The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
President of South Korea Is a Puppet of Her Rasputin-Like Shaman Fortuneteller
🔊 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
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the New York Times, a South Korean story reminiscent of Imam Gulen and other curious tales of high office:

A Presidential Friendship Has Many South Koreans Crying Foul
By CHOE SANG-HUN OCT. 27, 2016

SEOUL, South Korea — South Koreans have been riveted for weeks by a scandal involving the president and a shadowy adviser accused of being a “shaman fortuneteller” by opposition politicians.

The elusive figure, Choi Soon-sil, is a private citizen with no security clearance, yet she had remarkable influence over President Park Geun-hye: She was allowed to edit some of Ms. Park’s most important speeches. …

She even had power over the president’s wardrobe, overseeing the design of her dresses and telling her what colors to wear on certain days. …

But for most South Koreans, the real drama is that Ms. Choi is the daughter of a religious figure whose relationship with Ms. Park had long been the subject of lurid rumors. The figure, Choi Tae-min, was often compared to Rasputin here, and now critics say his daughter is playing the same role.

Mr. Choi was the founder of an obscure sect called the Church of Eternal Life. He befriended Ms. Park, 40 years his junior, soon after her mother was assassinated in 1974. According to a report by the Korean intelligence agency from the 1970s that was published by a South Korean newsmagazine in 2007, Mr. Choi initially approached Ms. Park by telling her that her mother had appeared in his dreams, asking him to help her.

Mr. Choi was a former police officer who had also been a Buddhist monk and a convert to Roman Catholicism. (He also used seven different names and was married six times by the time he died in 1994 at the age of 82.) He became a mentor to Ms. Park, helping her run a pro-government volunteer group called Movement for a New Mind. Ms. Choi became a youth leader in that group.

According to the report by the KCIA, as the country’s intelligence agency was then called, Mr. Choi was a “pseudo pastor” who had used his connection to Ms. Park to secure bribes.

Ms. Park’s father, Park Chung-hee, the former military dictator, was assassinated in 1979 by Kim Jae-gyu, the director of the KCIA.

In South Korea, life at the top is full of interest.

Mr. Kim told a court that one of the reasons he killed Mr. Park was what he called the president’s failure to stop Mr. Choi’s corrupt activities and keep him away from his daughter.

… In a 2007 diplomatic cable made public through WikiLeaks, the American Embassy in Seoul reported rumors that Mr. Choi “had complete control over Park’s body and soul during her formative years and that his children accumulated enormous wealth as a result.” One such tale held that Ms. Park, who has never married, had his child. (She has denied that.)

In a televised address to the nation on Tuesday, Ms. Park acknowledged that she had let Ms. Choi edit some of her most important speeches.

“I deeply apologize to the people,” Ms. Park said. She described Ms. Choi as an old friend who had stood by her through painful times, like the years after the killings of her mother and father.

On Wednesday, prosecutors raided homes belonging to Ms. Choi and some of her associates, as well as the offices of two foundations she controls, in connection with allegations that she had used her ties with Ms. Park to pressure businesses into donating $69 million to the foundations.

Ms. Choi, who has not been charged with a crime, had traveled to Germany, where she told a journalist that she was innocent but that she would not come home to face investigators. …

When local news media first reported allegations that Ms. Choi had edited the president’s speeches, Ms. Park’s office dismissed them as “nonsense.” But those denials crumbled this week, after the cable channel JTBC reported that it had obtained a discarded tablet computer once owned by Ms. Choi.

Silly woman, everybody knows you smash your obsolete electronic devices with a hammer.

Files discovered there included drafts of 44 speeches and other statements that Ms. Park had given from 2012 to 2014, as a presidential candidate and later as president. The computer’s log showed that Ms. Choi had received them hours or days before Ms. Park delivered the speeches. Many passages were marked in red. …

Ms. Choi’s close relationship with the president has long been suspected, as people close to her have worked in Ms. Park’s administration.

She and her ex-husband, who was Ms. Park’s chief of staff when she was a lawmaker, have been accused in the past of improperly profiting from their influence, allegations that Ms. Park dismissed as “slander” and attempts to “disrupt the national order.” Officials who investigated the allegations were fired.

… Last week, the president of Ewha Womans University in Seoul, a leading university in the nation, resigned amid accusations that the school had given Ms. Choi’s daughter, a student there, favorable treatment.

Apparently, that’s a very big deal in college admissions-obsessed South Korea. You are supposed to cheat your way into fancy colleges in the time-honored ways, not just rely on pull. What’s the younger generation coming to?

“Ms. Choi effectively told the president to do this and do that,” the newspaper quoted Mr. Lee as saying. “There was nothing the president could decide alone.” Ms. Park’s office did not comment on the report.

Here’s a fuller account from Ask a Korean!

This is also reminiscent of how following President Reagan’s near-assassination in 1981, Nancy Reagan put TV astrologer J0an Quigley on retainer. Oddly, this bit of 1980s history was anticipated quite closely in a sublplot of Robert A. Heinlein’s 1961 novel Stranger in a Strange Land, in which the heroes, needing to influence the President of the World (or whatever) to do something, start with the First Lady’s astrologer.

In Heinlein’s telling, the upshot is usually that the President of the World just does whatever he was probably going to do anyway, but with more confidence.

But I should also point out that death and fear of death play strong role in the Rasputin, Park, and Reagan cases.

Death is a big deal.

 
Hide 68 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I was talking to a Korean girl recently about the politics of the country, with a special interest on race and multicultural stuff.

    She told me that Park is part of the conservative party, but is demanding halal food in universities, which apparently has caused controversy. Also, the first non-ethnic Korean to be in the parliament was part of the same party.

    It looks like their “conservatives” are basically what the Republican elite was 15 years ago: hawkish, awful on the national question, and pro-immigration and multiculturalism. Seems like South Korea is fully determined to go cultural Marxist.

    • Replies: @let it burn
    how do you say "cuck" in korean? kuck-san park?
    , @Anon
    Vapid materialism -- which is what modern conservatism is about -- means women not having kids because all these material girls hooked on pop culture only want the best of everything.

    Also, obsession with education and status means Koreans don't want to have kids who aren't successful. All menial jobs are seen as beneath them. So, foreigners will have to fill them as no one wants to have children who will do manual labor.

    And the global elite everywhere take their cues from American elite colleges like Harvard. Rot spreads everywhere.

    "Seems like South Korea is fully determined to go cultural Marxist."

    They don't have much of a culture. They say 2000 yrs culture, but it is one of mediocrity, mendacity, and imitating great power China.

    Now, it's all about imitating whatever happens in great power USA.

    When US was Christian, many SKers leaned that way.
    Now that US is all about homomania and Diversity, many SKers lean that way.
    People without a culture just follow like a dog to the Power.

    But are white gentiles any better?

    , @Anon
    Aww now the stormtards will have to edit their awful copypasta.

    "Africa for the Africans. Most of Asia for the Asians. White countries and South Korea for everybody!

    Anti-racist is codeword for antiwhite and anti-Korean."
  2. Wait, is this an oblique reference to Comey being a puppet of Putin?

    • Replies: @tyrone
    haven't you heard Putin controls Comey ,Trump, Assange and who knows else……HAIL PUTIN HAIL PUTIN!
  3. @Hepp
    I was talking to a Korean girl recently about the politics of the country, with a special interest on race and multicultural stuff.

    She told me that Park is part of the conservative party, but is demanding halal food in universities, which apparently has caused controversy. Also, the first non-ethnic Korean to be in the parliament was part of the same party.

    It looks like their "conservatives" are basically what the Republican elite was 15 years ago: hawkish, awful on the national question, and pro-immigration and multiculturalism. Seems like South Korea is fully determined to go cultural Marxist.

    how do you say “cuck” in korean? kuck-san park?

  4. Being and Time

    Time is an ocean, but it ends on the shore/
    You may not see me tomorrow

    – Dylan said yesterday, he will be in Stockholm, if “at all possible” (being & time hidden in a hint – right at the surface, just like the greeks did it with heavy stuff – – according to Nietzsche – – – ).

    German writer Hermann Peter Piwitt dealt with power and superstition in his ’72 novel “Rothschilds”.

    “Otherworldly Reports – Quite Diffrent This Time Around

    If others say, they’ve seen Beings and have been talking to creatures while being in the next world, they were not in the same next world as I was.”

    …but one has to be careful: This is not the author -it’s one of his characters thinking out loud – on page 99… – –

  5. So basically no matter how powerful the woman is, we see a pattern of a stronger reliance by them on fortune-tellers and other occult hucksters than powerful men do. I wonder if Queen Elizabeth or Catherine the Great had personal occultist fortune-tellers to help them through things.

