Search Results

MAYBE THEY SHOULD JUST LEAVE “ANTI” OFF OF THEIR NAME: Defamation by the Anti-Defamation League:

The ADL’s national office tweeted, “thank you to @umich student leaders for exposing Canary Mission’s Islamophobic & racist rhetoric as ‘antithetical and destructive to supporting Israel and eliminating anti-Semitism on campus.'”

I googled ADL and Canary Mission, and could not find any ADL report analyzing or condemning Canary Mission. So I emailed ADL’s media folks yesterday morning, and asked if they could “please point me to the underlying evidence that ADL has relied on in support of it accusation of racism and Islamaphobia?” I sent a follow up email six hours later, and received this response: “Our research team is pulling together examples for you, so please stand by.”

It’s now the next morning, and still nothing. One would think that the ADL, an organization whose reputation depends on correctly identifying anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry, wouldn’t accuse a fellow Jewish organization, or anyone for that matter, of racism without having the research on hand to support it. It shouldn’t take a post hoc research effort, much less one that hasn’t borne fruit more than twenty-four hours after an initial inquiry.


Bathroom graffiti off campus. Racist rocks in a park. A student (identified later as Ellie Locke) engaging in nondescript “offensive” behavior. And now the campus is convulsing.

On Wednesday, university president Mark McCoy and vice president Alan Hill held a press conference on campus, the day after a student mob disrupted an appearance by an actress.

“I’m hurting too, but nowhere near like our students are hurting today,” said Alan Hill, who is black. The language is remarkable. You would think by the way he was talking that these students had witnessed a massacre. President McCoy mewled about “this time of pain on our campus.”

At just past the five minute mark during the press conference, the president agrees to let a student mob into the event. Bad move. The group, mostly black students, took the thing over, chanting, “Meet our demands! We’re not safe!”

It only gets worse from there.

DePauw’s annual tuition is $47,838, plus room and board. Parents and students, choose where to spend your money wisely.

THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST: Lawsuit Alleges Google Told Managers ‘Objectivity,’ ‘Colorblindness’ Are Racist.

STOP ME IF YOU THINK YOU’VE HEARD THIS ONE BEFORE: Morrissey says Loony Left calls everyone racist to change the subject.

K-12 IMPLOSION UPDATE: New high school history textbook teaches Trump is mentally ill and his supporters are racists.

YOUR DAILY TREACHER: Even Starbucks Is Racist Now, Apparently.

In three years, Starbucks has gone from this…

…To facing this:

As Treacher writes:

I hope this fiasco proves instructive to Howard Schultz and everybody else at Starbucks. No matter how liberal you are, no matter how hard you work to establish and maintain your #woke credentials, all it takes is one slip-up. Just one viral video, taken on one of the cameras that we all carry now, and the angry mob will descend on you. Nothing you do or say will appease them. No apology will be sufficient. You can’t grovel low enough.

Read the whole thing.

ANNALS OF LEFTWING AUTOPHAGY: #BoycottStarbucks trends on Twitter after video shows arrest of two black men at Philadelphia location.

Amid outrage, Starbucks issued a statement online, writing, “We apologize to the two individuals and our customers and are disappointed this led to an arrest.”

During a Facebook Live statement uploaded Saturday afternoon, Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross described the incident. He said the men were “trespassing,” because they were non-paying customers who wanted to use the bathroom. When Starbucks employees asked the men to leave, they refused and the police were called. He said the officers “did absolutely nothing wrong.”

However, several on social media disagreed and #BoycottStarbucks soon became a trending topic on Twitter Saturday. Many called the arrest racist and discriminatory.

Starbucks’ CEO (now executive chairman) Howard Schultz, a self-proclaimed “life-long Democrat,” floated the idea of having his baristas lecture customers on racial tolerance, trashed Trump, openly endorsed Hillary and afterwards, vowed “to hire thousands of refugees after President Donald Trump’s first executive order that temporarily banned travel from seven mostly-Muslim nations.”

Naturally, in response, #BoycottStarbucks is trending today, as the revolution eats its own – and washes the remains down with really mediocre coffee.

THE LEFT’S VENEZUELAZATION OF AMERICAN CITIES PROCEEDS APACE:  Liberal Cities Embrace Homelessness.  But it’s okay so long as they convince voters that actual competent people are racistsexisthomophobic.

GEORGE KORDA: ‘Student-led’ in-school events; who’s in charge around here? “Would students wishing to either protest, or support, Roe v. Wade be allowed to hold an approved in-school event with poetry, student art exhibits, student-led songs, and student speeches? What about students who want to wear T-shirts with the Confederate Flag, who make the argument that they’re not racist, but they feel they ought to have the freedom to wear the shirts if they wish, either as a First Amendment issue or just because they like it? What about any other subject or issue about which students feel inspired to leave class to demonstrate?”

These are like the “student-led” prayers schools used to do in an attempt to get around the Constitution. Just in service of a different religion.

MICHAEL BARONE: How genetic science is undercutting the case for racial quotas.

Reich obviously wishes to avoid the demonization endured by Murray, who was attacked by a mob at Middlebury College just last year. He is careful indeed to make clear that his findings should not be used to justify racist practices like the slave trade, the eugenics movement, and the Holocaust.

Reich also makes a point that is obvious to the ordinary person but which he — along with some of his critics who wrote to the Times — thinks needs reiteration. Which is, as one puts it, “differences in individuals vary far more widely than in populations.” When we are comparing traits of people with different genetic ancestry, we are looking at averages, like the differences between American whites’ and Asians’ IQ scores (Asians’ on average are higher). But within the white and Asian populations there is wide variety — which can be represented as an actual bell curve.

The assumption of “well-meaning people” is that ordinary Americans aren’t capable of grasping this. My view is that they understand it very well. They have learned, from school, from work, from everyday life, from public events, that there is a wider variation within each measured group than between measured groups.

Read the whole thing.

AMBER ATHEY: In Honor Of Kevin Williamson’s Firing: The Atlantic’s Worst Takes. My favorite is the one about the eclipse being racist. But who can forget Trump Is Probably Sleeping With His Daughter.

ANTISOCIAL MEDIA: YouTube Shooting Highlights Frustration Among Some ‘Creators.’ “Some independent video makers complain YouTube has limited their viewership and shortchanged them on ad payments.”

As the number of creators has grown and uploaded a wider range of videos, advertisers have grown more skittish about putting their messages next to what they deem objectionable content. Top brands including Procter & Gamble Co. pulled spending from the site last year after discovering YouTube running their ads before extremist, racist and hateful videos.

In response, YouTube last year began requiring video producers to have more than 10,000 views from their combined videos before they can start making any money from ads. The company also hired more human reviewers to vet videos, removing clips or entire accounts they see as violating their terms of service.

YouTube prohibits nudity, violence, and other categories of content it deems potentially harmful or dangerous. Its terms also restrict copyrighted content and personal information uploaded without consent.

Earlier this year, YouTube raised the bar even more for its video creators that want to carry ads. Rather than 10,000 views, YouTube channels must now have accumulated at least 4,000 hours of watch time in the past 12 months and 1,000 subscribers. YouTube said a “significant” number of channels would be affected but declined to provide more details. The company said nearly all affected channels make less than $100 a year in ad revenue.

The changes had little impact on YouTube’s most popular stars, some who make more than $100,000 on a single video, including sponsorships, according to Evan Asano, chief executive of Mediakix, a marketing agency for YouTube creators. But the new policies cut tens of thousands of smaller video makers off from getting paid, Mr. Asano said.

Some of them, like Chris Thompson, said the company has gone too far in removing content without being clear about what rules it violates.

Indeed. YouTube has been deplatforming countless conservatives without cause or explanation — and yet it was a lone progressive who went on a shooting spree.


Shephard was that Canadian university TA who was summoned before a Diversity Kangaroo Court to explain why, as part of an issues-in-media class, she had played a debate (which aired on a liberal Canadian tv station) about the use of made-up trans pronouns. The debate featured Jordan Peterson on the “against” side, and one or more students complained that being forced to listen to a debate (in which the other side was represented, too) about a contentious issue in the media was like Hitler invading the Issues in Media class.

She used to consider herself a leftist, but she says she now knows what leftism actually is, and she’s not that, any longer.

Related: Novelist Lionel Shriver: “…it seems I was cited on Twitter as a ‘racist provocateur’”

We’re well on our way to the label becoming a perverse badge of pride; if you’re outside the far-left faithful, your first charge of racism constitutes a losing of your political cherry, inoculating against any further sense of injury. This commonplace code for ‘not one of us’ is morphing into a meaningless playground taunt, just as forgettable as ‘stupid’.

QED: MSNBC Sees Trump ‘Playing the Race Card’ Against ‘Uppity Black Person’ Obama.

As James Taranto likes to say, if you can hear the dog whistles, you’re the dog.

NIALL FERGUSON IN THE BOSTON GLOBE: Enough With The Hating On White Men.

“Masculinity, not ideology, drives extremist groups,” was another recent headline that caught my eye, this time in The Washington Post.

Got it.

I have had to listen to a variation on this theme rather too much in recent weeks. Last month I organized a small conference of historians who I knew shared my interest in trying to apply historical knowledge to contemporary policy problems. Five of the people I invited to give papers were women, but none was able to attend. I should have tried harder to find other female speakers, no doubt. But my failure to do so elicited a disproportionately vitriolic response.

Under a headline that included the words “Too white and too male,” The New York Times published photographs of all the speakers, as if to shame them for having participated. Around a dozen academics — male as well as female — took to social media to call the conference a “StanfordSausageFest.” . . .

I was raised to believe in the equal rights of all people, regardless of sex, race, creed, or any other difference. That the human past was characterized by discrimination of many kinds is not news to me. But does it really constitute progress if the proponents of diversity resort to the behavior that was previously the preserve of sexists and racists?

Publishing the names and mugshots of conference speakers is the kind of thing anti-Semites once did to condemn the “over-representation” of Jewish people in academia. Terms such as “SausageFest” belong not in civil academic discourse but on urinal walls.

What we see here is the sexism of the anti-sexists; the racism of the anti-racists. In this “Through the Looking Glass” world, diversity means ideological homogeneity. “The whitesplaining of history is over,” declared another heated article by Satia last week. Hideous Newspeak terms such as “whitesplaining” and “mansplaining” are symptoms of the degeneration of the humanities in the modern university. Never mind the facts and reason, so the argument runs, all we need to know — if we don’t like what we hear — are the sex and race of the author.

Well, that’s how racists think, and academia is a cesspit of racism. Plus:

The process of indoctrination starts early. My six-year-old son stunned his parents the other day when we asked what he had been studying at school. He replied that they had been finding out about the life of Martin Luther King Jr. “What did you learn?” I asked. “That most white people are bad,” he replied.

This is America in 2018.

You want more Trump? This is how you get more Trump.

JUST NBC THE SHARK JUMPING! On Easter Sunday, Christians must remember how easily and often our faith is used defend white supremacy.

That’s pretty rich coming from the network that employs Al Sharpton, a Louis Farrakhan supporter with decades of racist and anti-Semitic baggage all his own.

Related: NBC’s Chuck Todd slammed on Twitter for Good Friday comments.

ANDREW SULLIVAN: Denying Genetics Isn’t Shutting Down Racism, It’s Fueling It.

Reich simply points out that this utopian fiction is in danger of collapse because it is not true and because genetic research is increasingly proving it untrue. On the male-female divide, for example, Reich cites profound differences, “reflecting more than 100 million years of evolution and adaptation.” On race, he is both agnostic about what we will eventually find out with respect to the scale of genetic differences, and also insistent that genetic differences do exist: “You will sometimes hear that any biological differences among populations are likely to be small, because humans have diverged too recently from common ancestors for substantial differences to have arisen under the pressure of natural selection. This is not true. The ancestors of East Asians, Europeans, West Africans and Australians were, until recently, almost completely isolated from one another for 40,000 years or longer, which is more than sufficient time for the forces of evolution to work.” Which means to say that the differences could be (and actually are) substantial.

This will lead to subtle variations in human brains, and thereby differences in intelligence tests, which will affect social and economic outcomes in the aggregate in a multiracial, capitalist, post-industrial society. The danger in actively suppressing and stigmatizing this inconvenient truth, he maintains, is that a responsible treatment of these genetic influences will be siloed in the academic field of genetics, will be rendered too toxic for public debate, and will thereby only leak out to people in the outside world via the worst kind of racists and bigots who will distort these truths to their own ends. If you don’t establish a reasonable forum for debate on this, Reich argues, if you don’t establish the principle is that we do not have to be afraid of any of this, it will be monopolized by truly unreasonable and indeed dangerous racists. And those racists will have the added prestige for their followers of revealing forbidden knowledge. And so there are two arguments against the suppression of this truth and the stigmatization of its defenders: that it’s intellectually dishonest and politically counterproductive.

I felt a genuine relief reading the op-ed because it was so nuanced and so low-temperature.

Many people, of course, have a vested interest in fueling racism.

SAM HARRIS: Ezra Klein: A Dishonest Editor-in-Chief.

I knew that having a friendly conversation with [Charles] Murray might draw some fire my way. But that was, in part, the point. Given the viciousness with which he continues to be scapegoated—and, indeed, my own careful avoidance of him up to that moment—I felt a moral imperative to provide him some cover.

In the aftermath of our conversation, many people have sought to paint me as a racist—but few have tried quite so hard as Ezra Klein, editor in chief of Vox. In response to my podcast, Klein published a disingenuous hit piece that pretended to represent the scientific consensus on human intelligence while vilifying me as, at best, Murray’s dupe. More likely, readers unfamiliar with my work came away believing that I’m a racist pseudoscientist in my own right.

After Klein published that article, and amplified its effects on social media, I reached out to him in the hope of appealing to his editorial conscience. I found none. The ethic that governs Klein’s brand of journalism appears to be: Accuse a person with a large platform of something terrible, and then monetize the resulting controversy. If he complains, invite him to respond in your magazine so that he will drive his audience your way and you can further profit from his doomed effort to undo the damage you’ve done to his reputation.

Since then, Klein has kept at it, and he delivered another volley today. I told him that if he continued in this way, I would publish our private email correspondence so that our readers could judge him for themselves. His latest effort has convinced me that I should make good on that promise.

Harris made good on his promise, which you can read in its entirety at the link.

GOOD: In response to racist violence, more African Americans look to bear arms. An armed society is a polite society, as a great man once said.

NO ENEMIES TO THE LEFT: Liberals refuse to face the left’s growing anti-Semitism.

Resorting to hateful stereotypes in response to accusations of anti-Semitism is, sadly, a bit of a trend on the left. When the Republican Jewish Coalition demanded the resignations of seven Democratic members of Congress who have met with Farrakhan while in office, one of the RJC’s targets, Andre Carson, responded by refusing to denounce the preacher of hate and asking Jewish Republicans to denounce Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — playing the classic anti-Semitic dual-loyalty card.

Read the whole thing. Late last week, presumably because I had retweeted several anti Farrakhan pieces, Twitter, err, helpfully suggested that I follow him:

Note that he still retains his blue checkmark. As Erick Erickson asked three weeks ago, “Twitter has revoked blue checkmarks of white supremacists and other racists. Why does Farrakhan still have one?” And why is he still in their algorithm for follow suggestions? Twitter has long been accused of “shadow banning” conservatives its censors don’t approve of, but Louis Farrakhan? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Apparently “no enemies to the left” really is Twitter’s policy.

OUT: POLICE ARE RACIST AND TRIGGER HAPPY. IN: “Guns are for the police and the government,” a 13-year-old girl confidently assured me.


t wasn’t just these three—from what I saw and heard at the rally, dying in school was a remarkably ubiquitous fear among young people. I spotted a little girl, perched on her father’s shoulders, waving a sign bearing the text “Am I Next?”

Marissa, a teenage girl from Michigan, told me she felt unsafe in school, and thought more security would help. Teenager after teenager testified that their fears of death were all-consuming, ever-present, and more justified than ever before.

Missing from these conversations was any awareness of a very basic, indisputable fact: Gun violence has declined precipitously over the past 25 years, and most Americans are much safer today than they were a generation ago.

Schools are no exception. They are “increasingly free of mass shootings,” according to researchers James Alan Fox and Emma Fridel. . . .

Obviously, it’s understandable for the survivors of the horrific events in Parkland to be feeling unsafe, given what happened to them. But mass shootings are not the norm, and kids don’t need to be terrified of going to school.

Actually, they do need to be terrified — if they’re to be put to proper political use by the Democrats.

YOU WANT TO BE A SHITHOLE COUNTRY? THIS IS HOW: More Racist Rhetoric From South Africa: Whites ‘Must Leave Everything;’ ‘Not calling for the slaughter of white people‚ at least for now.’

This sort of sentiment dominated Zimbabwe for decades as it went from breadbasket to, well, shithole. Over a decade ago, Nick Kristof reported that Zimbabweans were nostalgic for the old days of Rhodesia:

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

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

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

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

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

Nearly every peasant I’ve spoken to in Zimbabwe echoed those thoughts.

You’d think that Zimbabwe would be a cautionary example for South Africa, but it seems to be more of a how-to guide. And hey, the political insiders got rich.


Is pizza racist? Is Kim Kardashian an Asian-American because she’s half Armenian and Armenia is in Asia? Oh, and should a less-qualified black student be given a place at Yale over a more-qualified white student? What if the white kid is a child of privilege? What if the black kid is, too?

Such are the questions raised in Admissions, Joshua Harmon’s scathing and searching new play at Lincoln Center, directed con brio by Daniel Aukin. It’s a relentless, often very funny exposé of the hypocrisies and self-contradictions of the diversity craze that defines virtually every elite campus in America.

* * * * * * * *

The New York City theater scene is so insular — virtually everyone on both sides of the curtain is of the Left — that it paradoxically offers far more space for self-questioning than you’d expect. Because it’s simply assumed that no Republicans are listening in, ever, progressives in theater fall into animated quarrels among themselves about the defects in their own moral reasoning. Admissions is what happens when they’re forced to work through the injustices created by their social-justice obsession. Late at night. After a couple of glasses of pinot noir.

Read the whole thing.

ZIMBABWE REDUX: A White Farmer Is Killed Every Five Days in South Africa and Authorities Do Nothing About It, Activists Say.

If the numbers are accurate, then South Africa’s ethnic cleansing is just getting started — wait until the locals grasp just how much they can get away with.

In the meantime, I’m sure we can soon expect a few popular protest songs, along with calls for divestiture and sanctions on South Africa’s racist regime.

SHE HAS. REPEATEDLY. Hillary Should Just Admit She Hates Half of America.

Yes, she basically called half the country racist. Yes, she basically characterized women who voted for Trump as thoughtless vacuums for their husband’s opinions rather than as actual human beings. But I’m still kind of shocked that the comments made the news. Why? Because she has said these things before; we already know that she thinks this way.

During the election, Clinton said that “half” of Donald Trump’s supporters belonged to a “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic . . . basket of deplorables.” In an interview with NPR last year, she talked about women being “under tremendous pressure from fathers and husbands and boyfriends and male employers not to vote for ‘the girl.’” Despite the breathless news coverage, these comments weren’t really news so much as they were what we already know.

After the comments received backlash, Clinton insisted that she “meant no disrespect” by her comments — but she’s lying. Disrespect is exactly what she meant.

Even Clinton’s sorry-not-sorry non-apologies drip with contempt.

DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH: As a Rotherham grooming gang survivor, I want people to know about the religious extremism which inspired my abusers.

I’m a Rotherham grooming gang survivor. I call myself a survivor because I’m still alive. I’m part of the UK’s largest ever child sexual abuse investigation.

As a teenager, I was taken to various houses and flats above takeaways in the north of England, to be beaten, tortured and raped over 100 times. I was called a “white slag” and “white c***” as they beat me.

They made it clear that because I was a non-Muslim, and not a virgin, and because I didn’t dress “modestly”, that they believed I deserved to be “punished”. They said I had to “obey” or be beaten.

Fear of being killed, and threats to my parents’ lives, made it impossible for me to escape for about a year. The police didn’t help me.

Well, you were raped, and feared being killed, but they couldn’t risk being called racist.

YOUR DAILY TREACHER: When Hillary Clinton Called You a Racist, Misogynist Idiot, She Was ‘Misinterpreted.’

THE INSTAWIFE: Penis Facial: Boys’ Pain, Vain Women’s Gain.

KURT SCHLICHTER: Don’t Let Leftists Win By Making You Care. “Perhaps we fail to meet the moral standards of people who already call us racist, sexist, greedy, stupid, and all sorts of other stuff. You heard what Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit said about us. Hell, we are murdering children by sticking up for the Constitution, remember? But gee, it seems that this time we have really disappointed them. This time it’s totally serious. We’ve really done it now. Now our enemies are going to think really, really badly of us. Whatev.”

SHE’S STILL NOT READY FOR HER CLOSE-UP: Jonah Goldberg on Hillary’s Other America.

For years, I’ve been writing that the great myth about Hillary Clinton is the notion she shared even a fraction of her husband’s political skills. There is no transitive property to marriage. If Bill Clinton could play the xylophone, Hillary Clinton wouldn’t have gained the skill when she said, “I do.” So it goes with politics. Bill Clinton would never dream of saying anything like this. Having risen in Arkansas politics — not an over-performing state GDP-wise — he understood how to talk to working-class voters in ways Hillary never learned in 40 years of standing next to him sagely nodding.

So, what’s wrong with what she said? Well, nearly everything, starting with the fact that she probably believes all of it. It shows that she really doesn’t like large swathes of the country. She has a Manichaean view that says people who voted against her are backward, racist, sexist, and kind of dumb. I didn’t love the slogan “Make America Great Again,” and Lord knows I didn’t like Trump’s campaign style. But for millions of decent Americans, Trump’s program was optimistic. “We’re gonna make America great again” may sound unequivocally racist to the race-obsessed, but that’s not how everyone who liked it heard it. How easy and comfortable it must be to think that anyone who voted against you is against “black people getting rights.”

At Ricochet, this week’s GLoP (short for Goldberg, Rob Long and John Podhoretz) podcast is titled “A Cheeseburger of Schadenfreude,” because Hillary’s Deplorables on Steroids speech vindicates what conservatives have been saying about her for decades. Near the end of the podcast, the guys riff on her Norma Desmond-ish tone and joke that somebody should make an “I’m ready for my close-up, Mr. DeMille” parody video of her. But someone already did; Obama-supporting comedienne Lisa Nova – back in 2008. It speaks volumes about where the left was in 2016 that someone who they had rhetorically beaten like a bongo eight years prior in the rush to nominate The One ended up being their nominee. (Well that, and arguably rigging the race to avoid Bernie getting the nomination.)

Click to watch.

I’M SURE THIS IS SOMEHOW RACIST: Tim Scott Tells ‘Communities Of Color’ To Celebrate Trump Tax Cuts As Black Unemployment Continues To Drop.

ASKING THE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS: Is It Racist to Call Maxine Waters Stupid, Considering How Stupid She Is?

I REMEMBER WHEN EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT MS-13 WAS RACIST: WaPo: MS-13 is “taking over the school,” one teen warned before she was killed.



LOUIS FARRAKHAN, RACIST:  Louis Farrakhan: ‘Jews are my enemy,’ ‘white folks are going down’.

#METOO IS RACIST? Woman Who Lied to Police About 3 Black Men Raping and Kidnapping Her Faces Zero Years in Prison. Sadly, it’s newsworthy when women get prison time for lying about rape in any circumstances.

WRITERS BLOCKED: Lionel Shriver on how the new call-out culture is killing fiction.

[T]hese days, straight white fiction writers whose characters’ ethnicity, race, disability, sexual identity, religion or class differs from their own can expect their work to be subjected to forensic examination—and not only on social media. Publishers of young adult fiction and children’s literature hire “sensitivity readers” to comb through manuscripts for perceived slights to any group with the protected status once reserved for distinguished architecture.

The publishing magazine Kirkus Reviews assigns “own voices” reviewers with a matching “marginalised” pedigree to assess young adult books that contain a diverse cast. Last autumn, the magazine yanked both a positive review and its coveted “star” after online activists accused Laura Moriarty’s dystopian novel American Heart, which imagines a future in which US Muslims are sent to internment camps, of using a “white saviour narrative.” (Yes, whole plot lines are becoming unacceptable. This year’s film Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri has attracted heavy flak because its racist cop rounds into a half-decent human being. Writers can refurbish murderers into good guys, but must never redeem a racist.)

As for adult literature, it’s impossible to gauge the degree of politically correct censorship going on behind the scenes at publishing companies and literary agencies. Editors and agents are unlikely to assert directly that a submission’s content is too hot to handle. Having tackled divisive subjects or deployed characters who don’t hew to the rules of identity politics—rules that are often opaque, or at least until you break them—authors are left with uneasy suspicions about why their manuscripts might be attracting no takers, but with no hard evidence.

Read the whole thing.

ANNALS OF LEFTIST AUTOPHAGY: As Obama Presidential Center comes closer to reality, tensions on race, class surface.

When Bronwyn Nichols Lodato began pushing to prevent a portion of Chicago’s Midway Plaisance from being developed into a parking garage by the Obama Foundation, she never expected to be criticized as anti-black.

After all, she is an African-American woman who has lived in Hyde Park for more than a decade and is sensitive to both the city’s racial tensions and the needs of her neighbors.

“All I wanted to do was make sure my kids could play with no garage in their park,” she said. “I have three young children and we live in a condo and the Midway is our yard. My story is simply, how can we keep the park so our kids could play there?”

But soon after taking up her campaign, Lodato, who believes the South Side deserves what she calls “jewels” of open space, found herself under fire by people who believed that the garage would foster business in the area. Some accused her of siding with her well-off white neighbors and taking a stance that hurts the struggling communities around hers.

But of course — any action that might prevent Mr. Obama from achieving a desired goal is by its very nature automatically racist. Additionally, I’m told by reliable media figures that merely uttering the word “Chicago” is doubly racist.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Did NYU serve a racist dinner to celebrate Black History Month? The black students complain, and two black dining-service employees lose their jobs. From the comments: “She got 2 low level black workers fired. Her tuition is probably more than their annual wages (used to be). I hope she’s proud.”

Diversity and inclusion!


Apparently, there’s been some controversy about the film after leftists realized that what seemed like a feminist screed was, in fact, something else entirely. Well, good. Feminists have lost their way. Let them go and watch another showing of Wonder Woman and assuage their endless anger with dreams of a world that never was. Three Billboards is about this world, and the God who loves it in all its terrible beauty.

Read the whole thing.

BLUE ON BLUE: The Left’s War Against The New York Times.

The Times has flourished under Trump, witnessing a surge in digital subscriptions and regularly breaking major news about the administration and the Russia inquiry (not to mention #MeToo). Yet liberal criticism of the Times has also intensified, especially on social media. Not a day passes, it seems, without a prominent Twitter user complaining that the Times is biased against the left, too friendly to Trump and his supporters, or engaging in false equivalences between Democrats and Republicans.

Reporter Michael Schmidt was criticized for not asking more follow-up questions during an impromptu sit-down with Trump in December. His colleague Richard Fausset was accused of normalizing a neo-Nazi in his profile of an Ohio white nationalist the month before. Critics frequently charge that the Times is preoccupied with giving a voice to Trump supporters or even just saying something nice about the president, and the paper has openly struggled with how to cover racists. Broader criticisms go to questions of framing and context—whether news analysis of Trump is too gentle, like when Peter Baker described the president’s “reality-show accessibility,” or why the Times’ mobile phone push notifications seem strangely favorable to the White House. And then there’s the steady moan about the Times opinion section—not just stalwarts like Brooks and Ross Douthat, but Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss, both of whom joined the paper last year from The Wall Street Journal.

“I think there’s been a lot more anger from the grassroots against the Times,” Willis told me. “They’re able to be more vocal about it because of social media and Twitter specifically.” Sean McElwee, a socialist policy analyst and columnist at The Outline, said this anger sometimes “unites everyone from a deeply anti-imperialist socialist to someone who works at a center-left think tank.”

The Left turns on its own, always.

I HAD BEEN ASSURED THAT BORDER CONTROLS WERE RACIST: Colombia tightens borders as Venezuela crisis worsens.

LAYERS AND LAYERS OF FACT CHECKERS, EDITORS, AND HR DEPARTMENTS: New York Times writer fired just hours after being hired.

“Despite our review of Quinn Norton’s work and our conversations with her previous employers, this was new information to us,” read a statement from editorial page editor, James Bennet.

“Based on it, we’ve decided to go our separate ways.”

In a series of tweets, Norton admitted to being “friends with various neo-Nazis” although she claimed she “never agreed with them.”

In one conversation from 2013, Norton wrote “Here’s the deal, f—t. Free speech comes with responsibility. not legal, but human. grown up. you can do this.”

In another oddly prescient tweet from 2014, she said “Today I realized I’d probably make a lot more money being a racist for @nytimes.”

Analysis: True, alas.

Related: New York Times Fires Writer After Deciding It Went Too Far In Its Search For Intellectual Diversity.

YEAH, BUT IDIOTS THINK “ANGLO-AMERICAN” IS RACIST OR SOMETHING: The Anglo-American Office of Sheriff: Americans’ right to elect their Sheriffs comes from ancient English legal tradition.

PEOPLE: Poor people live in “food deserts” and can’t get anything good to eat.

TRUMP: Okay, let’s send them food boxes instead of SNAP cards.

PEOPLE: That’s terrible and racist!

NEW YORK LEFTIES: TRUMP IS A RACIST FOR CALLING THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES SHITHOLES. Also New York Lefties: “Wealthy New Yorkers are furious that Mayor Bill de Blasio plans to open a homeless shelter in their ritzy Manhattan neighborhood.”

As Michael Walsh writes in response, “Yeah, well, maybe you should have thought of that in the voting booth when you re-elected de Blasio, buddy.”

No Sh*thole People, Please, We’re Rich Liberals,” Rod Dreher adds.

COIN FLIPS ARE NOW RACIST: Jesse Jackson objects to ‘unfair’ coin flip that decided tie vote for Team USA flag bearer.

To paraphrase Jon Gabriel’s classic tweet about the Obama era, my favorite part about the Olympics is all the racial healing.

LATE-STAGE SOCIALISM: Mad Max violence stalks Venezuela’s lawless roads.

In one video apparently showing a looting and uploaded to social media, people are seen gleefully dragging live chickens from a stranded truck.

The looters use tree trunks and rocks to stop vehicles, and are particularly fond of “miguelitos” – pieces of metal with long spikes – to burst tires and halt vehicles.

A ring-road round the central town of Barquisimeto, with shanty-towns next to it, is notorious among truckers, who nickname it “The Guillotine” due to the regular attacks.

In some cases, crowds simply swarm at trucks when they stop for a break or repairs. Soldiers or policemen seldom help, according to interviews with two dozen drivers.

Yone Escalante, 43, who also takes vegetables from the Andes on a 2,800-km (1,700-mile) round-trip to eastern Venezuela, shudders when he recalls how a vehicle of his was ransacked in the remote plains of Guarico state last year.

“Social media” is as close as this Reuters report gets to the words “socialism” or “socialist.”

Related: Colombia and Brazil clamp down on borders as Venezuela crisis spurs exodus.

Isn’t border control racist?

ACTUALLY, “MANDATORY DIVERSITY TRAINING” WILL PROBABLY MAKE IT WORSE: GWU adopts mandatory diversity training after racist social media post.

OLD WOMAN YELLS AT CLOUDS: Even House Dems wonder: What was the point of the Pelosi filibuster?

Related: Nancy Pelosi’s Grandson Story Is So Racist.

BLESS HIS HEART: Chris Matthews dubs GOP Attacks on Pelosi ‘Ethnic Politics.’ And note this:

Matthews said, “Picking on somebody from one of the coasts, usually ethnic, and making them the poster person of the Democratic Party is old business for the Republicans. They did it with — way back to some guy from the Bronx back in the 40s. They did it with Bella Abzug from the west side of New York City. They did it to Tip O’Neill. They did it to Teddy Kennedy. Now, they’re doing it after Nancy Pelosi. They love to get an ethnic sort of person from one of the coasts and make them the bad person.”

As James Taranto likes to say, if you can hear the dog whistle, then you’re the dog — and nobody can hear imaginary dog whistles like Matthews.

But if being Irish-American like Teddy Kennedy or Tip O’Neill now makes one an “ethnic,” then (to borrow an old line from Dennis Miller), I am sick and tired of being racially attacked by The Man, baby.

(Classical reference in headline.)

THAT’S WHY THEY IGNORED IT: Eddie Scarry: Trump won on immigration at the State of the Union, even as the media ignored it.

Anyone hear about the two pairs of black parents who were invited to the State of the Union by President Trump in order to show the country how tragic our immigration system is?

I didn’t think so. Their appearance — and it was heartbreaking to see them grieve while Trump told the story of how their daughters were killed by illegal immigrant gang members — was almost entirely dismissed by the press. . . .

The two had been walking together when several members of MS-13, a gang largely made up of illegal immigrants from the slums of Central America, jumped them while wielding machetes and baseball bats. The girls, who had grown up friends since childhood, were slashed, brutalized, and bludgeoned to death, reportedly over an altercation that started on social media.

The machete is MS-13’s “weapon of choice” and is “used to mutilate and dismember victims during attacks that sometimes are recorded,” according to the Long Island newspaper Newsday.

Suffolk County Police Commissioner Tim Sini described the gruesome attacks as “depraved” and said the perpetrators would have had to have had “no regard for human life.”

So ravaged is Suffolk County by MS-13 that it received half a million dollars in a federal grant last October just to combat the gang violence.

But after Trump’s address, NBC “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd immediately complained that he “didn’t lead with a conciliatory tone on immigration.” (Presumably Trump’s guests, Evelyn Rodriguez, Freddy Cuevas, Elizabeth Alvarado, and Robert Mickens, were more upset that the illegals who killed their daughters “didn’t lead with a conciliatory tone” when they took machetes to their bodies.)

The New York Times editorial board said Trump had “injected only poison and confusion” into the immigration debate.

Flush with originality, the Washington Post also said Trump “injected more ethno-nationalist venom into a debate he already has done much to poison” and that he “chose in the most inflammatory way possible to associate immigrants with a horrific crime committed by a vicious gang.”

As Scarry notes, an actual look at the speech doesn’t reveal any actual poison. Plus:

It’s only worth noting that Cuevas, Mickens and their parents are black because of the media’s unrelenting accusation that any immigration policy outside of “complete open borders” is racist.

Trump spent the better part of the last month being called a racist because he suggested limiting immigration from “shithole countries.” Here at his State of the Union were four black parents who saw their children taken away because of illegal immigrant criminals.

That interests virtually no one in the national media?

Of course not, because that would be a win for Trump. And he always wins when the debate is over immigration.

That’s why they want to shut the debate down with bogus claims of racism.


Narrative has become a maligned word of late, but we find ourselves today in a news environment where the narratives are established, and the days’ Trump coverage seems largely in service of reinforcing (for the left) or debunking (the right) that narrative. We say this, the president says that, we’re at an impasse. Donald Trump called developing nations a shithole, unless he didn’t, but he probably did. What do we learn? Probably that he’s a racist who lies, both of which we already knew. But that doesn’t stop us from repeating the exercise day after day; maybe this will be the thing that finally does him in.

According to his bio, “Kyle Pope is the Editor in Chief and Publisher of the Columbia Journalism Review.”

As Ann Althouse wrote last month, “‘Shithole’ is a perfectly good rude, slangy word. It has a great history, and it’s vivid and effective. It is not a racial term, and shame on the people who are making it racist. I wonder if these people ever think of the pain and damage they are causing by proclaiming and insisting upon a connection between dark skin and excrement. They’re revealing what’s in their head, and they don’t mind burdening dark-skinned people with the knowledge that they are being thought about like that.”

James Taranto tweets, “A lot of the complaints about Trump’s departures from norms seem to me to be justifications for the critics’ own departures from norms.” “Do any members of ‘the political press corps’ dispute this characterization of their attitudes,” Taranto asks in a follow-up tweet linking to the CJR piece.

PASS THE DUTCHIE — AND THE NEWSPEAK DICTIONARY — ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE: Marijuana: is it time to stop using a word with racist roots?

YOUR DAILY TREACHER: No, There’s No Racist Conspiracy Against Marvel’s Black Panther Movie.

DAVID HARSANYI: The Media’s Ugly David Duke-Louis Farrakhan Double Standard.

It’s true that no politician has control over who supports him, even if politicians occasionally instigate that support. I mean, Farrakhan endorsed Barack Obama’s presidential run in 2008. Hillary Clinton was accused of passive-aggressive racism for even bringing up the topic. “I did not solicit his support,” the candidate explained at the time. “I can’t say to somebody that he can’t say that he thinks I’m a good guy.” Obama was correct, even if his antagonist policies towards Israel may have pleased the Nation of Islam leader who went to Iran to celebrate the anniversary for the Islamic Revolution a couple of years back.

On the other hand, when Obama posed for a photo with the man who claims white people are a “race of devils” and said Hitler was a “very great man” at a Congressional Black Caucus gathering in 2005, it was entirely his fault. We only found out about the picture recently — and thus the new questions — because the Congressional Black Caucus allegedly suppressed photos of Democrats hanging out with a man who spent decades spreading noxious anti-Semitic and racist conspiracies theories to African-Americans.

Obama is now gone. There are, however, 45 members in the CBC leading the resistance against Donald Trump. Four of them — Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee, Al Green, and William Jefferson — can been seen here exchanging pleasantries and running through some talking points on the hurricane Katrina response with Farrakhan in 2009.

But that’s different because shut up.

LIFE IN TRUMP’S RACIST AMERIKKKA: Black Panther advance ticket sales exceeding all previous superhero movies.

J. CHRISTIAN ADAMS: You Are an Unconscious Racist!

But now at least you’re a consciously unconscious racist.

CHUCK SCHUMER, MEET CHUCK SCHUMER: Brendan Kirby at LifeZette found an interesting speech on immigration issues delivered by the present Senate Minority Leader in 2009. Schumer said things then that Schumer today would condemn as racist. If he’s intellectually honest, that is. Why are you vigorously shaking your head and saying “No, he’s not!!!!”?


● Shot: Do Millennials Hate Real Men, And Real War, And Real Sex, And Real Life?

—Headline, Red State, yesterday.

● Chaser: The Question that Reveals the Heart of the Culture Wars: What is a man?

—Headline and subhead, column by David French at NRO, today.

● Hangover: Millennials Want Spain To Change Their Word For Black Because ‘It’s Racist.’

Unilad, January 22nd.

Fight over the word all you want  – just try taking my Negroni cocktail from my cold, drunk hands.

LICENSE TO KILLJOY: As Tom Wolfe wrote, paraphrasing Malcolm Muggeridge, “We live in an age in which it is no longer possible to be funny. There is nothing you can imagine, no matter how ludicrous, that will not promptly be enacted before your very eyes, probably by someone well known.” Back in October, while Harvey Weinstein was being defenestrated near-daily in the news, Rob Long, as part of his “The Long View” column in the dead tree edition of National Review, wrote up a satiric lawsuit featuring a dozen Bond girls suing the living daylights (sorry) out of Her Majesty’s swinging secret agent.

The above-named plaintiffs — and others to be included at a later date — allege that in separate instances the above-named defendant, James Bond, repeatedly made unwanted advances upon their persons, in locations including public areas, private hotel rooms, corporate-jet interiors, ski slopes, and hollowed-out volcano hideaways. Further, plaintiffs claim that defendant refused to accept their demurrals, would not take “No” for an answer, and in some instances used his considerable latitude vis-à-vis License to Kill etc. to coerce, intimidate, blackmail, and relentlessly pursue the plaintiffs into unwanted situations.

Half the article is behind the NR subscriber paywall, but you get the gist of it: how could James Bond survive in the Weinstein-inspired #Metoo era? It turns out that maybe he can’t.

Continue reading ‘LICENSE TO KILLJOY: As Tom Wolfe wrote, paraphrasing Malcolm Muggeridge, “We live in an age in whi…’ »

MICHAEL BARONE: Eschewing euphemisms frames the immigration issue Trump’s way.

Euphemism has been the weapon of the liberals on this. You can’t say illegal immigrants, you have to say undocumented aliens. (By the way, have you ever heard those two words spoken together in ordinary conversation?) You can’t say amnesty, you have to say legalization. You can’t say illegal immigrants brought in illegally as children, you have to say “Dreamers” (a phrase irresistibly appealing to journalists, like me, trying to keep their word count down).

You have to say that any immigration legislation providing a path to citizenship for the bulk of the estimated (by the widely respected Pew Research Center) 11 million illegal immigrants is “comprehensive.” You have to say that more restrictive plans are “hardline” and therefore presumably undesirable.

In previous debates over immigration legislation, in 2006, 2007, and 2013, euphemisms held sway. Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama both sought “comprehensive” legislation, including mass amnesty. That was the policy of every president since mass immigration picked up in the early 1980s.

President Trump, notoriously, campaigned for something different, starting just moments after he stepped off that escalator in Trump Tower in June 2015. His use of confrontation and sometimes vile language strikes many Americans, including me, as distasteful. But it has also helped him frame issues, including immigration, his way.

He was attacked as racist for saying that Mexico “does not send its best.” But Pew Research Center data confirms that immigrants from Mexico have on average the lowest education and skill levels as those from any country. His use of the term “chain migration” was attacked by Dreamer advocate Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., as offensive because slaves arrived in North America in chains. This effort at euphemism enforcement was a stretch: People of varying views have been using the term “chain migration” for two decades.

Including Durbin, but the race card is the only card they’ve got.

ONLY IN THEIR WEST WING/NPR FANTASIES: Does the Left Lose because It’s Too Civil?

We’re still endlessly debating how we “got Trump” in 2016. But one of the chief reasons is that many Republicans — down to the very marrow of their bones — believed that the GOP had been “too nice,” and that nominating gentlemen like Mitt Romney meant that the party was unilaterally disarming in a no-holds-barred political war. There is still deep rage at the way in which lefties who allegedly yearn for civility painted Romney as a greedy, racist monster who was indifferent to cancer deaths and sought to put African Americans “back in chains.”

No, Democrats aren’t losing because they’re “too nice” or because they yearn for dialogue. The better explanation is that they’re losing in part because their own incivility and rage drive millions of Americans to the polls to vote in perceived self-defense. Their own incivility and rage falsely escalate too many political disputes to matters of life and death. What’s the argument after claiming that Republicans are intentionally killing people? Is there a rhetorical step beyond that?

No, the next step is physical violence, and we’ve seen plenty of that from the left over the past year, up to and including, as the Daily Caller noted in August, “Bernie Bro James T. Hodgkinson, Attempted Assassin Of Steve Scalise, Already Being Erased From History.”

I’M SURE THAT EVEN ASKING THIS QUESTION IS SOMEHOW RACIST OR SOMETHING: If Trump is an authoritarian, why don’t Democrats treat him like one?

“CLEARLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL:” University of Alabama Student Expelled for Racist Instagram Rant.

IT’S COME TO THIS. You’d have to be a prig to find Friends offensive. Claims that 1990s sitcom is racist, homophobic, transphobic and fatphobic show a desperation to see a flaw in anything:

Friends has arrived on Netflix and people who apparently never saw it before are going nuts over how offensive it is.

* * * * * * * *

For this show to be declared problematic then is itself problematic. . . There is a hunger today to find the flaw, to be the one who says “that thing you think is fine is not fine, and I am a better person than you for noticing it”. You aren’t. You’re a prig and bore. Yes, maybe there’s a mote in my eye. Some eyes have those. No need to gouge them out.

—Hugo Rifkind in the London Times, as spotted by Steve Hayward of Power Line, who adds, “Just wait till they get a load of All in the Family re-runs.”

ROGER SIMON: Trump’s Not a Racist; He’s a ‘Scorch!’

A scorch was the kind of kid who, when someone muffed an easy fly in stickball, would scream out, seemingly totally incensed, “You [f-word]ing [derogatory word for Puerto Rican], how could you [f-word]ing drop that [f-word]ing ball, you dumb [f-word]ing [derogatory word for Puerto Rican] idiot?!”

Of course, no one paid that much attention because it was just one of our scorches – there were more than one, of all races and creeds – mouthing off and, soon enough, he and the Puerto Rican kid were heading off to the local candy store together – known, in my case, as Jesse’s Jip Joint – to share a cup of hot French fries with way too much ketchup, as if they were best buddies. Indeed, often, they were.

Read the whole thing.



LIZ SHELD’S MORNING BRIEF: Trump’s a Racist, Gov’t Shut Down and Much, Much More.

ALL THE NEWS THAT FITS THE NARRATIVE: The New York Times List Of Donald Trump’s “Racist” Quotes Is Garbage.


In honor of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s efforts to bring black and white America together, the New York Times has chosen to stoke arguments over race by amassing a collection of allegedly racist quotes by Donald Trump. The piece is titled: Donald Trump’s Racism:The Definitive List. In many places, the alleged examples of racism are dishonest and absurd. Time and time again, truthful statements by Trump are deemed to be “racist.” It’s shoddy work, and the Times ought to be deeply ashamed.

Let’s pick apart some specific examples, so you can see just how shameless this list is. I’m going to start by debunking one of the allegations at some length, because the claim of racism makes me so angry that I want you to see, in detail, why it’s so dishonest and outrageous.

You’ll need to read the whole thing.

THEY TOLD ME IF TRUMP WERE ELECTED, OPEN BIGOTRY WOULD REIGN. AND THEY WERE RIGHT! Tech Founder: Middle America Is Too ‘Violent, Stupid And Racist’ For New Jobs.

QUESTION ASKED: Do Americans Still Believe In Martin Luther King Jr.’s Dream?

But as we once again celebrate King and his dream today, we must ask ourselves, do we still share it? For the first time in decades we have a president whom serious people accuse of outright racism, and not without reason. His recent remarks about Haiti and Africa led even Republican Rep. Mia Love to label the commander in chief’s alleged words racist. Of course, these aren’t the first of his statements to come under such fire.

What became clear through Trump’s campaign and presidency is that the rules governing how we talk about race, forged in King’s civil rights struggle, no longer hold. Trump’s supporters, who include more blacks and minorities than many like to consider, simply do not find his statements disqualifying.

But this tolerance of questionable racial rhetoric is larger than Trump and predates him. Over the past two decades, we have moved away from King’s dream in significant ways. King said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of the character.” This does not appear to be the goal of our nation’s efforts against racism today.

In retrospect, the left’s mid-‘60s belief in a colorblind nation would soon give way to their utter obsession with identity politics. Colorblind politics? Identity politics? Pick one, because the two are not compatible, and the latter led to an alt-right which similarly rejects King’s notion of a colorblind society in favor of its own equally toxic form of identity politics.

THAT’S AWKWARD FOR THE NARRATIVE: Rand Paul: Trump isn’t prejudiced against Haiti because he helped fund my medical mission trip there. “There are a lot of questions that this ultimately intersects with policy, and the only thing I regret from all of this, other than I think some people in the media have gone completely bonkers with, you know, just ad hominem on the president, I want to see an immigration compromise and you can’t have an immigration compromise if everybody is out there calling the president a racist.”

PUNCH BACK TWICE AS HARD: ‘Deplorable’ NYU professor sues colleagues for defamation. “In academia, to be called a ‘racist’ and a ‘sexist’ is like the kiss of death.”

Academics — and academic administrators — care a lot about quality of life. Being sued will undermine that considerably. Whether or not he wins, he’ll likely wreck the department for years.

S***HOLE: Censure Resolution Planned Against Trump ‘for His Racist Statements.’

This writeup is from Bridget Johnson, whose unexplained and unacknowledged Twitter banishment remains unexplained and unacknowledged by Twitter management.


The Atlantic’s Caitlin Flanagan made an intriguing argument that even the heavily anti-Trump tenor of late-night comedy shows actually helped Trump: “Though aimed at blue-state sophisticates, these shows are an unintended but powerful form of propaganda for conservatives. When Republicans see these harsh jokes—which echo down through the morning news shows and the chattering day’s worth of viral clips, along with those of Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, and Seth Meyers—they don’t just see a handful of comics mocking them. They see HBO, Comedy Central, TBS, ABC, CBS, and NBC. In other words, they see exactly what Donald Trump has taught them: that the entire media landscape loathes them, their values, their family, and their religion. It is hardly a reach for them to further imagine that the legitimate news shows on these channels are run by similarly partisan players—nor is it at all illogical. No wonder so many of Trump’s followers are inclined to believe only the things that he or his spokespeople tell them directly—everyone else on the tube thinks they’re a bunch of trailer-park, Oxy-snorting half-wits who divide their time between retweeting Alex Jones fantasies and ironing their Klan hoods.”

Read the whole thing.

Incidentally, why would Trump’s base think that “the entire media landscape loathes them, their values, their family, and their religion?” Because that’s exactly what the media tells them on a regular basis.

QED:  CNN’s Don Lemon Lectures Trump Base for Supporting a ‘Racist:’ Makes You ‘Worse Than Him.’

Related: Michael Wolff, Golden Globes, and the Failure of the Artistic Class.

ANN ALTHOUSE:. “‘Shithole’ is a perfectly good rude, slangy word. It has a great history, and it’s vivid and effective. It is not a racial term, and shame on the people who are making it racist. I wonder if these people ever think of the pain and damage they are causing by proclaiming and insisting upon a connection between dark skin and excrement. They’re revealing what’s in their head, and they don’t mind burdening dark-skinned people with the knowledge that they are being thought about like that.”

SHELBY STEELE: Black Protest Has Lost Its Power: Have whites finally found the courage to judge African-Americans fairly by universal standards?

The recent protests by black players in the National Football League were rather sad for their fruitlessness. They may point to the end of an era for black America, and for the country generally—an era in which protest has been the primary means of black advancement in American life.

There was a forced and unconvincing solemnity on the faces of these players as they refused to stand for the national anthem. They seemed more dutiful than passionate, as if they were mimicking the courage of earlier black athletes who had protested: Tommie Smith and John Carlos, fists in the air at the 1968 Olympics; Muhammad Ali, fearlessly raging against the Vietnam War; Jackie Robinson, defiantly running the bases in the face of racist taunts. The NFL protesters seemed to hope for a little ennoblement by association.

And protest has long been an ennobling tradition in black American life. From the Montgomery bus boycott to the march on Selma, from lunch-counter sit-ins and Freedom Rides to the 1963 March on Washington, only protest could open the way to freedom and the acknowledgment of full humanity. So it was a high calling in black life. It required great sacrifice and entailed great risk. Martin Luther King Jr. , the archetypal black protester, made his sacrifices, ennobled all of America, and was then shot dead.

For the NFL players there was no real sacrifice, no risk and no achievement. Still, in black America there remains a great reverence for protest. Through protest—especially in the 1950s and ’60s—we, as a people, touched greatness. Protest, not immigration, was our way into the American Dream. Freedom in this country had always been relative to race, and it was black protest that made freedom an absolute.

It is not surprising, then, that these black football players would don the mantle of protest. The surprise was that it didn’t work. They had misread the historic moment. They were not speaking truth to power. Rather, they were figures of pathos, mindlessly loyal to a black identity that had run its course.

What they missed is a simple truth that is both obvious and unutterable: The oppression of black people is over with. This is politically incorrect news, but it is true nonetheless. We blacks are, today, a free people. It is as if freedom sneaked up and caught us by surprise.

It threatens too many people’s rice bowls.

GEORGE KORDA: Nathan Bedford Forrest: Instead of statue demolition, why not turn the tables on racists? This is a really thoughtful and informative piece.



It wasn’t just “M*A*S*H” — but the 1970s comedy was one of the worst offenders and one of the most influential shows of its era, Thompson says. It ran for 11 years, was a huge hit and the characters’ lecherous behavior “was really central to a lot of the comedy.”

Where many skeevy TV characters are portrayed as losers, the main protagonist on “M*A*S*H,” Alan Alda’s Capt. Benjamin Franklin “Hawkeye” Pierce, was suave, funny and smart.

But he, and the other men, also terrorized Loretta Swit’s Houlihan — who they called “Hot Lips” — and other nurses with sleazy, handsy come-ons.

“If fictional characters could be exposed, I’m sure Hawkeye Pierce would be one of them, all those nurses would finally come forward and talk about all the things he did,” Thompson says.

As the show and times went on, Alda — a liberal and self-professed “feminist” — gained more influence, and both “M*A*S*H” and his character moved away from such sexist gags.

In his year-end round-up of “The 165 Greatest American Movies,” John Nolte of Big Hollywood warned  Robert Altman’s original film version of M*A*S*H could never be made in today’s SJW environment:

Frank Burns (Robert Duvall) and Margaret “Hotlips” O’Houlihan (Sally Kellerman) are the insufferable Social Justice Warriors of their time — pious, smug, hypocritical, bossy snitches, forever sucking up to the  Establishment. They are nothing less than stand-ins for today’s left as personified by the elite media. Cutting them down to size are Hawkeye (Donald Sutherland) and Trapper John (Elliott Gould), two characters whose fun-loving attitude in pursuit of personal freedom would be villainized onscreen today as sexist and racist (they are not), as cisgender white males in need of a stern lecture from Hot Lips, who would now be portrayed as the movie’s heroine — sorry, hero. Think I’m kidding? Read this.

* * * * * * * *

M*A*S*H gives us the heroes we most need today: men who love women, sex, booze, a good time; women and men who respect life and professionalism, despise war and conformity, and whose favorite sport is the most crucial of all — removing the steel rods stuck up the backsides of society’s joyless scolds and virtue signalers.

A decade after he adapted M*A*S*H for the small screen, veteran TV writer/producer Larry Gelbart was interviewed by fellow lefty Todd Gitlin for his book on the TV industry, Inside Prime Time:

Perry Lafferty, who had been at CBS with Wood and Silverman, said that if someone else had come to him with an idea for a show about American doctors in the Korean War, he would have said, “Never. Bad concept. Terrible. What are you talking about?” The show sold without a pilot.

Obviously M*A*S*H was launched on a wave of antiwar sentiment. “We wanted to say that war was futile,” Gelbart said, “to represent it as a failure on everybody’s part that people had to kill each other to make a point. We wanted to say that when you take people from home they do things they would never do. They drink. They whore. They steal. They become venal. They become asinine, in terms of power. They get the clap. They become alcoholics. They become rude. They become sweet. They become tender. They become loving. We tended to make war the enemy without really saying who was fighting.” Gelbart’s favorite line was when Klinger, under fire, said, “Damn Truman, damn Stalin, damn everybody.” M*A*S*H and its cast were so lovable, the American right never saw much payoff in blasting it for dangerous pacifist tendencies. “It was chic to be antiwar,” Gelbart says. “You couldn’t offend anybody.”

Well, that was the left in the 1970s, when they were having fun. And now that the sexual revolution has moved into its French Revolution phase, it’s impossible to not offend them. Which is why, as our first link illustrates, M*A*S*H isn’t the only 1970s sitcom that humorless SJW scolds want to toss down the memory hole. What will Nick at Nite and TV Land have left to show?

(See also: Mel Brooks’ Blazing Saddles, which both Nolte and Brooks himself have noted could never be made today. As Nolte warned in 2014, “Buy a Copy Before the Left Burns Them All.”)


One of the most cogent observations that Rush Limbaugh ever made is the axiom that “most people believe history began the day they were born.” As a nation, we have become more and more historically illiterate. The native-born voters that will be eligible to go to the polls for the first time ever this fall will be the first born in the 2000s and the 2020 election will see the ascension of the 21st-century voter. These people will vote with little understanding of their country’s history beyond the idea that it was racist, misogynistic and a backwater of religious nuttery.

* * * * * * *

And with their reliance on the electronic record, a non-permanent and easily changeable source, we will inch closer to the days of Orwell’s nightmare vision of The Ministry of Truth. History will be bent to serve whatever purpose the present requires. As a case in point take the new edition of The New Yorker. 

Its cover depicts Dr. Martin Luther King kneeling in protest with Michael Bennett and Colin Kaepernick. The work is by San Francisco artist Mark Ulriksen who asked, “…what would King be doing if he were around today?”

To me, talking for the dead in the context of modern politics is the worst kind of history. King was a Southern man of great Christian faith and much of modern progressive politics is opposed to that kind of thinking. It’s dicey enough for members of the King family to make that projection, how about a West Coast white man like Ulriksen who was all of 11 when Dr. King lost his life?

King become increasingly radical near the end of his far-too-short life. But I’d like to think he wouldn’t take a knee alongside one man whose fashion choices include cops-as-pigs socks and pro-Castro T-shirts when he was still playing for the ‘Niners, and another who falsely claimed racism when questioned by the police after sneaking away during an active shooter incident in a Las Vegas casino. But then, the gap between King’s dignified fight for civil rights, and the pre-game “Woke Olympics” antics of today multi-millionaire NFL athletes is gigantic.

Related: ‘Racist Traitor’! Donald Trump catches hate for honoring Martin Luther King Jr.

Worst. Nazi. Ever.

WELL, IT’S THE ONLY GROUP THAT CAN BE SUBJECTED TO RACIST AND SEXIST COMMENTS WITH IMPUNITY: Pale, male and stale: is being a white man now bad for your career?

CIVIL SOCIETY: Racist goons are targeting the FCC chief — and his family.

The source of great consternation on the left is the FCC’s decision to scrap an Obama-era rule implemented in 2015 deemed “net neutrality.” The end of net neutrality will allow internet service providers to, if they choose, privilege the content of providers that they own or support.

Over this, Pai has been the target of a campaign of harassment that amounts to a national scandal.

HBO host John Oliver was among the first mainstream cultural figures to organize a net-neutrality campaign, which he dubbed “Go FCC Yourself.” He encouraged followers to bombard the FCC’s website with comments supporting the regulation, and so they did.

Those comments were peppered with claims that Pai was a pedophile, a “dirty, sneaky Indian” who should self-deport and reminders that anonymous online hordes maintain the “power to murder Ajit Pai and his family.” Oliver was eventually compelled to release a video urging his followers to dial back the racism and death threats.

This episode would prove to be just the beginning of Pai’s ordeal. By May of last year, Pai’s tormentors began a campaign to ensure that the FCC chairman could enjoy no peace — not even in his own home.

If this were happening to a Democrat appointee, it would be the lede story, everywhere, all the time.

WHEN THE RADICALS BECOME FANATICS: The Torment of Ajit Pai. At Commentary, Noah Rothman writes:

The so-called “Resistance” latched onto the net-neutrality issue early in the Trump presidency and went about expressing their opposition to the repeal of this regulation in the most contemptible fashion imaginable. HBO host John Oliver was among the first figures of mainstream cultural relevance to organize a campaign against this regulation, which he dubbed “Go FCC Yourself.” He encouraged his followers to bombard the FCC’s website with comments supporting the regulation, and that is precisely what they did. Those comments were peppered with claims that Pai was a pedophile, a “dirty, sneaky Indian” who should self-deport, and reminders that anonymous online hordes maintain the “power to murder Ajit Pai and his family.” Oliver was eventually compelled to release a video urging his followers to dial back the racism and death threats.

This episode would prove to be just the beginning of Pai’s ordeal. By May of last year, Pai’s tormentors began a campaign to ensure that the FCC chairman could enjoy no peace—not even in his own home. “Resistance” groups began distributing fliers and door hangers around Pai’s Arlington, Virginia neighborhood, featuring a black-and-white photo of Pai with his vital stats (height, weight, age, and professional background) and accusing him of selling the Internet out to corporations. “Have you seen this man?” the fliers read.

These demonstrators didn’t stop there. They began organizing “vigils” in Pai’s driveway—a tactic that net neutrality activists deployed in 2014 against then-FCC chairman Tom Wheeler. They “come up to our front windows and take photographs of the inside of the house,” Pai told the Wall Street Journal. “My kids are 5 and 3. It’s not pleasant.”

In a related post at Taki’s, Christopher DeGroot explores “Giving Offense, or How to Overcome Mass-Media Morality,” beginning with a look at “Lewis Hamilton, the Formula One race-car driver and whipping boy for the identity-politics puritans. The man had put up a video on Instagram in which he mocks his nephew for getting a dress for Christmas. ‘Boys don’t wear princess dresses!’ he said. For this he was—inevitably—taken to task by people who presume they have the right to do so. As you would expect, Hamilton issued the obligatory public apology. Good news for the mob and his PR people. Bad news for everyone else, including the callow Hamilton himself.”

In a passage that dovetails well with Time-Warner-CNN-HBO spokesman John Oliver ginning up the mob to attack Ajit Pai, DeGroot responds:

Today, people act as if they have a “right” to revenge, even as they have a “right” never to be offended. Here, it would be impossible to underestimate the influence of mass media, a source of endless division, resentment, and wickedness. Mass media produces a debasement such as no one in the past ever could have imagined. It is an infinite impetus to destructive sentiments. Nor is the sort of mad reaction that we saw in the Hamilton scandal, and the concomitant will to punish, going to go away anytime soon. For it has become a norm, and therefore something that many do not even question as possibly wrong. There are many—single mothers in particular—who, though they teach their children nothing of traditional morality, will allow them to believe that reflexive herd castigation is “good conduct,” what “decent and tolerant” people do.

Since it increasingly is ”morality,” mass-media influence is a nightmare from which we need to wake up. To do so we must, in Dr. Johnson’s words, “clear the mind of cant.” Rejecting mass-media morality, and thus the evil ends for which it is the vehicle, we must go our own way, indifferent to what media-shaped cattle think of us. Most of all, children must be taught that mere hurt feelings are not a sign of rectitude. Parents should be candid with boys and girls that the media is insidious, trafficking in evil under the guise of righteousness. The young must learn to see it for what it is. If not, the world will be happy to dupe them and profit at their expense.

America’s future is already difficult enough. A culture that lacks emotional restraint, choosing instead to indulge every offended impulse, will be especially ill-suited for dealing with its many problems. Therefore, people—and especially men, the primary targets—need to learn how to respond to these facile charges of sexism, racism, homophobia, and all the progressive rest.

Read the whole thing.

(Found via Kathy Shaidle, who writes, “as I’ve been saying for years, what people really need is insensitivity training…”)


I REMEMBER WHEN IT WAS RACIST TO POINT THIS OUT: Study: Young male migrants fuel rise in violence in Germany.

JUSTICE: Judge Rules in Favor of Student Accused of ‘Racist, Threatening Language.’

WHEN TAXPAYERS GET TIRED OF SUPPORTING THIS NONSENSE, WE’LL BE TOLD IT’S BECAUSE OF “ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM:” ‘White-Informed Civility’ Is the Latest Target in the Campus Wars: The rules of collegiate debate are also coming under attack as racist and patriarchal.

LAWRENCE MEYERS: It’s Only Been the Apocalypse for Democrats.

Ever since The Day Democrats Reached Out, I’ve been watching the hilarious hyperbolic reactions to every Trump tweet, and each piece of lint that flutters through the Oval Office. The Democrat reaction to every single move by the Trump Administration amounts to, “We’re all gonna die”.

Remember the mass deportation of Mexicans? Neither do I. Yet we we’re all gonna die. My Democrat friends here in Southern Wackyfornia told me that their maids and nannies were terrified that they were going to be rounded up because Trump was a racist.

Remember the mass deportation of Muslims? Neither do I. Yet we we’re all gonna die. During the March of the Week Spectacular that occurred early in 2017, Democrats clogged airports to protest the 90-day visa hold – a policy enacted merely to ensure the safety of Americans.

Remember how Trump’s election empowered hate groups to go and beat innocent minorities, and that we were all gonna die? Neither do I. What I do remember is the leftist group ANTIFA, whose very name epitomizes the phrase “unintended irony”, beating the crap out of innocent Americans and starting riots every chance they got – oh, but usually to shut down free speech. It was so bad in Berkeley that even the Washington Post couldn’t ignore the truth.

Remember how Trump is Hitler and Steve Bannon is a white nationalist – and that we we’re all gonna die? Neither do I. I never quite understood how Trump could be Hitler given his staunch support of Israel, and having the courage to do what no other President did by acknowledging Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

Election Day, 2018 will mark two years of turn-it-up-past-11 fear-mongering from the Left. The “professional left,” as Obama called it, seems to thrive on the constant shrieking, but you have to wonder how much good it’s doing with the more moderate voters they’ll need to mobilize for an off-year election.

LEFTIST AUTOPHAGY, GRAY LADY DOWN EDITION: SJWs Melt Down Over “Racist” New York Times Chopsticks Photo.

The revolution eats its own – while haggling over the inherent racism of the “wrong” chopsticks placement.


Anyway, if you want minority neighborhoods to have more farmer’s markets, you’re just promoting white privilege, so shut up, racist.

WHEN TAXPAYERS GET TIRED OF FUNDING THIS STUFF, WE’LL BE TOLD IT’S BECAUSE OF “ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM:” Professors claim farmers’ markets cultivate racism: ‘Habits of white people are normalized.’


● Shot:

As part of her Let’s Move campaign, [Michelle Obama] wants to help families make better choices — especially the 23.5 million Americans living in largely urban, low-income areas where access to healthy food can be spotty.

The White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity has identified this challenge of bringing more nutritious, affordable foods to so-called food deserts as one of the key pillars to solving the epidemic.

“We can give people all of the information in the world about healthy eating… but if parents can’t buy the food they need to prepare those meals… if their only options for groceries are in the corner gas station or the local mini mart, then all of that is just talk… and that’s not what Let’s Move is about,” she said.

—“First Lady: Let’s Move Fruits And Veggies To ‘Food Deserts,’” NPR, July 20, 2011.

And what happens if businesses go along with this, and take the risk of installing Whole Foods or farmers’ markets-style venues in higher crime urban areas? As they at the college that gave us the esteemed Senator Blutarsky, you f***ed up; you trusted us. And — unexpectedly! — you’ll be called a racist either way.

● Chaser:

Two professors from San Diego State University claim…that 44 percent of San Diego’s farmers’ markets cater to “households from higher socio-economic backgrounds,” which raises property values and “[displaces] low-income residents and people of color.”

“The most insidious part of this gentrification process is that alternative food initiatives work against the community activists and residents who first mobilized to fight environmental injustices and provide these amenities but have significantly less political and economic clout than developers and real estate professionals,” the academics write.

The men claim that negative externalities of “white habitus” formed at farmers’ markets can be managed through “inclusive steps that balance new initiatives and neighborhood stability to make cities ‘just green enough.’”*

—“Professors claim farmers’ markets cultivate racism: ‘Habits of white people are normalized,’” the Washington Times, yesterday.

* “Just green enough?” I knew Al Gore declared Mission Accomplished on radical environmentalism when he sold off his cable television network to Big Oil five years ago; it’s nice to see his fellow far leftists confirm that.

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: San Diego Teacher Thinks Citizenship Question Is ‘Racist,’ Refuses to Answer.


[Sheila Jackson Lee D-TX], meanwhile, claims she did nothing wrong.

“I asked for nothing exceptional or out of the ordinary and received nothing exceptional or out of the ordinary,” she said in a statement this weekend.

“But in the spirit of this season and out of the sincerity of my heart, if it is perceived that I had anything to do with this, I am kind enough to simply say sorry.”

She’s “kind enough” to “simply” say she’s sorry to the DC teacher she smeared as a racist on the weekend before Christmas:

“Since this was not any fault of mine, the way the individual continued to act appeared to be, upon reflection, because I was an African American woman, seemingly an easy target along with the African American flight attendant who was very, very nice,” Jackson Lee said in the statement. “This saddens me, especially at this time of year given all of the things we have to work on to help people. But in the spirit of this season and out of the sincerity of my heart, if it is perceived that I had anything to do with this, I am kind enough to simply say sorry.”

Simon said Jackson Lee’s statement accused her of racism, adding: “I had no idea who was in my seat when I complained at the gate that my seat had been given to someone else,” she said. “There is no way you can see who is in a seat from inside the terminal.”

Flashback to a 2002 Weekly Standard article on “Sheila Jackson Lee, Limousine Liberal,” which contains multiple examples of her abusing airlines and accusing anyone who doesn’t treat her as a queen (“You don’t understand. I am a queen, and I demand to be treated like a queen.”) as racist:

Continental managers, however, feared reprisal and saw little they could do. “After medicine, airlines are the most heavily regulated industry in the United States,” says a lobbyist for a Texas-based carrier. “Every airline feels they have to kiss up to Congress; they always feel their livelihood is in Congress’s hands.” But in February 1998, things finally came to a head. On a flight home to Houston, Jackson Lee became enraged when flight attendants failed to produce the seafood special she liked. “Don’t you know who I am?” she reportedly thundered. “I’m Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. Where is my seafood meal? I know it was ordered!”

That outburst prompted a phone call to Jackson Lee from Rebecca Cox, vice president of Continental’s government affairs office in Washington and the wife of California Republican Chris Cox. The message? Straighten up and fly right, or don’t fly with us. Cox did not return calls seeking comment, but a member of Jackson Lee’s staff who fielded the call remembered Cox saying, “[Jackson Lee] screamed at the top of her lungs at least a minute. She embarrassed the flight attendants and the passengers in first class. And she embarrassed herself.” Cox then joked, “We have already given her the Delta Airlines schedule.” Jackson Lee got back on board with Continental, but not for long. In May 1999, as Continental flight 1961 prepared to leave Reagan National Airport in Washington, Jackson Lee became flustered when she couldn’t find her purse.

Thinking she had left it in the boarding area, she went back to search for it. Meanwhile, the plane pulled away from the gate. Moments later, her purse was found onboard. According to aviation lobbyists at the time, Jackson Lee demanded that she be let back on the flight. Airline employees explained that FAA rules prohibit planes from returning to the gate once they’ve taxied away, but Jackson Lee was unconvinced. She accused the gate staff of racism and demanded to see their supervisor, who was a black woman. Her purse, meanwhile, was unceremoniously dropped out of the cockpit window and ferried back to her.

A year earlier, at a March 2, 1998, reenactment of the march on Selma, an irate Jackson Lee called her scheduler in D.C. demanding to know why she hadn’t been given a ride to the event by the organizer, as a white colleague had been. According to the aide–who quit after just a month and a half on the job–Jackson Lee shrieked, “You don’t understand. I am a queen, and I demand to be treated like a queen.” It will come as no surprise to learn that Jackson Lee is regarded as one of the most difficult members of Congress for whom to work.

Jackson Lee’s issues involving travel and racism also extend into the final frontier:

During a 1997 visit to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, Jackson Lee, who was then serving on the House Science Committee and on the Subcommittee that oversees U.S. space policy, asked a guide whether the Mars Pathfinder would be able to show an image of “the flag the astronauts planted there before.” When it was subsequently pointed out that the flag to which she was referring was in fact the one that Neil Armstrong had planted on the Moon—not Mars—in 1969, Jackson Lee complained that she was being mocked by bigots. “You thought you could have fun with a black woman member of the Science Committee,” her then-chief-of-staff wrote angrily in a letter to the editor.

How bad have Jackson Lee’s gaffes been over the years? Even the left-leaning Daily Beast has goofed on  her worst moments: The Constitution Is 400 Years Old and More Pearls From Sheila Jackson Lee.

We have the worst political class in American history, to coin an Insta-phrase.

UPDATE: Jean-Marie Simon tweeted last night that “United has NOT apologized to me. On Dec. 23, a low level employee at call center said he was sorry on phone. Voucher I received was United’s idea of compensation for cancelling my flight and given it to Ms. Jackson Lee… SFC + NYP articles claim ‘apology’ from United and $500 as apology wrong. United phone agent apologized, no apology from corporate United. $500 voucher was from exasperated gate agent who originally offered $300 and gave me ultimatum to take the $500 or have plane leave w/o me.”


On ESPN, Jemele Hill, co-host of “SC6,” grew excited. Her previous noteworthy excitements were tweets condemning President Trump as a “white supremacist” who contributes to the oppression of blacks, the second of which led to a brief suspension for defying ESPN’s instructions to cut it out.

Tuesday, Hill was excited for a different reason: ESPN had selected the halftime entertainment for the its broadcast of the national championship football game.

“The powers that be finally got something right — Kendrick Lamar!” she squealed, pumping her arms in delight. “Kendrick Lamar!”

Given Hill’s race-based activism, one logically wonders why she’d so openly favor Lamar, a rapper who has grown fabulously wealthy through lyrics that consistently refer to
black men as “N—-s”.

I’d be glad to provide Hill examples of his lyrical artistry so she can recite them on ESPN. She could start with “Money Trees.’’

That could never happen because ESPN would never allow such a thing, thus she’s spared from exposing her rank hypocrisy.

Or perhaps she can identify the proper context in which African-Americans should be called “N—-s,” and those logical instances when the vulgar degradation of women should be recorded, sold, performed, applauded.

Does Hill know that 12-year-old black kids now effortlessly, reflexively call one another “n—-s”? She’s good with that?

Odd, but not surprising, how it works. ESPN, a sports network, decries racism and sexism from within and beyond, yet eagerly seizes the cross-promotional (perceived) value in embracing such rappers. Still, not one ESPN exec would dare publicly repeat their lyrics.

Why, it’s as if the alt-right is the mirror image of the mainstream American left, or something. How mainstream is Lamar? Obama met with him in the oval office before his last State of the Union Speech, and he performed for Mr. Obama last Fourth of July, despite* Lamar’s lyrics, and the cover of his million-selling album:

A few hours before delivering that State of the Union, President Obama met with rapper Kendrick Lamar. Obama announced that Lamar’s hit “How Much a Dollar Cost” was his favorite song of 2015. The song comes from the album To Pimp a Butterfly; the album cover shows a crowd of young African-American men massed in front of the White House. In celebratory fashion, all are gripping champagne bottles and hundred-dollar bills; in front of them lies the corpse of a white judge, with two Xs drawn over his closed eyes. So why wouldn’t the president’s advisors at least have advised him that such a gratuitous White House sanction might be incongruous with a visual message of racial hatred? Was Obama seeking cultural authenticity, of the sort he seeks by wearing a T-shirt, with his baseball cap on backwards and thumb up?

To play the old “what if” game that is necessary in the bewildering age of Obama: what if President George W. Bush had invited to the White House a controversial country Western singer, known for using the f- and n- words liberally in his music and celebrating attacks on Bureau of Land Management officers?

It takes an Inner Party level of self-imposed amnesia for the left to simultaneously declare Trump a uniquely racist vulgarian, while blocking out their near-total control of pop culture for decades, and the former president’s embrace of some of the worst of it. Perhaps someone should have asked, are we being the baddies here, before going too far.

* I know, I know, I just Fox Butterfield-ed myself there.

RESERVATIONS ARE FOR THE LITTLE PEOPLE: Woman accuses United of giving her seat to Houston’s Sheila Jackson Lee. “A passenger on a flight from Houston to Washington D.C. has accused United Airlines of giving her first-class seat to U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee. D-Houston, and then threatening to remove her from the plane for complaining and snapping a photo of the Houston congresswoman. ‘It was just so completely humiliating,’ said Jean-Marie Simon, a 63-year-old attorney and private school teacher who used 140,000 miles on Dec. 3 to purchase the first-class tickets to take her from Washington D.C. to Guatemala and back home.”

Sheila Jackson Lee’s response is — wait for it, wait for it — that she’s a racist for complaining.

THE LEFT GRAPPLES WITH WHAT TO DO ABOUT ONCE FAVORITE ARTISTS WHO ARE OR WERE VERY DAMAGED SOULS: First up, at Slate, “Does Rotten Apples Toss Out Some Good Ones, Too? The website seeks to sort the movies of bad men from everything else. That’s more fraught than you’d think:”

More than two dozen men with ties to the entertainment industry have been fired, suspended, or otherwise censured in the 10 weeks since the New York Times published its initial exposé of producer Harvey Weinstein. If you’re having trouble keeping up with all the boldface names you should now refile under alleged scum, you’re not alone. In keeping with the rest of the news from this terrible year, the downfalls of accused creeps quickly became a torrent of stomach-churning but easily mix-up-able updates. For moviegoers who wish to avoid films made by or starring sexual malefactors, there should be an effortless way to find out how to watch responsibly.

That, anyway, is the thinking behind Rotten Apples, a searchable database that aims to inform users if a movie involves an actor, screenwriter, director, or producer facing allegations of sexual misbehavior. Enter a movie in the search window, and the site’s left half will deliver a verdict in stark red or green: Rotten Apples or Fresh Apples. “Rotten” results include a link to an article about the pertinent accusations.

And in the book world one blogger asks, “The Book That Made Me a Feminist Was Written by an Abuser. ‘The Mists of Avalon’ changed my life—how do I reconcile that with what I now know about its author?”

By the time I left home for a women’s college in 1989, I’d reread The Mists of Avalon several times. I arrived ready to smash the patriarchy.

And then, in 2014, Moira Greyland, Marion Zimmer Bradley’s daughter, told the world that her mother had sexually abused her and many other children for more than a decade. I didn’t even know how to process this information. I believed Greyland, absolutely, but I just couldn’t make this revelation fit with The Mists of Avalon and what that book meant to me. Bradley was not an author to whom I had a personal attachment. I’d never gotten into anything she’d written besides The Mists of Avalon. Had I been more of a fan, I might have seen the pedophilia threaded through her other work. I might have known that Walter Breen — Bradley’s husband and Greyland’s father — died in prison after being convicted of molesting a child. (Greyland says that there were many, many more victims.) Had I been more of a fan, I might have known that rumors about Bradley and Breen had circulated in the science fiction and fantasy communities for years.

As “Pervnado” extends to more and more of Hollywood, and as more and more past authors are discovered to either have committed real crimes, as Greyland’s parents did, or have simply run afoul of the left’s latest PC censors, there stands a good chance that a fair amount of pop culture history will be tossed into Orwell’s proverbial Memory Hole, as that’s always the left’s first instincts.

It’s much easier for those of us more or less on the right to believe that bad people can great art (including great pop art), as we already know that many of the people who working in Hollywood and the music industry hate our guts — and in many cases, hate the notion of America itself.

Beyond Polanski’s brilliant Chinatown and Woody Allen’s Annie Hall and Manhattan, there’s a bottomless supply of brilliant pop culture created by awful people. In the 1970s, Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas were Marin Marxists who believed the communist North Vietnamese were the good guys during the Vietnam War, and worked to put those themes into their movies, but who’d want to be without Apocalypse Now and the original Stars Wars?  The subtext of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey fits the definition of fascist moviemaking for both Susan Sontag’s 1975 “Fascinating Fascism” article and the chapter on Hollywood in Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism perfectly. It also contains some of the most arresting images captured on celluloid and its production design and special effects techniques paved the way for the Star Wars, Alien and Star Trek movie series. Ayn Rand’s writing in the ’50s and ’60s was fueled by Benzedrine and she had an affair with young acolyte Nathaniel Branden while they were both married to other partners, but was (and is) many a teenager’s gateway drug into libertarianism. In the music world, John Lennon was a nihilistic pro-NVA wife beater, but also wrote some of the Beatles’ finest songs. Led Zeppelin’s terrifying excesses are legendary.

But as I said, this list is endless. As a result of Harvey Weinstein and the rest of the “Pervnado,” the left’s goal of airbrushing the works of artists who led deeply flawed personal lives out of history has followed almost seamlessly after the recent wave of their statue topplers. Back in August, while the left were still in full-on statue smashing mode, in “The Orwellian War on History,” Brendan O’Neill of Spiked wrote:

The history erasers claim they only want to show how fair our societies now are. Rubbish. This isn’t about making the present better, it’s a projection of political correctness into the past. It’s the punishment of historical figures – even good historical figures, such as Jefferson, and good historical events, such as the settlement of Australia – for not sharing our exact modern world view.

And it reeks of PC paternalism. The idea that minority groups can’t cope with seeing statues of dead people who did some dodgy things is an affront to their intelligence and autonomy. It infantil­ises them, even suggesting they will feel physically wounded by history: after all, “there is a violence” to these statues.

It’s disturbingly ironic: this treatment of certain groups as fragile, as needing to have public life sanitised on their behalf in the way a new mum might baby-proof her home, is riddled with some fairly racist assumptions of its own.

One of the great things about public life is that it’s a patchwork of the historical events that made our nations. Take a walk through a city and you’ll see statues of soldiers, politicians, authors, suffragettes and others who shaped our societies. And most of them will have held views or done things we would consider questionable in 2017. So what? The point is they made history, and it’s right for the public sphere to reflect that.

The logic of the Year Zero crew is that we should see only historical figures they approve of (if there are any). They police history with an eye for policing what we citizens can see and by extension think about the societies we live in.

Earlier this month, when Minnesota Public Radio tossed Garrison Keillor’s segments of the Prairie Home Companion down the memory hole Rod Dreher wrote, “If you only chose to partake of art, music, and literature created by morally upstanding persons, you’d quickly come to the end of what’s available. Museums would empty out. Concert halls would fall silent. Bookstores would have to be repurposed as yoga studios, and movie theaters as hipster churches. The unfortunate truth is that bad, or at least deeply flawed, people often make the best art.”

NEWS YOU CAN USE: Here’s Tucker Carlson’s handy list of 100 racist things from 2017. Is your favorite on the list?

The insanity of the identity politics-obsessed left becomes increasingly apparent as you work your way through the list. It’s 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. When I reviewed Mark Lilla’s The Once and Future Liberal back in September, I asked “Can the Left Escape the Identity Politics Trap?” The answer, at a minimum, is not anytime soon.