Category Archives: culture

The Debil Made Me Do It

Posted on by
Reply

At least Flip Wilson’s routine was funny.  The Democrats’ and their Party’s comedy, though, is just sad.

In no particular order, it’s been low-information voters who didn’t get the message that caused Democrats to lose seats in Congress and ultimately caused Hillary Clinton to lose the Presidential election.  Or it was that we’re just too dumb to understand their message.  Or it was FBI Director Comey who spiked her campaign.  Or it was the Russians who rigged our election.  Or it was President-Elect Donald Trump who’s in cahoots with the Russians.  Or it became Republican Electors who need to do their moral duty and not vote for Trump.  Or it was a mendacious press that had it in for Clinton.  And the latest: Bill Clinton’s racist and sexist rant: it was all those angry, white men who didn’t vote for Hillary.

Now it’s Huma Abedin’s fault.  She was an enabler of Clinton’s decision to isolate herself from the public and from the nature of her campaign.

“The real anger is toward Hillary’s inner circle,” a Clinton insider told Vanity Fair for a Wednesday feature on Abedin. “They reinforced all the bad habits.”

Because her role—created by her boss (that would be Hillary Clinton for those of you following along at home)—as personal advisor and Deputy Campaign Chief meant her advising should have been taken seriously.  But it was only advice: the decisions were always those of the MFWIC (Clinton again).  And it was Clinton’s bad habits, no one else’s.

And she was too enamored of her role.

“She was enjoying the red carpet and enjoying the photo spreads much too much in my opinion,” one Clinton insider told Vanity Fair. “She enjoyed being a celebrity too much.”

Yeah, she enjoyed the spotlight on her caused by Anthony Weiner’s behavior.  Gotta be it.

It couldn’t possibly be that Clinton had no message on policy, no coherent argument on why her plan to continue, even extend, President Barack Obama’s (D) policies that have been a failure these last eight years was a good idea.  It couldn’t possibly be that in conjunction with that, Clinton simply has been a terrible campaigner.  And that she’s entirely untrustworthy in the eyes of too many Americans.  No, all of that would be Clinton doing something with her personal responsibility more concrete than just talking about taking it.

No, it’s never Democrats’ fault, and it’s never Clinton’s, either.

Intelligence Community Refuses

Posted on by
1

When the House Intelligence Committee called intel community directors—the CIA’s management, for instance—before them to testify about alleged Russian hacks and leaked CIA claims that the hacks were intended to sway the election toward the President-Elect, they refused to appear.  They also refused at the last moment, forcing the committee to cancel an already scheduled hearing into the matter.

This is unacceptable.  The committee should subpoena these men and women, and the subpoenas should be delivered by the House’s Sergeant at Arms.  If these men and women ignore the subpoenas, the House should find them in contempt (and do so again after 3 January so the contempt finding will be in effect, allowing the new DoJ which will appear after 20 January to enforce the citations).  Were it up to me, I would have held the hearing anyway, with questions addressed to the empty chairs in which those personnel would have been seated for their testimony.

On top of that, since these men and women are refusing to do their jobs, which includes testifying before the House committees with oversight of their organizations, the new budget should zero out budgets for intel community personnel in paygrades of GS-14 and above and equivalent levels—with effect from 14 December, clawbacks required.  We don’t need to spend taxpayer money on paying people who refuse to work.

Nearly as bad as this is the silence surrounding the matter.  Of the television sources, only Fox News is reporting the intel community’s refusal to testify and the House committee’s hearing cancelation.  Not CNN, not NBC, or CBS, or ABC or their online news arms are touching this.  Further, only Republican Congressmen are up in arms about this insubordination.  Not even the Democrats who insisted that hearings be held are upset over this.

That speaks volumes about bias.

It Wasn’t Political

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that the Hampshire College President, Jonathan Lash, pulled the US flag down from all campus flagpoles, along with “all other flags.”  Recall further that he took this action after he

had lowered the US flag to half-staff after Election Day[]

followed by the US flag being burned on Veterans Day.

Lash, though, as he finally was forced by the public’s hue and cry to restore our nation’s flag to its proper place atop flagpoles, is still denying that he did it for politics.

We did not lower the flag to make a political statement. … We acted solely to facilitate much-needed dialogue on our campus about how to dismantle the bigotry that is prevalent in our society.

As an aside, what you mean “we,” Paleface?  You’re the President; it was done at your order. Full stop.

More importantly, how are lowering the flag to half-staff and then taking it down altogether under the circumstances in which you ordered these things done not political statements?  Anything done with the flag beyond its normal handling is political.

And then: Lash thoroughly contradicted himself within his own statement: the free speech that is the “dialog” engendered by his actions is at the center of what is political.

Teaching Opportunity Successfully Avoided

Posted on by
Reply

Because safe spaces are more important than education spaces.

A Virginia school district has “temporarily” banned the classics, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain and To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, after a parent complained that her high school-aged son was traumatized by racial slurs used in the books.

Would a trigger warning have helped this snowflake masquerading as a Mom to do her job as a parent?  Probably not:

I keep hearing, “This is a classic, this is a classic[.]”  …  I understand this is a literature classic.  But at some point, I feel that children will not—or do not—truly get the classic part—the literature part, which I’m not disputing.  This is great literature.  But there are racial slurs in there and offensive wording that you can’t get past that.

No, the children can’t.  Not when their parents won’t let them learn how to do so.  And: I read Huck Finn in junior high and Mockingbird as a high school sophomore.  The slurs, aside from being part of the stories—they were, after all, tales of their times, another aspect of this teaching opportunity away from which this school, this “parent,” slunk away—they were minor incidents in the tales.

And: if these minor parts of the tales really are that important to today’s youth, to today’s infantile parents, then how better to teach these children how to deal with the slurs, the racism, the ugliness that still exists, for all the progress we’ve made since those days when I read this stuff without a hazmat suit to protect me, than to do it in a controlled environment where such words can be put in the contexts of their times and then in the context of our times?

The alternative, after all, is that these children will eventually leave their safe space homes and their safe space schools and encounter such behaviors out in the world without having had a chance to learn how to deal with them.  Then these children will learn how badly cheated they’ve been by those whom they thought they could trust because those homes and schools were not even close to safe because of “safe” space shielding.