    Elizabeth, in particular, seems to have been a prime mark for a charlatan: with her extreme unpopularity (history has whitewashed it as her being a super-hero British ruler, but in reality she was very much disliked by her subjects), the many assassination plots (due to her unpopularity both within in her kingdom, as well as from power-hungry rivals, Catholics, Irish/Scottish/Welsh haters, and foreign nations), her religious ambiguity, the open invasion threats from Spain and France, her lack of marriage and issue, and her paranoid mindset (Walshingham’s spies)—-well, let’s just say that lady would have been very open to a “psychic” easing her mind by telling her everything would be alright so long as he was allowed to tell her which dress to wear, which place not to visit on the full moon, which lady in waiting was of the wrong star sign to trust, etc.

    That also leads to another question—does Hillary have a personal medium? What about Angela Merkel?

    • Replies: @Cryptogenic
    Hillary and Merkel both have personal media.
    , @Dieter Kief
    Merkel is as sober as possible. Family lutheran, father minister, mother latin-teacher, she herself physical chemist. What she doesn't seem to get is, that there are other poeple as well.
    , @Anonymous
    Queen Elizabeth had John Dee as her astrologer and advisor:

    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-painting-of-john-dee-astrologer-to-queen-elizabeth-i-contains-a-hidden-ring-of-skulls-180957860
    , @Pat Casey

    Dr. Houston, a 57-year-old author of 15 books who is admired by many adherents of the human potential movement and of New Age mysticism, made headlines over the weekend because of her work with another mainstream figure, Hillary Rodham Clinton. "Seances" were among the interpretations of sessions in which Dr. Houston and Mrs. Clinton supposedly conversed with Eleanor Roosevelt and Gandhi.
     
    http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/25/us/performing-seances-no-just-pushing-the-membrane-of-the-possible.html
  6. Puppet of some fortune-teller.

    But Koreans are totally blind to S. Korea as puppet of US that has gone nuts since the end of the Cold War.

  7. If anyone is ever in Saint Petersburg, I recommend the Rasputin Museum, in an old 19th century palace. You walk through the usual room after enormous room of gold inlay and mirrored chandeliers (like all the usual Saint Petersburg palaces), and then suddenly you’re in a room with mirrors on all sides, and then a secret passageway brings you down to a small room with Rasputin and his killers as wax figures, playing cards I think. The story of how they tried to kill him is something else- poison, then shooting several times, then finally drowning him in the frozen Neva I think. That was a guy who took his time when it was his time to go.

    • Replies: @Kyle
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=htRHj3tyYyo
  8. @whorefinder
    So basically no matter how powerful the woman is, we see a pattern of a stronger reliance by them on fortune-tellers and other occult hucksters than powerful men do. I wonder if Queen Elizabeth or Catherine the Great had personal occultist fortune-tellers to help them through things.

    Elizabeth, in particular, seems to have been a prime mark for a charlatan: with her extreme unpopularity (history has whitewashed it as her being a super-hero British ruler, but in reality she was very much disliked by her subjects), the many assassination plots (due to her unpopularity both within in her kingdom, as well as from power-hungry rivals, Catholics, Irish/Scottish/Welsh haters, and foreign nations), her religious ambiguity, the open invasion threats from Spain and France, her lack of marriage and issue, and her paranoid mindset (Walshingham's spies)----well, let's just say that lady would have been very open to a "psychic" easing her mind by telling her everything would be alright so long as he was allowed to tell her which dress to wear, which place not to visit on the full moon, which lady in waiting was of the wrong star sign to trust, etc.

    That also leads to another question---does Hillary have a personal medium? What about Angela Merkel?

    Hillary and Merkel both have personal media.

  9. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Hepp
    I was talking to a Korean girl recently about the politics of the country, with a special interest on race and multicultural stuff.

    She told me that Park is part of the conservative party, but is demanding halal food in universities, which apparently has caused controversy. Also, the first non-ethnic Korean to be in the parliament was part of the same party.

    It looks like their "conservatives" are basically what the Republican elite was 15 years ago: hawkish, awful on the national question, and pro-immigration and multiculturalism. Seems like South Korea is fully determined to go cultural Marxist.

    Vapid materialism — which is what modern conservatism is about — means women not having kids because all these material girls hooked on pop culture only want the best of everything.

    Also, obsession with education and status means Koreans don’t want to have kids who aren’t successful. All menial jobs are seen as beneath them. So, foreigners will have to fill them as no one wants to have children who will do manual labor.

    And the global elite everywhere take their cues from American elite colleges like Harvard. Rot spreads everywhere.

    “Seems like South Korea is fully determined to go cultural Marxist.”

    They don’t have much of a culture. They say 2000 yrs culture, but it is one of mediocrity, mendacity, and imitating great power China.

    Now, it’s all about imitating whatever happens in great power USA.

    When US was Christian, many SKers leaned that way.
    Now that US is all about homomania and Diversity, many SKers lean that way.
    People without a culture just follow like a dog to the Power.

    But are white gentiles any better?

  10. @whorefinder
    So basically no matter how powerful the woman is, we see a pattern of a stronger reliance by them on fortune-tellers and other occult hucksters than powerful men do. I wonder if Queen Elizabeth or Catherine the Great had personal occultist fortune-tellers to help them through things.

    Elizabeth, in particular, seems to have been a prime mark for a charlatan: with her extreme unpopularity (history has whitewashed it as her being a super-hero British ruler, but in reality she was very much disliked by her subjects), the many assassination plots (due to her unpopularity both within in her kingdom, as well as from power-hungry rivals, Catholics, Irish/Scottish/Welsh haters, and foreign nations), her religious ambiguity, the open invasion threats from Spain and France, her lack of marriage and issue, and her paranoid mindset (Walshingham's spies)----well, let's just say that lady would have been very open to a "psychic" easing her mind by telling her everything would be alright so long as he was allowed to tell her which dress to wear, which place not to visit on the full moon, which lady in waiting was of the wrong star sign to trust, etc.

    That also leads to another question---does Hillary have a personal medium? What about Angela Merkel?

    Merkel is as sober as possible. Family lutheran, father minister, mother latin-teacher, she herself physical chemist. What she doesn’t seem to get is, that there are other poeple as well.

    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Merkel is a great example of how obedience to academic scientism (the nonsense that is egalitarianism) leads to disaster in the real world, which doesn't care a fig about theories...
    , @M
    An Germany resident American I read made a case that Merkel's choices were deeply marked by choosing what she thought God would want her to do. For instance, on the refugee subject. Any truth to this you think?
  11. @whorefinder
    So basically no matter how powerful the woman is, we see a pattern of a stronger reliance by them on fortune-tellers and other occult hucksters than powerful men do. I wonder if Queen Elizabeth or Catherine the Great had personal occultist fortune-tellers to help them through things.

    Elizabeth, in particular, seems to have been a prime mark for a charlatan: with her extreme unpopularity (history has whitewashed it as her being a super-hero British ruler, but in reality she was very much disliked by her subjects), the many assassination plots (due to her unpopularity both within in her kingdom, as well as from power-hungry rivals, Catholics, Irish/Scottish/Welsh haters, and foreign nations), her religious ambiguity, the open invasion threats from Spain and France, her lack of marriage and issue, and her paranoid mindset (Walshingham's spies)----well, let's just say that lady would have been very open to a "psychic" easing her mind by telling her everything would be alright so long as he was allowed to tell her which dress to wear, which place not to visit on the full moon, which lady in waiting was of the wrong star sign to trust, etc.

    That also leads to another question---does Hillary have a personal medium? What about Angela Merkel?

  12. “…Death is a big deal.”

    Not in Merkel’s Germany, or as they say- the wrong leader got deposed :

    Meanwhile, more music from our studio:

  13. Spiritual leaders to the powerful walk a fine line.

    I know a rich Jewish family in California who have their own holy men on retainer.

    This family is the most rotten in the community. Truly terrible people.

    When it comes to their magical holy man everybody knows that he is there puppet, not the other way around.

    Holy men are often there to provide the divine stamp of approval for whatever the wealthy and powerful are going to do anyhow as you said.

    • Replies: @Anon
    LOL.

    I don't usually watch TV shows but I took out dvd version of SILICON VALLEY, and it is one of the better TV shows(though I won't watch the whole thing)

    And yes, the guru guy is hilarious.

    The rich guy makes inane statements like it's profound revelation, and the guru plays along.

    But I'm not sure the guru in Silicon Valley is really a puppet. He seems to be a con-man getting his jollies by playing along.

