Our Slimy Overlords

Mark my words:  Any police official who refers to citizens as “sheep” (and, perforce, to police as “Sheepdogs” or “Lions”) needs to be escorted from public life, sans badge, gun, and power, with extreme prejudice.

Like Broward County sheriff Scott Israel – whose office didn’t have time to investigate nearly forty contacts with Nikolas Cruz, but has had time to act like…

…well, a Democrat pol in office:

Israel had been a Republican but ran for office as a Democrat. He was first elected sheriff in 2012, then re-elected in 2016. According to the Sun Sentinel:

The outreach workers, who mainly attend community events, are in addition to political activists and others Israel hired into community affairs roles, writing and designing printed pieces about the agency, and sharing it on social media. The employee log shows six hired into community affairs roles, their salaries totaling $388,729.

Israel’s opponents say he’s built a publicly funded political machine, paying back supporters with jobs and using them to keep him in office. They say the money could be better spent, particularly after the sheriff complained about not having enough funding to secure the county courthouse, where a murder suspect recently escaped.

Sound like the priorities in a city rhyming with “Every schmiberal city in the schmunited shmates” to anyone but me?

Oh, yeah – and this next bit?

Asked about the allegations, Israel responded, “What have I done differently than Don Shula or Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King, Ghandi?”

He also said, “Lions don’t care about the opinions of sheep.” That’s a paraphrase of a quote from the Game of Thrones character Tywin Lannister, a villainous public administrator known for promoting his family’s interests ahead of the government’s or the people’s.

Sheep.

That’s what he thinks of citizens.  Not unlike way too many cops.

It’s time for some changes in Broward County.

Appropriation

“Aliza Worthington” describes herself as “Brooklyn-bred, Baltimore by choice, music snob, history nerd, family-obsessed, friend-dependent, amateur glassblower, passable dancer, & since age 40, a writer”

She may have had a point until she hit that last clause.

Ms. Worthington – a honky – writes a piece in the ever-more-loathsome “Medium” entitled “Black Panther” Is Not For Us, White People“.

I’m gonna stop just short of telling white people NOT to see it. To be clear, I hope this movie makes A BAZILLION GAFLILLION SCHMATRILLION dollars opening weekend, and wins every single award possible. Speaking to my fellow white people, though, can we please consider letting Black people have this joy without us ruining it for them with our presence?

We have ruined, and continue to ruin so much for Black folx.[That’s right. Folx.  She is that dumb – Ed] Yes, often just by inserting ourselves where they are rightfully trying to enjoy their greatness in peace, and without our white nonsense.

Ms. Worthington:   do black “folx” (#VomitInMouth) need your help defending their culture?

I’m sure they’ll rise as one and offer their “thanx”.

Or, if you get tickets, and you notice it’s sold out, and some Black folx are outside bummed they weren’t able to get tickets, give your tickets to them and go to Applebee’s instead.

How very, very twee.

It just has to be tough, being both a honky and ˆ”authentic”.   Well done.

Ms. Worthington:  I’m going to exercise that greatest “white privilege” (I choose to call it “freedom”, and invite everyone of all races to partake in it) and go wherever I damn well want, do what I want, and mock your appropriation of the voice of American blacks.  They don’t need your help.

This is Modern “Feminism”

Former state representative Phyllis Kahn, commenting on Minnesota public radio’s upcoming pledge week:

I, myself, have chosen to remember how Garrison Keillor treated…

… Well, everybody. By all accounts, Keillor was obsequious to those he saw as his “superiors” – presidents, governors (provided they were Democrats) and stars – mildly ingratiating to peers who, in his opinion, could help him, and rude, dismissive and arrogant to those he saw as “below” him. And the legends about him as an employer should follow him into the next life, if there is cosmic justice.

It’s not hard to imagine that Phyllis Kahn believes there is one set of rules for everyone else, and one for the likes of her and Garrison Keillor; she’s the one that used her political clout to Jimmy the Minneapolis city code to ptrvent De La Salle high school from putting up lights at it’s football stadium – to avoid harsh and her nighttime mellow.

Dilatory

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

The IRS has apologized for treating Conservative groups differently from Liberal groups.

It’s not enough.  The IRS under the Obama Administration intentionally engaged in viewpoint discrimination based on political affiliation.  That’s the most fundamental of all First Amendment violations, and it was done by agents of the government while performing their official duties.  That’s a violation of 42 United States Code 1983 and entitles the aggrieved person to damages plus attorney’s fees for bringing the action.

Who’s the aggrieved person?  Mitt Romney in specific and the nation in general.  What are the damages?  Trillions.

Campaign Finance law says an individual can only donate so much to a political campaign but a non-profit corporation set up to “educate” the public can spend more and, if the corporation qualifies under Section 501(c)3 of the tax code, donations are tax-deductible although the corporation’s activities must be limited to retain the deduction.   Set up a dozen such corporations, raise millions of dollars, spend it on advertising to “educate” the public and thereby influence the voters.

When the IRS subjected Conservative groups to more rigorous scrutiny than Liberal groups before awarding 501(c)3 status, the IRS deprived Conservative groups of a meaningful opportunity to raise funds to get out their message, to educate the public on their side of the issues, to inform the voters of the Conservative alternative.  It deprived Conservatives of political speech at the most crucial time – right before the election.  This is banana-republic voter suppression and Obama’s IRS completely got away with it.  Nobody was fired.  Nobody was jailed.  Nobody cares.

Pretend the IRS had done it to groups organized by Blacks, or Muslims, and imagine the outrage.  An apology years later, from a different administration, wouldn’t be good enough for them.  It’s not good enough for me.

Joe Doakes

The only groups the Feds have been more dilatory about apologizing to have been slaves and Indians.

Which should tell you something.

Mom Knows Best

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

When kids grew in the 1960’s, Mom ran the household.  She decided when you had to get up, whether you had to make your bed, what kind of shampoo you used in the shower, what was cooked for meals, what clothes you wore, how much makeup you could wear, how long you could grow your hair . . . and as a kid, you were expected to shut up and do it.

Mom was the adult and you were just a kid, therefore she knew better than you and whatever she decided was for your own good, whether you understood it or not. You never got to make any of your own decisions.  At best, you might get an allowance but even then, your entertainment choices were regulated.

Same thing at school.  Class subjects, length of class, rules of behavior, what to eat, what to wear . . . all determined by your “betters” on your behalf.

Living under Liberalism is like being a permanent 12 year old.  I resented it then, and I resent it now.

Joe Doakes

Years ago – when I was still sorting out the details of my political worldview – a very left-of-center acquaintance described society as “like a big family – with mom and dad watching out for the kids”.

And then I realized – while I had some problems with some conservatives, I could never, ever be a “progressive”.

The Hollers Of Fresno

The most impoverished state in the union?  Gotta be West Virginia, or Mississippi.  Maybe Alabama or Arkansas. .

Right?

Wrong.  It’s California.  On the way to spending itself into the poorhouse, California has helped create a huge impoverished underclass untouched by the glitz of Hollywood and the sheen of Silicon Valley.

And the story should sound familiar to anyone from Minneapolis or Saint Paul:

Apparently content with futile poverty policies, Sacramento lawmakers can turn their attention to what historian Victor Davis Hanson aptly describes as a fixation on “remaking the world.” The political class wants to build a costly and needless high-speed rail system; talks of secession from a United States presided over by Donald Trump; hired former attorney general Eric H. Holder Jr. to “resist” Trump’s agenda; enacted the first state-level cap-and-trade regime; established California as a “sanctuary state” for illegal immigrants; banned plastic bags, threatening the jobs of thousands of workers involved in their manufacture; and is consumed by its dedication to “California values.” All this only reinforces the rest of America’s perception of an out-of-touch Left Coast, to the disservice of millions of Californians whose values are more traditional, including many of the state’s poor residents.

With a permanent majority in the state Senate and the Assembly, a prolonged dominance in the executive branch and a weak opposition, California Democrats have long been free to indulge blue-state ideology while paying little or no political price. The state’s poverty problem is unlikely to improve while policymakers remain unwilling to unleash the engines of economic prosperity that drove California to its golden years.

When you have uncontested one party rule upheld by legions of voters dependent on the gravy train, you can get away with keeping those legions in the dumps while you virtue-signal your merry way toward your pension.

 

“It Takes An Elite Education To Be This Stupid”

Failed former Minneapolis mayor Betsy Hodges has left the US, dodging the opprobrium from progressives outraged over what her mismanagement of Minneapolis did not only to the city, but to the reputation of American progressivism.

“It’s not completely justice, but it’s a start” said Ramona Beel-Zebab, spokeswoman for The Association Of Progressive Associations”.

When last heard Hodges … was… was…

Oh, I can’t keep a straight face.

No, Betsy Hodges isn’t running from her legacy.  And good heavens, no, progs aren’t gut-checking their movement over the misery it’s caused.

No, they’re making it part of the next generation’s playbook:

The Harvard Institute of Politics announced Betsy Hodges will be among its 2018 resident fellows.

Her study group will focus on racial equality, policing and local governance.

Some of you may be asking – which half of this post is the parody?

Betsy Hodges on Racial Equality?

Betsy Hodges on Policing?

Progressivism is about making poverty, racial division and inequity permanent bloody shirts to wave in society’s face.

Being Evil

Last year, Google’s collective (heh) culture of Urban Progressive Privilege-sotted virtue-signaling intolerance fell onto Google engineer James Damore for the high crime of out that Google, ironically, has a relentlessly PC, virtue-signaling-focused corporate culture.  Damore was summarily fired.

This past week, Damore and his team  filed their lawsuit

Damore has now answered Google with a legal broadside, and it’s extraordinary. Most people don’t have time to read his entire 181-page complaint, but those who do will find a comprehensive argument that Google’s corporate culture encourages, sanctions, and facilitates an extraordinary amount of abuse against conservative white males.

Artists Conception of a Google staff meeting:

 

And he has the receipts. Much of the complaint consists of screen shots of internal Google communications and postings on internal Google message boards that would constitute strong evidence of hostile-environment race-and-gender harassment if the the races and genders were reversed. For example, “Googlers” (that’s what employees call themselves, using Google’s silly corporate language) relentlessly enforce a so-called “Googley” culture where employees blacklist conservatives (blocking them from in-house communications), actually boo white-male hires, and openly discuss committing acts of violence against political opponents. The “punch a Nazi” debate is alive and well at Google, and the definition of “Nazi” is extraordinarily broad. In one posting, an employee proposes a “moratorium on hiring white cis heterosexual abled men who aren’t abuse survivors.” In another, an employee advertises a workshop on “healing from toxic whiteness.” Another post mocks “white fragility.” The examples go on and on, for page after page. Damore also alleges (and again, provides screenshots of emails and other communications to support his claims) that managers actively attacked conservative employees, encouraged punitive actions against dissenters, and even awarded “peer bonuses” for speech attacking conservatives.

Google is a private business?  Sure – they’ve got every right to run things any way they want.   But we’ve seen what mindless monocultures have brought to most of our major cities; what do you think it’ll do to a company?

Googlers may have special coding skills or may fit seamlessly in the company’s Googley culture, but it’s now plain that much of their discourse represents a special kind of pettiness, stupidity, and intolerance. It’s often fact-free, insulting, and narrow-minded. In other words, a Silicon Valley monoculture produces exactly the kind of discourse produced by monocultures everywhere. While there are certainly kind, courteous, and civil progressives at Google, the existence of the monoculture also enables the worst sorts of behavior.

Read the whole thing.

A Sign You’ve Solved All The Serious Crises

Dogs at Los Angeles’ animal shelters may  be going vegan:

The idea was proposed by Commissioner Roger Wolfson, a Hollywood screenwriter who cited research that he contended shows vegan diets “eliminate” many health problems in dogs, which are omnivores. But he said rethinking the dogs’ meals is about far more sweeping matters — the environmental effect of a meat industry that produces the main ingredients in lots of dog food and the ethics of feeding animals to animals.

“We have to embrace the fact that the raising and killing of animals for food purposes must only be done if we have absolutely no other choice,” Wolfson said at the meeting, according to a recording published on a county website. “This is about the long-term survival of every man, woman and child in this room, and all of the people in our lives.”

While “progressives” are all about “science” when it comes to smooching Bill Nye’s hindquarters or browbeating fundamentalists, it’d seem they’re swimming against the scientific current here…:

The city’s chief veterinarian, Jeremy Prupas, was not convinced. In a report to the commission, he recommended rejecting the proposal, saying that it could deprive dogs of sufficient protein, calcium and phosphorus and that it could be inadequate for injured, pregnant or lactating pups. Prupas said he’d consulted three clinical nutritionists at veterinary medical schools, one shelter medicine specialist and a veterinary toxicologist who works with a pet food company. None endorsed vegan dog diets, he testified.

Oh, yeah – and vegan dog food, not unlike vegan human food, costs four times as much as the regular stuff.

Which is all fine, if you’re just playing “government dress-up” with other peoples’ money.

Which is another way of saying “California”.

Although if it passes in LA, look for Alondra Cano to propose it in short order in Minneapolis.

Boca Chica And The DFL’s Intellectual And Political Cleansing

Boca Chica, on Saint Paul’s West Side, has been a neighborhood fixture for at least five decades and counting.

I’ve been there many times; I’ve taken my family there more times than I can possibly remember. It’s a pillar of the West Side community, and it knows it:

Boca Chica was named by my father, Guillermo, after a small town on the Gulf of Mexico where he spent many memorable times. “Boca Chica”, translated, means “little mouth of the river”. Today, Boca Chica has grown substantially and is rated “one of the best Mexican restaurants in the Twin Cities,” according to the Minneapolis-St. Paul Magazine’s March 2006 issue.

At Boca Chica Mexican Restaurante, we have a desire to contribute to our community’s cultural heritage by preserving in our beautiful painted murals the history and the essence of the Mexican people. These murals, painted by Rigel from Merida Yucatan, cover the walls in all three of our dining rooms. You can relax and enjoy comfortable dining in the Aztec room, the El Grito room, or the El Cortijo room.

I’ve also attended GOP political events there.

No more.  The Fourth District GOP was planning an event on January 10, a week from tonight, at Boca Chica.  According to the chair of the CD4 GOP, no more:

Yesterday I received notification from the Boca Chica Restaurant that they cancelled our Turn Minnesota Red CD 4 2018 Kick Off Event, which was scheduled for Jan. 10, 2018. Needless to say, I was upset. Apparently the Boca Chica Restaurant does not want to have Republican groups or organizations to have events at their restaurant. As Chairman of CD 4, CD 4 will not attempt to set any more events at the Boca Chica Restaurant.

The restaurant explained to a GOP figure of latino descent from the neighborhood that the restaurant had been the subject of “social media pressure” – although a quick investigation shows no facebook or twitter posts with Boca Chica and any GOP organizations.

My suspicion:  it’s DFLers from the neighborhood, carrying out “intellectual and political cleansing”.  They want to drive the GOP underground in places they control, figuratively and, perhaps, literally.

This is life in Democrat country.

Perhaps if we asked them to bake us a wedding cake?

Car Neutrality

SCENE:  Dayton, Ohio – 1904.  A group of protesters – young activists from Snofe Lakes, California – chant slogans in front of the Leach and Bitwell Auto Company; “Keep The Roads Democratic!”, “What do we want?  Road Neutrality.  When do we want it?  Now!” and “Cars are a Public Utility”.   After a few moments, Arthur LIBRELLE climbs up on the soapbox.  

LIBRELLE:  What we seek is highway neutrality.   We demand that the government treat cars and roads as the public utility they truly are.   That way, in thirty years, your children will be able to buy a car like this (LIBRELLE points to a 1904  Leach and Bitwell roadster – a two seater with a hand-crank starter that is basically a glorified go-kart with a two cylinder engine and a couple of chairs which lists at $5,000 – which is about $200,000 2017 dollars) – and their children, and their children’s children, as long as California is the capitol fo the horseless carriage industry.  Nobody will be able, using just more money, to buy a better car!

(Hezekiah MERG chimes in):  But if you treat the budding auto industry like a utility, there’ll be no impetus for someone like, say, Henry Ford or Louis Chevrolet, to respond to the market demand and build a cars that, before long, will be every big as good as the specimen you see here, for  a fraction of the price.

LIBRELLE:  (Scoffing as the young people from Snofe Lakes laugh uproariously)  Oh, it is to laugh!  The idea that people from Detroit will ever build cars, or that technology will ever surpass what we see in front of us!   No, indeed; let us regulate cars and roads like utilities, that they may ever be as successful as the crown jewel of Los Angeles’s transportation system, our streetcars!

(The crowd erupts)_.

Cell Neutrality

SCENE:  Walll Street, – 1983.  A group of protesters – young activists from Slough Fnakes, Vermont – chant slogans in front of the Motorola headquasrters building, wielding protest signs; “Keep Cell Phones Democratic!”, “What do we want?  Cell Neutrality.  When do we want it?  Now!” and “Car Phones are a Public Utility”.   After a few moments, Ashton LIBRELLE climbs up on the soapbox.  

LIBRELLE:  What we seek is car phone neutrality.   We demand that the government treat car phones and suitcase phones as the public utility they truly are.   That way, in thirty years, your children will be able to buy a mobile phone like this (LIBRELLE holds up a 1984 Motoirola cell phone – the size of at World War II walkie talkie, that cost $10,000 in 2017 dollars plus $1,000 a month and $4 a minute for talk times) – and their children, and their children’s children, as long as Motorola remains unchallenged atop the car phone industry.  Nobody will be able, using just more money, to buy a better phone!

(Hank MERG chimes in):  But if you treat the budding cellular communiations industry like a utility, there’ll be no impetus for someone like, say, Steve Jobs or Victor Droid, to respond to the market demand and build device that, before long, will not only do everything the phone your holding does thousands of times better, but do it for about one percent of the inllation adjusted cost.  Indeed, in 24 years, I predict that non-profits will be giving away phones that are millions of times more powerful per dollar, and criminals will buy them to use once and throw away!.

LIBRELLE:  (Scoffing as the young people fromSlough Fnakes laugh uproariously)  Oh, it is to laugh!  The idea that phones will be a commodity, like Pet Rocks, or that technology will ever surpass what we see in front of us!   No, indeed; let us regulate car and suitcase phones like utilities, that they may ever be as successful as the public education system!

(The crowd erupts)_.

On The One Hand…

…the bureaucracy – any bureaucracy – runs by rules of its own.  Those rules usually have  more to do with sustaining bureaucracy itself than to solving whatever problem or administering whatever service that bureaucracy is supposed to be doing.

On the other?  Read past the bureaucratese in this report and it appears that the Minneapolis Police Department has been shaving a lot of corners on psychological testing of its new recruits.

Does this have anything to do with, among other things, the Damond shooting?  Bureaucratic checkbox-checkers running amok?

Maybe a little bit of both?

Ripped From The Fictional Headlines

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Scene:  a cluttered office, a fat, balding man chewing a cigar, reading a script and scowling at it.  A young man steps into the doorway and raps on the door, three times, quickly.

Writer:  Boss, I’ve got a great idea for a new show.  It’s a political thriller, got action, intrigue, it’s great.

Boss:  Yeah?  Siddown and lay it out for me.

Boss tosses the script he was reading onto his desk and leans back in his chair, studying the young man.  Young man sits down, butt on the edge of the seat, and leans forward, speaking eagerly

Writer:  okay, there’s the guy, see?  And he works for the FBI.  He’s a true patriot, he hates the way the country is going and he wants to help a good candidate get elected.  He makes a donation like everybody in the office, but he wants to do more.  All the sudden, he finds himself assigned to investigate his favorite candidate for breaking the law.  But he doesn’t want to do it, see?  But he has to, see?  So there’s dramatic tension.

Boss: yeah, but the law is the law.  What’s he gonna do?

Writer:  that’s the cool part.  He interviews the candidate but he “forgets” to put her under oath.  So none of her answers can be used against her, right?  And there’s a suspicious death tied to the charges but he knows this candidate has a long trail of suspicious deaths and shady dealings so he’s afraid she might be involved with this one, too.  So he doesn’t want to investigate that, see?  But he’s torn about it, see, because maybe she really is as crooked as the rest of them.  But maybe she’s not, and besides, her opponent is a real jerk.  So he calls the death a “robbery gone bad” and when his boss is going to make a press announcement saying the candidate broke the law, our guy changes it to say she did NOT break the law.

Boss: wait, why wouldn’t the boss notice the change?

Writer:  the boss isn’t a cop, he’s a political hack, a time-serving moron.  So he goes along with the charade and the candidate gets away with the crime and stays in the election.

Boss: okay, weak, but we can work with it.

Writer: wait, it gets better!  His candidate loses the election.

Boss: what the hell?  How’s that help?  The show’s over.

Writer: no, no, it’s just getting started.  The candidate was supposed to win, see?  All the polls said so. All the experts said so.  She was so far ahead, she didn’t even campaign the last week, the election was in the bag.  She booked a hall and ordered fireworks and had her victory speech written and when she lost, it was stunning.  The talking heads on tv were stunned.  The losing candidate was drunk two days, couldn’t give a concession speech.  Total disaster.  And meanwhile, the smug jerk who won the election is all over Twitter rubbing it in, offering her five cents on the dollar for the fireworks she doesn’t need anymore.

Boss: yeah, so?  Sounds like a depressing show.  Nobody wants to watch that.

Writer:  Yeah, yeah, but our guy, remember him?  He’s in the FBI.  They see all kinds of wacko stuff, all kinds of nuts and goofballs with conspiracy theories.  So he’s devastated that his gal lost and the jerk won and he’s sitting at his desk moping when he glances at this file on his desk.  Some kook claims the jerk was in cahoots with the Russians to help him steal the election and he stayed in a Russian hotel where a team of hookers gave him a golden shower right on the hotel bed.

Boss: whoa, whoa, we can’t put that stuff on television.  Not in prime time.

Writer: okay, so maybe we don’t show it on screen

Boss: but maybe a special episode on cable?  Pay per view?  Hmmmm.

Writer: yeah, yeah!  Like that.  And anyway, so our guy, he sees this folder and he knows it’s bullshit but he thinks “If only the public knew what a jerk that guy is.”  Just then his boss walks by and says “I’m headed to brief the President-Elect, anything new I should know?” And all the sudden, on impulse, our guy hands his boss the folder and says “You might want to warn him this stuff is going around, so he doesn’t get blind-sided.”  The boss, being a dope, doesn’t realize it’s a set-up, he thinks our guy is being all noble and professional, so the boss goes right along.  But one of the long-term staff people in the President’s briefing sees the dossier is political dynamite and leaks it to his buddies in the press.  Ka-boom, huge political outrage, our guy’s losing candidate gets cheered up, the president-elect looks like an idiot, our guy is grinning like crazy.

Boss: and then?

Writer:  and then things get interesting.  The losing candidate’s political party seizes on the Russian Collusion angle and demands an investigation.  The new Attorney General is a another political appointee, not used to how the game is played in the bureaucracy, so he recuses himself.

Boss: excuses himself?

Writer: no, recuses.  He steps aside and lets the long-term staffers handle it.  And they all hate the new President.  So the staffers convince the new President the only way to clear his name is to appoint a special investigator.  And they recommend their old boss, who they assure him is a straight shooter, which he is – straight in your back.  But the new President doesn’t know that, see, so the new President goes along with it.

Boss: inside baseball.  boring.

Writer: no, wait!  The special investigator hates the new President, too.  And he hires a team of assistants to help him, all of them hate the new President.  And here’s the best part – he decides that for his top assistant on the team, he needs the guy who knows the most about the collusion.  He needs the guy who discovered the folder.  He needs OUR GUY!  Our guy is now the top assistant on the team investigating the new President.

Boss:  okay, more interesting.  Keep going

Writer:  so our guy is only part of the investigation, he can’t go after the President directly.  But he remembers that during the campaign, his team used a little “creative phrasing” to convince a judge to let them wiretap some people in the jerk’s campaign.  And one of those people is now the new President’s aide.  Our guy drops by the aide’s office to chat and just happens to ask some questions about one of the wiretapped conversations.  He doesn’t tell the aide he’s under investigation, the aide doesn’t have a lawyer present, the conversation isn’t recorded, but our guy goes back to the office and dummies up some notes in the file as to what our guy claims the aide said.

Boss:  so?

Writer: so our guy walks into the special investigator’s office and says “Hey, the President’s aide lied to me.  Here’s what he said on the wiretap and here’s what he told me in person.  He’s a liar.  We can prosecute him for lying and maybe get him to roll over on his boss, testify against the President.”  So the special prosecutor is liking that and ready to run with it but our guy screws up.  See, he’s married but he’s also having an affair with an FBI lawyer – that’s the love interest and we can get some steamy scenes out of that, too – and our guy sends his lover some texts bragging about his scam.  But somehow the texts leak

Boss: how?

Writer: I’m working on that.  But anyway, the texts leak and the special investigator finds out our guy is bent so his testimony is worthless,  but the special investigator really hates the President so he quietly reassigns our guy out of the way for a bit while he tries to finesse the aide into pleading guilty so he can get something to use against the President.

Boss: wait – what happened to our guy?  I thought this show was about him?

Writer: he’s reassigned to Human Resources to lay low until it blows over.  The special investigator temporarily becomes the star of the show.  It’s like when the main star is pregnant so the co-star gets a few episodes, you know?

Boss: yeah, okay.  Then what?

Writer: well, that’s as far as I’ve gotten.  But it’s great, right?  It’s got everything – sex, crime, politics, drama . . . so when do we start shooting?

Boss;  I gotta hand it to ya, kid, I really do.  Ya got a terrific imagination.  But this stuff, it’s too much.  It’s over the top.  One guy at the center of a conspiracy to take down the President?  Nobody would ever believe it.  And what the hell kind of name is Strzok?  Fuggedaboutit, kid.  Get the hell out of my office.

End scene

Joe Doakes

It’s only fiction if you ignore the real world.

Since We’re Talking About Harassment

Al Franken resigned so that the full weight of the Democrat noise machine can turn its attention to attacking Roy Moore – thereby returning the narrative to “The Republican War On Women”.

Speaking of which – has there ever been a better Berg’s Seventh Law violation than “The War On Women”?

Anyway – this past few months, our society’s been focused incessantly on the various grades of “Sexual Harassment” – the use of un-consented flirting, “blue” conversation, touching and more aggressive sexual contact, especially that which takes place in the context of a power disparity.    Whether it’s feeling entitled to grab a little “no go zone” anatomy without consent, to trading sex for advancement, to using the resources of the state you govern to silence people who complain about what you do, and everything in between, the genera consensus is “It’s bad”.

So our society’s been lingering for a few months on every possible permutation of sexual harassment, and how society deals with it (“due process”?  “Always believe women!”?  “Always believe women, unless they’re accusing men who are key votes for abortion rights legislation”?), I think it’s time to look at another version.

On The Plantation:  “Progressivism” heaps especial scorn on apostates – Afro-Americans, Latinos, Asians and women wno leave the Progressive plantation.

And no, the right doesn’t do the same thing.    Have you ever heard a conservative rip on, say, Paul Thissen or Tom Bakk for “betraying middle aged white guys” [1] by not being a conservative?   No.  And you never will.

But you do hear mainstream “progressives” tear into black, Latino, asian and female conservatives for, I kid you not, “betraying” their race and gender.  [2]

And if any of them run for office?  They turn psychotic (which brings us to Berg’s Eight Law).

In particular, I’ve talked with a number of female conservatives who’ve related a similar pattern to me; they’ve thought about running for office, or for higher office – but demurred…

…because they knew the Democrat smear machine was going to do in terms of splashing their private life, current, past and long-past, in public.

So let’s get this straight:  to “Progressive” “feminists”, “slut-shaming” women who have had more than one partner in their lives, or who’ve gone out in public dressed as someone other than Hester Prynne, is completely unacceptable –  unless one has:

  • Accused a Democrat politician of some sort of impropriety, in which it will be used to discredit you
  • Run for office as a non-Democrat, in which case it will be used to assassinate your character.

Which, put another way, is using sex to preserve disparate power.


[1] Their narrative about conservatives and conservatism.  Not mine.

[2] Conservatism is never, ever about identity.  Anyone who says it is is driven by narrative, not fact.

Baited, Switched

A long time ago, in a beautiful but cold place far far away, a communist dictator built a colosseum.  Being committed to the populist flim-flam most totalitarians use to get help in seizing power, he named it “The People’s Stadium” – although “the people” only got to use it with the permission of the dictator’s cronies.

And the dictator built a train – “The Peoples’ Train” – to bring people from the miserable, decaying, crime-sodden cities to The People’s Stadium.

The dictator and his cronies planned a massive rally to celebrate their power and perspicacity; the entire world’s media would be there to see the dictator’s work.

And the dictator worried: while he put on a slick facade for the foreign press, some of the locals were unruly, and parts o the city were falling apart.

So the dictator took steps to make sure The People wouldn’t screw up The People’s  Event at the People’s Stadium before the eyes of the world.  First, he barred The Hoi Polloi from the Peoples’ Train, to make sure they’d never encounter foreign visitors.

And then, to take no chances, he deployed his Army in the People’s City, to make sure the locals stayed in line.

Minneapolis officials are calling on Gov. Mark Dayton to mobilize the state National Guard for the Super Bowl, amid questions about whether the city’s police force has enough officers to effectively patrol neighborhoods and handle other demands.

Even with dozens of departments across the state pledging to send officers to help with security, Mayor Betsy Hodges and mayor-elect Jacob Frey wrote in a letter on Tuesday that the city’s police “cannot by themselves meet of all the safety and security needs of the 10 days of Super Bowl LII while maintaining public-safety operations for the entire city.”

When I wrote my book Trulbert:  A Comic Novella ab out the End of the World as We Know It, I wrote the scene in which a thinly disguised Roger Goodell-type NFL commissioner exacted concessions out of Minneapolis’ dictator, Myron Ilktost, to be as over the top as I could imagine; a complete NFL takeover of all civic resources, free transportation, prostitutes, whatever the NFL wanted.  And when I went back and edited and re-wrote, I massaged it to make it even more over-the-top.   I was satisfied that real life could never imitate my fiction.

Kudos, Roger Gooddell and Mark Dayton.  You’ve proven me wrong.

Whenever I Need A Little Pick-Me-Up…

With the departure of Fast Eddie Schultz from the (American) national media, Cenk Uygur has taken sole possession of the role of dumbest person in American public life.

And every once in a while, when I need a little pick-me-up, I re-roll this clip of his election-night journey from entitled, Urban-Progressive-Privilege-sodden, illiterate profane smugness to prehensile, Urban-Progressive-Privilege-sodden, profane rage.

Everything You Need To Know About Today’s Left…

…or at least its’ “progressive” wing, was predicted 38 years ago:

Don’t believe me? Watch Pete eat Repeat.

(And at the risk of sounding ungracious, I have to say that watching “Pantsuit Nation” – a group of entitled, Urban Progressive Privilege-sodden Hillary supporters – squirting tears after Trump’s election was, alone, enough to make this non-Trump-fan smile a big, broad smile).

Dear progs:  if you wanna eat your own, I’ve got some vegan, gluten free salt you can have for a modest price.

This Is What $1.4 Billion Of Government Work Gets You

It used to be that when you waited for the Green Line train, a little billboard on the platform told you how many minutes away the next train was.

Today?

The time is nice, if you have a schedule and the trains are on time (which you don’t and they’re not).

The track number?  There’s one track going in that direction.

But along with the news that mere citizens will be barred from the trains on Super Bowl week, I suspect it’s just another way of telling the peasants “be happy we grant you this much largesse, peasant! Be grateful!”

People Ask Me…

…”Mitch, why on earth did you write the character Avery Librelle?”

To which I respond “You mean, why did I create a ditzy, morally-flatlined person who seems to live in a world all hi…er, he…er, their own when it comes to the effects “progressive” policy have on real people?”

And my questioner responds “Yes!  Exactly!”

And I answer “Because it’s not even close to fictional”.

These are the people who claim to be non-violent – but not only tacitly support “Anti”-Fa, but ponied up a million dollars to defend a former terrorist who’d become a Highland Park liberal with impeccable credentials.

These are the people who say out of one corner of their mouth they worship science (especially that dreamy Neil DeGrasse Tyson) but reject everything evolution has wrought in regard to, to pick one example, gender roles.

And they are the ones who wrap themselves in feminism, up to and including the notion of scrapping due process when a woman accuses a man of any level of sexual harassment, abuse or assault…

…but only the wrong men.  Not the men that give us the legislation we like, or say the things we agree with.

On the other hand, Avery Librelle would have scoffed at the Strib’s letters to the editor about Garrison Keillor as being “too over the top”.

Selected quotelets about Keillor:  “Tears came to my eyes as I awoke Thursday morning, still partly in a wonderful dream in which I was going to an “A Prairie Home Companion” show. Garrison Keillor and a Walter Cronkite-type character were in the front seat of our carriage and we were in the back….They had unique takes on the world today, and past — and wisdom, hope and jokes to offer for the present and the future. Then, in real-word time, we discussed how incredibly sad we were, and my tears continued”.

“I’m convinced that in his professional life he was pure, mostly. That is all we can ask of anyone.”

“I think the knee-jerk response in this case is really over the top. Keillor really is the shyest guy in the room. I do not believe he ever knowingly committed any impropriety. This is becoming French Revolution stuff — just a single comment and it’s “off with his head!””

“The Star Tribune should step up and recognize that all mistakes have gradation — the kid who steals a Snickers and the bank robber are neither morally nor criminally equal. ”

“There is a significant cultural context to this issue. Keillor’s artistic creations added an important element to this state’s identity. So the steps MPR has taken not only diminish Keillor’s reputation, they also undercut what we believe to be good about Minnesota.”

True, he touched a woman in a place that isn’t her soul, and doing that wasn’t appropriate. But what he did isn’t fire-worthy. He’s apologized to her. We all have our foibles.”

Minnesota liberals?  I didn’t invent Avery Librelle.  You did.

Zero Sum Freedom

Honolulu orders gun owners with medical marijuana prescriptions to turn in their guns:

Gun-owning cannabis patients in Honolulu, Hawaii, aren’t feeling like they’re living in paradise right about now. After all, many recently got a letter from the Honolulu Police Department demanding they either transfer their firearms or turn them over to law enforcement.

“The Honolulu Police Department has sent letters to local medical marijuana patients ordering them to “voluntarily surrender” their firearms because of their MMJ status.

The letters, signed by Honolulu Police Chief Susan Ballard, inform patients that they have 30 days upon receipt of the letter to transfer ownership or turn in their firearms and ammunition to the Honolulu Police.”

Honolulu being a one-party town, what do you think is going to happen?

Oh, yeah – the Feds are saying the same thing.

Toxic Eunuchism

#NotMe

#NeverDidNeverWill

And #RealMenNeitherHarassNorAcceptGuiltByAssociation

And, for those who insist, #QQQQ.

I mean, as long as we’re communicating via the medium of the hashtag.


The #MeToo campaign is doing for sexual harassment what #BringBackOurGirls did for Boko Haram’s hostages; took a seirous issue and made it into a trite, temporal trifle; an “event” rather than either a social malady or a wartime atrocity, respectively.  In 21st century terms, the campaign “raised awareness”, which is a moderne way of saying “generated a lot of shrill chanting, shrieking and marching about, literally and metaphorically, in the interest of waving a bloody shirt”.

Genderquislings:  One of the most noxious byproducts of this bloody shirt campaign are the clumps of “feminist men” whose response to this past two months’ Robespierrian orgy of revelation is to throw themselves prostrate before the court of public opinion and demand mercy – for themselves (whatever) and every other man.

I come not to praise them, but to bury them and those who parrot them, especially via yet two more social media chanting orgies, “#YesAllMen” and “#ShutTheF**kUp”.

Among many other vague and morpheus sins of which they’d accuse their fellow guys is the notion of “toxic masculinity”, which in the hands of “feminists” [1] and their male hangers-on quickly turns into a synonym for “masculinity” of any kind.

My reply:  They – or the things they represent – are the real problem.  Not masciulinity – real masculinity.

Disc-lame-ers:  In an intelligent society that debated the merits of an argument, I could omit this section.

But I live in the “progressive” Twin Cities, so I have to treat much of the audience like ambulance-chasing lawyers.

The “First Wave” of feminism was right:  Women should be the equal of men in the eyes of the law.  They should face no discrimination due to their gender in the work place; they should be paid according to their qualifications, experience, credentials and other factors relevant to the job.  They should not have to accept non-consensual harassment and abuse due to their gender.

The “Second Wave” of feminism – AKA “Identity Feminism” – is wrong.  Women should also have no advantage over men in family court.  Their status as individuals should not be reverted to the Victorian era, where was assumed that a woman’s natural state frail victims (the term “potential victim” is used with a straight face by more than a few modern feminists) that must be protected from the male species, slavering brutes looking to pounce on the defenseless benighted damsels among us.

The Collective:  How this has manifested during the current sexual harassment crisis has been the notion that “#YesAllMen” are complicit in sexual harassment; that sexual harassment is a side effect of “toxic masculinity”; that harassment, abuse and rape are inextricable from being male.   That the world would be a better place if it were more like an anthill – where the women did the thinking and leading and designing, and the men just shut up and did what they were told, and contribute to the gene pool (until genetic engineering obsoletes that, too).

The males who’ve become the leading voices of this orgy of gender-abasement remind me of the people “convicted” of various thoughtdrimes curing the Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward who, after weeks, months or years jammed into prison cells and gulags, beaten and sleep-deprived by the Red Guards, abased themselves with almost ritual fervor on film and before crowds, not “begging for mercy” so much as abjuring being worthy of it, before being shot in the back of the head or sent off to be worked to death in the Chinese gulag.

Call them “victims of toxic social work”.

If nobody else will do it [2], then let me be the first to draw my line in the sand and yell “Stop”.

#NotMe

#NoNotAllMen

#QQQQSnowflakes

It’s The Devaluation, Stupid:  Matt Walsh had a great piece in the Daily Caller earlier this week, in which he pointed out the real problem:  not the presence of men, but the lack of Men:

The problem is not that there is too much masculinity in our culture. On the contrary, there isn’t nearly enough. A man becomes an abuser and harasser of women when he rejects that which makes him a man. He is not expressing his masculinity when he strips naked and struts around in front of his unwilling coworkers and subordinates — a move that seems oddly common among these types — rather, he is expressing his almost complete lack of masculinity.

Not sure if he’s referring to Charlie Rose or Louis CK – and I”m not sure it matters at the moment.

These men are weird, desperate, self-debasing, and effeminate. If you say we should have fewer of those kinds in positions of power, I agree. Let’s have none at all. But we would do well to replace them with men who are actually men. What we need in our society are chivalrous, strong, respectable, productive, and self-sacrificial men. Real men, in other words. Men who protect, provide, and do all of the things that society has always depended upon men to do. If you are that sort of man, you certainly should not shut up, step to the side, or consider yourself “trash.” Our culture needs your input and leadership more than ever.

Of course, the dominant narrative from a good chunk of our society – Hollywood, academia, the educational/industrial complex, is that traditional masculinity needs to be filed down to sized, tamed.   Primary schools medicate it; popular entertainment castigates it.  Entertainment has combined a relentless, big-budget focus on “girl power” with a near-complete suppression of any notion of giving boys any impetus to be what was traditionally called a “man” – chivalrous, comfortable with but not abusive of his power, driven to defend his family, his significant other and his community, self-sacrificing but optimistic and prone to using his power for good.  Those parts of society mock and taunt those notions (until they need a cop)…

…and propagate them with an education system that systematically feminizes boys, a family court system that ensures boys’ only role models as children will be mothers (who most assuredly do serve a role in raising emotioally boys – but not the only role) and that love, for a male, is an exercise in self-destruction, and an “entertainment” industry that seems to have taught half a generation boys that pornography is sex.

In other words – if you want to create the stunted, anti-masculine caricatures that are Harvey Weinstein, Charley Rose, Al Franken and Louis CK [3], the modern education, entertainment, academic and social justice systems are the most efficient possible factory to create more of them.

The only “Toxic Masculinity” is the stunted variety of caricatured, one-sided, immature, hollow “Masculinity” hat Identity Feminism demanded, and that the feminized Education system and Academy, and Hollywood delivered.

#NotMe:  Well, I’m done.

If you want to signal your virtue by gender self-abasement, expect me to mock and taunt you with the derision you deserve.

If you think the way to achieve equality for women is to beat down men, expect me to punch back twice as hard, and do whatever my feeble best is to lead more men – not males, mind you; men – to do the same.

If your response to discrimination against women is to promote discrimination against men, expect me to point out the obvious; you’re just passing around more discrimination.

You have rotted the society enough.  Hell, it may be too late; you may have killed it already.

I don’t care.

Continue reading

Crucial Yet Irrelevant

As we head towards another round of off year elections – including an awful lot of Democrat-controlled cities – a piece of re-usable narrative that is rapidly becoming a hallmark of the Trump age is starting to break out again; the notion that voting – or more precisely, “expecting your vote to affect anything”-  is “irrational”.– where “irrational” is defined as “your vote may not be the single vote that decides the election.

An expectation that seems, itself, a tad irrational.

Bear with me, here.

It popped up over the weekend before last on Minnesota public radio, on NPR’s syndicated “New Yorker Radio Hour”

Big Left has thrown out that particular notion in a couple of election cycles now – the idea of that voting is irrational and to the point of bizarre because one single, solitary vote it’s not the one that will determine the election. Which, if you follow it to its logical conclusion, leads to the supremely undemocratic idea that the only vote that doesn’t matter it’s the one that negates all other folks – the “vote” to overthrow democracy, consent and elections, and seize power for its oneself. Which, if you’re cynical – also supremely realistic – about Big Left, which seem to be their goal..

So far, the narrative seems to be about trying to deflect away from the idea of illegal voting. Especially if it illegal immigrants voting.

The narrative goes like this; given the irrationality of a voting, why would one risk capture, prosecution, conviction and deportation over a vote that, in the grand scheme of things, doesn’t matter at all.

(Of course, it’s nearly impossible to convict anyone of illegal voting – and in the cities where illegal voting is most likely, illegal immigration is a pretty safe bet as well.

Which speaks to my theory – which is almost a Berg Law, I’ll have you know – that Big Left doesn’t even bother trying to tell the truth to its own people; the gobble up any crap that I slept in front of them. Because we all know it’s almost impossible to get arrested for voter fraud; it’s almost an unprosecutable crime, especially in any “progressive” – run jurisdiction – like Minnesota.

So there’s no need to tell all of those lavishly funded nonprofits that are busy getting out the vote, pushing to allow eagle illegal immigrants the right to vote, and to clear allA chance to win for us election integrity as “racist”. The people who run Big Left don’t believe it either.

It’s just aimed at people who take democracy, the franchise, and the notion of “government by the consent of the governed” seriously.

Glad we were able to settle that..