Good Monday morning.
Here is what's on the president's agenda today:
- The president has no public events on his schedule today.
Of course white, MAGA-hat wearing Christians would bully and mock a native American elder
Of course. It took about a day before a more complete picture emerged of this purported provocative, racist interaction, but one has to be inclined to swallow the anti-Trump racist narrative with ease in order to start wagging fingers and writing hit pieces excoriating these kids without waiting for more information. I'm not referring to the mainstream media because I expect them to sell these kinds of stories -- it's all they know how to do. But people who are allegedly on the "right" jumped on these boys FAST. Any story that exactly fits the liberal racist worldview needs a timeout and closer investigation. Haven't we learned anything? Remember that Michael Brown, a promising young boy, cried, "Hands up, don't shoot" before he was shot in cold blood by a white police officer until he was a 6'4", 300 lb, adult who knocked around a convenience store clerk before he tried to steal an officer's gun and was fatally shot in self defense. Remember the Duke lacrosse players, the "Rape on Campus," and there are many others. It's always smart to wait and investigate. The media and the institutional left have an interest in cultivating a race war; they run a well-oiled machine to that effect.
From Robby Soave at Reason:
Far from engaging in racially motivated harassment, the group of mostly white, MAGA-hat-wearing male teenagers remained relatively calm and restrained despite being subjected to incessant racist, homophobic, and bigoted verbal abuse by members of the bizarre religious sect Black Hebrew Israelites, who were lurking nearby. The BHI has existed since the late 19th century, and is best describes as a black nationalist cult movement; its members believe they are descendants of the ancient Israelites, and often express condemnation of white people, Christians, and gays. DC-area Black Hebrews are known to spout particularly vile bigotry.
Here's another good rundown of the story.
Here's a tweet from a brother of one of the boys. Read the whole thread -- how sad:
Here's a list of some on the "right" who immediately joined into assist the left/media condemn these boys.
Trump comes forward with a deal, Democrats not interested
President Trump made another budget offer on Saturday, in hopes the Democrats would come to the table and an agreement could be reached so we can open the government. But alas, the Democrats will not make a deal unless Trump opens the government and tosses all his deal leverage away. Chris Wallace on FNC was incredulous that Trump wouldn't want to throw his leverage away.
"No, isn’t it really that you just want the leverage?" Wallace asked on "Fox News Sunday." "And that you figure if you don’t keep the government closed, that then they’re going to go nowhere?"
Uh YES, Chris, there is no reason the Democrats would make a deal on the wall once the government is open. They admitted they wouldn't make a deal on the wall even if Trump gave them everything they wanted and opened the government, so really, there isn't much to be done unless Trump abandons his campaign promises. The longer the government is closed, and the longer the Democrats refuse to deal while Trump makes offers, the worse it's going to look for the Dems.
Mueller's witch hunters undermine BuzzFeed story that Trump told Cohen to lie
This story was so HOT HOT HOT that all day on Friday everyone was giddy that finally *impeach Trump* was happening. Hours and hours of cable news shows talked about this story and the internet and Twitter were so excited. IT'S HAPPENING...until in a rare public appearance, Mueller's posse snuffed out the flame of impeachment.
Now here's how these stories happen to appear in the media -- and not just this story but most every story that makes it into the news cycle. Stories are pitched by professionals, a la Fusion GPS, to "journalists" at most of the major outlets; they aren't usually leaked by some do-gooder whistle-blowers. In the city of media hierarchy, BuzzFeed is basically the sewer system. "Prestige" publications like the New York Times will sometimes pass on poorly sourced stories but places like Buzzfeed will run with them. Once BuzzFeed runs a story the "prestige" publication can then write about the story in the context of "BuzzFeed is reporting..." Now here is the kicker: these "prestige" publications know the stories are weak, because they passed on running them, but nevertheless they give them headline after headline after headline but are insulated because they are just reporting what BuzzFeed is reporting. Same thing happened with the dossier: it was pitched to everyone but only BuzzFeed ran with it.
Meanwhile, BuzzFeed has doubled-down on their story.
Historical picture of the day:
And that's all I've got, now go beat back the angry mob!
But has she apologized?
Do yourself a favor and click on over and read this.
Off the cuff: In a PJM piece last week about how a rogue video editor at Seattle Fox affiliate Q-13 had doctored President Trump’s appearance during his national address on immigration and the shutdown, I was taken to task in the comment section on an issue unrelated to the report. Two commenters criticized (one harshly, one forgivingly) my use of the phrase “gender unspecified” when reporting that the television station in question did not reveal the sex of the person who had been fired for the doctoring. I used the phrase in what is apparently an old-school context, to denote male/female.
I looked into it, and found this Quillette essay: “Why We Should Stop Using the Word ‘Gender.’”
Here’s an informative pull-quote:
One interpretation is that the persistence of this sexually hazy usage of “gender” was rooted in the appeal of having a euphemistic term to distinguish the sexes, without getting too messily biological. This history seems to be also endorsed by Pinker, in The Language Instinct; he actually says here he refuses to use gender as a euphemism for the proper term of sex. The term gender, in this interpretation, would seem to be merely a delicate imposition in the interest of etiquette.
Beyond that, I quickly gathered that the word gender has been coopted by the left, and that the scientifically correct way to denote the two sexes is with the word “sex,” as in “sex unspecified.” Frankly, from a compositional standpoint, that sounds a bit clunky to me, but whatever.
After reading the Quillette essay, my ears perked up when Mr. Trump used the word gender in exactly the same context (“regardless of gender”) that I had during his follow-up White House announcement of the deal he was offering Democrats to address border insecurity and end the government shutdown.
I don’t think the president was including transsexuals in the language of his proposals. My sense is that unambiguously using the word gender to denote the traditional duality of male/female must be generational, i.e. a previous generation is unaware that the word has fallen out of favor, especially on the right.
The genius of Martin Luther King, Jr. was that he made his powerful case for civil rights, not on grievance or identity politics, but by holding the rest of America up to our founding ideals.
The postmodern Left has of course rejected all that in favor of grievance and identity politics -- because they despise our founding ideals.