    This is just ROTFL

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InNgTcuxkZc
  14. Female rulers are a sign that the mandate of heaven has been lost and doom shall surely soon befall you. This is as the Marxist would say a historical inevitability. Any people who suffers to be ruled by a woman will be cursed. Doubly so those who actively CHOOSE to be ruled by one.

    • Agree: BB753, Hepp
  15. Well, if the fortune-teller is a shaman, at least it’s an indigenous matter.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It's a Shaman cult that incorporates Buddhist, Christian and Confucian ideas. A very Korean cult group.

    BTW, previous President of South Korea was a deeply religious (Christian) man. President Park, on the other hand, has always been described as non-religious who didn't belong to any religious group.

  16. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Moshe
    Spiritual leaders to the powerful walk a fine line.

    https://youtu.be/wDe0unytbpA

    I know a rich Jewish family in California who have their own holy men on retainer.

    This family is the most rotten in the community. Truly terrible people.

    When it comes to their magical holy man everybody knows that he is there puppet, not the other way around.

    Holy men are often there to provide the divine stamp of approval for whatever the wealthy and powerful are going to do anyhow as you said.

    LOL.

    I don’t usually watch TV shows but I took out dvd version of SILICON VALLEY, and it is one of the better TV shows(though I won’t watch the whole thing)

    And yes, the guru guy is hilarious.

    The rich guy makes inane statements like it’s profound revelation, and the guru plays along.

    But I’m not sure the guru in Silicon Valley is really a puppet. He seems to be a con-man getting his jollies by playing along.

    This is just ROTFL

  17. @The most deplorable one
    Wait, is this an oblique reference to Comey being a puppet of Putin?

    haven’t you heard Putin controls Comey ,Trump, Assange and who knows else……HAIL PUTIN HAIL PUTIN!

  18. If the South Korean president was chosen by StarCraft tournament none of this would have happened.

  19. @Anon
    Well, if the fortune-teller is a shaman, at least it's an indigenous matter.

    It’s a Shaman cult that incorporates Buddhist, Christian and Confucian ideas. A very Korean cult group.

    BTW, previous President of South Korea was a deeply religious (Christian) man. President Park, on the other hand, has always been described as non-religious who didn’t belong to any religious group.

  20. “But I should also point out that death and fear of death play strong role in the Rasputin, Park, and Reagan cases.

    Death is a big deal.”

    In fact death and fear of death is the basis for god and religions. Especially Christianity. There is no Christianity without crucifixion and resurrection.

  21. @whorefinder
    So basically no matter how powerful the woman is, we see a pattern of a stronger reliance by them on fortune-tellers and other occult hucksters than powerful men do. I wonder if Queen Elizabeth or Catherine the Great had personal occultist fortune-tellers to help them through things.

    Elizabeth, in particular, seems to have been a prime mark for a charlatan: with her extreme unpopularity (history has whitewashed it as her being a super-hero British ruler, but in reality she was very much disliked by her subjects), the many assassination plots (due to her unpopularity both within in her kingdom, as well as from power-hungry rivals, Catholics, Irish/Scottish/Welsh haters, and foreign nations), her religious ambiguity, the open invasion threats from Spain and France, her lack of marriage and issue, and her paranoid mindset (Walshingham's spies)----well, let's just say that lady would have been very open to a "psychic" easing her mind by telling her everything would be alright so long as he was allowed to tell her which dress to wear, which place not to visit on the full moon, which lady in waiting was of the wrong star sign to trust, etc.

    That also leads to another question---does Hillary have a personal medium? What about Angela Merkel?

    Dr. Houston, a 57-year-old author of 15 books who is admired by many adherents of the human potential movement and of New Age mysticism, made headlines over the weekend because of her work with another mainstream figure, Hillary Rodham Clinton. “Seances” were among the interpretations of sessions in which Dr. Houston and Mrs. Clinton supposedly conversed with Eleanor Roosevelt and Gandhi.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/25/us/performing-seances-no-just-pushing-the-membrane-of-the-possible.html

    • Replies: @22pp22
    Another open goal missed by the Trump team.
    , @Bill
    iSteve is awesome. As is Pat Casey, of course.
    , @Dieter Kief
    Hilarious. I wouldn't even doubt it if it didn't look so true.
  22. Steve,

    A few years ago you alerted your readers about the machinations and intrigues of Turkish politics. This stuff from Korea makes Turkey look like staid ho hum run-of-the-mill!

  23. I suspect Rasputin had more fun than the other shamans. And had a song.

    (Did you know that Claudja Barry was a member of Boney M.?)

  24. Trump rally today:

    • Replies: @sayless
    Guy chants "Jew-S-A" in front of press pen

    Perhaps he was paid to do that.
    , @No_0ne
    ID'd as a Hillary plant. They're still at it, even after the Project Veritas videos exposed their use of agents provocateurs and shills:

    https://mobile.twitter.com/TheRickyVaughn/status/792862293898002436
  25. Park & Choi.
    Clinton & Abedin.

    How much of this goes on?

    • Replies: @whorefinder

    Park & Choi.
    Clinton & Abedin.

    How much of this goes on?
     

    Probably not a lot at all. Women have extremely fickle friendships compared to men; one woman described it to me in this way: "Women don't have friends; they just have enemies they want to keep close for a little while." Men tend to stay in contact with old buddies and will go out golfing with the same guy they played video games/baseball with when they were kids. Females, in contrast, compete with other women through social manipulation, which leads to a lot of hurt feelings and broken friendships (or, alternatively, the easy disregard of a friendship when the friends no longer run in the same circles).

    But women tend to feel guilty and needy about not having a "deep" female confidante. So hustling female confidantes play on that and offer them a "deep" relationship to bilk them/control them. Or the confidantes are manipulative lesbians biding their time to hope/trick the powerful woman into a relationship.

    Incidentally, this is why women tend to be the majority of authors/readers of "slash fiction." Slash fiction is a genre of internet fan stories about famous pop culture male friends (e.g. Spock and Kirk, Holmes and Watson, Picard and Data, Pitt and Clooney's characters from Ocean's 11) that end up being homosexual love stories (I know, eww).

    Women write and devour slash fiction tales, but they make no sense to men (and, again, the eww factor). It's because women don't "get" long-lasting male friendships, and so think it "must" be sexual, because that's the only way they could ever stay so close to someone.

  26. @Langley
    Park & Choi.
    Clinton & Abedin.

    How much of this goes on?

    Park & Choi.
    Clinton & Abedin.

    How much of this goes on?

    Probably not a lot at all. Women have extremely fickle friendships compared to men; one woman described it to me in this way: “Women don’t have friends; they just have enemies they want to keep close for a little while.” Men tend to stay in contact with old buddies and will go out golfing with the same guy they played video games/baseball with when they were kids. Females, in contrast, compete with other women through social manipulation, which leads to a lot of hurt feelings and broken friendships (or, alternatively, the easy disregard of a friendship when the friends no longer run in the same circles).

    But women tend to feel guilty and needy about not having a “deep” female confidante. So hustling female confidantes play on that and offer them a “deep” relationship to bilk them/control them. Or the confidantes are manipulative lesbians biding their time to hope/trick the powerful woman into a relationship.

    Incidentally, this is why women tend to be the majority of authors/readers of “slash fiction.” Slash fiction is a genre of internet fan stories about famous pop culture male friends (e.g. Spock and Kirk, Holmes and Watson, Picard and Data, Pitt and Clooney’s characters from Ocean’s 11) that end up being homosexual love stories (I know, eww).

    Women write and devour slash fiction tales, but they make no sense to men (and, again, the eww factor). It’s because women don’t “get” long-lasting male friendships, and so think it “must” be sexual, because that’s the only way they could ever stay so close to someone.

    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    "Men and women are united by the belief that you can't trust women." H.L.Mencken
    , @Stebbing Heuer
    Interesting, thank you.

    I've found that women in friendship circles tend to cover for each other's behaviour, explaining away or ignoring bad behaviour. At a macro level, we see something similar with the media refusing to acknowledge the less savoury aspects of Bill and Hillary.

    They just adopt the 'three wise monkeys' posture and refuse to budge from there. From experience, men in friendship circles are less likely to do this.

    Don't know why this is, although I can think of various uninformed explanations.
    , @dcite
    Projection much? Tin ear? Reaction to absurd feminist declarations that men don't have real friends? ( I have heard the occasional woman make such a claim.) A dehumanizing and unjust assumption applied to either sex, and probably part of the conspiracy to undermine social cohesion. Bound to backfire, as we see in this poor putz.

    "Slash fiction?" what the hell is that? Some bleak and turgid dream? I have dozens of books, many of unusual subject matter, but that genre passed me by.

    Without friends, some of decades duration, life wouldn't be worth the work commute. They have to capacity to cancel out the negativity of enemies. Certainly it's the same for men.

    Takes all kinds of monikers, even this commenter's.
    Eww. I'm outta here now. Think I need to talk to my friends.
  27. Steve, I wish you didn’t take your info about other countries from the NYT. Imagine Koreans forming their opinions of America in general and of this election in particular from the stuff they read in the NYT.

    I don’t know much about Korea, but I know other foreign countries that the US media covers. It lies about them even more than it lies about America.

  28. @Dieter Kief
    Merkel is as sober as possible. Family lutheran, father minister, mother latin-teacher, she herself physical chemist. What she doesn't seem to get is, that there are other poeple as well.

    Merkel is a great example of how obedience to academic scientism (the nonsense that is egalitarianism) leads to disaster in the real world, which doesn’t care a fig about theories…

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Yeah everything working akkording to plans - or hypotheses - something clean - -that's the dream. - Result: world of dreamers.

    Human biodiversity is also a theory, but it encapsulates more reality - which is disturbing.
  29. @whorefinder

    Park & Choi.
    Clinton & Abedin.

    How much of this goes on?
     

    Probably not a lot at all. Women have extremely fickle friendships compared to men; one woman described it to me in this way: "Women don't have friends; they just have enemies they want to keep close for a little while." Men tend to stay in contact with old buddies and will go out golfing with the same guy they played video games/baseball with when they were kids. Females, in contrast, compete with other women through social manipulation, which leads to a lot of hurt feelings and broken friendships (or, alternatively, the easy disregard of a friendship when the friends no longer run in the same circles).

    But women tend to feel guilty and needy about not having a "deep" female confidante. So hustling female confidantes play on that and offer them a "deep" relationship to bilk them/control them. Or the confidantes are manipulative lesbians biding their time to hope/trick the powerful woman into a relationship.

    Incidentally, this is why women tend to be the majority of authors/readers of "slash fiction." Slash fiction is a genre of internet fan stories about famous pop culture male friends (e.g. Spock and Kirk, Holmes and Watson, Picard and Data, Pitt and Clooney's characters from Ocean's 11) that end up being homosexual love stories (I know, eww).

    Women write and devour slash fiction tales, but they make no sense to men (and, again, the eww factor). It's because women don't "get" long-lasting male friendships, and so think it "must" be sexual, because that's the only way they could ever stay so close to someone.

    “Men and women are united by the belief that you can’t trust women.” H.L.Mencken

    • Replies: @dcite
    Will it be less knee-deep if Hillary goes away? I hope so. How about : why trust anybody?
    Even a good woman with ambition can make men's knees knock, and a bad one seems to disintegrate their powers of discernment. I find there have been women who are trustworthy and men who are; there women who are not and men who are not. I'm not extraordinary. My experience is in the normal range.

    Mencken was a cynic (the etymology of "cynic" is ancient Greek, referring to a canine sitting in the street, indifferently watching the passers-by), although sometimes he was just putting people on. A cynic's understanding of others is neither complex nor comprehensive, however clever and correct in a certain context, it may be. They know how to please other cynics and rile non-cynics. They enjoy it; but to take them at their word, be they masculinists or feminists, or whatever political persuasion, is to enter a bleak and unfinished basement of human experience.
    I wouldn't trust anybody who led me there.

  30. @whorefinder

    Park & Choi.
    Clinton & Abedin.

    How much of this goes on?
     

    Probably not a lot at all. Women have extremely fickle friendships compared to men; one woman described it to me in this way: "Women don't have friends; they just have enemies they want to keep close for a little while." Men tend to stay in contact with old buddies and will go out golfing with the same guy they played video games/baseball with when they were kids. Females, in contrast, compete with other women through social manipulation, which leads to a lot of hurt feelings and broken friendships (or, alternatively, the easy disregard of a friendship when the friends no longer run in the same circles).

    But women tend to feel guilty and needy about not having a "deep" female confidante. So hustling female confidantes play on that and offer them a "deep" relationship to bilk them/control them. Or the confidantes are manipulative lesbians biding their time to hope/trick the powerful woman into a relationship.

    Incidentally, this is why women tend to be the majority of authors/readers of "slash fiction." Slash fiction is a genre of internet fan stories about famous pop culture male friends (e.g. Spock and Kirk, Holmes and Watson, Picard and Data, Pitt and Clooney's characters from Ocean's 11) that end up being homosexual love stories (I know, eww).

    Women write and devour slash fiction tales, but they make no sense to men (and, again, the eww factor). It's because women don't "get" long-lasting male friendships, and so think it "must" be sexual, because that's the only way they could ever stay so close to someone.

    Interesting, thank you.

    I’ve found that women in friendship circles tend to cover for each other’s behaviour, explaining away or ignoring bad behaviour. At a macro level, we see something similar with the media refusing to acknowledge the less savoury aspects of Bill and Hillary.

    They just adopt the ‘three wise monkeys’ posture and refuse to budge from there. From experience, men in friendship circles are less likely to do this.

    Don’t know why this is, although I can think of various uninformed explanations.

  31. Mr. Kim told a court that one of the reasons he killed Mr. Park was what he called the president’s failure to stop Mr. Choi’s corrupt activities and keep (Choi) away from his daughter.

    Another completely lucid and rational assassin. (Not a sarcastic comment)

  32. Thin on real evidence, thick on wild speculation.

    The only actual evidence of wrongdoing is the president giving a copy of a speech to her personal confidant of forty years, which the latter edited. There is no evidence of anything else. In other words, this is really much ado about nothing, and arguably an order of magnitude less significant than the questionably-significant Hillary Email scandal. The South Korean opposition party, which has hated Park from the beginning, calling her a princess and unintelligent (both charges that have validity), has very cynically used this minor revelation, actually a mundane one (shock! a friend helps a friend) to whip up hysteria and promote all kinds of conspiracy theories; Koreans, being bandwagon jumpers, have followed along.

    Imagine a revelation to the effect that “Obama’s personal friend edited an Obama speech.” Would such a revelation cause hysteria in the USA? Would the Republicans use it to call for an impeachment? Why would it?

    More generally, don’t we understand that when electing a president we are implicitly electing not the candidate alone but their close circle of confidants? Do we really expect elected officials to sequester themselves off from all friends and confidants for the duration of their terms?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Perhaps I need a new Scandal-o-meter, but I have been puzzled for a long time by what qualifies and a scandal and what doesn't. This Korean thing--friend edits friend's speech--looks like a nothingburger, but it is shaking the government?!? Likewise Romney's supposedly notorious "47%" remark: what's so scandalous about noticing the Dems have built themselves a 47% floor? Romney was correct, and it was and is the fault of the Dems and their media cover-providers. So it should indeed have been a scandal--but for the other side. Even the infamous Scandal-of-Scandals, Watergate, a minor political burglary in quest of a minor partisan advantage, was really just a question of how much the president knew about it. Well, it's been four decades, and I'm still not sure what the answer was, but the question was apparently enough to terminate that presidency and that president's career forever.

    Conversely, Hillary's bout of current scandals that the media are ho-hum about all look pretty serious. The email server shows she is above the laws the rest of us must abide and shows her incompetence with national security that may well have gotten people killed and the country compromised. WikiLeaks shows she and her husband routinely sell off the nation's interest for their personal enrichment. These aren't just scandals, they're treason. In former times, they would be hanging offenses. Today, it's just gauche to talk about them.

    I guess this is the power of having the major media on your side. Maybe they should go to the gallows too.

    , @No_0ne
    Good call. This reads like one of those "So what are they REALLY after her for?" stories.
  33. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    OT

    https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36009

    From: Michael Werz
    Date: Wednesday, August 19, 2015
    Subject: Flagging Turkish campaign donations
    To: John Podesta

    John, heard this second hand but more than once. Seems Erdogan faction is making substantial investments in U.S. to counter opposition (CHP, Kurds, Gulenists etc.) outreach to policymakers and USG. Am told that the Erdogan crew also tries to make inroads via donations to Democratic candidates, including yours. Two names that you should be aware of are Mehmet Celebi and Ali Cinar. Happy to elaborate on the phone, provided you are not shopping at the liquor store.

  34. @whorefinder

    Park & Choi.
    Clinton & Abedin.

    How much of this goes on?
     

    Probably not a lot at all. Women have extremely fickle friendships compared to men; one woman described it to me in this way: "Women don't have friends; they just have enemies they want to keep close for a little while." Men tend to stay in contact with old buddies and will go out golfing with the same guy they played video games/baseball with when they were kids. Females, in contrast, compete with other women through social manipulation, which leads to a lot of hurt feelings and broken friendships (or, alternatively, the easy disregard of a friendship when the friends no longer run in the same circles).

