Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

Baldrick: My mother told me to stand up to homicidal maniacs

Black Adder the 3rd Duel and Duality 1987

One of the most pleasant surprises of this TV season has been the DC series Stargirl a well written comic book series about a character I had never heard of as she was introduced a full 10 years after I closed my comic store.

Over the past 10 weeks or so it’s become a Sunday ritual in the house that my wife gets home from work just before midnight, I get home 30 minutes later and we watch the newest episode which goes live at 11 PM EST each Sunday on the DC network together. It is well acted, well plotted and very well written, likely due to the fact the actual creator of the characters involved is the writer. Furthermore because of the DC multiverse concept (introduced way back in 1961 ) there is complete flexibility as to if a character lives or dies as was amply demonstrated in last week’s show the penultimate episode of this 1st season. (a spoiler from said episode 12 follows)

To set the stage, Injustice Society of America members Sportsmaster (Neil Hopkins) & his wife Tigress (Joy Osmanski) have just failed to killed Stargirl & her family as assigned. So the leader of the ISA Icicle (Neil Jackson) sends the Fiddler (Hinda Kahn) to assist them in a 2nd murder attempt with this result:

Now this scene struck me in several ways. First of all even in normal everyday circumstances it’s rather impolite to go into a couple’s home, insult their daughter and declare them unfit parents, but it’s downright suicidal to do so when:

  1. You know said people are psychopathic killers
  2. You, as the principal of the high school their daughter attends, know that said psychopathic killers have already killed three of your school’s football coaches for disciplining said daughter on the field.
  3. You know they kill for sheer pleasure.

That a highly intelligent professional cold blooded calculating murderer would not see the danger in this and instead presume that because they were all working toward the same master plan about to come to fruition they’d just take being scolded and insulted on a personal family level without complaint, surprised me completely.

I mean, it’s a comic show so you have to suspend disbelief to a degree but C’mon!

And THAT brings us to Antifa and the Democrats.

There seems to be some surprise online that the Democrats who turned up for Senator Cruz’s hearing on ANTIFA were unwilling to criticize them

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

despite testimony like this:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

and this

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Some are surprised, even shocked that Senators are defending people who are either burning down or attempting to burn down federal courthouses and attacking federal officers and police.

I’m not, this is a perfectly rational reaction on their part.

Public stances not withstanding they know they are dealing with homicidal maniacs, who have enlisted useful idiots to commit violence, they also know that said homicidal maniacs & their useful idiots have gone after political allies including the Mayors of Seattle, Portland and Oakland, even to their own homes in order to intimidate them and keep them in line in they deviate even one bit from their desired memes.

Given those facts it’s completely rational that Senators and Governors and Mayors would make it a point to not to say a bad word about the homicidal maniacs and useful idiots of ANTIFA. It makes even more sense when said Senators, Governors and Mayors have been using the same police and law enforcement whose job it would be to protect them from said homicidal maniacs and useful idiots, as punching bags for the last three months or more.

In fact it’s even more rational for MSM reporters to kowtow to the homicidal maniacs and useful idiots of antifa because unlike the Senators Governors and Mayors trying to defund and handcuff law enforcement, they do not have said police protection at their beck and call.

So while their actions might be despicable and dishonorable, they are entirely rational when dealing with such folks. You could ask Principal Bowen’s character from Stargirl about that but, alas she is no longer available for comment.

Note: The final episode of season 1 of Stargirl will be unlocked Sunday at 11 PM EST on the DC Universe livestream site and will be broadcast on air on the CW the following day. If you have an interest in the show this would be an excellent time to binge watch the 1st 12 episodes before the season finale. I suspect you’ll enjoy it.

The left and free speech

Posted: August 4, 2020 by chrisharper in politics
Tags:

By Christopher Harper

Many Americans say they do not talk about politics for fear it might cost them their jobs.

A Cato Institute poll found that 62% of those surveyed believe the current political climate prevents them from making their views public.

These fears cross partisan lines, but Republicans at 77% are by far the most likely to stay quiet.

Leftists stand out, however, as the only political group who feel they can say whatever they want to.

The survey also found that many people, particularly those on the left, think political contributions should affect someone’s employment. Nearly a third, or 31%, support firing a business executive who donates to Donald Trump’s reelection campaign. Support increases to 50% of leftist who support firing executives who personally donate to Trump.

Young Americans are also more likely than older Americans to support punishing people at work for personal donations to Trump. Forty-four percent of Americans under 30 support firing executives if they donate to Trump. That belief falls significantly, or 20%, among those over 55.

The analysts summed it up: “If people feel they cannot discuss these important policy matters, such views will not have an opportunity to be scrutinized, understood, or reformed.”

A recent email from Pearson Higher Ed, a major publisher of academic journals and books, underlined how leftists shout the loudest.

The publisher was pushing a variety of seminars on racism. “Systemic racism has created an unprecedented level of outrage across America and around the globe. People are looking for answers and information about how we got to this point and how to create a more equitable world,” the publisher postulated.

I’m almost certain many of my colleagues will pass along the seminars to their students. If I even questioned the foundation of these beliefs, I would be even more castigated by my colleagues. I just shut up and vote for Trump. Now I know I’m not alone.

The survey was designed and conducted by the Cato Institute in collaboration with YouGov. YouGov collected responses online July 1–6 from a national sample of 2,000 Americans 18 years of age and older. The margin of error for the survey is +/- 2.36 percentage points at a 95% level of confidence. See the full report at https://www.cato.org/publications/survey-reports/poll-62-americans-say-they-have-political-views-theyre-afraid-share

Four years ago when I re-endorsed Donald Trump after the Billy Bush tape dropped I posed this question to Jonah Goldberg:

Update 4: I respect Jonah Goldberg whose point is valid:

Either way, this video is not an aberration. It is not a special circumstance. It’s him. There’s no pivot in him. There’s no “presidential” switch to flip. He’s Donald Trump all the way down.

However given the reality that either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States I ask Jonah this question:

If we concede that Donald Trump’s character is bad, Would it be better for the country to have a President of poor character who will be under intense scrutiny by the press, pols and law enforcement agencies (Trump) or to have a President of poor character who will be given a pass and or defended by the press, the pols and apparently the FBI regardless of what they say or do (Hillary).

I submit and suggest the answer is clearly the former.

Now it’s four years later and on twitter a general question was asked as to why one supports Donald Trump for President. This was my answer:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

However there are others who have a much dimmer opinion of the president & his accomplishment who find themselves in the Trump column this time around for completely different reasons:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

While I have issues with some of the characterizations in this thread the primary point that is being made is rather critical

When it comes to the media/left is has now been amply demonstrated that DaTechGuy’s Laws of media outrage are in full force and no action by a Democrat, by the Democrat Party or even by people who are part of the Democrat base may be critiqued or highlighted if it might reflect badly on the potential return of Democrats to power or the maintenance of said power if it happens. And as Glenn Reynolds pointed out this view is not confined to pols and press:

It’s disappointing to see not just the usual gang of idiots, but also some people who should know better joining the hysteria here. As I said before, we had elections during the Civil War and there’s no need to delay them now. But once again, just because a tweet — or other presidential action — riles up the political class doesn’t make it an impeachable offense. And if our political class had been as dedicated to actually defending decency, decorum and tradition as it is determined to weaponize them against Trump, we wouldn’t have gotten Trump.

Amusingly on Facebook where this was originally posted, one person explicitly agrees with Steve Matthews’ legal argument — except for Trump. Because #OrangeManBad. Rule of law!

Put simply we now know that if the Democrats in general and Joe Biden in particular are given the reins of government, no action they take will be subject to critique by the mainstream media in print or television (except perhaps a 30 second segment at the end of Jake Tappers show to throw us a crumb).

However we can be assured that if Donald Trump is reelected, his words, his deeds, his facial expressions, his companies, their business dealings, his family and even his passing of gas will be scrutinized by this press to a level that will be the envy of the Chinese Totalitarian state (and likely financed by it too).

The bottom line is clear, if you don’t trust government and what to be sure that the press shines a bright light on anything it does, you need to re-elect Donald Trump.

If you however are a relative of a Democrat pol or of a large Democrat donor and want to be sure that you can get rich either off the taxpayer’s dime or via foreign money contributed to you as a favor. Well vote democrat.

Your call people.

By John Ruberry

Last month the Chicago Tribune’s lead columnist, John Kass, penned a column about left-wing billionaire George Soros and his funding of campaigns of Democratic prosecutors such as Cook County’s Kim Foxx–who can rightly be called soft-on-crime. Despite a state of Illinois threshold of $300, Foxx won’t prosecute accused shoplifters unless they steal merchandise worth more than $1,000. Even before this spring’s rioting and looting in Chicago, shoplifting was on the rise.

Criminals appear to be emboldened in Chicago–as the consequences for illegal activities diminish, people believe they can get away with more crimes. Think of it as the opposite of the “broken windows” theory of law enforcement. While I admit it could be a leap to equate Foxx’s permissive attitude on prosecution of crimes to an even more violent Chicago, but shootings and murders for July, 2020 were up dramatically from the previous July. Still I believe Foxx bears some of the responsibility. While the suits in the Chicago Police Department are claiming overall crime is down, I suspect shell game chicanery or something even more troubling. It could be that fewer crimes are being reported because victims believe that it won’t make a difference. The victims know, with minor crimes, Foxx won’t prosecute.

And what about more serious crimes?

In that controversial piece, Kass opined, “And in many of the violent cities, the prosecutors have delivered on their promises not to keep the violent in jail but rather to let them out.”

Kass’ column brought about a fierce backlash by the Chicago Tribune Guild, a union that Kass does not belong to, calling that piece an “odious, anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that billionaire George Soros is a puppet master controlling America’s big cities.”

That column led to a demotion of sorts from Kass. After over twenty years of his column being placed on Page 2, a halcyon spot once occupied by the legendary Mike Royko, Kass’ column has been moved, by the Trib’s editor-in-chief Colin McMahon to the opinion section, in order to, in his words “maintain credibility of news coverage.” That’s not a credible statement as I’m certain there are very few people who see Kass’ work as anything but opinion.

In that column about Soros, Kass did not mention the billionaire’s faith or ethnic origin. I’m going to be more direct. Kass didn’t say in that piece that Soros is Jewish.

On his Daily Herald blog about the Kass battle, Robert Feder, a longtime media reporter, referred to him as the “Chicago Tribune’s white male conservative standard-bearer.”

Whoah. Let me repeat that, the “Chicago Tribune’s white male conservative standard-bearer.”

I remarked on my own blog:

Replace “white” with black and “male” with female. And of course “conservative” with liberal. Do you think if Fraud Feder wrote that about an African-American writer at the Trib who is a woman that he would have gotten away with it?

Of course he wouldn’t have.

Which reminds me of something I read in high school from George Orwell. Not Animal Farm or 1984, but his 1946 essay, Politics and the English Language.

This line stands out from that classic: “The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable.'” Contemporary liberals, and especially leftists, reflexively label their critics as “fascists.”

I’m sure there is a Kass column over the years, none currently come to mind however, where in my opinion he was totally wrong. Any attacks on that theoretical opinion piece from me, correctly, should be on refuting his points with facts, or at least reasoned thoughts. Not, as some people might, retorting that Kass is wrong because he’s a white man, or that he benefits from “white privilege” and “systemic racism.”

Is white becoming, in Orwell’s words, “something not desirable?” Or worse, something that is inherently wrong?

Conveniently, at least for this post, Kass is of Greek descent. Much if not most of classical logic comes from the ancient Greeks. Oh, let’s say Kass is a Filipino-American. I’d still make the same points you’ll see next.

In college I took a logic course–and seriously–it may have held me back in the work force. I guess I’m too logical. There are a number of argumentative fallacies that the ancient Greeks identified, including the “fallacy of origins,” now generally called the “genetic fallacy.”

Here’s what Purdue’s Online Writing Lab offers on this subject:

Genetic Fallacy: This conclusion is based on an argument that the origins of a person, idea, institute, or theory determine its character, nature, or worth. Example:

The Volkswagen Beetle is an evil car because it was originally designed by Hitler’s army.

In this example the author is equating the character of a car with the character of the people who built the car. However, the two are not inherently related.

So, if the Chicago Tribune Guild wished to honestly attack Kass, they should have pointed out where they believe Kass is wrong about Soros and his funding of campaigns of Democratic prosecutors. They didn’t. They responded with another logical fallacy, the ad hominem attack, calling him anti-Semitic.

The Chicago Tribune Guild couldn’t, or was to lazy to, argue with Kass’ Soros column on its merits. Or lack of.

Feder in his blog post deemed it necessary to mention Kass’ race, gender, and political philosophy in explaining the columnist’s demotion.

That path angered me, so much so that for my Marathon Pundit post about Feder’s attack I used this headline, “Leftist Daily Herald blogger Robert Feder calls columnist John Kass ‘Chicago Tribune’s white male conservative standard-bearer.'” Okay, I admit, I don’t know if Feder is really a leftist but such a verbal assault is something leftists do now. Apparently stung, he accused me of “faux outrage” on Twitter.

But the outrage is real.

Using one’s race, faith, lack-of-faith, ethnic background, sexual identity and the like as a means of argumentative attack is something until recently I thought was a relic of a more ignorant era, or the denizen of crude online forums. Or the weapon of drunken barroom rants.

Our society is headed the wrong way. 

And if white people are today’s bogey man tomorrow it may another group. Movements with absolutist philosophies eventually eat their own. See the French Revolution. Or the Russian Revolution.

The “cancel culture” may be coming for you.

Kass is a brave man who is not backing down, as he explained in another column last week.

While Voltaire never said, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” he should have. Because it’s a noble sentiment I believe in. And no one is always right. Yep, not even me. Not John Kass either. No political philosophy has the solution to every problem. We need each other.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.