The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Great Moments in Congressional Hearings
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From The New Yorker:

“At a congressional hearing this week, Senator Richard Blumenthal displays an example of fake news disseminated by a Russian social-media account.” — The New Yorker

How Trump Helps Russian Trolls

by Ryan Lizza

Aziz Ansari, star of Parks and Recreation, is Russian?

Who knew?

It looks like Kremlin infiltration goes much deeper down the rabbit hole than we could possibly have imagined.

Did anyone ask Sen. Blumenthal (D-CT) just how dumb he must believe Hillary voters must be to fall for a photoshopped image of super-trustworthy-looking popular comic TV star Aziz Ansari holding a sign with a joke on it?

Or maybe both Blumenthal and New Yorker editor David Remnick are on Putin’s payroll as part of the Kremlin’s Operation MetaJoke to make Russia’s secret takeover of America seem silly?

In case you are thinking that old iSteve is just making this up for laughts, from ABC News:

MISLEADING ADS REVEALED

Sen. Richard Blumenthal revealed some of the ads taken out by Russians, including one that showed comedian Aziz Ansari holding up a sign that said “Save time, avoid the line, vote from home,” a message that falsely suggested voters could cast ballots by text message.

Another Twitter post urged voters to text “Hillary” to 59925 to cast their vote.

Blumenthal pressed Twitter’s acting general counsel Sean Edgett to commit to researching how many voters may have been misled into incorrectly believing they had voted because of the posts.

From the Connecticut Mirror:

Blumenthal asked Sean Edgett, Twitter’s general counsel, how many people had responded to the ad and tried to vote for Clinton by tweeting.

Edgett said he did not know.

“We were focused on removing the content,” he said.

Although Edgett said Twitter took down the ad as “illegal voter suppression,” Blumenthal said similar ads kept being posted.

“I have 20, 30, 40 of them,” Blumenthal said. “They kept reappearing.”

I bet they did.

 
Hide 182 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. It’s very important that people who would fall for that sign vote. This is a democracy, not a Russia!

  2. “Russians trick black people using Indian man as front.”

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    "I don't know who's jewing who anymore!"
  3. You know what the next stage of Russia-gate will be?

    Here’s the tweet:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/NewYorker/status/926214904482279424

    And here’s a reply:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Yrret_Moon/status/926216361625378816

    Obviously, Yrret_Moon is a Russian account. The influence is ongoing and impossible to gauge. You have an opinion counter to the narrative? Must be a Russian. We need more surveillance and restrictions to solve this problem!!

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I'm sorry but Yrret_Moon's tweet is not at all responsive. The question is not whether people had made up their minds but whether people were fooled into not actually voting (for Clinton) as a result of this Tweet. Personally I doubt many were (Twitter could probably tell us how many "votes" it received) but that's not what Yrret_Moon said.
  4. Liberals pride themselves on how much smarter they are than conservatives…

  5. Steve, any comment on Kevin Spacey?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Here's the only place on the Internet displaying the 1997 Esquire story by Tom Junod about Kevin Spacey:

    http://www.reocities.com/bspacey/esquire.html

    It starts with the reporter's elderly mom in Florida telling him the inside scoop about Kevin Spacey as heard around the retirement home swimming pool.

    In 1997.

  6. Russia is also now being blamed for rowdy Hillary supporters:
    Growing Evidence That Russia Using ‘The Resistance’ To Stoke Division
    http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/02/growing-evidence-that-russia-using-the-resistance-to-stoke-division/

    You’re collectively going insane, my American friends.

    • Replies: @guest
    Does that mean the Resistance is a bad thing?
  7. Like a “hanging chad,” or those complaining they wrongly entered a vote for Buchanan due to ballot design confusion in Florida in 2000, wouldn’t brigades of angry people have already appeared claiming to have voted in this manner via Twitter #hashtag.

    Except that’s not fake news, or even “fake news.” Fake is the Senator from Connecticut claiming he served in Vietnam, so you’d be mistaken if you thought the Senator knew fake.

    • Replies: @Rod1963
    He is beyond fake. He is one of those special needs senators. You know the type, incapable of parsing obvious bulls**t from reality.

    Still I bet he isn't the only one who fell for this, his staffers had to bring it to his attention. So they are complicit in being stupid and out of touch.

    And once again it proves you don't a need a brain to succeed in Washington, just brazen stupidity and the ability to lie your a** off.
  8. People should check out PBS Frontline’s two-part series, Putin’s Revenge. It is off the chain and in the long grass by the second half. I think they have, in all honesty, about two out of one hundred minutes in which the Russian government’s version of things is given.

    • Replies: @Marat
    Makes one seriously wonder if democracy isn’t doomed when a third of the population can watch over the top one-sided bunk like this. PBS usually falls all over itself to at least FAKE balance. This was truly astounding.
  9. Steve, this is hilarious! This was a trolling effort from 4chan and/or /r/the_donald. This one and the #DraftOurDaughters campaign stand out in my mind as some of the best meming from last year.

    Still, though, it’s a bit frustrating to see the other side think so little of us that they can’t attribute the dank memes to our gleeful culture warriors.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    This is true. People should be celebrating the 4chan and /pol/ trolling as a form of American folk art. Placeboing is just one of many Americans who deserve a spot in the Smithsonian:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OcldMG932o
    , @With the thoughts you'd be thinkin
    Here's archives of some of the threads:
    http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/95664643
    http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/96206420/
    , @rektnotrekt
    Yeah, I was thinking I hazily remembered the /pol/ thread that originated this picture. Glad to see someone pointing that out.
  10. 100 bucks says a NEET in his parents’ basement in Oregon made that image. And as Chris alludes to, if someone really was dumb enough to fall for that image,
    only an cynical, evil politician would be upset about it. Stupid people shpuld not vote.

    • Replies: @El Dato

    cynical, evil politician would be upset about it.
     
    I figure these people are dumb as bricks and need to be culled as a matter of public health urgency or they figure they can just can get away with doing ridiculous clownshit in armani while going home early, raking in taxpayer money and having the occasion to concentrate on getting wined and dined by lobbyists.
  11. Who had more influence over election propaganda, Russia or the Progressive Tech Oligarchy?

    • Replies: @guest
    House of Cards, starring gay hebephile Kevin Spacey, featured a presidential election between an evil Democrat (Spacey) and a Republican war hero it turns out was secretly owned by shadowy interests. Spacey was supposed to lose not only because he had numerous scandals and wasn't elected in the first place--his predecessor, though innocent, resigned in Nixonian disgrace--but also because the Republican was best buds with a giant tech company. Facebork, Gloogle, or whatever. Which inspired Spacey to secretly enlist the NSA to run gather campaign intelligence.

    Only in Hollywood are tech giants on that side. But, you know,they made the president a Democrat,* so they didn't have much choice if they wanted to run with that story.

    * I'm thinking not because they're comfortable with having lead characters be evil Democrats, but because the idea of being stuck depicting inner Republican politics on a serious drama is distasteful, even if they'd be denigrating it (like on the British original) the whole time. They'd rather it be all about their side, despite having them to admit it's possible for people on their side to be evil.

    , @Prof. Woland
    When the fly landed on Hillary's forehead during the debate, I knew it was a sign from God. Beelzebub the accursed would not be allowed to control the mightiest nation on earth.
  12. @Anonymous
    Steve, any comment on Kevin Spacey?

    Here’s the only place on the Internet displaying the 1997 Esquire story by Tom Junod about Kevin Spacey:

    http://www.reocities.com/bspacey/esquire.html

    It starts with the reporter’s elderly mom in Florida telling him the inside scoop about Kevin Spacey as heard around the retirement home swimming pool.

    In 1997.

    • Replies: @slumber_j
    If you can get through it, this is a very disturbing and utterly believable account of Kevin Spacey's having tried to rape a guy when he was 14 years old:

    http://www.vulture.com/2017/11/kevin-spacey-alleged-sexual-relationship.html

    The interviewee comes across as a completely levelheaded gay guy, and it's damning.
    , @duncsbaby
    From the article Robert Conrad says this:
    "He's a movie star now, Tom," Bob Conrad says. "He gets the good tables, and he gets his picture taken with Harvey Miramax, or whatever his name is." "I think it might be Harvey Miramax. I think he had it changed." "It's Weinstein, Tom. But you know what I mean. Kevin's out there *playing* a movie star now. And you can tell him I said that."

    Interesting article, makes me want to watch some of those old The Wild, Wild, West re-runs. I wonder if I read it back then because it seems to me that I knew in the late 90's Spacey was gay.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Or later in 2004 when Spacey got “brutally mugged” by a “kid” at 4:30 AM in a London park. He changed his story in explaining to police why he got thumped on the noggin. It seems that ‘wookin’ pa nub’ in all the wrong places can be hazardous.

    What actually happened is, I fell for a con. And I was, I think, incredibly embarrassed by it. Some sob story about somebody needing to call their mother.

    It was such a good con, that I actually dialled the number myself and when somebody answered I then finally handed [over] my phone. And this kid took off and I was so upset I ran after him.

    I tripped up over my dog, and I ended up falling on to the street and hitting myself in the head.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i7m0dx7G-Y
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    When Spacey moved to London to work at the National Theatre the press coverage over here was slightly 'off' in papers like the Guardian and the Times - they covered him almost as a Garbo "I want to be alone" type coming to London for anonymity. I remember reading them and thinking "is he gay?".

    On topic, I remember this Ricky Vaughn tweet from the campaign - Twitter (rightly IMHO, it had the potential to fool stupid people) took it down but then terminated his account (I think it was his second or third iteration already). As the guy says, the Senate call it an "ad" when it was yet more joshing.

    65 likes and 36 retweets! That's sure going to move the needle. Are these people mad, stupid or malicious?

    https://twitter.com/Vaped_taylor/status/925837629513523200

  13. >>Did anyone ask Sen. Blumenthal (D-CN) just how dumb he must believe Hillary voters must be to fall for a photoshopped image of popular comic TV star Aziz Ansari holding a sign with a joke on it?

    Well, Democrats did claim in 2000 that some of their constituents were too dumb or confused to figure out how to fill out a punch card ballot because, after all, nobody in South Florida would dave vote for Pat Buchanan, because, you know, only elderly Holocaust survivors lived down there.

    Lawrence Tribe the “noted constitutional scholar” even oped’ed in the NY Times after the election that there should be a do over for elderly Jewish voters, (and only elderly Jewish voters), this time with a simpler ballot, so that the authentic and true “voice of the people” could be heard. I swear, Tribe made this argument. It’s there in the Times archives.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist

    "Did anyone ask Sen. Blumenthal (D-CN) just how dumb he must believe Hillary voters must be to fall for a photoshopped image of popular comic TV star Aziz Ansari holding a sign with a joke on it?"
     
    Did anyone ask "Vietnam Dick" when he was informed these weren't real ads?
    , @Forbes
    For a "highly respected" constitutional scholar, Tribe has made any number of mind-boggling dumb arguments.

    I once attended an Obamacare debate between Tribe and Richard Epstein, and one of Tribe's responses was, if the American people, through their elected representatives, enact Obamacare, who are the Justices to overthrow it? According to Tribe, there was no limiting principle to an act of the legislature under a constitutional republic.
  14. Oh yeah, I remember that. Sites in the Stormer-sphere did that for about a week halfway through the election, and those people are not Russians.

    We seem to be at the point where anything not explicitly anti-Trump retweeted by a Russian account is now part of the conspiracy. I guess the millions of Russian twitter users should have recused themselves from commenting on American news for a year and a half, even though their country and its actions was the vocal point of the campaigns at times.

    This whole thing is the gayest thing ever. “Russian trolls”? Jesus, America can’t even create a proper fictional enemy anymore.

    • Replies: @Frau Katze
    I may be behind the times, but I have some questions.

    1. Why would Putin want Trump to win? He was an unknown.

    2. How do these tech companies figure out which ads are Russia-sponsored?

    I mean, if we assume Putin was in fact behind some ads I guarantee those ads would not have an obvious source.

    There's no Communitee of Concerned Russians for Trump.

    Lack of transparency is a hallmark of the current Russian govt. They have a lot of experience covering their tracks, going back to at least the USSR days.
  15. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Notice how quickly the Narrative has settled on the Russians pushing “divisive” propaganda to conceal the divisiveness of Hillary and the MSM’s tactics.

    That is, the Narrative shifted, without skipping a beat, from Russians pushed pro-Trump propaganda to Russians pushed memes to divide Americans once it was revealed — in a buried lede — that they also pushed BLM and anti-Trump protests. (When Hillary was set to win, this was her winning messaging; now that she’s flopped, the same rhetoric is divisive.)

    But if you watch PBS they only ever show the pro-Trump memes, so you’ll just assume “divisive” means the Russians amplified Trump’s “divisive” statements about Muslims, Mexicans, and the Wall.

    • Agree: Travis, AndrewR
    • Replies: @guest
    Hillary and the MSM can't be divisive, you see. They're the Moderate, Responsible Center.

    Anyone who tries to push something of which they don't approve is by definition "extremist," whether that's Trumpian deplorables, a cartoon frog, or the Russians.

    Extremists divide people. Ipso facto.

    Keep up with the PC glossary.

    , @Cato
    Someone should do a timeline of how the narrative evolved. First, Russians hacked voting machines, then Russians hacked the DNC, then Russians bought some ads. The intensity of the moral outrage is puzzlingly similar for each of these stages, though each step in the narrative seems to represent a dramatic deescalation of wrong-doing.
  16. @blah blah blah blah
    Steve, this is hilarious! This was a trolling effort from 4chan and/or /r/the_donald. This one and the #DraftOurDaughters campaign stand out in my mind as some of the best meming from last year.

    Still, though, it's a bit frustrating to see the other side think so little of us that they can't attribute the dank memes to our gleeful culture warriors.

    This is true. People should be celebrating the 4chan and /pol/ trolling as a form of American folk art. Placeboing is just one of many Americans who deserve a spot in the Smithsonian:

    • Replies: @blah blah blah blah
    Exactly! Obviously having a death grip on the media and academic establishment gives the left certain advantages but most of the trolls are on our side and I'm not being facetious when I say I'm glad to have them. Meming is a great way to cut through mass media and culture-backed dissembling.
    , @slumber_j
    Yes! And a great--maybe the greatest?--effect of it is the consequent transformation of the former Cool Kids of the Left into the very sort of clueless schoolmarms they used to rail against: viz. Senator Blumenthal.

    It's glorious!

  17. This is the Tribe that told generations that McCarthyite paranoia was the worst thing in US history after slavery?

    Trump and Trolls?

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    Your first mistake was expecting the Left to ever make logical sense.
    , @Moses
    Ironically, it turned out that McCarthy was right. Documents released from Russian archives in the chaos of the 1990s shows that the Rosenbergs were in fact guilty of nuclear espionage, and that commies were in fact infiltrating Hollywood and cultural and government institutions.
  18. @Cagey Beast
    Russia is also now being blamed for rowdy Hillary supporters:
    Growing Evidence That Russia Using ‘The Resistance’ To Stoke Division
    http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/02/growing-evidence-that-russia-using-the-resistance-to-stoke-division/

    You're collectively going insane, my American friends.

    Does that mean the Resistance is a bad thing?

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    I think that might be what they're doing now. They might be trying to blame the Russians for as much of the #Resistance hysteria and harsh words as possible, now that it's falling apart.
  19. One more:

    Some day people will be able to laugh about all this. For me, that day is today. For others, it will come later.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Brilliant remarks. But I have to ask, before I steal them : are they yours? Or perhaps Confucius? Machiavelli? Yoda?
    , @Thomas
    Took me awhile to find this one. Old but still gold.

    https://youtu.be/vWih5as7KTE
  20. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    OMG, Facebook allowing some Russian-paid ads was like cyanide in Tylenol!!!!

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/this-could-be-the-end-of-facebook-hive-podcast

    It’s funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals ‘dreamers’ and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA’S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?

    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    This is really true. I can't believe I didn't notice it before.
    , @415 reasons
    Importing tens of millions of foreign ringers over decades tto create a permanent Democratic super majority? Completely legitimate act of public policy.

    Russians bought $100K of Facebook ads and tweeted joke image macros? The most serious attack on American democracy in our history, and a literal act of war according to Clapper in the PBS documentary.

    , @Moses
    The elephant in the room here is Israel's extensive influence on American government and policy. It makes alleged Russian meddling look like child's play.

    Yet no one is talking about it. Hmm can't imagine why.
    , @Frau Katze
    Why wouldn't the Russians also be sending over illegal immigrants for nefarious purposes?

    They did it in the Soviet era.
    , @Thomas

    It’s funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals ‘dreamers’ and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA’S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?
     
    Yep, bingo. The whole idea of American elections somehow being sacrosanct and to be held inviolate from foreign interference was invented out of whole cloth barely a year ago. Hell, the Clintons were caught 20 years ago collecting campaign donations from Communist China. Mexico was openly campaigning against Trump among its citizens in the U.S. (https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/trump-mexico-backlash-223128) Obama was poo-pooing the idea of the Russians as a geopolitical force in the 2012 election ("The 1980s called, they want their foreign policy back!") and his administration was the one in place while all this Russian trolling was supposedly going on.

    And it's been the more or less openly declared intention of the Democratic Party to keep importing new voters until they achieve supremacy! What's more treasonous, allegedly receiving indirect assistance offered from a foreign power, or replacing your own country's native population and boasting about it?
  21. Anonymous [AKA "Random Troll"] says:

    That image wasn’t the Russians, it was the hacker known as 4chan. I remember the thread.

  22. In 1997.

    I am utterly fascinated by the phenomenon of Hollywood sex scandals. I assumed Weinstien was fluke, but clearly there’s more going on.

    I have assumed since at least 1997 and perhaps longer that the whole place was cesspool. That ideally you should have a preventive course of antibiotics before even thinking about talking to a Hollywood producer.

    So why now?

    Why in the information age how did we become so “But my favorite star had to sleep with someone to make it big???” I mean, my family had good chuckle at my Grandma’s expense when she said “I didn’t know Liberace was gay”(circa 1997 actually). Why is naive suddenly in?

    Why an era of homosexuality, porn, Hollywood stars showing up to formal events forgetting most of their clothes, why is promiscuity and the concept of sexual favors repulsive? (It should repulsive, I just don’t get how if you’re all about promiscuity.)

    What social energy has turned this into an odd witch hunt? I may never know – probably just need to pop some popcorn and watch the best entertainment Hollywood has created in a while.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    It's all part of the working out of themes unleashed to turn out the vote in Obama's re-election campaign.
    , @whorefinder
    1. There's a lot of #MeToo-ism from ladies trying to cover up the fact that they openly and willingly slept with Weinstein (and others) to get the roles. "What me? NEVER. He harassed me but I never said yes, I'm not a whore!"

    2. There's an attempt to bandwagon onto the #MeTooism to gain attention. "I'm a victim!" Lots of exaggeration going on as a result---I saw one white girl I knew on Facebook complaining that some black guys catcalling her at a 7-Eleven was a #MeToo moment.

    3. Typical mob mentality, where suddenly people start deluding themselves about what actually happened to remain part of the crowd. See the Satanic Panic of the 1980s, or the Salem Witch Trials stuff.

    4. Young female celebrities change like chameleons from one publicity tour to the next: first they're all about their sexuality, then all about their relationship, then all about being flirty, etc. It's the new feminism: a woman is always what she says she is at the moment, her past doesn't matter, and everything must always be viewed positively, etc. So if they dress like a hooker for a red carpet event, that's them being confident in their body and sexuality, but if she starts covering up that's her being classy and classic, etc.

    To these female celebrities, the fact that they can promote sluttiness and promiscuity in one moment and then get the vapors at trading sex for roles in another is not a contradiction, because its about how they feel in the moment.

    Sad!
    , @G Pinfold
    It’s hard to watch anything out of Hollywood now without seeing the Weintein self-serving narrative: Hollywood/Silicon Valley freaks and monsters have hearts of gold, while regular people are suspect and could learn a thing or two from their chilled betters.
    Random case in point: Why Him?
    , @Taney's Ghost
    People's moralistic impulses have to come out somewhere, and the traditional outlets have largely been foreclosed
    , @anonguy

    probably just need to pop some popcorn and watch the best entertainment Hollywood has created in a while.
     
    Threadwinner. This is definitely the best entertainment to come out of Hollywood in decades.
  23. @Cagey Beast
    This is true. People should be celebrating the 4chan and /pol/ trolling as a form of American folk art. Placeboing is just one of many Americans who deserve a spot in the Smithsonian:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OcldMG932o

    Exactly! Obviously having a death grip on the media and academic establishment gives the left certain advantages but most of the trolls are on our side and I’m not being facetious when I say I’m glad to have them. Meming is a great way to cut through mass media and culture-backed dissembling.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    Trolling is cultural guerrilla warfare.
    , @Cagey Beast
    Yes and I think that's why the green frog just feels right as the mascot for these guys. Frogs are slippery, agile, harmless, legion and easily slip back and forth between worlds: water & land, online & IRL.
  24. @Anonymous
    Who had more influence over election propaganda, Russia or the Progressive Tech Oligarchy?

    https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/925892311036375040

    https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/925945310928662528

    House of Cards, starring gay hebephile Kevin Spacey, featured a presidential election between an evil Democrat (Spacey) and a Republican war hero it turns out was secretly owned by shadowy interests. Spacey was supposed to lose not only because he had numerous scandals and wasn’t elected in the first place–his predecessor, though innocent, resigned in Nixonian disgrace–but also because the Republican was best buds with a giant tech company. Facebork, Gloogle, or whatever. Which inspired Spacey to secretly enlist the NSA to run gather campaign intelligence.

    Only in Hollywood are tech giants on that side. But, you know,they made the president a Democrat,* so they didn’t have much choice if they wanted to run with that story.

    * I’m thinking not because they’re comfortable with having lead characters be evil Democrats, but because the idea of being stuck depicting inner Republican politics on a serious drama is distasteful, even if they’d be denigrating it (like on the British original) the whole time. They’d rather it be all about their side, despite having them to admit it’s possible for people on their side to be evil.

    • Replies: @ChrisZ
    Guest, the original UK “House of Cards” is one of my very favorite TV series. It was great to cheer on a truly effective man of the Right in the person of Francis Urquhart. Made me proud to be a conservative—especially during the middle series where FU deposed the king (a Prince Charles clone).
    , @EdwardM

    * I’m thinking not because they’re comfortable with having lead characters be evil Democrats, but because the idea of being stuck depicting inner Republican politics on a serious drama is distasteful, even if they’d be denigrating it (like on the British original) the whole time. They’d rather it be all about their side, despite having them to admit it’s possible for people on their side to be evil.
     
    I was surprised when I started watching the show to see that the bad actors were Democrats. (Republican dirty deeds weren't really part of the show until the later seasons as you mention.) Then I realized that it's for two reasons:

    1. The writers could only write about Democrats. That was just reflexive.

    2. Many operators in D.C. actually like the way it depicts them. They enjoy the vicarious cloak-and-dagger adventure that is shown in their world. They rooted for the Underwoods. The left is all about power, anyway, so the unseemliness (to put it mildly) in pursuit of it seems to them a natural way to depict the Beltway. As with so many other things, they probably have no concept how a typical American would react to their profession being presented this way.
  25. @AM

    In 1997.
     
    I am utterly fascinated by the phenomenon of Hollywood sex scandals. I assumed Weinstien was fluke, but clearly there's more going on.

    I have assumed since at least 1997 and perhaps longer that the whole place was cesspool. That ideally you should have a preventive course of antibiotics before even thinking about talking to a Hollywood producer.

    So why now?

    Why in the information age how did we become so "But my favorite star had to sleep with someone to make it big???" I mean, my family had good chuckle at my Grandma's expense when she said "I didn't know Liberace was gay"(circa 1997 actually). Why is naive suddenly in?

    Why an era of homosexuality, porn, Hollywood stars showing up to formal events forgetting most of their clothes, why is promiscuity and the concept of sexual favors repulsive? (It should repulsive, I just don't get how if you're all about promiscuity.)

    What social energy has turned this into an odd witch hunt? I may never know - probably just need to pop some popcorn and watch the best entertainment Hollywood has created in a while.

    It’s all part of the working out of themes unleashed to turn out the vote in Obama’s re-election campaign.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Couldn’t find the clip, but:

    [In Repo Man,] when Otto escapes from being tortured, Agent Rogersz casually remarks, "It's all part of the plan."
     
    , @Bubba
    Will he assume the persona known as Deval Patrick in 2020? C'mon iSteve, tell us!
    , @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    It’s all part of the working out of themes unleashed to turn out the vote in Obama’s re-election campaign.
     
    They thought that they still had the juice to confine the fields of fire to the intended targets. "Binders full of women" seems sort of quaint today, doesn't it?

    Leftists have disguised their sexual predation - gay, straight, or pedo - as a sort of enlightened libertinism for as long as I can recall. (cf. Roman Polanski) They were eventually going to run out of cultural capital and come into conflict with the monsters they set loose against the Puritanical caricature of middle America.

    Additionally, I can't help but see this as a proxy for generational conflict - Weinstein is an entitled Boomer and his accusers are Gen-X and younger. Same with Spacey.
  26. Jullian Assange just reminded us that Trump’s campaign is itself a case of Hillary conspiring to help Trump troll the Republican Party. How many layers does this conspiracy onion have so far?

  27. @Anonymous
    Notice how quickly the Narrative has settled on the Russians pushing "divisive" propaganda to conceal the divisiveness of Hillary and the MSM's tactics.

    That is, the Narrative shifted, without skipping a beat, from Russians pushed pro-Trump propaganda to Russians pushed memes to divide Americans once it was revealed -- in a buried lede -- that they also pushed BLM and anti-Trump protests. (When Hillary was set to win, this was her winning messaging; now that she's flopped, the same rhetoric is divisive.)

    But if you watch PBS they only ever show the pro-Trump memes, so you'll just assume "divisive" means the Russians amplified Trump's "divisive" statements about Muslims, Mexicans, and the Wall.

    Hillary and the MSM can’t be divisive, you see. They’re the Moderate, Responsible Center.

    Anyone who tries to push something of which they don’t approve is by definition “extremist,” whether that’s Trumpian deplorables, a cartoon frog, or the Russians.

    Extremists divide people. Ipso facto.

    Keep up with the PC glossary.

  28. @Chrisnonymous
    You know what the next stage of Russia-gate will be?

    Here's the tweet:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/NewYorker/status/926214904482279424

    And here's a reply:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Yrret_Moon/status/926216361625378816


    Obviously, Yrret_Moon is a Russian account. The influence is ongoing and impossible to gauge. You have an opinion counter to the narrative? Must be a Russian. We need more surveillance and restrictions to solve this problem!!

    I’m sorry but Yrret_Moon’s tweet is not at all responsive. The question is not whether people had made up their minds but whether people were fooled into not actually voting (for Clinton) as a result of this Tweet. Personally I doubt many were (Twitter could probably tell us how many “votes” it received) but that’s not what Yrret_Moon said.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    You're missing my point, but that's okay.
  29. Anonymous [AKA "Objective conservative"] says:

    Hasn’t it be determined that the Twitter troll named “Ricky Vaughn” was outed as a Russian?

    • Replies: @Ofwhap
    I'm pretty sure Ricky Vaughn was interviewed in Mike Cernovich's/Loren Feldman's "Silenced". I think he's from Ohio or somewhere like that.
  30. My college roommate, who was a socialist and possibly the Antichrist (still waiting to see), left me a note one election morning telling me that Election Day had been postponed. I didn’t believe him, and I don’t think he expected me to. It was a joke. But probably there was the hint of a whisper of a hope in his heart that there was a greater than 0% chance I’d fall for it.

    If the Russians were running ploys like this, it wouldn’t be much more concerning than the hijinks of my (possibly diabolical) roommate.

    By the way, we lived across the street from the polling place, but I didn’t have my address on my driver’s license or my name on anything tying me to our house. I registered same-day on a previous election because he vouched for me. That’s how we do it in MN. If he didn’t want me voting, why didn’t he just refuse to vouch for me? I probably wouldn’t have driven all the way back to my parents’ house.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Unfortunately, I think you just argued that the Russians are possibly diabolical, which is probably not what you wanted to say.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Guest, I may be able to help you figure out what was actually going on on election day in your "household" if you would answer me a few quick questions:

    1) This roommate, did you ever see him eating some nasty-smelling reddish-colored soup?

    2) Did he tend to play a lot of chess, at all hours of the night?

    3) Did your roommate have books on his nightstand that weighed > 3 lb (1.4 kg) and were NOT shop manuals or parts books?

    4) Did said roommate buy his liquor by the pallet rather than just a case at a time?

    5) Did you ever see him copying and pasting barely-readable viagra ads into comment-body textareas of obscure, yet, oddly, fascinating web sites?

    If only as many as 2 of these 5 questions can be answered by YES, or WTF?, then your roommate might be one of the people behind the election of President Trump. Buy him a pallet of the best Grey Goose and say thanks on behalf of us deplorables - the check is in the mail too.
  31. @AM

    In 1997.
     
    I am utterly fascinated by the phenomenon of Hollywood sex scandals. I assumed Weinstien was fluke, but clearly there's more going on.

    I have assumed since at least 1997 and perhaps longer that the whole place was cesspool. That ideally you should have a preventive course of antibiotics before even thinking about talking to a Hollywood producer.

    So why now?

    Why in the information age how did we become so "But my favorite star had to sleep with someone to make it big???" I mean, my family had good chuckle at my Grandma's expense when she said "I didn't know Liberace was gay"(circa 1997 actually). Why is naive suddenly in?

    Why an era of homosexuality, porn, Hollywood stars showing up to formal events forgetting most of their clothes, why is promiscuity and the concept of sexual favors repulsive? (It should repulsive, I just don't get how if you're all about promiscuity.)

    What social energy has turned this into an odd witch hunt? I may never know - probably just need to pop some popcorn and watch the best entertainment Hollywood has created in a while.

    1. There’s a lot of #MeToo-ism from ladies trying to cover up the fact that they openly and willingly slept with Weinstein (and others) to get the roles. “What me? NEVER. He harassed me but I never said yes, I’m not a whore!”

    2. There’s an attempt to bandwagon onto the #MeTooism to gain attention. “I’m a victim!” Lots of exaggeration going on as a result—I saw one white girl I knew on Facebook complaining that some black guys catcalling her at a 7-Eleven was a #MeToo moment.

    3. Typical mob mentality, where suddenly people start deluding themselves about what actually happened to remain part of the crowd. See the Satanic Panic of the 1980s, or the Salem Witch Trials stuff.

    4. Young female celebrities change like chameleons from one publicity tour to the next: first they’re all about their sexuality, then all about their relationship, then all about being flirty, etc. It’s the new feminism: a woman is always what she says she is at the moment, her past doesn’t matter, and everything must always be viewed positively, etc. So if they dress like a hooker for a red carpet event, that’s them being confident in their body and sexuality, but if she starts covering up that’s her being classy and classic, etc.

    To these female celebrities, the fact that they can promote sluttiness and promiscuity in one moment and then get the vapors at trading sex for roles in another is not a contradiction, because its about how they feel in the moment.

    Sad!

    • Agree: EdwardM, Jim Don Bob
  32. @blah blah blah blah
    Exactly! Obviously having a death grip on the media and academic establishment gives the left certain advantages but most of the trolls are on our side and I'm not being facetious when I say I'm glad to have them. Meming is a great way to cut through mass media and culture-backed dissembling.

    Trolling is cultural guerrilla warfare.

  33. @Anon
    This is the Tribe that told generations that McCarthyite paranoia was the worst thing in US history after slavery?

    Trump and Trolls?

    Your first mistake was expecting the Left to ever make logical sense.

  34. @blah blah blah blah
    Exactly! Obviously having a death grip on the media and academic establishment gives the left certain advantages but most of the trolls are on our side and I'm not being facetious when I say I'm glad to have them. Meming is a great way to cut through mass media and culture-backed dissembling.

    Yes and I think that’s why the green frog just feels right as the mascot for these guys. Frogs are slippery, agile, harmless, legion and easily slip back and forth between worlds: water & land, online & IRL.

  35. @Anon
    OMG, Facebook allowing some Russian-paid ads was like cyanide in Tylenol!!!!

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/this-could-be-the-end-of-facebook-hive-podcast

    It's funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals 'dreamers' and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA'S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?

    This is really true. I can’t believe I didn’t notice it before.

    • Agree: Frau Katze
    • Replies: @silviosilver
    Similarly, they're always promoting globalism and advising everybody to "think globally." Well, from a global perspective, whites are hardly the "majority"; whites instead are a tiny and vanishing minority, which you think would entitle whites to certain minority rights and protections. Unfortunately, that suggestion makes the globalists go berserk.
  36. @Anon
    OMG, Facebook allowing some Russian-paid ads was like cyanide in Tylenol!!!!

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/this-could-be-the-end-of-facebook-hive-podcast

    It's funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals 'dreamers' and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA'S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?

    Importing tens of millions of foreign ringers over decades tto create a permanent Democratic super majority? Completely legitimate act of public policy.

    Russians bought $100K of Facebook ads and tweeted joke image macros? The most serious attack on American democracy in our history, and a literal act of war according to Clapper in the PBS documentary.

    • Replies: @square root

    Importing tens of millions of foreign ringers over decades tto create a permanent Democratic super majority? Completely legitimate act of public policy.
     
    The single most important fact about the radical demographic change in America is that it was done entirely against the wishes of actual Americans. That little piece of trivia is never mentioned because if the government can fundamentally transform the electorate against the democratic will of the people, while taunting them that they will soon be irrelevant, in what sense do we even live in a democracy?
  37. Coalition of the Fringes, at work

    Donna Brazile, former interim head of the DNC, published an excerpt of her forthcoming book in Politico today, Inside Hillary Clinton’s Secret Takeover of the DNC. While she remains totally not sorry for leaking CNN debate questions to Hillary Clinton last year, she nonetheless throws Hillary under the bus.

    Popcorn!

    Brazile reports her shock at discovering gambling at Rick’s Team Hillary rigging procedures against Bernie. Apparently, longtime political operatives are as trusting children, deep down.

    The best part is her description of how Clinton, that longtime campaign finance reform advocate, strove to get the money out of politics.

    Under FEC law, an individual can contribute a maximum of $2,700 directly to a presidential campaign. But the limits are much higher for contributions to state parties and a party’s national committee.

    Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the 32 states’ parties who were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to [Clinton Presidential Campaign HQ in] Brooklyn.

    No story here, compared to the scandal of Putin spending 0.135 million dollars on social media. That must be because a little goes along way, while a lot goes only a little way. At least at this moment in the news cycle.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    1. Note that what the Hillary campaign did was to exploit a completely legal loophole.

    2. Note that our campaign funding laws are a joke. You can only legally contribute $2,700 to the Hillary Campaign Fund but you can contribute another $353,400 to the Hillary VICTORY Fund, which is TOTALLY different, except that it isn't. This from the party that loves to bitch about Citizens United.

    The other scandal that Brazile mentions is that the Hillary campaign had completely taken over the DNC long before the primaries. They were able to do this because Obama and Wasserman left the DNC finances in a shambles - the Hillary campaign bailed out the DNC in exchange for total control. Except that the DNC is supposed to be neutral until the candidate is chosen. Hillary viewed her entire candidacy as a coronation - niceties like the DNC remaining neutral be damned, it was HER turn. You can only imagine how much she would have observed democratic (small d) norms and customs once she was crowned inaugurated. She would have made Maduro of Venezuela look like Mother Teresa in comparison. Imagine Obama's executive order abuse on steroids and no Federal district judges in Hawaii to block her.
  38. @Jack D
    I'm sorry but Yrret_Moon's tweet is not at all responsive. The question is not whether people had made up their minds but whether people were fooled into not actually voting (for Clinton) as a result of this Tweet. Personally I doubt many were (Twitter could probably tell us how many "votes" it received) but that's not what Yrret_Moon said.

    You’re missing my point, but that’s okay.

    • Replies: @anon

    [Jack D] You’re missing my point …
     
    That’s what a__holes do.
  39. One of the tweets featured before congress was a prominent troll “Ricky Vaughn”. Big Steve Sailer fan.

    When we figure out how Major League, The Kremlin, and this blog is connected, the world will finally make sense.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    I remember Ricky Vaughn and his crowd pulling that prank. I even remember tweeting at them that it would all end in tears because anyone could tell that crossed into illegality. They tweeted back that it was fine. I think even Ricky himself told me it wasn't a big deal. The guys who pulled that off are about as Russian as Charley Pride.
  40. @Daniel H
    >>Did anyone ask Sen. Blumenthal (D-CN) just how dumb he must believe Hillary voters must be to fall for a photoshopped image of popular comic TV star Aziz Ansari holding a sign with a joke on it?

    Well, Democrats did claim in 2000 that some of their constituents were too dumb or confused to figure out how to fill out a punch card ballot because, after all, nobody in South Florida would dave vote for Pat Buchanan, because, you know, only elderly Holocaust survivors lived down there.

    Lawrence Tribe the "noted constitutional scholar" even oped'ed in the NY Times after the election that there should be a do over for elderly Jewish voters, (and only elderly Jewish voters), this time with a simpler ballot, so that the authentic and true "voice of the people" could be heard. I swear, Tribe made this argument. It's there in the Times archives.

    “Did anyone ask Sen. Blumenthal (D-CN) just how dumb he must believe Hillary voters must be to fall for a photoshopped image of popular comic TV star Aziz Ansari holding a sign with a joke on it?”

    Did anyone ask “Vietnam Dick” when he was informed these weren’t real ads?

    • Replies: @Detective Club
    I know for a fact that "Vietnam Dick" was with the 173rd Airborne in the Central Highlands, spraying the VC and the NVA with his own personal 30-gallon flamethrower on November 11, 1967 at Dak To, going up Hill 875, right behind Sgt. Rock - - - and that is not fake news. I read it in VFW magazine and they never lie! Never!

    They never could prove that "Vietnam Dick" fragged a librarian in Cos Cob!
  41. @AM

    In 1997.
     
    I am utterly fascinated by the phenomenon of Hollywood sex scandals. I assumed Weinstien was fluke, but clearly there's more going on.

    I have assumed since at least 1997 and perhaps longer that the whole place was cesspool. That ideally you should have a preventive course of antibiotics before even thinking about talking to a Hollywood producer.

    So why now?

    Why in the information age how did we become so "But my favorite star had to sleep with someone to make it big???" I mean, my family had good chuckle at my Grandma's expense when she said "I didn't know Liberace was gay"(circa 1997 actually). Why is naive suddenly in?

    Why an era of homosexuality, porn, Hollywood stars showing up to formal events forgetting most of their clothes, why is promiscuity and the concept of sexual favors repulsive? (It should repulsive, I just don't get how if you're all about promiscuity.)

    What social energy has turned this into an odd witch hunt? I may never know - probably just need to pop some popcorn and watch the best entertainment Hollywood has created in a while.

    It’s hard to watch anything out of Hollywood now without seeing the Weintein self-serving narrative: Hollywood/Silicon Valley freaks and monsters have hearts of gold, while regular people are suspect and could learn a thing or two from their chilled betters.
    Random case in point: Why Him?

  42. Democrats aghast at how many stupid people may not have voted, news @ 11.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "Democrats aghast at how many stupid people may not have voted, news @ 11."

    LOL. That might just be my favorite Democratic delusion: "Democrats are smart and Republicans are all evil and stupid. Oh and BTW, please don't do anything that would make it harder for idiots, rapists, and lazy people to vote."
  43. @whorefinder
    "Russians trick black people using Indian man as front."

    “I don’t know who’s jewing who anymore!”

  44. @guest
    Does that mean the Resistance is a bad thing?

    I think that might be what they’re doing now. They might be trying to blame the Russians for as much of the #Resistance hysteria and harsh words as possible, now that it’s falling apart.

  45. Connecticut embarrassment Blumenthal should know that we vote early and often here, and then we get on the bus and vote in all the other towns.

    Just like the citizens and non-citizens in all the other blue states.

    Greasy Bloomie, who looks like he should play a corrupt cop on TV, was the AG here before he became one of our overexposed senators. These guys Blumenthal and Murphy have outsized media presence because of where they live and who they know.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Blumie is not running any more - claims he will retire. Murphy is sticking his finger in the wind to see what he should believe in next. His gun control efforts are: boring...and the Uranium One debacle is freaking out Dems. He better be nicey-nice because Trump could skip Electric Boat and give contracts to Virginia, or something.
  46. Look at that foto — most Americans work hard to create some product or offer some service, and then their money is taken via the coercive tax system to fund government activity like this and government employees like this.

    If Trump was serious about ‘MAGA’ and ‘Drain the Swamp’, he’d rev that up by firing this fucker Mueller and his entire staff in a spectacularly public way, eg face-to-face, personally accompanying security while they escort him out of the building, immediately afterward holding a big ‘Fuck You’ news conference, basically daring Congress to do something about it — Stephen Miller could write his opening remarks.

    I now understand why after the French Revolution they brought out the guillotine.

    • Agree: Thea
  47. @duderinompc
    One of the tweets featured before congress was a prominent troll "Ricky Vaughn". Big Steve Sailer fan.

    When we figure out how Major League, The Kremlin, and this blog is connected, the world will finally make sense.

    I remember Ricky Vaughn and his crowd pulling that prank. I even remember tweeting at them that it would all end in tears because anyone could tell that crossed into illegality. They tweeted back that it was fine. I think even Ricky himself told me it wasn’t a big deal. The guys who pulled that off are about as Russian as Charley Pride.

    • Replies: @duderinompc
    I was being a bit silly, Ricky is an early 20's New Yorker. It just adds a bit of humor to me since I've interacted with him for years online before the election and he's now "Russian interference"
  48. @Steve Sailer
    Here's the only place on the Internet displaying the 1997 Esquire story by Tom Junod about Kevin Spacey:

    http://www.reocities.com/bspacey/esquire.html

    It starts with the reporter's elderly mom in Florida telling him the inside scoop about Kevin Spacey as heard around the retirement home swimming pool.

    In 1997.

    If you can get through it, this is a very disturbing and utterly believable account of Kevin Spacey’s having tried to rape a guy when he was 14 years old:

    http://www.vulture.com/2017/11/kevin-spacey-alleged-sexual-relationship.html

    The interviewee comes across as a completely levelheaded gay guy, and it’s damning.

    • Replies: @anon
    It's all very believable but I don't see it as especially damning.

    He was a post pubescent, sexually active gay male. Spacey wasn't in a position of authority. A teacher or employer. He admits he has a thing for older guys and is currently in a relationship with someone 10 years older. He says he acted very seductive toward Spacey.

    The 'victim' calls Spacey a pedophile and a sexual predator. And make the claim that its like homosexuality .... it's your sexuality and your stuck with it.

    Except pedophilia is an exclusive or predominant interest in prepubescent children. As far as predation, the guy was into it until their last unfortunate hook up and Spacey never contacted him again.

    Was Spacey a creep? It doesn't matter. It's a story because Spacey is being accused of being a pedophile and predator.

    And the victim felt it was somehow his duty to discuss his story of youthful sexual exuberance gone bad because the aging Spacey might be grooming another 14 year old. So ... he didn't really want to talk about his only brush with fame .... but he HAD to do it. Just in case.

    The gay thing seems perverted, but I can't say that. The rest of it seems utterly unremarkable.
    , @AndrewR
    The story reads like some lurid, surrealist fiction. Anon dating older cousin who'd been caught with anon's older brother before and mom had threatened to kill cousin if cousin touched anon, but then anon starts wearing cousin's clothes and sleeping over at cousin's and family is in denial?

    Anon repeatedly topping Spacey but suddenly Spacey wants to top anon one day and tries to do so rapishly?

    Anonymous accusations are worthless but it made for good reading, and I liked how he admitted pedophilic desires, like homosexual ones, are something sufferers are stuck with. Although strictly speaking, Spacey seems to be a non-exclusive ephebophile. No one TMK has accused him of sexual advances towards pre-pubescent kids.

  49. I hope the Dems aren’t counting on the NSA to help prevent these Russian-tricks in the future after the job they did preventing the Uzbek truck attack.

    • Replies: @Clyde

    I hope the Dems aren’t counting on the NSA to help prevent these Russian-tricks in the future after the job they did preventing the Uzbek truck attack.
     
    If the NSA pre crime ops are so good why didn't they copy and paste out alerts on this Uzbek mass killer? IOW we are throwing billions down the proverbial rat hole.

    The real NSA purpose is expanding the NSA empire with tax payers monies.
  50. @Cagey Beast
    This is true. People should be celebrating the 4chan and /pol/ trolling as a form of American folk art. Placeboing is just one of many Americans who deserve a spot in the Smithsonian:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OcldMG932o

    Yes! And a great–maybe the greatest?–effect of it is the consequent transformation of the former Cool Kids of the Left into the very sort of clueless schoolmarms they used to rail against: viz. Senator Blumenthal.

    It’s glorious!

  51. @AM

    In 1997.
     
    I am utterly fascinated by the phenomenon of Hollywood sex scandals. I assumed Weinstien was fluke, but clearly there's more going on.

    I have assumed since at least 1997 and perhaps longer that the whole place was cesspool. That ideally you should have a preventive course of antibiotics before even thinking about talking to a Hollywood producer.

    So why now?

    Why in the information age how did we become so "But my favorite star had to sleep with someone to make it big???" I mean, my family had good chuckle at my Grandma's expense when she said "I didn't know Liberace was gay"(circa 1997 actually). Why is naive suddenly in?

    Why an era of homosexuality, porn, Hollywood stars showing up to formal events forgetting most of their clothes, why is promiscuity and the concept of sexual favors repulsive? (It should repulsive, I just don't get how if you're all about promiscuity.)

    What social energy has turned this into an odd witch hunt? I may never know - probably just need to pop some popcorn and watch the best entertainment Hollywood has created in a while.

    People’s moralistic impulses have to come out somewhere, and the traditional outlets have largely been foreclosed

  52. @Buzz Mohawk
    Connecticut embarrassment Blumenthal should know that we vote early and often here, and then we get on the bus and vote in all the other towns.

    Just like the citizens and non-citizens in all the other blue states.

    Greasy Bloomie, who looks like he should play a corrupt cop on TV, was the AG here before he became one of our overexposed senators. These guys Blumenthal and Murphy have outsized media presence because of where they live and who they know.

    Blumie is not running any more – claims he will retire. Murphy is sticking his finger in the wind to see what he should believe in next. His gun control efforts are: boring…and the Uranium One debacle is freaking out Dems. He better be nicey-nice because Trump could skip Electric Boat and give contracts to Virginia, or something.

  53. Anyone who fell for that tweet shouldn’t vote.

    By keeping profoundly clueless people away from the polls, the tweeter was improving the health of our democracy.

    As someone once said, “Democracy is ok. It’s the people that ruin it.”

  54. At this point, isn’t all this Russia junk less
    about trying to discredit Trump’s election and more about Democrats posturing themselves for the brewing Democratic Party civil war? Donna Brazile is throwing Hillary under the bus and going full in with Bernie’s Current Year faction. Couldn’t blabbing about Russia be a signal that you are on the Clinton side of this fight?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Brazile's also throwing DWS under the bus. I wonder how that will play out. It looks like she might get squeezed by the Awan's on one side and the people who still have some power on the other.
    , @27 year old
    It's also kind of their Benghazi: showboating for their base so they don't have to face unpleasant questions like why haven't you delivered on anything we want. Now, unfortunately, unlike Benghazi they have a lot of the media and organs of the state on their side.
  55. @ic1000
    Coalition of the Fringes, at work

    Donna Brazile, former interim head of the DNC, published an excerpt of her forthcoming book in Politico today, Inside Hillary Clinton’s Secret Takeover of the DNC. While she remains totally not sorry for leaking CNN debate questions to Hillary Clinton last year, she nonetheless throws Hillary under the bus.

    Popcorn!

    Brazile reports her shock at discovering gambling at Rick's Team Hillary rigging procedures against Bernie. Apparently, longtime political operatives are as trusting children, deep down.

    The best part is her description of how Clinton, that longtime campaign finance reform advocate, strove to get the money out of politics.

    Under FEC law, an individual can contribute a maximum of $2,700 directly to a presidential campaign. But the limits are much higher for contributions to state parties and a party’s national committee.

    Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the 32 states’ parties who were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to [Clinton Presidential Campaign HQ in] Brooklyn.
     
    No story here, compared to the scandal of Putin spending 0.135 million dollars on social media. That must be because a little goes along way, while a lot goes only a little way. At least at this moment in the news cycle.

    1. Note that what the Hillary campaign did was to exploit a completely legal loophole.

    2. Note that our campaign funding laws are a joke. You can only legally contribute $2,700 to the Hillary Campaign Fund but you can contribute another $353,400 to the Hillary VICTORY Fund, which is TOTALLY different, except that it isn’t. This from the party that loves to bitch about Citizens United.

    The other scandal that Brazile mentions is that the Hillary campaign had completely taken over the DNC long before the primaries. They were able to do this because Obama and Wasserman left the DNC finances in a shambles – the Hillary campaign bailed out the DNC in exchange for total control. Except that the DNC is supposed to be neutral until the candidate is chosen. Hillary viewed her entire candidacy as a coronation – niceties like the DNC remaining neutral be damned, it was HER turn. You can only imagine how much she would have observed democratic (small d) norms and customs once she was crowned inaugurated. She would have made Maduro of Venezuela look like Mother Teresa in comparison. Imagine Obama’s executive order abuse on steroids and no Federal district judges in Hawaii to block her.

    • Replies: @JerryC
    Right now, we are only taking Brazile's word for it that what they were doing was "completely legal". Campaign finance law is very complicated and it could very well be that what they did broke the law. It certainly bears looking into.
    , @Thea
    She would have been so terrible we'd be in Civil war now. Which has some benefits.

    I think she threw Obama under the bus. How can he be responsible for DNC finances while POTUS? Surely he delegated that.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    Well said as usual, Jack D.

    And let's not forget who signed the campaign finance laws after promising to veto them. Non other than George W Bush, Hitler the First. Much of the push to get Congress to pass these laws was an astro turf campaign organized by Pew and blessed by McCain.
  56. Blumenthal pressed Twitter’s acting general counsel Sean Edgett to commit to researching how many voters may have been misled into incorrectly believing they had voted because of the posts.

    Senator Blumenthal also instructed the committee’s council to investigate how many voters may have pulled someones finger or believed that somebody had their nose.

  57. @415 reasons
    Importing tens of millions of foreign ringers over decades tto create a permanent Democratic super majority? Completely legitimate act of public policy.

    Russians bought $100K of Facebook ads and tweeted joke image macros? The most serious attack on American democracy in our history, and a literal act of war according to Clapper in the PBS documentary.

    Importing tens of millions of foreign ringers over decades tto create a permanent Democratic super majority? Completely legitimate act of public policy.

    The single most important fact about the radical demographic change in America is that it was done entirely against the wishes of actual Americans. That little piece of trivia is never mentioned because if the government can fundamentally transform the electorate against the democratic will of the people, while taunting them that they will soon be irrelevant, in what sense do we even live in a democracy?

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    "entirely against the wishes"

    That's highly false. A great number of Americans have welcomed the demographic changes.

    Every terrible government policy in US history that I'm aware of has had a significant degree of public support. The Iraq War had tens of millions of fools supporting it. Open borders has even more supporters.
  58. @Anon
    This is the Tribe that told generations that McCarthyite paranoia was the worst thing in US history after slavery?

    Trump and Trolls?

    Ironically, it turned out that McCarthy was right. Documents released from Russian archives in the chaos of the 1990s shows that the Rosenbergs were in fact guilty of nuclear espionage, and that commies were in fact infiltrating Hollywood and cultural and government institutions.

    • Replies: @Ivy

    ...McCarthy was right...
     
    Once upon a time, newspapers would issue polite corrections typically either in response to public input or to new information. Such simple acknowledgements of objective facts would update the record. Too much of modern media print and airtime output now consists of opinion masquerading as fact, showing how any blurring or obfuscation could be acceptable. Journalism 101 seems passé or counter-revolutionary.
  59. @Anon
    OMG, Facebook allowing some Russian-paid ads was like cyanide in Tylenol!!!!

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/this-could-be-the-end-of-facebook-hive-podcast

    It's funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals 'dreamers' and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA'S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?

    The elephant in the room here is Israel’s extensive influence on American government and policy. It makes alleged Russian meddling look like child’s play.

    Yet no one is talking about it. Hmm can’t imagine why.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Some people do talk about it, but they are anti-semites. You're not an anti-semite, are you, goy?
    , @Anonymous
    Someone is. Watch the reaction:

    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-russia-jewish-farage-brexit-698486


    Jews Should Concern Americans More Than Russian Influence, Nigel Farage Says
    By Nicole Goodkind On 11/1/17 at 1:57 PM

    Farage in a Monday interview singled out the so-called “Jewish lobby” as an overwhelming power in America during a discussion about Russia’s interference in U.S. politics.

    “There are other very powerful lobbies in the United States of America, and the Jewish lobby, with its links with the Israeli government, is one of those strong voices,” Farage said on his London-based radio show.

    ... Conflating a Jewish and Israeli lobby is not only conspiratorial and false, said Greenblatt, but could “have the unintended consequence of encouraging anti-Semites and extremists to exploit them.”

    The largest pro-Israel lobbying group in the United States is Christians United for Israel, which has a large Evangelical base and more than 1 million members overall. Opinion polls show the majority of Americans hold favorable views of Israel.
     

    AIPAC? Who? It's Christians United for Israel! See, you silly goyim, you told yourself to support Israel!
    , @Pericles
    The first one to stop clapping is an anti-semite.
  60. @Jack D
    1. Note that what the Hillary campaign did was to exploit a completely legal loophole.

    2. Note that our campaign funding laws are a joke. You can only legally contribute $2,700 to the Hillary Campaign Fund but you can contribute another $353,400 to the Hillary VICTORY Fund, which is TOTALLY different, except that it isn't. This from the party that loves to bitch about Citizens United.

    The other scandal that Brazile mentions is that the Hillary campaign had completely taken over the DNC long before the primaries. They were able to do this because Obama and Wasserman left the DNC finances in a shambles - the Hillary campaign bailed out the DNC in exchange for total control. Except that the DNC is supposed to be neutral until the candidate is chosen. Hillary viewed her entire candidacy as a coronation - niceties like the DNC remaining neutral be damned, it was HER turn. You can only imagine how much she would have observed democratic (small d) norms and customs once she was crowned inaugurated. She would have made Maduro of Venezuela look like Mother Teresa in comparison. Imagine Obama's executive order abuse on steroids and no Federal district judges in Hawaii to block her.

    Right now, we are only taking Brazile’s word for it that what they were doing was “completely legal”. Campaign finance law is very complicated and it could very well be that what they did broke the law. It certainly bears looking into.

    • Replies: @Demosthenes Rapaport
    Campaign finance law is so complex, that everyone is in violation of something. I once considered running for office, and when I went to the court house to file my candidacy, they handed me a 500-page printout that detailed the laws I'd be expected to follow. I only scanned it, but everywhere I went, there were warnings about how I'd be fined or imprisoned if I ran afoul of this or that rule. After looking it over, I decided I really didn't want to serve in my state legislature all that badly.
    , @Desiderius

    It certainly bears looking into.
     
    Democrats have diplomatic immunity.
  61. @Steve Sailer
    It's all part of the working out of themes unleashed to turn out the vote in Obama's re-election campaign.

    Couldn’t find the clip, but:

    [In Repo Man,] when Otto escapes from being tortured, Agent Rogersz casually remarks, “It’s all part of the plan.”

  62. @Steve Sailer
    It's all part of the working out of themes unleashed to turn out the vote in Obama's re-election campaign.

    Will he assume the persona known as Deval Patrick in 2020? C’mon iSteve, tell us!

  63. In the Dems’ ideal world, we actually would all vote online. Maybe not over Twitter, or not at first anyway. But it wouldn’t matter anyway, if they can control the agenda. Elections would serve a purely propagandistic purpose, that of “proving” that the people support the state’s policies. The more votes, the better — regardless of citizenship, crime record or even respiration.

  64. @Forbes
    Like a "hanging chad," or those complaining they wrongly entered a vote for Buchanan due to ballot design confusion in Florida in 2000, wouldn't brigades of angry people have already appeared claiming to have voted in this manner via Twitter #hashtag.

    Except that's not fake news, or even "fake news." Fake is the Senator from Connecticut claiming he served in Vietnam, so you'd be mistaken if you thought the Senator knew fake.

    He is beyond fake. He is one of those special needs senators. You know the type, incapable of parsing obvious bulls**t from reality.

    Still I bet he isn’t the only one who fell for this, his staffers had to bring it to his attention. So they are complicit in being stupid and out of touch.

    And once again it proves you don’t a need a brain to succeed in Washington, just brazen stupidity and the ability to lie your a** off.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    You get it. Senators and House Reps are massively distracted and their staffers do their bidding. And their hamster staffers have a strong tendency to be female and gay, not necessarily in this order and most dismaying is that Republicans are no better and like trading staff back and forth w Dems.


    Ever seen a video of these elected DC shithooks marching along with three staffers on cell phones? Their life is chaos and they like it this way.
    , @Forbes

    just brazen stupidity and the ability to lie your a** off.
     
    It's their only qualifications.
  65. @Cagey Beast
    I remember Ricky Vaughn and his crowd pulling that prank. I even remember tweeting at them that it would all end in tears because anyone could tell that crossed into illegality. They tweeted back that it was fine. I think even Ricky himself told me it wasn't a big deal. The guys who pulled that off are about as Russian as Charley Pride.

    I was being a bit silly, Ricky is an early 20’s New Yorker. It just adds a bit of humor to me since I’ve interacted with him for years online before the election and he’s now “Russian interference”

    • Replies: @Thea
    I'm insulted that Russians get all the credit for homegrown American talent.
  66. @kihowi
    Oh yeah, I remember that. Sites in the Stormer-sphere did that for about a week halfway through the election, and those people are not Russians.

    We seem to be at the point where anything not explicitly anti-Trump retweeted by a Russian account is now part of the conspiracy. I guess the millions of Russian twitter users should have recused themselves from commenting on American news for a year and a half, even though their country and its actions was the vocal point of the campaigns at times.

    This whole thing is the gayest thing ever. "Russian trolls"? Jesus, America can't even create a proper fictional enemy anymore.

    I may be behind the times, but I have some questions.

    1. Why would Putin want Trump to win? He was an unknown.

    2. How do these tech companies figure out which ads are Russia-sponsored?

    I mean, if we assume Putin was in fact behind some ads I guarantee those ads would not have an obvious source.

    There’s no Communitee of Concerned Russians for Trump.

    Lack of transparency is a hallmark of the current Russian govt. They have a lot of experience covering their tracks, going back to at least the USSR days.

  67. @Anon
    OMG, Facebook allowing some Russian-paid ads was like cyanide in Tylenol!!!!

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/this-could-be-the-end-of-facebook-hive-podcast

    It's funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals 'dreamers' and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA'S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?

    Why wouldn’t the Russians also be sending over illegal immigrants for nefarious purposes?

    They did it in the Soviet era.

  68. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @slumber_j
    If you can get through it, this is a very disturbing and utterly believable account of Kevin Spacey's having tried to rape a guy when he was 14 years old:

    http://www.vulture.com/2017/11/kevin-spacey-alleged-sexual-relationship.html

    The interviewee comes across as a completely levelheaded gay guy, and it's damning.

    It’s all very believable but I don’t see it as especially damning.

    He was a post pubescent, sexually active gay male. Spacey wasn’t in a position of authority. A teacher or employer. He admits he has a thing for older guys and is currently in a relationship with someone 10 years older. He says he acted very seductive toward Spacey.

    The ‘victim’ calls Spacey a pedophile and a sexual predator. And make the claim that its like homosexuality …. it’s your sexuality and your stuck with it.

    Except pedophilia is an exclusive or predominant interest in prepubescent children. As far as predation, the guy was into it until their last unfortunate hook up and Spacey never contacted him again.

    Was Spacey a creep? It doesn’t matter. It’s a story because Spacey is being accused of being a pedophile and predator.

    And the victim felt it was somehow his duty to discuss his story of youthful sexual exuberance gone bad because the aging Spacey might be grooming another 14 year old. So … he didn’t really want to talk about his only brush with fame …. but he HAD to do it. Just in case.

    The gay thing seems perverted, but I can’t say that. The rest of it seems utterly unremarkable.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    Occam’s is saying the drunker (or more buzzed) he got the younger he went. Kevin Space Boi/
    , @Pericles

    It’s all very believable but I don’t see it as especially damning.

    He was a post pubescent, sexually active gay male. Spacey wasn’t in a position of authority. A teacher or employer. He admits he has a thing for older guys and is currently in a relationship with someone 10 years older. He says he acted very seductive toward Spacey.

     

    Tell it to the judge.
    , @Anonymous
    Life is complex. There are many degrees of moral turpitude. Anyone who denies this is already several degrees down.
  69. Shouldn’t the title be “How Russian Trolls Help Trump”?

    I read the article to find out how it is that Trump helps the Russian trolls and I don’t think it said how. Headlines are often teasers that have little to do with the article but this is particularly bad.

  70. Sen. Richard Blumenthal….. You can tell this jamoke is a meat world muppet by how much influence he thinks a few Russian adverts had on 2016 election. I do not think he is jaking it or faking it. He is just stupid (Occam’s) Evil stupid because he is a semi effective Dem op/propagandist. A wannabee Chuck Schumer in the making.

  71. That’s my boy Tom Haverford in that picture! Please do the needful!

  72. @anon
    It's all very believable but I don't see it as especially damning.

    He was a post pubescent, sexually active gay male. Spacey wasn't in a position of authority. A teacher or employer. He admits he has a thing for older guys and is currently in a relationship with someone 10 years older. He says he acted very seductive toward Spacey.

    The 'victim' calls Spacey a pedophile and a sexual predator. And make the claim that its like homosexuality .... it's your sexuality and your stuck with it.

    Except pedophilia is an exclusive or predominant interest in prepubescent children. As far as predation, the guy was into it until their last unfortunate hook up and Spacey never contacted him again.

    Was Spacey a creep? It doesn't matter. It's a story because Spacey is being accused of being a pedophile and predator.

    And the victim felt it was somehow his duty to discuss his story of youthful sexual exuberance gone bad because the aging Spacey might be grooming another 14 year old. So ... he didn't really want to talk about his only brush with fame .... but he HAD to do it. Just in case.

    The gay thing seems perverted, but I can't say that. The rest of it seems utterly unremarkable.

    Occam’s is saying the drunker (or more buzzed) he got the younger he went. Kevin Space Boi/

  73. I voted 37 times for Hillary, and NOW you tell me it was a trick? Dam# Trump!

  74. @Chrisnonymous
    You're missing my point, but that's okay.

    [Jack D] You’re missing my point …

    That’s what a__holes do.

  75. @Rod1963
    He is beyond fake. He is one of those special needs senators. You know the type, incapable of parsing obvious bulls**t from reality.

    Still I bet he isn't the only one who fell for this, his staffers had to bring it to his attention. So they are complicit in being stupid and out of touch.

    And once again it proves you don't a need a brain to succeed in Washington, just brazen stupidity and the ability to lie your a** off.

    You get it. Senators and House Reps are massively distracted and their staffers do their bidding. And their hamster staffers have a strong tendency to be female and gay, not necessarily in this order and most dismaying is that Republicans are no better and like trading staff back and forth w Dems.

    Ever seen a video of these elected DC shithooks marching along with three staffers on cell phones? Their life is chaos and they like it this way.

    • Replies: @guest
    Back when I was in college I had an offer to be a staffer at my state capital (grandpa was a railroad lobbyist and briefly a politician way, way back when). I instinctively knew I was just not that type of person. It is a type. Even in the provinces.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    And their hamster staffers have a strong tendency to be female and gay...
     
    While I was walking through the core of the District one day, it occurred to me that this city was little more than a theme park. Kinda like Walt Disney World, with older buildings.

    And who else works at WDW but females and gays?

    The core of WDW is surrounded by virtual wilderness, populated by alligators. Washington is similar, but with negrators instead.
  76. @Anonymous
    Who had more influence over election propaganda, Russia or the Progressive Tech Oligarchy?

    https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/925892311036375040

    https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/925945310928662528

    When the fly landed on Hillary’s forehead during the debate, I knew it was a sign from God. Beelzebub the accursed would not be allowed to control the mightiest nation on earth.

  77. @Thea
    I hope the Dems aren't counting on the NSA to help prevent these Russian-tricks in the future after the job they did preventing the Uzbek truck attack.

    I hope the Dems aren’t counting on the NSA to help prevent these Russian-tricks in the future after the job they did preventing the Uzbek truck attack.

    If the NSA pre crime ops are so good why didn’t they copy and paste out alerts on this Uzbek mass killer? IOW we are throwing billions down the proverbial rat hole.

    The real NSA purpose is expanding the NSA empire with tax payers monies.

  78. @JerryC
    Right now, we are only taking Brazile's word for it that what they were doing was "completely legal". Campaign finance law is very complicated and it could very well be that what they did broke the law. It certainly bears looking into.

    Campaign finance law is so complex, that everyone is in violation of something. I once considered running for office, and when I went to the court house to file my candidacy, they handed me a 500-page printout that detailed the laws I’d be expected to follow. I only scanned it, but everywhere I went, there were warnings about how I’d be fined or imprisoned if I ran afoul of this or that rule. After looking it over, I decided I really didn’t want to serve in my state legislature all that badly.

    • Replies: @Thomas
    That's just one of many, many reasons that nobody can run for office without a lot of their own money or else the backing of a political machine and fundraising apparatus. You need, just to cite one example, specialized lawyers to navigate compliance with those campaign finance laws. The era of the "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" citizen legislator is long, long gone.
  79. @Steve Sailer
    Here's the only place on the Internet displaying the 1997 Esquire story by Tom Junod about Kevin Spacey:

    http://www.reocities.com/bspacey/esquire.html

    It starts with the reporter's elderly mom in Florida telling him the inside scoop about Kevin Spacey as heard around the retirement home swimming pool.

    In 1997.

    From the article Robert Conrad says this:
    “He’s a movie star now, Tom,” Bob Conrad says. “He gets the good tables, and he gets his picture taken with Harvey Miramax, or whatever his name is.” “I think it might be Harvey Miramax. I think he had it changed.” “It’s Weinstein, Tom. But you know what I mean. Kevin’s out there *playing* a movie star now. And you can tell him I said that.”

    Interesting article, makes me want to watch some of those old The Wild, Wild, West re-runs. I wonder if I read it back then because it seems to me that I knew in the late 90’s Spacey was gay.

    • Replies: @It's All Ball Bearings
    "in the late 90′s Spacey was gay." AI knew before you did.
  80. The always-incoherent Russian hackers story accomplishes four key goals:
    –delegitimizes the Trump presidency. (This is sedition, and illegal.)
    –justifies censoring the internet. (This is attacking the Constitution, and illegal.)
    –avoids the objective facts that Hillary Clinton has always been a widely hated national figure and that she was an indefensibly incompetant candidate. (This is legal but self-defeating, and forehead-bruisingly dumb.)
    –most importantly, this nonsense erases the diverse and widespread millions of people who object to “the way things are going,” and all their greivances and evidence, without any discussion.
    Problems with unchecked mass immigration? What problems? You seem to have been confused by some Russian propaganda.
    I predict mid-term election shakeups.

    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
  81. One thing that should be obvious about this whole rigamarole is that this is the legacy prestige political press taking the opportunity for some revenge against Facebook, Google, Twitter, the rest of the Web 2.0 industry that basically are the gatekeepers now of public information and discussion. That was a role the press played once, with their high water mark during Watergate. Now, not only do they have competition, they’re dependent on those outfits for revenue, as much as anything else (and they don’t even get the lion’s share of that revenue anymore). The old media would love their new superiors to get taken down a peg and forced to knuckle under to new policies, or otherwise new laws and regulations, that force them to toe the same line the press does. The Establishment more generally doesn’t want another Trump, who can get his message out to the public past the gatekeepers the way he does.

    That’s the big metastory here. The Russians are just a scarecrow and bogeyman in service of an effort to lock down the Web so nobody ever again slips by and so richly humiliates these people who thought they controlled the country by controlling public discourse. They were working on this last year, with the supposed threats of terrorism (e.g., ISIS recruitment) and hate speech, trolling and harassment as their excuse. The Russians though were topical, and I assume appeal to baby boomers who are getting foggy as they enter their 70s and maybe don’t remember that the Cold War ended a quarter-century ago.

    • Replies: @Thea
    I'm not sure the press was ever quite as honorable or virtuous as you saw them.
    , @ChrisZ
    Interesting comment, here and elsewhere Thomas.
  82. @square root

    Importing tens of millions of foreign ringers over decades tto create a permanent Democratic super majority? Completely legitimate act of public policy.
     
    The single most important fact about the radical demographic change in America is that it was done entirely against the wishes of actual Americans. That little piece of trivia is never mentioned because if the government can fundamentally transform the electorate against the democratic will of the people, while taunting them that they will soon be irrelevant, in what sense do we even live in a democracy?

    “entirely against the wishes”

    That’s highly false. A great number of Americans have welcomed the demographic changes.

    Every terrible government policy in US history that I’m aware of has had a significant degree of public support. The Iraq War had tens of millions of fools supporting it. Open borders has even more supporters.

    • Agree: Cagey Beast
    • Replies: @Issac
    The claim that the Iraq War had popular support is specious, the claim that Open Borders is even more popular is pure fantasy. Polling during the election showed less than half of Democrats supported more liberal immigration policies and Republicans skewed closer to 90/10 against.
    , @Mr. Anon

    That’s highly false.
     
    No, what you say is "highly false". At no time has a majority of Americans wanted unrestricted immigration, or to be displaced and disenfranchised in thier own country. A clear majority wanted just the opposite.
    , @ben tillman
    I could not disagree more. In 1965, if you'd ask the American people whether they supported an immigration policy that would eventually result in 0% of the population being white, approximately 0% of white Americans would have said they supported the policy.

    There was and is absolutely no support for this policy among whites that is not due to manipulation by hostile non-whites, i.e., indoctrination and intimidation/incentivization.
  83. @Anon
    OMG, Facebook allowing some Russian-paid ads was like cyanide in Tylenol!!!!

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/this-could-be-the-end-of-facebook-hive-podcast

    It's funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals 'dreamers' and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA'S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?

    It’s funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals ‘dreamers’ and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA’S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?

    Yep, bingo. The whole idea of American elections somehow being sacrosanct and to be held inviolate from foreign interference was invented out of whole cloth barely a year ago. Hell, the Clintons were caught 20 years ago collecting campaign donations from Communist China. Mexico was openly campaigning against Trump among its citizens in the U.S. (https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/trump-mexico-backlash-223128) Obama was poo-pooing the idea of the Russians as a geopolitical force in the 2012 election (“The 1980s called, they want their foreign policy back!”) and his administration was the one in place while all this Russian trolling was supposedly going on.

    And it’s been the more or less openly declared intention of the Democratic Party to keep importing new voters until they achieve supremacy! What’s more treasonous, allegedly receiving indirect assistance offered from a foreign power, or replacing your own country’s native population and boasting about it?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    This is all true, Thomas, but the democrats and the Lyin Press count on Americans (and including some of the Dem's and LP) to have very little long-term memories when it comes to politics. In addition, the 25 years or so of 24x7 infotainment on CNN and others has given them the ability to bombard American households with so much noise, that people can't even recall the memories they do have over the noise.

    "The Russians spent money to influence ..."
    "The Russians ...."
    "Money ..."
    "Elections ...."
    ("Hey, wasn't there something about BJ Clinton renting out rooms in the White House and ...")
    "We found out that the RUSSIANS spent over 8 THOUSAND DOLLARS, that's EIGHT THOUSAND ... to ..."
    ("I remember that the President of Mexico kept telling Mexicans to invade and ...")
    "EIGHTY-THREE HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS!"

    "Honey, can you turn that shit off, for cryin' out loud!"

    "Don't call me honey, if you want to get on this flight, Sir! I have no control over that TV hanging from the roof joists."
  84. @Moses
    The elephant in the room here is Israel's extensive influence on American government and policy. It makes alleged Russian meddling look like child's play.

    Yet no one is talking about it. Hmm can't imagine why.

    Some people do talk about it, but they are anti-semites. You’re not an anti-semite, are you, goy?

    • LOL: Trelane
    • Replies: @Anon
    Most so-called 'anti-semites' are really anti-philosemites.

    They are not for blind hatred of Jews.
    They are against blind worship of Jews.
  85. @Clyde
    You get it. Senators and House Reps are massively distracted and their staffers do their bidding. And their hamster staffers have a strong tendency to be female and gay, not necessarily in this order and most dismaying is that Republicans are no better and like trading staff back and forth w Dems.


    Ever seen a video of these elected DC shithooks marching along with three staffers on cell phones? Their life is chaos and they like it this way.

    Back when I was in college I had an offer to be a staffer at my state capital (grandpa was a railroad lobbyist and briefly a politician way, way back when). I instinctively knew I was just not that type of person. It is a type. Even in the provinces.

  86. @slumber_j
    If you can get through it, this is a very disturbing and utterly believable account of Kevin Spacey's having tried to rape a guy when he was 14 years old:

    http://www.vulture.com/2017/11/kevin-spacey-alleged-sexual-relationship.html

    The interviewee comes across as a completely levelheaded gay guy, and it's damning.

    The story reads like some lurid, surrealist fiction. Anon dating older cousin who’d been caught with anon’s older brother before and mom had threatened to kill cousin if cousin touched anon, but then anon starts wearing cousin’s clothes and sleeping over at cousin’s and family is in denial?

    Anon repeatedly topping Spacey but suddenly Spacey wants to top anon one day and tries to do so rapishly?

    Anonymous accusations are worthless but it made for good reading, and I liked how he admitted pedophilic desires, like homosexual ones, are something sufferers are stuck with. Although strictly speaking, Spacey seems to be a non-exclusive ephebophile. No one TMK has accused him of sexual advances towards pre-pubescent kids.

  87. @guest
    My college roommate, who was a socialist and possibly the Antichrist (still waiting to see), left me a note one election morning telling me that Election Day had been postponed. I didn't believe him, and I don't think he expected me to. It was a joke. But probably there was the hint of a whisper of a hope in his heart that there was a greater than 0% chance I'd fall for it.

    If the Russians were running ploys like this, it wouldn't be much more concerning than the hijinks of my (possibly diabolical) roommate.

    By the way, we lived across the street from the polling place, but I didn't have my address on my driver's license or my name on anything tying me to our house. I registered same-day on a previous election because he vouched for me. That's how we do it in MN. If he didn't want me voting, why didn't he just refuse to vouch for me? I probably wouldn't have driven all the way back to my parents' house.

    Unfortunately, I think you just argued that the Russians are possibly diabolical, which is probably not what you wanted to say.

    • Replies: @guest
    The diabolical business is just an aside. It has as much to do with the rest of the story as would my mentioning he was of above-average height or a fan of Rush.

    I can't help but bring it up in reference to him, even if it hurts my overall point.

  88. @Demosthenes Rapaport
    Campaign finance law is so complex, that everyone is in violation of something. I once considered running for office, and when I went to the court house to file my candidacy, they handed me a 500-page printout that detailed the laws I'd be expected to follow. I only scanned it, but everywhere I went, there were warnings about how I'd be fined or imprisoned if I ran afoul of this or that rule. After looking it over, I decided I really didn't want to serve in my state legislature all that badly.

    That’s just one of many, many reasons that nobody can run for office without a lot of their own money or else the backing of a political machine and fundraising apparatus. You need, just to cite one example, specialized lawyers to navigate compliance with those campaign finance laws. The era of the “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” citizen legislator is long, long gone.

    • Replies: @The Wobbly Guy

    You need, just to cite one example, specialized lawyers to navigate compliance with those campaign finance laws. The era of the “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” citizen legislator is long, long gone.
     
    That's an interesting observation. Maybe that's the REAL point of campaign finance laws, to prevent ordinary citizens from running for office and allowing only 'vetted' candidates who have the logistical support of political parties to run.
  89. @Steve Sailer
    Here's the only place on the Internet displaying the 1997 Esquire story by Tom Junod about Kevin Spacey:

    http://www.reocities.com/bspacey/esquire.html

    It starts with the reporter's elderly mom in Florida telling him the inside scoop about Kevin Spacey as heard around the retirement home swimming pool.

    In 1997.

    Or later in 2004 when Spacey got “brutally mugged” by a “kid” at 4:30 AM in a London park. He changed his story in explaining to police why he got thumped on the noggin. It seems that ‘wookin’ pa nub’ in all the wrong places can be hazardous.

    What actually happened is, I fell for a con. And I was, I think, incredibly embarrassed by it. Some sob story about somebody needing to call their mother.

    It was such a good con, that I actually dialled the number myself and when somebody answered I then finally handed [over] my phone. And this kid took off and I was so upset I ran after him.

    I tripped up over my dog, and I ended up falling on to the street and hitting myself in the head.

    • Replies: @Detective Club
    Didn't now-retired Associate Justice David Souter once get mugged in a very Gay part of DC, one fine night, while he was "out jogging?"
  90. @AndrewR
    "entirely against the wishes"

    That's highly false. A great number of Americans have welcomed the demographic changes.

    Every terrible government policy in US history that I'm aware of has had a significant degree of public support. The Iraq War had tens of millions of fools supporting it. Open borders has even more supporters.

    The claim that the Iraq War had popular support is specious, the claim that Open Borders is even more popular is pure fantasy. Polling during the election showed less than half of Democrats supported more liberal immigration policies and Republicans skewed closer to 90/10 against.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    A lot of people were very vocal against the war but there was never a shortage of useful idiots who would readily insult anyone who was opposed to the war. I shouldn't have to remind you, but apparently I do: there was no draft. Hundreds of thousands of young people willingly enlisted annually to put a boot in Iraqi ass like Toby Keith told them to. Misguided patriotism wasn't everyone's only motive for joining but it was a powerful one for many.
  91. ‘Russia’ is a smoke screen used by the Tribe.

    It’s like ink released by the octopus.

  92. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Moses
    The elephant in the room here is Israel's extensive influence on American government and policy. It makes alleged Russian meddling look like child's play.

    Yet no one is talking about it. Hmm can't imagine why.

    Someone is. Watch the reaction:

    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-russia-jewish-farage-brexit-698486

    Jews Should Concern Americans More Than Russian Influence, Nigel Farage Says
    By Nicole Goodkind On 11/1/17 at 1:57 PM

    Farage in a Monday interview singled out the so-called “Jewish lobby” as an overwhelming power in America during a discussion about Russia’s interference in U.S. politics.

    “There are other very powerful lobbies in the United States of America, and the Jewish lobby, with its links with the Israeli government, is one of those strong voices,” Farage said on his London-based radio show.

    … Conflating a Jewish and Israeli lobby is not only conspiratorial and false, said Greenblatt, but could “have the unintended consequence of encouraging anti-Semites and extremists to exploit them.”

    The largest pro-Israel lobbying group in the United States is Christians United for Israel, which has a large Evangelical base and more than 1 million members overall. Opinion polls show the majority of Americans hold favorable views of Israel.

    AIPAC? Who? It’s Christians United for Israel! See, you silly goyim, you told yourself to support Israel!

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Here's Dana Milbank's 2005 column in the Washington Post on just how big AIPAC is in Washington:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/23/AR2005052301565.html

    , @Anonymous
    Clever trick, unless numbers of people suddenly outrank numbers of dollars when it comes to influencing congress. And they say they're not crafty.
  93. @AndrewR
    Some people do talk about it, but they are anti-semites. You're not an anti-semite, are you, goy?

    Most so-called ‘anti-semites’ are really anti-philosemites.

    They are not for blind hatred of Jews.
    They are against blind worship of Jews.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    Mostly, "anti-semites" are for criticizing Jews like you would any other people, instead of pretending that they're the one sole group on earth whom its inherently immoral to criticize.

    But of course, there certainly are real, living and breathing, actual anti-semites, who are hell bent on more than just a bit of criticism, so the label "anti-semite" is not just a political contrivance designed to shore up Jewish power, even though that's mostly the way it's deployed.

  94. Wait a minute. It’s the Democrats who’ve been pushing for ease of voting from home, as well as early voting.

  95. @AndrewR
    100 bucks says a NEET in his parents' basement in Oregon made that image. And as Chris alludes to, if someone really was dumb enough to fall for that image,
    only an cynical, evil politician would be upset about it. Stupid people shpuld not vote.

    cynical, evil politician would be upset about it.

    I figure these people are dumb as bricks and need to be culled as a matter of public health urgency or they figure they can just can get away with doing ridiculous clownshit in armani while going home early, raking in taxpayer money and having the occasion to concentrate on getting wined and dined by lobbyists.

  96. @blah blah blah blah
    Steve, this is hilarious! This was a trolling effort from 4chan and/or /r/the_donald. This one and the #DraftOurDaughters campaign stand out in my mind as some of the best meming from last year.

    Still, though, it's a bit frustrating to see the other side think so little of us that they can't attribute the dank memes to our gleeful culture warriors.
  97. @JerryC
    Right now, we are only taking Brazile's word for it that what they were doing was "completely legal". Campaign finance law is very complicated and it could very well be that what they did broke the law. It certainly bears looking into.

    It certainly bears looking into.

    Democrats have diplomatic immunity.

  98. @NJ Transit Commuter
    At this point, isn’t all this Russia junk less
    about trying to discredit Trump’s election and more about Democrats posturing themselves for the brewing Democratic Party civil war? Donna Brazile is throwing Hillary under the bus and going full in with Bernie’s Current Year faction. Couldn’t blabbing about Russia be a signal that you are on the Clinton side of this fight?

    Brazile’s also throwing DWS under the bus. I wonder how that will play out. It looks like she might get squeezed by the Awan’s on one side and the people who still have some power on the other.

  99. The Russians know something that the Dems don’t.

    That advert can be seen by any voter, yet they know that only Hillary voters will fall for it.

    Anatoly Karlin insists the Kremlin doesn’t do HBD.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    An intriguing theory, my dear fellow!

    We are deep in Putin's Pendulum territory here.
  100. This reminds me how once Steve linked to that clip:

    as an example of libertarians’ authism.

  101. @Chrisnonymous
    This is really true. I can't believe I didn't notice it before.

    Similarly, they’re always promoting globalism and advising everybody to “think globally.” Well, from a global perspective, whites are hardly the “majority”; whites instead are a tiny and vanishing minority, which you think would entitle whites to certain minority rights and protections. Unfortunately, that suggestion makes the globalists go berserk.

  102. @Chrisnonymous
    Unfortunately, I think you just argued that the Russians are possibly diabolical, which is probably not what you wanted to say.

    The diabolical business is just an aside. It has as much to do with the rest of the story as would my mentioning he was of above-average height or a fan of Rush.

    I can’t help but bring it up in reference to him, even if it hurts my overall point.

  103. @Anon
    Most so-called 'anti-semites' are really anti-philosemites.

    They are not for blind hatred of Jews.
    They are against blind worship of Jews.

    Mostly, “anti-semites” are for criticizing Jews like you would any other people, instead of pretending that they’re the one sole group on earth whom its inherently immoral to criticize.

    But of course, there certainly are real, living and breathing, actual anti-semites, who are hell bent on more than just a bit of criticism, so the label “anti-semite” is not just a political contrivance designed to shore up Jewish power, even though that’s mostly the way it’s deployed.

  104. My advice to true blue American patriots like Senator Blumenthal would be not to get mad, but to get even. America should fight fire with fire. How about setting up a government organization dedicated to interfering in other countries’ elections? Maybe call it the “National Endowment for Democracy” or something – you know, as a plausible subterfuge.

    • LOL: ic1000
  105. @22pp22
    The Russians know something that the Dems don't.

    That advert can be seen by any voter, yet they know that only Hillary voters will fall for it.

    Anatoly Karlin insists the Kremlin doesn't do HBD.

    An intriguing theory, my dear fellow!

    We are deep in Putin’s Pendulum territory here.

  106. @guest
    My college roommate, who was a socialist and possibly the Antichrist (still waiting to see), left me a note one election morning telling me that Election Day had been postponed. I didn't believe him, and I don't think he expected me to. It was a joke. But probably there was the hint of a whisper of a hope in his heart that there was a greater than 0% chance I'd fall for it.

    If the Russians were running ploys like this, it wouldn't be much more concerning than the hijinks of my (possibly diabolical) roommate.

    By the way, we lived across the street from the polling place, but I didn't have my address on my driver's license or my name on anything tying me to our house. I registered same-day on a previous election because he vouched for me. That's how we do it in MN. If he didn't want me voting, why didn't he just refuse to vouch for me? I probably wouldn't have driven all the way back to my parents' house.

    Guest, I may be able to help you figure out what was actually going on on election day in your “household” if you would answer me a few quick questions:

    1) This roommate, did you ever see him eating some nasty-smelling reddish-colored soup?

    2) Did he tend to play a lot of chess, at all hours of the night?

    3) Did your roommate have books on his nightstand that weighed > 3 lb (1.4 kg) and were NOT shop manuals or parts books?

    4) Did said roommate buy his liquor by the pallet rather than just a case at a time?

    5) Did you ever see him copying and pasting barely-readable viagra ads into comment-body textareas of obscure, yet, oddly, fascinating web sites?

    If only as many as 2 of these 5 questions can be answered by YES, or WTF?, then your roommate might be one of the people behind the election of President Trump. Buy him a pallet of the best Grey Goose and say thanks on behalf of us deplorables – the check is in the mail too.

    • Replies: @guest
    1). No, but he did eat soup out of Tupperware a lot.

    2). We played chess regularly. (I taught him, in fact.) But usually in the evening.

    3) . I don't know. Didn't really go in his room. All I remember is ugly carpeting and a Union Jack on the wall.

    4). He didn't drink much, to my recollection. We had bottles in the house, including Stoli, but they'd stay a while.

    5). No.

    I very much doubt he voted Trump, unless he was a disgruntled Bernie Bro.

    He had in his possession a statuette of Lenin, if that's important. (Not kidding.)

  107. @Issac
    The claim that the Iraq War had popular support is specious, the claim that Open Borders is even more popular is pure fantasy. Polling during the election showed less than half of Democrats supported more liberal immigration policies and Republicans skewed closer to 90/10 against.

    A lot of people were very vocal against the war but there was never a shortage of useful idiots who would readily insult anyone who was opposed to the war. I shouldn’t have to remind you, but apparently I do: there was no draft. Hundreds of thousands of young people willingly enlisted annually to put a boot in Iraqi ass like Toby Keith told them to. Misguided patriotism wasn’t everyone’s only motive for joining but it was a powerful one for many.

    • Replies: @Issac
    Hundreds of thousands is still a very small percentage, even if you're only looking at the military age white males. Propaganda was wall to wall at the time, as is the case with Open Borders today, but neither polled or polls as well as the American media would have you believe.
  108. @Achmed E. Newman
    Guest, I may be able to help you figure out what was actually going on on election day in your "household" if you would answer me a few quick questions:

    1) This roommate, did you ever see him eating some nasty-smelling reddish-colored soup?

    2) Did he tend to play a lot of chess, at all hours of the night?

    3) Did your roommate have books on his nightstand that weighed > 3 lb (1.4 kg) and were NOT shop manuals or parts books?

    4) Did said roommate buy his liquor by the pallet rather than just a case at a time?

    5) Did you ever see him copying and pasting barely-readable viagra ads into comment-body textareas of obscure, yet, oddly, fascinating web sites?

    If only as many as 2 of these 5 questions can be answered by YES, or WTF?, then your roommate might be one of the people behind the election of President Trump. Buy him a pallet of the best Grey Goose and say thanks on behalf of us deplorables - the check is in the mail too.

    1). No, but he did eat soup out of Tupperware a lot.

    2). We played chess regularly. (I taught him, in fact.) But usually in the evening.

    3) . I don’t know. Didn’t really go in his room. All I remember is ugly carpeting and a Union Jack on the wall.

    4). He didn’t drink much, to my recollection. We had bottles in the house, including Stoli, but they’d stay a while.

    5). No.

    I very much doubt he voted Trump, unless he was a disgruntled Bernie Bro.

    He had in his possession a statuette of Lenin, if that’s important. (Not kidding.)

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    1) Ahaaa!

    2) He should have been teaching you. Strange and unsettling. Did he always open with pawn to king 4?

    3) Did his Union Jack have a sickle in one corner?

    4) Yeah, never mind - he's no self-respecting Ruskie.

    5) Dammit, I thought that was the guy! One down and the rest of the internet to go...

    Wait... was the statuette filled with Vodka? Lenin, you say? Not Putin? No, not deplorable enough for my tastes.

    My Ruskdar says "NYET"!
  109. @Steve Sailer
    Here's the only place on the Internet displaying the 1997 Esquire story by Tom Junod about Kevin Spacey:

    http://www.reocities.com/bspacey/esquire.html

    It starts with the reporter's elderly mom in Florida telling him the inside scoop about Kevin Spacey as heard around the retirement home swimming pool.

    In 1997.

    When Spacey moved to London to work at the National Theatre the press coverage over here was slightly ‘off’ in papers like the Guardian and the Times – they covered him almost as a Garbo “I want to be alone” type coming to London for anonymity. I remember reading them and thinking “is he gay?”.

    On topic, I remember this Ricky Vaughn tweet from the campaign – Twitter (rightly IMHO, it had the potential to fool stupid people) took it down but then terminated his account (I think it was his second or third iteration already). As the guy says, the Senate call it an “ad” when it was yet more joshing.

    65 likes and 36 retweets! That’s sure going to move the needle. Are these people mad, stupid or malicious?

    https://twitter.com/Vaped_taylor/status/925837629513523200

  110. @Anonymous
    Someone is. Watch the reaction:

    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-russia-jewish-farage-brexit-698486


    Jews Should Concern Americans More Than Russian Influence, Nigel Farage Says
    By Nicole Goodkind On 11/1/17 at 1:57 PM

    Farage in a Monday interview singled out the so-called “Jewish lobby” as an overwhelming power in America during a discussion about Russia’s interference in U.S. politics.

    “There are other very powerful lobbies in the United States of America, and the Jewish lobby, with its links with the Israeli government, is one of those strong voices,” Farage said on his London-based radio show.

    ... Conflating a Jewish and Israeli lobby is not only conspiratorial and false, said Greenblatt, but could “have the unintended consequence of encouraging anti-Semites and extremists to exploit them.”

    The largest pro-Israel lobbying group in the United States is Christians United for Israel, which has a large Evangelical base and more than 1 million members overall. Opinion polls show the majority of Americans hold favorable views of Israel.
     

    AIPAC? Who? It's Christians United for Israel! See, you silly goyim, you told yourself to support Israel!

    Here’s Dana Milbank’s 2005 column in the Washington Post on just how big AIPAC is in Washington:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/23/AR2005052301565.html

  111. @Thomas
    That's just one of many, many reasons that nobody can run for office without a lot of their own money or else the backing of a political machine and fundraising apparatus. You need, just to cite one example, specialized lawyers to navigate compliance with those campaign finance laws. The era of the "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" citizen legislator is long, long gone.

    You need, just to cite one example, specialized lawyers to navigate compliance with those campaign finance laws. The era of the “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” citizen legislator is long, long gone.

    That’s an interesting observation. Maybe that’s the REAL point of campaign finance laws, to prevent ordinary citizens from running for office and allowing only ‘vetted’ candidates who have the logistical support of political parties to run.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    In a lot of states there are complicated laws for getting on the ballot - you need a certain # of petitions signed by registered voters who reside in your district, etc. People who have party support get on no problem - they have professionals that go out to gather the petitions and know all the laws regarding who is qualified to sign them, how many extra signatures you need to get to be sure you have enough, etc. If you decide to run and gather your own petitions, the party machine has election law specialist lawyers go over your petitions with a fine tooth comb and get enough of your signatures thrown out that you don't qualify to appear on the ballot. This signature was signed in the wrong color ink. The registered voter's name is Rufus T. Washington and the petition was signed by Rufus Washington. And so on - death by a thousand cuts.
    , @Thomas

    Maybe that’s the REAL point of campaign finance laws, to prevent ordinary citizens from running for office and allowing only ‘vetted’ candidates who have the logistical support of political parties to run.
     
    McCain-Feingold (which was largely struck down by the Supreme Court in the Citizens United decision) was often called the "Incumbent's Protection Act" by observers. It's probably not an accident that Trump, the first candidate in modern history to bum rush the two-party system and win, is a billionaire.
  112. @Thomas

    It’s funny. These open borders type say Nationalism sucks. Who cares about borders and sovereignty. Heck, call illegals ‘dreamers’ and give them the vote.

    But if Russia ran some ads on facebook that had little to do with the election?

    HOW DARE THEY INTERFERE IN AMERICA’S NATIONAL AFFAIRS?
     
    Yep, bingo. The whole idea of American elections somehow being sacrosanct and to be held inviolate from foreign interference was invented out of whole cloth barely a year ago. Hell, the Clintons were caught 20 years ago collecting campaign donations from Communist China. Mexico was openly campaigning against Trump among its citizens in the U.S. (https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/trump-mexico-backlash-223128) Obama was poo-pooing the idea of the Russians as a geopolitical force in the 2012 election ("The 1980s called, they want their foreign policy back!") and his administration was the one in place while all this Russian trolling was supposedly going on.

    And it's been the more or less openly declared intention of the Democratic Party to keep importing new voters until they achieve supremacy! What's more treasonous, allegedly receiving indirect assistance offered from a foreign power, or replacing your own country's native population and boasting about it?

    This is all true, Thomas, but the democrats and the Lyin Press count on Americans (and including some of the Dem’s and LP) to have very little long-term memories when it comes to politics. In addition, the 25 years or so of 24×7 infotainment on CNN and others has given them the ability to bombard American households with so much noise, that people can’t even recall the memories they do have over the noise.

    “The Russians spent money to influence …”
    “The Russians ….”
    “Money …”
    “Elections ….”
    (“Hey, wasn’t there something about BJ Clinton renting out rooms in the White House and …”)
    “We found out that the RUSSIANS spent over 8 THOUSAND DOLLARS, that’s EIGHT THOUSAND … to …”
    (“I remember that the President of Mexico kept telling Mexicans to invade and …”)
    “EIGHTY-THREE HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS!”

    “Honey, can you turn that shit off, for cryin’ out loud!”

    “Don’t call me honey, if you want to get on this flight, Sir! I have no control over that TV hanging from the roof joists.”

  113. @Cagey Beast
    One more:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUEeAzl9Weo

    Some day people will be able to laugh about all this. For me, that day is today. For others, it will come later.

    Brilliant remarks. But I have to ask, before I steal them : are they yours? Or perhaps Confucius? Machiavelli? Yoda?

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    I think I thought of it on my own but I can never be sure. One time I came up with an elaborate joke about politician and only later realized I was describing a scene from a Terry-Thomas movie I'd seen years ago on television. Apparently Jung found a case of Nietzsche doing the same sort of thing in one of his books. Jung contacted Nietzsche's sister and she agreed the scene in Nietzsche's book was unintentionally plagiarized from a story she and her brother had read years before.
  114. @duderinompc
    I was being a bit silly, Ricky is an early 20's New Yorker. It just adds a bit of humor to me since I've interacted with him for years online before the election and he's now "Russian interference"

    I’m insulted that Russians get all the credit for homegrown American talent.

  115. @Anonymous
    Someone is. Watch the reaction:

    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-russia-jewish-farage-brexit-698486


    Jews Should Concern Americans More Than Russian Influence, Nigel Farage Says
    By Nicole Goodkind On 11/1/17 at 1:57 PM

    Farage in a Monday interview singled out the so-called “Jewish lobby” as an overwhelming power in America during a discussion about Russia’s interference in U.S. politics.

    “There are other very powerful lobbies in the United States of America, and the Jewish lobby, with its links with the Israeli government, is one of those strong voices,” Farage said on his London-based radio show.

    ... Conflating a Jewish and Israeli lobby is not only conspiratorial and false, said Greenblatt, but could “have the unintended consequence of encouraging anti-Semites and extremists to exploit them.”

    The largest pro-Israel lobbying group in the United States is Christians United for Israel, which has a large Evangelical base and more than 1 million members overall. Opinion polls show the majority of Americans hold favorable views of Israel.
     

    AIPAC? Who? It's Christians United for Israel! See, you silly goyim, you told yourself to support Israel!

    Clever trick, unless numbers of people suddenly outrank numbers of dollars when it comes to influencing congress. And they say they’re not crafty.

  116. @guest
    1). No, but he did eat soup out of Tupperware a lot.

    2). We played chess regularly. (I taught him, in fact.) But usually in the evening.

    3) . I don't know. Didn't really go in his room. All I remember is ugly carpeting and a Union Jack on the wall.

    4). He didn't drink much, to my recollection. We had bottles in the house, including Stoli, but they'd stay a while.

    5). No.

    I very much doubt he voted Trump, unless he was a disgruntled Bernie Bro.

    He had in his possession a statuette of Lenin, if that's important. (Not kidding.)

    1) Ahaaa!

    2) He should have been teaching you. Strange and unsettling. Did he always open with pawn to king 4?

    3) Did his Union Jack have a sickle in one corner?

    4) Yeah, never mind – he’s no self-respecting Ruskie.

    5) Dammit, I thought that was the guy! One down and the rest of the internet to go…

    Wait… was the statuette filled with Vodka? Lenin, you say? Not Putin? No, not deplorable enough for my tastes.

    My Ruskdar says “NYET”!

  117. @Jack D
    1. Note that what the Hillary campaign did was to exploit a completely legal loophole.

    2. Note that our campaign funding laws are a joke. You can only legally contribute $2,700 to the Hillary Campaign Fund but you can contribute another $353,400 to the Hillary VICTORY Fund, which is TOTALLY different, except that it isn't. This from the party that loves to bitch about Citizens United.

    The other scandal that Brazile mentions is that the Hillary campaign had completely taken over the DNC long before the primaries. They were able to do this because Obama and Wasserman left the DNC finances in a shambles - the Hillary campaign bailed out the DNC in exchange for total control. Except that the DNC is supposed to be neutral until the candidate is chosen. Hillary viewed her entire candidacy as a coronation - niceties like the DNC remaining neutral be damned, it was HER turn. You can only imagine how much she would have observed democratic (small d) norms and customs once she was crowned inaugurated. She would have made Maduro of Venezuela look like Mother Teresa in comparison. Imagine Obama's executive order abuse on steroids and no Federal district judges in Hawaii to block her.

    She would have been so terrible we’d be in Civil war now. Which has some benefits.

    I think she threw Obama under the bus. How can he be responsible for DNC finances while POTUS? Surely he delegated that.

    • Replies: @Jack D

    we'd be in Civil war now. Which has some benefits.
     
    Only if you are alive and on the winning side at the end of the war. Which is far from a sure thing. Whatever "benefits" can be gained from civil war are usually vastly outweighed by the cost in blood and treasure.

    I really get the feeling that a lot of people here would like to have some kind of cleansing fire that would burn through our institutions and get rid of all the bugs. This is like burning your house down in order to treat a termite infestation (and hoping that you don't set the whole neighborhood on fire). It's true that if you don't treat the termites then eventually they will eat your house, but the fire cure is worse than the disease.
    , @Mr. Anon

    She would have been so terrible we’d be in Civil war now. Which has some benefits.
     
    As Jack D points out, it really doesn't have any benefits. It is not something to be wished for.
  118. @The Alarmist

    "Did anyone ask Sen. Blumenthal (D-CN) just how dumb he must believe Hillary voters must be to fall for a photoshopped image of popular comic TV star Aziz Ansari holding a sign with a joke on it?"
     
    Did anyone ask "Vietnam Dick" when he was informed these weren't real ads?

    I know for a fact that “Vietnam Dick” was with the 173rd Airborne in the Central Highlands, spraying the VC and the NVA with his own personal 30-gallon flamethrower on November 11, 1967 at Dak To, going up Hill 875, right behind Sgt. Rock – – – and that is not fake news. I read it in VFW magazine and they never lie! Never!

    They never could prove that “Vietnam Dick” fragged a librarian in Cos Cob!

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    Funny, I thought he was a GIrine. Was that at the old Mill Pond shooping centre branch, or the newer one on Sinoway Rd?
  119. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Or later in 2004 when Spacey got “brutally mugged” by a “kid” at 4:30 AM in a London park. He changed his story in explaining to police why he got thumped on the noggin. It seems that ‘wookin’ pa nub’ in all the wrong places can be hazardous.

    What actually happened is, I fell for a con. And I was, I think, incredibly embarrassed by it. Some sob story about somebody needing to call their mother.

    It was such a good con, that I actually dialled the number myself and when somebody answered I then finally handed [over] my phone. And this kid took off and I was so upset I ran after him.

    I tripped up over my dog, and I ended up falling on to the street and hitting myself in the head.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i7m0dx7G-Y

    Didn’t now-retired Associate Justice David Souter once get mugged in a very Gay part of DC, one fine night, while he was “out jogging?”

  120. @NJ Transit Commuter
    At this point, isn’t all this Russia junk less
    about trying to discredit Trump’s election and more about Democrats posturing themselves for the brewing Democratic Party civil war? Donna Brazile is throwing Hillary under the bus and going full in with Bernie’s Current Year faction. Couldn’t blabbing about Russia be a signal that you are on the Clinton side of this fight?

    It’s also kind of their Benghazi: showboating for their base so they don’t have to face unpleasant questions like why haven’t you delivered on anything we want. Now, unfortunately, unlike Benghazi they have a lot of the media and organs of the state on their side.

  121. @Thomas
    One thing that should be obvious about this whole rigamarole is that this is the legacy prestige political press taking the opportunity for some revenge against Facebook, Google, Twitter, the rest of the Web 2.0 industry that basically are the gatekeepers now of public information and discussion. That was a role the press played once, with their high water mark during Watergate. Now, not only do they have competition, they're dependent on those outfits for revenue, as much as anything else (and they don't even get the lion's share of that revenue anymore). The old media would love their new superiors to get taken down a peg and forced to knuckle under to new policies, or otherwise new laws and regulations, that force them to toe the same line the press does. The Establishment more generally doesn't want another Trump, who can get his message out to the public past the gatekeepers the way he does.

    That's the big metastory here. The Russians are just a scarecrow and bogeyman in service of an effort to lock down the Web so nobody ever again slips by and so richly humiliates these people who thought they controlled the country by controlling public discourse. They were working on this last year, with the supposed threats of terrorism (e.g., ISIS recruitment) and hate speech, trolling and harassment as their excuse. The Russians though were topical, and I assume appeal to baby boomers who are getting foggy as they enter their 70s and maybe don't remember that the Cold War ended a quarter-century ago.

    I’m not sure the press was ever quite as honorable or virtuous as you saw them.

  122. @Moses
    The elephant in the room here is Israel's extensive influence on American government and policy. It makes alleged Russian meddling look like child's play.

    Yet no one is talking about it. Hmm can't imagine why.

    The first one to stop clapping is an anti-semite.

  123. @anon
    It's all very believable but I don't see it as especially damning.

    He was a post pubescent, sexually active gay male. Spacey wasn't in a position of authority. A teacher or employer. He admits he has a thing for older guys and is currently in a relationship with someone 10 years older. He says he acted very seductive toward Spacey.

    The 'victim' calls Spacey a pedophile and a sexual predator. And make the claim that its like homosexuality .... it's your sexuality and your stuck with it.

    Except pedophilia is an exclusive or predominant interest in prepubescent children. As far as predation, the guy was into it until their last unfortunate hook up and Spacey never contacted him again.

    Was Spacey a creep? It doesn't matter. It's a story because Spacey is being accused of being a pedophile and predator.

    And the victim felt it was somehow his duty to discuss his story of youthful sexual exuberance gone bad because the aging Spacey might be grooming another 14 year old. So ... he didn't really want to talk about his only brush with fame .... but he HAD to do it. Just in case.

    The gay thing seems perverted, but I can't say that. The rest of it seems utterly unremarkable.

    It’s all very believable but I don’t see it as especially damning.

    He was a post pubescent, sexually active gay male. Spacey wasn’t in a position of authority. A teacher or employer. He admits he has a thing for older guys and is currently in a relationship with someone 10 years older. He says he acted very seductive toward Spacey.

    Tell it to the judge.

  124. @blah blah blah blah
    Steve, this is hilarious! This was a trolling effort from 4chan and/or /r/the_donald. This one and the #DraftOurDaughters campaign stand out in my mind as some of the best meming from last year.

    Still, though, it's a bit frustrating to see the other side think so little of us that they can't attribute the dank memes to our gleeful culture warriors.

    Yeah, I was thinking I hazily remembered the /pol/ thread that originated this picture. Glad to see someone pointing that out.

  125. @Steve Sailer
    It's all part of the working out of themes unleashed to turn out the vote in Obama's re-election campaign.

    It’s all part of the working out of themes unleashed to turn out the vote in Obama’s re-election campaign.

    They thought that they still had the juice to confine the fields of fire to the intended targets. “Binders full of women” seems sort of quaint today, doesn’t it?

    Leftists have disguised their sexual predation – gay, straight, or pedo – as a sort of enlightened libertinism for as long as I can recall. (cf. Roman Polanski) They were eventually going to run out of cultural capital and come into conflict with the monsters they set loose against the Puritanical caricature of middle America.

    Additionally, I can’t help but see this as a proxy for generational conflict – Weinstein is an entitled Boomer and his accusers are Gen-X and younger. Same with Spacey.

    • Replies: @anonguy

    Additionally, I can’t help but see this as a proxy for generational conflict – Weinstein is an entitled Boomer and his accusers are Gen-X and younger. Same with Spacey.
     
    Very much agree.

    Plus, the part of "progressive" social mores has a lot of pervy guys. What a surprise, no?
  126. You ever see Senator Blumenthal at the government train safety presentation? Here’s the GIF (I can’t embed images as an anon):

  127. @Thomas
    One thing that should be obvious about this whole rigamarole is that this is the legacy prestige political press taking the opportunity for some revenge against Facebook, Google, Twitter, the rest of the Web 2.0 industry that basically are the gatekeepers now of public information and discussion. That was a role the press played once, with their high water mark during Watergate. Now, not only do they have competition, they're dependent on those outfits for revenue, as much as anything else (and they don't even get the lion's share of that revenue anymore). The old media would love their new superiors to get taken down a peg and forced to knuckle under to new policies, or otherwise new laws and regulations, that force them to toe the same line the press does. The Establishment more generally doesn't want another Trump, who can get his message out to the public past the gatekeepers the way he does.

    That's the big metastory here. The Russians are just a scarecrow and bogeyman in service of an effort to lock down the Web so nobody ever again slips by and so richly humiliates these people who thought they controlled the country by controlling public discourse. They were working on this last year, with the supposed threats of terrorism (e.g., ISIS recruitment) and hate speech, trolling and harassment as their excuse. The Russians though were topical, and I assume appeal to baby boomers who are getting foggy as they enter their 70s and maybe don't remember that the Cold War ended a quarter-century ago.

    Interesting comment, here and elsewhere Thomas.

  128. @guest
    House of Cards, starring gay hebephile Kevin Spacey, featured a presidential election between an evil Democrat (Spacey) and a Republican war hero it turns out was secretly owned by shadowy interests. Spacey was supposed to lose not only because he had numerous scandals and wasn't elected in the first place--his predecessor, though innocent, resigned in Nixonian disgrace--but also because the Republican was best buds with a giant tech company. Facebork, Gloogle, or whatever. Which inspired Spacey to secretly enlist the NSA to run gather campaign intelligence.

    Only in Hollywood are tech giants on that side. But, you know,they made the president a Democrat,* so they didn't have much choice if they wanted to run with that story.

    * I'm thinking not because they're comfortable with having lead characters be evil Democrats, but because the idea of being stuck depicting inner Republican politics on a serious drama is distasteful, even if they'd be denigrating it (like on the British original) the whole time. They'd rather it be all about their side, despite having them to admit it's possible for people on their side to be evil.

    Guest, the original UK “House of Cards” is one of my very favorite TV series. It was great to cheer on a truly effective man of the Right in the person of Francis Urquhart. Made me proud to be a conservative—especially during the middle series where FU deposed the king (a Prince Charles clone).

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    +100 on the original UK “House of Cards”. Ian Richardson was fantastic.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz8RjPAD2Jk

    https://www.amazon.com/House-Cards-Trilogy-Original-Remastered/dp/B009Z59ZNE
    , @Kylie
    Also loved the original "House of Cards". I adored Ian Richardson and was crushed when he died.
    , @guest
    The U.K. series was of course based on a series of books by Michael Dobbs, who was Chief of Staff of the Conservative Party in Britain during the Thatcher years. Presumably he put real-world knowledge to use.

    The American version appears to be based more on the general idea of the original, with the on-screen narration device and some of the plot points repeated. Otherwise, it's an "in the fashion of" adaptation.

    I always wonder why they bother adapting, in that case. Because if they're going to be almost a new show, why not make it different enough that you can grab all the credit without being sued? Does House of Cards really have great brand-recognition? I mean, it's not Star Trek.

  129. @AM

    In 1997.
     
    I am utterly fascinated by the phenomenon of Hollywood sex scandals. I assumed Weinstien was fluke, but clearly there's more going on.

    I have assumed since at least 1997 and perhaps longer that the whole place was cesspool. That ideally you should have a preventive course of antibiotics before even thinking about talking to a Hollywood producer.

    So why now?

    Why in the information age how did we become so "But my favorite star had to sleep with someone to make it big???" I mean, my family had good chuckle at my Grandma's expense when she said "I didn't know Liberace was gay"(circa 1997 actually). Why is naive suddenly in?

    Why an era of homosexuality, porn, Hollywood stars showing up to formal events forgetting most of their clothes, why is promiscuity and the concept of sexual favors repulsive? (It should repulsive, I just don't get how if you're all about promiscuity.)

    What social energy has turned this into an odd witch hunt? I may never know - probably just need to pop some popcorn and watch the best entertainment Hollywood has created in a while.

    probably just need to pop some popcorn and watch the best entertainment Hollywood has created in a while.

    Threadwinner. This is definitely the best entertainment to come out of Hollywood in decades.

  130. The Russians were as involved in the US election as Richard Blumenthal was in the Vietnam war.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Sadly, I just used my LOL button.
  131. @guest
    House of Cards, starring gay hebephile Kevin Spacey, featured a presidential election between an evil Democrat (Spacey) and a Republican war hero it turns out was secretly owned by shadowy interests. Spacey was supposed to lose not only because he had numerous scandals and wasn't elected in the first place--his predecessor, though innocent, resigned in Nixonian disgrace--but also because the Republican was best buds with a giant tech company. Facebork, Gloogle, or whatever. Which inspired Spacey to secretly enlist the NSA to run gather campaign intelligence.

    Only in Hollywood are tech giants on that side. But, you know,they made the president a Democrat,* so they didn't have much choice if they wanted to run with that story.

    * I'm thinking not because they're comfortable with having lead characters be evil Democrats, but because the idea of being stuck depicting inner Republican politics on a serious drama is distasteful, even if they'd be denigrating it (like on the British original) the whole time. They'd rather it be all about their side, despite having them to admit it's possible for people on their side to be evil.

    * I’m thinking not because they’re comfortable with having lead characters be evil Democrats, but because the idea of being stuck depicting inner Republican politics on a serious drama is distasteful, even if they’d be denigrating it (like on the British original) the whole time. They’d rather it be all about their side, despite having them to admit it’s possible for people on their side to be evil.

    I was surprised when I started watching the show to see that the bad actors were Democrats. (Republican dirty deeds weren’t really part of the show until the later seasons as you mention.) Then I realized that it’s for two reasons:

    1. The writers could only write about Democrats. That was just reflexive.

    2. Many operators in D.C. actually like the way it depicts them. They enjoy the vicarious cloak-and-dagger adventure that is shown in their world. They rooted for the Underwoods. The left is all about power, anyway, so the unseemliness (to put it mildly) in pursuit of it seems to them a natural way to depict the Beltway. As with so many other things, they probably have no concept how a typical American would react to their profession being presented this way.

  132. @duncsbaby
    From the article Robert Conrad says this:
    "He's a movie star now, Tom," Bob Conrad says. "He gets the good tables, and he gets his picture taken with Harvey Miramax, or whatever his name is." "I think it might be Harvey Miramax. I think he had it changed." "It's Weinstein, Tom. But you know what I mean. Kevin's out there *playing* a movie star now. And you can tell him I said that."

    Interesting article, makes me want to watch some of those old The Wild, Wild, West re-runs. I wonder if I read it back then because it seems to me that I knew in the late 90's Spacey was gay.

    “in the late 90′s Spacey was gay.” AI knew before you did.

  133. @AndrewR
    "entirely against the wishes"

    That's highly false. A great number of Americans have welcomed the demographic changes.

    Every terrible government policy in US history that I'm aware of has had a significant degree of public support. The Iraq War had tens of millions of fools supporting it. Open borders has even more supporters.

    That’s highly false.

    No, what you say is “highly false”. At no time has a majority of Americans wanted unrestricted immigration, or to be displaced and disenfranchised in thier own country. A clear majority wanted just the opposite.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Strawman. Try to pay attention.
  134. You know, people call Harvey Weinstein physically repulsive but Blumenthal is right up there.

  135. @Jack D
    1. Note that what the Hillary campaign did was to exploit a completely legal loophole.

    2. Note that our campaign funding laws are a joke. You can only legally contribute $2,700 to the Hillary Campaign Fund but you can contribute another $353,400 to the Hillary VICTORY Fund, which is TOTALLY different, except that it isn't. This from the party that loves to bitch about Citizens United.

    The other scandal that Brazile mentions is that the Hillary campaign had completely taken over the DNC long before the primaries. They were able to do this because Obama and Wasserman left the DNC finances in a shambles - the Hillary campaign bailed out the DNC in exchange for total control. Except that the DNC is supposed to be neutral until the candidate is chosen. Hillary viewed her entire candidacy as a coronation - niceties like the DNC remaining neutral be damned, it was HER turn. You can only imagine how much she would have observed democratic (small d) norms and customs once she was crowned inaugurated. She would have made Maduro of Venezuela look like Mother Teresa in comparison. Imagine Obama's executive order abuse on steroids and no Federal district judges in Hawaii to block her.

    Well said as usual, Jack D.

    And let’s not forget who signed the campaign finance laws after promising to veto them. Non other than George W Bush, Hitler the First. Much of the push to get Congress to pass these laws was an astro turf campaign organized by Pew and blessed by McCain.

  136. @ChrisZ
    Guest, the original UK “House of Cards” is one of my very favorite TV series. It was great to cheer on a truly effective man of the Right in the person of Francis Urquhart. Made me proud to be a conservative—especially during the middle series where FU deposed the king (a Prince Charles clone).

    +100 on the original UK “House of Cards”. Ian Richardson was fantastic.

    https://www.amazon.com/House-Cards-Trilogy-Original-Remastered/dp/B009Z59ZNE

    • Agree: Kylie
  137. @J1234
    The Russians were as involved in the US election as Richard Blumenthal was in the Vietnam war.

    Sadly, I just used my LOL button.

  138. @Cagey Beast
    People should check out PBS Frontline's two-part series, Putin's Revenge. It is off the chain and in the long grass by the second half. I think they have, in all honesty, about two out of one hundred minutes in which the Russian government's version of things is given.

    Makes one seriously wonder if democracy isn’t doomed when a third of the population can watch over the top one-sided bunk like this. PBS usually falls all over itself to at least FAKE balance. This was truly astounding.

  139. @ChrisZ
    Guest, the original UK “House of Cards” is one of my very favorite TV series. It was great to cheer on a truly effective man of the Right in the person of Francis Urquhart. Made me proud to be a conservative—especially during the middle series where FU deposed the king (a Prince Charles clone).

    Also loved the original “House of Cards”. I adored Ian Richardson and was crushed when he died.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Go see "Dark City". Ian Richardson was in that too. It's kind of a Matrix movie before there were Matrix movies.
  140. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    It’s all part of the working out of themes unleashed to turn out the vote in Obama’s re-election campaign.
     
    They thought that they still had the juice to confine the fields of fire to the intended targets. "Binders full of women" seems sort of quaint today, doesn't it?

    Leftists have disguised their sexual predation - gay, straight, or pedo - as a sort of enlightened libertinism for as long as I can recall. (cf. Roman Polanski) They were eventually going to run out of cultural capital and come into conflict with the monsters they set loose against the Puritanical caricature of middle America.

    Additionally, I can't help but see this as a proxy for generational conflict - Weinstein is an entitled Boomer and his accusers are Gen-X and younger. Same with Spacey.

    Additionally, I can’t help but see this as a proxy for generational conflict – Weinstein is an entitled Boomer and his accusers are Gen-X and younger. Same with Spacey.

    Very much agree.

    Plus, the part of “progressive” social mores has a lot of pervy guys. What a surprise, no?

  141. @Anonymous
    Brilliant remarks. But I have to ask, before I steal them : are they yours? Or perhaps Confucius? Machiavelli? Yoda?

    I think I thought of it on my own but I can never be sure. One time I came up with an elaborate joke about politician and only later realized I was describing a scene from a Terry-Thomas movie I’d seen years ago on television. Apparently Jung found a case of Nietzsche doing the same sort of thing in one of his books. Jung contacted Nietzsche’s sister and she agreed the scene in Nietzsche’s book was unintentionally plagiarized from a story she and her brother had read years before.

  142. @Thea
    She would have been so terrible we'd be in Civil war now. Which has some benefits.

    I think she threw Obama under the bus. How can he be responsible for DNC finances while POTUS? Surely he delegated that.

    we’d be in Civil war now. Which has some benefits.

    Only if you are alive and on the winning side at the end of the war. Which is far from a sure thing. Whatever “benefits” can be gained from civil war are usually vastly outweighed by the cost in blood and treasure.

    I really get the feeling that a lot of people here would like to have some kind of cleansing fire that would burn through our institutions and get rid of all the bugs. This is like burning your house down in order to treat a termite infestation (and hoping that you don’t set the whole neighborhood on fire). It’s true that if you don’t treat the termites then eventually they will eat your house, but the fire cure is worse than the disease.

  143. @The Wobbly Guy

    You need, just to cite one example, specialized lawyers to navigate compliance with those campaign finance laws. The era of the “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” citizen legislator is long, long gone.
     
    That's an interesting observation. Maybe that's the REAL point of campaign finance laws, to prevent ordinary citizens from running for office and allowing only 'vetted' candidates who have the logistical support of political parties to run.

    In a lot of states there are complicated laws for getting on the ballot – you need a certain # of petitions signed by registered voters who reside in your district, etc. People who have party support get on no problem – they have professionals that go out to gather the petitions and know all the laws regarding who is qualified to sign them, how many extra signatures you need to get to be sure you have enough, etc. If you decide to run and gather your own petitions, the party machine has election law specialist lawyers go over your petitions with a fine tooth comb and get enough of your signatures thrown out that you don’t qualify to appear on the ballot. This signature was signed in the wrong color ink. The registered voter’s name is Rufus T. Washington and the petition was signed by Rufus Washington. And so on – death by a thousand cuts.

    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    If you decide to run and gather your own petitions, the party machine has election law specialist lawyers go over your petitions with a fine tooth comb and get enough of your signatures thrown out that you don’t qualify to appear on the ballot.
     
    Election officials and staff are by definition members of public-sector unions (e.g. SEIU) and often work hand-in-glove with the Democratic Party machine.

    Mysterious disqualification of just the right number of signatures to miss a threshold is one of the standard services provided by these cabals. Payment is usually in cash.

    , @Anonymous
    Libtys and Constitutionalists and Greens do it all the time.
  144. @Kylie
    Also loved the original "House of Cards". I adored Ian Richardson and was crushed when he died.

    Go see “Dark City”. Ian Richardson was in that too. It’s kind of a Matrix movie before there were Matrix movies.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    Great film Dark City.
    , @Kylie
    Thanks!

    He was also excellent in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Private Schulz.
  145. @Svigor
    Democrats aghast at how many stupid people may not have voted, news @ 11.

    “Democrats aghast at how many stupid people may not have voted, news @ 11.”

    LOL. That might just be my favorite Democratic delusion: “Democrats are smart and Republicans are all evil and stupid. Oh and BTW, please don’t do anything that would make it harder for idiots, rapists, and lazy people to vote.”

    • LOL: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Jack D
    The Democrats are well aware that they have a high-low coalition - on the one hand the white/Asian/affirmative action "meritocracy" geniuses at the top and OTOH the colored masses at the bottom.
  146. @Mr. Anon

    That’s highly false.
     
    No, what you say is "highly false". At no time has a majority of Americans wanted unrestricted immigration, or to be displaced and disenfranchised in thier own country. A clear majority wanted just the opposite.

    Strawman. Try to pay attention.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Strawman. Try to pay attention.
     
    Strawman? Spare me the spergy BS. I am paying attention. What you said (about immigration) was wrong.
  147. @Wilkey
    "Democrats aghast at how many stupid people may not have voted, news @ 11."

    LOL. That might just be my favorite Democratic delusion: "Democrats are smart and Republicans are all evil and stupid. Oh and BTW, please don't do anything that would make it harder for idiots, rapists, and lazy people to vote."

    The Democrats are well aware that they have a high-low coalition – on the one hand the white/Asian/affirmative action “meritocracy” geniuses at the top and OTOH the colored masses at the bottom.

  148. 3. Typical mob mentality, where suddenly people start deluding themselves about what actually happened to remain part of the crowd. See the Satanic Panic of the 1980s, or the Salem Witch Trials stuff.

    You’re probably a Holocaust denier, too.

    “entirely against the wishes”

    That’s highly false. A great number of Americans have welcomed the demographic changes.

    Every terrible government policy in US history that I’m aware of has had a significant degree of public support. The Iraq War had tens of millions of fools supporting it. Open borders has even more supporters.

    Sorta. When you constrain the conversation so far as to destroy it, supporters’ agreement has a big asterisk, becomes positively Soviet.

    That’s before we even get into the carrots and sticks. Lots of actual Soviet citizens loved* the regime.

    I knew in the late 90′s Spacey was gay.

    It’s almost impossible to miss, given his mannerisms, fey speaking style. Though I suppose you could also interpret it as bi.

    The Russians though were topical, and I assume appeal to baby boomers who are getting foggy as they enter their 70s and maybe don’t remember that the Cold War ended a quarter-century ago.

    Did anti-Russian rhetoric from the ruling class then approach what has been displayed recently? My impression is not.

    Some people do talk about it, but they are anti-semites. You’re not an anti-semite, are you, goy?

    Who but an antisemite would broach the subject of Jewish malfeasance, never mind have extensive knowledge of it?

    Most so-called ‘anti-semites’ are really anti-philosemites.

    They are not for blind hatred of Jews.
    They are against blind worship of Jews.

    The term is “countersemite.”

    My advice to true blue American patriots like Senator Blumenthal would be not to get mad, but to get even. America should fight fire with fire. How about setting up a government organization dedicated to interfering in other countries’ elections? Maybe call it the “National Endowment for Democracy” or something – you know, as a plausible subterfuge.

    Latest complete season of Homeland (highly recommended, much more so than previous seasons) made this point very openly. Saul Berenson says the coup going on in America (yes, the one we’ve all been watching on TV since election day, and before) is the same as the ones they pulled in Ukraine, Arab Spring, etc.

  149. The Democrats are well aware that they have a high-low coalition – on the one hand the white/Asian/affirmative action “meritocracy” geniuses at the top and OTOH the colored masses at the bottom.

    And they know the leftist narrative rules, so nobody gets to point out that the Dems have an iron lock on the stupidest and most violent demographic in America.

  150. @ChrisZ
    Guest, the original UK “House of Cards” is one of my very favorite TV series. It was great to cheer on a truly effective man of the Right in the person of Francis Urquhart. Made me proud to be a conservative—especially during the middle series where FU deposed the king (a Prince Charles clone).

    The U.K. series was of course based on a series of books by Michael Dobbs, who was Chief of Staff of the Conservative Party in Britain during the Thatcher years. Presumably he put real-world knowledge to use.

    The American version appears to be based more on the general idea of the original, with the on-screen narration device and some of the plot points repeated. Otherwise, it’s an “in the fashion of” adaptation.

    I always wonder why they bother adapting, in that case. Because if they’re going to be almost a new show, why not make it different enough that you can grab all the credit without being sued? Does House of Cards really have great brand-recognition? I mean, it’s not Star Trek.

  151. @Jack D
    In a lot of states there are complicated laws for getting on the ballot - you need a certain # of petitions signed by registered voters who reside in your district, etc. People who have party support get on no problem - they have professionals that go out to gather the petitions and know all the laws regarding who is qualified to sign them, how many extra signatures you need to get to be sure you have enough, etc. If you decide to run and gather your own petitions, the party machine has election law specialist lawyers go over your petitions with a fine tooth comb and get enough of your signatures thrown out that you don't qualify to appear on the ballot. This signature was signed in the wrong color ink. The registered voter's name is Rufus T. Washington and the petition was signed by Rufus Washington. And so on - death by a thousand cuts.

    If you decide to run and gather your own petitions, the party machine has election law specialist lawyers go over your petitions with a fine tooth comb and get enough of your signatures thrown out that you don’t qualify to appear on the ballot.

    Election officials and staff are by definition members of public-sector unions (e.g. SEIU) and often work hand-in-glove with the Democratic Party machine.

    Mysterious disqualification of just the right number of signatures to miss a threshold is one of the standard services provided by these cabals. Payment is usually in cash.

  152. @Anonymous
    Hasn’t it be determined that the Twitter troll named “Ricky Vaughn” was outed as a Russian?

    I’m pretty sure Ricky Vaughn was interviewed in Mike Cernovich’s/Loren Feldman’s “Silenced”. I think he’s from Ohio or somewhere like that.

  153. @Moses
    Ironically, it turned out that McCarthy was right. Documents released from Russian archives in the chaos of the 1990s shows that the Rosenbergs were in fact guilty of nuclear espionage, and that commies were in fact infiltrating Hollywood and cultural and government institutions.

    …McCarthy was right…

    Once upon a time, newspapers would issue polite corrections typically either in response to public input or to new information. Such simple acknowledgements of objective facts would update the record. Too much of modern media print and airtime output now consists of opinion masquerading as fact, showing how any blurring or obfuscation could be acceptable. Journalism 101 seems passé or counter-revolutionary.

    • Replies: @anonguy

    Once upon a time, newspapers would issue polite corrections typically either in response to public input or to new information. Such simple acknowledgements of objective facts would update the record. Too much of modern media print and airtime output now consists of opinion masquerading as fact, showing how any blurring or obfuscation could be acceptable. Journalism 101 seems passé or counter-revolutionary.
     
    People keep going back to some 50 year period or so, at most, when there was this notion of journalistic objectivity, as the norm/default for journalism.

    Maybe it isn't that way, maybe it was a fluke. Before that, journalists and paper were highly partisan and nobody thought anything was wrong with that. Maybe we are just returning to a norm, of highly partisan information outlets.

    As far as I can tell, during that period, all the journalists said the same stuff, pretty much toed the establishment line, might as well as have been Stalinist in the range of opinion available to the public then as compared to now. Three nightly channels with about the same opinions.

    And this is your vision of a richly informative new media, the way it used to be because everyone was so well informed and served by the media then? Do tell....
  154. @Jim Don Bob
    Go see "Dark City". Ian Richardson was in that too. It's kind of a Matrix movie before there were Matrix movies.

    Great film Dark City.

  155. @Jim Don Bob
    Go see "Dark City". Ian Richardson was in that too. It's kind of a Matrix movie before there were Matrix movies.

    Thanks!

    He was also excellent in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Private Schulz.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Ian Richardson was only 72 when he died. I'll bet he left with a lot still in the tank. RIP.

    Thanks for the tip on Private Schulz.
    , @Mr. Anon
    The 1979 BBC teleplay of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy was pretty good. The movie that came out a half-dozen years ago was crap.
  156. @Kylie
    Thanks!

    He was also excellent in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Private Schulz.

    Ian Richardson was only 72 when he died. I’ll bet he left with a lot still in the tank. RIP.

    Thanks for the tip on Private Schulz.

  157. @Rod1963
    He is beyond fake. He is one of those special needs senators. You know the type, incapable of parsing obvious bulls**t from reality.

    Still I bet he isn't the only one who fell for this, his staffers had to bring it to his attention. So they are complicit in being stupid and out of touch.

    And once again it proves you don't a need a brain to succeed in Washington, just brazen stupidity and the ability to lie your a** off.

    just brazen stupidity and the ability to lie your a** off.

    It’s their only qualifications.

  158. @Daniel H
    >>Did anyone ask Sen. Blumenthal (D-CN) just how dumb he must believe Hillary voters must be to fall for a photoshopped image of popular comic TV star Aziz Ansari holding a sign with a joke on it?

    Well, Democrats did claim in 2000 that some of their constituents were too dumb or confused to figure out how to fill out a punch card ballot because, after all, nobody in South Florida would dave vote for Pat Buchanan, because, you know, only elderly Holocaust survivors lived down there.

    Lawrence Tribe the "noted constitutional scholar" even oped'ed in the NY Times after the election that there should be a do over for elderly Jewish voters, (and only elderly Jewish voters), this time with a simpler ballot, so that the authentic and true "voice of the people" could be heard. I swear, Tribe made this argument. It's there in the Times archives.

    For a “highly respected” constitutional scholar, Tribe has made any number of mind-boggling dumb arguments.

    I once attended an Obamacare debate between Tribe and Richard Epstein, and one of Tribe’s responses was, if the American people, through their elected representatives, enact Obamacare, who are the Justices to overthrow it? According to Tribe, there was no limiting principle to an act of the legislature under a constitutional republic.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    According to Tribe, there was no limiting principle to an act of the legislature under a constitutional republic...
     
    ...when his side is in power.

    When the other side gets in, it's all John Marshall.
  159. @AndrewR
    A lot of people were very vocal against the war but there was never a shortage of useful idiots who would readily insult anyone who was opposed to the war. I shouldn't have to remind you, but apparently I do: there was no draft. Hundreds of thousands of young people willingly enlisted annually to put a boot in Iraqi ass like Toby Keith told them to. Misguided patriotism wasn't everyone's only motive for joining but it was a powerful one for many.

    Hundreds of thousands is still a very small percentage, even if you’re only looking at the military age white males. Propaganda was wall to wall at the time, as is the case with Open Borders today, but neither polled or polls as well as the American media would have you believe.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Lol math really is not your forte
  160. @Cagey Beast
    One more:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUEeAzl9Weo

    Some day people will be able to laugh about all this. For me, that day is today. For others, it will come later.

    Took me awhile to find this one. Old but still gold.

  161. @Anonymous
    Notice how quickly the Narrative has settled on the Russians pushing "divisive" propaganda to conceal the divisiveness of Hillary and the MSM's tactics.

    That is, the Narrative shifted, without skipping a beat, from Russians pushed pro-Trump propaganda to Russians pushed memes to divide Americans once it was revealed -- in a buried lede -- that they also pushed BLM and anti-Trump protests. (When Hillary was set to win, this was her winning messaging; now that she's flopped, the same rhetoric is divisive.)

    But if you watch PBS they only ever show the pro-Trump memes, so you'll just assume "divisive" means the Russians amplified Trump's "divisive" statements about Muslims, Mexicans, and the Wall.

    Someone should do a timeline of how the narrative evolved. First, Russians hacked voting machines, then Russians hacked the DNC, then Russians bought some ads. The intensity of the moral outrage is puzzlingly similar for each of these stages, though each step in the narrative seems to represent a dramatic deescalation of wrong-doing.

  162. by Ryan Lizza

    That’s almost a Spoonerism of “lyin’ risible”.

    How Trump Helps Russian Trolls

    Are these trolls nested, perchance?

  163. @Clyde
    You get it. Senators and House Reps are massively distracted and their staffers do their bidding. And their hamster staffers have a strong tendency to be female and gay, not necessarily in this order and most dismaying is that Republicans are no better and like trading staff back and forth w Dems.


    Ever seen a video of these elected DC shithooks marching along with three staffers on cell phones? Their life is chaos and they like it this way.

    And their hamster staffers have a strong tendency to be female and gay…

    While I was walking through the core of the District one day, it occurred to me that this city was little more than a theme park. Kinda like Walt Disney World, with older buildings.

    And who else works at WDW but females and gays?

    The core of WDW is surrounded by virtual wilderness, populated by alligators. Washington is similar, but with negrators instead.

  164. @Forbes
    For a "highly respected" constitutional scholar, Tribe has made any number of mind-boggling dumb arguments.

    I once attended an Obamacare debate between Tribe and Richard Epstein, and one of Tribe's responses was, if the American people, through their elected representatives, enact Obamacare, who are the Justices to overthrow it? According to Tribe, there was no limiting principle to an act of the legislature under a constitutional republic.

    According to Tribe, there was no limiting principle to an act of the legislature under a constitutional republic…

    …when his side is in power.

    When the other side gets in, it’s all John Marshall.

    • Replies: @Ivy
    So that's their Plan!
  165. @AndrewR
    Strawman. Try to pay attention.

    Strawman. Try to pay attention.

    Strawman? Spare me the spergy BS. I am paying attention. What you said (about immigration) was wrong.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    The person I had responded to said "entirely against the wishes of actual Americans."

    Obviously, this is false to a large extent. Don't blame me because you don't know what "entirely" means. I mean, reasonable people can quibble over the exact percentages but there are obviously many "actual Americans" who support liberal immigration policies. If you don't know any, then consider yourself fortunate, but don't pretend these people don't exist. The problem is not just elites who do bad things. It's the tens of millions of citizens who cheer said elites on.
  166. Anyone who’s actually dim enough to buy all this Russian conspiracy electing Trump nonsense could fall for it…

  167. @Reg Cæsar

    According to Tribe, there was no limiting principle to an act of the legislature under a constitutional republic...
     
    ...when his side is in power.

    When the other side gets in, it's all John Marshall.

    So that’s their Plan!

  168. @Ivy

    ...McCarthy was right...
     
    Once upon a time, newspapers would issue polite corrections typically either in response to public input or to new information. Such simple acknowledgements of objective facts would update the record. Too much of modern media print and airtime output now consists of opinion masquerading as fact, showing how any blurring or obfuscation could be acceptable. Journalism 101 seems passé or counter-revolutionary.

    Once upon a time, newspapers would issue polite corrections typically either in response to public input or to new information. Such simple acknowledgements of objective facts would update the record. Too much of modern media print and airtime output now consists of opinion masquerading as fact, showing how any blurring or obfuscation could be acceptable. Journalism 101 seems passé or counter-revolutionary.

    People keep going back to some 50 year period or so, at most, when there was this notion of journalistic objectivity, as the norm/default for journalism.

    Maybe it isn’t that way, maybe it was a fluke. Before that, journalists and paper were highly partisan and nobody thought anything was wrong with that. Maybe we are just returning to a norm, of highly partisan information outlets.

    As far as I can tell, during that period, all the journalists said the same stuff, pretty much toed the establishment line, might as well as have been Stalinist in the range of opinion available to the public then as compared to now. Three nightly channels with about the same opinions.

    And this is your vision of a richly informative new media, the way it used to be because everyone was so well informed and served by the media then? Do tell….

  169. @Jack D
    In a lot of states there are complicated laws for getting on the ballot - you need a certain # of petitions signed by registered voters who reside in your district, etc. People who have party support get on no problem - they have professionals that go out to gather the petitions and know all the laws regarding who is qualified to sign them, how many extra signatures you need to get to be sure you have enough, etc. If you decide to run and gather your own petitions, the party machine has election law specialist lawyers go over your petitions with a fine tooth comb and get enough of your signatures thrown out that you don't qualify to appear on the ballot. This signature was signed in the wrong color ink. The registered voter's name is Rufus T. Washington and the petition was signed by Rufus Washington. And so on - death by a thousand cuts.

    Libtys and Constitutionalists and Greens do it all the time.

  170. @Kylie
    Thanks!

    He was also excellent in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Private Schulz.

    The 1979 BBC teleplay of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy was pretty good. The movie that came out a half-dozen years ago was crap.

  171. @Thea
    She would have been so terrible we'd be in Civil war now. Which has some benefits.

    I think she threw Obama under the bus. How can he be responsible for DNC finances while POTUS? Surely he delegated that.

    She would have been so terrible we’d be in Civil war now. Which has some benefits.

    As Jack D points out, it really doesn’t have any benefits. It is not something to be wished for.

  172. @anon
    It's all very believable but I don't see it as especially damning.

    He was a post pubescent, sexually active gay male. Spacey wasn't in a position of authority. A teacher or employer. He admits he has a thing for older guys and is currently in a relationship with someone 10 years older. He says he acted very seductive toward Spacey.

    The 'victim' calls Spacey a pedophile and a sexual predator. And make the claim that its like homosexuality .... it's your sexuality and your stuck with it.

    Except pedophilia is an exclusive or predominant interest in prepubescent children. As far as predation, the guy was into it until their last unfortunate hook up and Spacey never contacted him again.

    Was Spacey a creep? It doesn't matter. It's a story because Spacey is being accused of being a pedophile and predator.

    And the victim felt it was somehow his duty to discuss his story of youthful sexual exuberance gone bad because the aging Spacey might be grooming another 14 year old. So ... he didn't really want to talk about his only brush with fame .... but he HAD to do it. Just in case.

    The gay thing seems perverted, but I can't say that. The rest of it seems utterly unremarkable.

    Life is complex. There are many degrees of moral turpitude. Anyone who denies this is already several degrees down.

  173. @Detective Club
    I know for a fact that "Vietnam Dick" was with the 173rd Airborne in the Central Highlands, spraying the VC and the NVA with his own personal 30-gallon flamethrower on November 11, 1967 at Dak To, going up Hill 875, right behind Sgt. Rock - - - and that is not fake news. I read it in VFW magazine and they never lie! Never!

    They never could prove that "Vietnam Dick" fragged a librarian in Cos Cob!

    Funny, I thought he was a GIrine. Was that at the old Mill Pond shooping centre branch, or the newer one on Sinoway Rd?

  174. @The Wobbly Guy

    You need, just to cite one example, specialized lawyers to navigate compliance with those campaign finance laws. The era of the “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” citizen legislator is long, long gone.
     
    That's an interesting observation. Maybe that's the REAL point of campaign finance laws, to prevent ordinary citizens from running for office and allowing only 'vetted' candidates who have the logistical support of political parties to run.

    Maybe that’s the REAL point of campaign finance laws, to prevent ordinary citizens from running for office and allowing only ‘vetted’ candidates who have the logistical support of political parties to run.

    McCain-Feingold (which was largely struck down by the Supreme Court in the Citizens United decision) was often called the “Incumbent’s Protection Act” by observers. It’s probably not an accident that Trump, the first candidate in modern history to bum rush the two-party system and win, is a billionaire.

  175. @Issac
    Hundreds of thousands is still a very small percentage, even if you're only looking at the military age white males. Propaganda was wall to wall at the time, as is the case with Open Borders today, but neither polled or polls as well as the American media would have you believe.

    Lol math really is not your forte

  176. @Mr. Anon

    Strawman. Try to pay attention.
     
    Strawman? Spare me the spergy BS. I am paying attention. What you said (about immigration) was wrong.

    The person I had responded to said “entirely against the wishes of actual Americans.”

    Obviously, this is false to a large extent. Don’t blame me because you don’t know what “entirely” means. I mean, reasonable people can quibble over the exact percentages but there are obviously many “actual Americans” who support liberal immigration policies. If you don’t know any, then consider yourself fortunate, but don’t pretend these people don’t exist. The problem is not just elites who do bad things. It’s the tens of millions of citizens who cheer said elites on.

    • Agree: 415 reasons
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “entirely against the wishes of actual Americans.”
     
    Which I would interperet to mean against the wishes of a clear majority, which is indeed the case.

    The problem is not just elites who do bad things. It’s the tens of millions of citizens who cheer said elites on.
     
    That is true. However, a lot of them cheer the elites on because they have been inculcated since birth by those same elites through their propaganda outlets (movies, TV, the press) to accept and agree with elite opinion.
  177. @AndrewR
    The person I had responded to said "entirely against the wishes of actual Americans."

    Obviously, this is false to a large extent. Don't blame me because you don't know what "entirely" means. I mean, reasonable people can quibble over the exact percentages but there are obviously many "actual Americans" who support liberal immigration policies. If you don't know any, then consider yourself fortunate, but don't pretend these people don't exist. The problem is not just elites who do bad things. It's the tens of millions of citizens who cheer said elites on.

    “entirely against the wishes of actual Americans.”

    Which I would interperet to mean against the wishes of a clear majority, which is indeed the case.

    The problem is not just elites who do bad things. It’s the tens of millions of citizens who cheer said elites on.

    That is true. However, a lot of them cheer the elites on because they have been inculcated since birth by those same elites through their propaganda outlets (movies, TV, the press) to accept and agree with elite opinion.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Your interpretation is dubious. Had he written "against the wishes of most Americans" all of this would have been avoided. He wrote something very different.

    As for the second part, all of us Americans here on unz.com were exposed to the same propaganda (after controlling for age). Why are we not open borders fanatics?

    Elites share a disproportionate amount of blame, but focusing all our blame on them is counterproductive. It's true that most Americans never wanted open borders per se but how many have ever really been willing to fight against them?
  178. @Mr. Anon

    “entirely against the wishes of actual Americans.”
     
    Which I would interperet to mean against the wishes of a clear majority, which is indeed the case.

    The problem is not just elites who do bad things. It’s the tens of millions of citizens who cheer said elites on.
     
    That is true. However, a lot of them cheer the elites on because they have been inculcated since birth by those same elites through their propaganda outlets (movies, TV, the press) to accept and agree with elite opinion.

    Your interpretation is dubious. Had he written “against the wishes of most Americans” all of this would have been avoided. He wrote something very different.

    As for the second part, all of us Americans here on unz.com were exposed to the same propaganda (after controlling for age). Why are we not open borders fanatics?

    Elites share a disproportionate amount of blame, but focusing all our blame on them is counterproductive. It’s true that most Americans never wanted open borders per se but how many have ever really been willing to fight against them?

  179. @AndrewR
    "entirely against the wishes"

    That's highly false. A great number of Americans have welcomed the demographic changes.

    Every terrible government policy in US history that I'm aware of has had a significant degree of public support. The Iraq War had tens of millions of fools supporting it. Open borders has even more supporters.

    I could not disagree more. In 1965, if you’d ask the American people whether they supported an immigration policy that would eventually result in 0% of the population being white, approximately 0% of white Americans would have said they supported the policy.

    There was and is absolutely no support for this policy among whites that is not due to manipulation by hostile non-whites, i.e., indoctrination and intimidation/incentivization.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings