Sunday, March 17, 2024

TRUMP THREATENS NUCLEAR WAR

Quoth the Orange man: "This guacamole is the bomb." 

Carolina 1 Seed in the West

GDTBATH

Bloodbath Bloodbath!

CAN YOU BELIEVE TRUMP USED THAT WORD???


ACC Tournament Final: State 84 - Carolina 76

Congrats to State.

Turley: From GA to NY: Selective Prosecution and Unequal Treatment of Left-Wing and Right-Wing Defendants

There's no denying it anymore.
Turley doesn't even mention the E. Jean Carroll farce.

Saturday, March 16, 2024

ACCT Semi-Finals: Good News / Bad News

d00k lost / State won.

Such is life.

ACC Tournament Final is Set: UNC vs. NCSU

Like old times...

Friday, March 15, 2024

Report: Trump DID Propose 10,000 National Guard Troops on 1/6/21

As Turley relentlessly argues here this offer basically refutes the claim that Trump intended for the protest to constitute an "insurrection."

New Transanity Drops: J.K. Rowling Suggested Nazis Did Not Burn "Trans" Books; THIS IS HOLOCAUST DENIAL, BIGOT

It's almost beyond belief how nutty these people are.
Did the Nazis burn books about transgenderism and/or about transgenders?
I don't know.
And frankly don't care.
The Nazis burned a lot of books. The Nazis burning a book on x doesn't make x good, and doesn't make people who are x good, and it doesn't make them "victims of the Holocaust," and it doesn't make you a "Holocaust denier" if you don't know or don't care about whether such books were burned. 
Honestly, just about the time the progressive left seems to have reached its nadir of sanity, it manages to go ahead and outdo itself.
And I'll add: this is not exactly the best time for lefties to try elbowing Jews aside in order to pretend to some sweet, sweet Holocaust victim cred...

Bottom line: J. K. Rowling is right about this. The lefties are wrong...and crazy.

[Addendum: apparently as soon as this dispute cropped up, lefties went in and altered the relevant sections of Wikipedia to create the illusion that it bolsters their case. So apparently the argument gets started, then low-rent lefty outlets like The Mary Jane post stories about it, then the lefties who run Wikipedia immediately link to those stories as sources. Apparently e.g. Rowling's page is one of the ones that's been Pravdafied...]

Judis/Teixeira: Democrats and the Rise of Racial Radicalism

Thursday, March 14, 2024

ACC Tournament: Carolina 92 - FL State 67

boom

Matt Taibbi: The New Yorker, "Andrea" Long Chu, and "The Dumbest Cover Story Ever": "Freedom of Sex"

I haven't read this New Yorker story...but, then, I don't have to. I know all the arguments and they are, indeed, stupid.
   One thing you have to realize about the left: it's an incoherent mish-mash of negative, intentionally destructive arguments. Its goal is not to say something coherent about the status quo--it's not even clear how much of the left even believes in coherence, nor how much that does believes it to be a desideratum. The contemporary left is an incoherent mass of individually incoherent quasi-literary, quasi-philosophical theories that aims to destabilize the status quo. Queer theory is one component of the left that openly admits this. At its heart, queer theory is not about non-heterosexuality--it's about undermining the intellectual foundations of society--Western civilization in particular. Capitalism, of course, is always Public Enemy Number One for them. Followed closely by the nuclear family. As Larry Correia has said, approximately: it's about destroying everything that works and replacing it with an imaginary utopia made of unicorn farts.
   If there were really such a thing as sex changes, or if the pseudo-sex-changes we can currently perform were reversible, fewer people would object to them. If people could take a pill and genuinely transform into the opposite sex--and especially if this were similarly reversible--there wouldn't be much to object to. We might even permit this for kids. But that's not what's happening. What's happening is that children are being brainwashed with incoherent, leftist, postpostmodern bullshit--brainwashed into undertaking life-destroying and semi-destroying medical procedures that that they simply are not in a position to really understand. "Gender" has become an incoherent pseudo-concept to obscure what's really going on here. (And don't get me started on the phrase "gender-affirming care"...) And "sex changes" are not sex changes at all, but sexual mutilation. And the left is insisting that children be allowed to make these decisions.
   Another problem with the left is that, in order to support their first-order policy preferences, they commonly have to presuppose a boatload of insane, pseudo-philosophical meta-positions--e.g. reality is socially constructed, truth is relative or subjective, language cannot refer to non-linguistic objects, natural kinds are not real, women, indigenous people and other allegedly oppressed groups have special "knowledges" or "ways of knowing" that evilstraightwhitemales cannot fathom, capitalism is the source of Western science and metaphysics, etc. etc. etc. To defend their first-order positions, they have to dump a whole truckload of unsupportable, generally unintelligible philosophical views onto the debate. This means, in reality, they cannot support their positions--their arguments require that they first be able to win intractable debates by defending incoherent positions. Chu can defend his conclusions only if you basically grant him premises like Capitalism created the sexes. As soon as you realize that, you should decare the debate over. It's obviously false--in fact, insane--and such arguments have no place in policy discussions. It's as if you refused to acknowledge the property line between your land and your neighbors' on the grounds that Marx questions the legitimacy of private property. Even aside from the obvious point that the burden of proof is on you (and you can't carry it), this is an egregious violation of the presuppositions of ordinary reasoned discussion. You might as well take my lawn mower and then argue that it's not really mine because we're in the Matrix and none of the physical objects we see are real...
   The left would never let the right get away with such a thing--and rightly so. If the right made another push to get creationism or intelligent design theory taught in schools, and if their alleged justifications required the acceptance of a bunch of heavy-duty metaphysics about God and the creation and original sin or whatever...or if they explicitly made appeals to faith or direct religious experience in their arguments...progressives would laugh them off the stage. As well they should. But that's exactly the sort of thing the left is doing on basically every front in the culture war.

Wednesday, March 13, 2024

"Why Would a Rape Survivor Endorse Donald Trump?"

link

Well, Mace was lying when she said Stephanopoulos was trying to "shame" her. She was, indeed, as the author claims, "playing the rape card."

Stephanopoulos was being a jackass propagandist...and would never have treated a progressive rape victim in that way. He's a partisan hack making the case for his side. 

And Mace is pushing the case for her side. Probably to some extent she's telling the truth about honoring the views of her constituents. Maybe she's doing that out of principle, maybe to stay in office. Probably to some extent she also knows that no one can stand up to the Trump steamroller. 

The "card-playing" strategy is one the right has basically learned from the left. Almost the only "argument" the left has is the playing of such cards--on behalf of self or others. That's racist/your racist; that's misogynist/you're a misogynist; that's x-phobic/you're x-phobic...blah blah blah. I hate to see the red team pick this sophistry up...OTOH, it sure seems to work for the blue team...

My own view, though, is that such strategies facilitate only Pyrrhic victories. We may win individual battles, but perhaps at the cost of helping to entrench such sophistries in the unwritten rules of our public discussions.

Also, of course: E. Jean Carroll is probably lying.

And it's all part of the illicit, anti-democratic blue-team lawfare strategy--a strategy far more harmful to the nation than the January 6th Capitol clown show.

And, of course, both sides are similarly hypocritical. The red team accepted the Clinton rape accusations, the blue team defended him. The blue team readily accepted such accusations against Trump, the reds defend him.

Then of course there's the minor technicality that Trump was not found guilty of rape...and that the whole case was yet another progressive lawfare circus... 

Monday, March 11, 2024

Everybody Crazy: George Stephanopoulos vs. Nancy Mace re: Trump / Carroll

Imagine that someone on Fox treated a woman who was a Democrat like this:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/opinions/katie-britt-border-biden-speech-sotu-obeidallah/index.html

Now, I don't see that he is trying to "shame" Mace. But I don't think he'd have asked a question like this of a Democrat known to have been a rape victim. And I can't believe he'd relentlessly press the issue in the way he does. He's just obnoxious as hell. He needs a good slap upside the head. [To be clear: I think Mace's (apparently false) accusation that GS is intending to "shame" her is reprehensible. She could have said something more like: It's not permissible to ask me that question.]
   But aside from all that: he's lying about the judgment. As York notes, Trump was not found liable for rape. It's a lie
   And that's not even to mention the fact that the whole thing is a farce--just more Democrat lawfare. Politics by other means.
   And, of course, Carroll herself is almost certainly lying.
   The whole interconnected structure of the vast, society-encompassing progressive platform is built of lies. 
   So much so that the sad, rickety red-team alternative looks downright respectable...or, well, almost so...by comparison.

Nutty Crap About Illegal Immigration, Left and Right

Everybody here is nuts.
Britt told a relevant but misleading story. 
Everybody seems to know that many women (and even children) are raped by gangs and coyotes during the trek to the U.S. border...though the left no longer seems to care about that, as illegals > women in the oppression Olympics (Again: women basically always get jostled to the bottom of the totem pole of victims.) 
Contrary to what CNN claims, Trump was right: illegal aliens bring crime, including rape, into the country. They bring drugs, including deadly fentanyl. See, they are unvetted. This is what happens when huge numbers of unvetted foreigners pour across your border...
Trump, of course, had to ratchet up the rhetoric, and ended up producing that "poisoning the blood" of the nation line. Nice. Yeah, don't say it that way. The general idea is right. The more specific metaphor--not good.
CNN, of course, does what the left always does and simply drops the illegal...whoops...I mean "undocumented"...part, and, with absolutely shameless dishonesty, pretends that the discussion is about immigrants generally. It's just unbelievable how often the left/MSM does this (hint: just about every time)...and how often it seems to work.
Oh, and, needless to say: shrieks RAAAACISM!!!!1111
Now hear this: no one is against legal immigration... And none of this has anything to do with racism.
The left merely shrieks the shriek automatically, about everything, and everyone, always.
(Though actually there are important arguments that we need to adjust it and throttle back on it a bit--a million a year is...a lot... But I don't have a view about this. I just think we have to be able to discuss it without one side shrieking RACISM!!111... Or, just keep discussing it even while they're shrieking it..)
Anyway.

Sunday, March 10, 2024

Biden Apologizes for Not Using Correct Newspeak Term for Illegal Aliens

First, 'illegal alien' is the actual term. It's a legal term (or was, until leftists purged it). There's nothing insulting about it. 'Resident alien' is also a perfectly fine term. The left often deploys the following sophistry: No human is illegal! They falsely assert that the term means that illegal aliens are somehow inherently illegal qua persons. Which makes no sense whatsoever. 'Illegal alien' is like 'illegal contractor' or 'illegal truckdriver.' Illegal aliens are foreigners in the country illegally. Illegal contractors are people contracting illegally. Etc. This is not complicated. There is, indeed, no such thing as a person being illegal qua person. Which, if nothing else were, should be your clue that that's not what such terms mean. In each case, a person is doing something in an illegal manner.
   Such bullshit isn't innocent. The progressive left has proven to be astonishingly adept at manipulating language. Its aim in cases like this is to repeatedly replace terms with negative connotations with cushier, happier-sounding terms in order to make something actually bad seem less so. 'Illegal alien' is accurate. And being in the country illegally is bad. So 'illegal alien' takes on the appropriate negative connotation. So the left then stomps its little feet and shrieks that the term is NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT. We were then told to say 'illegal immigrants.' But that's still got 'illegal' in it. So then 'undocumented immigrants.' Still not happy/dishonest enough. Next the term became just 'migrants.' See? No even mention of illegality! And heck, you can't even tell they're coming in! They may be going out. You don't know. They may just be wandering around... Recently, of course, they floated 'newcomer'... You really almost can't make this shit up.
   Other times they just insist that we follow their whimsical linguistic preferences--e.g. "people of color." Sure, it's basically 'colored people'...which sounds archaic to just about everybody...but it's different! See...it's rearranged! One is basically a racial slur, bigot! The other is the right one! The left's impressionistic linguistic preferences are to be our commands...
   Enforcing its preferences even when they don't matter, however, also serves the purpose of conditioning people to do as their told, linguistically...
   Of course, the really important thing is that we not refer to the murderers of American girls in politically incorrect terms...:

    

   And as for "they built this country"...wut?
   The left has just lost its mind. It can never come to rest on a reasonable position--e.g. the standard American view that legal immigrants are welcome, but illegal ones are not. The internal, radicalizing logic of the left pushes it ever leftward. If not defeated politically by saner movements, this internal, radicalizing logic ultimately leads to the elimination of borders, of distinctions between citizens and non-citizens, and of nations themselves. It's not like this should come as a surprise--the vanguard of the left has made it clear for a hundred years that it wants to elminate nations. The vanguard, however, translates its destructive revolutionary ends into the ooey-gooey language of empathy and inclusion attractive to the trailing edge of the movement.
   A nation that imports millions of third-world immigrants becomes that much more like the third world. Slowing accepting reasonable numbers of legal immigrants who assimilate and move toward citizenship is one thing. What the Democrats have inflicted on us is something else entirely.

[Here's a near-future leftist cause: "Non-Citizen Suffrage"]