    But women tend to feel guilty and needy about not having a "deep" female confidante. So hustling female confidantes play on that and offer them a "deep" relationship to bilk them/control them. Or the confidantes are manipulative lesbians biding their time to hope/trick the powerful woman into a relationship.

    Incidentally, this is why women tend to be the majority of authors/readers of "slash fiction." Slash fiction is a genre of internet fan stories about famous pop culture male friends (e.g. Spock and Kirk, Holmes and Watson, Picard and Data, Pitt and Clooney's characters from Ocean's 11) that end up being homosexual love stories (I know, eww).

    Women write and devour slash fiction tales, but they make no sense to men (and, again, the eww factor). It's because women don't "get" long-lasting male friendships, and so think it "must" be sexual, because that's the only way they could ever stay so close to someone.

    Projection much? Tin ear? Reaction to absurd feminist declarations that men don’t have real friends? ( I have heard the occasional woman make such a claim.) A dehumanizing and unjust assumption applied to either sex, and probably part of the conspiracy to undermine social cohesion. Bound to backfire, as we see in this poor putz.

    “Slash fiction?” what the hell is that? Some bleak and turgid dream? I have dozens of books, many of unusual subject matter, but that genre passed me by.

    Without friends, some of decades duration, life wouldn’t be worth the work commute. They have to capacity to cancel out the negativity of enemies. Certainly it’s the same for men.

    Takes all kinds of monikers, even this commenter’s.
    Eww. I’m outta here now. Think I need to talk to my friends.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    lol. Your denial, delusions, and projections are noted. And hilarious.
    , @Anonymous
    Hang in there. Just have to wade through the dross for the gems.
  35. By CHOE SANG-HUN

    With respect –It is probably preferable to have a non-Korean report on this matter. Non-Koreans familiar with the subject are going to be much less subject to the waves of emotional hysteria and bandwagoning that regularly engulf Korea — one such wave is now sweeping through the land (but it will soon pass and be forgotten, as they all are). The non-Korean reporters’s less-sensationalist version would be a credit to the integrity of journalism, which most of the South Korean media has temporarily lost in the frenzy of anti-Park sharks tasting blood over a minor affair.

    In a similar scandal about a U.S. president, none but the likes of National Enquirer would ever do something so reckless as to declare the president a “shaman’s puppet” with no evidence. And hence millions, hundreds of millions? of people across the world are duped into buying the vicious attack-line of an recalcitrant political opposition party… Political hatreds > Reality.

  36. Imagine a political witch hunt, led by longtime anti-Hillary Republicans, accusing Hillary Clinton of being “an Islamic puppet” abd maybe a “a Hindu puppet” because her “unelected” adviser and confidant, Huma Abedin, is the daughter of an Islamic scholar of East Indian origin.

    The accusations against Park Geun-Hye, analogized onto U.S. politics, are about the above.

    That this scandal has become such a major story says something about the political culture of South Korea. I am no fan of Park Geun Hye, but I know a case of hysteria trumping reality when I see it.

  37. Jeez this comments section is hilarious.

    This situation South Korea is an example of nepotism and oligarchy gone wrong, not some example to paint female leaders with. Male leaders have depended on odd rituals, religions, etc.. as well and many have been failures.

    This should be a cautionary tale to oligarchs who are supporting stupid puppets to maybe not support puppets that are too stupid..

  38. @pyrrhus
    "Men and women are united by the belief that you can't trust women." H.L.Mencken

    Will it be less knee-deep if Hillary goes away? I hope so. How about : why trust anybody?
    Even a good woman with ambition can make men’s knees knock, and a bad one seems to disintegrate their powers of discernment. I find there have been women who are trustworthy and men who are; there women who are not and men who are not. I’m not extraordinary. My experience is in the normal range.

    Mencken was a cynic (the etymology of “cynic” is ancient Greek, referring to a canine sitting in the street, indifferently watching the passers-by), although sometimes he was just putting people on. A cynic’s understanding of others is neither complex nor comprehensive, however clever and correct in a certain context, it may be. They know how to please other cynics and rile non-cynics. They enjoy it; but to take them at their word, be they masculinists or feminists, or whatever political persuasion, is to enter a bleak and unfinished basement of human experience.
    I wouldn’t trust anybody who led me there.

    • Replies: @Anon
    While there are trustworthy women, the point is that women are better able to get away with being untrustworthy.
    , @L Woods
    You sound like a leftist. "There are black criminals and white criminals, and black surgeons and white surgeons, so nothing to be noticed here!"
  39. […] 8. Sailer on the recent turmoil in South Korea […]

  40. @Pat Casey

    Dr. Houston, a 57-year-old author of 15 books who is admired by many adherents of the human potential movement and of New Age mysticism, made headlines over the weekend because of her work with another mainstream figure, Hillary Rodham Clinton. "Seances" were among the interpretations of sessions in which Dr. Houston and Mrs. Clinton supposedly conversed with Eleanor Roosevelt and Gandhi.
     
    http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/25/us/performing-seances-no-just-pushing-the-membrane-of-the-possible.html

    Another open goal missed by the Trump team.

  41. The president of the country is controlled by a shadowy shaman cabal . Is anime becoming real ?

  42. @pyrrhus
    Merkel is a great example of how obedience to academic scientism (the nonsense that is egalitarianism) leads to disaster in the real world, which doesn't care a fig about theories...

    Yeah everything working akkording to plans – or hypotheses – something clean – -that’s the dream. – Result: world of dreamers.

    Human biodiversity is also a theory, but it encapsulates more reality – which is disturbing.

  43. @Hepp
    I was talking to a Korean girl recently about the politics of the country, with a special interest on race and multicultural stuff.

    She told me that Park is part of the conservative party, but is demanding halal food in universities, which apparently has caused controversy. Also, the first non-ethnic Korean to be in the parliament was part of the same party.

    It looks like their "conservatives" are basically what the Republican elite was 15 years ago: hawkish, awful on the national question, and pro-immigration and multiculturalism. Seems like South Korea is fully determined to go cultural Marxist.

    Aww now the stormtards will have to edit their awful copypasta.

    “Africa for the Africans. Most of Asia for the Asians. White countries and South Korea for everybody!

    Anti-racist is codeword for antiwhite and anti-Korean.”

    • Replies: @Pericles
    They're deplorable.
  44. @dcite
    Will it be less knee-deep if Hillary goes away? I hope so. How about : why trust anybody?
    Even a good woman with ambition can make men's knees knock, and a bad one seems to disintegrate their powers of discernment. I find there have been women who are trustworthy and men who are; there women who are not and men who are not. I'm not extraordinary. My experience is in the normal range.

    Mencken was a cynic (the etymology of "cynic" is ancient Greek, referring to a canine sitting in the street, indifferently watching the passers-by), although sometimes he was just putting people on. A cynic's understanding of others is neither complex nor comprehensive, however clever and correct in a certain context, it may be. They know how to please other cynics and rile non-cynics. They enjoy it; but to take them at their word, be they masculinists or feminists, or whatever political persuasion, is to enter a bleak and unfinished basement of human experience.
    I wouldn't trust anybody who led me there.

    While there are trustworthy women, the point is that women are better able to get away with being untrustworthy.

  45. @dcite
    Will it be less knee-deep if Hillary goes away? I hope so. How about : why trust anybody?
    Even a good woman with ambition can make men's knees knock, and a bad one seems to disintegrate their powers of discernment. I find there have been women who are trustworthy and men who are; there women who are not and men who are not. I'm not extraordinary. My experience is in the normal range.

    Mencken was a cynic (the etymology of "cynic" is ancient Greek, referring to a canine sitting in the street, indifferently watching the passers-by), although sometimes he was just putting people on. A cynic's understanding of others is neither complex nor comprehensive, however clever and correct in a certain context, it may be. They know how to please other cynics and rile non-cynics. They enjoy it; but to take them at their word, be they masculinists or feminists, or whatever political persuasion, is to enter a bleak and unfinished basement of human experience.
    I wouldn't trust anybody who led me there.

    You sound like a leftist. “There are black criminals and white criminals, and black surgeons and white surgeons, so nothing to be noticed here!”

    • Replies: @anonymous
    What are you noticing, exactly? We can quantify this -- who is more likely, men or women, to deceive in sexual matters (bedding), affairs, and the like? Who is more likely to deceive in family matters, leaving children with no parent? Who is more likely to deceive in work matters, racking up sentences for white collar crime?

    Women deceive more in interpersonal relations, if that's what you're thinking of, but the big whoppers are the domain of men.
  46. @Anonymous
    Trump rally today:

    https://twitter.com/NYTnickc/status/792510299232284672

    Guy chants “Jew-S-A” in front of press pen

    Perhaps he was paid to do that.

  47. Suppose you have a tale to tell about a bisexual honeypot who is the link between her exhibitionist pedophile husband and her lesbian mistress who is a high government official. One way to tell this tale would be to write a roman-a-clef in which fictional names replace the names Huma, Carlos, and Hillary. But another way would be to engineer a news report in a foreign country, in which familiar names become hard-to-remember foreign names, and the plot points are disguised as unfamiliar foreign customs.
    On the other hand, though, even the disguised account will not be believed, because the original scenario is so non-credible to begin with.

  48. @dcite
    Projection much? Tin ear? Reaction to absurd feminist declarations that men don't have real friends? ( I have heard the occasional woman make such a claim.) A dehumanizing and unjust assumption applied to either sex, and probably part of the conspiracy to undermine social cohesion. Bound to backfire, as we see in this poor putz.

    "Slash fiction?" what the hell is that? Some bleak and turgid dream? I have dozens of books, many of unusual subject matter, but that genre passed me by.

    Without friends, some of decades duration, life wouldn't be worth the work commute. They have to capacity to cancel out the negativity of enemies. Certainly it's the same for men.

    Takes all kinds of monikers, even this commenter's.
    Eww. I'm outta here now. Think I need to talk to my friends.

    lol. Your denial, delusions, and projections are noted. And hilarious.

    • Agree: L Woods, L Woods
  49. @Dieter Kief
    Merkel is as sober as possible. Family lutheran, father minister, mother latin-teacher, she herself physical chemist. What she doesn't seem to get is, that there are other poeple as well.

    An Germany resident American I read made a case that Merkel’s choices were deeply marked by choosing what she thought God would want her to do. For instance, on the refugee subject. Any truth to this you think?

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    I dunno. What she publicly said made me nervous: She said if we started to protect our borders, then there'd be pictures in the TV we could not stand.

    This statement bothers me because TV is not reality: That's at the bottom of my nervousness.

    Plus she ranks the outcome of an event ON TV higher than reality itself.

    Then there's one more important point: There's no problem in Germany with refugees. Public cocnsensus is: We help them in their misery.

    The unresolved problem are the migrants (most "refugees" that arrive here, are no refugees at all: They are migrants).

    Back to Angela Merkel.
    What outsiders (foreign correspondents, for example) don't get, is the shame she feels about borders, because she once at least for practical reasons agreed with the eastern government (she was brought up in the east by a family, that had m o v e d there from the west - a thing that maybe a few hundred poeple did at all... her father was a socialist, who thought he had to go east and help build a better society...) - well: She grew up in the east, identified (in parts - her lutheran family was opposed to a lot of things happening in the east...) - she identified in parts, as did her family with this state, that had made p r i s o n e r s of most of it's population - - by means of a wall - which meant the strictest border-control (guns shot at refugeees, trying to get o u t!).

    I'd assume she is for those w r o n g reasons against a border-protection too: She is still full of eastern guilt - and pride as well, maybe, a little bit, which confuses things even more.

    Beautiful autumn day today - I've been for a walk in a nearby wood on a little mountain overseeing the Lake, shimmering silvery in milky light - and what did we discuss - the fact, that there's one more factor, that's unresolved and strongly at work against the protection of our borders: The Internationalism of Marxist origin, that's still alive and which gets reinforced nowadys by tourism and trade, ironically.

    And that leads me to a certain sillyness in nowadays look at poeple in general: We tend to look at them as alike, as comrades, "Brothers&Sisters" - that's all Rousseau und Marx in shining bright colours, and that's all fine as long as you make no reality-check - which always proves, that poeple (all poeple - maybe I disagree on this point with Steve Sailer) are build out of "crumbled wood" as Kant expressed it.

    One of the big unresolved problems in nowadays Germany is that there is no real understanding of what it means to replace religion. To make this short: Rousseau and Marx seem to be up to the task, but they are not.

    One of the big advantages of a solid Christian worldview is, that it's basically not kitschy for a very simple reason: It knows the diffrence between heaven and earth. Maybe it overdramaticises the whole case a bit, - I'd agree on this: But it makes this diffrence.
    Most important sentence in this context: Love they neighbour like yourself - NOT: Love everybody else like yourself.

    For reasons, that would be very interesting to explore (but nobody did, as far as I know), Merkel makes the mistake on both sides of the ideologial spectrum: As a humanitarian, she tends to be of the Marxist-Rousseauist kind, and as a Christian, she is one of those, who don't understand that Christian belief does not necessarily imply the neglection of your own vital interests (the problem is best expressed in the biblical verses I cited above: Love your neighbour like yourself is hard enough as a task - it does not mean: Love all others like yourself...).

    To end - for now - with German writer and legendary radio-man Helmut Heissenbüttel:

    No need to say more about this.

  50. @Hail
    Thin on real evidence, thick on wild speculation.

    The only actual evidence of wrongdoing is the president giving a copy of a speech to her personal confidant of forty years, which the latter edited. There is no evidence of anything else. In other words, this is really much ado about nothing, and arguably an order of magnitude less significant than the questionably-significant Hillary Email scandal. The South Korean opposition party, which has hated Park from the beginning, calling her a princess and unintelligent (both charges that have validity), has very cynically used this minor revelation, actually a mundane one (shock! a friend helps a friend) to whip up hysteria and promote all kinds of conspiracy theories; Koreans, being bandwagon jumpers, have followed along.

    Imagine a revelation to the effect that "Obama's personal friend edited an Obama speech." Would such a revelation cause hysteria in the USA? Would the Republicans use it to call for an impeachment? Why would it?

    More generally, don't we understand that when electing a president we are implicitly electing not the candidate alone but their close circle of confidants? Do we really expect elected officials to sequester themselves off from all friends and confidants for the duration of their terms?

    Perhaps I need a new Scandal-o-meter, but I have been puzzled for a long time by what qualifies and a scandal and what doesn’t. This Korean thing–friend edits friend’s speech–looks like a nothingburger, but it is shaking the government?!? Likewise Romney’s supposedly notorious “47%” remark: what’s so scandalous about noticing the Dems have built themselves a 47% floor? Romney was correct, and it was and is the fault of the Dems and their media cover-providers. So it should indeed have been a scandal–but for the other side. Even the infamous Scandal-of-Scandals, Watergate, a minor political burglary in quest of a minor partisan advantage, was really just a question of how much the president knew about it. Well, it’s been four decades, and I’m still not sure what the answer was, but the question was apparently enough to terminate that presidency and that president’s career forever.

    Conversely, Hillary’s bout of current scandals that the media are ho-hum about all look pretty serious. The email server shows she is above the laws the rest of us must abide and shows her incompetence with national security that may well have gotten people killed and the country compromised. WikiLeaks shows she and her husband routinely sell off the nation’s interest for their personal enrichment. These aren’t just scandals, they’re treason. In former times, they would be hanging offenses. Today, it’s just gauche to talk about them.

    I guess this is the power of having the major media on your side. Maybe they should go to the gallows too.

    • Replies: @thinkingabout it
    The most ridiculous was the whole binders full of women thing. They went on for months about a statement which honestly I could see nothing wrong with. Especially when uttered by a strait-laced Mormon.
    , @Peter Akuleyev
    WikiLeaks shows she and her husband routinely sell off the nation’s interest for their personal enrichment. ...In former times, they would be hanging offenses.

    I hate to defend the Clintons, but come on. Franklin Pierce would laugh at you. The US has gone through epochs of incredible government corruption before - the 1840s-50s, the 1880s-90s, not to mention Harding or JFK. The Clintons are venal and corrupt, but not the first US Presidents to be that way, and certainly not the last.

    Nixon was railroaded, that is certainly true. Compared to JFK or LBJ Nixon was a boy-scout.
  51. I’ve begun to suspect every such “people’s demonstration” in foreign countries as being orchestrated by left-wing NGOs, Soros and their ilk. The pattern is far too similar, in country after country, for it to be spontaneous. Always a bunch of young, westernized people in the leadership, use of social media, claim of a “new” politics, and some vague left-wing talking points.

    We’ve seen it in Turkey, Iran, India, Hong Kong, Ukraine, Egypt, Tunisia, and so many more. I’m not sure what the current SK protests look like but I’m not very hopeful.

  52. @Almost Missouri
    Perhaps I need a new Scandal-o-meter, but I have been puzzled for a long time by what qualifies and a scandal and what doesn't. This Korean thing--friend edits friend's speech--looks like a nothingburger, but it is shaking the government?!? Likewise Romney's supposedly notorious "47%" remark: what's so scandalous about noticing the Dems have built themselves a 47% floor? Romney was correct, and it was and is the fault of the Dems and their media cover-providers. So it should indeed have been a scandal--but for the other side. Even the infamous Scandal-of-Scandals, Watergate, a minor political burglary in quest of a minor partisan advantage, was really just a question of how much the president knew about it. Well, it's been four decades, and I'm still not sure what the answer was, but the question was apparently enough to terminate that presidency and that president's career forever.

    Conversely, Hillary's bout of current scandals that the media are ho-hum about all look pretty serious. The email server shows she is above the laws the rest of us must abide and shows her incompetence with national security that may well have gotten people killed and the country compromised. WikiLeaks shows she and her husband routinely sell off the nation's interest for their personal enrichment. These aren't just scandals, they're treason. In former times, they would be hanging offenses. Today, it's just gauche to talk about them.

    I guess this is the power of having the major media on your side. Maybe they should go to the gallows too.

    The most ridiculous was the whole binders full of women thing. They went on for months about a statement which honestly I could see nothing wrong with. Especially when uttered by a strait-laced Mormon.

  53. @Pat Casey

    Dr. Houston, a 57-year-old author of 15 books who is admired by many adherents of the human potential movement and of New Age mysticism, made headlines over the weekend because of her work with another mainstream figure, Hillary Rodham Clinton. "Seances" were among the interpretations of sessions in which Dr. Houston and Mrs. Clinton supposedly conversed with Eleanor Roosevelt and Gandhi.
     
    http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/25/us/performing-seances-no-just-pushing-the-membrane-of-the-possible.html

    iSteve is awesome. As is Pat Casey, of course.

  54. @Almost Missouri
    Perhaps I need a new Scandal-o-meter, but I have been puzzled for a long time by what qualifies and a scandal and what doesn't. This Korean thing--friend edits friend's speech--looks like a nothingburger, but it is shaking the government?!? Likewise Romney's supposedly notorious "47%" remark: what's so scandalous about noticing the Dems have built themselves a 47% floor? Romney was correct, and it was and is the fault of the Dems and their media cover-providers. So it should indeed have been a scandal--but for the other side. Even the infamous Scandal-of-Scandals, Watergate, a minor political burglary in quest of a minor partisan advantage, was really just a question of how much the president knew about it. Well, it's been four decades, and I'm still not sure what the answer was, but the question was apparently enough to terminate that presidency and that president's career forever.

    Conversely, Hillary's bout of current scandals that the media are ho-hum about all look pretty serious. The email server shows she is above the laws the rest of us must abide and shows her incompetence with national security that may well have gotten people killed and the country compromised. WikiLeaks shows she and her husband routinely sell off the nation's interest for their personal enrichment. These aren't just scandals, they're treason. In former times, they would be hanging offenses. Today, it's just gauche to talk about them.

    I guess this is the power of having the major media on your side. Maybe they should go to the gallows too.

    WikiLeaks shows she and her husband routinely sell off the nation’s interest for their personal enrichment. …In former times, they would be hanging offenses.

    I hate to defend the Clintons, but come on. Franklin Pierce would laugh at you. The US has gone through epochs of incredible government corruption before – the 1840s-50s, the 1880s-90s, not to mention Harding or JFK. The Clintons are venal and corrupt, but not the first US Presidents to be that way, and certainly not the last.

    Nixon was railroaded, that is certainly true. Compared to JFK or LBJ Nixon was a boy-scout.

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson

    I hate to defend the Clintons, but come on.
     
    Really? The Clintons are in the top 1% of the top 1% of the top 1% based on influence peddling only. They have no skills for serving others. They have no inventions, no innovations and no wealth amplification techniques. Nothing like Clintonian corruption has happened before. None of your citations have any facts backing your absurd assertions of moral equivalence.

    If you hate to defend the Clintons, but fabricate claims to defend them, then maybe you should sit down for a heart-t0-heart with yourself. And in your self conversation maybe you might find the means to govern the impulses that led to your initial defense.

    There are no instances of comparable events, circumstances or outcomes matching the perfidy of the Clintons' corruption in all of American history.
    , @Almost Missouri
    You'll have to explain to me what was so corrupt about Franklin Pierce. I thought he was pretty good in those circumstances (country verging toward civil war, coming into office on a personal tragedy).

    Harding is indeed known today for Teapot Dome and a few smaller similar things, but 1) these were more the deeds of certain cabinet members rather than him personally, 2) compared to the Clintons these were small potatoes, 3) were the higher ethical standards of that time applied to the Clintons today, we would be hanging them, and 4) at the time of Harding's death those scandals were unknown and Harding was well regarded. The Clintons are still alive and Hillary hasn't even gotten in office yet and we already know they are thoroughly corrupt. After they die (and maybe Chelsea too) and their ability to suppress adverse information passes, we'll probably learn even worse Clinton history.
  55. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=3025424

    “This isn’t even a dictatorship,” Choo Mi-ae, chairwoman of the main opposition Minjoo Party of Korea, said Thursday. “It’s a terrifying theocracy.”

    She added, “Park never communicated with the people. She never communicated with the public servants, vice ministers or ministers. She only had her spiritual communication with Choi.”

    “Choi Soon-sil reportedly said North Korea will collapse within two years,” Rep. Woo Sang-ho, floor leader of the Minjoo Party, said Thursday. “She appeared to be a shamanist prophet. If Park was captivated by her prophecy and implemented her foreign and North Korea policies, this is a serious problem.”

    Rumors spread further as it was pointed out that Park often used unusual expressions in her speeches, possibly influenced by Choi.

    “If you do not learn history properly, your soul will become abnormal,” Park said on Nov. 10, 2015. “If you wish earnestly, the entire universe will help you,” Park said in her Children’s Day speech in 2015.

    Rumors also spread that Choi had established a secret inner circle, named the “Eight Fairies,” to control state affairs. The National Intelligence Service’s logo was abruptly changed earlier this year to depict a dragon, and speculation has spread that it symbolizes the Mi-R Foundation. Mireu is an ancient Korean word for “dragon,” and Choi was accused of using the foundation to strong-arm conglomerates to make massive donations and then embezzling the money.

    Moreover, during Park’s inaugural ceremony, a tree was erected at Gwanghwamun Square with small silk purses hung from it in order to conjure good fortune.

  56. @M
    An Germany resident American I read made a case that Merkel's choices were deeply marked by choosing what she thought God would want her to do. For instance, on the refugee subject. Any truth to this you think?

    I dunno. What she publicly said made me nervous: She said if we started to protect our borders, then there’d be pictures in the TV we could not stand.

    This statement bothers me because TV is not reality: That’s at the bottom of my nervousness.

    Plus she ranks the outcome of an event ON TV higher than reality itself.

    Then there’s one more important point: There’s no problem in Germany with refugees. Public cocnsensus is: We help them in their misery.

    The unresolved problem are the migrants (most “refugees” that arrive here, are no refugees at all: They are migrants).

    Back to Angela Merkel.
    What outsiders (foreign correspondents, for example) don’t get, is the shame she feels about borders, because she once at least for practical reasons agreed with the eastern government (she was brought up in the east by a family, that had m o v e d there from the west – a thing that maybe a few hundred poeple did at all… her father was a socialist, who thought he had to go east and help build a better society…) – well: She grew up in the east, identified (in parts – her lutheran family was opposed to a lot of things happening in the east…) – she identified in parts, as did her family with this state, that had made p r i s o n e r s of most of it’s population – – by means of a wall – which meant the strictest border-control (guns shot at refugeees, trying to get o u t!).

    I’d assume she is for those w r o n g reasons against a border-protection too: She is still full of eastern guilt – and pride as well, maybe, a little bit, which confuses things even more.

    Beautiful autumn day today – I’ve been for a walk in a nearby wood on a little mountain overseeing the Lake, shimmering silvery in milky light – and what did we discuss – the fact, that there’s one more factor, that’s unresolved and strongly at work against the protection of our borders: The Internationalism of Marxist origin, that’s still alive and which gets reinforced nowadys by tourism and trade, ironically.

    And that leads me to a certain sillyness in nowadays look at poeple in general: We tend to look at them as alike, as comrades, “Brothers&Sisters” – that’s all Rousseau und Marx in shining bright colours, and that’s all fine as long as you make no reality-check – which always proves, that poeple (all poeple – maybe I disagree on this point with Steve Sailer) are build out of “crumbled wood” as Kant expressed it.

