Search Results

WHEN EVEN SALON WON’T BUY YOUR SMEARS: Calling Jeff Sessions “racist” conveniently ignores the work he’s done for Alabama’s black community.

AND WITHOUT A COMPASS: The Democratic Party enters the wilderness.

Lisa Boothe:

What is left is the reality that the Democratic Party has been propped up by the personal likability of President Obama that pushed them past the finish line in 2008 and 2012. Now they are grappling with what is next in a post-Obama landscape.

But instead of shifting leadership or messaging strategies, they are poised to reelect the same people and failed ideas that led them into the darkness of irrelevancy. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco liberal, will likely stay at the helm. Rep. Ben Lujan, who ran the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and picked up only an embarrassing six seats for his party in the House, will stay in command as well. Chuck Schumer has already been tapped to lead Democrats in the Senate as minority leader.

A separate race for the Democratic National Committee has exposed how liberal and out of touch the party truly is right now. Candidate Rep. Keith Ellison, who once called for a separate country for black Americans, has received the endorsement of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. Ellison has also been accused of anti-Semitism and has ties to the Nation of Islam. The Daily Caller has also identified law school columns in which Ellison calls the Constitution “best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples.”

The Democratic Party will likely continue its sharp turn left.

Steve’s Second Law of Holes says that when you’re opponent is in one, hand them a bigger and nicer shovel.

CIVIL RIGHTS UPDATE: After Trump Victory, Minorities Flock to Gun Stores.

According to NBC News, minorities are heading to the gun stores to arm up following the victory of Donald Trump in the presidential election.

After Donald Trump’s win, Yolanda Scott is upgrading the crowbar she keeps in her purse to a small-caliber pistol.

Scott, an African-American, is one of many minorities who have been flocking to gun stores to protect themselves, afraid Trump’s victory will incite more hate crimes.

“You feel that racists now feel like they can attack us just because the president is doing it,” Earl Curtis, the owner of Blue Ridge Arsenal in Chantilly, Virginia, told NBC News.

I hope and suspect we’ll see a decrease in racially motivated attacks, now that the Race Agitator-in-Chief is on his way out. But even if we don’t, there’s still reason to applaud any American for exercising their constitutionally recognized right to self-defense.

Also in the plus column: Watching gun-grabbers twist themselves into knots explaining why this time is different.

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Democrats, Not Trump, Racialize Our Politics.

Heather Mac Donald:

The most absurd Democratic meme to emerge from the party’s ballot-box defeat is the claim that it is Donald Trump, rather than Democrats, who engages in “aggressive, racialized discourse,” in the words of a Los Angeles Times op-ed. By contrast, President Barack Obama sought a “post-racial, bridge-building society,” according to New York Times reporter Peter Baker. Obama’s post-racial efforts have now “given way to an angry, jeering, us-against-them nation,” writes Baker, in a front-page “news” story.

Tell that valedictory for “post-racial bridge-building” to police officers, who have been living through two years of racialized hatred directed at them in the streets, to the applause of many Democratic politicians. Black Lives Matter rhetoric consists of slogans like: “CPD [Chicago Police Department] KKK, how many children did you kill today?” “Fuck the police,” and “Racist, killer cops.” Officers have been assassinated by Black Lives Matter-inspired killers who set out to kill whites in general and white police officers in particular. Gun murders of law enforcement officers are up 67 percent this year through November 23, following five ambushes and attacks over the November 18 weekend that left a San Antonio police officer and a U.S. marshall dead. A few days before those weekend shootings, anarchist wannabes in Austin led a counting chant based on the template: “What’s better than X dead cops? X + 1 Dead Cops.”

President Obama welcomed Black Lives Matter activists several times to the White House. He racialized the entire criminal-justice system, repeatedly accusing it of discriminating, often lethally, against blacks. At the memorial service for five Dallas police officers gunned down in July 2016, Obama declared that black parents were right to fear that “something terrible may happen when their child walks out the door”—that the child will be shot by a cop simply for being “stupid.”


PAUL MIRENGOFF: Dems’ smear campaign against Sessions likely to backfire.


Imagine you are one of the anti-Trump folks who believe we just elected a racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-semitic, science-denying dictator. Let’s say that’s the movie playing in your mind. That’s some scary stuff.

Now imagine watching the news as Trump reveals in slow-motion that he’s flexible and pragmatic on just about everything. . . .

As Trump continues to demonstrate that he was never the incompetent monster his critics believed him to be, the critics will face an identity crisis. They either have to accept that they understand almost nothing about how the world works – because they got everything wrong about Trump – or they need to double-down on their current hallucination. Most of his critics will double-down. That’s how normal brains work.

And that brings us to our current situation. As Trump continues to defy all predictions from his critics, the critics need to maintain their self-images as the smart ones who saw this new Hitler coming. And that means you will see hallucinations like you have never seen. It will be epic.

The reason this will be so fun to watch is that we rarely get to see a situation in which the facts so vigorously violate a hallucination. Before Trump won the presidency everyone was free to imagine the future they expected. But as Trump continues to do one reasonable thing after another, his critics have a tough choice. They can either…

1. Reinterpret their self-images from wise to clueless.


2. Generate an even stronger hallucination. (Cognitive dissonance.)

If Trump’s critics take the second option – and most of them will – it means you will see a lot of pretzel-logic of the type that is necessary hold onto the illusion that Trump is still a monster despite continuing evidence to the contrary.

Stay tuned. Buy popcorn.

REALIGNMENT: Will the Midwest Stay Republican? The Democrats should probably spend the next four years calling midwesterners ignorant racists to make sure that doesn’t happen.

Related: What Happened In Minnesota: “Although Donald Trump narrowly lost the state of Minnesota to Hillary Clinton, Minnesota Republicans achieved remarkable results in legislative races. Republicans amplified their majority to an unprecedented number for a presidential-year election in the state House of Representatives and captured a one-vote majority in the state Senate (again, in a presidential election year when the turnout advantage usually accrues to Democrats). The result in the state Senate were striking as well. As Patrick Coolican put it in the Star Tribune: ‘Senate Republicans have endured the indignities of minority status for all but two of the past 44 years[.]'”

YES: Untrustworthy journalists left us vulnerable to fake news.

Each January, tens of thousands of pro-lifers descend upon our nation’s capitol to mark the solemn occasion of the Roe v. Wade anniversary. That’s the month in 1973 the Supreme Court used a fake law to create a fake right to kill our own offspring, and a body count that has now reached well over 50 million began.

Each January, this mass demonstration of conviction rarely gets more than perfunctory coverage by major U.S. newspapers, cable news networks and the nightly broadcast news. However, last weekend a few blocks away from the site of the march, the meeting of a couple hundred racists trying to rebrand themselves as the “alt-right” received days of coverage.

Type “March for Life” into Google News and 4.6 million results come up. That’s a pretty hefty number until you type in “alt right” and see it returns more than 6 million. How come a term most of us hadn’t heard of, until the just-concluded 2016 presidential election, gets more attention than a national protest that is older than Google itself?

Talk about your fake news.

But a different kind of fake news spread on social media is what a growing chorus of journalists, liberals and tech leaders (three overlapping groups obviously) at least partially blame for Donald Trump’s election victory.

For most Americans, it is hardly a new phenomenon. It’s been going on for quite some time, actually: Dan Rather’s fake gotcha story on George W. Bush during the 2004 election. ABC News’ failure to disclose ties between George Stephanopoulos and Hillary Clinton before his fake interview about the Clinton Foundation. The more than 24 “journalists” who took their fake objectivity with them to work in the Obama administration. When CNN, PBS NewsHour,, The Washington Post, Slate and many others thought fake news was kinda cool because the fake news was written by liberal comedians for cable satire shows.

See, our industry has been peddling quite a bit of hackery and partisanship as “news” for years now, so the public no longer trusts us.

To be fair, why should we?


For now, liberal media is filled with doomsy prognostics and rise-up protest pieces as progressives exhort their people to form a sort of moral fifth column against the Trump regime. It’s a group, says Guardian writer Steven Thrasher, that will give “hell to anyone who tries to normalize the racist, misogynist, xenophobic bully who will soon be president.”

But if they truly want change, the left needs to move beyond a feelings-based platform for something far more tangible and effective.

At best, social justice folks should trade their victim-based ideology for a movement far more rooted in accountability and achievement rather than suffering. At the very least, progressives must learn to contend with — and ultimately sympathize with — feelings other than their own.

He’s right, but I’m not holding my breath on this one.

WHEN REPUBLICANS USED OBAMA’S MIDDLE NAME, THEY WERE CALLED RACIST: If these people had no double standards, they would have no standards at all. Poor Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III.


NEWS YOU CAN USE: “If your neighbor isn’t wearing a sheet, stop calling him racist”; and other helpful advice in Andrew Klavan’s “Alternative 12-Step Response to Trump.”

SCOTT ADAMS: “The only people who will think Trump is a racist going forward are people who haven’t read this article. If you find someone like that, send them the link. This piece is a brilliant service to the country. Breathtaking.”


Back in October 2015, I wrote that the picture of Trump as “the white power candidate” and “the first openly white supremacist candidate to have a shot at the Presidency in the modern era” was overblown. I said that “the media narrative that Trump is doing some kind of special appeal-to-white-voters voodoo is unsupported by any polling data”, and predicted that:

If Trump were the Republican nominee, he could probably count on equal or greater support from minorities as Romney or McCain before him.

Now the votes are in, and Trump got greater support from minorities than Romney or McCain before him. You can read the Washington Post article, Trump Got More Votes From People Of Color Than Romney Did, or look at the raw data (source).

Trump made gains among blacks. He made gains among Latinos. He made gains among Asians. The only major racial group where he didn’t get a gain of greater than 5% was white people. I want to repeat that: the group where Trump’s message resonated least over what we would predict from a generic Republican was the white population. . . .

I stick to my thesis from October 2015. There is no evidence that Donald Trump is more racist than any past Republican candidate (or any other 70 year old white guy, for that matter). All this stuff about how he’s “the candidate of the KKK” and “the vanguard of a new white supremacist movement” is made up. It’s a catastrophic distraction from the dozens of other undeniable problems with Trump that could have convinced voters to abandon him. That it came to dominate the election cycle should be considered a horrifying indictment of our political discourse, in the same way that it would be a horrifying indictment of our political discourse if the entire Republican campaign had been based around the theory that Hillary Clinton was a secret Satanist. Yes, calling Romney a racist was crying wolf. But you are still crying wolf.

I avoided pushing this point any more since last October because I didn’t want to look like I was supporting Trump, or accidentally convince anyone else to support Trump. But since we’re past the point where that matters anymore, I want to present my case. . . .

First, I want to go over Donald Trump’s official, explicit campaign message. Yes, it’s possible for candidates’ secret feelings to differ from their explicit messages, but the things they say every single day and put on their website and include in their speeches are still worth going over to see what image they want to project.

Trump’s official message has been the same vague feel-good pro-diversity rhetoric as any other politician.

Read the whole thing.

BEGIN THE HEALING, KANYE-STYLE: Kanye West ‘would’ve voted for Trump’ at US elections.

