on a rock, movement is highly traumatic. I figure that’s why they’re always bashing on about “diaspora” and demanding everyone give them a homeland (while surrendering ours). They don’t cotton to engagement with unfamiliar places and translate this, like everything else, into neurosis around Suffering and chosenmania.

    Sabrina Rubin’s pieces reek of hatred of every white/founding stock institution of social mobility for our best and brightest young people. That mindset substitutes for our genomically robust mobility a shallower type–Africans pouring out of Africa, e.g.–then inflicts it on everyone as the Law.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Thanks. You make many good points I can't add to. I do think she was in it for the money (and movie rights money) primarily because she is of a certain age with two children. She has been around long enough to have some common sense same as her husband, who leads a responsible life. Second comes her ideologies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Coemgen says:
    @Lagertha
    I know. Upon reading your post I had this flash back of No Way Out. When the Shawn Young character ( a call girl) gets hurled over the mezzanine (by bad guy Gene Hackman) and crashes onto the glass table; you just know she is dead. And, poor Kevin Costner's character sees the glass shards and bloody corpse of his lover. Maybe Jackie saw that movie too? Kevin was a prototype of Haven? Having cut myself really badly while working on a project, glass cuts are the worst and there is so much blood, and it hurts - your nerve endings are on fire. Even if you are drunk you will feel the pain, recoil and seek treatment...or you die of blood loss, possibly. Stitches are needed for most glass lacerations. It leaves ugly scars.

    Interesting. Haven is the pronunciation of the vocative case of Kevin akin to Seumas/Hamish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Kylie says:
    @candid_observer
    The leftist descriptions of Trump and his possible presidency invariably employ the overwrought language of classic mass hysteria.

    And hysteria, as its etymology suggests, is the right term here. If one goes down the list of major episodes of mass hysteria, one can't fail to notice that in virtually every case, it involves women or girls:

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

    Even the Salem Witch scare was, of course, instigated by a group of girls.

    It's remarkable how much the hysteria over Trump is caused by little more than his saying things that women find offensive. So many of them seem incapable of entertaining and weighing any issue other than his "offensiveness". (This is pretty much what Newt Gingrich was getting at in his recent encounter with the Megyn Kelly, the exemplar of the type.)

    Today's left has reduced itself to hysterical women of both sexes. For them indeed a Trump presidency seems like "an extinction level event."

    “It’s remarkable how much the hysteria over Trump is caused by little more than his saying things that women find offensive.”

    No. Things that SOME women find offensive. I’m surprised and pleased to see my conservative Facebook friends post that they simply don’t care what he allegedly said or did. They still support him.

    Also no, it’s not remarkable. The left loves any excuse to get hysterical over real or imagined racist and/or sexist offenses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. dr kill says:
    @Kylie
    "For the young coeds, it[the college rape crisis story] helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably."

    More like, "the coeds' anger with themselves for behaving foolishly and regrettably".

    I think you're being way too easy on coeds whose integrity is as suspect as their chastity is absent.

    We have college-age sons, you should hear the stories about college-age women.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Questionator
    Please share.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. dr kill says:
    @Spotted Toad
    Something I've been thinking about is how the college rape crisis story assuages the psychological needs of both the young female students and the older administrators, journalists, and professors who get involved. For the young coeds, it helps them resolve both their unhappiness with current sexual culture and their anger with the young men who, an earlier era would say, had treated them dishonorably. For the administrators, it helps them resolve the inevitable jealousy and malaise they would feel at being excluded from a culture that worships young feminine sexuality but now, with motherhood increasingly marginalized, has little use for anyone older ( One of the problems with "Girl power" is the girl part.) The rape crisis narrative addresses both of these sets of needs, giving the young women a story that acknowledged their unhappiness while still holding out the promise of free self-actualized sexuality, and allowing the older women to be needed as supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young, who are pitiable victims instead of enviable.

    Men have a fight, then go out for a beer. Women have a fight and hate each other forever. I see the old, tired and bitter hags intentionally destroying the chance of a fulfilling life for the sweet young stupids. I see no evidence of the described supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Questionator
    I see the old, tired and bitter hags intentionally destroying the chance of a fulfilling life for the sweet young stupids.

    I'd like to know what actions you are referring to. I can't really call to mind examples of older women doing this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. What made Trump the GOP nominee was Obama’s decision four years ago to revive grievances against white men.

    As if they weren’t already alive and thriving…

    “Barack Obama, the post-racial Lincoln-esque uniter.” I knew it was bullshit, but I never dreamed that he would to such lengths to disprove all those who believed that his election would lead to racial “healing.” (The only healing he’s done has been of the Jack Kevorkian variety.)

    We’re in for a long two weeks … and an even longer four years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    That's not BS, in the Lincoln didn't unite anything except by force of arms.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. guest says:
    @Lagertha
    I know. Upon reading your post I had this flash back of No Way Out. When the Shawn Young character ( a call girl) gets hurled over the mezzanine (by bad guy Gene Hackman) and crashes onto the glass table; you just know she is dead. And, poor Kevin Costner's character sees the glass shards and bloody corpse of his lover. Maybe Jackie saw that movie too? Kevin was a prototype of Haven? Having cut myself really badly while working on a project, glass cuts are the worst and there is so much blood, and it hurts - your nerve endings are on fire. Even if you are drunk you will feel the pain, recoil and seek treatment...or you die of blood loss, possibly. Stitches are needed for most glass lacerations. It leaves ugly scars.

    “Kevin was a prototype of Haven?”

    Maybe, since Kevin was playing a KGB spy posing as an American naval officer, or something like that. In a sense he, too, didn’t exist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. dr kill says:
    @Thea
    It will set a horrible precedent if Eramo loses. Like the travesty of the cake bakers being forced to make wedding cakes for sodomites. There will be more outrageous lies posing as journalism.

    The left never loses. They are some times forced to take a break but when it's over they kept pushing the world leftward into the abyss.

    Eramo is one of them. I could care less if she wins or loses. I just like hearing the story. Over and over is fine with me. I do hope that the Phi Psi’s crush those cockroaches at RS.

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

    America has no such laws (because they are unconstitutional) so I guess Jews must not be a powerful elite in America.

    Liechtenstein and Bosnia OTOH both have such laws due to the powerful secret cabal of Jews who control them.

    Or maybe Jews aren’t powerful enough to steamroll the First Amendment yet. Or maybe they think such laws are more important at the scene of the crime, and less so in America. Or maybe the laws in Europe have more to do with lefties than Jews.

    In fact “Jackie” is now retracting and saying that she was raped, but she has no memory of what actually happened. How convenient is this amnesia!

    A dog has more dignity than Jackie Coakley.

    I think the SJW phenomenon is the worst possible combination of sanctimonious, crusading New England culture mixed with what the equivalent is in Jewish culture.

    There is no equivalent in Jewish culture. SJWs would have to have been pro-Apartheid South Africa for that, and that ship has definitely sailed. Western European peoples can’t do what Jews do, it’s not in their psychological makeup.

    This trial is small justice but it stings like hell because it is not about Erdely having to fess up, it is about a Jewish woman who hates white men.

    Where’s Whis? Isn’t it time for him to appear? And play up Coakley, and play down Erdely? Play up the woman, play down the Jew?

    Edit: ahh, there we go. Only had to wait a couple minutes…

    “Goyim” is an imperfect way of saying “badwhites”. Modern Jewish SJWs have nothing against goyim who are goodwhites – many of their friends, colleagues and lovers are goodwhites, they might (more that might – in fact most likely will) marry a goodwhite. But SJW’s hate hate hate badwhites (those who fit in Hillary’s Basket of Deplorables) . Badwhites are not entitled to free speech, they should lose their jobs if they announce any badwhite views, they should be shunned wherever possible, etc. The “overwhelmingly blond” TJ lovers that Erdely met at UVa were badwhites, which is why it was OK to hate on them.

    It’s kind of like how slaveholders liked compliant slaves, but whipped the bad ones. Retcon history wants to make them all out as simply racist, but it was a lot more complicated than that. The vast majority of white slaveholders loved blacks, as long as they didn’t get uppity.

    As for the assumption that blond = badwhite, I find that absurd. Put another way: I’m sure there are tons of goodwhites in the crowd Coakley and Erdely were so happy to bash.

    They apparently did order white strippers but instead Mangum and another black stripper arrived. I assume at that point there were already a bunch of guys gathered and they figured that black strippers were better than nothing. Wrong. Duke guys are usually pretty smart but admissions standards are lower for athletes.

    More about street smarts. Takes a bit of guts to lock a psycho black stripper out, and a bit of experience to know to do it. They basically got into trouble because they were insufficiently racist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "They basically got into trouble because they were insufficiently racist"

    That's true.

    "More about street smarts"

    I get that for before they hired the strippers. My instinct would be to either find someone who's hooked into the local stripper/escort scene, or at least get onto online message boards and communities. There are so many ways to get ripped off in that world, but less in the internet era.

    But okay, maybe they were in a rush. They did the best they could, and oops, they end up with hood rats. How much street smarts does it take to know they're not worth it? Or, if you're scared to turn them away, at least pay them to stay out of your life.

    But to pay them, get ripped off, then piss them off on top of it, that's plain stupid.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @slumber_j
    I'm under the impression that she's actually pretty Welsh--despite her tin ear for the English language, although perhaps the Welshness does account for her purported fondness for drink. But stylistically speaking, you're certainly right.

    Anthony Burgess claimed that the among the Celts, the Welsh drank less and were more sexually open than the repressed hard drinking Irish and Scots. Ironic, because his 1st wife was Welsh and died young from complications of severe alcoholism. And then there was Dylan Thomas…

    Read More
    • Agree: slumber_j
    • Replies: @Questionator
    Anthony Burgess claimed that the among the Celts, the Welsh drank less and were more sexually open than the repressed hard drinking Irish and Scots.

    What did he mean by "sexually open"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Jews are a large and extraordinarily influential part of the forces pushing the anti-white agenda - massive immigration, white privilege, punishing any form of white ethnic pride, etc. - which appears to have as its final goal the end of whites as a distinct race via miscegenation.

    Jews do everything in their power to protect Israel in order to preserve the Jewish people and their homeland. Jews also have no issue with any other race besides whites wanting to preserve itself, at least in the United States and Europe.

    It's hard to accept that at least a portion of Jews - and, importantly, the Jews that count - aren't "out to get" whites.

    The day that powerful and rich Jews start calling on Israel and Jews to accept massive 3rd world immigration, to stop showing any pride in being Jewish and to start mixing with other races, I'll believe that Jews (and, yes, if your leaders are attacking me and your not stopping them, I have to lump you all in together) aren't out to get whites.

    Until then, stop pissing on my head and telling me that it's raining.

    That’s why it is so important that Sailer specifically shines a light on the Jewish aspect of this nonsense. Anti gentile bias is pervasive among the bigfoot Jewish culture creators and gatekeepers of the current era. Yet no one publicly notices, except Steve. And where Sailer goes, others may eventually follow.

    Read More
    • Agree: Questionator
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. guest says:
    @Stan Adams

    What made Trump the GOP nominee was Obama’s decision four years ago to revive grievances against white men.
     
    As if they weren't already alive and thriving...

    "Barack Obama, the post-racial Lincoln-esque uniter." I knew it was bullshit, but I never dreamed that he would to such lengths to disprove all those who believed that his election would lead to racial "healing." (The only healing he's done has been of the Jack Kevorkian variety.)

    We're in for a long two weeks ... and an even longer four years.

    That’s not BS, in the Lincoln didn’t unite anything except by force of arms.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @Almost Missouri
    Steve, on top of all your other reading, did you just happen across that Shapiro "poem" you linked? Or did you google "non-rhyming anti-gentilic college hate-verse"?

    A commenter linked to it.

    Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. @Lagertha
    Oh my....they are "spotting her." Isn't that the same dude (2nd guy) who carried that epipen-like syringe?

    Looks like him. They call him “Dr Frankenstein” now. He has quickly become a minor celebrity. Many believe he is Nigerian born Oladotun Okunola. His face looks hilarious. Just looks like a clueless fool. I hope he gets his own TV show after the election.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    No, he's not. He's secret service agent Todd Madison. Hillary does travel with a (female) doctor but the big black guy is not her doctor. Hillary has had problems going up steps for some time now. It's just as well that they help her - if she were to fall, she might incur even more brain damage than she already has.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Looks like him. They call him “Dr Frankenstein” now. He has quickly become a minor celebrity. Many believe he is Nigerian born Oladotun Okunola."

    Do you really think Hillary would have a black doctor? If, as Jack D says, he is a secret service agent (and that seems far more likely to me than that he is a doctor or EMT), he must be the only secret service agent who likes Hillary. From what I've heard, most of her personal security people despise her, as she treats them like dirt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @FX Enderby
    Anthony Burgess claimed that the among the Celts, the Welsh drank less and were more sexually open than the repressed hard drinking Irish and Scots. Ironic, because his 1st wife was Welsh and died young from complications of severe alcoholism. And then there was Dylan Thomas...

    Anthony Burgess claimed that the among the Celts, the Welsh drank less and were more sexually open than the repressed hard drinking Irish and Scots.

    What did he mean by “sexually open”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @FX Enderby
    He implied the Irish turned to drink to drown Catholic sexual guilt and frustration. The Welsh supposedly drank less because they had more sex. So, yeah...
    Burgess was great but he made a lot of stuff up, especially in his 2 volume autobiography!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @dr kill
    Men have a fight, then go out for a beer. Women have a fight and hate each other forever. I see the old, tired and bitter hags intentionally destroying the chance of a fulfilling life for the sweet young stupids. I see no evidence of the described supporters, mentors, and advocates for the young.

    I see the old, tired and bitter hags intentionally destroying the chance of a fulfilling life for the sweet young stupids.

    I’d like to know what actions you are referring to. I can’t really call to mind examples of older women doing this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. @dr kill
    We have college-age sons, you should hear the stories about college-age women.

    Please share.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. @guest
    I find it ridiculous to consider my reputation my property. What, I own other people's thoughts? And what about the "public figure" exception? All public figures are, really, is people with bigger reputations for than others. In what other circumstances are people with more property welcome to less legal protection?

    But a foolish consistency, blah, blah, blah. I don't want to be overly rational.

    “I find it ridiculous to consider my reputation my property.”

    Well, there’s nothing strange or “ridiculous” about it really. In fact all property rights are actually intangible, even the most tangible of all: real property (real estate). Is there a force field over your house that prevents anyone you don’t want from entering? No of course not. Your “ownership” of the house is really just an intangible concept verified by the title paper at the town office. Because there is an intangible agreement to respect that “ownership”, you feel you have the “right” to “your” “property”. And I agree. You do. I am part of that intangible agreement. That’s why when someone starts damaging intangibles, real harm results, whether it is to your home ownership or to your reputation. Hence, law, in flavors ranging from real property law to libel law.

    It’s also why, as our “Republic” enters its death spiral of corruption, you can expect that the intangible agreements that formerly made for stable, consistent and reliable property ownership will become increasingly tattered and frayed, until you won’t really feel you can be confident that you still own your stuff anymore, because, increasingly, you won’t. Someone better connected than you will.

    I have a Cuban friend. His family lived in Cuba after the Castro revolution. They thought it didn’t apply to them since they weren’t connected to the previous regime. So they just carried on living as they always had. But it turned out that even if they didn’t take any interest in the new regime, the new regime took an interest in them. One by one, the things they owned, became interesting to, then the property of, people connected to the new regime: first their meager savings, then their car, then their business, then their furniture, then their house, then their land. If they had daughters, that would probably have been next. As it was, they had sons, so the next extraction was forced labor. They finally fled Cuba with a change of clothes. They consider themselves lucky to this day.

    American versions of this are increasingly happening here.

    All ownership is rights and all rights are intangible and subject to government enforcement or lack thereof. Expect a lot more lack thereof for the unconnected.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    In America, the dispossession is more subtle than the outright confiscation that went on in communist takeovers of places like Cuba. You "own" your own business, but the way you run it is subject to more and more oppressive regulation. You're no longer free to hire the most competent staff you can find, or you'll be prosecuted for racial discrimination, etc. A sexual harassment case could bankrupt you, even if it's false. The economies of scale mean that big corporations can survive this better than small businesses, which is why people like Bill Gates are fully on board with it.

    As for your reputation, you can only hold on to it at the cost of pretending you believe all the lies about diversity and equality - look at what happened to James Watson.
    , @guest
    I didn't say my sense of its ridiculousness has anything to do with tangibility.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. Jack D says:
    @guest
    I find it ridiculous to consider my reputation my property. What, I own other people's thoughts? And what about the "public figure" exception? All public figures are, really, is people with bigger reputations for than others. In what other circumstances are people with more property welcome to less legal protection?

    But a foolish consistency, blah, blah, blah. I don't want to be overly rational.

    I don’t know what you do, but whatever it is, let’s say I called up your employer or customers and (falsely) told them that you were a liar, drunk, thief, child molester, adulterer, etc. and should not be trusted in the future. And let’s say your employer or customers believed me and fired you or quit patronizing your business as a result. Do you still find it ridiculous?

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Yes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @Jack D
    Hard cases make bad law. The situation at the time (the NY Times being sued in dozens of places down South by white supremacists in front of white supremacist juries even though their paper hardly circulated in the South) was unsympathetic so the S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it. The alternative was to put every major Northern newspaper out of business.

    That being said, I think their framework (that there is there should be higher threshold for defaming "public figures", especially government officials) makes a certain amount of sense. The press is supposed to shed light on malfeasance by government officials, especially in one party strongholds where no one else will and they can't do this job if they live in fear of libels suits for the slightest error. If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction by the press (ask Trump).

    BTW, we have gone full circle where parts of the country are filled with one party (Democrat) strongholds, except now instead of the solid South, these strongholds are our big cities and northern coastal states.

    It's also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats - all those sheriffs with police dogs were Democrats.

    “S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it.”

    Yet somehow, Americans great and small had managed to live and thrive for over a century without the Supreme Court’s meddling. In fact, if the “paper hardly circulated in the South”, then there wouldn’t have been much to claim in the damage stage of the trial. If there had been colossal punitives awarded, well, the paper could just do what other businesses do today in states with notoriously windfall-happy juries: not have a local presence. If the state feels neglected, they can rein in their tort law.

    Really, the NYT just wanted to have their cake and eat it too: to have the megaphone in every state and be immune from local legal heckling. And the Warren court made their wish come true. We are all worse off for this. We should oppose national monopolies, especially on public expression. Why make an exception for the seditious shrikes at the NYT of all people? If anything, they are supposed to be professionals, so they should bear higher scrutiny, not less.

    “If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction”

    Wouldn’t it be even more apropos to say that if you publish journalism, you should expect some skepticism to be thrown your way? After all, journalists can’t shut up about their (actually non-existent) “professional standards”. Yet in reality they are held to a lower standard than everyone else. In real professions (law, medicine) practitioners are held to a higher standard. The Warren court carved out a lower standard for journalists. Again they want to have their cake and eat it too: be “professionals” but be subject to diminished standards.

    “It’s also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats”

    Yes, you are right about this, but whenever I remind these people, they are yawningly uninterested. I have glumly concluded that all politics is now Who–Whom (or “identity politics”, to give it its better known name), so this kind archaic score-keeping is just an old white guy hobby, of academic interest to me or to you perhaps, but it’s not gonna swing any elections anymore.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nico

    Why make an exception for the seditious shrikes at the NYT of all people?
     
    Because the Warren court of all courts was not going to miss a golden chance to impose its ideological intelligentsia in all zones and at all levels of American society.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. BenKenobi says:
    @Jack D
    Rhymes with Schenectady.

    Wow, and the last pony crosses the finish line. Never realized the title was a pun. I’ll have to chalk it up to my Canadian-ness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Jack D says:
    @FX Enderby
    Looks like him. They call him "Dr Frankenstein" now. He has quickly become a minor celebrity. Many believe he is Nigerian born Oladotun Okunola. His face looks hilarious. Just looks like a clueless fool. I hope he gets his own TV show after the election.

    No, he’s not. He’s secret service agent Todd Madison. Hillary does travel with a (female) doctor but the big black guy is not her doctor. Hillary has had problems going up steps for some time now. It’s just as well that they help her – if she were to fall, she might incur even more brain damage than she already has.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FX Enderby
    Thanks for the clarification. So Todd Madison's the guy who picks her up off of various sidewalks and tosses her in the Ambulance Van/Limo like a sack of potatoes...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. Mr. Anon says:
    @SPMoore8
    Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian. I also doubt she would be picking on some short, dumpy white guy, regardless of coloring, and regardless of affiliation. On the other hand I'm certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation.

    White we are on the subject it would be interesting to see how the evolution of Sabrina's views has anything to do with not only Stephen Glass (already raised) but incidents during her tenure at U Penn, including hoax articles, the missing run of the college paper, and the famous "Water Buffalo" incident.

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to "destroy" them. In fact, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. I do think people like Sabrina are motivated by other resentments, but those are not based on religion or being MOT. Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that "Jews" are "out to get" "gentiles". This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful.

    “Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian.”

    More likely, she is not interested in targeting any Koreans or blacks of whatever religion. Just white guys.

    “On the other hand I’m certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation.”

    Really? Including tall, fair good looking jewish guys? Has she displayed any particular animus against that particular group? Has she ever investigated sexual assault at a jewish fraternity?

    “Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to “destroy” them.”

    Hardly any other? Not all, sure. Not a majority – yes I’d say that too. But an insignificant number? Unlikely.

    “Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that “Jews” are “out to get” “gentiles”. This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful.”

    Clearly there are a not insignificant number of gentiles who do in fact dislike Jews and think that all Jews are out to get them. Why then is it unreasonable to consider the possibility that an also not insignificant number of Jews dislike gentiles and think that all gentiles are out to get them? I think a good case can be made for exactly that proposition.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Mr. Anon says:
    @FX Enderby
    Looks like him. They call him "Dr Frankenstein" now. He has quickly become a minor celebrity. Many believe he is Nigerian born Oladotun Okunola. His face looks hilarious. Just looks like a clueless fool. I hope he gets his own TV show after the election.

    “Looks like him. They call him “Dr Frankenstein” now. He has quickly become a minor celebrity. Many believe he is Nigerian born Oladotun Okunola.”

    Do you really think Hillary would have a black doctor? If, as Jack D says, he is a secret service agent (and that seems far more likely to me than that he is a doctor or EMT), he must be the only secret service agent who likes Hillary. From what I’ve heard, most of her personal security people despise her, as she treats them like dirt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FX Enderby
    Course he's not her doctor. I just think it's funny that the Nigerians proudly claim him as one of their own Yoruba tribe. As if being Hillary's doctor is a job Americans just can't or won't do.
    Here's the NigeriaBuzz link if you missed it in the 1st comment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Mr. Anon says:
    @Lagertha
    Oh my....they are "spotting her." Isn't that the same dude (2nd guy) who carried that epipen-like syringe?

    “Oh my….they are “spotting her.” Isn’t that the same dude (2nd guy) who carried that epipen-like syringe?”

    It wasn’t an epipen. Who would carry that in his hand all the time? That’s silly. It’s not necessary, and that’s what pockets are for. He was carrying a laser-pointer, which he used to direct Hillary to exits, etc.. Either because that’s some kind of standard thing they do for the VIPs they protect, or because it’s something they do for dotards like Clinton, or (so say some) because it’s done to guide people who have neurological problems.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Rob McX says:
    @Almost Missouri

    "I find it ridiculous to consider my reputation my property."
     
    Well, there's nothing strange or "ridiculous" about it really. In fact all property rights are actually intangible, even the most tangible of all: real property (real estate). Is there a force field over your house that prevents anyone you don't want from entering? No of course not. Your "ownership" of the house is really just an intangible concept verified by the title paper at the town office. Because there is an intangible agreement to respect that "ownership", you feel you have the "right" to "your" "property". And I agree. You do. I am part of that intangible agreement. That's why when someone starts damaging intangibles, real harm results, whether it is to your home ownership or to your reputation. Hence, law, in flavors ranging from real property law to libel law.

    It's also why, as our "Republic" enters its death spiral of corruption, you can expect that the intangible agreements that formerly made for stable, consistent and reliable property ownership will become increasingly tattered and frayed, until you won't really feel you can be confident that you still own your stuff anymore, because, increasingly, you won't. Someone better connected than you will.

    I have a Cuban friend. His family lived in Cuba after the Castro revolution. They thought it didn't apply to them since they weren't connected to the previous regime. So they just carried on living as they always had. But it turned out that even if they didn't take any interest in the new regime, the new regime took an interest in them. One by one, the things they owned, became interesting to, then the property of, people connected to the new regime: first their meager savings, then their car, then their business, then their furniture, then their house, then their land. If they had daughters, that would probably have been next. As it was, they had sons, so the next extraction was forced labor. They finally fled Cuba with a change of clothes. They consider themselves lucky to this day.

    American versions of this are increasingly happening here.

    All ownership is rights and all rights are intangible and subject to government enforcement or lack thereof. Expect a lot more lack thereof for the unconnected.

    In America, the dispossession is more subtle than the outright confiscation that went on in communist takeovers of places like Cuba. You “own” your own business, but the way you run it is subject to more and more oppressive regulation. You’re no longer free to hire the most competent staff you can find, or you’ll be prosecuted for racial discrimination, etc. A sexual harassment case could bankrupt you, even if it’s false. The economies of scale mean that big corporations can survive this better than small businesses, which is why people like Bill Gates are fully on board with it.

    As for your reputation, you can only hold on to it at the cost of pretending you believe all the lies about diversity and equality – look at what happened to James Watson.

    Read More
    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. guest says:
    @Almost Missouri

    "I find it ridiculous to consider my reputation my property."
     
    Well, there's nothing strange or "ridiculous" about it really. In fact all property rights are actually intangible, even the most tangible of all: real property (real estate). Is there a force field over your house that prevents anyone you don't want from entering? No of course not. Your "ownership" of the house is really just an intangible concept verified by the title paper at the town office. Because there is an intangible agreement to respect that "ownership", you feel you have the "right" to "your" "property". And I agree. You do. I am part of that intangible agreement. That's why when someone starts damaging intangibles, real harm results, whether it is to your home ownership or to your reputation. Hence, law, in flavors ranging from real property law to libel law.

    It's also why, as our "Republic" enters its death spiral of corruption, you can expect that the intangible agreements that formerly made for stable, consistent and reliable property ownership will become increasingly tattered and frayed, until you won't really feel you can be confident that you still own your stuff anymore, because, increasingly, you won't. Someone better connected than you will.

    I have a Cuban friend. His family lived in Cuba after the Castro revolution. They thought it didn't apply to them since they weren't connected to the previous regime. So they just carried on living as they always had. But it turned out that even if they didn't take any interest in the new regime, the new regime took an interest in them. One by one, the things they owned, became interesting to, then the property of, people connected to the new regime: first their meager savings, then their car, then their business, then their furniture, then their house, then their land. If they had daughters, that would probably have been next. As it was, they had sons, so the next extraction was forced labor. They finally fled Cuba with a change of clothes. They consider themselves lucky to this day.

    American versions of this are increasingly happening here.

    All ownership is rights and all rights are intangible and subject to government enforcement or lack thereof. Expect a lot more lack thereof for the unconnected.

    I didn’t say my sense of its ridiculousness has anything to do with tangibility.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Then your complaint makes even less sense.

    Well, you did say you don't want to be overly rational. So mission accomplished, I guess.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. guest says:
    @Jack D
    I don't know what you do, but whatever it is, let's say I called up your employer or customers and (falsely) told them that you were a liar, drunk, thief, child molester, adulterer, etc. and should not be trusted in the future. And let's say your employer or customers believed me and fired you or quit patronizing your business as a result. Do you still find it ridiculous?

    Yes.

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

    The economies of scale mean that big corporations can survive this better than small businesses, which is why people like Bill Gates are fully on board with it.

    While this is true and an excellent point, it’s also true that much of the diversity regime doesn’t even kick in until a company reaches a certain size. Granted, it’s not a high bar, but the mom and pops are exempt. At least, this used to be the case – it’s not like I keep up with the laws. I want to say it was like 15 employees or less, and you’re exempt, but don’t quote me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  213. SnakeEyes says:
    @TheJester
    There is still a movie deal in there after the lawsuits are over ... but it is about how Rolling Stone and Sabrina Rubin Erdely blundered big time in trying to put together a narrative story about evil cisgendered White males and their oppressive patriarchy.

    iSteve, on the good side, there is bound to be a walk on part for you in the movie (or someone pretending to be you) as the story-line shows how the narrative unraveled.

    As for Jackie Coakley, she appears to be one those spoiled adolescent females in the Age of Feminism mongering for the attention and status associated with having an Alpha-Male panting after her. When they don't, she makes one up. Given her deposition, she still appears to accept no responsibility for what she did nor the consequences of what she did. "I feel faint ..., I mean I'm suffering from PTSD!" How should Jackie be portrayed? There is no comedy, no tragedy, and no drama in her involvement ... only pathos.

    Except the movie will be sympathetic to RS and will advance a narrative that the story was true. See this year’s “Truth” which brazenly pushed the fantasy that the 60 Minutes GWB Air National Guard story was accurate (not even fake but accurate).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. @Questionator
    Anthony Burgess claimed that the among the Celts, the Welsh drank less and were more sexually open than the repressed hard drinking Irish and Scots.

    What did he mean by "sexually open"?

    He implied the Irish turned to drink to drown Catholic sexual guilt and frustration. The Welsh supposedly drank less because they had more sex. So, yeah…
    Burgess was great but he made a lot of stuff up, especially in his 2 volume autobiography!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @Mr. Anon
    "Looks like him. They call him “Dr Frankenstein” now. He has quickly become a minor celebrity. Many believe he is Nigerian born Oladotun Okunola."

    Do you really think Hillary would have a black doctor? If, as Jack D says, he is a secret service agent (and that seems far more likely to me than that he is a doctor or EMT), he must be the only secret service agent who likes Hillary. From what I've heard, most of her personal security people despise her, as she treats them like dirt.

    Course he’s not her doctor. I just think it’s funny that the Nigerians proudly claim him as one of their own Yoruba tribe. As if being Hillary’s doctor is a job Americans just can’t or won’t do.
    Here’s the NigeriaBuzz link if you missed it in the 1st comment.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. @Jack D
    No, he's not. He's secret service agent Todd Madison. Hillary does travel with a (female) doctor but the big black guy is not her doctor. Hillary has had problems going up steps for some time now. It's just as well that they help her - if she were to fall, she might incur even more brain damage than she already has.

    Thanks for the clarification. So Todd Madison’s the guy who picks her up off of various sidewalks and tosses her in the Ambulance Van/Limo like a sack of potatoes…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. @Prof. Woland
    Many of these types of false accusations are a result of civil actions v. the other way around. False rape / DV accusations have long been a staple in the family courts as a tactic to gain alimony or custody. The UVA rape hoax was never meant to go to trial and neither were any of the "11 women to come forward". But then again, Erdely's goal was never to convict Haven Monahan, it was to get the University to kick the fraternity off of campus and to start a greater hysteria about white men. This trial is small justice but it stings like hell because it is not about Erdely having to fess up, it is about a Jewish woman who hates white men.

    Yes you’re right. This was never meant to come to a criminal court. And without the libel laws, it would never have come to a civil court. Without libel laws, Rolling Stone would further feed the press hysteria about Gentile white men and Erdely would be moving onto her next, well paid Goy rape hoax. Truly, this woman Erdely is a bloodsucking parasite.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. @guest
    I didn't say my sense of its ridiculousness has anything to do with tangibility.

    Then your complaint makes even less sense.

    Well, you did say you don’t want to be overly rational. So mission accomplished, I guess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  220. guest says:
    @Svigor

    America has no such laws (because they are unconstitutional) so I guess Jews must not be a powerful elite in America.

    Liechtenstein and Bosnia OTOH both have such laws due to the powerful secret cabal of Jews who control them.
     
    Or maybe Jews aren't powerful enough to steamroll the First Amendment yet. Or maybe they think such laws are more important at the scene of the crime, and less so in America. Or maybe the laws in Europe have more to do with lefties than Jews.

    In fact “Jackie” is now retracting and saying that she was raped, but she has no memory of what actually happened. How convenient is this amnesia!
     
    A dog has more dignity than Jackie Coakley.

    I think the SJW phenomenon is the worst possible combination of sanctimonious, crusading New England culture mixed with what the equivalent is in Jewish culture.
     
    There is no equivalent in Jewish culture. SJWs would have to have been pro-Apartheid South Africa for that, and that ship has definitely sailed. Western European peoples can't do what Jews do, it's not in their psychological makeup.

    This trial is small justice but it stings like hell because it is not about Erdely having to fess up, it is about a Jewish woman who hates white men.
     
    Where's Whis? Isn't it time for him to appear? And play up Coakley, and play down Erdely? Play up the woman, play down the Jew?

    Edit: ahh, there we go. Only had to wait a couple minutes...

    “Goyim” is an imperfect way of saying “badwhites”. Modern Jewish SJWs have nothing against goyim who are goodwhites – many of their friends, colleagues and lovers are goodwhites, they might (more that might – in fact most likely will) marry a goodwhite. But SJW’s hate hate hate badwhites (those who fit in Hillary’s Basket of Deplorables) . Badwhites are not entitled to free speech, they should lose their jobs if they announce any badwhite views, they should be shunned wherever possible, etc. The “overwhelmingly blond” TJ lovers that Erdely met at UVa were badwhites, which is why it was OK to hate on them.
     
    It's kind of like how slaveholders liked compliant slaves, but whipped the bad ones. Retcon history wants to make them all out as simply racist, but it was a lot more complicated than that. The vast majority of white slaveholders loved blacks, as long as they didn't get uppity.

    As for the assumption that blond = badwhite, I find that absurd. Put another way: I'm sure there are tons of goodwhites in the crowd Coakley and Erdely were so happy to bash.

    They apparently did order white strippers but instead Mangum and another black stripper arrived. I assume at that point there were already a bunch of guys gathered and they figured that black strippers were better than nothing. Wrong. Duke guys are usually pretty smart but admissions standards are lower for athletes.
     
    More about street smarts. Takes a bit of guts to lock a psycho black stripper out, and a bit of experience to know to do it. They basically got into trouble because they were insufficiently racist.

    “They basically got into trouble because they were insufficiently racist”

    That’s true.

    “More about street smarts”

    I get that for before they hired the strippers. My instinct would be to either find someone who’s hooked into the local stripper/escort scene, or at least get onto online message boards and communities. There are so many ways to get ripped off in that world, but less in the internet era.

    But okay, maybe they were in a rush. They did the best they could, and oops, they end up with hood rats. How much street smarts does it take to know they’re not worth it? Or, if you’re scared to turn them away, at least pay them to stay out of your life.

    But to pay them, get ripped off, then piss them off on top of it, that’s plain stupid.

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

    mixed with what the equivalent is in Jewish culture.
     
    There is really NOTHING like this in traditional Jewish culture. What does exist (and is of relatively recent origin - i.e. a little over a century) is Jewish SOCIALIST culture. Jewish Communists/Socialists consciously reject Jewish religious teaching in favor of a belief in the universal brotherhood of man. Those who opposed such brotherhood are "fascists" and are hated not for their particular religion but for their rejection of universalism. Conversely, if you are a goodwhite who accepts these principles, you are acceptable even as marriage material.

    In a modern spin on this, just as in "liberation theology", certain aspects of traditional Jewish beliefs (Tikun Olam - repair the world) are twisted to mean modern SJWish things rather than bearing their traditional (spiritual) meaning, but mostly Jewish socialists have little to do with Jewish religion - Bernie Sanders wouldn't be caught dead in a synagogue.

    Modern SJWism is the marriage of Puritan do-goodism with Jewish Socialism. For WASPs, SJWism was a move to the left, but for Jewish Socialists, it was actually a (slight) move to the right - lots of today's Jewish SJWs are "red diaper babies" whose parents or grandparents were Communists or Socialists. Slight because if you look at for example, Bernie Sanders, he brought the Democrat party to his positions and didn't have to give up any part of his socialism at all.

    Modern SJWism is the marriage of Puritan do-goodism with Jewish Socialism.

    Puritan “do-goodism”, such as it was, came from the tikkun-olamism of the Jewish community next door.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. @SPMoore8
    Precisely because there are many Christians who I know Sabrina is not interesting in targeting. For example, Korean evangelists, or any black Christian. I also doubt she would be picking on some short, dumpy white guy, regardless of coloring, and regardless of affiliation. On the other hand I'm certain that she would hate on any tall, fair, good looking white guy, regardless of religious affiliation.

    White we are on the subject it would be interesting to see how the evolution of Sabrina's views has anything to do with not only Stephen Glass (already raised) but incidents during her tenure at U Penn, including hoax articles, the missing run of the college paper, and the famous "Water Buffalo" incident.

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to "destroy" them. In fact, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. I do think people like Sabrina are motivated by other resentments, but those are not based on religion or being MOT. Encouraging that idea is to suggest the gentile paranoid fantasy that "Jews" are "out to get" "gentiles". This is the mirror image of the Jewish paranoid fantasy (all gentiles are out to get the Jews), but neither are either relevant or helpful.

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to “destroy” them. In fact, I don’t even know what that is supposed to mean.

    Ask Noel Ignatiev.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Thanks for turning me on to this individual. While born Jewish, Noel Ignatiev seems to have a fitful relationship with "The Tribe":


    From 1986 until 1992, Ignatiev served as a tutor (academic advisor) for Dunster House at Harvard University. In early 1992, Ignatiev objected to the University's purchase of a toaster oven for the Dunster House dining hall that would be designated for kosher use only. He insisted that cooking utensils with restricted use should be paid for by private funds. In a letter to the Harvard student newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, Ignatiev wrote that "I regard anti-Semitism, like all forms of religious, ethnic and racial bigotry, as a crime against humanity and whoever calls me an anti-Semite will face a libel suit."[10]

     

    Sounds like a limited public figure to me!

