Search Results

WHY ARE DEMOCRAT-RUN INDUSTRIES SUCH CESSPITS OF RACISM? ‘It’s a racist myth that only a white man can save the world’: Constance Wu hits out at ‘whitewashed’ Great Wall film in which Matt Damon plays soldier in ancient China.

Why does an industry chockablock full of institutional racism deserve its own tax cuts anyhow?

TALKING POINTS MEMO: How These Former Obama Voters Came To See Trump As Their Champion. Short version: They voted for Obama but now they’re racist.

WELL, A CERTAIN FLAVOR OF THEM, ANYWAY: Democratic Youth Council shows why we dislike millennials.

If you were wondering why so many people dislike millennials today, look no further than the Orwellian-sounding “Youth Council” of the Democratic Party.

When Sarah Audelo, Millennial Vote Director for Hillary for America, took the podium, she began her remarks with a bunch of rules, a tactic that has become typical of snowflakes on college campuses protesting everyone’s free speech except their own.

“I open this space, perhaps, with a couple of ground rules,” she said. The first two rules were about working beyond the election and recognizing that everyone came for “good reasons.” But the third rule was, well, typical millennial.

“One of the ground rules that I do in a lot of my trainings, maybe you all have heard this before. I love it, but it is ‘don’t yuck my yum,'” she said “For some of us, there are some things that are very yummy and it hurts when people ‘yuck’ on us. So for example, if one issue is my core issue and it’s not yours, that’s cool, it’s my core issue, don’t yuck my yum, that’s cool.”

The phrase “yuck my yum” basically means not to tell someone that what they like is bad simply because you don’t like it. It can sometimes refer to food (quite literally, don’t tell me my food is gross), but also to sexuality.

Audelo went on to talk about the “space” she wanted to create for millennials in the room, something that didn’t need to be said and came off as insolent and not very inclusive. It reminded me of campus protesters who barred allies from helping with their cause simply because they were not black or of the LGBT community.

The anti-racists are always the most racist, the anti-sexists the most sexist, etc.

BLACK LIVES MATTER PROTESTORS IN PHILADELPHIA’S STREETS: They claim they’re sending a message to the Democrats. They oppose Bill Clinton’s 1994 crime bill. One spokesman said Hillary’s “husband created a bill that generationally continues to harm black and brown families.” OK– a Clinton did it. But then the spokesman — no doubt saving his job– called Donald Trump a “racist bigot.” The man’s free to express his opinions, and express them forcefully. The Constitution’s First Amendment guarantees citizens the right to free political speech (though Hillary wants to restrict it). But after the Dallas massacre, the Black Lives Matter organization and those who speak in its name no longer receive free pass privileges from media. The outfit’s members went too far when they scorned the phrase Blue Lives Matter as racist. The Dallas tragedy showed why their angry scorn was a mistake.



Screen Shot 2016-07-25 at 6.53.06 PM

Screen Shot 2016-07-25 at 6.52.15 PM

Screen Shot 2016-07-25 at 6.52.27 PM

Screen Shot 2016-07-25 at 6.52.40 PM

FLASHBACK: As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap:

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. Unlike Brooks, I actually ventured out to “intermingle” with Tea Partiers at various events that I covered for, contributing commentary to the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Examiner. As I reported from one event in Nashville, “Pundits claim the tea partiers are angry — and they are — but the most striking thing about the atmosphere in Nashville was how cheerful everyone seemed to be. I spoke with dozens of people, and the responses were surprisingly similar. Hardly any had ever been involved in politics before. Having gotten started, they were finding it to be not just worthwhile, but actually fun. Laughter rang out frequently, and when new-media mogul Andrew Breitbart held forth on a TV interview, a crowd gathered and broke into spontaneous applause. A year ago (2009), many told me, they were depressed about the future of America. Watching television pundits talk about President Obama’s transformative plans for big government, they felt alone, isolated and helpless. That changed when protests, organized by bloggers, met Mr. Obama a year ago in Denver, Colo., Mesa, Ariz., and Seattle, Wash. Then came CNBC talker Rick Santelli’s famous on-air rant on Feb. 19, 2009, which gave the tea-party movement its name. Tea partiers are still angry at federal deficits, at Washington’s habit of rewarding failure with handouts and punishing success with taxes and regulation, and the general incompetence that has marked the first year of the Obama presidency. But they’re no longer depressed.”

One of the most famous things about the Tea Partiers was that — as befits a relentlessly bourgeois protest movement — they left things cleaner than they found them. Rich Lowry reported from Washington, DC: “Just as stunning as the tableaux of the massive throngs lining the reflecting pool were the images of the spotless grounds afterward. If someone had told attendees they were expected to mow the grass before they left, surely some of them would have hitched flatbed trailers to their vehicles for the trip to Washington and gladly brought mowers along with them. This was the revolt of the bourgeois, of the responsible, of the orderly, of people profoundly at peace with the traditional mores of American society. . . .

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.


People who are unhappy with the things Trump is saying need to understand that he’s only getting so much traction because he’s filling a void. If the responsible people would talk about these issues, and take action, Trump wouldn’t take up so much space.

And there’s a lesson for our ruling class there: Calling Trump a fascist is a bit much (fascism, as Tom Wolfe once reported, is forever descending upon the United States, but somehow it always lands on Europe), but movements like fascism and communism get their start because the mechanisms of liberal democracy seem weak and ineffectual and dishonest. If you don’t want Trump — or, perhaps, some post-Trump figure who really is a fascist — to dominate things, you need to stop being weak and ineffectual and dishonest. . . .

Likewise, it’s a bit hard to take people seriously about Trump’s threat to civil liberties when President Obama was just endorsing an unconstitutional gun ban, when his attorney general was threatening to prosecute people for anti-Muslim speech (a threat later walked back, thankfully) and when universities and political leaders around the country are making clear their belief that free speech is obsolete.

Hearing that Yale professor Erika Christakis won’t be teaching at Yale because of the abuse she received over a respectful but non-PC email, former DNC chair Howard Dean tweeted: “Free speech is good. Respecting others is better.” To his credit, CNN’s Jake Tapper responded: “Of course only one of them is enshrined in the Constitution.”

But Twitter humorist IowaHawk had the last word: ”With the exception of POTUS, the Atty General, both leading presidential candidates, the media, and universities, Americans love free speech.”

If you wish to hold fascism, or even just Trumpism, at bay, then we need elites who are trustworthy, who can be counted on to protect the country, and who respect the Constitution even when it gets in the way of doing something they want to do. By failing to live up to these standards, they have chosen their “Destructor.” Let’s hope that they haven’t chosen ours, as well.

Okay, I have to admit, so far it’s not looking great.

FLASHBACK: Michelle Obama launches attack on Clinton.

Michelle Obama, who could become America’s first black First Lady, has launched a scathing attack on her husband’s opponent Hillary Clinton, stating she represents “the same old thing over and over again”.

Whereas Barack Obama preaches a message of hope and transcending differences that is more kumbaya than combative, his wife, like him a lawyer and a Harvard graduate, did not hesitate to take his main opponent on in an appearance at a Las Vegas.

On her 44th birthday, and less than 48 hours before today’s crucial Nevada caucuses, Mrs Obama spoke passionately about racial slurs against her husband and the symbolism of having a black family in the White House.

In a fiery comparison between his 2004 Senate campaign and this year’s presidential race, she said: “You know what they were saying about him then? They said he was too young. They said he was too inexperienced. They said he should wait his turn.

Well, he was too young and inexperienced. But Hillary the racist had to be stopped.


My grandma (Mamaw) recognized this instinctively. She said that most people were probably prejudiced, but they had to be secretive about it. “We”–meaning hillbillies–“are the only group of people you don’t have to be ashamed to look down upon.” During my final year at Yale Law, I took a small class with a professor I really admired (and still do). I was the only veteran in the class, and when this came up somehow in conversation, a young woman looked at me and said, “I can’t believe you were in the Marines. You just seem so nice. I thought that people in the military had to act a certain way.” It was incredibly insulting, and it was my first real introduction to the idea that this institution that was so important among my neighbors was looked down upon in such a personal way. To this lady, to be in the military meant that you had to be some sort of barbarian. I bit my tongue, but it’s one of those comments I’ll never forget.

The “why” is really difficult, but I have a few thoughts. The first is that humans appear to have some need to look down on someone; there’s just a basic tribalistic impulse in all of us. And if you’re an elite white professional, working class whites are an easy target: you don’t have to feel guilty for being a racist or a xenophobe. By looking down on the hillbilly, you can get that high of self-righteousness and superiority without violating any of the moral norms of your own tribe. So your own prejudice is never revealed for what it is.

A lot of it is pure disconnect–many elites just don’t know a member of the white working class. A professor once told me that Yale Law shouldn’t accept students who attended state universities for their undergraduate studies. (A bit of background: Yale Law takes well over half of its student body from very elite private schools.) “We don’t do remedial education here,” he said. Keep in mind that this guy was very progressive and cared a lot about income inequality and opportunity. But he just didn’t realize that for a kid like me, Ohio State was my only chance–the one opportunity I had to do well in a good school. If you removed that path from my life, there was nothing else to give me a shot at Yale. When I explained that to him, he was actually really receptive. He may have even changed his mind.

What does it mean for our politics? To me, this condescension is a big part of Trump’s appeal.

Trump is a symptom of the political class’s toxicity. Naturally, they’d rather we think he’s the toxin.

L.A. TIMES: Why the weasel word ‘problematic’ should be banned.

Urban Dictionary, that indispensable compendium of vernacular terms and usages, defines “problematic” as “a corporate-academic weasel word used mainly by people who sense that something may be oppressive, but don’t want to do any actual thinking about what the problem is or why it exists.” . . .

What’s more, as I’ve observed it, “problematic” tends to get used in inverse proportion to the seriousness of the offense.

We don’t hear “problematic” applied to police shootings of unarmed black men or to legislation preventing transgender people from using certain bathrooms. (The operative description of those issues would be, respectively, “actual problem” and “stupid.”) We certainly don’t hear it when the topic is international finance or the NFL because most people who use “problematic” can’t be bothered to follow such things. In the last few months the word has been applied, with some fanfare, to Calvin Trillin, who published a poem about Chinese food in the New Yorker that was deemed racist, and to Taylor Swift’s new boyfriend, whom fans are unhappy about because … I have no idea.

People who obsess over such things should be brutally mocked. It should be painful to be that stupid.

MORE ON BATON ROUGE: Local authorities say the murderer “deliberately ‘targeted and assassinated’” police officers. According to the Dallas Morning News, on July 9, two days after the slaughter in Dallas, the Baton Rouge murderer (Gavin Long) entered a Dallas barber shop. Long began ranting about “knowledge and power” and said he had been affiliated with the Black Panthers.” Let’s see. It was about a month ago, wasn’t it, that you were a despicable racist if you said Blue Lives Matter?


WAPO: I rejected my parents’ WASP values. Now I see we need them more than ever.

Visiting home between assignments, I found myself noticing and appreciating things I had always taken for granted — the tamed greenery and smooth streets, the absence of fear and abundance of choice, the code of good manners and civilized discussion. I also began to learn things about my parents I had never known and to realize that I had judged them unfairly. I had confused their social discomfort with condescension and their conservatism with callousness.

Related: 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. Unlike Brooks, I actually ventured out to “intermingle” with Tea Partiers at various events that I covered for, contributing commentary to the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Examiner. As I reported from one event in Nashville, “Pundits claim the tea partiers are angry — and they are — but the most striking thing about the atmosphere in Nashville was how cheerful everyone seemed to be. . . .

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.

We have the worst political class in American history, and our nation is being fundamentally transformed as a result. If, at this point, they find the transformation uncomfortable, please forgive my lack of sympathy.


Meh. Rosenthal invented the supermarket scanner myth to attack the patrician George H.W. Bush as out of touch in 1992. He shouldn’t be surprised when a more vulgar candidate succeeds him.

Flashback: The Tyranny and Lethargy of the Times Editorial Page — Reporters in ‘semi-open revolt’ against Andrew Rosenthal.

WE’D BE HEARING HYSTERICAL CRIES OF HORROR AND ANGUISH ABOUT ALEPPO’S HUMANITARIAN NIGHTMARE IF A REPUBLICAN WERE IN THE WHITE HOUSE: Medical aid group says 300,000 people face starvation in Aleppo, Syria. Remember Responsibility To Protect (R2P), hyped once upon a time by Obama Administration UN Ambassador Samantha Power? She used R2P as a media-academic weapon, portraying President George W. Bush as a benighted racist cowboy dummy for failing to intervene in Sudan’s Darfur war. Bush failed to lead and look at the disaster!!!!

At the link you’ll find a Samantha quote that the mainstream media appear to have forgotten:

In what perhaps could be seen as a preview of coming Obama administration policy was revealed during Samantha Power’s U.S. Senate confirmation hearing of July 17 (2013) when she stated, “We see the failure of the UN Security Council to respond to the slaughter in Syria – a disgrace that history will judge harshly.”

300,000 about to starve in Aleppo, Samantha, perhaps 400,000 already dead in the Syrian mess. Last month 51 US diplomats filed a dissent cable — perhaps they’ve seen enough history to feel the disgrace?

Forces loyal to the Assad dictatorship, supported by Russian strike aircraft, are attacking Aleppo. Recall in August 2013 the Assad regime attacked civilian neighborhoods with nerve gas, despite Obama’s “red line” warning. A motley collection of rebel groups is defending Aleppo. Some of the rebels have links to Islamist extremist organizations. However, VOA reports: “…Western-backed nationalist insurgents loosely grouped under the banner of the Free Syrian Army say they control the rebel-held part of the city.” Note that the VOA report quotes Samantha power as telling the UN Security Council that the attack by pro-Assad forces could have “potentially devastating consequences”…”Russia, as a co-sponsor of the cessation of hostilities, should use its influence on the regime to help stop these attacks,” Power said.”

In 2004, when you were bashing Bush about Darfur, you sure talked a big game, Samantha. US leadership! Bush must lead! It’s there, in print. Pretty harsh, huh?

THE HUFFINGTON POST: Every Time You Say “All Lives Matter” You Are Being an Accidental Racist.

As opposed to the deliberate racists that the Huffington Post prefers.

HEH: Dear Kurt, What Should I Do? I Think My Cat Is Racist.

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: Yale Cafeteria Worker Resigns After Breaking “Racist,” One-of-a-Kind Stained Glass:

A Yale cafeteria worker has resigned after smashing a historic stained glass window in Yale’s notorious Calhoun College residence hall, which is named after the 19th century white supremacist John C. Calhoun. The stained glass depicted two slaves picking cotton.

The worker, Corey Menafee, is black. He told the New Haven Independent that the dining hall window was “racist” and “very degrading” and that last month, while working an event for the college, he decided to use a broomstick to smash the window.

“I took a broomstick, and it was kind of high, and I climbed up and reached up and broke it,” he told the Independent. “It’s 2016, I shouldn’t have to come to work and see things like that.

“I just said, ‘That thing’s coming down today. I’m tired of it,’” he added. “I put myself in a position to do it, and did it.”

City police arrested Menafee, who now faces a felony charge.

As Iowahawk tweets in response, Welcome to “Yale University, where cafeteria workers ‘resign.’” Given that “he is renowned for his iconoclastic defenestration,” “He will be forwarding his Curriculum Vitae to the Harvard cafeteria department forthwith.”




FBI Director James Comey stood before the nation and issued a list of Hillary Clinton’s astounding wrongdoings Tuesday as regards America’s national security — and then said he was not recommending prosecution because, in essence, what Mrs. Clinton did was “extremely careless” but not criminal.

As he spoke, I recalled F. Scott Fitzgerald’s peerless description in “The Great Gatsby” of a feckless wealthy couple: “They were careless people, Tom and Daisy—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into . . . their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

Fitzgerald’s Tom and Daisy are pikers compared to Bill and Hillary. If one wishes to accept Comey’s contention that Mrs. Clinton is a careless but not criminal person, and one then considers her carelessness as a continuum with her husband’s careless conduct during his time in the Oval Office, then the Clintons have earned the dubious distinction of being the most outrageously careless couple this nation has ever known.

—John Podhoretz, “FBI just told us we’d be in bad hands with Hillary,” the New York Post, July 5th.


WASHINGTON — IT says a lot about our relationship with Hillary Clinton that she seems well on her way to becoming Madam President because she’s not getting indicted.

If she were still at the State Department, she could be getting fired for being, as the F.B.I. director told Congress, “extremely careless” with top-secret information. Instead, she’s on a glide path to a big promotion.

And that’s the corkscrew way things go with the Clintons, who are staying true to their reputation as the Tom and Daisy Buchanan of American politics. Their vast carelessness drags down everyone around them, but they persevere, and even thrive.

—Maureen Dowd, “The Clinton Contamination,” the New York Times, July 9th.

Back in 2009, Time magazine asked “Is Maureen Dowd Guilty of Plagiarism?”

In her weekend column, Dowd sought to highlight the irony of the Republicans’ holding House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s feet to the fire for not opposing Republican policies on torture aggressively enough. Interesting as this line of thinking might have been, it subsequently drowned in the backwash of controversy over her almost verbatim use of a 43-word paragraph that had already appeared in a column written by Josh Marshall on the political website Talking Points Memo.

The similarity was first noticed by TPM on Sunday, and by the evening a mortified Dowd had apologized, saying she had not read Marshall’s column but that evidently someone she knew had.

This time around, it’s repeat of a concept, not a direct lift. But in that same column, Dowd committed a crime far worse in the eyes of many leftist true believers than (likely unintentionally) stealing a metaphor for Hillary.

“You know what’s racist? The NYT’s Maureen Dowd just found out the hard way,” the Liberty Unyielding blog notes. Dowd’s crime?

I hope you’re sitting down while you’re reading this.

Later in the same column linked to above, she dared called Obama “Barry.” As in:

The president and his aides attempted to keep a rein on Clinton’s State Department — refusing to let her bring in her hit man, Sidney Blumenthal.

But in the end, Hillary’s goo got on Obama anyhow. On Tuesday, after Comey managed to make both Democrats and Republicans angry by indicting Clinton politically but not legally, Barry and Hillary flew to Charlotte, N.C., for their first joint campaign appearance.

The result? After delicate leftists cracked open vials of smelling salts and picked themselves up off their fainting couches, the hashtag “#PresidentObamaNotBarry” trended on Twitter and there were calls for Dowd’s ouster from the Times. Though as one person with a bit more common sense tweeted in respose, “So after Dubya, Slick Willie, Tricky Dick, etc., you’re telling me Barry’s off the table? Go find better outrages.”

Like midwestern pizza parlors, rocket scientists in hipster shirts and airline pilots who compliment their flight crew.

JONAH DOES POLITICAL JIU-JITSU: The conservative principle behind Black Lives Matter, as explored by Jonah Goldberg in the L.A. Times:

Liberals have seemingly boundless faith in the power and nobility of government, but many draw a line around cops, creating one of the strangest ironies of modern liberalism: Many of those most eager to support new laws and new regulations suddenly lose faith when it comes to the government employees charged with enforcing them. It’s particularly amazing given that law enforcement personnel typically receive far more training than your typical bureaucrat or legislator.

Just as conservatives need to recognize the ills of police abuse, liberals need to acknowledge that the first obligation of the state is to defend the safety and property of its citizens, and that nothing undermines the legitimacy of the law more than vilifying those sworn to uphold it.

As lots of people have pointed out, the modern left has devolved down two opposing statements: All cops are potential racists and can’t be trusted. But only the police should have guns.

So which is it?

HEATHER MAC DONALD: The Myths Of Black Lives Matter:

Apparently the Black Lives Matter movement has convinced Democrats and progressives that there is an epidemic of racist white police officers killing young black men. Such rhetoric is going to heat up as Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders court minority voters before the Feb. 27 South Carolina primary.

But what if the Black Lives Matter movement is based on fiction? Not just the fictional account of the 2014 police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., but the utter misrepresentation of police shootings generally.

To judge from Black Lives Matter protesters and their media and political allies, you would think that killer cops pose the biggest threat to young black men today. But this perception, like almost everything else that many people think they know about fatal police shootings, is wrong.

The Washington Post has been gathering data on fatal police shootings over the past year and a half to correct acknowledged deficiencies in federal tallies. The emerging data should open many eyes.

For starters, fatal police shootings make up a much larger proportion of white and Hispanic homicide deaths than black homicide deaths. According to the Post database, in 2015 officers killed 662 whites and Hispanics, and 258 blacks. (The overwhelming majority of all those police-shooting victims were attacking the officer, often with a gun.) Using the 2014 homicide numbers as an approximation of 2015’s, those 662 white and Hispanic victims of police shootings would make up 12% of all white and Hispanic homicide deaths. That is three times the proportion of black deaths that result from police shootings.

The lower proportion of black deaths due to police shootings can be attributed to the lamentable black-on-black homicide rate. There were 6,095 black homicide deaths in 2014—the most recent year for which such data are available—compared with 5,397 homicide deaths for whites and Hispanics combined. Almost all of those black homicide victims had black killers.

Police officers—of all races—are also disproportionately endangered by black assailants. Over the past decade, according to FBI data, 40% of cop killers have been black. Officers are killed by blacks at a rate 2.5 times higher than the rate at which blacks are killed by police.

Some may find evidence of police bias in the fact that blacks make up 26% of the police-shooting victims, compared with their 13% representation in the national population. But as residents of poor black neighborhoods know too well, violent crimes are disproportionately committed by blacks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, though they made up roughly 15% of the population there.

Such a concentration of criminal violence in minority communities means that officers will be disproportionately confronting armed and often resisting suspects in those communities, raising officers’ own risk of using lethal force.

She has a book out, The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe. But remember, facts don’t matter, because this is all about energizing black turnout in November. Nothing less, and nothing more.

JOHN LOTT: Obama’s false racism claims are putting cops’ lives in danger.

So he’s acting stupidly, to coin a phrase.

DALLAS OBSERVER: One Dallas Cop’s Experience and Thoughts on Thursday Night.

To compound issues a continuation of the demonstration sprung up in front of a convenience store and the crowd there quickly grew from 30-50 to 150-200 angry demonstrators shouting things at assembled officers who stood in a skirmish line between the store and demonstrators. We worked to funnel additional resources there as well as divert some DART busses to provide transportation away for those who needed it.

Some got on and some stayed to hurl insults at officers. One officer later told me “I tried to tell them that we were there to protect them and the guy said, ‘Protect us hell! You guys are the targets tonight!’” and started laughing.

Black Lives Matter is acting like a racist hate group. You can only imagine how the press would treat Tea Partiers or Trump supporters who acted this way.

Related: The Violent Tone of Black Lives Matter Has Alienated Even Liberals Like Me.


Screen Shot 2016-07-08 at 8.32.59 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-08 at 8.32.47 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-08 at 8.38.45 AM

Latest: Snipers kill 5 cops at Dallas protest. “Three people, including a woman, were in custody before the fourth suspect’s death, Dallas Police Chief David Brown said Friday morning.”

Plus: President Obama on the Fatal Shootings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile.

Also: Obama: ‘When people say Black Lives Matter, that doesn’t mean blue lives don’t matter.’ I dunno, I’m pretty sure it was racist to say that yesterday. And why is Obama talking about police officers’ “collective bargaining rights” at a time like this?

Related: Donald Trump’s statement.


Screen Shot 2016-07-08 at 8.46.58 AM

Not everyone favors civil society.

UPDATE: Dallas Shooting Suspect Targeted White Officers, Was Killed When Officials Detonated Bomb.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Counterargument:

Screen Shot 2016-07-08 at 9.20.04 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-08 at 9.21.12 AM


Screen Shot 2016-07-08 at 9.34.10 AM

THE RACIST HISTORY OF GUN CONTROL, IN THE ATLANTIC: The Second Amendment’s Second-Class Citizens. Unlike Philandro Castile, Alton Sterling was a felon, and thus not allowed to have a gun — which the article glosses over somewhat — though it’s true that the police probably couldn’t have known that.

“SOCIAL JUSTICE” IN A NUTSHELL: Yelling ‘I hate white people’ and punching one isn’t a hate crime, Canadian judge rules. Most of the WaPo story isn’t about the actual assault, but about how racist Canada has always been.

STUPID RACIST COMPUTERS: The available evidence suggests that face matching systems don’t work equally well for different races.

AMERICAN JOURNALISTS COVERING THE TRUMP PHENOMENON COULD LEARN A LOT FROM this piece on Pauline Hanson by Margo Kingston. “Her supporters were by and large nice people with little money who were largely uninterested in politics. They were suffering badly from the effects of competition policy, which had seen basic services and jobs stripped out of their towns. They loved Hanson’s grit and plain speaking. Most of all, they loved that she listened. . . . When I tried to converse with supporters about politics I misinterpreted everything they said, and likewise. I thought they were racists and they thought I was a racist. Communication was impossible without getting to know each other first. . . . Western democracies are splitting up into warring tribes. I think Hanson’s return to our parliament is a chance to bring ours together a little bit. If we try.”

TRUMP SON-IN-LAW JARED KUSHNER WRITES ABOUT THE DONALD TRUMP HE KNOWS: I freelance for The New York Observer, which Jared Kushner owns. I don’t know him and he doesn’t know me. But this is quite an essay.

Blunt lead:

My father-in-law is not an anti-Semite. It’s that simple, really. Donald Trump is not anti-Semitic and he’s not a racist. Despite the best efforts of his political opponents and a large swath of the media to hold Donald Trump accountable for the utterances of even the most fringe of his supporters—a standard to which no other candidate is ever held—the worst that his detractors can fairly say about him is that he has been careless in retweeting imagery that can be interpreted as offensive.

Kushner is responding to an essay written by an Observer staffer.

Read them both…We link. You decide.


Amanpour asks one of her guests, either Daniel Hannan or the UK foreign minister, can’t remember which, what is wrong with the Leave people. Don’t they like their strong economy? It has not occurred to the stateless, rootless, global-citizen Amanpour that people might prefer their own customs and sovereignty to getting rich. Having no loyalty to any particular place, Amanpouristas find the love of one’s people, land, and traditions simply bizarre. So they denounce it as racist. I don’t believe this is cynical. I think they honestly believe it. And here is why it’s tribalism: they see anyone outside the tribe as barbarian. The fact that they see themselves as sophisticated and advanced instead of mere partisans of a different tribe, with their own prejudices and limitations, is what makes them so hard to take. Technocratic liberalism is their religion, and its god is a jealous god.

Read the whole thing.

21ST CENTURY POLITICKING: Donald Trump’s Reddit Fan Club Faces Crackdown, Infighting.

The subreddit, managed by a handful of mostly anonymous fans, is a breakout success. But it’s also plagued by constant infighting among its leaders, infiltration by white supremacists and clashes with the site’s administrators over complaints that its users game the system to make their content more visible.

Reddit’s content is promoted on a competitive basis: The more users “upvote” an individual post, the higher it appears on r/all, a homepage that encompasses the whole site, with certain exceptions. The popularity of r/the_donald meant ordinary users who visited Reddit in recent months faced a regular bombardment of Trump posts, including some that critics found grotesque, racist or just plain obnoxious.

These complaints reached a crescendo in June when Reddit’s founder and CEO Steve Huffman announced that he was changing the algorithm for r/all to ensure more “diverse” posts and prevent users from colluding to force their content to the front page.

The Trump subreddit is the most obvious example, but even blog comments have seen infestations by trolls, bots, and sockpuppets on behalf of various candidates. The signal-to-noise ratio of this election cycle is often indecipherably low.

AS A WISE COMMUNITY ORGANIZER ADVISED HIS CONSTITUENTS, GET IN YOUR OPPONENTS’ FACES AND PUNCH BACK TWICE AS HARD: “Vote Properly, You Virulent Racist!” As Dale Franks writes, “The Elites are about to learn that the rubes and hayseeds in flyover country don’t like them.”


—Headline, Salon, January 31st, 2016.

—Headline, NewsBusters, yesterday.

As Milo Yiannopoulos writes, there’s only one solution to the Clinton’s long sordid history of racism: vote for the first real black president this November.

A RARE MOMENT OF SANITY IN THE MIDST OF THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: UNC removes guidelines calling golf, compliments microaggressions.

Don’t worry though, golf will always be racist at MSNBC.

DALE FRANKS: Vote Properly, You Virulent Racist! “Most people, most of the time, are perfectly happy to let elites run the country. After all, it seems to make the elites happy to run run things, and, as long as they’re reasonably competent at it, and do it reasonably unobtrusively, no one much seems to care. But when elite competence is compromised by faulty ideology and cronyism, people become unhappy. And when the elite response to complaints is dismissal or insult, political problems begin to bloom. People begin to think about politics. They begin to do things. It is no coincidence, as our Soviet friends used to say, that the last decade has seen the rise of the TEA Party, the Occupy Movement, and the Trump phenomenon. People of all political stripes are becoming unhappy. I think we’re about to watch the elites start paying a price for that inattention and contempt.”

If so, it’ll be the first time they’ve paid a price for anything in quite a while. Which is also the point, I suppose.

Related: Liz Peek: Pushed Around and Left Out. The Frightening US Parallels to Brexit.

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: NJ third grader mentions brownies being served at class party, called racist by another student, police dispatched:

On June 16, police were called to an unlikely scene: an end-of-the-year class party at the William P. Tatem Elementary School in Collingswood.

A third grader had made a comment about the brownies being served to the class. After another student exclaimed that the remark was “racist,” the school called the Collingswood Police Department, according to the mother of the boy who made the comment.

The police officer spoke to the student, who is 9, said the boy’s mother, Stacy dos Santos, and local authorities.

Dos Santos said that the school overreacted and that her son made a comment about snacks, not skin color.

“He said they were talking about brownies. . . . Who exactly did he offend?” dos Santos said.

No one of course, but like the Junior Spies in Orwell’s 1984, it’s always good for “Progressives” to use hapless kids to keep the rest of the proles on their toes. As Jonah Goldberg wrote in 2008’s Liberal Fascism, “Because liberals have what Thomas Sowell calls an ‘unconstrained vision,’ they assume everyone sees things through the same categorical prism:”

So once again, as with the left’s invention of social Darwinism, liberals assume their ideological opposites take the “bad” view to their good. If liberals assume blacks—or women, or gays—are inherently good, conservatives must think these same groups are inherently bad.

This is not to say that there are no racist conservatives. But at the philosophical level, liberalism is battling a straw man. This is why liberals must constantly assert that conservatives use code words—because there’s nothing obviously racist about conservatism per se. Indeed, the constant manipulation of the language to keep conservatives—and conservatives—and other non-liberals—on the defensive is a necessary tactic for liberal politics. The Washington, D.C., bureaucrat who was fired for using the word “niggardly” correctly in a sentence is a case in point. The ground must be constantly shifted to maintain a climate of grievance. Fascists famously ruled by terror. Political correctness isn’t literally terroristic, but it does govern through fear. No serious person can deny that the grievance politics of the American left keeps decent people in a constant state of fright—they are afraid to say the wrong word, utter the wrong thought, offend the wrong constituency.

Which is why everything must be racist, right down to the food on your kids’ plates.

Related: Needless to say, racism is also a particularly useful cudgel for “Progressives” at election time.


Brexit? That one I got absolutely right, and for a very simple reason: I was raised by the quivering, arrogant, and hopelessly delusional tribe of the Israeli left.

If you think my assessment uncharitable, mosey over to the promised land and have a chat with anyone who still votes Meretz, though you may have to hurry as there are fewer and fewer of them with each electoral cycle. Catch one on a good day, though, and you will probably hear the following account of all that plagues the state of the Jews: Israelis, goes the leftist ur-narrative, used to be reasonable and genial people. They used to believe in peace, which is why they signed the Oslo accords and welcomed back Yasser Arafat and strove toward a permanent two-state solution of peace and reconciliation. Then, like a devil out of Bulgakov, Netanyahu, a Middle East Mephistopheles, appeared on the scene, and, with his dark tricks, poisoned hearts and minds, turning Israelis from a gaggle of glowing Labor-voters to a rabble of benighted boobs, always reaching for their pitchforks and always thirsty for blood. If only reason would prevail, cries the Israeli left, peace will soon return. And if it does not, disaster is almost certain.

Omitted from this story, of course, are a few inconvenient facts, including most mentions of unrequited Israeli concessions and almost all talk of escalating Palestinian incitement and violence. But bring none of this up with the left, please: Only fools and racists still talk about things like terrorism or religion or national pride.

Translate these attitudes into the Queen’s English, and you’ll hear an all-too-familiar story. Labour, for long the occupants of 10 Downing, downplayed legitimate concerns shared by growing swaths of the population as being somehow inappropriate, as if only bigots watched the news and concluded that lax immigration policies deserved, at the very least, close scrutiny. Some members of the party have come to see this strategy as misguided: Jack Straw, Labour’s former Home Secretary, for example, recently admitted that setting no restrictions on migration in 2004 was “a spectacular mistake” as well as a “well-intentioned policy we messed up.”

Though to be fair, creating a permanent underclass does wonders for building the roster of leftwing voters, on both sides of the Atlantic.

DONALD TRUMP: Elizabeth Warren Is A “Racist.”

Donald Trump lashed out at Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Monday, calling her a “racist” and a “total fraud.”

Speaking in an interview with NBC News correspondent Hallie Jackson, Trump retaliated against Warren, who described him as a bigot just hours earlier at a campaign stop with presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton in Ohio. . . .

“We call her Pocahontas for a reason,” Trump, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, told NBC. “She said she’s 5 percent Native American. She was unable to prove it. She used the fact that she was Native American to advance her career. Elizabeth Warren is a total fraud. I know it. Other people who work with her know it. Elizabeth Warren is a total fraud.

“She made up her heritage, which I think is racist,” Trump continued. “I think she’s a racist, actually, because what she did was very racist.”

Trump has repeatedly hammered Warren over a controversy that flared up during her 2012 Senate run over her claims that she has Native American ancestry. During her tenure as a professor at Harvard University, the school touted those claims as evidence of its diverse faculty.

Trump on Monday went on to call Warren “one of the least productive senators in the United States Senate,” and said he hopes Clinton picks her for vice president so that he can “speak very openly about her.”

Will we have a 23andMe debate?

MEGAN MCARDLE: ‘Citizens of the World’? Nice Thought, But … “The inability of those elites to grapple with the rich world’s populist moment was in full display on social media last night. Journalists and academics seemed to feel that they had not made it sufficiently clear that people who oppose open borders are a bunch of racist rubes who couldn’t count to 20 with their shoes on, and hence will believe any daft thing they’re told. Given how badly this strategy had just failed, this seemed a strange time to be doubling down.”

SHUT UP, RACIST, VOX EXPLAINED: Brexit isn’t about economics. It’s about xenophobia.

Isn’t it always?

ANALYSIS: TRUE. “Blaming guns for the Islamist murder of 49 people in the Orlando gay club, is like saying that Zyklon B gas was the cause of the Holocausts and not the Nazis:”


In Toronto, Premier Kathleen Wynne, Canada’s first openly gay premier, also refused to address the Islamist nature of the attack, saying, “one cannot fight homophobia with Islamphobia”, at a vigil for the Orlando victims.

This is nonsense. Orlando was an act of Islamic terror and of Islamofascism, a doctrine of hatred towards the West and what it stands for, including LGBTQ rights.

It holds secular liberal democracy in contempt, hates non-Muslims, degrades women and is racist towards non-Arabs, especially black Africans.

It is a supremacist death cult that has the end times as its ultimate goal.

Chia Barsen, a 32-year old Canadian Marxist, was 10 when his family fled Islamic Iran, political refugees escaping the murderous rule of its barbaric ayatollahs.

Commenting on the liberal left’s reaction to the Oralando massacre, Barsen wrote on his blog:

“Blaming guns for the Islamist murder of 49 people in the Orlando gay club, is like saying that Zyklon B gas was the cause of the Holocausts and not the Nazis. Gun control is a clear and present issue in the U.S. and there are countless episodes of shootings in the U.S. to justify the removal of all guns (not just automatic weapons), from the streets.

“However, piggybacking on the gun control debate and not making any mention of the threat of Political Islam and Islamism, is the furthering of a political agenda and not simple ignorance or apathy.” Exactly.

Toronto Sun columnist Tarek Fatah in a column titled “West bowing to radical Islam,” who looks back on Mark Steyn’s America Alone and his run-in with Canada’s anti-free speech authorities and concludes, “Today, I recognize, Steyn was right and I was wrong.”


From the editors: Like the rest of the country and the world, Billboard editors were horrified by the mass killing at Orlando’s Pulse nightclub on June 12, and by the murder of singer Christina Grimmie the night before. Both tragedies occurred where musicians and music fans gathered. And so faced with another gun-related tragedy, the staff organized this special “Open Letter to Congress” cover of Billboard.

With the help of leading gun-violence prevention group Everytown for Gun Safety, editors reached out to those we cover in the music industry, and asked for their support and their signatures to help seek a sane and safe end to gun violence. Within minutes, Joan Jett was the first to sign on. Lady Gaga shortly followed. Within hours, and then in a matter of just a few days, nearly 200 top artists and executives—pop stars (including Grimmie’s friend Selena Gomez), rappers, rock gods, legends, Broadway heroes, even two Beatles and Yoko Ono—lent their voices to the chorus of Americans looking to our political leaders for change. Billboard, artists and music-industry executives join so many members of the House and Senate this week proudly advocating for common-sense gun safety.

—Entertainment industry house organ Billboard, a once-staid publication devoted to tracking record and videotape sales, which has now dropped the mask and gone full SJW.

Funny though, the week after 9/11, I don’t recall music industry mavens lining up at the Boeing plant in Seattle to protest against the massively lethal attack caused by their giant assault planes. But then, a different form of magical thinking was employed by many on the left back then to wish away the causes of that Islamic terrorist attack onto a more acceptable enemy.

IT’S COME TO THIS: Gawker: “House Democrats are going to the mat for a shitty, racist, useless bill.” That’s right, even Gawker sees through this.

But remember, it’s not about gun control. It’s about distracting people from the fact that Obama’s FBI let a Muslim registered Democrat kill 49 gay people — and then, after that, also managed to lose track of his accomplice-wife.

MORE ON THE CLEMSON ADMINISTRATION’S BANANA DEBACLE: Truth And Indoctrination At Clemson University.

On Monday, April 11, bananas were found hanging from a banner commemorating the contributions of African-Americans to Clemson University. Almost immediately, a group of perpetually self-promoting campus agitators posted a photograph of the hanging bananas to social media. This small faction then constructed a narrative clearly implying that the perpetrators were white racists.

Their message was clear: Clemson University is a racist institution. Their goal was to smear Clemson University and its students, to induce a sense of collective racial guilt, and to fundamentally transform Clemson.

Later that day, Chris Miller, Associate Vice President and Dean of Students, issued the following statement addressed to the Clemson community: “Clemson University does not tolerate racist or intolerant activities and behavior of any kind. We will respond accordingly when those boundaries are violated and will use the full force of our adjudication process to sanction all who may be involved.”

On Wednesday, April 13, student protestors (urged on by a few faculty and administrative supporters) launched a slick, media-driven, nine-day protest on the steps of Sikes Hall triggered by the “racist” banana incident.

There was only one problem with this narrative: It wasn’t true! It was based on a lie. Even worse, the CU administration knew the narrative was false from day one and did nothing about it.

I expect the South Carolina legislature will be asking questions.

IF IT’S RACIST TO DEMAND PHOTO ID FOR VOTING, isn’t it racist to demand background checks for Uber drivers?

Uber is safer than taxis. The Uber app, by its nature, keeps track of which drivers pick pick up which passengers.

INSTITUTIONAL RACISM: Clemson let white students be tarred and feathered for hate-crime they knew was hoax.

‘Our own administration has allowed the reputation of a majority of the student body to be torn to shreds’

One Clemson University student says he is very upset at campus leaders for their decision to allow the student body and the nation to wrongly believe that bananas hung from a pole on campus was a hate crime.

The incident took place in mid-April, but emails released a few weeks ago by the school show officials knew the same day the bananaing occurred that it was not racially motivated.

But “Bananagate,” as some now call it, had thrust South Carolina’s second largest university into the national spotlight because the day after the pictures of the hanging bananas spread like wildfire on social media students launched an eight-day sit in over claims of campus racism.

The “racist” bananas prompted student protesters to claim they felt unsafe at Clemson, that it was filled with racism, and that “Clemson does not embrace its students from underrepresented groups.”

Now at least one student, Clayton Warnke, said he believes campus leaders should apologize for their “lie,” he recently told “The Tara Show,” a radio talk show on local station 106.3 WORD.

“I do believe they should apologize,” Warnke said. “Clemson is made up primarily of white students, I think everyone knows that. … And our own administration has allowed the reputation of a majority of the student body to be torn to shreds in the public spotlight and has done nothing to stop this.”

Reached for additional comment by The College Fix, Warkne referred to his extensive comments given on the show.

Asked by Tara whether Clemson’s decision was discriminatory toward white students, noting “it really made white people at Clemson look horrible,” Warnke replied: “Absolutely it did. Talking to some of these people, I am basically told straight up that my opinion and what I have to say doesn’t matter simply because of the color of my skin.”

“Ironically,” he continued, “that is exactly the opposite of what Martin Luther back during the Civil Rights movement of the 60s advocated for.”

This is all about diversity and student-life educrats trying to build their empires via racial/political intimidation.


Well, the people who initially created them certainly were. In addition to the Davis-Bacon Act of the 1930s, which John Ellis mentions in his article at PJM, E. A. Ross (1866-1951), who coined the “race suicide” theory as an early “Progressive” intellectual, gave his justification for a minimum wage in starkly racist terms at the turn of the 20th century: “The Coolie cannot outdo the American, but he can underlive him.” He wasn’t alone amongst his “Progressive” peers in espousing such justifications.

On the other hand, such laws are leading to dramatic new advancements in robotics, so they’ve got that going for them…

MEGAN MCARDLE ON BREXIT: Britain’s Elites Can’t Ignore the Masses.

The folks I talked to were from all over Britain, but they had middle age in common as well as, mostly, membership in the petit bourgeoisie. What did they think about leaving the EU?

“I still don’t know how I’m going to vote,” said an adult-education teacher from the Midlands, who then proceeded to deliver a long and earnest speech about the cost of providing social services to immigrants, which suggested that she wasn’t really so unsure. Her sentiments were echoed by other people I talked to during that endless layover.

These weren’t racist diatribes; no one mentioned race or nationality, and, in fact, they were very sympathetic to the plight of immigrants. They just didn’t want to have to accept them into their country — operative words “have to.” The dominant tone was what is often called compassion fatigue, and their arguments were not unreasonable.

Riding a refugee-crowded ferry back from the Greek island of Lesvos last fall, my heart broke for every one of the families I saw. But I couldn’t help but ask myself just how many such people Europe could absorb in a short period of time. The people in the airport were asking themselves the same question, and the answer they were getting was “no more, please.”

Around 1:30 Monday morning, a budget jet brought me to Luton, where I stayed overnight. The next leg of my travel did not begin until late afternoon, and so I took the opportunity to walk around the area near the Mall Luton, which turned out to be a very good place to think about Brexit.

Luton is a city of about 200,000 people on the outskirts of London. It was once known for its manufacture of hats, and in 1905, Vauxhall Motors opened a manufacturing plant in Luton. The company stopped making passenger cars there in 2002, and the town is now — like so many places in Europe and America — looking for its post-industrial future. EasyJet, a budget airline, is based there, but as you so often find in similar cities in the U.S., the biggest employers are the local government and the local hospital. It has also had a dramatic shift in population. The Luton council estimates that “between 50% and 75% of the population would not have lived in Luton or not have been born at the time of the 2001 Census.” It is now minority white British, and only barely majority white.

You can see it in the area around the mall. It’s not a notably prosperous place: multiple dollar stores, not much in the way of upscale retail. The Duke of Clarence pub is closed, having apparently run afoul of the local constabulary; one Polish food store appeared to be doing a land-office business. I wandered into several off-license shops in search of batteries and found that all of them appeared to cater to a significant foreign-born clientele. I bought some Polish sausage and pastry at an off-license, some Indian dumplings and Thai noodles at a couple of food trucks, and I sat on a bench in the mall, listening to people from three continents chat with each other in more than half a dozen languages, none of which I spoke.

As an American, this did not strike me as odd; this is what our cities have been like for centuries, particularly on the coasts. One group of immigrants moves in, creates an enclave, then gets rich, assimilates and moves out, making way for the next group that will throw a little of their food, their language and their customs into our vast melting pot. But this is not normal in most of the world. Nor is it necessarily welcome.

Read the whole thing. Or as Ace says, The Transnationalists/Globalists/Universalists of the GOP Capital Class Ought to Read this Megan McArdle Piece Before It’s Too Late.

GARRISON KEILLOR IS RETIRING FROM NPR’S THE PRAIRIE HOME COMPANION: “Public radio always wondered what it was going to do when Garrison leaves,” [Eric Nuzum, former vice president for programming at NPR] said. “It’s about to find out.”

Near the end of a fawning New York Times profile on the 73-year old Keillor, the mask is lowered, and the real man begins to emerge:

Curiously, Mr. Keillor has always found it difficult spending so much time with the strong, good-looking, above average people of Lake Wobegon, which he based on his relatives, past and present.

In “The Keillor Reader” (2014), he complained bitterly about “their industriousness, their infernal humility, their schoolmarmish sincerity, their earnest interest in you, their clichés falling like clockwork — it can be tiring to be around.”

Speaking on his porch, Mr. Keillor said of Lake Wobegonians, i.e., his relatives, “I am frustrated by them in real life.” They were too controlled by good manners, he said, and “have a very hard time breaking through.”

So why devote so much of his professional life ruminating about them? “It’s the people I think I know,” he replied.

Will he miss them, and the weekly jolt of the show?

“No,” he replied. “No.”

As with many on the left, in the wake of 9/11, Keillor emerged as a vicious partisan, describing President Bush’s supporters thusly in 2004:

The party of Lincoln and Liberty was transmogrified into the party of hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills, faith-based economists, fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini libertarians, people who believe Neil Armstrong’s moonwalk was filmed in Roswell, New Mexico, little honkers out to diminish the rest of us, Newt’s evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man suspicious of the free flow of information and of secular institutions, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk.

As Christopher Caldwell memorably put it that same year:  “At some point, Democrats became the party of small-town people who think they’re too big for their small towns…For these people, liberalism is not a belief at all. No, it’s something more important: a badge of certain social aspirations. That is why the laments of the small-town leftists get voiced with such intemperance and desperation. As if those who voice them are fighting off the nagging thought: If the Republicans aren’t particularly evil, then maybe I’m not particularly special.”

SHOT: Mizzou Race Activists Declare ‘Too Many White People’ at Orlando Vigil.



FLASHBACK:  “It’s really amazing how liberals are finding a way to blame Christians for the actions of the Orlando terrorist, who was, 1) gay, 2) Muslim, 3) Democrat, and 4) racist. But then that’s what they did that time when a crazed liberal gay activist tried to shoot up the Family Research Council. Remember that? He literally said he wanted to kill everyone and then ‘smear Chick-Fil-A in the victim’s faces’… So when gay liberal Muslims kill gays, it’s our fault, and also when a gay liberal tries to kill Christians, it’s our fault. I guess they’re consistent?”

As Jonah Goldberg wrote yesterday, there’s a reason why “Orlando Shooting Reaction Has the Feel of Eternal Recurrence.”

HOLLYWOOD’S GUN HYPOCRISY, in 15 Movie Posters from 2016.

As Hollywood’s Alec Baldwin asked of himself, his industry and his ideology in 2011, “What Changes Will We Make After the Giffords Shooting?”

If only his fellow leftists had listened to his impassioned cri de coeur, so much of his industry’s dangerous — arguably racist — eliminationist clip art could have been avoided.

AND YET IF YOU SAID HE WAS GUILTY 20 YEARS AGO, YOU WERE A RACIST: Most Blacks Now Think OJ Was Guilty. I wonder what current attitudes will undergo a similar change in 20 years?

DON’T DO STUPID SH*T: Orlando Terrorist Worked for Same Security Contractor That Has Been Moving Illegal Aliens Into U.S. by the Vanload.

UPDATE: Glenn’s point from last night, that Mateen “escaped scrutiny because people were afraid of seeming racist or something,” seems particularly apt now.

SHOCKER: Co-worker: Omar Mateen homophobic, ‘unhinged.’

Gilroy, a former Fort Pierce Police officer, said Mateen frequently made homophobic and racial comments. Gilroy said he complained to his employer G4S Security several times but it did nothing because he was Muslim.

Gilroy quit after he said Mateen began stalking him via multiple text messages — 20 or 30 a day. He also sent Gilroy 13 to 15 phone messages a day, he said.

“I quit because everything he said was toxic,” Gilroy said Sunday, “and the company wouldn’t do anything. This guy was unhinged and unstable. He talked of killing people.”

Gilroy said this shooting didn’t come as a surprise to him.

So, like the San Bernardino shooter, he escaped scrutiny because people were afraid of seeming racist or something.

BUT IT’S RACIST TO SUGGEST THAT JUDGES MIGHT BE INFLUENCED BY THEIR ETHNICITY: The Obama Admin Blocked An Iranian-American Judge From Hearing Iranian Immigration Cases.

In 2015, immigration Judge A. Ashley Tabaddor sued the United States Department of Justice after it forced her to recuse herself from “all immigration cases involving Iranians.”

According to reporting from NPR, Obama’s DOJ first became “concerned with the appearance of impropriety” after Tabaddor — who is of Iranian descent — attended a 2012 White House meeting with other high-profile Iranian-Americans.

Why is the Obama Administration so racist?

MEGAN MCARDLE: Five Reasons Decent People May Want To Back Trump:

4. Immigration. Trump supporters are not wrong to say that elites of both parties have basically conspired to keep both immigration and trade off the agenda. Nor are they wrong to be annoyed when any opposition to increased immigration, or to legalizing people who are here illegally, is immediately dismissed as racist. No one who wrings their hands about gentrification can reasonably dismiss “I like my community the way it is” as an inherently racist and illegitimate sentiment.

Moreover, in a country with birthright voters, immigration means importing your future electorate; this, of course, sounds splendid to people on the left who think that this electorate will be more friendly to social democratic programs, but it is perfectly reasonable for people who prefer a more conservative government to oppose greater immigration for the same reason. Opposition to immigration can be racist, but it isn’t necessarily so. Trump’s pledge to deport all immigrants who are illegally in the U.S. is ludicrous, but it’s not ludicrous to think we should not reward people who have broken our immigration laws. Tarring these arguments as racist has not made them go away; rather, it appears to have made people less worried about being called racists. And empowered Trump, the only politician who has refused to be cowed by the epithet.

Read the whole thing.


“My nose is broken. I have bruises and scratches all over. I got knocked in the head a lot,” San Jose’s Juan Hernandez, 38, told me. He suffered a mild concussion. That’s the price Hernandez paid for attending the infamous Donald Trump rally in San Jose last week at which protesters were seen burning flags and Trump hats, pelting a supporter with an egg and mobbing people who were doing what civics teachers tell students citizens are supposed to do. For his trouble, Hernandez was called names, beaten and bloodied. For dessert, he got to hear politicians suggest it was the fault of his candidate that thugs beat him up. When liberals are on the receiving end, this is known as blaming the victim.

Hernandez does not fit the stereotype of a Trump supporter. He is gay (and a proud member of Log Cabin Republicans) with Mexican roots.

If the parties were reversed, the coverage would be all about gay-bashing and racist attacks on Hispanics.

NEWS YOU CAN USE: Liberals, Want Trump to Win? Keep Calling Him Racist.

POLL: Trump Leads Clinton By One Percent In Florida. On Facebook, Sean Trende comments: “This poll was taken of Florida voters in the middle of the initial blowup over Trump’s comments about the Hispanic judge and immediately after Clinton’s comments about his temperament. It was taken by a Democratic polling firm. It shows him leading by a point. It is the first poll to show him leading since March. Some day, people will figure out that (a) Trump’s penchant for racist comments are already baked into his support/opposition, (b) each blowup only serves to allow him to dominate a news cycle and suck the oxygen out of the room (Clinton’s speech disappeared from the news immediately, and (c) people really, really dislike Clinton as well. But today is not that day.”


PAUL RYAN: Trump on Judge ‘Sort of Like the Textbook Definition of a Racist Comment.’

YEAH, BUT HIS POLITICS WERE OKAY SO IT DIDN’T MATTER: Muhammad Ali embodied everything lefties hate about ‘lad culture.’

Related: Piers Morgan (!?!): Muhammad Ali was racist, Trump is not.

NOBODY’S AS RACIST AS LEFTY MINORITY FOLKS WHEN THERE ARE NO WHITE PEOPLE AROUND: Facebook ‘safe space’ shuttered after anti-white/male statements leak.

FROM THE MOST DELIBERATELY RACIALLY DIVISIVE PRESIDENT IN MY LIFETIME: Obama Accuses “Right-Wing Radio” And “Some Cable News Stations” Of Stoking Racial Fears Among White People. Notice, by the way, the deliberate en passant smear of the VFW.

And this remains evergreen, alas:

Screen Shot 2015-04-25 at 9.59.38 PM

But aside from being a disgrace, Obama’s action is a tell: They always start this talk when they think they’re losing.

And a warning: The Tea Party was smeared as racist. Now we have Trump. Keep this up, and who comes after Trump? “When politeness and orderliness are met with contempt and betrayal, do not be surprised if the response is something less polite, and less orderly.”

WHEN THEY’RE CALLING YOU RACIST, IT MEANS THEY’RE LOSING: The legal campaign against Gawker has roots in the racist South.

WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THIS COMING? Welcome to Swedenistan…and have a lousy day.

‘And, until about 2005, I felt blessed to live in a true social democracy, where people willingly paid high taxes for a fine welfare system and liberal values.’

So what prompted – or rather drove – the amiable Dan and his gentle wife, creator of the world’s most lip-smacking gravidlax, to sell their Malmö shoreline home, rip up their roots and migrate to Spain?

‘Sure, the sunshine and lifestyle played some part in our decision,’ he explains. ‘But the real reason was Sweden’s changing demographics and politics. The radical, Left-wing establishment became totally obsessed with multiculturalism and political correctness, which we didn’t need reminding had been part of Swedish ethos for centuries.

‘But this was different. It was verging on authoritarian diktat and the open-door immigration policy was threatening the nation’s cohesion. Only a fool couldn’t see this, but there was a conspiracy of silence, or rather a policy to whitewash the adverse effects of accepting half-a-million immigrants from the Middle East, who plainly weren’t interesting in adopting Sweden’s values and Swedish culture.\
‘The politicians, the media, the intellectuals…they all played their parts in pandering to this dangerous ideology and, sadly, it’s changing the fabric of Swedish society irreversibly.’

Karla, who’d sat passively, occasionally nodding in agreement at Dan’s analysis, then interrupted, saying, ‘If you disagree with the establishment, you’re immediately called a racist or fascist, which we’re definitely not. At times I felt that this was what it must have been like to live in the old Soviet Union.’

All leftist utopias tend toward Stalinism.

LIFE IN THE AGE OF OBAMA: Smiling Is Now Racist, Because “White Fragility.”

SCOTT JOHNSON: Dartmouth And Double Standards. PC culture effectively makes black students “lesser breeds outside the law,” not expected to live up to the standards of behavior expected of others. This is racist, of course, but PC was never about getting rid of racism, merely redirecting it in politically useful ways.

YES. THIS. EXACTLY:  Victor Davis Hanson makes cogent observations on the “high IQs” of the establishment political class:

Turn on an evening cable show and ask which interviewer is married to which anchor on another channel, or which of the pundits are former politicos, or how many in the White House worked for Big News or are married or related to someone who does. How many pundits were advisers to political candidates or related to someone who was? How does Ben Rhodes do an interview on CBS News or George Stephanopoulos interview Hillary Clinton or a writer expound on the primaries when he is also an adviser to a particular campaign? The problem is not just that all this is incestuous or unethical, but that it blinds a tiny elite to what millions of quite different Americans value and experience.

Charles Murray recently wrote in anger, addressing those who would vote for Trump because “Hillary is even worse”: “I know that I am unlikely to persuade any of my fellow Establishmentarians to change their minds. But I cannot end without urging you to resist that sin to which people with high IQs (which most of you have) are unusually prone: Using your intellectual powers to convince yourself of something despite the evidence plainly before you. Just watch and listen to the man. Don’t concoct elaborate rationalizations. Just watch and listen.” . . .

Murray has a point that Trump’s crudity and buffoonery should be taken seriously, but when he says establishmentarians have “high IQs,” what exactly does he mean? Did a high IQ prevent an infatuated David Brooks (whom he quotes approvingly) from fathoming presidential success as if he were a sartorial seancer, from the crease of Senator Obama pants leg? What was the IQ of the presidential historian who declared Obama the smartest man ever to be elevated to the White House? . . . Or perhaps the conservative wit who once wrote that Obama has a “first-class temperament and a first-class intellect,” and that he is the rare politician who “writes his own books,” which were “first rate”?

Establishmentarian high IQs? The point is not to castigate past poor judgment, but to offer New Testament reminders about hubris and the casting of first stones — and why hoi polloi are skeptical of their supposed intellectual betters.

So how did a blond comb-over real-estate dealer destroy an impressive and decent Republican field and find himself near dead even with Hillary Clinton — to the complete astonishment, and later fury, of the Washington establishment? Simply because lots of people have become exhausted by political and media elites who have thought very highly of themselves — but on what grounds it has become increasingly impossible to figure out.

Indeed. If I hear one more of my conservative/libertarian “high IQ” colleagues (many of them long-time friends) denigrate Trump as stupid, racist, sexist or (I kid you not)  not “really” successful–I may puke.

One certainly may oppose Trump’s policies on a principled basis.  But to hear the right-of-center intelligentsia (who may be well-educated and perhaps even have high IQs, but are not necessarily intelligent) denigrate the presumptive GOP nominee–selected by We the People–using the same leftist tactics used to denigrate George W. Bush and many other conservative standard-bearers, is nauseating.

These “high IQ” members of the GOP intelligentsia simply cannot hide their disdain for ordinary Americans’ selection of a GOP nominee, yet they simultaneously claim that the GOP represents ordinary Americans’ values. The GOP intelligentsia is behaving like a delusional narcissist, reveling in its (false) superiority over the little people.

THE DANGERS OF ELECTED, RACIST STUPIDITY: Why is Louisiana Democrat Barbara Norton so eager to insult the legacy of Martin Luther King?

HE WAS EXPENDABLE: “California refuses to honor John Wayne, but the state lavishes tributes on liberal-friendly figures guilty of similar (or worse) sins,” Matthew Hennessey writes at City Journal:

For example, in 1988, the California legislature voted unanimously to declare April 21 John Muir Day. The Sierra Club founder, according to current governor Jerry Brown, was “a giant of a man” whose “scientific discoveries, engineering innovations and writings still inspire us today.” Presumably, Brown hasn’t read Muir’s reflections on “negroes” as “easy-going and merry, making a great deal of noise and doing little work.” It’s shocking to the modern ear to hear the celebrated naturalist declare that “one energetic white man, working with a will, would easily pick as much cotton as half a dozen Sambos and Sallies.”

Muir—the “great man”—evidently also had little regard for Native Americans. As The New Yorker’s Jedidiah Purdy surmised last year, Muir and other early environmentalists viewed communing with the American wilderness as “a way for a certain kind of white person to become symbolically native to the continent.” Yet, John Muir Day endures in California, celebrated with an official proclamation from the governor’s office every April 21, presumably because Muir’s status as the granddaddy of the environmental movement trumps his racist views.

On March 31 of every year since 2000, California formally celebrates Cesar Chavez Day, in honor of the founder of the United Farm Workers. “I ask all Californians to join me in continuing to build on his dream of a world where all workers are treated with dignity and respect,” Brown says in his annual proclamation. Countless California schools, parks, monuments, and public buildings bear Chavez’s name. And in 2014, President Obama declared March 31 a federal commemorative holiday in Chavez’s honor. All this for a man who, in a 1972 interview, called strikebreakers from Mexico “wetbacks,” a term widely considered racist and unmentionable today.

Not to mention Chavez’s later years leading a Jim Jones-like cult, as a left-leaning, Berkeley-born Atlantic author discovered much to her chagrin, in a 2011 piece appropriately titled “The Madness of Cesar Chavez.”

CONOR FRIEDERSDORF TALKS TO a 22-year-old Trump supporter. Key bit:

We are young, urban, and have a happy future planned. We seem molded to be perfect young Hillary supporters. But we’re not. Both of us voted Libertarian in 2012, and ideologically we remain so. But in 2016? We’re both going for Trump.

For me personally, it’s resistance against what San Francisco has been, and what I see the country becoming, in the form of ultra-PC culture. That’s where it’s almost impossible to have polite or constructive political discussion. Disagreement gets you labeled fascist, racist, bigoted, etc. It can provoke a reaction so intense that you’re suddenly an unperson to an acquaintance or friend. There is no saying “Hey, I disagree with you,” it’s just instant shunning. Say things online, and they’ll try to find out who you are and potentially even get you fired for it. Being anti-PC is not about saying “I want you to agree with me on these issues.” It’s about saying, “Hey, I want to have a discussion and not get shouted down because I don’t agree with what is considered to be politically correct.” . . .

This is a war over how dialogue in America will be shaped. If Hillary wins, we’re going to see a further tightening of PC culture. But if Trump wins? If Trump wins, we will have a president that overwhelmingly rejects PC rhetoric. Even better, we will show that more than half the country rejects this insane PC regime. If Trump wins, I will personally feel a major burden relieved, and I will feel much more comfortable stating my more right-wing views without fearing total ostracism and shame. Because of this, no matter what Trump says or does, I will keep supporting him. . . .

Look who PC culture does empower. Yesterday’s “Google doodle” was a racial separatist who admired Osama Bin Laden. I think she is just as hateful as white supremacists, but she is celebrated by Google. I don’t think Google would celebrate a white separatist with a fun drawing and a place of honor on its front page! I have a problem that it celebrated someone who denounces America, but I’m willing to debate why she should have no place of honor instead of just denouncing Google.

You hear a lot of that.

ROD DREHER: Re-Tribalizing America. “Donald Trump and Milo Yiannopoulos are provocateurs, no question. But they are proving something important about the militant left: that it is often racist against whites, and has no intention of allowing any opinions other than its own to be voiced in the public square. And whether in the streets or in a university lecture hall, it will use violence to impose its will. . . . Trump is a vulgar, crass, alpha-male brute. But he doesn’t care what SJWs and liberals say about him. He fights, and sometimes fights as dirty as they do. That’s not nothing. White liberal middle-class society and many bourgeois conservatives have demonized within themselves, collectively and individually, the instinct that would have given them the strength to fight civilization’s enemies on the Left and on the Right.”

Punch back twice as hard, as another provocateur once said.

NONSENSE, THEY CAN’T BE RACIST, THEY’RE NOT WHITE: Racist laundry detergent ad in China sparks outrage on social media. “The advertisement for Qiaobi washing powder circulating various online platforms on Friday shows a black man whistling at a young Chinese woman. Acting as if she’s about to kiss him, she puts a detergent capsule in his mouth instead, shoves him into her washing machine, and sits on the lid while the machine gets to work. When he reemerges, he’s no longer black, but a ‘clean’ Chinese man. . . . The commercial, reportedly shown at Chinese cinemas earlier in May, is a spin-off from an Italian advertisement, which shows a white man being forced into a washing machine and a black man emerging out of it, followed by the slogan, ‘Colored is better.'”


The more stinging critique is about the quality of what Salon publishes – and Goodman’s pieces in particular have reignited lamentations about the site’s downward spiral. Walsh and Miller have been outspoken on Twitter about some of the stories from the site, as have many others. Two guys even created a vicious parody account, @salondotcom, to mock Salon’s increasingly strident brand of leftism, with fake tweets like “Ten signs your cat might be racist” and “Should GMOs come with trigger warnings?”

“It’s really sad,” Talking Points Memo publisher Josh Marshall tweeted last month. “These Salon headlines are like the bastard child of World Net Daily and the LaRouche Times … In retrospect it’s scary to think that Salon was maybe always just one @joanwalsh or @KerryLauerman away from derp oblivion.”

Well, that’s one way to put it, considering that the words Joan Walsh and “derp” go together rather well.

Fiscal overindulgence aside, the content of Salon over the years is a cautionary tale of an ideology that, to borrow from Woody Allen’s shark analogy in Annie Hall, believes it must be constantly moving further leftward to survive. While “Progressivism” may be the dominant ideology in America, as the headlines from the above-mentioned Salon parody account illustrate, intellectually, it’s a dead shark.

A LOOK BACK AT THE DAYS BEFORE THE GREAT PC CLEANUP: Nine Vintage Ads That Are So Ridiculously Racist and Sexist They’d Be Banned Today.

CONTEMPT FOR THE LITTLE PEOPLE: Labour MP Pat Glass apologises after calling voter ‘a horrible racist.’

I’M SURE IT’S SOMEHOW RACIST TO EVEN POINT THIS OUT: #BlackLivesMatter Leader Charles Wade Arrested for Sex Trafficking.

WHY IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SUCH A CESSPIT OF THUGGERY? Bernie Sanders Issues Statement on Nevada: ‘Nonsense’ to Say Campaign Has ‘Penchant for Violence.’

Anyone who runs against Hillary will be a racist, sexist, misogynist with a penchant for violence, at least in the press and until November.

WHY SO RACIST AT VIRGINIA TECH? Jason Riley and the Left’s conservative minority problem.

Jason Riley must be suffering from whiplash. This spring, the Wall Street Journal columnist and scholar with the prestigious Manhattan Institute was invited, then disinvited, and now finally re-invited to give a lecture at Virginia Tech’s Pamplin College of Business as part of its Distinguished Lecture series.

The controversy stems from the fact that Riley is a conservative in an era when conservative viewpoints are unwelcome on many college campuses. Riley, thus, joins a long list of right-leaning analysts and policymakers – including George Will, Greta Van Susteren, Ann Coulter, and Scott Brown to name just a few — whom activists have sought (with mixed results) to “disinvite” from campus speaking engagements around the country.

But Riley’s politics are only partially to blame for his “disinvitation.” If politics alone were to the issue Virginia Tech would not have hosted a lecture by earlier this year by conservative scholar Charles Murray.

To be sure, student protests of Murray’s lecture made administrators skittish about bringing Riley to campus — one conservative is more than enough! But Riley’s real offense is not that he is a conservative, it is that he is a black conservative who not only expresses conservative viewpoints on economics and foreign affairs, but who dares to challenge the prevailing liberal orthodoxy on race.


FUNNY, I DON’T RECALL SIMILAR HEADLINES REGARDING THE WAPO AND KERRY, OBAMA AND HILLARY: Washington Post assigns army of 20 to dig into ‘every phase’ of Trump’s life.

“Notice how they didn’t do this earlier when Trump first started doing well in the polls. And I wonder how many reporters they have on the Clintons,” Betsy Newmark adds.

Related: Yes, Trump’s butler sounds like a flaming racist nutjob, but why no MSM freakout over THESE guys?

AS THEY SAY, SJWs ALWAYS DOUBLE DOWN: Oxford SJW on Wronged Waitress: “Frankly, Her Feelings Are Irrelevant.” The waitress in question, meanwhile, is a superior human being:

In an interview she said: “Oxford isn’t a place where racists from South Africa are fit to go. It’s a privilege to be there. He is far more privileged than me.”

Schultz said she earns around $1 an hour, meaning that it would take her around 50 years to earn enough to fund Qwabe’s lavish scholarship.

But she insisted she shouldn’t “lose everything” despite being “a bit of an idiot”.

On the other hand, examples need to be made.



As John Nolte wrote at Big Hollywood early last year when the Onion’s otherwise often enjoyable AV Club Website attacked a Michigan restaurateur for symbolically “banning” Hollywood’s Michael Moore and Seth Rogan after the two smeared the late Chris Kyle when Clint Eastwood’s American Sniper proved to be a surprise box office smash:

And how does the AV Club respond to this symbolic but righteous protest? By using no fewer than 7 paragraphs to relentlessly mock the Little Guy and his business.

[Restaurant owner Tommy] Brann has come up with the equally deadly revenge of denying him “decent, better than average, but nothing to rave about” fare delivered through “terrible service” amid “dated and kinda dirty” decor, of the sort that Americans must consume daily to live. Rogen and Moore are hereby condemned to slowly starve to death in the Brann’s parking lot, yearning fruitlessly for Brann’s Classic Onion Straw Loaf, the lights of the sign that illuminates their fatal mistake growing dim in their eyes.

Is anyone else old enough to remember when speaking truth to and defying power was the in-thing?

When the American Left reveals who they are really for and against, it is chilling.

Know your place and shut your mouth, little man.

And now you too, teenage boys with geeky but harmless superhero T-shirts and the prom dates who love them. As Fred Siegel wrote in 2014 history of the American left, The Revolt Against the Masses, “The best short credo of liberalism came from the pen of the once canonical left-wing literary historian Vernon Parrington in the late 1920s.‘Rid society of the dictatorship of the middle class.’” And if that means insinuating high school kids are budding Klansmen as part of the PC cleanup, hey, at least you can feel proud knowing you fought the good fight by Speaking Truth to Prom.

ANALYSIS: TRUE. California: The Ultimate Nanny State.

Related: California Democrats Brand John Wayne ‘Racist,’ Reject Marking Day in His Honor.

That’s what happens when a once all-American state is fundamentally transformed. Somewhere in hell, the ghosts of the Frankfurt School old boys are chuckling at this development.

FIGHT IT OUT ALL THE WAY TO THE CONVENTION FLOOR, BERNIE! Is it too late for Bernie Sanders to convince superdelegates to choose him?

On Sunday during a press conference to commemorate the first anniversary of his announcement for the presidency, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders indicated once again that he would be seeking to peel away superdelegates from his rival Hillary Clinton.

Sanders currently trails Clinton by 327 pledged delegates plus 481 superdelegates. If Sanders could convince the vast majority of Clinton’s superdelegates to defect to him, he could in theory win the nomination.

The notion is not unheard of. In 2008, Clinton also won the overwhelming support of superdelegates, but they started breaking away from her and supporting then-Sen. Barack Obama around the time she barely squeaked out what was supposed to be an easy win in Indiana.

The difference in 2016 is that Clinton is also winning primaries, and convincingly so. Sanders has won 17 primaries and caucuses across the country, but even when he wins, Clinton oftentimes gets more delegates because of superdelegate support.

Also, Bernie’s not black, so superdelegates won’t be called racist for backing Hillary.


Recently, Clemson students have been the victims of a smear campaign. Individuals on social media and around campus have claimed that the Clemson student body is racist. On Monday, April 11, a controversial image surfaced on social media. The image circulated online displayed four bananas hung on a poster dedicated to Clemson’s African-American heritage. In the following nine days of protest, five students were arrested and the administration mandated new diversity and inclusivity training for all students and faculty.

Some lower level administration even attended and endorsed the protests, giving credibility to the smear campaign. The administration as a whole genuflected to the protesters’ demands, granting the smear further substance.

Since campus wide unrest was the direct result of the four bananas being hung it seems natural to ask who hung the bananas and what their motivations were. The Clemson administration knows the answers to these questions, but has not revealed them. The only thing most people on campus are aware of is the suspicious behavior and activity from the administration and the student protest leaders.

This leads to more questions than answers. . . .

There have been allegations on campus that the student who placed the bananas on the banner in the first place was African American. The implication is that the student intended for the incident to incite a campus protest. If this is not the case, why has the administration not released any information about the race or motives of the student who placed the bananas?

As it turns out, no charges (criminal or disciplinary) were brought against this student. If the act was supposedly so racist that the administration has decided to start assigning mandatory diversity and inclusivity training to faculty and students, then why was the individual not sanctioned? And if the individual was not sanctioned because she or he did not place the bananas in an act of racism, why are administrators and student activists still claiming the campus has a racially discriminatory environment?

Suspiciously, the identity of the student who posted threatening messages to Yik Yak was released to the public, amid calls for the university to do so. Yet, the identity of the person who placed the bananas is being kept a secret. Why are they so interested in this banana vandal’s privacy?

Stay tuned.

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: Mizzou Race Relations Committee Releases Series of Anti-Racism Videos for ‘White People:’

The University of Missouri’s Faculty Council Committee on Race Relations released a video series this week that aims to educate students and faculty about racism on campus, Mizzou’s student newspaper, the Maneater, reported.

Committee member Craig Roberts, a Mizzou plant sciences professor, said that the target audience of these videos will be white faculty, the lessons will be applicable for the while community as a whole.

Roberts explained in an email to the Maneater that white people, including himself, are not as likely to detect racism because they do not experience it first-hand, and white faculty often downplay the degree to which racism affects the community.

“White people tend to see racism in terms of lynching, physical abuse, bullying and other products of hate,” Roberts said. “Racism is more than the overt, blatant, extreme incidents.”

As Ace of Spades quips, “And now you can view Mizzou’s handy guide to What a Racist Your Child Is. Plus — there’s still that one-in-five-will-be-raped thing! So you know: Definitely send your kid there.”

But fortunately, to coin a phrase, A New Hope has emerged from a most unlikely source. “Melissa Click just (accidentally) outed the campus PC Gestapo,” Carrie Lukas writes at the New York Post:

Click now claims her own dismissal is racially charged, meant to send a message that blacks aren’t supposed to stand up against whites. Yet she also notes that being “a white lady” makes her an “easy target.”

In other words, Click believes that although bigotry pervades the university’s liberal halls, administrators are too cowed to fire anyone who isn’t white, making her supposed white privilege also her biggest handicap.

Click is suing the school for allegedly failing to follow the rules governing firings in cases like hers. Her charge may have merit. But where was Click when Wolfe was being similarly sacrificed for political expedience?

As Lukas writes, “It’s long been evident that something is seriously wrong with American higher education, but Click’s case ties key pieces of the puzzle together: the absurdity of the racial- and gender-grievance game on college campuses, the politically motivated inquisitions that serve as university justice and the increasingly useless nature of so much of what’s studied.”

Is there nothing she can’t do?

STANDING UP AGAINST RACISM AND BIGOTRY Now THAT’S a tip: Twitter raises R13‚000 for RMF waitress:

Donations received from as far afield as England‚ Canada and Germany swelled a fund for the waitress to R13‚381 by 11am on Saturday‚ according to Roman Cabanac of Johannesburg‚ one of the three men behind the Twitter campaign.

The first gift – R50 – came from Sihle Ngobese‚ the spokesman for Western Cape social development MEC Albert Fritz‚ who went to the ObzCafe after work on Friday to find the waitress.

She had been reduced to tears by Ntokozo Qwabe‚ an RMF leader at Oxford University‚ who then posted a Facebook rant about what he and fellow activist Wandile Dlamini had done.

He wrote: “We are out at ObzCafe … and the time for the bill comes. Our waitress is a white woman. I ask … what the going rate for tips/gratuity is in these shores. They look at me very reluctantly and they say ‘give me the slip‚ I’ll sort that out’. I give them the slip.

“They take a pen & slip in a note where the gratuity/tip amount is supposed to be entered. The note reads in bold: “WE WILL GIVE TIP WHEN YOU RETURN THE LAND”. The waitress comes to us with a card machine for the bill to be sorted out. She sees the note & starts shaking. She leaves us & bursts into typical white tears (like why are you crying when all we’ve done is make a kind request? lol!).”

Ngobese told TimesLive on Saturday that he found Qwabe’s post “insulting‚ racist and disgraceful” and felt the least he could do was to give the waitress the tip she had been denied. He posted a photograph on Twitter of his receipt for R50‚ with the handwritten words “And the kindness is free. F*** RMF!”

“Qwabe misses the complete irony of what he did‚” Ngobese told TimesLive. “If you want to talk about privilege‚ being a master’s graduate from Oxford and lording it over a minimum-wage waitress is the height of irony. It speaks to the disdain I have for RMF’s claims to being a voice for the downtrodden.”

Well, that’s Social-Justice-Warriorism in a nutshell, isn’t it?


In 2010, Jon Stewart warned Wilmore that his race card was maxed out; advice he sadly never heeded.

ONLY A PC KILLJOY COULD HATE THE NEW JUNGLE BOOK, R. J. Moeller writes at Acculturated; but sadly PC killjoys are all too plentiful these days:

In a post titled, “How Disney’s New Jungle Book Subverts the Gross Colonialism of Rudyard Kipling,” Katy Waldman of Slate had the following to contribute to the conversation:

Well, Kipling was certainly a racist f**k—look no further than his novel Kim for a portrait of brave British spies and slavish, dark-skinned Buddhists—but The Jungle Book, which Kipling wrote out of a Vermont cabin in 1894, doesn’t showcase his bigotry so much as his uncritical reverence for power. Might makes right mesmerized Kipling; the more ruthless the subjugation, the better. He loved the panther Bagheera with his liquid menace (“his jaws shut with a snap, for he did not believe in being humble”), the terrifying python Kaa, and most of all Mowgli, who commands fire and possesses a gaze the beasts cannot meet without flinching. You might wince at the subtext of these characters’ dominance—for Kipling, whites were born rulers as surely as tigers were born predators—or point out the author’s lack of pity for the weak. You might furrow your brow at the way the Indian villagers succumb to supernatural babble and suspicion. But as far as pure and explicit racism goes, Kipling’s novel scores lower than Disney’s 1967 movie, which introduced a great ape called King Louie (after Louie Armstrong) who sang minstrel songs about his desire to get civilized.

One would have to guess that the Disney Corporation and director Jon Favreau did not set out to promote imperialism, colonialism, or disrespect for those who have suffered under the yoke of foreign rule—but words and ideas and stories do matter.

So what’s a conscientious, free society to do with such controversial, beloved stories? Am I contributing to 19th century crimes against humanity by singing the ballads of Baloo and King Louie while taking my morning shower? Should we start banning books and movies that Slate bloggers find offensive to their delicate sensibilities (on behalf of the ancestors of strangers half a world away)? Ought we to put F-bomb-laced warnings of “Pro-Colonialism Propaganda Contained Within!” on movie posters?

Nahh — that’s what we have Gawker and its spin-off Website io9 for — that’s where Katharine Trendacosta’s review can be found titled “Reminder: Rudyard Kipling Was a Racist Fuck and The Jungle Book Is Imperialist Garbage.” Hard to predict where’s she going with that subtle, nuanced headline:

The Jungle Book is just as drenched with racism and colonialism as anything else Kipling wrote on the subject. The thread running throughout the stories is that Mowgli is superior to the animals that raised him by virtue of being man, not beast. That’s a neat parallel to Britain and India.

“Except Mowgli is…Indian,” Kyle Smith of the New York Post tweeted in response. And as one of his followers added, “But man is superior to animals. What’s wrong with that?”

Why, that’s so, so problematic, to coin an adjective.

If only someone had predicted at the end of the 19th century that intellectual life was about to face a systematic “recessional,” with dire and lasting consequences to the West. (Lest we forget.)

WHY ARE LEFTIST INSTITUTIONS SUCH CESSPITS OF PREJUDICE? New York Times boss sued over alleged ageist, racist and sexist hiring practices.

MSNBC WITH BETTER VISUALS: Curt Schilling: ESPN Home to ‘Some of the Biggest Racists in Sports Commentating.’

In early 2014, when MSNBC’s race-obsessions were arguably at their most vitriolic, Jeffrey Lord of the American Spectator wrote, ‘Meet MSNBC. Better Described as Jim Crow TV.’ ESPN has been working very hard to acquire that ignominious sobriquet as well.

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: Yale Votes to Retain Honors for Rabidly Racist Democrat.


The students identified as the people behind a recent racist drawing found at Salisbury University’s library are black, school officials confirmed Tuesday.

The image, found April 10 on a whiteboard in Blackwell Library, showed a stick figure being hung and labeled with a racial slur. Underneath was the hashtag “#whitepower.”

The university confirmed Tuesday, April 26, the students involved in the incident were black, spokesman Richard Culver wrote in an email. The university would not provide names of the students, citing the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.

Yeah, if this were genuine and the students were white, we’d know their names.

WHY ARE DEMOCRAT-RUN CITIES SUCH CESSPITS OF RACISM? San Francisco Police Ensnared in New Racist Texting Scandal.

IT’S AS IF THEY CARE MORE ABOUT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES THAN THEY DO ABOUT CITIZENS: CDC secret warning on surge of illegal kids: ‘Plan on many having TB.’

During the recent surge of tens of thousands of young illegal immigrants crossing the Mexico-U.S. border, the Centers for Disease Control warned staff that many will be infected with tuberculosis — but the public wasn’t given a head’s up.

In fact, the young adults, few of whom had received the types of vaccines U.S. children received, arrived with TB, swine flu and even Dengue, according to reports that eventually filtered out of border agents and hospitals on or near the U.S. border.

The internal warning was: “We might as well plan on many of the kids having TB.” It was included in June 2014 email guidance from environmental health scientist Alaric C. Denton as the agency prepared to handle the crisis, which was repeated in 2015 and is expected again this year.

“Most of these kids are not immunized, so we need to make sure all our staff are immunized,” said Denton, who is stationed at the CDC headquarters in Atlanta, according to a new document obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch and released Thursday.

What’s more, the documents obtained in Judicial Watch’s investigation of the flood of so-called unaccompanied minors, topping 70,000 a year, revealed that all aren’t the little children the administration has portrayed them as. Many are young adults, and gang members.

“The CDC official reveals in the documents obtained by JW as a result of the lawsuit that ‘some of these kids are not really kids they are young adults, and we should be wary of personal safety,'” said a memo.

Meanwhile, members of the public who said similar things were called paranoid racist conspiracy-mongers.


Not surprisingly, she writes for the Grauniad.

FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORMED: It Takes Exactly Four Tweets From Non-Eyewitnesses to Tar a City as Racist. “As we keep learning, the evidentiary bar for calling people racist is appallingly low, even among institutions that are supposed to be in the corroboration business. Thank Buddha there’s a universe of smartasses ready to use the BS detector that newspapers once prided themselves on.”

DOES SHE HAVE INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION FOR THIS CLAIM? Michelle Obama: I’ve Been Victimized By Sexism – Men Used To Whistle At Me!  (For extra frosting on the idiocy cake note she said this in ARGENTINA.  The lack of understanding of Latin cultures this betrays might actually form a black hole* that sucks our entire universe into it.  You have been warned.)

*Added for the benefit of those even less informed than Michelle Obama: Black hole is not actually a racist term.  Here’s an explanation of Black Hole for students k-4.  Ask someone to explain the hard words.

FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORMED: Democrats, Not Republicans, Have Moved on Immigration.

A casual observer of the 2016 presidential election and immigration politics could be forgiven for thinking that Republicans have moved sharply to the right on the issue, while Democrats have stayed roughly where they have always been. But an interesting new Pew poll suggests the opposite is true: Republican voters’ views on immigration have held roughly steady over the past decade, while Democratic voters’ views have lurched sharply to the left. . . .

As the attached figure from Pew shows, in 2006, 34 percent of Republicans said that immigrants “strengthen the country”; today, 35 percent say the same. Democrats, on the other hand, underwent a massive (nearly 30-point) pro-immigration shift over the last 10 years. So while Trump’s rise probably reflects a stronger mobilization of anti-immigration voters than the GOP has seen before, it may not be the case that the average Republican voter is in such a different place on immigration than he was during the Bush years. Meanwhile, the Democrats’ lurch leftward on immigration—while not covered as extensively as Trump’s various immigration-related outrages—has been visible to anyone willing to look: at the Univision debate last month, for example, both Democratic presidential candidates essentially promised to suspend immigration enforcement altogether.

The standard media narrative holds that political polarization in the United States a GOP-driven phenomenon; that Republicans have gone off the deep end, and that Democrats remain sensible, centrist, and open to compromise. As we’ve said before, however, the truth is much more complicated. As much as many bien pensants would like to lay blame for our angry and polarized politics at the feet of racist Republicans, the Democrats’ dramatic leftward pivot—on issues from the $15 minimum to immigration to the culture wars—has clearly played a major role.

The media rule is that Democrats’ current positions always mark the Sensible Center. Republicans are always trying to turn back the clock. To, you know, the outdated, benighted views that dominated the nation six months ago. . .


Whig history, and the variation of it that I was taught in school, in which all of history led to the glories of FDR, JFK, and midcentury liberalism was built around the notion that people in past centuries were far from perfect, but we need to study them carefully to understand how all of history led to today’s Wondrous Age. Black Armband History, as it was dubbed in 1993 by Australian historian Geoffrey Blainey to differentiate it from the Whiggish “Three Cheers” schools of history, implies that the essence of history is racism, colonialism, imperialism, and oppression in general. The people made famous by history are by their very nature nasty old evil racist oppressors and can be safely airbrushed out of history entirely, with the exception of a few flawed but benighted revolutionary souls such as Marx, Che and Castro.

You can’t “Start From Zero,” as Tom Wolfe would say, until the great PC cleanup is complete – at which point, 2+2 can equal five should the state wish it to be so, and “a 5’10” white man can tell you he’s a 6’5″ Chinese girl,” as Ace writes, “and you are required to believe him because each person constructs his own quantum reality moment by moment, it’s no difficult thing to also accept that killing the kulaks and putting the farms under inefficient state rule will result in a greater grain harvest.”