Search Results

TELL US HOW YOU REALLY FEEL, SAM: Sam Kass of the Huffington Post on “What Should Have Happened In Hillary Clinton’s Useless Book:”

It’s like a self-care book written by a serial killer. Aside from the alternate-nostril breathing, she drinks plenty of Chardonnay but refuses antidepressants. (“Wasn’t for me. Never has been.”) She redecorates her other mansion, the one next door to the mansion she lives in. She retreats from her quest for world domination, returning to the simple joys of being a multimillionaire. In one revealing anecdote, a well-wisher sends her a thousand origami cranes. Hanging them up inside your house, the accompanying note tells her, brings you good luck. Clinton hangs them on her porch.

* * * * * * *

In literary terms, the book could be classed as a Mary Sue self-insertion fanfic. Reading What Happened induces a horrifying claustrophobia, the feeling of being pent up in a small room as someone delivers an unending lecture about how much better they are than everyone else. Like every horrifying little room, this one is cluttered with cutesy sayings on every wall. Each chapter begins and ends with an inspirational quote about believing in yourself and reaching higher, 25 epigraphs in total. One (“It is hard to be a woman. You must think like a man, act like a lady, look like a young girl, and work like a horse”) is attributed to “a sign that hangs in my house.”

Ordinarily, I’d snark, “When Hillary’s lost the Huffington Post” – but as we saw in 2008, she had never won them, and eight years before her “Deplorables” smear against Trump’s supporters, the Huffington Post was declaring her own voters as racist white men. Used cars rarely succeed as Democrat party presidential nominees – they like their candidates with that shiny new presidential smell, and as minimal baggage as possible to used against them, but hey, as the Hillary campaign moronically debated as a slogan in 2016, it was her turn

INCLUSIVITY: Activist in Seminar: All White People Are Racist and Always Will Be.

I’m not certain she’s thought this through.

WHEN EVERYTHING IS RACIST… Even Hobby Lobby Cotton Is Racist These Days.

MORE EMOTIONAL BUBBLE CHILDREN:  Even Hobby Lobby Cotton Is Racist These Days.

SO MUCH PROJECTION THEY SHOULD OPEN MOVIE THEATERS?  Racism And Guns: Why The Left Keeps Painting Gun Owners As Racist.

SCENES FROM ACADEMIA: A Campus Conservative’s Year Facing Anger, Doxing and Intimidation.

The University of Minnesota did call for a “Campus Climate” conversation about the recent controversial events, but this, too, devolved into chaos. About 15 minutes into the event, more than 200 protesters came into the room chanting, “Hey hey, ho ho, racism has got to go,” surrounding those students who had come to the event to engage in a civil conversation.

The protesters took over the stage as the student body president stood at the front of the room with her fist in the air, leading the chants. Students took turns lamenting how their feelings were hurt, how writing “Build the Wall” amounts to hate speech, and how they want to be included in conversations on campus. At the end of the event, one of the protesters stood on stage and asked the crowd if any College Republicans had attended. Madison stood up and raised her hand.

When the “event” ended, she was swarmed by the mob. “They were completely surrounding me; I was unable to leave the event. They were screaming in my face calling me racist, xenophobic, and other unmentionable names. They were aggressive, and I just wanted to get out safely,” said Madison. “One girl was holding another girl back saying, ‘She’s not worth it. Don’t hit her.’”
Later in the year, the radical left struck her again. Madison runs the University of Minnesota’s chapter of Turning Point USA, a nonpartisan group that promotes fiscal responsibility, free markets, and limited government. Members of the loosely organized far-left militant group Antifa targeted her for promoting capitalism on campus, posting online her address, phone number, parent’s address, parent’s phone number, a photo of her, and a reference to her as an alt-right Nazi.

“I endured a lot of violent threats throughout the year, but Antifa’s attack was the scariest.”

“Shut up, they explained” has gone from humorous Instapundit literary reference to the current condition of free speech on campus.

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Diversity Can Spell Trouble.

America is experiencing a diversity and inclusion conundrum—which, in historical terms, has not necessarily been a good thing. Communities are tearing themselves apart over the statues of long-dead Confederate generals. Controversy rages over which slogan—“Black Lives Matter” or “All Lives Matter”—is truly racist. Antifa street thugs clash with white supremacists in a major American city. Americans argue over whether the USC equine mascot “Traveler” is racist, given the resemblance of the horse’s name to Robert E. Lee’s mount “Traveller.” Amid all this turmoil, we forget that diversity was always considered a liability in the history of nations—not an asset.

Ancient Greece’s numerous enemies eventually overran the 1,500 city-states because the Greeks were never able to sublimate their parochial, tribal, and ethnic differences to unify under a common Hellenism. The Balkans were always a lethal powder keg due to the region’s vastly different religions and ethnicities where East and West traditionally collided—from Roman and Byzantine times through the Ottoman imperial period to the bloody twentieth century. Such diversity often caused destructive conflicts of ethnic and religious hatred. Europe for centuries did not celebrate the religiously diverse mosaic of Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians, but instead tore itself apart in a half-millennium of killing and warring that continued into the late twentieth century in places like Northern Ireland.

In multiracial, multiethnic, and multi-religious societies—such as contemporary India or the Middle East—violence is the rule in the absence of unity.

Well, luckily we have Social Justice types to remind everyone that they’re not supposed to get along.

IT’S ALMOST LIKE THEY JUST HATE AMERICA OR SOMETHING: ‘Racist Anthem’ spray painted on 106-year-old Francis Scott Key statue in Baltimore.

WASHINGTON EXAMINER: Deplorable Book, Deplorable Person.

Nearly a year after she lost the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton is promoting a book about how her defeat is everyone else’s fault. So much, so familiar.

What’s striking is that even though she has barely begun her book tour, Clinton has already given the game away, reverting to her self-pitying idea that half her countrymen are “irredeemable” and “deplorable.”

Remember that riff she got into at a 2016 private fundraiser? No? Well here it is, to freshen your recollection.

You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people — now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks — they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.”

Clinton later issued a half-cocked apology for casting aspersions on tens of millions of her fellow citizens. She didn’t repeat exactly those words this past weekend when trying to flog her book, but she might as well have done. In an interview with Jane Pauley, she said Trump “was quite successful in referencing a nostalgia that would give hope, comfort, settle grievances, for millions of people who were upset about gains that were made by others.” She then clarified that she meant “millions of white people, yeah.”

This is actually an uglier comment than the one for which she pretended to apologize during the election. It’s a characteristically self-centered and selfish remark that should remind the nation why it can be glad Clinton didn’t become president and never will.

Every day Trump goes on not being President Hillary, and every day that makes me happy. Hillary’s clueless book is only making me happier.

Plus: “Between 2009 and 2017, Democrats and the Left forgot how to make arguments for their political positions. They leaned on Obama’s blackness, and argued that all his critics must ipso facto be racists. It was facile to make the accusation, but it seemed worthwhile at the time because it obviated the need for the sort of clear-eyed introspection that can make people, even politicians, question their beliefs and come up with fresh ideas. But convenient though it was to hide behind unthinking charges or bigotry, it eroded the Democrats ability to back their policies with facts and cogent reasoning. It was always a weak argument. Voters saw through in two midterm elections and again in 2016. But how much more contemptible it is to see that same racial crutch used by to prop up the amour propre of a whiter-than-white, uber-privileged politician who rode into public life on her husband’s coattails.”

In cosmic irony, though, she ignored Bill Clinton’s “mansplaining” of the election to her, and as a result, lost.

‘ENDLESS STUPID POLITICAL NAGGING’: Tucker Carlson Blasts ESPN After Anchor Calls Trump a ‘White Supremacist.’

Related: Clay Travis of the Outkick the Coverage sports blog, who is interviewed by Carlson in the above link, and who broke the Robert Lee story last month via tips from inside what he likes to call MSESPN, tweets, “Sources: After [veteran ESPN anchor] Linda Cohn spoke out on politics…she was told by prez John Skipper not to come to work & to think about what she said.” A Sports Illustrated headline in late April read “Linda Cohn says politics ‘definitely a percentage’ of ESPN’s problems.” That rare moment of reality from an ESPN anchor no doubt caused plenty of cognitive dissonance inside the Disney boardroom.

UPDATE: In contrast to Cohn (allegedly temporarily suspended) and Curt Schilling (fired), ESPN Issues Mild Reprimand to Liberal Host Who Called Trump a ‘White Supremacist.’

Just think of them as Democrat activists with halftime highlight reels, and it all makes sense.

KID ROCK: ‘Pretty funny how scared I have them.’

Musician Kid Rock on Monday defended himself against charges of racism from a Detroit-based civil rights group, claiming he wouldn’t be facing such attacks were he not considering a run for the U.S. Senate.

A Detroit-based affiliate of the National Action Network said last week it would protest Kid Rock’s six-show run opening the new Little Caesars Arena in Detroit this week, aiming to get the concerts canceled.

Kid Rock, whose real name is Robert Ritchie, said in a statement that people should ignore “the garbage the extreme left is trying to create!”

“They are trying to use the old confederate flag BS, etc. to stir the pot, when we all know none of this would be going on if I were not thinking of running for office. Pretty funny how scared I have them all and their only agenda is to try and label people / me racist who do not agree or cower to them!!” wrote Ritchie, who lives in Clarkston.

“My track record in Detroit and Michigan speaks for itself, and I would dare anyone talking trash to put theirs up against mine.”

In closing, he said, “I LOVE BLACK PEOPLE!!”

The Senate could do far worse — and has.

LEFTIST AUTOPHAGY, MUSICAL EDITION: British conductor sacked by US music festival after ‘innocent’ joke with his African-American friend was labelled racist. It doesn’t say who the officious “white woman” was who overheard two strangers talking and took it upon herself to tell the Stasi that she had witnessed badthink. But I doubt she was motivated by “good intentions.” More like self-importance and a desire to wield unaccountable power. She should make a public apology for this unconscionable act of big-brotherism.

THE GHOST OF LEONARD BERNSTEIN COULD NOT BE REACHED FOR COMMENT AND NON-TAX DEDUCTIBLE DONATIONS, as New York magazine comes full circle, nearly a half century later. New York Magazine: White Audiences Must ‘Examine Their Racist Failings:’

Relics of the past should be preserved, for the sake of history, art, and future generations. But the current frenzy to demand removal of (and in some cases actually violently destroy) Confederate monuments, and even American monuments threatens to erase large swaths of American history — noble and deplorable alike.

The arts are certainly not immune to the hysteria. In response to a theater in Tennessee cancelling a showing of Gone With the Wind, because of its “insensitivity,” New York Magazine’s Vulture published a piece calling the film, “a cinematic monument to the Confederacy.” However, Angelica Jade Bastien, the essayist, argued that the film should in fact be preserved. Why? “When watching Gone With the Wind, white audiences today who are willing to examine their racist failings must also examine how they specifically propagate the mythology that upholds white supremacy,” she reasoned.

Perhaps by holding lavish Park Avenue fundraisers to assuage their guilt, with the funds from elite leftists going to chicly radical organizations

BUT OF COURSE: ‘American Horror Story: Cult’ Premiere Sets Up Trump Supporters as Racist, Fear Mongers.

The first season was all in campy good fun, but my wife and I gave up in the first half of Season Two and never went back.

BRITAIN: Sarah Champion interview: ‘I’d rather be called a racist than turn a blind eye to child abuse’: The Labour MP’s article about sex gangs caused a furore. Clearly a lot of British officialdom felt differently.

BRENDAN O’NEILL: This Isn’t Anti-Racism, It’s Middle-Class Misanthropy: “When is it okay for someone from a ‘solidly middle-class’ background, who was brought up by a mother who was ‘super successful’ at a ‘financial company’, to scoff at the homeless? To imply that it is they who are privileged? To remove the silver spoon from her mouth for five seconds and in her cut-glass tones declare: ‘You can be homeless and still have white privilege’? When that person is Munroe Bergdorf, the queer, trans model who was given the heave-ho by L’Oréal last week for saying all white people are racist.”

Plus: “And, more importantly, the worldview of so many who describe themselves as ‘progressive’ and ‘anti-racist’ these days. Something has gone horribly wrong with the once noble, optimistic, humanist goal of anti-racism. When I got involved in anti-racist activism in the early 1990s, it was about defending the ideals of universalism against the divisive logic of the state and establishment; against those who would have us believe that blacks and whites were fundamentally different and should therefore distrust each other. It was also about defending the equality of autonomy. It was an argument for the ability and right of ethnic minorities to navigate public life and work life, built on a conviction that they were as capable as any white person of doing so. Now, perversely, and depressingly, ‘anti-racism’ – those scare quotes really are necessary – means almost entirely the opposite.”

RUN FOR OFFICE AS A REPUBLICAN AND — SHAZAM! — INSTANT RACIST! “When the Ilitch family’s Olympia Entertainment division chose divisive performer Kid Rock to christen Little Caesars Arena with six shows and a new restaurant, it sent a message to the Detroiters who made the project possible and who have yet to see the benefits promised. It’s a message that’s not too far off those Jim Crow-era signs warning that blacks weren’t welcome.”

Just like nobody ever called Donald Trump a racist — and even the New York Times couldn’t find anything but good stuff on him and race relations — but suddenly he became the Imperial Wizard.

Well, when all you’ve got is a race card, that’s the card you’re going to play. But this piece is embarrassing even by the low standards of the “dog whistle that only Democrats can hear” genre. But sure, tell us that Smokey Robinson is supporting a Klansman.

And if you’re cynical — and where this kind of stuff is concerned, you can bet that I am — the purpose of pieces like this is precisely to scare off similar black figures who might otherwise endorse him. Just like they did when Trump ran. Because it’s never about ending racism, and always about protecting Democrats’ cynical manipulation of minority voters.

DIVERSITY OVERREACH AT AMERICAN UNIVERSITY.

American University’s pervasive left-wing political climate has not prevented nasty racial incidents, but it sure has facilitated official overreaction antithetical to academia. AU is rapidly moving further than many other colleges and universities to enshrine ideological indoctrination into the curriculum in the name of diversity and inclusion.

The campus witnessed two dramatic racist events during the past academic year. A white student threw a banana at an African-American student in her dorm room and scribbled obscene graffiti on her door’s whiteboard. Later, during final exams, someone hung nooses with bananas marked with racist messages, including one attacking the African-American sorority of the new student body president, at three separate locations on campus, and vicious white supremacist attacks on her followed.

Both incidents were widely and laudably condemned by students, faculty, and administration alike in a positive exercise of free speech. The student who perpetrated the invasion of another student’s room was caught and disciplined by the university. AU has enlisted the FBI’s assistance and vowed to catch and to punish the other guilty parties.

But as those who follow campus news well know, racist or sexist events rarely end with punishment or a return to normality. They often trigger cries of “systemic” racism or sexism, curable only by reform programs, usually mandatory, to reshape the attitudes of all students.

Thought police gonna thought-police. Cost of attending American University: $61,360 per year.

WELL, AT LEAST THEY PROBABLY WON’T BEHEAD YOU: Let us mock Texans, their faith and their politics.

In other words, any excuse will do to smack down people of Christian faith who do not cleave to the liberal line that Big Government is the same as the Hand of God. The Left sees everything in on-off, right-wrong terms. There is no nuance in their world view. A liberal colleague of mine, whom I have know for 20-plus years and who I count a a true friend, posted this similar cartoon on his FB page. . . .

In his comments on the cartoon, my friend betrayed what you encounter on the Left over and over: “I’m pointing out that the stance that all government help is bad is ridiculous and bad… .” To which I replied, “I know, or know of, exactly zero people on my side of the aisle who say that ‘all government help is bad.’ That’s a memetic straw man on the Left but it has no basis.”

I wonder what the cartoonist or its enthralled would say if they knew that the quote in the first section, above, “That government is best which governs least,” was penned by Henry David Thoreau (not Thomas Jefferson, as commonly attributed). . . .

And that is the basic template of almost all Leftist politics. There is absolutely nothing that so defines Leftism as anger, of which this is only one example. Converse or correspond with anyone on the Left long enough and it becomes obvious that they are just plan mad, especially at people who do not agree that they just know better than you do. So their commentary is, “smug, predictable, dismissive,” says Morrisey, “with all of the subtlety, wit, and artistry of a sledgehammer.” You either agree with them altogether or you are painted as a racist, homophobic, neo-Nazi, fundamentalist Christian, white supremacist, misogynist child of darkness. Who hates the government except in hurricanes.

Leftism is the politics of a spoiled child, thwarted.

IOW THE SPLC JUST MAKES SH*T UP AND HOPES IT STICKS: Asatru and Racism. (It isn’t.) Oh, and they REALLY want us to look for racists under every bed.  Racist by their definition, of course. Excluding people who make comments like every white guy should die, of course.

SPIKED: We Need More Texas Attitude And Less PC:

The official response to Harvey appears to be very competent. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was on the ground two days before Harvey reached land. Texas governor Greg Abbott deployed the entire Texas National Guard. Houston mayor Sylvester Turner quickly activated police and firefighters, and provided calm, clear instructions to residents. This was much better than the response to Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana in 2005 – indeed, it seemed to show that the authorities had learned the lessons of the botched response to Katrina. . . .

As capable as the local, state and federal disaster response has been, what has been even more impressive is the great effort made by thousands of ordinary people, volunteering to help their fellow citizens. Seeing massive flooding and destruction, many would think: ‘How do I get out of here?’ But in Houston we saw lines of cars towing boats, people driving into the worst of the flooding. Like the cavalry, on came the hundreds of the ‘Texas Navy’ (joined by the ‘Cajun Navy’ of Louisiana) in fishing boats, jet skis and kayaks.

They went about their business with modest determination. CNN found two men loading up their boat, heading into the storm. ‘What are you going to do?’, the CNN reporter asked. ‘Go try to save some lives’, one of the men said, in a matter-of-fact way. Those without a boat helped, too. Five volunteer rescuers from Lufkin, Texas stopped at a gas station, and a guy handed them three $100 bills, according to a New York Times report. ‘Texas people just stick together’, said one.

While Hurricane Harvey brought out the best in many, it also brought out the worst. Across social media, certain liberals were feeling less than sympathetic to Texans, seen as Trump voters and Republican Party backers. ‘I don’t believe in instant karma, but this feels like it for Texas’, tweeted a University of Tampa professor: ‘Hopefully this will help them realise the GOP doesn’t care about them.’ (This professor was later fired for this tweet, which he shouldn’t have been.)

The heroism shown by ordinary Texans has been a great antidote to the prejudices expressed by well-off liberals towards ‘deplorable’ Americans. The politically correct view is that white folks are irredeemably racist, and the country is inescapably divided by race, yet the images from Houston told a different story: a black deputy sheriff wading through floodwaters with a white child in each arm; a white SWAT officer carrying a Vietnamese-American woman and her baby through floodwaters; three Asian and Hispanic constables moving an elderly woman in a wheelchair.

As it happens, this was not exceptional: as anyone who has travelled through Texas and the South will know, social interactions between people of different backgrounds are casually pleasant. Unlike PC liberals, most people don’t see life through a prism of racial categories. In response to Harvey, we didn’t see the ‘diversity’ of essentially different people – we saw citizens helping citizens, Texans helping Texans.

Yes, but that offers insufficient opportunities for graft and political manipulation.

THE HILL: Right accuses left of hypocrisy on antifa.

Conservatives are decrying what they see as a muted response to the rise of the left-wing antifa movement amid a series of violent protests and clashes that have broken out at events across the country.

Some on the right have accused liberals and the media of being loath to condemn violence on the left from militant groups that resist neo-Nazis and white supremacists, while racing to denounce such behavior by right-wing groups.

“After Charlottesville, the media rightly demanded that President Trump and all Republicans condemn the neo-Nazis and the KKK,” Marc Thiessen, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush and a fellow at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, wrote Wednesday in an op-ed for The Washington Post.

“So where are the calls for Democrats to condemn antifa — and the brutal public condemnation for those who fail to do so?”

The conservative Independent Journal Review took aim at Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat, writing that he had failed to specifically call out antifa after the chaos in Charlottesville. Democrats, IJR’s Benny Johnson wrote, “have not yet denounced antifa and its violent tactics by name.”

Antifa, a contraction of the word “anti-fascist,” refers to the loose movement of radical activists — communists, socialists and anarchists among them — who in recent months have scrapped with right-wing demonstrators, racist groups and, at times, run-of-the-mill supporters of President Trump.

Separate from the peaceful protesters who joined the bevy of nationwide marches and demonstrations in the wake of Trump’s inauguration, many antifa activists have adopted a willingness to use violence to confront those they deem fascists.

Which, basically, is anyone they don’t like at the moment. And I’m pretty sure the only reason they’re getting any pushback now is that their violence and craziness — now the stuff of Onion parodies — is hurting Democrats.

IT’S COME TO THIS: University of Mississippi Ends Fraternity Retreat Early After Participant Threw Banana Peel Into a Tree. “Some students perceived it as a racist act.”

ROGER SIMON: HARVEY WILL BE THE TURNING POINT OF THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY: “Trump is proving himself under fire in a situation immeasurably more important than Twitter sideshows. Nitpickers now seem more what they are — pickers of nits. And those accusing Trump of racismsexismhomophobiaIslamophobiayaddayaddayadda will appear to be exactly what they are as well — dim-witted bores who wouldn’t know a real racist when they saw one. (Most likely that would take a mirror.)”

THAT’S WHAT THEY ALWAYS SAY WHEN IT’S HELD BY REPUBLICANS: Labor Leader Sees A White House Of ‘Racists’ and ‘Wall Streeters.’

How is President Goldman-Sachs doing these days, anyway?

BLUE ON BLUE: All White People Are Socialized to Be Racist & Tina Fey Made That Clear.

CLIVE CROOK: Why People Still Support Trump:

There are two main theories of Trump’s support. One is that a large minority of Americans — 40 percent, give or take — are racist idiots. This theory is at least tacitly endorsed by the Democratic Party and the mainstream liberal media. The other is that a large majority of this large minority are good citizens with intelligible and legitimate opinions, who so resent being regarded as racist idiots that they’ll back Trump almost regardless. They may not admire the man, but he’s on their side, he vents their frustration, he afflicts the people who think so little of them — and that’s good enough.

It’s disappointing that Charlottesville hasn’t changed their minds — but then it hasn’t changed my mind either. I still think the first theory is absurd and the second theory basically correct. . . .

This sense that democratic politics is futile if not downright dangerous now infuses the worldview of the country’s cultural and intellectual establishment. Trump is routinely accused of being authoritarian and anti-democratic, despite the fact that he won the election and, so far, has been checked at every point and has achieved almost nothing in policy terms. (He might wish he were an authoritarian, but he sure hasn’t been allowed to function as one.) Many of his critics, on the other hand, are anti-democratic in a deeper sense: They appear to believe that a little less than half the country doesn’t deserve the vote.

The second theory — the correct theory — is a terrible indictment of the Democratic Party and much of the media. Why aren’t the intelligible and legitimate opinions of that large minority given a hearing? Why must their views be bundled reflexively into packages labelled “bigotry” and “stupidity”? Why can’t this large minority of the American people be accorded something other than pity or scorn?

Because Democrats still can’t deal with losing, and a large part of belonging to the left is the satisfaction of feeling superior to ordinary Americans.

ENJOY YOUR ANTIFA PROTESTS, BECAUSE IT’S GOING TO GET AWKWARD SOON.

You see, there are quite a number of Democratic senators in Congress who are up for re-election next year. Our very own U.S. senator Bob Casey is considered vulnerable being located in a state that voted for President Trump. One of the most vulnerable Democratic senators in Congress is Missouri senator Claire McCaskill. Her state voted for Donald Trump by 57% to Hillary Clinton’s 38%. She has to desperately look as moderate as possible, her Republican attackers will put up ads “Clare’s people think every last one of you is a racist Nazi,” and pair photos of her in ballrooms with Nancy Pelosi set to dramatic music. See how this works?

This obviously has Democratic strategists in a pickle.

It’s very obvious what next year will be like. The worst footage from protest demonstrations will be put on display in campaign advertising and all the claims that Democratic pundits and authors have made claiming America is festooned with 64 million gas-chamber-murdering Nazis. Everyone who voted for Donald Trump is a Nazi. They’re all Nazis. Every fucking last one of them is a motherfucking Nazi.

There are few Republicans up for re-election in 2018 who are really vulnerable. Those 64 million Trump voters still have access to ballot machines and they can still vote. Calling every Trump voter a Nazi, as so many of you have done, is not going to be forgotten. That projection is going to come back to haunt people. It terrifies people who actually do politics as part of their career; namely pundits, campaign strategists and party officials. . . . You don’t need any more embarrassing YouTube video clips of AntiFa protestors chanting “NO USA AT ALL“.

I’ve noticed a sudden media pivot against Antifa in the last couple of days, which I assume means that someone has polled this stuff and it’s electoral poison for Democrats. Which should come as no surprise, unless you live in a Media Bubble.

THE RACIST SELF IDENTIFIES. APPARENTLY ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN TAN COMMIT FRAUD: Schumer to Trump: Reject White Supremacy, Disband Voter Fraud Commission.  Mister Schumer, having poll watched in pasty-white Colorado Springs, I can promise you that the fraud knows no color barrier.

CHANGE: Advertisers move away from using pictures of white, straight customers for fear of being seen as racist or gay-hating. Prediction: Ads grow less effective on average consumers, ad revenue for media outlets drops. The GOP’s political-correctness Screwfly Solution for the left continues to work!

QUESTION ASKED AND ANSWERED:

● Shot: Is ‘identity liberalism’ killing the Democratic party?

Hot Air, yesterday.

● Chaser: HuffPost Actually Goes There: Publishes Article Asking if Military Service Makes You Racist.

Independent Journal Review, yesterday.

OF COURSE THEY DO: Law professors argue colleagues’ ‘bourgeois’ ideal is racist and classist.

I recently reread Christopher Lasch’s The Revolt of the Elites, and he has a lot to say about that. He writes:

The new elites are in revolt against “Middle America,” as they imagine it: a nation technologically backward, politically reactionary, repressive in its sexual morality, middlebrow in its tastes, smug and complacent, dull and dowdy. . . .

The culture wars that have convulsed America since the sixties are best understood as a form of class warfare, in which an enlightened elite (as it thinks of itself seeks not so much to impose its values on the majority (a majority perceived as incorrigibly racist, provincial and xenophobic), much less to persuade the majority by means of rational public debate, as to create parallel or “alternative” institutions in which it will no longer be necessary to confront the unenlightened at all.

Bourgeois culture is bad because it limits the flexibility of the elites. When the middle class was ascendant, it had the power to force bourgeois norms on elites, and even many of the poor. This led to social goods that people miss now, but it was also experienced as confining by those so constrained. Hence Vernon Parrington’s much-followed 1920s call to “Rid society of the dictatorship of the middle class,” in favor of an “enlightened” autocracy of scientists, thinkers, and artists.

Which is why bourgeois is the new transgressive.

YES. NEXT QUESTION? Is ‘identity liberalism’ killing the Democratic party?

Humanities professor Mark Lilla has a new book out titled “The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics”… If you want a sense of how the left is responding to this thesis, you can turn to this contentious interview at Slate. Author Isaac Chotiner seems to be doing his best to undermine Lilla’s argument and, more specifically, to make the case that everything comes down to racism. Lilla’s position is that this assumption is blinding Democrats to seeing a more nuanced view of the problem:

John Sexton of Hot Air goes on to quote a wide swatch of Lilla’s interview, but I want to drill down to this moment, which sums up just how unreceptive Lilla’s intended audience of fellow leftists will be to his message:

[Lilla:] When you ask them about identity issues, the people who are not voting for us, and ask them about what they perceive as political correctness, they respond. You only have to look at polls about this, and it’s a great recruiting tool for the right. Now, unless you assume that all of white America is racist and lost and cannot be saved—

Chotiner: Only about half, yeah.

So Lilla is saying people on the right are responding to the left’s obvious contempt for them and Chotiner’s reply is to label half of them are racist, which is sort of making Lilla’s point,”  Sexton adds after quoting more of the interview.

Slate is the last journalistic redoubt of the Graham family, who owned the Washington Post and Newsweek for decades, before offloading, in recent years, the latter for $1 and the former in return for Jeff Bezos’ pocket change. One of the reasons why their publications managed to turn a large investment into a smaller one is the smugness of their journalists, one of whom wore a “Yeah, I’m in the Media, Screw You!” button to the GOP’s 1992 convention.

And if anything, the smug cloud over both the DNC and its operatives with bylines has grown much, much larger. As William Voegeli concludes in his review of Lilla’s book at City Journal (titled “Liberals, Shipwrecked,” which is also well worth your time to read in full), “Lilla’s hope for a future liberalism that will forge ahead and surmount identity politics seems naïve.”

And how.

THE ACLU TURNED WHITE SUPREMACIST SO SLOWLY, I HARDLY EVEN NOTICED. The ACLU’s Twitter account gets a lesson in political correctness:

Earlier this week, the Twitter account for the American Civil Liberties Union posted an innocuous picture of a toddler wearing a tyke-sized ACLU T-shirt with the words “Free Speech” on the front. The little one was holding a stuffed animal in one hand and a mini American flag in the other. The tweet that accompanied the photo said “This is the future that ACLU members want.”

Within moments, the tweet was descended upon from the corners of the outrage twitter-sphere because that’s what social media is now. The great social injustice committed here by the ACLU? The child in the picture was white and therefore declared as racist and propping up white supremacists…Within the hour, however, the ACLU posted a weird retraction of the image, stating “When your Twitter followers keep you in check and remind you that white supremacy is everywhere,” along with a Kermit the Frog gif.

Read the whole thing.

WHY GOOGLE COULD LOSE. “If protected concerted activity allows individuals to yell racist slurs on the picket line, then workers can probably send a memo criticizing an employer’s diversity program to other staff members in an effort to improve work conditions.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, CLEMSON EDITION: ‘All Republicans are racist scum,’ Clemson professor declares.

ALSO, ESPN WON’T LET ANYONE NAMED GANDHI SPORTSCAST FOOTBALL GAMES: Ghana Will Remove Statue of ‘Racist’ Mahatma Gandhi From Its Oldest University. “The petition, which had more than 1,700 supporters on Thursday, cited letters Gandhi wrote during his time in South Africa as evidence that he advocated for the superiority of Indians over black Africans. It also took issue with his use of the derogatory term kaffir to refer to native Africans and criticized the lack of statues of African heroes and heroines on campus.”

IT’S INTERESTING TO SEE THIS IN SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, WHICH HAS BEEN PRETTY PC LATELY: The Unfortunate Fallout Of Campus Postmodernism.

Students are being taught by these postmodern professors that there is no truth, that science and empirical facts are tools of oppression by the white patriarchy, and that nearly everyone in America is racist and bigoted, including their own professors, most of whom are liberals or progressives devoted to fighting these social ills. Of the 58 Evergreen faculty members who signed a statement “in solidarity with students” calling for disciplinary action against Weinstein for “endangering” the community by granting interviews in the national media, I tallied only seven from the sciences. Most specialize in English, literature, the arts, humanities, cultural studies, women’s studies, media studies, and “quotidian imperialisms, intermetropolitan geography [and] detournement.” A course called “Fantastic Resistances” was described as a “training dojo for aspiring ‘social justice warriors’” that focuses on “power asymmetries.”

If you teach students to be warriors against all power asymmetries, don’t be surprised when they turn on their professors and administrators. This is what happens when you separate facts from values, empiricism from morality, science from the humanities.

If you create a generation of vipers, you are likely to wind up bit.

ROGER KIMBALL: While They Rage, Trump Builds. “Doubtless there are many things to criticize about Donald Trump. But being racist isn’t among those things. What infuriates his critics—but at the same time affords them so many opportunities to bathe in the gratifying fluid of their putative moral superiority—is that Trump refuses to collude in the destructive, politically correct charade according to which ‘racism’ is the nearly ubiquitous cardinal sin of white America. He is having none of that, and his refusal to go along with the attempted moral blackmail is driving his critics to distraction.”

CONSIDER THE BARREL-BOTTOM TO HAVE BEEN SCRAPED: Howard Dean: If You Vote Republican in 2018, You’re A Racist.

Dems: Vote for us, we got nothin’.

CLAIM: Asian-American doctor says white nationalists refuse her care.

Dr. Esther Choo is an Asian-American emergency room physician who has practiced medicine for more than a decade. Yet, she says, a few times a year, a patient will refuse to let her treat them. Solely because of her race.

Choo, who works in Oregon, first shared her experience of dealing with racist patients who shun her care in a viral Twitter thread last Sunday.

Democrat-run Oregon has a nasty history of official racism, but racists who delay or refuse emergency medical care would seem to be one of those self-correcting problems.

ANDREW KLAVAN AND THE RACIST MAZE: Everyone is welcome, but there’s no way out.

Maybe it’s located next to the lobby of the Hotel California.

THEY TOLD ME IF TRUMP WERE ELECTED, OUR CAMPUSES WOULD BECOME RACIST CESSPITS OF HOSTILITY TOWARD ANYONE DIFFERENT: Blonde women in Trump gear TRIGGER students at Howard University. “A group of white women, some of whom were wearing Trump gear, triggered the Howard University community over the weekend when they dared attempt to eat lunch in the school’s cafeteria. . . . Jamilah Lemieux thought campus police should be involved. . . . Even the Twitter account for the school’s dining services weighed in on the need for students to have ‘safe & comfortable’ dining spaces.”

What’s next, denying them service at a lunch counter?

JOHN KASS: While we’re toppling offensive symbols, what about the Democratic Party?

History is important, but history can also be quite offensive.

But there’s one thing wrong with Sharpton. It’s not that he goes too far. It’s that he doesn’t go far enough.

Because if he and others of the Cultural Revolution were being intellectually honest, they’d demand that along with racist statues, something else would be toppled.

And this, too, represents much of America’s racist history:

The Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party historically is the party of slavery. The Democratic Party is the party of Jim Crow laws. The Democratic Party fought civil rights for a century.

And so by rights — or at least by the standards established by the Cultural Revolutionaries of today’s American left — we should ban the Democratic Party.

Not only get rid of it in the present, but strike its very name from the history books, and topple all Democratic statues of leaders who benefited, prospered and became wealthy by cleaving to the party. And shame Democrats until they confess the truth of it.

The Democratic Party’s military arm in the South was the KKK. The Democratic Party opposed the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, making the former slaves citizens of the United States and giving them the vote.

If the new Cultural Revolution was serious, wouldn’t it also demand that the Democratic Party be put in a museum somewhere, away from decent people, along with those Confederate statues?

We could put Democrats in exhibits, behind glass, watching white political bosses chomp cigars and pass out goodies for votes, as minorities were relegated, as they are today, to failing schools and lost educational opportunity and neighborhoods that have become killing fields for the young and old.

And in great museums, the Democrats could be studied, safely, without endangering the sensibilities of the children.

We might even peer down on an animatronic Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd, once a leader of the KKK. And with him, prominent animatronic Democrats who, just a few short years ago, said wonderful, moving things about Byrd after his funeral.

I’m convinced.

TIME TO RENAME YALE, instead of honoring racist, slave-trading Yale University founder.

Speaking as the very first “Yalie of the Week,” so named by the Yale Alumni Magazine back in 2008, I think it’s time. Now, about John Harvard. . . .

RACISM IN WHITOPIA: In cities that vote blue, no immunity from racism. “Progressive to its core, Portland is also America’s whitest big city – in part the troubling legacy of Oregon’s founding goal in the 19th century of creating a white utopia through exclusionary laws. Here in a city of hops and hipsters, where Republicans have been all but banished, Ms. Smith’s properties have been vandalized with racist graffiti – a particularly sore point since they are one of the only black families left in what was once the core of black Portland, around the corner from where Duke Ellington used to hang out. . . . And as white Portlanders have grown richer, the median black income has fallen – to less than $30,000 per year. The city’s criminal justice system sends black kids to juvenile detention at four to five times the rate of white kids, for the same misdeeds.”

Plus: “It isn’t Richard Spencer calling the cops on me for farming while Black. It’s nervous White women in yoga pants with ‘I’m with Her’ and ‘Coexist’ stickers on their German SUVs.”

RACISTS SHOULDN’T DO DNA: I Celebrated Black History Month… By Finding Out I Was White. “I found out I was White. Not just 13% White, my husband’s percentage when he too completed the ancestry composition report. Not just 25% White, since the average amount of DNA in an African American’s genome traced back to West Africa is about 75%. I was damn near 1/3 White. That’s significant. . . . It can remain a theory for the rest of my family, but as someone who has become a Black millennial marketing expert… this s*** matters. It’s as if I’ve obscured the one thing which has guided me since I was nine years old… my heritage. Even back then I believed in Black power, creating drawings in art class titled “A Strong Black Nation”, featuring black construction paper hands reaching for the sky. Along with being a millennial and being a woman, being Black enlivens me. I’m personally and professionally compelled to clarify misconceptions and elevate all three of my squads. As inappropriate (but honest) as it sounds, I’d discovered I had the so-called ‘superior’ race running through my veins, and never before had I felt so inferior. Then, in a startling and unexpected twist, shame surfaced.”

Related: White nationalists are flocking to genetic ancestry tests. Some don’t like what they find.

PAULA BOLYARD: Tech Companies Begin Blacklisting Alt-Right Sites, Purging Them from the Internet.

If this is the new norm, what’s the excuse for permitting continued access for hate and/or racist groups like La Raza, Black Lives Matter, or Antifa?

WHY IS SILICON VALLEY SO RACIST? AI Programs Are Learning to Exclude Some African-American Voices.

Related: Why Microsoft Accidentally Unleashed a Neo-Nazi Sexbot.

WHY ARE MILITARY BASES IN THE SOUTH NAMED FOR CONFEDERATE GENERALS?: An op-ed from the Charlotte Observer by Michael Newcity, a professor at Duke. When you read it remember who was president in 1918: Woodrow Wilson. Wilson was a Democrat, a southerner and a for real racist who segregated the federal work force. Note Newcity doesn’t mention Wilson, his party or his ugly record.

FIRST AMENDMENT ICON BURT NEUBORNE: From cross burning to funeral protests, hate speech enjoys broad protection.

The First Amendment, the justices have said, protected a Ku Klux Klan member decrying Jews and blacks in Ohio in 1969. It protected neo-Nazis seeking to march through heavily Jewish Skokie, Ill., in 1977. It protected a U.S. flag burner from Texas in 1989, three cross burners from Virginia in 2003 and homophobic funeral protesters in 2011.

Just two months ago, the high court ruled unanimously that even derogatory trademarks deserve First Amendment protection — a victory for an Asian-American rock band dubbed The Slants as well as the Washington Redskins.

You wouldn’t know it from the public condemnation that has followed the events in Charlottesville, which led to the death of a 32-year-old female counter-protester and two state troopers.

Faced with the racist and anti-Semitic speeches and symbols of the marchers, the violence that resulted and President Trump’s equivocal denunciation of “all sides,” Republican as well as Democratic officials have said the groups should not be welcomed anywhere.

Ah, but they are — by virtue of Supreme Court precedent.

“I don’t quarrel with the president’s recognition that people had a right to march,” said Burt Neuborne, a professor of civil liberties at New York University School of Law who represented Ku Klux Klan members and others as an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer. “This is a time to distinguish legal rights from moral condemnation.”

Indeed.

IRONY ALERT: CHARLOTTESVILLE CANDLELIGHT VIGIL FEATURES SONG FROM RACIST SON OF A KLANSMAN.

The Jammie Wearing Fools quote extensively from an L.A. Weekly article headlined “Little Known Fact: Woody Guthrie Was a Big Ol’ Racist.”

DAVID BLANKENHORN: Charlottesville, Trump, And Our Bitter Politics.

Like so many, I’m saddened and deeply troubled by what happened in Charlottesville this past weekend, and its aftermath. And I also worry that more argument about it at this point is unlikely to do much good and may even do harm. Yet silence, somehow, feels cowardly.

Let’s review the basic story to date. An innocent woman lies dead, murdered. Far-right hate groups, for decades essentially exiled from anything but the most marginal participation in our public life, are now being discussed around the world (whether accurately or not) as a viable and perhaps growing presence among us. And the polarization of our society, much of it stoked by our market-share obsessed media—the rancor, the bitterness, the frantic hyperbole, the relentless either/or framing of issues, our fear of and anger at each other—appears only to have been increased by Charlottesville and its aftermath.

I agree with, or at least can understand with some sympathy, many things President Trump said. Left-wing provocateurs do exist; and they, too, use telegenic violence to recruit new members and raise money. Labels such as “alt-right” or “neo-Nazi” probably don’t describe everyone who showed up for the rally. There is more than one side to the issue of the Confederate statues and monuments; indeed there are at least three sides, since some African-American members of a Charlottesville city commission formed by the Mayor to consider the issue favored keeping the statues partly as “teaching moments” for the future.

The President also said yesterday that neo-Nazis and white nationalists “should be condemned totally,” a sentiment for which I’m grateful and with which I fully agree—but which also seems both forced and late.

But here’s the heart of the matter, for me. The great majority of Americans on both sides of the political aisle recognize that, in this land we all love and want to make better, racism exists. It’s deep and it’s serious. It dishonors us, and we need to do everything we can to erase it and put it behind us.

In that light consider: The rally in Charlottesville was planned and carried out by openly racist groups in pursuit of openly racist objectives. These facts should and do cause the great majority of Americans to feel distress, embarrassment, regret, shame, remorse, anger, and a renewed determination to do all that we can to minimize this terrible thing that crawled out of the fever swamps this past weekend to highjack our attention. Almost all of us—liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats—know this and feel this in our bones.

Read the whole thing.

NO. NEXT QUESTION? The Oscar winners seek to publicly shame Neo Nazis, but have they really thought this through?

JENNIFER LAWRENCE AND WEAPONIZED FAME:

The Twitter account @yesyoureracist has made it its mission to publicly “out” and name those who attended the rallies this past weekend. In doing so, they have misidentified several people to their 370,000 Twitter followers. The account’s response is to simply say sorry, ask for more patron donations and move on. The innocent people on the other end, however, have to deal with days of threats, harassing phone calls to their employers and the fear that their private information might become public.

Shortly after the high-profile shooting death of Travyon Martin, director Spike Lee took to Twitter to blast out the home address that he thought belonged to George Zimmerman, the man who was accused (and later acquitted) in Martin’s death. The address was not Zimmerman’s, however. It belonged to a couple who were forced to vacate their home due to death threats. Lee later apologized profusely and settled with the couple out of court. Too late. Damage done.

As with other high profile cases of mistaken identity (Newtown shooter Adam Lanza and the Boston Bombing suspects) the rush to identify and dish out digital justice first can have devastating effects and perhaps even fatal ones. The absolute last thing a group of online blood-thirsty amateurs need is to be empowered by those with the largest platforms among us.

Calling out hate is one thing. Digital vigilantism dished out by celebrities like Lawrence where innocent people are bound to be targeted over no fault of their own is something completely different, and will only lead nowhere good.

Earlier: Freddie deBoer on the “Planet of Cops.”

ANOTHER LIBEL SUIT FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES TO DEFEND: NY Times must face defamation lawsuit over professor’s slavery comments. “A federal appeals court on Tuesday said the New York Times Co must face a defamation lawsuit by a Louisiana economics professor who said it quoted him out of context by saying he described slavery as ‘not so bad.’ The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived claims by Walter Block, who teaches at Loyola University, over a January 26, 2014, front page article about libertarianism and a potential presidential candidacy of Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican who later ran for the White House. . . . Block said this made him appear racist, despite his having always been a ‘bitter opponent’ of slavery. A lower court judge dismissed the case, but the three-judge appeals court panel found a ‘genuine issue of material fact’ as to whether the article was false and had a defamatory meaning.”

While I’d be surprised to see New York Times v. Sullivan overruled, I would not be shocked to see courts growing somewhat less zealous in its application, as the performance of the news media continues to decline.

OCEANIA HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH TEDDY ROOSEVELT:

● Shot: “I think that Teddy Roosevelt was a great American.”

—Hillary Clinton in a May 1, 2008 interview with Bill O’Reilly.

● Double-Shot: “It’s time to take a page from Teddy Roosevelt’s book and get our economy working for Americans again. That’s what I’ll do as president.”

—Hillary, as quoted in an October 28, 2015 Dow Jones Marketwatch.com article titled “Hillary Clinton wants to be Teddy Roosevelt.”

● Chaser: Leftist Activists Demand New York Museum Take Down Statue of ‘Racist’ Theodore Roosevelt — You give an inch, they take a mile.

—The Daily Wire, today.

As a prominent, albeit fictitious member of the news media would say:

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY: The Left Tries To Politicize Charlottesville, And Exposes Its Own Double Standards. “When a violent event fits a liberal narrative it sparks wails of outrage, makes the front page news, gets talked about 24/7 on cable news. But if it doesn’t fit that narrative — for example, the targeting of Republicans by a deranged liberal, or vicious attacks by leftists on Trump supporters, death threats to conservatives, etc. — the left can barely muster any reaction at all. Obama never mentioned the anti-cop sentiment fomented by Black Lives Matter — with an assist from Obama himself — in his brief statement after five police officers were assassinated in Dallas. Obama did find room in those remarks to mention racist cops. Did anyone on the left complain?”

BRET STEPHENS: Trump, Obama and the Politics of Evasion.

Consider the following propositions:

(1) James Alex Fields Jr., the young man who on Saturday, police say, rammed his Dodge Challenger into a crowd in Charlottesville, killing Heather Heyer and injuring 19 others, was not a “domestic terrorist.”

(2) He was a fatherless, troubled individual who likely experienced economic disenfranchisement as a child of Kentucky and was moved to violence for motives about which we can only guess.

(3) The marchers who gathered in Charlottesville to protest the removal of a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee are not necessarily “alt-right.” After all, the alt-right movement encompasses a diverse spectrum of opinion, only some of it racist, and should not be tarred by the rhetoric or actions of a few.

(4) White people should feel no sense of responsibility because a tiny handful of so-called white “nationalists” and “supremacists” falsely claim to speak in their name.

(5) The blame for the events in Charlottesville does not lie with any particular group. Both sides bear their share of guilt and should have shown greater restraint.

(6) President Trump was right on Saturday to avoid stigmatizing any particular group in his remarks condemning violence and hatred. Doing so would unnecessarily elevate the profile of the angry losers and occasionally violent extremists who defame Americans and give them the P.R. victory they were seeking all along.

O.K., now here’s hoping you’re revolted by each of the six preceding points. Because, if you are, then maybe we can at last rethink the policy of euphemism, obfuscation, denial and semantic yoga that typified the Obama administration’s discussions of another form of terrorism.

Read the whole thing.

THE WHITEWASHING OF colleges’ racist history.

ROD DREHER: CHARLOTTESVILLE IS THE KIND OF AMERICA THAT IDENTITY POLITICS IS CALLING INTO BEING. It’s time for straight talk about that:

Finally, we on the Right have to start speaking out without fear against identity politics — and calling out people on the Left, especially those within institutions, for practicing it. The alt-right has correctly identified a hypocritical double standard in American culture. It’s one that allows liberals and their favored minority groups to practice toxic identity politics — on campus, in the media, in corporate America, on the streets — while denying the possibility to whites and males. By speaking out against left-wing identity politics, and by explaining, over and over, why identity politics are wrong and destructive, conservatives strengthen their position in chastising white nationalists on the Right.

But none of this will matter at all as long as the Left refuses to oppose identity politics in its own ranks. As I keep saying here, you cannot have an identity politics of the Left without calling up the same thing on the Right. Left-liberals who want conservatives to stigmatize and denounce white nationalism, but conservatives who do so will be sneered at by white nationalists as dupes and fools who advocate disarmament in the face of racist, sexist forces of the Left.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE (FROM GLENN): David Marcus was warning of this over a year ago: How Anti-White Rhetoric Is Fueling White Nationalism: White people are being asked—or pushed—to take stock of their whiteness and identify with it more. This is a remarkably bad idea.

Related: We’ll have more Charlottesvilles. I’d rather have a culture in which people responded to ideas and groups they dislike with peaceful criticism, but we haven’t had that for a while.

“WELL THIS IS AWKWARD. THIS PIECE PROMOTING VIOLENT LEFTIES RAN IN THE LOCAL SECTION OF TODAY’S WASHINGTON POST,” Curtis Houck of NewsBusters tweets.

The Post’s article is headlined, “What draws Americans to anarchy? It’s more than just smashing windows.” Yes – it’s the puff pieces they know they’ll get from newspapers like the WaPo:

Anarchists — who are often grouped with the antifascists, or antifa — have been increasingly visible across the country, engaging in high-profile protests that sometimes turn violent. In Berkeley, Calif., they have squared off with far-right and other groups, rioting to stop people they deem to be fascists from speaking on campus — ticking off debates about free speech. In Portland, Ore., the threat of violence between anarchists and far-right groups forced a popular family parade to be shut down.

Interviews with a dozen anarchists in the Washington area and beyond show a group that, while angry with President Trump, would be dissatisfied with any U.S. leader. (They protested President Barack Obama’s second inauguration, too, but it was a smaller group.)

They said they think liberals become complacent when a Democrat is in the White House, letting injustices go unquestioned. But they also think marginalized groups will fare worse under the Trump administration. In their minds, the entire U.S. government should be abolished and reimagined on a much smaller scale. [Oh wait, they’re libertarians now? I don’t think so — Ed]

“The Trump presidency has certainly given a boldness to fascists and racist movements throughout the country, and that’s a moment where anarchists are ready to respond in a way that many others aren’t,” said Samantha Miller, 32, a D.C. anarchist who helped organize the Inauguration Day protests.

And the photo atop the Post’s article graphically illustrates how “anarchists are ready to respond in a way that many others aren’t.” It features a smug-looking 37-year old fella dressed in black, wearing polka-dotted sunglasses – and carrying a baseball bat over his shoulder. It’s reminiscent of Rolling Stone’s efforts to glamorize convicted Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The Post would never be caught dead running a photo of a member of the alt-right in such a “look at how cool this guy is” pose, and rightly so. But as the captions I added to it illustrate, the masked slipped a bit with this photo selection.

WE CERTAINLY ARE: Paying The Price For Breakdown Of The Country’s Bourgeois Culture.

I’m reading/rereading Christopher Lasch’s The Revolt of the Elites right now, and he has a lot to say about that. He writes:

The new elites are in revolt against “Middle America,” as they imagine it: a nation technologically backward, politically reactionary, repressive in its sexual morality, middlebrow in its tastes, smug and complacent, dull and dowdy. . . .

The culture wars that have convulsed America since the sixties are best understood as a form of class warfare, in which an enlightened elite (as it thinks of itself seeks not so much to impose its values on the majority (a majority perceived as incorrigibly racist, provincial and xenophobic), much less to persuade the majority by means of rational public debate, as to create parallel or “alternative” institutions in which it will no longer be necessary to confront the unenlightened at all.

Bourgeois culture is bad because it limits the flexibility of the elites. When the middle class was ascendant, it had the power to force bourgeois norms on elites, and even many of the poor. This led to social goods that people miss now, but it was also experienced as confining by those so constrained.

THE LIBERAL CRACKUP: It’s a shame that Mark Lilla’s brilliant article, adopted from his book, The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics, (scheduled for release this Tuesday) is behind the Wall Street Journal’s subscriber login, because the left-leaning professor of the humanities at Columbia University makes some extremely timely points. Not least of which is this:

There is a mystery at the core of every suicide, and the story of how a once-successful liberal politics of solidarity became a failed liberal politics of “difference” is not a simple one. Perhaps the best place to begin it is with a slogan: The personal is the political.

This phrase was coined by feminists in the 1960s and captured perfectly the mind-set of the New Left at the time. Originally, it was interpreted to mean that everything that seems strictly private—sexuality, the family, the workplace—is in fact political and that there are no spheres of life exempt from the struggle for power. That is what made it so radical, electrifying sympathizers and disturbing everyone else.

But the phrase could also be taken in a more romantic sense: that what we think of as political action is in fact nothing but personal activity, an expression of me and how I define myself. As we would put it today, my political life is a reflection of my identity.

* * * * * * * * *

As a teacher, I am increasingly struck by a difference between my conservative and progressive students. Contrary to the stereotype, the conservatives are far more likely to connect their engagements to a set of political ideas and principles. Young people on the left are much more inclined to say that they are engaged in politics as an X, concerned about other Xs and those issues touching on X-ness. And they are less and less comfortable with debate.

Over the past decade a new, and very revealing, locution has drifted from our universities into the media mainstream: Speaking as an X…This is not an anodyne phrase. It sets up a wall against any questions that come from a non-X perspective. Classroom conversations that once might have begun, I think A, and here is my argument, now take the form, Speaking as an X, I am offended that you claim B. What replaces argument, then, are taboos against unfamiliar ideas and contrary opinions.

Which is how you get Brendan Eich shoved out of Firefox, James Damore crucified by Google, and conservative cake bakers and pizzeria owners threatened by the left. And it’s also how you get this pair of incidents at the left’s Netroots Nation convention this weekend. First up, Jazz Shaw of Hot Air has a “Video [of] Democrats shouting down the “wrong sort” of Democrats at NN17,” to which he adds:

One of the incidents this week deserves at least a brief look however, since it speaks volumes about the current state of the Democratic Party and the schism currently taking place there. One of the scheduled speakers at the event was Stacey Evans, a member of the Georgia House of Representatives and a candidate in the Democratic primary race for Governor of that state. It’s important to say that Ms. Evans was a scheduled speaker, because she didn’t get the chance to do very much actual speaking.

* * * * * * * * *

Nobody was saying a thing about Evans’ policies, voting record or insufficiently progressive positions. The chants were all about “Support Black Women.” In case you haven’t picked up on this yet, Evans is white and one of her opponents in the primary, Stacey Abrams (who is described in the article as having been “treated like royalty”) is black. That’s the entire difference. In fact, when one of the AJ-C reporters caught up with the protesters to ask about their opposition to Evans, they couldn’t come up with a thing. (Emphasis added)

And that’s just how the man who is the deputy chairman of the Democratic Party likes it. “Keith Ellison demands Democrats defend ‘intersectionality,’” Emily Jashinsky writes at the Washington Examiner:

Ellison, a Democratic congressman from Minnesota, implored progressives gathered at Netroots Nation on Friday to embrace the philosophy of intersectionality. “All of us in this room have got to defend intersectionality as a concept,” he said from the stage, drawing cheers from the crowd.

“That applause ain’t quite loud enough!” Ellison went on, riling up the crowd.

Seated to his left was Kimberlé Crenshaw, the feminist scholar credited with introducing the philosophy of intersectionality in the 1980’s. Crenshaw said she’s been “astonished” by the attacks on her work, which even prompted her to go back and read it herself, wondering if perhaps she said something wrong. From that, Crenshaw explained she came away “with an even greater feeling that the distortion isn’t accidental.”

* * * * * * * * *

To sum up intersectionality in brief, it means that once you’ve accepted that everything is racist, consistency demands that you also accept everything is sexist, everything is transphobic, everything is Islamophobic, and so on and so forth. Think of it as the grand unified theory of victimhood.

Crenshaw herself has explained it “came from the idea that if you’re standing in the path of multiple forms of exclusion, you are likely to get hit by both.”

The doctrine is characteristic of the brand of progressive radicalism from which many centrist Democrats believe the party must disassociate in order to broaden its appeal and recapture working class voters between the coasts. With Ellison perched in power at the DNC, those pleas probably won’t be persuasive.

All of which is a reminder that the goons carrying tiki torches and pretending to be cast members in a revival of Triumph of the Will in Charlottesville aren’t the only group in America utterly obsessed with skin color. But they’re a powerless fringe group compared to the intersection of the Democratic party, academia, the media, and Silicon Valley. As someone whose worldview intersects at the crossroads of moderate to conservative to libertarian politics, I’m happy that such ideas have been an enormous anchor dragging down the left (err, aside from its aforementioned control of one of America’s two major political parties, academia, the media, and the computer industry). But as an American, I find racism repulsive on both sides of the aisle.

And of course, creating an army of angry SJWs has another downside for the left as well: “Creating Monsters Is The Easy Part,” David Thompson writes. “Enabling and excusing all that leftist psychodrama sure is expensive.”

JAMES DAMORE WAS FIRED FOR BEING INSUFFICIENTLY GOOGLY. “Googly. Yes, it’s a word, at least within Google. It’s an adjective describing someone who has the appropriate characteristics of a Google employee,” Charlie Martin writes. “He rejected Google’s internal mythology, and worse, he did so with basic math, in a company where mathiness is supposed to be part of the culture.”

Is it? Mathiness is racist and sexist and homophobic, all the SJWs tell me.

IT’S COME TO THIS: Newsweek’s Nina Burleigh, Who Offered Bill Clinton Oral Sex, Decries Mrs. Trump’s Degrading High Heels.

Meanwhile, New York magazine’s women-oriented spin-off Website The Cut has an article titled “Political Peroxide — Blonde privilege,” in which the leftwing racial grievance division really has their decoding machines turned up to Bletchley Park levels:

Fox News America is a place where all the classic signifiers of privilege and wealth work on overdrive: country-club-issue blue blazers with brass buttons and khaki pants, and above all else, for women, that yellow-blonde, carefully tended hair — a dog whistle of whiteness, an unspoken declaration of values, a wink-wink to the power of racial privilege and to the 1980s vibe that pervades a movement led by a man who still believes in the guilt of the Central Park Five.

As James Taranto likes to say, if you can hear the dog whistle, you’re the dog. Or as Alex Griswald of the Washington Free Beacon tweets, “Really banner day for progressive publications attacking conservative women for their appearance.”

ANDREW KLAVAN:  Why Detroit Bombed:

People don’t want to spend their summer entertainment hours watching folks get tortured and killed by psycho racist cops.

I’m not sure there’s any more to the film’s failure than that. But if the left had wanted to destroy this movie’s commercial chances, if they had plotted and planned to strip it of legitimacy and appeal, they could not have done anymore than they have.

Read the whole thing.

Personally, I blame intersectionality. No – really. You can get whiplash spotting the dueling headlines over the past couple of weeks that (A) a white woman shouldn’t have directed a film about a significant moment in black American history and that (B) there should be a quota system in Hollywood to require more female directors. (As someone tweeted in response, “Everyone knows the best art is created with quotas.”)

When all entertainment is reduced to being “problematic” to this or that leftwing grievance group, no wonder the industry can’t do much beyond, as Glenn recently wrote, “Comic book movies, redos, and redos of comic book movies. A vast wasteland.” Dunkirk is the exception that proves the rule, but its director is a superstar thanks to his comic book movies and the rest of his past oeuvre. With the exception of Zero Dark Thirty (which didn’t top the magic 100 million dollar mark in its US gross), Kathryn Bigelow’s movies have never come close to Christopher Nolan’s box office.

All of which is why, as Kurt Schlichter writes, “Politically Correct Hollywood Is Doomed.” In no small part because once again, the SJW crowd is devouring their own.

WHY ARE DEMOCRATIC DONORS SO RACIST? Daniel Loeb, a Cuomo Donor, Makes Racial Remark About Black Leader.

HUGE IF TRUE: The Nation says DNC “hack” was actually an inside job.The Nation, hardly a bastion of right-wing conspiracists, picks up the story that the alleged Russian hack of the DNC was in fact an inside job. This notion has percolated on the right for a while but now the Democracy Dies In Darkness crowd will need a bigger pillow. Between this and the Awan-Wasserman non-story they have a lot to not cover.”

From The Nation: “There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.”

CUE WORLD’S SMALLEST VIOLIN: Halle Berry Says Her High School Was Racist. Her Classmates Lit Up Facebook to Set the Record Straight.

TERROR:

First it was arson, then it was crack, now it’s farm-fresh goat cheese.

Will the horror never end? Can Newark ever catch a break? The questions are implied in a New York Times piece this week headlined with a lament from one city resident that Whole Foods, which opened its Newark branch in late winter, is “not for us.” Newark’s population is only one-fourth white, and it seems obvious that the sentiment being expressed here, as well as the use of the word “gentrification,” are what in other contexts might be called “racial dog whistles.” The Times frets that it’s a “tense moment” and that development is happening “unevenly” in Newark, that only certain neighborhoods have benefited so far. No doubt this is correct. You might think a paper based in New York would be aware of another city where development occurred in an uneven pattern. The Upper West Side gentrified in the 1980s, Times Square in the mid 1990s, the Lower East Side in the late 1990s, Williamsburg and Greenpoint, Brooklyn, in the 2000s. Harlem and Bedford-Stuyvesant are gentrifying as we speak. It takes a while to renovate a city. . . .

Let’s recap the slate of urban worries on the left. “Food deserts,” meaning a lack of availability of fresh food (or a lack of market demand for it), are bad. The opening of a gigantic store dedicated to selling healthy comestibles and produce, though, is also bad. When large corporations don’t invest in urban communities, that’s shameful. Investment? Also shameful. White flight by people moving to suburbs in the 1960s? Racist. Their grandchildren’s return? Also racist. Increased disorder that leads to garbage-strewn vacant lots, abandoned buildings, and declining property values is troubling, but increased order that leads to refilled buildings, cleaned-up neighborhoods, and rising rents is also troubling. Segregation? Bad. Integration? Bad. Such thoughts are not restricted to the fringe. Ta-Nehisi Coates, perhaps the most revered thinker on black life in America, advances them in his National Book Award winning memoir-cum-manifesto Between the World and Me. When white people started moving into his neighborhood, he felt this way: “I saw white parents pushing double-wide strollers down gentrifying Harlem boulevards in T-shirts and jogging shorts . . . their sons commanded entire sidewalks with their tricycles. The galaxy belonged to them, and as terror was communicated to our children, I saw mastery communicated to theirs.”

Spike Lee compared the gentrification of Fort Greene, Brooklyn, where he grew up, to genocide after someone called the police to complain about his musician father playing late at night. Cornel West equated gentrification with “land-grabbing” and “power-grabbing,” and in an interview with AlterNet he denounced Harlem as “49 percent vanilla” as white people have moved in to “leave precious and poor working people dangling with very little for a place to go.” In his very next comment, he deplored the large number of abandoned buildings in places like Philadelphia as a result of “neoliberal hegemony.”

Sounds racist to me. And what about the Statue of Liberty?

THE HORROR. THE HORROR. Newark Terrorized by Whole Foods:

Let’s recap the slate of urban worries on the left. “Food deserts,” meaning a lack of availability of fresh food (or a lack of market demand for it), are bad. The opening of a gigantic store dedicated to selling healthy comestibles and produce, though, is also bad.

When large corporations don’t invest in urban communities, that’s shameful. Investment? Also shameful. White flight by people moving to suburbs in the 1960s? Racist. Their grandchildren’s return? Also racist. Increased disorder that leads to garbage-strewn vacant lots, abandoned buildings, and declining property values is troubling, but increased order that leads to refilled buildings, cleaned-up neighborhoods, and rising rents is also troubling. Segregation? Bad. Integration? Bad.

Exit quote: “Whole Foods is plainly worried that in Newark the shiitake might hit the fan.”

Heh, indeed.™ Read the whole thing.

WHY DOES #FIGHTFORFIFTEEN HATE BLACK PEOPLE? Black Teens Are Fired When the Minimum Wage Rises: Two labor economists report that when the minimum wage increases, Black teens suffer disproportionate dismissals.

It is no surprise that Black teens, 16- to 19-years old, are disproportionately unemployed. At the Great Recession’s bottom, African-American teens had an unemployment rate of nearly 50 percent while the rate for all teens was 27.1 percent. In the weak post-Recession, many teens compete for jobs against down-sized adults with college degrees.

And economists William Even from Miami University and David Macpherson from Trinity University report that when a state, or the federal government, increases the minimum wage, Black teens are more likely to be laid off. The duo analyzed 600,000 data points, which the Employment Policies Institute says included “a robust sample of minority young adults unprecedented in previous studies on the minimum wage.”

The report focused on 16-to 24-year-old males without a high school diploma and found that for each 10 percent increase in the federal or state minimum wage employment for young Black males decreased 6.5 percent. By contrast, after the same wage boost, employment for white and Hispanic males fell respectively just 2.5 percent and 1.2 percent.

Like so many things pushed by unions, the minimum wage is a racist barrier to entry.

SPENGLER: Jim Acosta, Racist Apologist for White Privilege.

‘TOP CHEF’ PRODUCER: Padma Lakshmi was threatened, called racist names by Teamsters.

Four Teamsters members acted like real bottom-feeders toward “Top Chef” star Padma Lakshmi, her producer testified in court.

Show runner Ellie Carbajal said in Boston federal court on Wednesday that Teamsters Union members physically threatened the reality show’s crew and hurled racist insults at Lakshmi while they were picketing a 2014 shoot, leaving her “paralyzed with fear.”

Carbajal recalled the members of Teamsters Union Local 25 — John Fidler, Daniel Redmond, Robert Cafarelli and Michael Ross — swarming Lakshmi’s car and growling at her in 2014, Deadline reported.

Why are Democrat-run institutions such cesspits of violent, racist rhetoric?

SOME PEOPLE THOUGHT STEM COURSES WOULD BE IMMUNE TO CAMPUS CRAZINESS: Engineering Education: Social Engineering Rather than Actual Engineering.

Alas, the world we engineers envisioned as young students is not quite as simple and straightforward as we had wished because a phalanx of social justice warriors, ideologues, egalitarians, and opportunistic careerists has ensconced itself in America’s college and universities. The destruction they have caused in the humanities and social sciences has now reached to engineering.

One of the features of their growing power is the phenomenon of “engineering education” programs and schools. They have sought out the soft underbelly of engineering, where phrases such as “diversity” and “different perspectives” and “racial gaps” and “unfairness” and “unequal outcomes” make up the daily vocabulary. Instead of calculating engine horsepower or microchip power/size ratios or aerodynamic lift and drag, the engineering educationists focus on group representation, hurt feelings, and “microaggressions” in the profession.

An excellent example is the establishment at Purdue University (once informally called the “MIT of the Midwest”) of a whole School of Engineering Education. What is this school’s purpose? Its website tells us that it “envisions a more socially connected and scholarly engineering education. This implies that we radically rethink the boundaries of engineering and the purpose of engineering education.”

I have always thought my own education in engineering was as scholarly as possible. Once I became a professor, I never worried about how “socially connected” the education we provided at Michigan State for engineering students was. With trepidation, I read on to see if I was missing something important. I learned to my dismay that Purdue’s engineering education school rests on three bizarre pillars: “reimagining engineering and engineering education, creating field-shaping knowledge, and empowering agents of change.” . . .

The recently appointed dean of Purdue’s school, Dr. Donna Riley, has an ambitious agenda.

In her words (italics mine): “I seek to revise engineering curricula to be relevant to a fuller range of student experiences and career destinations, integrating concerns related to public policy, professional ethics, and social responsibility; de-centering Western civilization; and uncovering contributions of women and other underrepresented groups…. We examine how technology influences and is influenced by globalization, capitalism, and colonialism…. Gender is a key…[theme]…[throughout] the course…. We…[examine]… racist and colonialist projects in science….”

This is a bad thing.

JOURNALISM: Justice Department Gets Attacked For Trying To Protect Asians From Discrimination.

The Justice Department was attacked as racist due to a false New York Times story claiming the DOJ was working to protect white students from discrimination.

The Times story inferred that an internal personnel posting seeking volunteers to investigate “possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions” was meant to look at policies discriminating “against white applicants.”

The Daily Caller first reported that a DOJ source said this Times article “appears to assume it deals with white students without evidence.” DOJ spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores later put out a statement confirming this.

“Press reports regarding the personnel posting in the Civil Rights Division have been inaccurate. The posting sought volunteers to investigate one administrative complaint filed by a coalition of 64 Asian-American associations in May 2015 that the prior Administration left unresolved,” Flores wrote. “The complaint alleges racial discrimination against Asian Americans in a university’s admissions policy and practices.”

It’s all about the Narrative.

TO BE FAIR, IT’S NOT MEANT TO HELP EDUCATION, IT’S MEANT TO HELP TEACHERS’ UNIONS MAINTAIN SCHOOLS AS DEMOCRATIC PARTY VOTE FARMS: Megan McArdle: Demonizing School Choice Won’t Help Education: Critics of public schools aren’t the Bible-thumping racists that some liberals make them out to be.

Liberals who think that ad hominem is a sufficient rebuttal to a policy proposal should first stop to consider the role of Hitler’s Germany in spreading national health insurance programs to the countries they invaded. If you think “But Hitler” does not really constitute a useful argument about universal health coverage, then you should probably not resort to “But Jim Crow” in a disagreement over school funding.

Nor is it accurate, or useful, to imply that critics of failing “government schools” today are the direct descendants of those groups, who “really mean” that they want shelter for a racist and anti-gay agenda. No doubt there are people out there who want school choice for just this reason, just as some people out there want a national health program because it will be a more efficient way to implement their eugenics program. After 15 years of writing on the internet, I can guarantee you this: In a country of more than 300 million, at any given moment someone will be saying whatever appalling things you can imagine, and quite a few you couldn’t. Many of them will have taken the trouble to write down and publish their musings, at which point their ideological opponents will pounce to declare that this is obviously the secret key to the thinking of anyone who ever agreed with the author about anything.

None of these super-secret keys has ever opened the door to deeper understanding about anything except the mind of the person waving them. And Stewart’s plaint about the school choice movement is no exception. For many critics of failing government schools, myself among them, have drawn their support for school choice from quite a different source: failing government schools. Some of us actually attended those schools, and were fortunate enough to have parents with enough social or financial capital to get them out when the school broke down.

As we see it, members of the middle class in this country already enjoy quite a lot of school choice; if their local school is awful, they either send their kids to private school, or move. This allows nice liberal parents to proclaim their support for the democratic ideal of a common, public education, while sticking their own kids in an exclusive school. That school may be nominally “public,” but it comes bundled with granite countertops. . . . Time after time, more money was poured into schools, but produced little in the way of better results for anyone who didn’t happen to be employed by the school district. Time after time, when deeper institutional change was tried, the bureaucracies beat back the reformers. Failing teachers kept collecting their paychecks, and failing students ended up out on the street with no useful skills.

And, of course, calling their opponents Bible-thumping racists while feathering the nests of the upper classes and hardcore Democrat constituencies is what the progressive project is all about, these days.

WHEN DON’T THEY? When Progressives Endorse Hate.

The Women’s March moved me. O.K., so Madonna and Ashley Judd said some nutty things. But every movement has its excesses, I reasoned. Mr. Trump had campaigned on attacking the weakest and most vulnerable in our society. Now was the time to put aside petty differences and secondary issues to oppose his presidency.

That’s certainly what the leaders of the Democratic Party, who applauded the march, told us. Senator Charles Schumer called the protest “part of the grand American tradition.” The House Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi, offered her congratulations to the march’s “courageous organizers” and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand gushed about them in Time, where they were among the top 100 most influential people of 2017. “The Women’s March was the most inspiring and transformational moment I’ve ever witnessed in politics,” she wrote. “And it happened because four extraordinary women — Tamika Mallory, Bob Bland, Carmen Perez and Linda Sarsour — had the courage to take on something big, important and urgent, and never gave up.” . . .

What wasn’t to like?

A lot, as it turns out. The leaders of the Women’s March, arguably the most prominent feminists in the country, have some chilling ideas and associations. Far from erecting the big tent so many had hoped for, the movement they lead has embraced decidedly illiberal causes and cultivated a radical tenor that seems determined to alienate all but the most woke.

Start with Ms. Sarsour, by far the most visible of the quartet of organizers. It turns out that this “homegirl in a hijab,” as one of many articles about her put it, has a history of disturbing views, as advertised by . . . Linda Sarsour.

The progressive pantheon is always like this. Look at the cult of Che Guevara, a mass-murdering gay-hating racist who is still treated as an emblem of liberation.

WE SEEM TO HAVE A LOT OF HISTORIANS MAKING STUFF UP IN ORDER TO CALL LIBERTARIANS RACIST LATELY: Sloppy History in The New York Times: Who was against “government schools”?

Katherine Stewart has an op-ed in today’s New York Times that purports to expose the sordid history of the phrase “government schools.” The “attacks on ‘government schools,'” she claims, “have a much older, darker heritage. They have their roots in American slavery, Jim Crow-era segregation, anti-Catholic sentiment and a particular form of Christian fundamentalism.”

How reliable a historian is Stewart? Not very.

Since evidence-free smears are all the rage nowadays, I’m going to blame Vladimir Putin’s global crusade against libertarianism.

TO BE FAIR, THAT WOULD EXPLAIN A LOT ABOUT THE OBAMAS, CLINTONS AND GORES. NYT Op-Ed: Parents Who Don’t Send Their Kids To Public Schools Are Racist Theocrats.

Why does the Gray Lady hate Malia, Sasha, Chelsea, Albert Gore III, and other past and current attendees of Sidwell Friends so much?

THEY TOLD ME IF TRUMP WERE ELECTED, WE’D SEE MORE OPEN RACISM THAN WE’VE SEEN IN DECADES. AND THEY WERE RIGHT! ‘Description of their clientele.’ Ijeoma Oluo tweets ridiculously racist tweet about Cracker Barrel.

BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE STUPID: Winnipeg Man Has Vanity Plate Referencing Star Trek Recalled Over Complaints Of How Racist It Is. Well, SJW people are stupid, anyway.

OH: A White Woman Can’t Walk Down the Street Anymore Without Being Racist. Literally.

KAROL MARKOWICZ: Now the speech police are going after small talk.

“What do you do?” is now considered impolite. The Huffington Post has called it a “conversation killer” and the Boston Globe’s Robin Abrahams called it “the lamest party question.”

Abrahams writes: “I’ve had people tell me straight up that they find the question rude. Many folks perceive it as a prestige contest — and when it’s preceded by, say, ‘I’m a spinal surgeon and run a private-equity fund in my spare time,’ it’s easy to feel that way.”

But why does everything have to be a competition? If you come across a spinal surgeon who runs a private-equity fund that should be the best conversation of your life. Why would anyone refuse to take the opportunity to learn something from someone so accomplished?

Also, if you’re hearing that answer, that means you’re the one who asked the question. If you don’t feel great about your professional life, small talk makes it easy to steer away from the topic or change the subject once it’s introduced. That’s the thing about small talk: It can go anywhere you’d like.

In the last few years, my go-to question — “Where are you from?” — has also become unacceptable. Apparently it’s racist or anti-immigrant or any number of problematics to ask someone where they grew up.

There’s nothing committed busybodies can’t ruin for everybody else.

THE GRAY LADY SURE HAS A FUNNY WAY OF TREATING ITS CORE READERS: White Women Are Racist Because of the Way They Walk on Sidewalks.

EUGENE VOLOKH: Can accusation of lynching be ordered taken down as a supposed threat of lynching?

I agree that “Lynching is our paradigmatic image of private racist violence against African American,” but here it is being used to accuse Brummer of figurative racist violence — and of literal racist adjudication — not to threaten Brummer. The “tragic history and present-day reality of racism” can’t justify, I think, categorically labeling images of lynching associated with a person as threats, when the person is accused of being the perpetrator of lynching (not urged as a target for lynching).

Yeah, I wish I were amazed that someone got a court to order this taken down, but I’m not amazed by much anymore.

IT’S COME TO THIS: Algebra is not racist, don’t get rid of it. How can it be racist? Wasn’t it invented by Arabs?

ONCE AGAIN, THE NEW YORK TIMES DECLARES ITS CORE LEFTWING READERS TO BE RACIST. NY Times reporter: White women seem racist on the city’s sidewalks,” John Sexton paraphrases at Hot Air – because they don’t appear to get out of the author’s way when he’s walking down the sidewalk:

The author does do some speculating on what this might mean, but all of his thoughts seem to boil down to white women being afraid to acknowledge him. He says he has asked white women he knows and they tell him they don’t know what he’s talking about. “Wait, am I crazy?” he wonders. But then when he asks black male friends and “they know what I’m talking about.”

What I see are a lot of unexplored variables. Since these are people passing in the opposite direction, the author doesn’t really know how these women behaved toward everyone else. In other words, maybe he has just encountered some rude women. The idea that there are rude people walking around New York being rude doesn’t exactly come as a shock to me.

Back in 2013, the Times ran an essay by Ta-Nehisi Coates that similarly assumed the paper’s core readers are racists. As I wrote at the time:

So just to add up the comments by Times contributors over the past couple of years: if you live in the big blank space between Manhattan and L.A. in the New Yorker cartoon, you’re a participant in “the dance of the low-sloping foreheads.”  If you actually live in the Times’ backyard, you’re a potential Progressive racist. (Woodrow Wilson, call your office.) When the Weekly Standard noted recently that in the eyes of the MSM, the customer is always wrong, they had no idea how much he was truly loathed by those hoping that he’ll part with a note featuring Abraham Lincoln’s face and some change for a copy of the Sunday edition.

* * * * * * * *

Which brings us to the title of Coates’ article: “The Good, Racist People.” About which, [Ann] Althouse herself wrote, “My question is: How did some people get to be considered the ‘good’ people in the first place? It’s that question that fires my antagonism to liberals. They think they are good.”

Perhaps they feel they earn their penitence by paying to be harangued on a regular basis by the Gray Lady. I assume they enjoy wearing their NYT-emblazoned hairshirts, but all of the blue-on-blue action above is yet another reminder of Jon Gabriel’s classic tweet from 2014:

WALTER WILLIAMS: The Key Facts About Slavery That the Left Conveniently Ignores.

Slavery is by no means peculiar, odd, or unusual. It was common among ancient peoples such as the Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Hittites, Greeks, Persians, Armenians, and many others.

Large numbers of Christians were enslaved during the Ottoman wars in Europe. White slaves were common in Europe from the Dark Ages to the Middle Ages. It was only after A.D. 1600 that Europeans joined with Arabs and Africans and started the Atlantic slave trade.

As David P. Forsythe wrote in his book, “The Globalist,” “The fact remained that at the beginning of the 19th century an estimated three-quarters of all people alive were trapped in bondage against their will either in some form of slavery or serfdom.”

While slavery constitutes one of the grossest encroachments on human liberty, it is by no means unique or restricted to the Western world or United States, as many liberal academics would have us believe.

Much of their indoctrination of our young people, at all levels of education, paints our nation’s Founders as racist adherents to slavery, but the story is not so simple.

Read the whole thing.

“Everybody does it” is no excuse, but not everybody fights a horrible Civil War over it, then constitutionally elevates former slaves to full citizenship.

OF COURSE, RACISTS WILL JUST CITE THIS AS PROOF THAT MINORITIES ARE TOO FRAGILE TO FLOURISH AT UNIVERSITY: UK University to Get Rid of Portraits of White Scholars Because They ‘Intimidate’ Ethnic Minorities.

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Our Corrupt Media Is Now Haunted By All The Precedents They Set While Colluding With Obama.

Barack Obama trafficked guns to Mexican drug lords, secretly delivered pallets filled with billions in cash to Iran’s America/Jew-hating mullahs, left four Americans to die in Benghazi and then lied about it, allowed his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to exchange government favors for hundreds of millions of dollars slushed into the Clinton Foundation, sic’d his IRS on everyday, law-abiding Americans, and used a trillion dollars in “stimulus” funds to pay off his cronies, like those behind a boondoggle called Solyndra.

And all along, over eight terrible years, our media did a whole lot more than just let Obama get away with it. They wholeheartedly colluded. They allowed Obama to persecute them through the Department of Justice and to lie to our face (remember: I just now read about it in the newspaper, the IRS did nothing wrong, you can keep your insurance). And when that wasn’t enough, the media mercilessly attacked as racist anyone who criticized the Precious and ginned up nothingburgers like Todd Akin to distract from those four dead Americans. And when even that wasn’t enough, they themselves lied and obfuscated, covered up and dissembled, and most of all they set all kinds of precedents that, in a delicious form of irony, are now driving this utterly failed institution to the edge of insanity. . . .

And now — now! — this very same media (with the help of #NeverTrump’s forever-preening moral narcissists) is using the spear of Muh Principles to demand that those of us on the political right agree to destroy ourselves in their corrupt crusade, that we acquiesce like second-class citizens to their separate sets of rules?

Like hell.

People do notice hypocrisy.

OUT: FAKE NEWS. IN: FAKE SCHOLARSHIP. Nancy MacLean’s segregationist sins of omission…and commission.

To bolster her non-existent case, MacLean resorts to playing a game of six degrees of separation in which she deploys a heavy stream of innuendo and unfounded supposition to write Buchanan into the pro-segregation political apparatus of Harry Flood Byrd, Sr. and a Richmond newspaper editor. As I’ve documented in my previous posts, she also fabricates claims out of thin air that allege Buchanan’s intellectual debts to the pro-segregation Vanderbilt Agrarians and to the 19th century pro-slavery politician John C. Calhoun. Remarkably, there’s almost no evidence for any of these claims – just a fanciful tale that is increasingly taking on conspiratorial overtones in the way that MacLean has mounted her defense.

Sadly, a number of historians have displayed a remarkable credulity for MacLean’s claims on this point, even refusing to engage the evidence.

It was that way with Michael Bellesiles, too. Plus:

There’s another problem though: MacLean’s narrative about UVA is badly flawed. In order to portray Buchanan as a collusive and acquiescing partner of Virginia’s segregationist political machine, she omitted a critical piece of evidence that contradicts her narrative.

In 1965 Buchanan recruited an economist by the name of William H. Hutt to serve as a visiting professor at the Thomas Jefferson Center, his hub of operations at UVA. Hutt was a natural fit for the role. He had recently retired from his position as chair of the economics department at the University of Capetown in South Africa. He was also an early contributor to the public choice school of thought, and his work drew heavily upon Buchanan and Gordon Tullock’s The Calculus of Consent. Hutt’s own academic reputation is noteworthy though because he was one of the leading academic opponents in South Africa of that country’s notorious Apartheid regime.

Before he came to UVA, Hutt spent almost three decades criticizing the Apartheid government of his own country. His work repeatedly drew the ire of the South African government. In one notable instance from 1955, the Apartheid regime even suspended Hutt’s passport in an attempt to prevent him from presenting on the barbarism of this policy abroad. He regained his travel rights after a public controversy over his academic freedom, and remained undeterred in criticizing the South African government. Hutt’s work on Apartheid eventually culminated in a book length treatment of the subject entitled The Economics of the Colour Bar, which he published in 1964. The work notably employs an early version of public choice theory to explain the origins of Apartheid in South Africa as a form of regulatory capture to the benefit of white labor unions over black workers.

When Buchanan recruited Hutt the following year, his international reputation as an Apartheid critic was near its peak. . . .

In short order, Hutt began extending his analysis of Apartheid to what he saw around him in the segregationist United States. While under Buchanan’s sponsorship at Virginia, he gave multiple lectures on this subject and penned a short article for the journal Modern Age describing their similarities. . . . MacLean is certainly aware of Hutt’s presence at UVA because she mentions that Buchanan recruited him on p. 59 of her book. But she also conveniently leaves out any references whatsoever to Hutt’s research and activities during his time the Jefferson Center. In fact, she twists and contorts it in an opposite direction that even goes so far as to imply Hutt’s complicity in the same blatantly fabricated segregationist conspiracy she uses to tar Buchanan.

It is necessary to the Narrative that anyone who threatens the Narrative must be racist. If evidence for that proposition does not exist, it will be fabricated.

So in “scholarship” as in “journalism.”

yglesias_sophistry_8-10

HOT AIR’S JOHN SEXTON IS REMEMBERING THE JOURNOLIST IN 2008 AND THE “PROGRESSIVE” MEDIA’S BAG OF TRICKS:

For those who don’t remember it, Journolist was just a listserv created by Ezra Klein. The list was invitation only and was mostly made up of progressive journalists. In theory, the list was a kind of digital water cooler where like-minded people could talk to others in the field. That may have been all it was much of the time, but when candidate Obama got in trouble in 2008, it also became a place for partisans to discuss a coordinated media strategy.

Author Jonathan Strong wrote this particular piece about the Journolist response to a crisis in the 2008 campaign. Rev. Jeremiah Wright, as you probably remember, was the pastor of the church Obama attended. He was the pastor who married Barack and Michelle and the person who inspired the title of Obama’s book: The Audacity of Hope. Wright was also a far-left crank who regularly denounced America…Obama would eventually denounce Wright and quit the church in June, but in the interim, it seemed possible the issue could seriously damage his campaign. Journolist members discussed various ways to respond to the Rev. Wright story. Michael Tomasky (now at the Daily Beast) wanted members of the list to “kill ABC” and thereby kill the story[.]

Read the whole thing.

Between 2000 and 2017, the Democrats pivoted on a host issues ranging from Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Russia, and gay marriage. But few moments have had the full “Oceania has always been/has never been at war with Eastasia” (which Orwell based on how the British left flip-flopped under Stalin’s orders in WWII) feel as the week between Rev. Wright’s racist 2008 NAACP speech, which CNN’s Soledad O’Brien (herself a Wright acolyte) proclaimed “a home run” to anchor John Roberts asking on-air then-candidate Obama if it was OK with him to declare the network “a Wright-free zone.” If CNN is angry that it’s now constantly being called “fake news,” transparently politics-motivated flip-flops such as this are a big reminder of how they brought that well-deserved epithet upon themselves:

UPDATE: From a 2010 Free Republic post, “JournoList: 157 Names Confirmed (With Organizations).”

SPEAKING OF SHIA LABOEUF:Bodycam Footage of Shia LaBeouf Arrest Shows Actor’s Racist Comments.  Someone should tell him that he shall not divide us…