    In 2008, the American Jewish Committee objected to an encyclopedia article on Zionism that Ignatiev wrote for The Encyclopedia of Race and Racism.[12] In the article, Ignatiev described Israel as a "racial state, where rights are assigned on the basis of ascribed descent or the approval of the superior race" and likened it to Nazi Germany and the Southern United States before the civil rights movement.[13]

    The American Jewish Committee cited numerous "factual and historical inaccuracies" in Ignatiev's article. The American Jewish Committee also questioned why the encyclopedia included an entry about Zionism, stating that it was the only nationalist movement with an article in the encyclopedia.[12] Gideon Shimoni, Professor Emeritus at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, criticized the article as a "litany of errors and distortions of fact."[14]

    Subsequently, the Encyclopedia's publisher, Gale, announced the appointment of an independent committee to investigate "the factual accuracy, scholarly basis, coverage, scope, and balance of every article". In addition, Gale published a 10-part composite article, "Nationalism and Ethnicity", with a new article on Zionism and evaluations of cultural nationalism in across the globe. The composite article was free of charge to all customers.[15] In response to the findings of the independent committee, Gale has eliminated Ignatiev's article from the encyclopedia.[16]
     
    Sounds like a prince!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Ignatiev
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. SPMoore8 says:
    @ben tillman

    Gentile means: Not Jewish. I simply do not believe that Sabrina, or hardly any other Jew, is motivated by a resentment towards non-Jewish whites such that they wish to “destroy” them. In fact, I don’t even know what that is supposed to mean.
     
    Ask Noel Ignatiev.

    Thanks for turning me on to this individual. While born Jewish, Noel Ignatiev seems to have a fitful relationship with “The Tribe”:

    From 1986 until 1992, Ignatiev served as a tutor (academic advisor) for Dunster House at Harvard University. In early 1992, Ignatiev objected to the University’s purchase of a toaster oven for the Dunster House dining hall that would be designated for kosher use only. He insisted that cooking utensils with restricted use should be paid for by private funds. In a letter to the Harvard student newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, Ignatiev wrote that “I regard anti-Semitism, like all forms of religious, ethnic and racial bigotry, as a crime against humanity and whoever calls me an anti-Semite will face a libel suit.”[10]

    Sounds like a limited public figure to me!

    In 2008, the American Jewish Committee objected to an encyclopedia article on Zionism that Ignatiev wrote for The Encyclopedia of Race and Racism.[12] In the article, Ignatiev described Israel as a “racial state, where rights are assigned on the basis of ascribed descent or the approval of the superior race” and likened it to Nazi Germany and the Southern United States before the civil rights movement.[13]

    The American Jewish Committee cited numerous “factual and historical inaccuracies” in Ignatiev’s article. The American Jewish Committee also questioned why the encyclopedia included an entry about Zionism, stating that it was the only nationalist movement with an article in the encyclopedia.[12] Gideon Shimoni, Professor Emeritus at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, criticized the article as a “litany of errors and distortions of fact.”[14]

    Subsequently, the Encyclopedia’s publisher, Gale, announced the appointment of an independent committee to investigate “the factual accuracy, scholarly basis, coverage, scope, and balance of every article”. In addition, Gale published a 10-part composite article, “Nationalism and Ethnicity”, with a new article on Zionism and evaluations of cultural nationalism in across the globe. The composite article was free of charge to all customers.[15] In response to the findings of the independent committee, Gale has eliminated Ignatiev’s article from the encyclopedia.[16]

    Sounds like a prince!

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

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. @Jack D
    Just a bad photo. I think she's just a garden variety subcontinental woman. Here she is with her other daughter:

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/03/26/article-2299477-18EEFDD9000005DC-686_306x423.jpg

    Because the shades of brown people vary so much and we are not really sure what shade any give brown person is, when printing photos of them it is common to render them either much darker or much lighter than they really are. Obama is depicted anywhere from high yeller to darkie. The pictures of Arline on the interwebs are all over the place in terms of her coloring.

    BTW,is Kercher's father really Jewish? His name is John (not a common Jewish name) and his son is also named John (not a common Jewish naming practice).

    I’ve known plenty of Jewish men named John, including one of my best friends in high school.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Some of your best friends are...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. Long-haired rapist frat boy is prematurely greying. Give him another 20-40 years and he’ll look like the burnouts you find all over the Bay Area.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  226. @Jack D
    Just a bad photo. I think she's just a garden variety subcontinental woman. Here she is with her other daughter:

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/03/26/article-2299477-18EEFDD9000005DC-686_306x423.jpg

    Because the shades of brown people vary so much and we are not really sure what shade any give brown person is, when printing photos of them it is common to render them either much darker or much lighter than they really are. Obama is depicted anywhere from high yeller to darkie. The pictures of Arline on the interwebs are all over the place in terms of her coloring.

    BTW,is Kercher's father really Jewish? His name is John (not a common Jewish name) and his son is also named John (not a common Jewish naming practice).

    BTW,is Kercher’s father really Jewish? His name is John (not a common Jewish name) and his son is also named John (not a common Jewish naming practice).

    But more common among Sephardim, who tend to be relatively more numerous in England.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Kercher is not a Sephardic name. He would be an Ashkenazi if he were Jewish at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. @Ripple Earthdevil
    I've known plenty of Jewish men named John, including one of my best friends in high school.

    Some of your best friends are…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. @Steve Sailer
    Erdely's entire Rolling Stone article is comprised of Hunter S. Thompsonisms. I mean, the subtitle of her article is "A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA," which is a complete Thompsonism, but nobody much noticed.

    I’d assume, that this Thomsonite subtitle was written by somebody of the editorial staff at RS.

    Deconstructivism and the like have been useful for some time as anti-utopian ways of thinking, anti-totalitarian too, but that’s long gone and now you have PC, sexual harrassment, microaggressions, gender-mainstreaming … as the realms of Derrida- and Foucault- and Lyotard- and so on – pupils. A possibility of endless considerations, because there’s never been a shortage of personal problems in the world. And since the West is declining (especially the economy – and this is not only happening in the US) – since the West’s prospects aren’t too rosy, the critical young (well, the well educated and affluent critical young) in the colleges start fights with themselves, so to speak. – That’s a lot more comfortable than a look at reality at large. It’s always good, and a lot less depressing, to have a personal enemy – and for shure better than to face the hardships of the – what was the number, Trump had these days: 17.000 US factories closed or shipped abroad.

    Look at what Obama was referring to, when he spoke to the young: His advice, not to study art-history – in all it’s naivité – – was telling. It sounded to me like the funny guy who forbids smoking, while the ship’s on fire.

    There’s two big books, which both discussed such questions at length: Franzens Freedom (cf. rape at school) and Tom Wolfes I am Charlotte Simmons (cf. rape at college). The Erdely-case is part of this problem – and of this whole field of societal uncertanty. You could even add Wolfes A Man In Full – since it sheds light on Trump too. I sould have been more astonished to learn, that you were one of the first to notice the Erdely-problem (of course, a double-coded compliment – positively double-coded – if at my expense).

    Last pargraph: Franzen’s last book reminded me a lot of your work since it’s about Karl Kraus, who for years wrote a stunning journal of critique Die Fackel (The Torch – 20.000 pages – most of them written by Kraus) – critizising especially the media; and not shying away from the fact, that lots of the media he critizsed had been owned by jews. The big diffrence between Steve Sailer and Karl Kraus is not their workload, or that Sailer i no jew – it’s the language. Kraus can’t really tame his ideas, while Steve Sailer does. This diffrence resulted in Franzens and his (partly native-speaking) collaborators’ difficultuies, translating Kraus.
    The other way round would be much easier.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. Clyde says:
    @Olorin
    He didn't start out in individual practice.

    Caught my eye: the part where he advertises that he has helped DNA experts testify on forensics in rape trials. You'd think some of that might attention to detail/data have rubbed off on his distaff side, but apparently not.

    Did you see:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/news/special_packages/inquirer/20091214_Busy_lawyers__Balky_victims__Botched_logistics_.html

    Grounds for racial realism you'd think. Instead, we see much to suggest (at least on the wife's part) doubling down on Hate Whitey.


    So they make maybe 300-500k per year. Maybe over extended with two homes?
     
    No idea but the one $875K, five bedroom townhouse in Old Philly suggests it's possible. RS offered her a $300K contract for seven stories ($40K for the UVA piece). That's not chump change.

    She hasn't done any pieces since 10/01 that I've found on Jews selling doom for profit.

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/10/15/get-your-gas-masks-here

    As you note, individual practice trial lawyers in Center City Philly would have to work pretty hard, or anyway be well connected, to pull down half a mil after all the bills were paid. Several of the ones I knew lived outside town in the less expensive burbs...but family money can make that easier.

    Still, I don't think she did it for money.

    These folks live in an echo chamber bubble. IME they're like the shtetl Jews of the Lower East Side of Manhattan in the 19-Aughts. (I've known both of those types.) Extremely provincial and hermetic in their views, regardless of their signalling of cosmopolitanism. Stuck in a limited repertoire of stories. Under all the access-class flash, very little innovative adaptive substance.

    My sense back in the day was that part of the Hate Whitey meme was precisely that so many whites are descended from millennia of explorers who encounter the unknown on its terms and adapt just fine. I figured this is why they revile our space program, our explorers, our innovators...and demand we hold all that back for, say, black preachers in mule carts 'protesting' at the Apollo launch. (And who gave them that idea, and the funds to act out the social drama?)

    IME Jews by contrast are like barnacles. Once they plant their noggins on a rock, movement is highly traumatic. I figure that's why they're always bashing on about "diaspora" and demanding everyone give them a homeland (while surrendering ours). They don't cotton to engagement with unfamiliar places and translate this, like everything else, into neurosis around Suffering and chosenmania.

    Sabrina Rubin's pieces reek of hatred of every white/founding stock institution of social mobility for our best and brightest young people. That mindset substitutes for our genomically robust mobility a shallower type--Africans pouring out of Africa, e.g.--then inflicts it on everyone as the Law.

    Thanks. You make many good points I can’t add to. I do think she was in it for the money (and movie rights money) primarily because she is of a certain age with two children. She has been around long enough to have some common sense same as her husband, who leads a responsible life. Second comes her ideologies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. Nico says:
    @Almost Missouri

    "S. Ct. had to think of a way to put a stop to it."
     
    Yet somehow, Americans great and small had managed to live and thrive for over a century without the Supreme Court's meddling. In fact, if the "paper hardly circulated in the South", then there wouldn't have been much to claim in the damage stage of the trial. If there had been colossal punitives awarded, well, the paper could just do what other businesses do today in states with notoriously windfall-happy juries: not have a local presence. If the state feels neglected, they can rein in their tort law.

    Really, the NYT just wanted to have their cake and eat it too: to have the megaphone in every state and be immune from local legal heckling. And the Warren court made their wish come true. We are all worse off for this. We should oppose national monopolies, especially on public expression. Why make an exception for the seditious shrikes at the NYT of all people? If anything, they are supposed to be professionals, so they should bear higher scrutiny, not less.


    "If you enter the arena of politics, you should expect to have some rocks thrown in your direction"
     
    Wouldn't it be even more apropos to say that if you publish journalism, you should expect some skepticism to be thrown your way? After all, journalists can't shut up about their (actually non-existent) "professional standards". Yet in reality they are held to a lower standard than everyone else. In real professions (law, medicine) practitioners are held to a higher standard. The Warren court carved out a lower standard for journalists. Again they want to have their cake and eat it too: be "professionals" but be subject to diminished standards.

    "It’s also amazingly forgotten (especially by blacks) that the whole structure of white supremacy in the South was erected by Democrats"
     
    Yes, you are right about this, but whenever I remind these people, they are yawningly uninterested. I have glumly concluded that all politics is now Who--Whom (or "identity politics", to give it its better known name), so this kind archaic score-keeping is just an old white guy hobby, of academic interest to me or to you perhaps, but it's not gonna swing any elections anymore.

    Why make an exception for the seditious shrikes at the NYT of all people?

    Because the Warren court of all courts was not going to miss a golden chance to impose its ideological intelligentsia in all zones and at all levels of American society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Rod1963
    That's right it's not. The thing is as Trumps campaign has shown, is that the MSM(including RS) are all part of the political establishment. Even long time political pollster Pat Caddell has stated the MSM is part of it.

    This is why the demonization of Trump has been so uniform across the media spectrum. And why the MSM has avoided mentioning Wikileaks and O'Keefe's videos at all.

    People need to understand that the MSM in whatever guise be it the NYT, RS or TNR. They are not purveyors of objective journalism but promote agenda or narrative disguised as news aimed at demonizing whites and their culture.

    Erdley is just another footsoldier promoting the narrative. Tribe members are naturals at it since they seem to be hardwired from birth to hate whites.

    We Jews do not all hate White people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Opinionator
    BTW,is Kercher’s father really Jewish? His name is John (not a common Jewish name) and his son is also named John (not a common Jewish naming practice).

    But more common among Sephardim, who tend to be relatively more numerous in England.

    Kercher is not a Sephardic name. He would be an Ashkenazi if he were Jewish at all.

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

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record 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