Kanye West has said he would have voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential elections. Speaking at a concert in San Jose, California, the rapper – who has in the past been a vocal supporter of the Democratic party – said he did not vote last week but if he had, his allegiance would have been with the Republican representative rather than Hillary Clinton.

West’s statement, which was met with boos from the audience in San Jose, was caught on camera by one Twitter user.

West elaborated throughout the show. He stated that while he admired Trump’s debating style – saying that it was “genius” because it “worked” – his true reason for backing the Republican was that his win would inspire racists to reveal themselves. “This is the beginning,” West said, according to one attendee, adding: “Neither candidate would fix racism in this country.”

According to reports from the show, West, who has said he will run for president in 2020, also stated that black people should “stop focusing on racism”. “We are in a racist country,” he said. “Period.”

This country has certainly kept Kanye down.

WHY ARE TRUMP OPPONENTS SO RACIST? Kanye West shocker: I felt ‘persecuted as black man’ supporting Trump.


This could be fun, and a game you can play for as long as it takes to staff Trump’s cabinet — and beyond!

BEGIN THE HEALING, DAILY SHOW-STYLE: ‘Daily Show’ Correspondent Sees Racist White House As ‘A Great Thing’

KURT SCHLICHTER: The Democrats Won’t Autopsy Their Own Corpse.

You could try to figure out where you went wrong losing so many voters who you used to have sewn up. The idea is to figure out how you might be able to prevent similar results in the future. Some call it a “post-event analysis.” In the Army – for the goatee n’ scarf gang, that’s the one that fights on the ground – we call it an “after action review.” Coroners call it an “autopsy.”

And you’ll never, ever do it. Why? Because you are liberals and you already have your answers.

Everyone is racist.

Everyone is sexist.

Everyone is stupid.

Everyone but you, that is. You, the ones the racist, sexist, stupid people beat like a NFL player’s wife.

And speaking of the NFL, have you noticed how its own autopsy of its own dying ratings also seems to have a predetermined outcome, one that studiously avoids any unwelcome conclusions?

To be fair, the GOP’s own 2012 “autopsy” was a joke.

JOURNALISM: Ira Stoll: The Borking of Bannon — or Why Trump’s Breitbart Pick Bests the New York Times’ Arthur Sulzberger.

The effort by the Times to depict Mr. Bannon as the second coming of Adolph Hitler and David Duke initially struck me as odd. I say that primarily because when my book JFK, Conservative came out, Mr. Bannon had me on his radio show. He was gracious, friendly and supportive. He’d clearly read the book, which has plenty of material about Kennedy and Israel and the Soviet Jews, and which doesn’t exactly leave it a mystery where I am coming from on those issues. I assume he realized I was Jewish from my biography indicating past work for the Forward and the Jerusalem Post.

In the past few days, additional testimony and information has emerged. Ben Shapiro, a critic of Breitbart‘s who left the site with some acrimony, nevertheless wrote: “I have no evidence that Bannon’s a racist or that he’s an anti-Semite; the Huffington Post’s blaring headline ‘WHITE NATIONALIST IN THE WHITE HOUSE’ is overstated, at the very least.” No mention of that in the New York Times.

As David Bernstein has pointed out, the Breitbart site also includes totally philosemitic and innocuous content, such as this story headlined: “1000 Attend Giant Shabbat Dinner in Tel Aviv for Global Shabbat Project.” No mention of that in the New York Times.

It’s interesting, too, that the New York Times that is so suddenly on newfound hair-trigger alert for antisemitism would publish, in the same issue as all the paranoid coverage of Mr. Bannon, an article headlined: “76 Experts Urge Donald Trump to Keep Iran Deal.” Among these “experts” are Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, whose view of the “Israel lobby” was endorsed by David Duke, and whose book and Harvard Kennedy School paper were widely condemned by Jewish groups for trafficking in long-discredited and harmful stereotypes of Jewish influence. Yet the Times news article doesn’t even mention their involvement, let alone their sordid history. It’s a double standard — almost enough to make one think that what the Times is worried about isn’t antisemitism, but Republicans in the White House.

To be fair, that’s always what they’re worried about. But getting this kind of pushback — in The Algemeiner, no less — is a pretty brutal blow.

ELIZABETH NOLAN BROWN: There Is No Wave Of Trump-Inspired Hate Crimes. “The bulk of racist graffiti incidents appear to have happened around middle- and high-schools, which doesn’t make their messages any less hurtful, I’m sure, but does suggest a phenomenon driven by mean and immature kids rather than rogue bands of serious neo-Nazis. . . . The ‘hate acts reported across the country’ in the wake of Trump’s victory seem mostly relegated to graffiti at a few schools and one carjacking which may or may not have had anything to do with racial or religious prejudice. . . . Pushers of this ‘rampant racist crimewave’ in Trump’s America story will dismiss posts like this one, and anyone who challenges their narrative, as naive, enabling of racists, or unconscionably non-empathetic to non-straight, white, Christian Americans. But I’m not the one trying to stoke false terror in vulnerable people or over-hype America’s levels of hate for pageviews and Twitter faves.”

Related: Stop Sharing News That Trans Teen Suicides Spiked Post-Election—It’s Not Just Wrong, But Dangerous to LGBT Youth: This false epidemic going viral could drive real suicide attempts among struggling teens.


After all, these same voters have watched as every Republican candidate in recent memory has been accused of waging a “War on Women.” If Democrats are going to claim that Mitt Romney and John McCain hate women (and they did), then they shouldn’t be surprised when voters ignore them when they say Donald Trump hates women. If every Republican is a misogynist, then no Republican is.

While many liberals have dismissed the idea of political correctness as a right-wing manufactured hysteria, it is in fact a real thing. That Trump has stretched its meaning to encompass pretty much any horrible thing he wants to say makes its existence no less real.

Conservative white Americans have watched (often fearfully) as liberal cultural elites demand that everyone fall in line with their agenda or risk being called a homophobe, racist or misogynist. The concept of persuasion and debate has been overridden by a quest for immediate and forced cultural conformity. My friend Sally Kohn, the liberal commentator, summed up the left wing view fairly honestly when she told me in a recent debate over free speech that, “If [conservatives on campus] feel like they can no longer speak against positive social change, good.”

This is a paradigm where honest disagreement about abortion makes one a woman-hater, holding orthodox religious views on marriage equates to gay-bashing, and refusing to cop to white privilege — even if you are a working class white person struggling economically — defines you as a racist.

It’s basically a culture of hate, when you think about it.


Instead, they targeted the emerging electorate of young, Latino and African-American voters who catapulted Mr. Obama to victory twice, expecting, mistakenly, that this coalition would support her in nearly the same numbers. They did not.

In the end, Mr. Trump’s simple promise to “Make America Great Again,” a catchphrase Mrs. Clinton dismissed as a vow to return to a racist past already long disappeared, would draw enough white Americans to the polls to make up for his low minority support.

“The emerging demographic majority isn’t quite there yet,” said Anita Dunn, a Democratic strategist and former White House communications director. “The idea you can get to a presidential campaign and just press a button and they’ll vote, it’s not there yet.”

Mrs. Clinton had planned to conclude her 19-month campaign with an elaborate victory celebration on Tuesday night, complete with confetti shaped like glass shards that would fall from the glass ceiling of the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center in Midtown Manhattan — an extravagant production to mark the history of the evening.

Instead, in a hastily scheduled speech in a dreary hotel ballroom on Wednesday, Mrs. Clinton gave her concession speech, declaring the country “more deeply divided than we thought.”

A few thoughts. (1) Is it Bill leaking this “they should have listened to Bill” story?

(2) In 2000, there was a similar happening, where former Tennessee Governor (and politico extraordinaire) Ned Ray McWherter tried to warn Al Gore that he would lose Tennessee if he didn’t adjust his campaign, only to be blown off by staffers who didn’t even really know who he was, causing Al to lose the state and the election; and

(3) The big one: What if minority voters just won’t turn out for non-minority candidates any more? That’s a real problem for the Democrats, especially if all the racial politics they pursue in order to try to motivate minority voters (Black Lives Matter, immigration protests, etc.) actually serve to make minorities less likely to vote for whites, even if they’re Democrats. And if working-class whites start to vote Republican the way minorities have voted Democratic — and all that racial politics is likely to encourage that — the Dems are in trouble.



IT’S JUST BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE SUDDENLY TURNED RACIST: Trump’s Key To Victory: Counties Obama Carried. “Of the nearly 700 counties that twice sent Obama to the White House, a stunning one-third flipped to support Trump. Trump also won 194 of the 207 counties that voted for Obama either in 2008 or 2012. . . . The Obama-Trump counties were critical in delivering electoral victories for Trump. Many of them fall in states that supported Obama in 2012, but Trump in 2016.”

IF THEY DID THIS WITH OBAMA IT WOULD BE RACIST: In NYC — Protests include a Trump effigy hanging from a noose.

Remember, nooses used to have all sorts of connotations, from the Old West of spaghetti westerns like Hang ‘Em High to generalized populist revolt. But it was decreed a while back that the only possible connotation of a noose nowadays is racist lynching.

So why are anti-Trump protesters so racist?


Back in 2003, a very unusual TV pilot called Dirty Jobs, Forrest-Gumped its way onto The Discovery Channel and found an audience – a big one. For Discovery, this was a problem. You see, Dirty Jobs didn’t look like anything else on their channel. It wasn’t pretty or careful. It took place in sewers and septic tanks, and featured a subversive host in close contact with his 8-year old inner child who refused to do second takes. Everyone agreed that Dirty Jobs was totally “off-brand” and completely inappropriate for Discovery. Everyone but the viewers. The ratings were just too big to ignore, so the pilot got a green-light, and yours truly finally got a steady gig.

But here’s the thing – Dirty Jobs didn’t resonate because the host was incredibly charming. It wasn’t a hit because it was gross, or irreverent, or funny, or silly, or smart, or terribly clever. Dirty Jobs succeeded because it was authentic. It spoke directly and candidly to a big chunk of the country that non-fiction networks had been completely ignoring. In a very simple way, Dirty Jobs said “Hey – we can see you,” to millions of regular people who had started to feel invisible. Ultimately, that’s why Dirty Jobs ran for eight seasons. And today, that’s also why Donald Trump is the President of the United States.


Last week, three old friends – people I’ve known for years – each requested to be “unfriended” by anyone who planned on voting for Trump. Honestly, that was disheartening. Who tosses away a friendship over an election? Are my friends turning into those mind-numbingly arrogant celebrities who threaten to move to another country if their candidate doesn’t win? Are my friends now convinced that people they’ve known for years who happen to disagree with them politically are not merely mistaken – but evil, and no longer worthy of their friendship?

For what it’s worth, Carol, I don’t think Donald Trump won by tapping into America’s “racist underbelly,” and I don’t think Hillary lost because she’s a woman. I think a majority of people who voted in this election did so in spite of their many misgivings about the character of both candidates. That’s why it’s very dangerous to argue that Clinton supporters condone lying under oath and obstructing justice. Just as it’s equally dangerous to suggest a Trump supporter condones gross generalizations about foreigners and women.

These two candidates were the choices we gave ourselves, and each came with a heaping helping of vulgarity and impropriety. Yeah, it was dirty job for sure, but the winner was NOT decided by a racist and craven nation – it was decided by millions of disgusted Americans desperate for real change. The people did not want a politician. The people wanted to be seen. Donald Trump convinced those people that he could see them. Hillary Clinton did not.

Read the whole thing. And Trump should take Rowe up on this offer: “I’ll make the same offer to President Trump that I did to President Obama – to assist as best I can in any attempt to reinvigorate the skilled trades, and shine a light on millions of good jobs that no one seems excited about pursuing.”

SHE CHOSE…POORLY: Juliette Ochieng (aka “Baldilocks”) smacks down racist illiberal liberal.



I wrote a whole book about this called The Obama Hate Machine. This President has been the subject of more ugly personal attacks, mean attacks aimed at him personally, not at his policies, than any President since Abraham Lincoln, fueled by the Koch brothers and carried, of course, mainly on Fox News and by Rush Limbaugh. Joe, we just saw some of those clips. They called him a socialist. They have called him a racist.

You know, they’ve called him a communist. I mean, street thug, all the name-calling. And it continues. But I have to say this, Reverend Al. I don’t blame the media entirely, you know. It’s John Boehner and Mitch McConnell who picked it up. Rush Limbaugh said I hope he fails.

—Leftwing commentator Bill Press, appearing on Al Sharpton’s MSNBC ‘s show, PoliticsNation, January 24, 2014.



—Bill Press, today.

“COMMENTARY: THE UNBEARABLE SMUGNESS OF THE PRESS,” as diagnosed by Will Rahn, who came to CBS News via the Daily Caller:

So much for that. The audience for our glib analysis and contempt for much of the electorate, it turned out, was rather limited. This was particularly true when it came to voters, the ones who turned out by the millions to deliver not only a rebuke to the political system but also the people who cover it. Trump knew what he was doing when he invited his crowds to jeer and hiss the reporters covering him. They hate us, and have for some time.

And can you blame them? Journalists love mocking Trump supporters. We insult their appearances. We dismiss them as racists and sexists. We emote on Twitter about how this or that comment or policy makes us feel one way or the other, and yet we reject their feelings as invalid.

It’s a profound failure of empathy in the service of endless posturing. There’s been some sympathy from the press, sure: the dispatches from “heroin country” that read like reports from colonial administrators checking in on the natives. But much of that starts from the assumption that Trump voters are backward, and that it’s our duty to catalogue and ultimately reverse that backwardness. What can we do to get these people to stop worshiping their false god and accept our gospel?

We diagnose them as racists in the way Dark Age clerics confused medical problems with demonic possession. Journalists, at our worst, see ourselves as a priestly caste. We believe we not only have access to the indisputable facts, but also a greater truth, a system of beliefs divined from an advanced understanding of justice.

As Rahn writes (and it’s astonishing his article got published by a news division whose president is the brother of Obama’s disastrous middle eastern guru Ben Rhodes),  “The mood in the Washington press corps is bleak, and deservedly so.”

How bleak? This was a tweet CBS published, and then deleted yesterday:


Found via Kate of Small Dead Animals, who has video of Milo Yiannopoulos surveying the departed lifeboats from the MSM’s Titanic as Trump was accepting his victory early Wednesday morning.

UPDATE: And again: No, THIS is deplorable: Mother Jones’ Clara Jeffery compares Trump’s win to 9/11.


● “We have proof, in exit polls, that white women will pawn their humanity for the safety of white supremacy.”

What Happened on Election Day, The New York Times, yesterday.

Due to the double standards being played by the mainstream media, the Clintons have been able to hide their racist skeletons.  The Clintons’ “Birth of a Nation” tactics have gone unnoticed by many White people, but best believe that African-Americans peeped it in South Carolina and definitely in Pennsylvania as we witnessed Hillary chant over and over again to her predominately White audience “he’s not one of us”and “I will fight for you.”   Well, people here’s the iceberg to HRC’s already sinking Titanic:  The United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC). The UDC is a neo-Confederate organization that is affiliated with white supremacist groups including: the Council of Conservative Citizens and the League of the South, to name a few.  The organization was formed in 1894, and limits its membership to white women who are related to Confederate veterans of the “War Between the States.”  Now how are the Clintons affiliated with them? Oh, they’ve  just only written letters lavishing praise upon the organizations values and ideology for more than 10 years!!  I can’t believe this woman has audacity to say she’s more electable.

The Clintons’ Link to White Supremacist Group-UDC, the Daily Kos, May 8, 2008.

An unhinged tirade by Air America Radio host Randi Rhodes has led to an unprecedented suspension from the network, according to its new management and several left- wing websites. This is a breaking story with details still emerging.

In a rant so salty it could make a sailor blush, Rhodes repeatedly called Hillary a “big f***ing whore”, to both cheers and jeers from the audience. The afternoon drive talker was there on behalf of Air America at an event sponsored by the local affiliate.

In addition, Rhodes referred to former Democrat vice presidential candidate [and Hillary campaigner in ’08] Geraldine Ferraro  as a “David Duke in Drag”.

Randi Rhodes Suspended; Calls Hillary ‘Big F—ing Whore,’ NewsBusters, April 3, 2008.

If Hillary pulls it out in Pennsylvania, and she could, and if she follows it up in Indiana, she can make a credible case that she deserves to be the candidate; these last primaries will show which of the two Democratic candidates is better at overcoming the bias of a vast chunk of the population that has never in its history had to vote for anyone but a candidate who could have been their father or their brother or their son, and who has never had to think of the president of the United States as anyone other than someone they might have been had circumstances been just slightly different.

Hillary’s case is not an attractive one, because what she’ll essentially be saying (and has been saying, although very carefully) is that she can attract more racist white male voters than Obama can. Nonetheless, and as I said, she has a case.

—Nora Ephron, “White Men,” the Huffington Post, April 20, 2008.

— Father Micheal Pfleger, in Obama’s Trinity United Church, circa 2007-2008. In May of 2008, CNN reported that “Obama has known Pfleger for more than 20 years.”

YES: What most people haven’t realized yet is the extent to which Donald Trump’s election victory is the unintended legacy of President Obama.

Part of the reason Democrats failed to realize the precariousness of their situation is because they talked themselves into the theory of an Emerging Democratic Majority. The idea was that racial minorities will inevitably constitute a growing portion of voters, while old white men are inevitably dying off.

So even as President Obama was elected on an illusory image as someone who could unite the country and put racial politics behind us, the Democrats’ whole electoral strategy was based on appealing to racial politics. Obama’s two election victories depended in large part on increased turnout by minority voters, who voted in unusually high percentages to elect and re-elect the first black president.

This electoral strategy fit well with the inclinations of a politician who had actually been brought up neck deep in racial politics. So we saw President Obama pass up every opportunity to be a calming and uniting figure in racial controversies from the Beer Summit to Trayvon Martin to Ferguson to Black Lives Matter. While he quietly demurred to the idea that all of his critics must be racists, he didn’t exactly go out of his way to discourage his supporters from making that argument.

It’s not just that Hillary Clinton couldn’t replicate Obama’s mobilization of minority voters. (It appears, against all logic and reason, that Donald Trump got a higher percentage of the black and Hispanic vote than the earnest, innocuous Mitt Romney.) Even worse, the Democrats’ constant stoking of racial politics provoked a backlash, often in ugly forms, among blue-collar whites who are tired of being targeted as the enemy—which once again delivered the Reagan Democrats to Trump.


Related: Why The Latino Vote Didn’t Save Hillary: “Given the bad blood between Trump and Latinos, one of the biggest surprises on Election Night was that so many Latinos ended up voting for their tormentor. According to CNN’s exit polls, about 27 percent of Latinos voted for Trump. Exit polls from The New York Times put the figure at 29 percent. This means that Trump did better with Hispanics than Bob Dole in 1996 (21 percent), and wound up comparable to Mitt Romney in 2012 (27 percent). . . . To understand the concept of ‘Latinos for Trump,’ the first thing you have to do is to accept that Latino voters aren’t monolithic, one-dimensional, or single-issue oriented. Like the Boston Irish of the 20th century, some of us may define ourselves first by our ethnicity while others just see ourselves as Americans. Period.”

If Trump and the GOP are smart, they’ll pursue policies, and rhetoric, that encourage more of the latter.

I’M SO OLD I CAN REMEMBER WHEN “TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY” WAS A RACIST PHRASE: Anti-Trump Protesters March In Downtown Boston. “Chants of ‘My Body My Choice,’ ‘Black Lives Matter’ and ‘Love Trumps Hate’ reverberated around the park. Protesters, many of who said they feel unsafe now, argued they want to take back the country.”

UPDATE: Twitter Erupts With Calls For Donald Trump To Be Assassinated.

Plus: Rioting Snowflakes: Hillary Fanatics Burn Flag, Threaten To Kill “Not My President” Trump.

SO JOHN FUND EMAILS ME THIS “MUST READ” PIECE FROM . . . GLENN GREENWALD? Hey, when he’s right, he’s right. Democrats, Trump, and the Ongoing, Dangerous Refusal to Learn the Lesson of Brexit. “The parallels between the U.K.’s shocking approval of the Brexit referendum in June and the U.S.’ even more shocking election of Donald Trump as president last night are overwhelming. Elites (outside of populist right-wing circles) aggressively unified across ideological lines in opposition to both. Supporters of Brexit and Trump were continually maligned by the dominant media narrative (validly or otherwise) as primitive, stupid, racist, xenophobic, and irrational. In each case, journalists who spend all day chatting with one another on Twitter and congregating in exclusive social circles in national capitals — constantly re-affirming their own wisdom in an endless feedback loop — were certain of victory. Afterward, the elites whose entitlement to prevail was crushed devoted their energies to blaming everyone they could find except for themselves, while doubling down on their unbridled contempt for those who defied them, steadfastly refusing to examine what drove their insubordination. The indisputable fact is that prevailing institutions of authority in the West, for decades, have relentlessly and with complete indifference stomped on the economic welfare and social security of hundreds of millions of people. . . . Trump vowed to destroy the system that elites love (for good reason) and the masses hate (for equally good reason), while Clinton vowed to manage it more efficiently.”

“SO, ABOUT LAST NIGHT …” In his column at the Washington Post, Sonny Bunch of the conservative Washington Free Beacon writes:

There’s something to be said for the idea that Trump rode a wave of white resentment into the White House. But this is, at best, a half-truth. I’ll discuss the demographics in a moment; for now, let’s focus on the resentment. “Family Guy”‘s Seth MacFarlane made the totally reasonable point that “the Left expended so much energy over the last several years being outraged over verbal missteps, accidental innuendo, ‘tasteless tweets’ … in the name of clickbait, that when the REAL threat to equality emerged, we’d cried wolf too many times to be heard.”

This is a variation on the “But he fights!” defense/critique of Donald Trump. He gives voice to people who have spent the social media age watching viral outrage after viral outrage consume news cycles and destroy lives, to people who look at the silliness on college campuses and recoil at the thought of giving such institutions tens of thousands of dollars to fill their children’s heads with nonsense ideas. As Robby Soave noted at Reason, “Trump won because he convinced a great number of Americans that he would destroy political correctness.”

* * * * * * * *

Twitter created a series of impenetrable bubbles this cycle, and bubbles of this sort are not healthy for members of the media. They’re not healthy for anyone, really, but they’re doubly unhealthy for those of us who would dare to think they can or should shape the national narrative. If Democrats’ takeaway from last night is “the people of this country are filled with hatred,” as my own bubble suggests it might be, they will learn no lessons and gain no weapons with which to combat Trump and his successors going forward.

I don’t know if it’s fair to say that it was Twitter that created those impenetrable bubbles, or if it was simply one of the many platforms available to amplify and broadcast them.

During the 1960 presidential election, at the height of mass-media, mass-production, and the concomitant federal government shaped by the socialist New Deal, Nixon and Kennedy shared remarkably similar midcentury centrist views on most issues, from civil rights to the role of religion in America to the Cold War. But virtually every election since has seen pitched battles between two diametrically opposed worldviews: the radical chic anger of the McGovernites versus Nixon’s Great Society-esque foreign and domestic policies. Jimmy Carter’s big government malaise versus Reagan’s Goldwater-inspired conservatism. Al Gore’s radical environmentalism as religion versus George W. Bush’s Compassionate Conservatism. Etc., etc.

Until now. This election offered a plethora of worldviews slugging it out: a Northeast Corridor-based overculture that believes a radical chic-inspired failed community organizer and failed health care reformer in a bespoke suit is the second coming of God. And that his designated successor, whom they previously denigrated as a reactionary racist, whose biggest achievement was making a hash of the Middle East while pointlessly racking up nearly a million air miles (all the while railing against “climate change”) deserves to be president simply because of her gender.

Their reality was opposed by the alternate media bubble created by Trump’s most loyal media supporters, such as Dilbert creator Scott Adams, an increasingly surreal Drudge Report, and a that would likely be unrecognizable by its late founder.

Their reality in turn was opposed by the #NeverTrump crowd at the Weekly Standard and National Review. Who at times arguably seemed more angry with Trump himself and his mixed legacy in business than his Democratic opponent.

Ultimately though, the reality that prevailed was that of Trump’s working class base of supporters. Who tried to send a message to Washington in 2009 with the surprise election of Scott Brown to block Obamacare. And when that failed to stop the Democrats, tried to send a message in 2010 by sweeping a wave of Republicans into the House to block its implementation. And when that failed to stop the Democrats (and its rollout turned out to the debacle that everyone on the right insisted it would be) sent a wave that recaptured the Senate. A group that’s angry at being called homophobic bigots and racists. Angry at a never-ending war in Iraq after victory was in-hand. Angry at a stagnant economy. Angry over possibly the biggest lie told repeatedly by an American president: “If you like your plan you can keep your plan,” only to discover no, you can’t – and if you want any health insurance at all, you might need a second mortgage to cover the premiums.

Is Trump a perfect messenger for such anger? Of course not. But like Bill Clinton in 1992 and Obama in 2008, he showed up to play, mentally decided that he had more star power and cable media savvy than his opponents in his party’s primary, and rode a populist message to success. I hope he can deliver on some of his promises, but the fact that he won’t begin his administration by launching a culture war against half the nation, as both Obama and Clinton did, will give us all room to breathe.

WHEN RUSH LIMBAUGH SAID SOMETHING SIMILAR IN 2008, IT WAS RACIST: Progressive group vows to obstruct Trump presidency.

DAVID BROOKS: “Sociologically, this campaign has been an education in how societies come apart.” “Any decent society rests on codes of etiquette and a shared moral ecology to make cooperation possible, to prevent economic and political life from descending into a savage war of all against all. But this year Donald Trump has decimated the codes of basic decency without paying a price.”

FLASHBACK: How David Brooks Created Donald Trump.

Brooks is, of course, horrified at Trump and his supporters, whom he finds childish, thuggish and contemptuous of the things that David Brooks likes about today’s America. It’s clear that he’d like a social/political revolution that was more refined, better-mannered, more focused on the Constitution and, well, more bourgeois as opposed to in-your-face and working class.

The thing is, we had that movement. It was the Tea Party movement. . . .

Yet the tea party movement was smeared as racist, denounced as fascist, harassed with impunity by the IRS and generally treated with contempt by the political establishment — and by pundits like Brooks, who declared “I’m not a fan of this movement.” After handing the GOP big legislative victories in 2010 and 2014, it was largely betrayed by the Republicans in Congress, who broke their promises to shrink government and block Obama’s initiatives.

So now we have Trump instead, who tells people to punch counterprotesters instead of picking up their trash.

When politeness and orderliness are met with contempt and betrayal, do not be surprised if the response is something less polite, and less orderly. Brooks closes his Trump column with Psalm 73, but a more appropriate verse is Hosea 8:7 “For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” Trump’s ascendance is a symptom of a colossal failure among America’s political leaders, of which Brooks’ mean-spirited insularity is only a tiny part. God help us all.

He doesn’t seem to have learned much. Also, “decimated,” which means “reduced by a tenth,” is not a synonym for “devastated.” I rather doubt that Brooks means that Trump has reduced basic decency by 10%. Amazing that that got by an editor.

And really, you backed Hillary Clinton and you’re talking about basic decency? Really?

SEEN ON FACEBOOK: “Immigration to Canada is trending. Why not Mexico, you racists?”

EMBITTERED DEMOCRATS ENGAGE IN RACIST OUTBURSTS: CNN’s Van Jones: “This Was a Whitelash Against a Changing Country.”

KINKY FRIEDMAN ON THE ELECTION: ‘We Don’t Know Who the Hero Is Until the Ship Sinks.’

The Texas Democrats have been nearly wandering in the desert forever. It’s not a matter of left or right. There are a lot of liberal pussies in Austin. I don’t think people like Sam Rayburn, Barbara Jordan, hell, probably even Ann Richards, that whole bunch … I don’t think they’d recognize it [the Democratic Party].

It’s a matter of, all they do is spend their time calling people racists. In doing so, they create a lot of racists.


If you look at the great ones, Mother Teresa, Winston Churchill, FDR, they were all aristocratic freaks with very little interest in others. They’re very much like Trump. I mean, particularly Churchill. He was a polo player in India and an adult butterfly collector. They liked to hang out at the country club, Rachel. They were very privileged people.

When they got into office, Churchill and FDR, they did something that Obama was never able to do: change. The agent of change, Obama, could not change himself. He remained a fixed point in a changing world. It’s just too bad; it’s who he is. He’s not the smartest guy in the room. He may be the glibbest. He may be the most facile. I believe, if he’s concerned about a legacy, I believe he can pretty well forget that.

All I’m saying is, we don’t know who the hero is until the ship sinks. Or when the plane is crashing. You don’t know who’s going to run back and save somebody, or who’s going to dress up like a woman so he can hide in a lifeboat.

And: “I’m old enough to sleep alone now. My shrink, Willie Nelson, has advised me not to get married under any circumstances. He says that would be a very big mistake.” Read the whole thing.

FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORMED: From Hope And Change To Fear And Loathing:

So this is how Hope & Change ends. With the FBI in turmoil, with surging anti-police violence, with fears of voter fraud and foreign hacking, with a sluggish economy, with a terror warning and with two unpopular presidential candidates tearing at each other like wolves.

Heckuva job, Barack Obama!

The 44th president made history by being elected, but leaves behind a nation on the verge of a crack-up. He flatters himself by insisting his tenure has been a roaring success, but the public mood tells a different story.

Obama promised to unite America, but exits amidst far greater divisions. It is telling that he has stopped portraying himself as a uniter and, like Jimmy Carter, blames the public.

Carter saw malaise, Obama sees bitter clingers, racists and xenophobes. While Obama’s lectures convey disappointment in his fellow Americans, it never occurs to him that he is a disappointment to them.

His failure to come to grips with the polarization, combined with an aggressively liberal agenda spearheaded by executive orders and a politicized bureaucracy, means his successor will inherit a country broken along every fault line imaginable. Voices of discontent and even estrangement are rising among Americans of all stripes and persuasions.

It would have been hard for him to have done more damage if that had been his goal all along.


Saturday’s New York Times anti-Trump roundup included an ironic compliment to the Trump campaign, which has freed journalists to label (Republican) politicians as liars and racists. Times editorial board member Brent Staples perversely celebrated “The Election That Obliterated Euphemisms.” The text box: “Donald Trump made it impossible to avoid the word ‘racist.’” Staples certainly didn’t.

Staples is following the path of colleague Jim Rutenberg’s notorious August 8 front-page opinion, “The Challenge Trump Poses to Objectivity,” which argued that treating Trump like a racist demagogue was a basic journalistic duty.

Ahh, the same media that concluded in 2012 that words such as “golf,” and “Chicago” were racist. The same newspaper whose columnist tweeted that year, “Stick that in your magic underwear,” to the Republican nominee. The same newspaper whose then-ombudsman wrote way back in 2004, “Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? Of course it is.”

But this year was totally different from all of the previous election years. Until 2020, when (if Trump loses tomorrow) whoever the Republican nominee is, he’ll be considered a reactionary troglodyte compared to Trump’s nuanced views on abortion, gay rights, etc.

Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

WHY ARE DEMOCRAT MONOPOLY INSTITUTIONS SUCH CESSPITS OF RACIST HATE SPEECH? “Roberto Orci, a producer for ‘Star Trek,’ says he has a special bond with one of the franchise’s most popular characters. Orci, a Mexican-born filmmaker, likens Mr. Spock to an illegal* alien in modern society, and would refer to the fictional character as ‘Mr. Spic’ when developing the ‘Star Trek’ movies and TV series. ‘I always thought of Mr. Spock as a Latino, he’s an alien, an immigrant,’ the Latino producer said at Variety’s #Inclusion Summit on Tuesday. ‘Just between us, and only I can say this, I personally used to call him Mr. Spic.’”

As with the country itself, the Hollywood institution that Gene Rodenberry built a half century ago is in the very best of hands.

* I don’t recall the backstory where Spock entered the Federation illegally, do you?

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: “Memo to loony campus progressives: if you’re demanding apartheid, you’re probably a racist.”

THE 21st CENTURY ISN’T WORKING OUT AS I’D HOPED: Racist Progressives Demand Segregation.

Perennial headline, whose mile-markers can be seen 13 years ago, and a century ago and many points in-between.

WHY ARE LEFTY MOVEMENTS SUCH CESSPITS OF RACISM? One of the Largest Social Justice Warrior Subreddits Accused of Being Racist.

WELL, SEE THE CHRIS MATTHEWS/YAMICHE ALCINDOR ITEM BELOW: Triggered: Journalist Snowflakes Scared Trump Supporters Are ‘Turning on the Media.’ “Triggered journalists from across the nation are bemoaning the treatment members of the press are receiving at Trump campaign rallies from the Trump supporters the media routinely misrepresents as ignorant racists, fascist Nazis, or disenchanted working whites. With increasing regularity, these journalist snowflakes are ‘reporting’ their victimization at the hands Trump supporters who chant mean things like, ‘CNN sucks’ and call them names like ‘presstitutes.'”

Yeah, they’re the only ones who are supposed to be able to name-call without consequence.

SUN TZU SAYS: The best strategy is to attack your enemy’s strategy. The Dems’ strategy is to divide us into ethnic (read: racist) and special interest (read: Goldman Sachs) camps. Instead, Donald Trump calls for a “new deal” for black Americans.

“My deal is grounded in three promises: safe communities, great education, and high-paying jobs,” Trump said, speaking off what appeared to be scripted remarks. “Whether you vote for me or not, I will be your greatest champion. We live in a very divided country and I will be your greatest champion…African-American citizens have sacrificed so much for our nation. They fought and died in every war since the Revolution and from the pews and the picket lines, they’ve lifted up the conscience of our country in the long march for civil rights. Yet too many African-Americans have been left behind.”

OK. “Scripted remarks” is a giveaway we’re dealing with a bigoted reporter. Who’s more scripted than Hillary? But dig the Sun Tzu: Trump’s New Deal is a direct challenge to the crooked Democrats’ evil (hey, it is evil) and racist strategy of division and ritual hate. (Institutionalized hatred is evil — and that’s part of their game.) Challenging this scheme of hate and division is long over due. The Democrats’ strategy has damaged American politics.

RACISM, STRAIGHT UP: Total ugly. Team Hillary is racist and sexist. “The brown and women pundits.”

One of Hillary Clinton’s top allies wrote in 2015 that they should consider deploying “the brown and women pundits” to pressure the New York Times into giving them friendlier coverage, according to a series of private emails published by the hacking group WikiLeaks.

The Clinton campaign was particularly unhappy with the Times during the summer of 2015 as the paper reported at length on the federal investigation of Clinton’s use of an unauthorized and unsecured private email server when she worked at the State Department.

FLASHBACK 1986: Donald Trump, Rosa Parks, and Muhammad Ali pose together after receiving the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

Snopes lists the story as True, but jerks their knees hard to the left to smear Trump as a crypto-racist anyhow, just for kicks and grins.

THE BULLY PARTY: Scott Adams: “I’ve been trying to figure out what common trait binds Clinton supporters together. As far as I can tell, the most unifying characteristic is a willingness to bully in all its forms.”

If you have a Trump sign in your lawn, they will steal it.

If you have a Trump bumper sticker, they will deface your car.

if you speak of Trump at work you could get fired.

On social media, almost every message I get from a Clinton supporter is a bullying type of message. They insult. They try to shame. They label. And obviously they threaten my livelihood.

We know from Project Veritas that Clinton supporters tried to incite violence at Trump rallies. The media downplays it.

We also know Clinton’s side hired paid trolls to bully online. You don’t hear much about that.

Yesterday, by no coincidence, Huffington Post, Salon, and Daily Kos all published similar-sounding hit pieces on me, presumably to lower my influence. (That reason, plus jealousy, are the only reasons writers write about other writers.)

Joe Biden said he wanted to take Trump behind the bleachers and beat him up. No one on Clinton’s side disavowed that call to violence because, I assume, they consider it justified hyperbole.

Team Clinton has succeeded in perpetuating one of the greatest evils I have seen in my lifetime. Her side has branded Trump supporters (40%+ of voters) as Nazis, sexists, homophobes, racists, and a few other fighting words. Their argument is built on confirmation bias and persuasion. But facts don’t matter because facts never matter in politics. What matters is that Clinton’s framing of Trump provides moral cover for any bullying behavior online or in person. No one can be a bad person for opposing Hitler, right?

It’s who they are, it’s what they do.

OUR RACIST LIBERAL MEDIA: A New Yorker headline denies the humanity of Clarence Thomas.

TO BE FAIR, ISN’T EVERYTHING, THESE DAYS? Is SNL’s “Black Jeopardy” racist?

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE. Mark Steyn on a college president inventing the hate crime of racial facials:

Disciplined? For what? [Beverly Kopper, President of the University of Wisconsin at Whitewater] blamed the students for ‘failing to think about the implications’ – of having a facial. Because we live in a world where a facial is one step away from a minstrel show.

I’m an effete nancy-boy, and I get a facial from time to time, because I want my skin to look good for brutal close-ups on nights like this, and it’s well known that ‘Can I get a seaweed wrap?’ is code for ‘I’m a big redneck southern bigot who wants to look good under my Klan hood’. If you go to any luxury spa in Sydney right now and kick open the door there’ll be whole roomfuls of people covered in algae coconut moisturizing exfoliant capering around going ‘Oh, my darling little mammy, down in Alabammy…’

Sometimes a society becomes too stupid to survive. What this college president, Beverly Kopper, means when she says these students ‘failed to think about the implications’ of their racist exfoliating is that professional grievance mongers like her have so incentivized the taking of offence that there are now far more people who need to be offended than the number of people willing to offend them: Demand far outstrips supply. So in ten years’ time these two students will be applying for jobs and their potential employer will Google them and the first 200 pages that come up will be about how racey-racey-racist they are.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Kathy Shaidle.)

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: High School Teacher: ‘To Be White Is To Be Racist, Period.’




JOURNALISM: ABC’s embarrassing article about Hillary Clinton’s white pantsuit.

That’s right, you weren’t just looking at a woman wearing a white pantsuit, you were looking at a woman who was … standing up for women’s rights by channeling suffragettes, according to the senior fashion editor of the Hollywood Reporter, Booth Moore.

“The choice of a white suit for Wednesday’s debate harkened back to the not-so-distant past, when suffragettes wore white to promote their struggle to gain the right to vote,” she said.

Not-so-distant, indeed.

Clinton also wore a white pantsuit when she accepted the Democratic nomination. At that time, it seemed like she was wearing it because she knew the media would try to make her look like a deity, the way they seem to do with President Obama.

And by the way, remember when Melania Trump wore white to the Republican National Convention? A fashion writer for claimed it was racist.

Well, sure, when a Republican does it . . .

THE CONTENT OF THEIR CHARACTER: Teacher Sparks Controversy After Telling Students, “To Be White Is To Be Racist”

“Am I racist? And I say, yeah. I don’t want to be. It’s not like I choose to be racist,” the teacher is heard saying in audio obtained by KFOR. “But do I do things because of the way I was raised?” The student who recorded the statement says the remarks were made during a lecture on healing the racial divide. The student began recording after finding some of the discussion offensive.

“Half of my family is Hispanic, so I just felt like, you know, him calling me racist just because I’m White…I mean, where’s your proof in that? You start telling someone something over and over again that’s an opinion, and they start taking it as fact,” she told KFOR.

Joseph Siano, superintendent of Norman Public Schools, agrees that the teacher should have handled the discussion differently.

At the very least.


He is the worst major-party candidate in history.

He’s a gaffe machine. He’s an evil racist who wants to return black people to slavery.

He’s a brutal sexist who wants to return women to the subservience of the 1950s.

He’s a nasty warmonger who doesn’t get the fundamental intricacies of modern foreign policy, with the Manichean worldview to match. He’s an old homophobe with a history of cruelty to workers.

Think we’re talking about Donald Trump?

No, we’re talking about Mitt Romney circa 2012. That’s how the media painted one of the most honorable men ever to run for the White House, the creator of Romneycare, a northeastern Republican with a penchant for compromise and negotiation. Mitt Romney, the left claimed, was no John McCain — that halcyon of moderation and decency.

Now, of course, the media tells us that Donald Trump is a massive departure from the legacy of John McCain and Mitt Romney. He’s beyond the pale! He panders to racists! He’s a vicious sexist and sexual assaulter! He’s uninformed, unstable, ignorant, stupid! Why, compared to Mitt Romney, the man’s a monster!

Much of this may be true in a way it simply wasn’t about Romney. But by 2020, Donald Trump will be the new standard of civility and decency according to the Left.

See also strange new respect the left has granted Nixon, Reagan – and even Dubya.

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: Watch Leftist Students Say Science Is Racist and Should Be Abolished:

Essentially, these students believe that modern scientific understanding is too Eurocentric. One explained:

“I have a question for all the science people. There is a place in KZN called Umhlab’uyalingana. They believe that through the magic’ you call it black magic’ they call it witchcraft’ you are able to send lightening to strike someone. Can you explain that scientifically because it’s something that happens?”

Many people laughed at this remark because, well, witchcraft is not something that happens. But according to the student, witchcraft is like Isaac Newton’s theory of gravity—it’s just one way of explaining the world, among many.

“Decolonising the science would mean doing away with it entirely and starting all over again to deal with how we respond to the environment and how we understand it,” the student continued.

Straight outta Oceania!

“REMEMBER WHEN LEFTISTS SAID MITT ROMNEY WAS A RACIST BECAUSE HE USED THE WORD ‘OBAMACARE’ IN A SPEECH? GOOD TIMES,” Avik Roy tweets, linking to a July 2012 Daily Beast article titled “Michael Tomasky* on Mitt Romney the Race Baiter at the NAACP.”

That was also the year that words such as “golf” and “Chicago” were declared racist by a division of Comcast.

To slightly modify a sentence from Glenn last month, both Romney and Tea Party people “were polite, and were betrayed and demonized. Trump supporters are angry, and are betrayed and demonized. What comes next?”

* And if you think Tomasky hates Romney, don’t even get him started on his voters, particularly those from the south.

6 REASONS FOR TRUMP’S RISE that no one talks about. “Step outside of the city, and the suicide rate among young people fucking doubles. The recession pounded rural communities, but all the recovery went to the cities. The rate of new businesses opening in rural areas has utterly collapsed. . . . If you don’t live in one of these small towns, you can’t understand the hopelessness. The vast majority of possible careers involve moving to the city, and around every city is now a hundred-foot wall called ‘Cost of Living.’ . . . And if you dare complain, some liberal elite will pull out their iPad and type up a rant about your racist white privilege. . . . It really does feel like the worst of both worlds: all the ravages of poverty, but none of the sympathy. . . . The rural folk with the Trump signs in their yards say their way of life is dying, and you smirk and say what they really mean is that blacks and gays are finally getting equal rights and they hate it. But I’m telling you, they say their way of life is dying because their way of life is dying. It’s not their imagination. No movie about the future portrays it as being full of traditional families, hunters, and coal mines. Well, except for Hunger Games, and that was depicted as an apocalypse.”

Try to guess where this article appears without mousing over the link.

ISN’T EVERYONE USED TO THAT FIRST PART BY NOW? Barack Obama’s Wrong: The New Cold War’s Only Just Begun.

Michael Weiss:

“Vladimir Putin,” [Mikhail] Zygar writes, “did not like the new American president from the start. For him, Barack Obama was both soft and intractable… Paradoxically, Obama, the most idealistic and peace-loving U.S. president in living memory, became a symbol of war in Russia, a target for Russian state propaganda and racist jokes, and a hate figure for millions of patriotic Russians. He was caricatured as an ill-fated enemy doomed to be defeated by Vladimir Putin.”

Surveying some much-buried news over the last seven days, one begins to appreciate the weight of this grim appraisal.

Read the whole thing.

IT’S COME TO THIS: Black Tenant Slams Neighbor’s Noise Complaint As Racist ‘White Tears:’

The noisy neighbor, Richard Brookshire, issued a blistering response accusing his neighbors of racial aggression and calling their note a “direct threat”.

“As a Black man, I take these overt actions as a direct threat to my physical and psychological well-being and as an act of violence upon me (see attached list of the 821 black men, women, and children killed by police or in police custody to date in 2016),” he wrote. “This threat cannot be taken lightly.”

Because for leftists in 2016, the will to power derives from victimhood — and not just on college campuses anymore.




Why, it’s almost as it America was being governed by a former community advisor who’s chummy with Al Sharpton and spent years in the pulpit of a hyper-racist pastor or something. Forgive me — that’s all science fiction talk, of course.




Why are Democrat-monopoly institutions, like, err, the Democratic Party, such cesspits of racism?

WELL, PEOPLE SAY BILL CAN’T BE TRUSTED, BUT THIS SEEMS ABOUT RIGHT: Video: Bill Clinton Trashes Obamacare At Event, Calls It ‘Crazy System.’

Former President Bill Clinton attacked President Barack Obama’s signature health care legislation Monday, calling it a “crazy system” that “doesn’t make any sense” during a Michigan campaign event for Hillary.

“It doesn’t many any sense. The insurance model doesn’t work here,” Clinton said about the government-run marketplaces Obamacare set up. Clinton said that Obamacare “works fine” for people with “modest” incomes or who are eligible for government subsidies, or Medicare. But he added that, “the people that are getting killed in this deal are small business people and individuals who make just a little too much to get any of these subsidies.”

I’m so old, I can remember when saying things like this made you a racist tool of Big Healthcare.


For Daniel Patrick Moynihan, it was the racism charges that broke the camel’s back. His famous 1965 report on the pathologies of black culture landed him in a hornet’s nest. “I was not a bigot,” he wrote later, “but the good guys were calling me a racist, while here was this fellow Buckley saying these thoughtful things. Glazer and I began to notice that we were getting treated in National Review with a much higher level of intellectual honesty.”

Moynihan was just one of many erstwhile-liberals who was startled to find a rare bastion of sanity in National Review. That trickle of refugees from liberalism would prove critical to getting William Buckley’s fledgling conservative movement off the ground. Having once regarded themselves as liberals, many neoconservatives had managed to attain influential mainstream positions that traditionalists of Russell Kirk’s persuasion would likely have found difficult. They were invaluable for raising the movement’s profile. At the same time, their experience and background made them savvy to policy. They would lay the groundwork for conservative policy developments over the next several decades.

As today’s conservative movement braces for four years under a corrupt, autocratic president, we should note this silver lining: As in Moynihan’s time, liberalism is in terrible shape. Present-day progressivism enjoys a cultural dominance that is somewhat reminiscent of 1960s liberalism. Despite that, the Left is demoralized, paranoid, and intellectually exhausted. Despite legions of high-profile supporters, the Democrats seem unable to win the loyalty of the most anti-traditional generation in American history.

The time is ripe for recruiting a new crop of ex-liberals. Who’s ready to get mugged by reality?

Of course, the mugging may not be enough to return some completely to reality – as William F. Buckley said after Moynihan died in 2003 at age 76, the Cassandra-esque New York Democrat “always said the right thing and always voted the wrong way.”

But why do I need to “get ready for the Neo-Neocons,” when I’ve known the original Neo-Neocon for over a decade?



Contra [clapter jockey Samantha Bee], the fact that late-night television is full of so-called comedians launching into political rants is a big problem for political discourse in the era of Trump. For instance, it was quickly pointed out that in 2012 Richter was making jokes, if you’d call them that, about Mitt Romney being racist. It’s the boy who cried “wolf.” Even when there are legitimate objections to Trump, it’s hard to take them seriously coming from people who slandered a good man as racist without cause in 2012.

It’s pretty indisputable that rebellion against the mocking of politically correct scolds is a significant part of Trump’s appeal. The likes of Bee and Richter and the rest of the late-night lefty -comedian industrial complex will never admit it, but the more rabid their attempts to discredit Trump, the more they help him.

And make no mistake, Bee’s job is helping a small audience of liberal elites to blur the line between self-righteousness and humor.

As John Podhoretz tweeted last week, “Late-night ‘comedy’ on HBO and Comedy Central is for liberals what televangelism was for born-agains in the 1980s and 1990s.” Spot-on, especially considering how “Progressivism” is a 150-year old enterprise to replace God with politics and aesthetics.

And given the headline of the above Weekly Standard article and the left’s self-righteousness and unending smug, this Photoshop by Jon Gabriel seems apropos:


HEH, INDEED: Just Because Hillary’s a Birther, That Doesn’t Make Her Racist!, Andrew Klavan insists.


JOEL KOTKIN: Is There A Future For The GOP?

Whether he loses or, more unlikely, wins, Donald Trump creates an existential crisis for the Republican Party. The New York poseur has effectively undermined the party orthodoxy on defense, trade and economics, policies which have been dominant for the last half century within the party but now are falling rapidly out of fashion among the rank and file.

In this sense, Trump’s nomination could be seen as both an albatross and something of a life preserver. His rallying of a large working-class base, particularly in the Heartland, provides a potential new direction for the party that has lost irretrievably the business elite, the coastal states, minorities and the educated young. Clearly, the party needs to revise its electoral strategy. . . .

Now the Democrats have become the party of the urban gentry, public employees and the government-dependent poor, an identification that hurts them elsewhere.In contrast, Trump’s strongest support comes from small towns and, to a lesser extent, the suburbs. In these geographic heartlands, low labor participation rates, declining incomes, struggling Main Street businesses and collapsing opportunity incite resentment and a call for radical change. The disconnect with the power centers is further stoked by the celebratory coverage received by the asset/inflation-driven “false economy.”

Clearly, the traditional Republican path to victory — pandering to the ultrarich — seems misplaced, if not a trifle masochistic. Trump may boast about how he benefited from cronyism, but his critiques resonate more with the owner of a bar on a small town Main Street or a 20-person machine shop who knows that he can’t count on the Treasury Department defending his tax avoidance, as has occurred in the case of big-time Democratic donor Apple.

Similarly, Trump’s crude assault on undocumented immigration makes more sense to many lower-skilled Americans who compete with them for jobs. Additionally, Trump’s attack on the Democrats’ ever more strident decarbonization drive has brought Appalachia firmly into the GOP realm, and may also deliver some key Midwestern swing states, such as Iowa and Ohio.

Bill Clinton, who once effectively reached such voters, now denounces the “coal people” like they are a bunch of mindless Bubbas. His wife’s recent attack on Trump supporters as homophobes, racists and xenophobes revealed an unflattering glimpse at the inner thoughts of the “party of the people.”



Fragile Leftists at New York Magazine Take Down Video Calling Lawrence of Arabia Sexist After Backlash: “What is ironic about the social justice criticism of Lawrence of Arabia is that some interpret O’Toole’s performance to intentionally have homosexual undertones and the film’s female editor won an academy award for her role in the film.”

Earlier: NY Post Writer Wants ‘Racist’ Gone with the Wind Banished, but Black America Disagrees.

Comrade Ogilvy could not be reached for comment.


Jon Gabriel, call your office.


IF YOU THINK OF BLACK PEOPLE — AND RAPE! — WHEN SOMEONE MENTIONS A GORILLA, I’M PRETTY SURE IT’S YOU WHO’S THE RACIST: Clemson Housing Bans “Harambe references”: says they “add to the rape culture” on campus and are a form of “racism.”

MORE LIKE THIS, PLEASE: An Unarmed White Man Is Shot by a Cop, and Black Activists Rally.

Over the last several months, the phrase “white lives matter” has been derided by many as a willfully obtuse (and usually racist) response to the Black Lives Matter movement, particularly in light of the disproportionate number of African-Americans shot by police.

But one group of mostly African-American civil rights leaders is stepping up to question a deputy’s shooting of an unarmed, white, homeless man in Castaic — because it just might be the right thing to do.

“We can’t only be advocates when black people are killed by police unjustly,” says Najee Ali, founder of Project Islamic Hope.

Viewing the problem through a racial lens has political benefits for some, but it actually makes the problem harder to solve. And it’s not like plenty of white people aren’t shot by police, too (and in many of the recent shootings, the police officer was black, under a black chief). You want police to only shoot people when it’s absolutely necessary, regardless of their race. Like the NRA’s (somewhat slow, but still important) call for an investigation in the Philando Castile case, where a black man with a CCW was shot, we need this stuff to cross racial lines. Making it all about race is a formula for paralysis.

THE HILL: Hispanic Dems ‘disappointed’ with party’s Latino outreach.

Congressional Hispanic Democrats are questioning the party’s approach to campaigning in Latino communities, as Republicans led by Donald Trump exceed expectations with the demographic.

The poor results reveal a rift between the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) and Democratic Party leadership over how to approach Latino voters.

Although Trump has alienated many Latino voters with his strong rhetoric on immigration and comments about Hispanics, his performance in polls has been roughly on par with 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney. A recent Bloomberg Politics average of polls found Hillary Clinton leads Trump by 38 points among Hispanics. Obama beat Romney by 44.

(Emphasis added. Because wow.) So for all the talk about Trump being racist and killing the GOP with Hispanics, he’s actaully doing 6 points better than Romney.

WHY ARE DEMOCRAT MONOPOLY INSTITUTIONS SUCH CESSPITS OF RACISM? First Latina cast member of NBC’s Saturday Night Live caught deleting thousands of tweets, including several racist and offensive posts.


Shot: “Colin Kaepernick Had No Choice but to Kneel.”

Time magazine, which put Kaepernick on its cover this week after he refused to stand for the National Anthem, has a BLM-obsessed Twitter feed. and wore socks depicting pigs wearing police hats during training camp.

Chaser: “The Seattle Mariners suspended Steve Clevenger without pay for the remainder of the season, moving swiftly Friday to discipline their backup catcher after his set of tweets imploring that protestors in Charlotte should be ‘locked behind bars like animals.’”

USA Today, yesterday.

(Classical reference in headline.)


The quote in question came during an exchange she had with guest and MRC Latino Guide to Conservative Hispanic Speakers member Alfonso Aguilar about the term “hard worker” being racist back when Harris-Parry still had an MSNBC show on October 24, 2015.

Alfonso Aguilar, Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles: “If there’s somebody who is a hard worker when he goes to Washington, it’s Paul Ryan….”
Host Melissa Harris-Perry: “I want us to be super careful when we use the language ‘hard worker,’ because I actually keep an image of folks working in cotton fields on my office wall, because it is a reminder about what hard work looks like. So, I feel you that he’s a hard worker, I do, but in the context of relative privilege.”
— Exchange on MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry, October 24, 2015.

More “fun” from the NBC-owned network at the link.

WHY ARE DEMOCRAT-MONOPOLY INSTITUTIONS SUCH CESSPITS OF RACISM?  David Simon, Creator of HBO’s The Wire, under fire for using the N-word to mock Sean Hannity’s upcoming town hall on race with Donald Trump.

HBO’s parent company is one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest donors.

Perhaps Simon, a far left former journalist before striking gold with Time-Warner-CNN-HBO, is auditioning to be the next publisher of the Village Voice.

JOHN PODHORETZ: The liberal establishment’s Clinton obsession is blowing up in its face:

Trump wasn’t defeated in his quest for the nomination, but it wasn’t because the party or the conservative movement lay down and rolled over for him. Indeed, all the lines of attack being raised today by Hillary Clinton against him, from Trump’s footsie-playing with racists to his foundation’s high jinks to Trump University, were introduced into the national discussion and aired out on the Right for months.

Democrats and liberals, by contrast, did not adjudicate the matters now dogging Hillary’s candidacy during the primary season. Instead, they left all opposition to the ministrations of a 74-year-old socialist who wasn’t even a Democrat until 2014.

And his surprising strength in running against her — Sanders ultimately secured 44 percent of the Democratic primary vote — should have made clear that whatever the mainstream Democratic view, ordinary Democrats did see her as shifty, untrustworthy and someone they did not wish to vote for.

Well, here we are. And here you are, Democrats and liberals. There will be a lot of blame to go around if Trump wins. But a significant share will go to you, because you live in a bubble so impervious to reality, you didn’t realize that nominating a widely disliked person with legal and ethical problems might come to bite you in the ass in the end.

Naturally of course, Podhoretz’s warnings will go unheeded inside the DNC-MSM. Which brings us to this bit of eye-rolling hagiography: It might be time for our media to take a breather from non-stop praise of Hillary Clinton,” Mollie Hemingway similarly warns at the Federalist.  “The Washington Post just called her a style icon. Really.”

Atop Mollie’s post? Hillary’s recent Pittsburgh Steelers horizontal striped bumblebee throwback jersey look – which makes for a nice contrast with her silver United Federation of Planets galactic ambassador togs, I guess.


Click to enlarge, deplorable primitive earthling!

IT’S ALWAYS NICE TO SEE COLLEGE STUDENTS STANDING UP AGAINST PC BULLYING. At Clemson, Coach Dabo Swinney invoked Martin Luther King, Jr. in duscussing Colin Kaepernick and the National Anthem.

This led Clemson Prof. Chenjerai Kumanyika to invoke Black Privilege and write: Take MLK’s name out your mouth: An open letter to Clemson football coach Dabo Swinney. “Coach Swinney, based on your statements, I think that maybe you would not have liked Dr. King if you had known him. Dr. King worked closely with Jackie Robinson, whose presence and success on the field was a protest.”

Then Clemson Student Mitchell Gunter responded: We Won’t Take Your Class: An Open Letter to Chenjerai Kumanyika.

I cringed when you, a non-Muslim, wore a traditional, Islamic head scarf to the Donald Trump rally last year. Talk about cultural appropriation. Given your status as a professor at Clemson, the selective video editing to make it appear as if you were being removed for “your religion” is staggering and troubling.

To your credit though, your “test of our rights to practice the democratic process”, was well-intentioned as you nobly blocked the view of those sitting behind you, a statement of solidarity for groups that sometimes feel marginalized by campaign rhetoric.

You acknowledged that you don’t think that ALL Trump supporters are bigoted, and you merely wanted to start a conversation about equality for all. For a moment there, although you attempted to use me as political fodder to further your narrative of a “racist, backwoods Clemson,” I felt tempted to take one of your classes.

But then I read your “Rate My Professor profile.”

Dr. Kumanyika, I really wish I hadn’t done that.

In your Rate My Professor profile, you have an overall quality score of 1.8 out of 5. One student opines that you’re the “Worst professor I have ever had.” Grading is described as “unnecessarily tough and completely arbitrary” and your classroom habits include “cutting students off before they can finish a sentence, which scares most students into silence.” As a communications professor, I was very surprised to see one student say “Also never answers emails.” I thought that came with the territory.

The two comments that stuck with me were “Terrible. Worst class ever. Very condescending.” and “inside the classroom it’s as if he finds joy in making you feel stupid.” Perhaps you should take some of this feedback to heart.

Your open letter to Dabo indicated that much of this student criticism is true. At the Sikes Sit-In, you talked to me about compassion, yet the level of condescension in your writing is unbearable.

Ouch. To be fair, the last time I looked most of my Ratemyprofessors comments were from people who obviously hadn’t taken any of my classes, but were just goofing via the Internet. I doubt that Prof. Kumanyika is in the same situation, though I suppose I could be wrong. But read the whole thing, which goes well beyond student comments.

Plus, as noted in the comments here, Jackie Robinson was a Republican who voted for Nixon.

THE HILL: How ‘Birtherism’ became Hillary’s Waterloo.

Hillary Clinton had a rough week. From collapsing into a vehicle to her collapsing poll numbers, the Democratic darling is steering her campaign into an iceberg. Put simply, she’s losing.

On Friday, Hillary hit rock bottom. In order to turn the tide in the final weeks of the campaign she resurrected an issue that had long disappeared from the 2016 campaign — birtherism. It was a move that will prove to be her Waterloo.

“For five years [Republican nominee Donald Trump] has led the birther movement to delegitimize our first black president,” Hillary said. “His campaign was founded on this outrageous lie.”

The “birther movement” of which Hillary speaks dealt with the issue of whether President Barack Obama was born in the United States. Because the President failed to release his birth certificate when asked, some began to question what the President was hiding. After Trump brought the issue to the forefront, Obama finally release a birth certificate showing he was born in the United States.

To Hillary, though, Trump’s attachment to the birther movement was much more nefarious. In fact, it was racist.

“He is feeding into the worst impulses, the bigotry and bias that lurks in our country,” the Democratic presidential nominee proclaim. “Barack Obama was born in America, plain and simple, and Donald Trump owes him and the American people an apology.”

Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.

“Hold out baits to entice the enemy,” wrote Sun Tzu, “feign disorder, and crush him.” Hillary, by baiting Trump with the birther controversy, was hoping the outspoken candidate would respond in a manner than that was undisciplined and unpresidential. She was hoping Trump would be Trump. It was a gamble she lost.

“President Barack Obama was born in the United States, period,” Trump said in response. “Now, we all want to get back to making America strong and great again.”

Trump’s response — short and simple — showed a candidate who was not only more disciplined but a candidate who understood he was in the lead. It showed a candidate that was willing to shrug of a desperate attack in order to stay on a script that has brought Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, and Colorado back in play.

Moreover, Trump turned the issue back on Hillary. In laughing off the attack, Trump reminded America that the so called seeds of birtherism were planted by Team Clinton during her rough and tumble primary with Obama in 2008. He also reminded the American people that he was the one who settled the issue, thus removing the cloud hanging over Obama’s head.

“Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy,” Trump said. “I finished it.”


Screen Shot 2016-09-19 at 7.18.58 PM

SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL, HILLARY’S BIRTHER CONSPIRACIST PROPAGANDIST: Ole Sid’s doing the deny deny deny shuffle, but McClatchy has the email trail. Get this: “McClatchy has not been able to reach Blumenthal for comment. He worked for both President Bill Clinton and more recently for the Clintons’ charitable foundation.” You mean the Clinton State-Foundation? The end of this essay narrows the Grail Quest for the Ur-Birther to two suspects.

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: “In the safe spaces on campus, no Jews allowed,” notes the Washington Post, astonishingly enough:

The recent surge of progressive activism on college campuses across the country has led to many debates on the merits of concepts such as “microaggressions” and “safe spaces” in educational settings that should respect free speech and dialogue. Student uprisings against racial injustice and discrimination at Yale, the University of Missouri and dozens of other universities have shown the power of students who have banded together against institutionalized racism in academia and the student body.

But little has been said about how the idea of “intersectionality” — the idea that all struggles are connected and must be combated by allies — has created a dubious bond between the progressive movement and pro-Palestinian activists who often engage in the same racist and discriminatory discourse they claim to fight. As a result of this alliance, progressive Jewish students are often subjected to a double standard not applied to their peers — an Israel litmus test to prove their loyalties to social justice.

Why are Democrat monopoly institutions such cesspits of anti-Semitism? For a primer on the leftwing conspiracy theory that is “intersectionality,” Christina Hoff Sommers has you covered:

FIRST JIMMY CARTER AND HIS KILLER RABBIT, NOW THIS: “Mrs. Clinton takes on a cartoon frog,” and James Taranto is there to observe every painful moment of the encounter — for the frog:

Poor Pepe! He’s just a make-believe frog, and he stands falsely accused of being ‘racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic—you name it.’ Which means that, according to the definition we set forth yesterday, he qualifies as a Deplorable. That meme [Trump adviser Roger Stone and scion Donald Trump Jr.] tweeted might have been silly, but damned if it doesn’t pass the fact check.

Heh. Read the whole thing.

NEWS YOU CAN USE: Menthol Cigarettes Are Racist.

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Obama’s Legacy: The Rise Of Donald Trump.

Without policy achievements to hang his hat on, Obama’s rhetoric will be how he’s remembered – and the results have been ugly. On his recent Asian tour, President Obama characterized his fellow Americans (the most productive workers in the world) as “lazy.” In fact, he went on to deride Americans for a list of supposed transgressions ranging from the Vietnam War to environmental desecration to the 19th century treatment of Native Americans. “If you’re in the United States,” the president said, “sometimes you can feel lazy and think we’re so big we don’t have to really know anything about other people.”

The attack on supposedly insular Americans was somewhat bizarre, given that Obama himself knows no foreign languages. He often seems confused about even basic world geography. (His birthplace of Hawaii is not “Asia,” Austrians do not speak “Austrian,” and the Falkland Islands are not the Maldives).

Obama’s sense of history is equally weak. Contrary to his past remarks, the Islamic world did not spark either the Western Renaissance or the Enlightenment. Cordoba was not, as he once suggested, an Islamic center of “tolerance” during the Spanish Inquisition; in fact, its Muslim population had been expelled during the early Reconquista over two centuries earlier.

In another eerie ditto of his infamous 2008 attack on the supposedly intolerant Pennsylvania “clingers,” Obama returned to his theme that ignorant Americans “typically” become xenophobic and racist: “Typically, when people feel stressed, they turn on others who don’t look like them.” (“Typically” is not a good Obama word to use in the context of racial relations, since he once dubbed his own grandmother a “typical white person.”) Too often Obama has gratuitously aroused racial animosities with inflammatory rhetoric such as “punish our enemies,” or injected himself into the middle of hot-button controversies like the Trayvon Martin case, the Henry Louis Gates melodrama, and the “hands up, don’t shoot” Ferguson mayhem.

Most recently, Obama seemed to praise backup 49ers quarterback and multimillionaire Colin Kaepernick for his refusal to stand during the National Anthem, empathizing with Kaepernick’s claims of endemic American racism. What is going on in Obama’s home stretch? Apparently Obama is veering even further to the left, in hopes of establishing a rhetorical progressive legacy in lieu of any lasting legislative or foreign-policy achievement.

Obama opened the way for Trump. He’s like Rick Moranis in Ghostbusters, or something. And even Ghostbusters was ruined on his watch. . . .

BRAVO! Black Conservative Woman Stands Up to Racist Liberal Insults (Video).

HILLARY’S DEPLORABLES: New Poll Finds That Hillary Supporters Are Pretty Racist Too.

IT’S WORSE THAN YOU KNOW: The Sordid History of Liberals Calling Republicans Racists.

DENVER POST: Hillary Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” remark goes way too far.

Before elite donors at a glitzy fundraiser on Friday, Hillary Clinton managed to insult millions of Americans by arguing that half of Donald Trump’s supporters are deplorable individuals animated by racist, sexist, homophobic and other warped ways of thinking. Though she’s backed away from applying that characterization so broadly, she deserves the backlash she’s getting over the remarks. . . .

We condemned Mitt Romney in 2012 for making his 47 percent comments to well-heeled donors. Romney said that nearly half the nation was comprised of freeloaders who “pay no income tax” and who are in the tank for Democrats because of the party’s identification with government assistance.

And we remember that in 2008, the last time Clinton ran for president, she happily joined criticism of then-candidate Barack Obama for telling donors that struggling Americans “cling to guns or religion or antipathy towards people who aren’t like them.”

Related: Not Deplorable, Not Horrible, Not Irredeemable:

When Hillary Clinton denounced half of Donald Trump’s supporters as a “basket of deplorables” last Friday, it seemed less an unscripted gaffe and more part of a targeted messaging strategy. Earlier last week, in an interview with an Israeli television network, she also trotted out the “basket of deplorables” line. Perhaps this “deplorables” attack will help rally the Left’s base. Maybe this was intended as a strategy to distract from Secretary Clinton’s myriad scandals and try to make the election a referendum on Donald Trump. However, the partisan optics of her attack might be less revealing than its deeper assumptions. Whether or not this proves an effective partisan gambit, the “deplorables” attack reveals some of the assumptions that have rendered public debates more fractious. . . .

Making politics simply the conflict between right-thinking people and “deplorables” (or sheep misled by such “deplorables”) undermines the foundation of serious political discussion, which demands a good-faith effort at communication and a recognition that those who differ from us might have legitimate alternative viewpoints. Without that mode of discussion, politics degenerates into simply screaming slogans at the opposing side. It’s a commonplace to lament political “gridlock,” but the impulse to deplorablize one’s opponents very much gets in the way of finding prudential compromise. The politics of demonization decreases civil trust and threatens to increase the fractures of an already divided body politic.

It makes perfect sense, though, if you divide voters into those who can be useful and those who might stand in your way.

UPDATE: Ramesh Ponnuru: Clinton’s ‘Basket of Deplorables’ wasn’t just impolitic, it was wrong.

DANA MILBANK: Yes, half of Trump supporters are racist.

Maybe they’re the almost-half of the Washington Post’s readership that’s disappeared since 2004.

PAUL RAHE: Trump Seizes A Golden Opportunity. “Hillary Clinton crossed a line Friday night when she borrowed a line from Barack Obama’s playbook and demonized those who disagree with her, denouncing one-quarter of her fellow Americans as sexists, racists, homophobes, and Islamophobes and castigating them as a ‘basket of deplorables.’ It is one thing to attack a political candidate or even a political party. When one thinks that they have gone astray, they are fair game. It is another to go after their voters; and today, when Donald Trump responded to this vile attempt to set American against American and to sow the seeds of civil strife, he hit a home run.”

SPENGLER: Deplorably, Trump Is Going To Win.

You can’t win an American presidential election without the deplorables’ vote. Deplorables are America’s biggest minority. They might even be the American majority. They may or not be racist, homophobic and so forth, but they know they’re deplorable. Deplorable, and proud. They’re the median family whose real income has fallen deplorably by 5% in the past ten years, the 35% of adult males who deplorably have dropped out of the labor force, the 40% of student debtors who deplorably aren’t making payments on their loans, the aging state and local government workers whose pension funds are $4 trillion short. They lead deplorable lives and expect that their kids’ lives will be even more deplorable than theirs.

Americans are by and large forgiving people. They’ll forgive Bill for cavorting with Monica “I did not have sex with that woman” Lewinsky in the Oval Office and imposing himself on any number of unwilling females. They might even forgive Hillary for losing tens of thousands of compromising emails on an illegal private server and then repeatedly lying about it in a way that insults the deplorable intelligence of the average voter. But the one thing you can’t do is spit on them and tell them it’s raining. They’ll never forgive you for that. They’re hurting, and they rankle at candidates who rub their faces in it.

Mitt Romney’s campaign was unsalvageable after the famous 2012 “47% remark,” by which he simply meant that the 47% of American workers whose income falls below the threshold for federal taxes would be indifferent to his tax cut proposals. The trouble is that these workers pay a great deal of taxes–to Social Security, Medicare, and in most cases to local governments through sales taxes and assessments. After a covert video of his remarks at a private fundraiser made the rounds, Romney spent the rest of the campaign with the equivalent of an advertising blimp over his head emblazoned with the words: “I represent the economic elite.” Clinton has done the same thing with the cultural elite.

First the deplorables, then the “pneumonia” thing. If I were Trump, I’d be worried that the Dems will pull Hillary out and put in somebody fresher (well, that would be anybody) and harder to beat (well, that would be anybody).


Screen Shot 2016-09-11 at 10.33.17 AM

UPDATE: CBS News reports the pool of reporters who travel with Clinton “are being penned in at 9/11 memorial, not informed of her current whereabouts.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Hillary Clinton reportedly has ‘medical episode’ at 9/11 ceremony.

The 68-year-old Democratic nominee appeared to faint shortly before 10 a.m. as family members of the 2,977 victims were reading through their names, and minutes before a moment of silence at 9:58 a.m. commemorating the collapse of the South Tower, sources told The Post.

A witness said the former Secretary of State’s knees buckled and she lost a shoe as her security team rushed her to a nearby van.

Clinton left the event so abruptly that she even left behind the pool of reporters assigned to follow her.

But remember, the people who have been raising questions about her health are racist, sexist conspiracy theorists.

MORE: Now they’re saying she was “overheated.” At 9 am in September in New York, with a temperature in the 70s?

Meanwhile, CNN is looking kind of sickly, too.

Flashback: HuffPost Fires Contributor, Deletes Articles Questioning Hillary’s Health.

STILL MORE: Video of Hillary being carried, falling.

MORE STILL: This enlarged view via stumble-and-fall experts at The Old Row shows Hillary trying to step forward and starting to fall twice before sturdy men (Secret Service agents, I presume) take her by both arms, but she still collapses (almost taking them down, too) and is held up by them as she gets into the van. This is more than a “stumble.”

But yeah, if you’re raising concerns about her health, it’s because you’re a racist, misogynistic conspiracy theorist.


A familiar scene is playing out in Zimbabwe. Robert Mugabe’s followers, roving bands of unemployed young men who thirst for land, are once again invading and occupying farms. But they are merely pawns in the old man’s game. Land is the board upon which Zimbabwe’s politics are played and Grand Master Mugabe always manages to maneuver his pieces into the right places.
To anyone who follows Zimbabwe, it should come as no surprise that Mugabe, the country’s nonagenarian dictator, is still using the land issue to reward loyalists and punish dissenters.

When mostly white-owned farms were seized by similar bands of young men just over a decade ago, for the most part they weren’t distributed to poor black farmers. Instead, choice farms were handed out as patronage to members of the ruling ZANU-PF, Mugabe’s party, and many of these farms underperformed or were left fallow, for their new owners—well-connected politicians, lawyers, and military types—had little experience with farming. With Zimbabwe’s commercial farming industry in shambles, exports of tobacco and cut flowers plummeted. Harvests of staples like wheat collapsed as well, ushering in a major malnutrition crisis in a country that had once been the breadbasket of southern Africa.

But a recent NYT piece has a curious gloss on the land reform disaster in Zimbabwe. . . .

The oddly muted account of Mugabe’s terrible policy would be the most striking part of this passage, were it not for the irony of Mutambara’s quote. The former ambassador complains about how well-connected government officials were given “huge farms.” But Mutambara was one of those well-connected officials who got a farm. Does he really expect us to believe that the way land reform went was actually “contrary to what [they] had expected”? Did anyone actually expect most of the land to be evenly distributed to poor black farmers instead of well-connected officials like him? Or, alternatively, perhaps he is suggesting that his 530-acre farm isn’t all that big compared to the larger farms given to higher-ranking government officials. Either way, it is difficult to sympathize with his plight. Once Zimbabwe’s government dispensed with property rights, and a dictator was empowered to hand out land willy-nilly to his cronies, it opened the door to a cycle of predation that vitiates whites and blacks alike.

Mugabe has long gotten a pass because of the racism of “anti-colonial” Westerners, who are unwilling to hold a black leader to the standards they set for whites. Meanwhile, over a decade ago, Nick Kristof reported that black Zimbabweans were nostalgic for the days of white rule:

The hungry children and the families dying of AIDS here are gut-wrenching, but somehow what I find even more depressing is this: Many, many ordinary black Zimbabweans wish that they could get back the white racist government that oppressed them in the 1970’s.

“If we had the chance to go back to white rule, we’d do it,” said Solomon Dube, a peasant whose child was crying with hunger when I arrived in his village. “Life was easier then, and at least you could get food and a job.”

Mr. Dube acknowledged that the white regime of Ian Smith was awful. But now he worries that his 3-year-old son will die of starvation, and he would rather put up with any indignity than witness that.

An elderly peasant in another village, Makupila Muzamba, said that hunger today is worse than ever before in his seven decades or so, and said: “I want the white man’s government to come back. Even if whites were oppressing us, we could get jobs and things were cheap compared to today.”

His wife, Mugombo Mudenda, remembered that as a younger woman she used to eat meat, drink tea, use sugar and buy soap. But now she cannot even afford corn gruel. “I miss the days of white rule,” she said.

That’s just sad.


“That message, I’ll give you America great again — If you’re a white southerner, you know exactly what it means,” Clinton said.

The former president indicated that Trump’s campaign slogan signaled that he would make white people more culturally [dominant] over other races in the country.

“What it means is I’ll give you the economy you had 50 years ago* and I’ll move you back up the social totem pole and other people down,” Clinton said.

Huh – so all those leftists saying that Bill and Hillary were crypto-racists in 2008 we’re right! Not least of which considering that, as John Hinderaker of Power Line notes, “In 2008, Bill Clinton himself promised that Hillary would…wait for it…make America great again! You can’t make this stuff up:”

* Clinton’s smears of racism aside, what exactly does he have against the American economy overseen by Lyndon Johnson, his fellow southern Democrat? As with much of the decade’s growth, it was fueled by his immediate predecessor’s tax cuts, and really wasn’t too shabby, all things considered. Perhaps the aging former president simply forgot which decade he was campaigning in.