    One of the big unresolved problems in nowadays Germany is that there is no real understanding of what it means to replace religion. To make this short: Rousseau and Marx seem to be up to the task, but they are not.

    One of the big advantages of a solid Christian worldview is, that it’s basically not kitschy for a very simple reason: It knows the diffrence between heaven and earth. Maybe it overdramaticises the whole case a bit, – I’d agree on this: But it makes this diffrence.
    Most important sentence in this context: Love they neighbour like yourself – NOT: Love everybody else like yourself.

    For reasons, that would be very interesting to explore (but nobody did, as far as I know), Merkel makes the mistake on both sides of the ideologial spectrum: As a humanitarian, she tends to be of the Marxist-Rousseauist kind, and as a Christian, she is one of those, who don’t understand that Christian belief does not necessarily imply the neglection of your own vital interests (the problem is best expressed in the biblical verses I cited above: Love your neighbour like yourself is hard enough as a task – it does not mean: Love all others like yourself…).

    To end – for now – with German writer and legendary radio-man Helmut Heissenbüttel:

    No need to say more about this.

  57. I know a Korean whose family left in a hurry when the legal, economic, political, or whatever tide turned back home. He assimilated to US culture rather quickly; he married white, and he throws great football parties.

    But in one area, he went Mexican: he started a second family on the side. Simultaneously with the first.

    Well, at least the half-siblings get along. They’ll need to.

  58. @Anonymous
    Trump rally today:

    https://twitter.com/NYTnickc/status/792510299232284672

    ID’d as a Hillary plant. They’re still at it, even after the Project Veritas videos exposed their use of agents provocateurs and shills:

    https://mobile.twitter.com/TheRickyVaughn/status/792862293898002436

  59. @Hail
    Thin on real evidence, thick on wild speculation.

    The only actual evidence of wrongdoing is the president giving a copy of a speech to her personal confidant of forty years, which the latter edited. There is no evidence of anything else. In other words, this is really much ado about nothing, and arguably an order of magnitude less significant than the questionably-significant Hillary Email scandal. The South Korean opposition party, which has hated Park from the beginning, calling her a princess and unintelligent (both charges that have validity), has very cynically used this minor revelation, actually a mundane one (shock! a friend helps a friend) to whip up hysteria and promote all kinds of conspiracy theories; Koreans, being bandwagon jumpers, have followed along.

    Imagine a revelation to the effect that "Obama's personal friend edited an Obama speech." Would such a revelation cause hysteria in the USA? Would the Republicans use it to call for an impeachment? Why would it?

    More generally, don't we understand that when electing a president we are implicitly electing not the candidate alone but their close circle of confidants? Do we really expect elected officials to sequester themselves off from all friends and confidants for the duration of their terms?

    Good call. This reads like one of those “So what are they REALLY after her for?” stories.

  60. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @L Woods
    You sound like a leftist. "There are black criminals and white criminals, and black surgeons and white surgeons, so nothing to be noticed here!"

    What are you noticing, exactly? We can quantify this — who is more likely, men or women, to deceive in sexual matters (bedding), affairs, and the like? Who is more likely to deceive in family matters, leaving children with no parent? Who is more likely to deceive in work matters, racking up sentences for white collar crime?

    Women deceive more in interpersonal relations, if that’s what you’re thinking of, but the big whoppers are the domain of men.

  61. @dcite
    Projection much? Tin ear? Reaction to absurd feminist declarations that men don't have real friends? ( I have heard the occasional woman make such a claim.) A dehumanizing and unjust assumption applied to either sex, and probably part of the conspiracy to undermine social cohesion. Bound to backfire, as we see in this poor putz.

    "Slash fiction?" what the hell is that? Some bleak and turgid dream? I have dozens of books, many of unusual subject matter, but that genre passed me by.

    Without friends, some of decades duration, life wouldn't be worth the work commute. They have to capacity to cancel out the negativity of enemies. Certainly it's the same for men.

    Takes all kinds of monikers, even this commenter's.
    Eww. I'm outta here now. Think I need to talk to my friends.

    Hang in there. Just have to wade through the dross for the gems.

  62. @Peter Akuleyev
    WikiLeaks shows she and her husband routinely sell off the nation’s interest for their personal enrichment. ...In former times, they would be hanging offenses.

    I hate to defend the Clintons, but come on. Franklin Pierce would laugh at you. The US has gone through epochs of incredible government corruption before - the 1840s-50s, the 1880s-90s, not to mention Harding or JFK. The Clintons are venal and corrupt, but not the first US Presidents to be that way, and certainly not the last.

    Nixon was railroaded, that is certainly true. Compared to JFK or LBJ Nixon was a boy-scout.

    I hate to defend the Clintons, but come on.

    Really? The Clintons are in the top 1% of the top 1% of the top 1% based on influence peddling only. They have no skills for serving others. They have no inventions, no innovations and no wealth amplification techniques. Nothing like Clintonian corruption has happened before. None of your citations have any facts backing your absurd assertions of moral equivalence.

    If you hate to defend the Clintons, but fabricate claims to defend them, then maybe you should sit down for a heart-t0-heart with yourself. And in your self conversation maybe you might find the means to govern the impulses that led to your initial defense.

    There are no instances of comparable events, circumstances or outcomes matching the perfidy of the Clintons’ corruption in all of American history.

  63. @Peter Akuleyev
    WikiLeaks shows she and her husband routinely sell off the nation’s interest for their personal enrichment. ...In former times, they would be hanging offenses.

    I hate to defend the Clintons, but come on. Franklin Pierce would laugh at you. The US has gone through epochs of incredible government corruption before - the 1840s-50s, the 1880s-90s, not to mention Harding or JFK. The Clintons are venal and corrupt, but not the first US Presidents to be that way, and certainly not the last.

    Nixon was railroaded, that is certainly true. Compared to JFK or LBJ Nixon was a boy-scout.

    You’ll have to explain to me what was so corrupt about Franklin Pierce. I thought he was pretty good in those circumstances (country verging toward civil war, coming into office on a personal tragedy).

    Harding is indeed known today for Teapot Dome and a few smaller similar things, but 1) these were more the deeds of certain cabinet members rather than him personally, 2) compared to the Clintons these were small potatoes, 3) were the higher ethical standards of that time applied to the Clintons today, we would be hanging them, and 4) at the time of Harding’s death those scandals were unknown and Harding was well regarded. The Clintons are still alive and Hillary hasn’t even gotten in office yet and we already know they are thoroughly corrupt. After they die (and maybe Chelsea too) and their ability to suppress adverse information passes, we’ll probably learn even worse Clinton history.

  64. @Spotted Toad
    If anyone is ever in Saint Petersburg, I recommend the Rasputin Museum, in an old 19th century palace. You walk through the usual room after enormous room of gold inlay and mirrored chandeliers (like all the usual Saint Petersburg palaces), and then suddenly you're in a room with mirrors on all sides, and then a secret passageway brings you down to a small room with Rasputin and his killers as wax figures, playing cards I think. The story of how they tried to kill him is something else- poison, then shooting several times, then finally drowning him in the frozen Neva I think. That was a guy who took his time when it was his time to go.

  65. @Anon
    Aww now the stormtards will have to edit their awful copypasta.

    "Africa for the Africans. Most of Asia for the Asians. White countries and South Korea for everybody!

    Anti-racist is codeword for antiwhite and anti-Korean."

    They’re deplorable.

  66. […] news. The finding that the President of South Korea, Ms. Park Gyun-Hye (pronounced Pak Kune), is a “puppet” of a sleazy bunch of con artists who clame to be shamans with spiritual powers. Those sleazy shamans have been caught trafficking in state secrets, writing up her speeches, and […]

  67. Mr. Choi was a former police officer who had also been a Buddhist monk and a convert to Roman Catholicism. (He also used seven different names and was married six times by the time he died in 1994 at the age of 82.)

    How fascinating. I have known many Koreans and have to say that if you take the distribution curve for personality disorders in that community and lay it on top of, say for example, one taken from Holland, you would be surprised by how much the Korean mean is shifted to the right!

    The same goes for distributions from Iran and, to a less extent, Japan.

  68. @Pat Casey

    Dr. Houston, a 57-year-old author of 15 books who is admired by many adherents of the human potential movement and of New Age mysticism, made headlines over the weekend because of her work with another mainstream figure, Hillary Rodham Clinton. "Seances" were among the interpretations of sessions in which Dr. Houston and Mrs. Clinton supposedly conversed with Eleanor Roosevelt and Gandhi.
     
    http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/25/us/performing-seances-no-just-pushing-the-membrane-of-the-possible.html

    Hilarious. I wouldn’t even doubt it if it didn’t look so true.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS