Author Archives: Dana Pico

Posted on by

Karma comes to Taylor Lorenz!

The First Street Journal has previously reported on the very lovely Taylor Lorenz, who covers technology and online culture for The Washington Post. Miss Lorenz was most famous for her doxing of Chaya Raichik as the creator and proprietor of the Twitter site Libs of TikTok, along with her continual fretting about people not wearing face masks for all eternity.

But, I used the wrong tense above. Miss Lorenz does not cover anything for the Post, but covered her subjects, as in past tense.

Taylor Lorenz leaves Washington Post following her Biden ‘war criminal’ post controversy

Columnist had gone weeks without anything published by the paper, suggesting she was benched over the Instagram post</h4
By Joseph A. Wulfsohn, Fox News | Tuesday, October 1, 2024 | 12:18 PM EDT

Reporter Taylor Lorenz announced she left The Washington Post on Tuesday after being absent for weeks following a viral controversy involving her calling President Biden a “war criminal.”

Lorenz went viral in August after a screenshot obtained by the New York Post’s Jon Levine appeared to show her calling President Biden a “war criminal” in an Instagram post while attending a White House event. Lorenz initially implied the caption was edited by someone else before admitting that she shared the post herself.

Translation: Miss Lorenz knew that she had f(ornicated) up badly, and lied to try to save her job. She knew that the newspaper was supporting Democrats editorially, and she had just posted something which hurt the Democrats chances in the November election. We don’t know that was the concern of the editors, but the credentialed media cannot go around calling the President of the United States a “war criminal” unless it’s in a specific opinion column, or he’s a Republican.

As part of the launch of her User Magazine Substack, she explained “why I’m leaving legacy media,” saying her type of reporting “has become increasingly difficult to do in corporate media.”

Yup!

Further down:

In the viral image shared by Levine, a masked Lorenz was seen taking a selfie with Biden speaking in the background. Included was a caption that read “War criminal” with a frowny face.

Fox News Digital learned the post was made in an Instagram story specifically using the “close friends” feature as indicated by the green star icon, meaning it was not posted publicly and could only have been seen by a select group of Instagram users of her choosing.

Perhaps Miss Lorenz wasn’t quite as good an “online culture” reporter as she believed. Anyone even a quarter-way internet savvy knows that anything you post on the internet has left your control, and can be ferreted out and used by someone else. That she sent it out only to “close friends” tells us that she knew it could be problematic for her, but wasn’t quite smart enough to not send it in the first place.

Miss Lorenz was trying to get Miss Raichik fired from her previous job with her doxing article. I don’t think she’s still doing real estate, but her net worth is now estimated to be $10 million, so being doxed doesn’t seem to have hurt her.

Posted on by

Midnight oil blogging There was a tremendous amount of anti-Semitic propaganda on Twitter while my electricity was out

Burning the midnight oil

I suppose it’s my own fault, because I sometimes can’t resist opening up tweets in which the anti-Semites tell us how the Jooooos really rule the world, that I keep getting more of their bovine feces. The United States is controlled by the Jews, the United Kingdom is controlled by the Jews, all of the Western world is controlled by Jews.

With the 3¼ day power outage, I wound up rereading Herman Wouk’s The Winds of War on my Kindle reader. With its internal light, it was about the only thing I could read in a dark house, unless it was by my single oil lamp.

The Winds of War is a historical fiction novel, with Navy Captain Victor “Pug” Henry serving in various roles, at the time of the subsequent page, from Chapter 22, American Naval attaché to Nazi Germany:

“There’s the live nerve,” (Wolf) Stöller said. “And that’s what I’ve found difficult to convey even to the air marshal, who’s usually so hardheaded. Germans who haven’t been across the water are impossibly provincial about America. I’m sorry to say this goes for the Führer himself. I don’t believe he yet truly grasps the vast power of the American Jews. It’s a vital factor in the war picture.”

“Don’t exaggerate that factor,” (Victor) Henry said. “You fellows tend to, and it’s a form of kidding yourselves.”

“My dear Victor, I’ve been in the United States nine times and I lived for a year in San Francisco. Who’s your Minister of the Treasury? The Jew Morgenthau. Who sits on your highest court, wielding the most influence? The Jew Frankfurter.”

He proceeded to reel off a list of Jewish officials in Washington, stale and boring to Pug from endless repetition in Nazi propaganda; and he made the usual assertion that the Jews had American finance, communications, justice, and even the Presidency in their pockets. Stöller delivered all this calmly and pleasantly. He kept repeating “der Jude, der Jude” without a sneer. There was no glare in his eye, such as Pug had now and then observed when Thoda challenged some vocal anti-Semite. The banker presented his statements as though they were the day’s stock market report.

“To begin with,” Pug replied, a bit wearily, “the Treasury post in our country has little power. It’s a minor political reward. Christians hold all the other cabinet posts. Financial power lies with the banks, the insurance companies, the oil, rail, lumber, shipping, steel, and auto industries, and such. They’re wholly in Christian hands. Always have been.

“Lehman is a banker,” said Dr Knopfmann.

“Yes \, he is. The famous exception.” Pug went on eith his stock answers to anti-Semitism: the all but solid Christian ownership of newspapers, magazines, and publishing houses, the Christian composition of Congress, the cabinet, and the executive branch, the eight Christian judges out of nine on the Supreme Court, the paramount White House influence of a Christian, Harry Hopkins, and all the rest. On the faces of his hearers appeared the curious universal smirk of Germans when discussing Jews: condescending, facetious, and cold, with superior awareness of a very private inside joke.

Stöller said in a kindly tone, “That’s always the Jewish line, you know, how unimportant they are.”

That’s a rather long quote, but I think it important. After six years — at the time set in the novel — of Nazi propaganda, overlaid on Europe’s traditional anti-Semitism. Mr Wouk’s characters very believably accepted what they were being told.

And that’s what I’m seeing from today’s anti-Semitic social media postings. Like Alice, they can believe six impossible things before breakfast.

There’s an old trope that somehow, some way, Jews control everything in the world. If you follow that link, you’ll see plenty of sources on that silliness, and, interestingly enough, many of them predate the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel. The Washington Post, which is owned by Jeff Bezos, who is not Jewish, reported how that myth at least partially motivated an attack on Congregation Beth Israel in Colleyville, Texas.

My copy of Mein Kampf. I don’t own it because I support it, but because I read it.

Adolf Hitler wrote dictated in Mein Kampf:

To what extent the whole existence of this people is based on a continuous lie is shown incomparably by The Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion, so infinitely hated by the Jews. They are based on a forgery, the Frankfurter Zeitung[1]The Frankfurter Zeitung was a Jewish-owned newspaper founded in 1856. It survived until 1943, as Nazi propaganda minister Josef Goebbels found it useful, after the Jewish writers, editors, and … Continue reading moans and screams once every week: the best proof that they are authentic. What many Jews may do unconsciously is here consciously exposed. And that is what matters. It is completely indifferent from what Jewish brains these disclosures originate; the important thing is that with positively terrifying certainty they reveal the nature and activity of the Jewish people and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims.[2]Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1971), 307–308.

While even the Nazis did not believe that the Protocols were anything but a fake, they used them extensively in their propaganda.

But now we’ve come full circle. The apologists for Hamas and Hezbollah, and the supporters of the ‘Palestinians’, have once again been spewing the line that the evil Jews control everything, manipulating President Biden, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and pretty much all of the world’s leaders who are not attacking Israel.

How much of this is being swallowed by the pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah, pro-‘Palestinian’ supporters? I honestly don’t know, but I see this stuff all the time by accused groomer Richard Medhurst, a Syrian-British pro-Palestinian propagandist, and several Twitter — I refuse to call it 𝕏 — accounts, many of which are probably bots — and though some try to differentiate between Zionists and Jews in general, a lot of the protesters just use the word Jew instead.

One final point, paraphrased from The Winds of War, and I cannot remember where in the book I saw it, but it’s in there: while the Nazis and other anti-Semites[3]The Nazis had tremendous help from ordinary Europeans, not just Germans, but the public in all of the lands they conquered, in finding and rounding up the Jews for shipment to the concentration … Continue reading claimed that the Jews secretly ruled the world, when it came to the Holocaust, the Jews didn’t have enough power to even save themselves.

References

References
↑1 The Frankfurter Zeitung was a Jewish-owned newspaper founded in 1856. It survived until 1943, as Nazi propaganda minister Josef Goebbels found it useful, after the Jewish writers, editors, and publisher were forced out.
↑2 Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1971), 307–308.
↑3 The Nazis had tremendous help from ordinary Europeans, not just Germans, but the public in all of the lands they conquered, in finding and rounding up the Jews for shipment to the concentration camps. The Nazis could do it al by themselves.
Posted on by

John Kerry lets us know that the Democrats have not given up on the idea of regulating speech

My daily diary informed me that September 30th is Canada’s National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, and my immediate thought was: whose truth?

John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee, Secretary of State during the last half of the Obama Administration, and recently President Biden’s Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, said:

“But, look, if people go to only one source, and the source they go to is sick and has an agenda, and they’re putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as a major block to the ability to be able to hammer it out of existence,” Kerry said.

“What we need is to win the ground, win the right to govern by hopefully winning enough votes that you’re free to be able to implement change,” he added, while acknowledging that different people have other visions for change.

It was 2004, and CBS News, certainly one of our traditional media sources, tried to torpedo the younger President Bush’s re-election campaign, and if it weren’t for two blogs, Powerline and Little Green Footballs — the latter of which has gone off the deep end whacko — spotting that the documents used to buttress the story were forged, and were able to publish that on the internet, it is at least possible that Mr Bush would have lost the election.

Thus, you can see why Mr Kerry doesn’t really like Freedom of Speech, at least not the kind of speech which doesn’t support Democrats.

It’s not just the 80-year-old Mr Kerry. President Biden wanted to set up a Ministry of Truth Disinformation Governance Board in the Department of Fatherland Homeland Security, to be run by the highly partisan Nina Jankowicz, but that effort was first paused and then dropped due to the fiery reaction it received. Naturally, The Washington Post’s Taylor Lorenz waxed wroth!

Jankowicz’s experience is a prime example of how the right-wing Internet apparatus operates, where far-right influencers attempt to identify a target, present a narrative and then repeat mischaracterizations across social media and websites with the aim of discrediting and attacking anyone who seeks to challenge them. It also shows what happens when institutions, when confronted with these attacks, don’t respond effectively.

Those familiar with the board’s inner workings, including DHS employees and Capitol Hill staffers, along with experts on disinformation, say Jankowicz was set up to fail by an administration that was unsure of its messaging and unprepared to counteract a coordinated online campaign against her.

The lovely Miss Lorenz told us everything we needed to know about how Miss Jankowicz was expected to run her Ministry of Truth Disinformation Governance Board: she expected it to block “far-right influencers” and “the “right-wing Internet apparatus.” The left were aghast when the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, bought Twitter — sorry, I absolutely refuse to call it 𝕏 — because Mr Musk wants it to be a free speech site, not one which censors some — mostly conservative — arguments.

Mr Kerry’s comments at the World Economic Forum, that private jet set gathering of the hoitiest and the toitiest in Davos, Switzerland to talk about Other People not being able to use fossil fuels, tell us one thing: today’s Democrats have not given up on the idea that they can somehow circumvent the First Amendment and regulate people’s speech. They are so invested in telling people what they want them to hear, and not wanting them to hear anything else, that they actually do thing that regulation of speech, to control ‘disinformation,’ of course, is actually the freedom of speech. And if Kamala Harris Emhoff wins in November, we’ll simply see further efforts to regulate speech.

Posted on by

What would ‘Palestine’ be like if Hamas and Hezbollah won? If they were under the kind of government that Hamas and Hezbollah would set up if they could, 'progressives' would be utterly astonished to find that they'd be the first ones lined up against the wall.

Sir Ahmed Salman Rushdie is, according to his Wikipedia biography:

an Indian-born British-American novelist. His work often combines magic realism with historical fiction and primarily deals with connections, disruptions, and migrations between Eastern and Western civilizations, typically set on the Indian subcontinent. Rushdie’s second novel, Midnight’s Children (1981), won the Booker Prize in 1981 and was deemed to be “the best novel of all winners” on two occasions, marking the 25th and the 40th anniversary of the prize.

After his fourth novel, The Satanic Verses (1988), Rushdie became the subject of several assassination attempts and death threats, including a fatwa calling for his death issued by (Ayatollah) Ruhollah Khomeini, the supreme leader of Iran. In total, 20 countries banned the book. Numerous killings and bombings have been carried out by extremists who cite the book as motivation, sparking a debate about censorship and religiously motivated violence. In 2022, a man stabbed Rushdie after rushing onto the stage where the novelist was scheduled to deliver a lecture at the Chautauqua Institution in Chautauqua, New York.

Simply put, Mr Rushdie is personally familiar with Islamist governments, and what they do, but, not to worry, a Swedish PhD candidate, @AcademiskC — she does not give us her real name — thinks that she knows more about the Middle East than Mr Rushdie. She tweeted:

I have not one atom of respect for this guy. Not one atom. I am trying very hard to remain polite. There is simply no intelligentsia left. No one big voice. Nobody. Also a complete indictment of academia.

“AkademiskC”, from her Twitter profile.

Here we have a novelist under a death sentence in absentia, one issued by a hard-line Islamist government, telling us that an Islamic government in ‘Palestine,'[1]I always put ‘Palestine’ and ‘Palestinians’ in quotation marks, to note that it is not a real place, and they are not a real people separate from the Arabs. … Continue reading should the world be so unfortunate as to see the ‘Palestinians’ succeed in their goal of conquering Israel and driving the Jews — at least the ones they don’t kill — into the sea would not be ‘progressive’ in any sense of the word as Western liberals see it.

The Taliban are, of course, the most extreme of the Islamist governments. They force women into almost completely obscuring burkas, ban girls from being educated, destroyed non-Islamic art in Afghanistan, and basically imposed their version of shari’a, Islamic law, on the country. Homosexual activity can be, and is, punished, sometimes with death. That Iran publicly and routinely hangs homosexuals has been extensively documented and photographed.

At least Da’ish’s method of executing homosexuals seems to kill them more quickly.

The religious leaders in Iran, which has been funding both Hezbollah and Hamas, are only slightly less restrictive in their laws.

Of course, the Taliban and Iranian religious leaders are not Hamas and Hezbollah. The obvious question is: what have Hamas promised? The Wilson Center stated:

Since its creation in December 1987, Hamas has invoked militant interpretations of Islam to spearhead a Sunni extremist movement committed to destroying Israel. Hamas distanced itself from the longstanding Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)—an umbrella organization for disparate Palestinian factions that ranged from Marxist to secular nationalists—by propagating resistance in the religious context of jihad, or a holy struggle and martyrdom. “Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes,” Hamas said in its first statement in the late 1980s. Predominantly Shiite Iran has armed, trained and funded Hamas since the late 1980s largely due to its opposition to Israel and Islamic ideology.

The United States Department of State noted:

Hamas, a U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organization with de facto control of Gaza, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and other extremist groups disseminated anti-Semitic materials and advocated violence through traditional and social media channels, as well as during rallies and other events. Hamas also continued to enforce restrictions on Gaza’s population based on its interpretation of Islam and sharia.

When people tell us who they are, perhaps we ought to believe them!

So, what would an Hamas/Hezbollah government over the Holy Land be like?

Israel is officially Jewish, but in my all-too-short visit to Jerusalem, I was able to visit and attend Mass at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, built over the site where Jesus was crucified and buried. The Church has existed since the conversion of Constantine to Christianity, and the subsequently ordered investigations and excavations of Christian sites. Following Muslim soldiers gaining control of Jerusalem, in 1009, the fanatical Fatimid caliph al-Hakim ordered the destruction of the church. However, subsequent Islamic rulers, as the city changed hands between the Muslims, then the Crusaders, to the Muslims again, the Islamic leadership allowed the Church in Jerusalem to continue.

Small mosque on the Via Dolorosa. Photo by D R Pico, and may be freely used, with proper attribution.

Today’s Jewish leadership allow and support the existence of Christian holy sites in Jerusalem. While there have been a few, and I stress the word “few,” protests by Jews in Jerusalem concerning Christian sites, the government have supported the freedom of religion.

It isn’t too far down the Via Dolorosa in which my daughter and I visited a small mosque. The Jewish government allowed that to operate as well.

I visited the Church of the Flagellation, supposedly where Jesus was scourged before his crucifixion, the Garden of Gethsemane, the (supposed) birthplace of Mary, and other sites. I had wanted to visit Bethlehem, but my daughter, an Army Reservist, was under orders not to enter the ‘Palestinian’ areas. While this was eleven months before the October 7th massacres, I understood completely.

I have to wonder: if the Islamists conquered the Holy Land, would they continue to allow the existence of Christian sites, or would they go all-out Taliban, and destroy them? When Jews attempted to visit Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus, some Muslims attacked them.

On two occasions, Israeli security forces prevented attempts to detonate explosive devices when Jewish worshipers visited the Tomb. In June and October (2019), unknown persons also threw explosive devices at Rachel’s Tomb from the West Bank.

One of the extreme idiocies we have seen in the anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas demonstrations in the United States following the October 7th massacres has been a few demonstrators holding “Queers for Palestine” posters. What would life be like for homosexuals and the ‘transgendered’ in a ‘Palestine’ completely controlled by the Islamists?

I don’t know AkademiskC, and the odds I will ever meet her are vanishingly small. I’ve never been to Sweden, and if we ever do visit Europe again, that country isn’t high on our list of places to go. Sweden produced global warming climate change and pro-Hamas activist Greta Thunberg, so great wisdom seems to be in short supply there.

Still, as a PhD candidate, I have to assume that AkademiskC knows a little bit more than Miss Thunberg. Surely she’s noticed the increased crime in her country due to immigration from Third World countries. Yet she is utterly appalled that someone would dare to suggest that an independent ‘Palestine’ would somehow not be an enlightened and ‘progressive’ place.

Our Swedish doctoral candidate complained, “There is simply no intelligentsia left.” Mirriam-Webster defines “intelligentsia” as “intellectuals who form an artistic, social, or political vanguard or elite,” but I find it difficult to accept the idea that “intellectuals” or “intelligentsia” can accurately define people like AkademiskC, and so many on the left, who cannot see just what and who Hamas and Hezbollah really are. It is as though the “intelligentsia” are completely absorbed by the silliness of “intersectionality“:

Intersectionality is an analytical framework for understanding how individuals’ various social and political identities result in unique combinations of discrimination and privilege. Intersectionality identifies multiple factors of advantage and disadvantage.[1] Examples of these factors include gender, caste, sex, race, ethnicity, class, sexuality, religion, disability, weight, species[2] and physical appearance.[3] These intersecting and overlapping social identities may be both empowering and oppressing.[4][5] However, little good-quality quantitative research has been done to support or undermine the theory of intersectionality.[6]

Intersectionality broadens the scope of the first and second waves of feminism, which largely focused on the experiences of women who were white, middle-class and cisgender,[7] to include the different experiences of women of color, poor women, immigrant women, and other groups. Intersectional feminism aims to separate itself from white feminism by acknowledging women’s differing experiences and identities.

This is intellectual vacuity, empty and lacking content or serious ideas. It doesn’t take a doctoral candidate to see that the interests of different groups, even if the left find them to be oppressed in some fashion, are not all the same. The desires of the ‘Palestinians’ and Islamists are not at all like those of homosexuals or ‘progressives’ or feminists, and the Muslims have been perfectly willing to tell everyone this. The ‘progressives’ have simply been unwilling to believe the evidence of their own eyes and ears.

If they were under the kind of government that Hamas and Hezbollah would set up if they could, ‘progressives’ would be utterly astonished to find that they’d be the first ones lined up against the wall to be shot.

References

References
↑1 I always put ‘Palestine’ and ‘Palestinians’ in quotation marks, to note that it is not a real place, and they are not a real people separate from the Arabs. ‘Palestinians’ are simply Arabs who live in the areas conquered by Israel in 1967.
Posted on by

Democrats talk a good game, but when they have had the power, their policies have not worked! 3½ years of President Biden have produced record homelessness

Philadelphia’s last Republican Mayor, Bernard Samuel, left office on January 7, 1952, when Harry Truman was still President of the United States, and George VI was still King of England. In the 21½ years since January 3, 2003, Republicans have been Governors of Pennsylvania for just four years, with Tom Corbett leaving office on January 20, 2015. And since January 20, 2009, a Republican has held the White House for only four years. So, if homelessness is rising in the City of Brotherly Love, it isn’t exactly the GOP’s fault.

Homelessness in Philadelphia increases for third consecutive year

The number of homeless Philadelphians exceeded 5,000 for the first time since 2020.

by Layla A. Jones | Monday, September 23, 2024 | 3:09 PM EDT

The number of homeless Philadelphians increased for the third consecutive year, according to the annual point-in-time homelessness count conducted by the Office of Homeless Services.

The count was conducted in January and includes unsheltered people and those living in emergency shelters, safe haven and transitional housing. In 2024, the total number of homeless people reached 5,191, up from 4,725 the previous year — a 10% increase.

Mandated by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, the annual point-in-time count is a snapshot of homelessness on one day in January.

Philadelphia’s count calls on volunteers, armed with clipboards, socks, and gloves, to spread across the city interviewing and cataloging people who are homeless.

How is it, if Democratic Party policies work, that homelessness is increasing in Philly? The Keystone State has had Democrats as Governors, and the city is a one-party, Democratic town. Mr Biden won Pennsylvania by 80,555 votes in 2020, 3,458,229 (50.01%) to 3,377674 (48.84%), but only because he carried Philadelphia 603,790 (81.44%) to 132,740 (17.90%), a margin of 471,050 votes. That’s how Democratic Philadelphia is![1]Without Philly, President Trump would have carried the Keystone State 3,244,935 (52.56%) to 2,854,439 (46.23%). Whatever the Democrats wanted to do in Philadelphia, they had the votes and the officeholders to do.

High – but declining – poverty, the opioid epidemic and a lack of affordable housing are to blame for the rising numbers of unsheltered people, according to a summary of the city’s winter count.

“Poverty remains a factor, irrespective of poverty trends/trajectories,” said Sherylle Linton Jones, spokesperson for the Office of Homeless Services.

More than 20% of homeless people had either been evicted or displaced for another reason in the preceding 90 days, showing how impactful an issue affordable housing is in Philadelphia.

If poverty is declining, why would homelessness increase?

The drug crisis is certainly a factor, as former Mayor Jim Kenney concentrated on hugely important things, like an additional tax on Big Gulps from Seven/Eleven, but, other than that, had pretty much checked out of doing his job, and the Kensington section of the city had become not just a local laughing stock, but a nationally and even internationally known drug wasteland.

Let’s tell the truth here: Democrats talk a good game, but when they have power, their policies have not worked!

Philadelphia’s rising homelessness comes after the office overspent its budget by almost $15 million, pressured by a mandate to keep people sheltered.

The Democrats tell you that they are going to do something, but even with having overspent their budgets, they don’t get the job done!

Philadelphia’s numbers are in lockstep with a nationwide trend of rising homelessness. In 2023, homelessness grew 12% to the highest level ever recorded. More than an estimated 650,000 people are homeless in the United States, the largest number since the country started tracking the annual point-in-time survey in 2007. The rising homelessness crisis led the conservative-leaning Supreme Court to rule that municipalities could ban sleeping in public places, effectively outlawing unsheltered homelessness.

It hasn’t been just Philly. Under President Joe Biden, and the Administration’s oh-so-sympathetic attitude, homelessness nationwide has still soared to record levels. Vice President Kamala Harris Emhoff has been telling us that she’s going to solve the problem by building 3,000,000 new, ‘affordable’ homes, but whatever her ideas to do that are, she never presented it or persuaded President Biden to do it. Once again, the Democrats are talking a big game, but they’ll fail miserably.

Mrs Emhoff is, as the Democrats always say they are, big on labor unions, but if her ‘plan’ includes pushing union labor on building those three million new homes, then she will have automatically made them more expensive, and less ‘affordable.’

Millions of people will vote Democratic this November, but those people will be voting for promises that cannot and will not be kept.

References

References
↑1 Without Philly, President Trump would have carried the Keystone State 3,244,935 (52.56%) to 2,854,439 (46.23%).
Posted on by

USA Today sports columnist is incredibly butthurt that two top athletes didn’t speak out the way she wanted

For whom Patrick Mahomes and Caitlyn Clark intend to vote has absolutely no bearing on for whom I intend to vote, but sports columnist Nancy Armour apparently believes that it’s their duty to open their secret ballots to me.

Caitlin Clark, Patrick Mahomes’ bland answers evoke Michael Jordan era of athlete activism

by Nancy Armour | September 13, 2024

Not every athlete can be LeBron James or Megan Rapinoe.

Remember Michael Jordan’s comment about Republicans buying shoes? There’s a long history of athletes putting as much space as possible between themselves and controversy, and what Caitlin Clark and Patrick Mahomes did this week was no different.

Asked about the upcoming presidential election Wednesday and who they might be supporting, both Clark and Mahomes dodged the question and instead found a safe space in encouraging people to register and to vote.

“It’s more than nothing, but it doesn’t put them on the front lines of the discussion,” said David Niven, an associate professor of political science at the University of Cincinnati who teaches a course on sports and politics.

Perhaps, just perhaps, Mr Mahomes and Miss Clark were not thinking about Mr James or Miss Rapinoe; perhaps they were thinking about Colin Kaepernick, and the activism that persuaded NFL owners not to sign him.

Mr James did himself no favors with his political statements, which only exacerbated people looking at him as an opportunist and a flop artist in the NBA. Miss Rapinoe’s political activism didn’t serve her or women’s soccer very well, either. The fact that Mr Mahomes plays in deeply conservative Missouri, and Miss Clark in very red Indiana might have contributed to their decisions, and Miss Clark, who has led the WNBA from near-obscurity to sold-out arenas when and where she plays, makes her hugely valuable to the league. Miss Armour was saying that it’s a shame the athletes weren’t openly supporting Kamala Harris Emhoff.

Clark’s Instagram account is now flooded with nasty comments from supposed fans who are upset she liked Taylor Swift’s post endorsing Kamala Harris. Mahomes is getting backlash both from people who want him to disassociate himself from his wife’s (presumed) political beliefs and people angry he didn’t defend them.

Perhaps Mr Mahomes disagrees with Mrs Mahomes, who ‘liked’ an Instagram post from former President Trump, and perhaps he doesn’t. That’s really kind of a ‘who cares’ thing as far as I am concerned.

We have a long tradition of a secret ballot in the United States, and while a lot of people, including me, are willing to tell others how they will vote — I will vote the straight sensible ticket, meaning Republican, over the blithering idiots, the Democrats — a lot of other people are not.

The Democrats have even tried to exploit the secret ballot, with comments that women do not have to tell their husbands or boyfriends how they voted, and that they can even lie and support Mrs Emhoff, when the men in their lives vote more sensibly. And when it comes to the presidential contest, it almost doesn’t matter: President Trump will carry the states in which Mr Mahomes and Miss Clark live, and it will not be close.

Outkick noted that Miss Armour did not support Tom Brady speaking out on politics, because Mr Brady supported Mr Trump. It seems as though Miss Armour is really only interested in athletes speaking out on politics if they happen to support the politicians she likes. Miss Armour was similarly upset when Kansas City Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker spoke in favor of conventional, Catholic morals at a Catholic college. She just retweeted a post in which Mr Butker missed a kick, which said, “Harrison Butker is, once again, a little too far right.”

And she has taken the far-left position that ‘transgender women’ — meaning males who have deluded themselves into thinking that they are girls — should be able to compete in women’s sports. Neither her Wikipedia profile nor her Twitter bio say anything about her ever having played sports.

Miss Armour has, as we all do, the absolute freedom of speech and of the press, and she can say whatever she wishes. But the freedom of speech and of the press carries with it the freedom not to say something, and the columnist is just wholly upset that a couple of well-known athletes didn’t say what she wanted them to say.

Posted on by

Democrisy! The party of more and more gun control are now buying themselves more guns.

We noted, 2½ years ago, that, in the aftermath of its bloodiest year on record — 562 homicides in 2021 — even Philadelphia Magazine’s Victor Fiorillo, who is so dramatically opposed to Fox 29 News Steve Keeley actually reporting on crime, told us about Philadelphians applying for concealed carry permits at a greatly increased rate.

Now it seems that significant numbers of the American left, who have been so vigorous in their demands to infringe upon our rights to keep and bear arms, have decided to keep and bear arms themselves. From The Wall Street Journal:

The Most Surprising New Gun Owners Are U.S. Liberals

After decades of decline, gun ownership is rising among Democrats

by Cameron McWhirter and Zusha Elinson | Thursday, September 19, 2024 | 9:22 PM EDT

Michael Ciemnoczolowski, a lifelong Democrat, supports stricter gun laws and contributes to Sandy Hook Promise, a gun-violence-prevention nonprofit.

But this summer, the liquor store clerk in Iowa City, Iowa, for the first time in his life bought a gun. Apprehension about street crime, armed right-wing extremists, and “whatever else the world could possibly throw at us,” drove his decision.

“Domestic politics have grown increasingly acrimonious,” says Ciemnoczolowski, 43.

This is kind of laughable. “(A)rmed right-wing extremists”? It wasn’t “right-wing extremists” who have tried to assassinate former President Donald Trump recently. It wasn’t “right-wing extremists” who shot up schools in Nashville or other places. And it certainly hasn’t been “right-wing extremists” who have been responsible for the “street crime” we’ve seen in Chicago, Philadelphia, and our other major cities.

American gun culture has long been dominated by conservative, white men. Now, in a marked change, a burgeoning number of liberals are buying firearms, according to surveys and fast-growing gun groups drawing minorities and progressives.

“It’s a group of people who five years ago would never have considered buying a gun,” says Jennifer Hubbert, an anthropology professor at Lewis & Clark College in Portland, Ore., who has researched liberal gun owners.

Historically, it wasn’t unusual for Democrats to own guns, with many more of them living in rural areas. Also, hunting was much more popular. But starting in the early ’90s, gun ownership among Democrats dropped significantly. Increasingly divisive political battles over the role of firearms in American society led the Democratic Party to become an advocate for gun regulation. Republicans became the party of gun rights.

Now, today’s Democrats are rediscovering guns.

There follow several paragraphs giving liberals’ reasons for increasing their firearm ownership percentages, up from an all-time low of 22.5% in 2010, to 29.2% in 2022, the last year one which information was available. That’s a 29.78% increase, and since this deals with percentages, it isn’t an increase due to population growth. The number was only 25.4% just the previous year, a 16.14% increase in just one year, the year after the murderous carnage of Joe Biden’s first year in office.

The Democrats interviewed for this article brought up all sorts of reasons, many of them political, which the Journal’s authors diligently reported, but 2021 and 2022 were years of Donald Trump losing voter fraud cases in courts, and the January 6th protesters being tried and jailed. The credentialed media tried drumming up fears about conservatives, but, for the very greatest part, the violence of 2021 and 2022 was perpetrated from the criminal classes in our major cities.

Four decades ago, Democratic gun owners were typically white men, including auto or steel union workers who grew up hunting.

That line is absolutely rotten reporting, something very unusual in the Journal. Four decades ago, Democrats in the South were far more rural than they are now. Four decades ago, Democrats controlled state legislatures and gubernatorial seats in most of the South, rather than being so heavily packed into urban areas as they are today. The Journal’s comparison of those numbers wasn’t even as close as apples and oranges, but more like apples and turnips.

Of course, today’s Democrats in general are not very much like the Democrats of “four decades ago.” The Democrats of forty years ago would have laughed at the notion of homosexual marriage, were pretty much anti-war as a holdover from Vietnam, were complete free speech supporters, and would have hauled off to the insane asylums anyone who held that a guy could simply declare himself to be a girl and compete in women’s sports.  The only Democrats who could have been called #woke forty years ago were the ones who had gotten up with the alarm clock to actually go to work. The urban Democrats of the 1980s who didn’t own firearms were the ones who lived in safer neighborhoods.

The Democrats of forty years ago were seeing the weakening of the Soviet Union, and calling that a good thing, rather than electing socialists. They remembered the ‘Palestinians’ as terrorists who attacked Israelis at the 1972 Olympic games in Munich, rather than as somehow selfless martyrs and resistance fighters in Gaza.

Today we have the same party which has been screaming for more and more gun control buying more and more guns for themselves. They want to be able to defend themselves, not from evil reich-wing gangs, but criminals, criminals created and enabled by the Democrats own policy choices, but they have to mouth silliness about Republicans and conservatives to justify their own hypocrisy

 

Posted on by

In the end, hiding from your enemies just doesn’t work The way to fight anti-Semitism is not to let the anti-Semites win!

In February of 1896, long before the Nazis, just a couple of months before Adolf Hitler’s 7th birthday, Theoror Herzl’s Der Judenstaat, The Jewish State, was published in Leipzig and Vienna by M. Breitenstein’s Verlags-Buchhandlung. Mr Herzl saw the persecution Jews were facing in Europe, where they had lived ever since their expulsion from the Holy Land by the Romans beginning in 70 AD. Jews, he believed, needed to live apart from the mostly Christian populations of Europe.

But even living apart, while in Europe, didn’t prove particularly safe. While the Jüdischer Wohnbezirk in Warschau, the Warsaw ghetto, was not formally established until November of 1940 by the Nazi occupation authorities, it contained those heavily Jewish neighborhoods which existed before the outbreak of World War II in Europe.

Now there’s this, from The Wall Street Journal:

Maybe It’s Time for Jewish Self-Segregation

The self-protective impulse is a healthy response to a wave of antisemitism.

By Joseph Epstein | Thursday, September 19, 2024 | 5:33 PM EDT

The recent and rampant rise in antisemitism is, to put it gently, disheartening. One finds it everywhere, much of it passing under the flag of anti-Zionism, criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and presumably sympathy for the Palestinians. Saddest of all is that antisemitism has cropped up so exuberantly among students in our elite universities. Apart from decrying it, calling it out for what it is, what are Jews to do to protect themselves from this recurring nightmare? Perhaps a jaunt down memory lane will help.

For those who don’t have my too-expensive subscription to the Journal, the OpEd can be accessed for free here.

I was 5 when I was first aware not only that I was Jewish but that being Jewish had consequences. My father asked me what I had learned in school one day, and I told him the poem “Eenie, Meenie, Miney, Moe,” which I began to recite. When I came to the n-word—before “tiger” had been substituted as a more appropriate alternative—my father angrily stopped me and told me I was never to use the word again, especially since our people, like the Negroes (as they were called then), had been long persecuted and called all sorts of terrible names.

A few years later, returning with my father from a Bing Crosby movie, “Going My Way,” I asked if we might have a Christmas tree. “No,” he said. Why not? “Because you are Jewish.” Case closed. Not long after that, my mother pointed out various Chicago neighborhoods and suburbs—Sauganash, Kenilworth—that were “restricted,” which meant no Jews allowed. Not only did being Jewish carry responsibilities; it also apparently meant being despised, at least in certain quarters.

After several more paragraphs, in which Joseph Epstein, the author, describes his life growing up, and in college, in mostly Jewish enclaves, we get to the meat of the column:

No one saw the current wave of antisemitism coming. Who thought Hamas would find supporters at Harvard, Columbia, the University of California, Los Angeles, and elsewhere? The country had known of this virus before, but it came not from crowds of thousands but from prominent people. Henry Ford was openly antisemitic. No Jew in those days drove his cars. Father Charles Coughlin, on his radio show in the 1930s, attacked what he termed “international bankers.” But those were largely isolated, the present strain more widespread.

Is self-chosen segregation among Jews a good thing? In one sense, it feels like taking a step backward toward a less open society. Yet when the politics of a country swing too far in either direction, antisemitism is almost certain to come in its train. The swing today is unmistakably and strongly leftist, and self-segregation strikes me as the first step in combating the attacks on Jews that attend it.

I am not Jewish, and I live in an area with very few, if any Jews, so perhaps I just don’t understand, but this seems to me to be an advocacy of surrender, and not even an effective one. If American Jews self-segregate, into small, mostly Jewish communities, are they not simply gathering in a smaller and more confined target area for any violently antiSemitic ‘mostly peaceful protests’? We have already seen ‘protests’ at synagogues and Hillel Centers on campuses. Self-segregation, self-isolation doesn’t work when those who hate you still know where you congregate and live.

Israel is, of course, Mr Herzl’s dream, even if he never saw it; he died in 1904, at a very young 44 years of age, though he is now buried in Mt Herzl, on the west side of Jerusalem. But look at the situation today. Israel is the self-segregation of millions of Jews in the modern world, yet we see not just the Arabs — who can always be counted on for hate — but millions of people reared in Western civilization nations who don’t want the Jews to have even that small nation.

Self-segregation counts on the tolerance of others to allow your segregated communities, and we aren’t seeing much of that tolerance by the supporters of Hamas and the ‘Palestinians.’

In the end, hiding from your enemies just doesn’t work.

Posted on by

#Hezbollah’s pagers go boom, #AntiSemites wax wroth

Israel launched one of the greatest covert action attacks ever yesterday, with some kind of operation that targeted the pagers that Hezbollah were using in Lebanon. Israel had the pager numbers of the Hezbollah operatives, including an Iranian representative to the group in Beirut, and sent a group page than caused the pagers to explode. As nearly as I can see, the only problem with the operation is that the explosions weren’t lethal enough!

Hezbollah had turned to pagers for communications because the Israel Defense Force, IDF, had been successful in tracking Hezbollah’s cell phones, and targeting drones to zero in and whack the terrorists. At least in theory, the pagers couldn’t be tracked.

This was a brilliant operation, because it targeted Hezbollah members specifically, as opposed to having to bomb particular buildings or streets to strike at the terrorists, thus including possibly significant ‘collateral’ casualties. There were a few, few! collateral injuries in this operation; that was unavoidable. Nevertheless, FrumTikTok — who is not Libs of TikTok! — found and tweeted out the frantic response of a pretty but nevertheless silly redhead — and redheads always get a break from me! — to the operation.

Click on the image and you can listen to her entire rant.

She was horrified, horrified, that Israel was able to strike Hezbollah so precisely. Would she have preferred that the IDF would have blown up entire blocks?

Also see: William Teach, “Funny: Hezbollah Pagers Explode“

No, of course not. Rather, she is horrified that Israel is fighting back at all against the terrorist group, who have been launching missiles and rockets against northern Israel. Nowhere in her rant did I see any mention that Hezbollah had been attacking Israel, or any condemnation of the terrorists’ actions. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would have greatly preferred that his country not have to deal with other Islamist enemies while the operation in Gaza was continuing, but Israel is not going to just sit back and take potentially lethal attacks, from anyone.

The odious Edward Snowden, who has had nothing to say about the Islamists attacking Israel, said that this precision attack was “terrorism.”

I will admit to being amused that some of these pagers detonated in ways that could have emasculated some of the terrorists. 🙂 They fully deserve it.