Mark My Words

Someday, when there is a post-cold-war style reckoning with the past crimes of the American media – and I realize this may be more an “afterlife” kind of thing – the ongoing effort by the American media to slander people not like them, politically speaking, will be an entire wing in the museum.

Let’s allow up front that in a nation of 320 million people there will be loonies of every description afoot, and that not everyone deals with frustration, bigotry or hatred well or constructively.

With that out of the way?

There is no wave of Trump-inspired hatred in this country.  The media is, er, trumping up a series of:

…into a “story”, and spinning it into a largely fictional narrative.

Why?

To wag the dog.  To try to create the movement that they’re reporting on.  To try to do for hate what they did for Armenian valley girls and Flava Flav.

Will it work?

Well, their efforts didn’t give us an Empress President HIllary.  But that may have been a lucky break.

And “luck” isn’t a plan.

Holiday Season Open Letter To Minnesota / National Public Radio

To:  National Public Radio (cc: Minnesota Public Radio)
From:  Mitch Berg; not really a pollyanna
Re:  The Season For The Wheezin’

Dear various PRs,

Last Thursday was Thanksgiving.  And like every week after every Thanksgiving, I know what that means, especially vis-a-vis Public Radio programming.

To listen to your broadcasts, we are on the precipice of a national mental health plague, something Americans only survive with the aid of therapy, drinking or an endless slathering on of (wry, fashionable-understated) cynicism.   A time of year where all ceremony is onerous, all family members are insane or intolerable, all travel is wearing, all human interaction is a layer of plastic fakery over a rotten, frothing core of anxiety and desperation.

That’s right – the Holiday season.

Public radio programming will be clogged with with newscasters droning on about seasonal mental health afflictions; with “entertainers” jabbering about the only kind of get-togethers any of them seem to have – ugly, dysfunctional ones; with obscure writers and artists elevated (?) to radio commentators, testifying to the ordeal we’re all about to go through.

Point taken, Public Radio – the upper-middle-class, over-miseducated, secular (wildly-disproportionally secular-jewish) crowd is exquisitely bored with the whole thing.

But might I suggest you poke your collective (heh) nose outside your Subaru-driving, Oberlin/Bard/Saint Olaf-educated, Whole-Foods-shopping, free-range-alpaca-wearing, urban-liberal-privilege-wallowing, Israel-divesting, coffee-shop-music-loving, prematurely gray, bumper-sticker-clad Obama-shilling bubble and take note that for a whole lot of people, perhaps the majority, the holidays aren’t about mindless personal drama, and bring us some measure of joy?

I mean, fine – you’ll joke about how pathetic you find it.  That’s fine – and nothing new!

Just saying – perhaps you can put down the bottle and take your head out of the oven and look around a bit?

That is all.

Wag The Pigs

You want a lot of publicity for very very very little effort?

Put on a white pointy robe and yell “Make America Great Again!”

David Harsanyi points out what a lot of us on the right already know: the “Alt-Right” is to 2016 what the “Vast Rightwing Conspiracy” was to 1995, and the “War on Women” was to 2012;  a smear, pushed with relentless dedication by a media that were basically Democrat operatives with bylines, to smear the Democrats’ opponents by associating them with the a convenient, if barely extant, boogeyman.  It was something that Saul Alinsky called “framing”, and that anyone who’s studied psychological abuse calls “Gaslighting”.

David Harsanyi points out the facts on what is, to borrow a phrase, “fake news”:

Every major cable news network had a discussion about the importance of the [National Policy Institute – the place where the “crowd” yelled “Hail Trump”]. But here’s a little nugget from the NPR piece that asserts the election has given this “once fringe movement a jolt”: “About 300 people — split nearly evenly between conference attendees and protesters of the conference outside — were on hand at the downtown D.C. event.”

300 people – 150 of them attendees?

150 people go to the big game warehouse in Roseville to play Warhammer every weekend with no media coverage.

Four times that many people turn out in maroon shirts at the Legislature every time some liberal bobblehead tries to introduce a gun grab bill.

There are bowling leagues with more people and political clout than the National Policy Institute.

About 300 people? Some jolt. To put that into context, there were well over 300 people at thousands of churches and temples across the Washington area this weekend praying for peace on Earth. In this country, you could pull together 300 people for a meeting about anything, actually. Thousands of UFO enthusiasts got together in the Arizona desert last year in hopes of not being mass abducted by space aliens.

A few years ago, I attended the Socialist convention in Chicago, where at least a thousand activists gathered to discuss how to end economic freedom. Since then, 43 percent of Democrat primary goers have given this extreme movement a jolt, I guess.

In a nation of a third of a billion people, there should be a lot more crazies than that.  And who knows; if CNN and the NYTimes wave enough cameras around looking for boogeymen, then that’s exactly what we’ll get.  You create a media market for something, you’ll get…something.

Devils Of Our Nature

I hate to indulige in schadenfreude.

Part of it is because I’m a pretty emphathetic guy.  I put myself in others’ shoes pretty easily.

Part of it is that while I don’t believe in karma, I do believe what goes around comes around.

However, hearing about the psychic trauma some “blue-staters” are feeling over this past weeks, I’m rapidly giving into my worse nature and saying “Good.  Suffer, you vacuous hamsters.  If your well-being is so wrapped around a presidential election that it affects your mental health, you should really not participate”.

“But Mitch – isn’t that an unfair caricature?”

Sorry, but no – it’s not.

What A Difference Eight Years Makes

2008:  Discussion of secession from the union (by Texas, were the sentiment is pretty strong) or from oppressive an alienating state governments (inland and northern California) are “treason” and a call for a return to slavery.

2016:  Calls for secession are all the liberal rage.

I say keep it up.  You may never get seceded (although good riddance, California), but you’ll give me the impetus I need to revive one of my old online larks into a full fledged book.

Connect The Dots

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Here’s an example of why Conservatives claim there is Liberal bias in the media – the entire focus of this story is misplaced.

 The article says the shooter was a National Guardsman and makes the point that he and his wife both are members of the Minnesota National Guard. 

 Yeah?  So what?  Were they in uniform at the time of the shooting?  Acting on orders?  Using military-issued weapons?  If not, then their membership in the Guard is entirely irrelevant to the story.

 Why emphasize the Guard?  Why not “former high school drummer” or “enthusiastic fly fisherman” or “diesel mechanic” or “Lutheran church member?”

 Possibly because in the Liberal mind, the Guard is military, which uses assault rifles, which are bad, so naturally this guy also is bad, probably has PTSD, never should have been allowed to own a gun but for America’s militaristic culture of gun violence and the never-sufficiently-to-be-damned NRA.

 Pathetic.

 Joe Doakes

In the world of “fuzzy logic”, the liberal mind is God’s own lint trap.

From Thin Air

SCENE:  Mitch BERG is ordering a cup of coffee and a bagel.

Brian FURIOUS, liberal opionblogger for “”MinnesotaLIberalAlliance.blogspot.com”, walks into the coffee shop.

FURIOUS:  Merg!

BERG:  Oh, hey, Brian…

FURIOUS:  I am Brian Furious, defender of fact, crusader of truth!

BERG:  Right.  Or…hey, Brian.

FURIOUS:  Don’t you deny it!  You’ve been writing about Ilhan Omar!

BERG:  Well, mostly I’ve been doing a combination of writing about people writing about Ilhan Omar, and writing about people writing about people writing about Ilhan Omar.  There’s a bit of a difference.

FURIOUS:  What you did was engage in race-baiting, saying that if someone comes to the US they should learn our laws and abide by them,

BERG:  We’ll come back to the “race-baiting” red herring in a bit.  But as re the other bit – you mean, like “learn and abide by our laws” like everyone who comes to the US – or, for that matter, goes to other countries – is supposed to do?

FURIOUS:  That’s not news!

BERG:  Not sure what you mean.  It’s not news that immigrants, like citizens, are supposed to follow the law?

Or do you mean the Ilhan Omar story?   Because it seems like there just might be some news there.  Even the mainstream liberal media seems to think so.

FURIOUS:  But you admitted you probably wouldn’t adhere to laws requiring a marriage license!

BERG:  Well, yeah – like Ms. Omar, I believe that marriages in one’s faith tradition that ignore state licensing are perfectly legitimate.   And, by the way, it’s not “illegal” to eschew the state license.

Anyway, let me repeat the important part; I defended Ilhan Omar’s “marriage in her faith tradition“, while noting that her explanation still left some questions.

You seem to have trouble recognizing that fact.  Perhaps you’re racist?

FURIOUS:  You’re just saying it’s about being “foreign” is just taking a change to stoke anti-immigrant fears and is, yes, race-baiting!   You’re demeaning her, and with her other Somalis for whom she’s an emblem because of her ethnicity.  You’re claiming it’s her “foreign-ness” which is the problem. 

BERG:  Er, yeah – I’d heard you wrote that.  The thing is,  I’ve never mentioned Ilhan’s “foreign-ness”, never alluded to it in anything I’ve ever written or said, never even hinted about it.  It’s a fabrication.

FURIOUS:  No, it’s not!

BERG:  Well, given that I’m supporting Abimalik Askar – a Somali immigrant – in the race for the seat, let’s just say it’s kinda weird.   So – if Ms. Omar’s “foreign-ness” is a problem, wouldn’t that of Mr. Askar – who is from the exact same place – also be a problem?

FURIOUS:  Clearly, Askar is not Somali!

BERG:  He was born in Somalia, and immigrated to the US in 1993.

FURIOUS:  Then it stands to reason you hate him too!

BERG:  Er, no – I’ve interviewed him on my show, and I’ll do it again.  He’s a very sharp guy and is quite clearly the best candidate for the job of any ethnic origin.

FURIOUS:  But he’s a ReTHUGliican!  Clearly he must hate Somalis!

BERG:  Huh.  Hey – look!  A shiny object!

[BERG slips quietly away as FURIOUS furiously whips his head around]

[And SCENE]

I’m Sure…

this will turn out to be more right-wing conservative Christian violence.  Or maybe those elusive pro-life Tea Partiers.

Over thirty dead and counting in Istanbul.

Darn that NRA.

Not to snark overly much; I’ve always felt somewhat close to Turkey.  My mom lived there for several years, back in the nineties.

Just waiting to see what kind of “workplace violence” our State Department or Administration try to redact this into.

Darn Those White Conservative Christians

Orlando murderer Omar Mateen – a man who seems to have mixed sexual confusion and extreme millenarian Islam on his way to becoming the worst mass-shooter in US history – was giving off warning signs even in childhood:

At age 14, he said he could shoot an AK-47 and mimicked an airplane flying into the World Trade Center. At 26, he bragged to courthouse co-workers of terrorist ties. Weeks ago, at 29, Mateen sought to buy heavy-duty body armor and bulk ammunition.

Many of his violent outbursts aped or celebrated Islamic terrorism and he repeatedly claimed connections to known terrorists, including the Boston Marathon bombers. He cheered the 9/11 attacks on the day they happened and once threatened to shoot partygoers at a barbecue when pork, which is forbidden to Muslims, touched his hamburger.

Bear in mind that Mateen passed not one, but eight background checks:

So let’s walk through this from the beginning:

  1. Mateen spends his entire life as a vocal terror sympathizer.  He also meets all the right people – has contact with other known terror figures, the whole nine yards.
  2. The feds investigate him at least twice.  Maybe they found nothing.  Maybe political pressure led then to foreshorten their inquiry; maybe to avert accusations of “profiling” they took their resources to investigate NASCAR drivers in Alabama.  We don’t know, and probably never will.
  3. Mateen passes eight of the background checks that are the “common sense regulation” that the orcs of Big Gun Control want to subject the law-abiding citizen to – which is further evidence that they don’t care about crime, but do want to register gun owners.
  4. Mateen – who was either in the midst of a struggle over sexuality, or was adopting a “gay” cover to case gay bars for his attacks – becomes enough of a regular figure in Orlando gay bars to not arouse notice.
  5. For their part, the State of Florida made all bars “gun free zones”; every victim at “Pulse” was, by law, disarmed.     While gun owners in many states – the states where “gun free zones” are treated as trespassing rather than misdemeanors or worse – routinely ignore “gun free zone” signs, nobody at “Pulse” apparently did.

Oh, yeah.  It just must be the fault of Christian NRA members.

For Purposes Of Argument

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Liberals moan about money in elections. Imagine the Liberals are correct and it’s possible to buy politicians. How much would you pay to buy a Supreme Court justice seat to replace Scalia, knowing that failure gives the other side decades to control the law?

Joe doakes

I for one will throw a bake sale.

“When Did You Stop Beating Your Wife?”

I’m not a Donald Trump fan.  I disliked Trump even before it was cool – going back to the ’80s, even, when I thought his “if you’re not a billionaire, you’re a loser” schtick was too stupid to take seriously.

chanting_points_200px

I still do.

But today, in USA Today, we see Trump being blamed for…

…a question asked at a Trump rally?

“We got a problem in this country. It’s called Muslims. We know our current president is one. We know he’s not even an American. (Trump: We need the question.) But anyway. We have training camps brewing where they want to kill us. That’s my question. When can we get rid of them?”

Trump didn’t directly address what the man said about the president — nor did he correct him — and replied:

“We’re going to be looking at a lot of different things. A lot of people are saying that. A lot of people are saying that bad things are happening out there. We’re going to be looking into that and plenty of other things.”

Let’s leave aside, for a moment, the likelihood that the “questioner” was a plant; our experience during the Tea Party, when lefty provocateurs were busted red-handed posing as Tea Partiers, bringing signs, is still fresh in my mind.  Back then, there’d be an occasional ring of fringies around the edges of the protest, who’d gravitate toward the cameras – unless the rally made a point of publicizing that its security people would be taking pictures of provocative signs to crowdsource; they tended not to show up.  Candid shots of “racist tea partiers” tended to turn out to be slumming lefties.

No, we’ll leave that aside for now.

It’s a Republican event – and no Republican, least of all Trump, is immune to what seems to the great truth of American politics and media in the 21st century

  1. Nothing any Democrat says, or does, up to and including violating federal law and national security, will ever be held against them
  2. Anything untoward done, said, hinted at, or speculated to have been done, said or hinted at by any Republican officeholder (no matter how obscure or inconsequential), candidate, party official, contributor, voter, supporter, rally attendee, or putative supporter, contributor or rally attendee, or anyone claiming or reputed to be or to have at any time been a Republican party member, supporter or sympathizer, will not only be treated like it’s evidence in a federal trial, but imputed to every conservative, anywhere, regardless of its context, accuracy or even truthfulness.

Oh, yeah – and the story will focus exclusively on violations of political correctness, and studiously ignore any actual issues that may have been addressed.

This behavior is so pervasive and predictable, I have canonized it as “Berg’s Seventeenth Law“.

Our Idiot Elite: Freedom Is Slavery, Winston

Was there a time when being published in The New Yorker meant you were a better, smarter, more capable writer than, say, a liberal blogger?

I dimly remember such a time.

But in reading Kalefa Sanneh’s “The Hell You Say” – an apologia for gutting the First Amendment and letting government decide how much freedom of speech we really need, because that’s the way Europe does it.

It’s a target-rich environment of bad research and lazy writing, a bit of journalism of entitlement that would fit in on Minnesota Progressive Project.

Yep.  That bad.

I picked one bit – in which Sanneh argues that unregulated speech as we know it really only started in the past 100 years due to – wait for it – white privilege:

This, in essence, was Justice Holmes’s rationale, in 1919, when he argued in an influential dissent that antiwar anarchists should be free to agitate. “Nobody can suppose that the surreptitious publishing of a silly leaflet by an unknown man, without more, would present any immediate danger,” he wrote. Free-speech advocates typically claim that the value of unfettered expression outweighs any harm it might cause, offering assurances that any such harm will be minimal. But what makes them so sure? America’s free-speech regime is shot through with exceptions, including civil (and, in some states, criminal) laws against libel.

Right.  But defamation requires both untruth and actual, tangible, real damages.  It’s intentionally hard to win a defamation / libel case.  For good reason.

By what rationale do we insist that groups—races, communities of faith—don’t deserve similar protection?

Races?  Who would file the petition?

Communities of faith?  Boy, are us Christians going to go to town when we lawyer up.

Many free-speech arguments turn on a deceptively simple question: what is speech? It’s clear that the protected category excludes all sorts of statements. (The First Amendment will be of no use to someone who writes a fraudulent contract, or who says, “Hand over your wallet and iPhone,” and means it.)

And in not knowing the difference between Speech and Robbery,Sanneh has not only forever destroyed The New Yorker as a source of useful journalism, but ousted Grace Kelly from her throne as the least cogniscent writer in the world.

The howlers come with a density that I’ve only rarely encountered, much less tackled.

Indeed, so insidiously bad is the piece that Greg Lukianoff mobilized ten free speech advocates to tackle and beat Saleh’s piece unconscious.

Read Sanneh to see the id of today’s left in action.

Read Lukianoff to see it dismembered.

There’s your assignment for the day.

The Right Profile

SCENE:  Mitch BERG is watching fireworks from a bluff over the Mississippi River.  Avery LIBRELLE, carrying an overstuffed bag of bug spray, sun parasols and other outdoor gear, lurches up behind him.  

LIBRELLE:  Hey, Merg!  We need to control guns in our society!  The New York Times says so!

BERG:  Right. we talked about that the other day.  Why do you think that?  In your own words, please.

LIBRELLE:   Because we don’t want every fat, overweight, bald, red-faced, out-of-shape racist sexist anti-government Christian Tenther  Extremist in the square states having guns!

BERG:  Huh.  What was that demographic again?

LIBRELLE:  Fat, overweight, bald, red-faced, out-of-shape racist sexist anti-government Christian Tenther  Extremists!  The ones who are likely to become terrorists!

BERG:  Huh.  Speaking of which – the cops are scrutinizing radical mosques to find links to terror…

LIBRELLE:  Stop!

BERG:  …what?

LIBRELLE:  Profiling is wrong!

(And SCENE)

I, Revolutionary

What culture made a curse of the saying “May you live in interesting times?”  Hindi?  Confucianist?  Aztec?  Irish?  Yiddish?

Who knows?  It merely seems that that’s what we’re doing.

We live in a society that’s led by a political and media elite that seems no less dim and self-referential than Emperor Nero; a society where the schools and universities are working for the bad guys, where the President is outwardly more concerned about Tea Partiers than ISIS or an Iranian bomb, where five appointed Ivy Leaguers dictate to 535 elected representatives, where the rights of the law-abiding mainstream seem to be worth less than the wishes and desires and agendas of a motivated minority.

But to David French in the NRO, today is a great time to be alive and conservative.  Because there’s no shortage of purpose facing a good conservative today:

It’s common for our fellow citizens to sometimes feel aimless, to lack purpose for their lives. Yet no American patriot should lack purpose today. In an era when our kids are seen as the vanguard of the Left’s social revolution, it’s a patriotic act to raise children to understand and respect the Constitution, to comprehend the great truths of American history, and to acquire the psychological toughness that will help them endure the stigma and scorn of the Left.

In an era when the Left seeks to drive social conservatives not just from the campus and pop culture (where we cling by our fingernails) but also from the marketplace and — finally — from our own churches, the simple act of openly and fearlessly living out your faith and values is a patriotic act.

In an era when too many liberals seek to appropriate charity — care and concern for the “least of these” — for the state, it’s a patriotic and deeply loving act to reach out and lift up friends and neighbors in need. While there are well-meaning bureaucrats in the vast welfare-industrial complex, there is no substitute for the unique, individual impact of Americans in relationship with one another, mentoring and supporting those who need help the most. And it remains a deeply patriotic and meaningful act to enlist in the military, to train to defeat enemies abroad — even if this president is unwilling to effectively confront our foes. Reality has a way of ultimately dictating foreign policy, and we need men and women who are prepared for the days ahead. Even as we see the significance of patriotism in the way in which we live our everyday lives, we need to abandon the idea that there’s a cultural or political shortcut — that the right combination of events or the right politician will turn the tide. Cultures change as a result of the persistent effort of millions, not because of the glorious leadership of one individual — not even Barack Obama, The One.

The examples of what the Army of Davids can do are all around us, if you care to look.

The Big Lie, Chapter MCDLXXVI

I’m not sure that this is quite a Berg’s Seventh Law reference – but as a general rule, when the far left says the far right is getting more violent, they’re lying.  

Indeed, it’s almost becoming a corollary to Berg’s Seventh – all lefty claims of “right wing violence” should be presumed false until proven true beyond a reasonable doubt.

Ryan Winkler Should Thank George Takei

Because Winkler is no longer the most ineptly, tone-deafly racist commentator in recent American history.

I’ve had the odd chuckle as George “Mr. Sulu” Takei has oozed back into a wry, giggly mainstream prominence.  He can be a funny guy.  And he’s got an interesting story; growing up in an internment camp, building a career in Hollywood at a time when an Asian couldn’t get a break, yadda yadda.

But someone’s gotta slap him:

In a nasty, racist rant captured by a Fox affiliate in Arizona, former Star Trek actor-turned-gay rights activist George Takei lashed out at Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, calling him a “clown in black face.”

Here, a man who became famous sitting on a TV set pushing fake buttons and saying “Warp Factor Five, Aye-Aye” and running a snarky but occasionally hilarious Facebook account, gaysplains to one of America’s most accomplished jurists…

…not only using terms that are groaning with racist baggage, but also legally full of Roddenberry dust.  Thomas is, unfortunately for Takei, correct.  The Obergefell decision was, like Roe V. Wade, conjuring up law from nothing – or, worse than nothing, pure emotion.

Back to snarking on Facebook, George.

Fake But Inaccurate

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Let’s talk about liars.

Progressives claim they speak Truth to Power to effect Change.  They view themselves as warriors for social justice, all members of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, bravely pounding out their messages of hate in the service of a Higher Calling: Hope and Change.  For these courageous soldiers in the war on Everything Traditional, no tactic is too extreme, not even the Fake Review.

Suppose a Non-Progressive author has a new book on Amazon.  Suppose it’s getting great reviews from customers who bought the book and actually read it.  That can’t be allowed to continue . . . innocent readers might believe the high ratings, purchase the book and have their minds polluted with Non-Progressive Thinking.  Plainly, it is the duty of every good SJW to fight those high ratings by posting their own one-star reviews.   That will bring down the average rating to the point where innocents will conclude the book sucks and they won’t buy it, which will not only preserve blank minds to be filled with Progressive indoctrination, but also will hurt the Non-Progressive author’s wallet in the form of lost sales – a two-fer!

We saw that last spring, with the controversy over the River Oasis Cafe in Stillwater posting a “minimum wage fee” on its receipts; Yelp readers from all over the country who couldn’t possibly have ever visited the place left scathing, often disgusting and scatological, reviews on the online restaurant review site.  Dissent must be crushed.

Continue reading

Berg’ Seventh Law Is Absolute

Last week, when stickers labeling establishments as “exclusively for white people” went up around Austin, Texas, I quietly figured it had to be a “progressive” false flag.

Why?

Because Bergs Seventh Law (“When a Liberal issues a group defamation or assault on conservatives’ ethics, character, humanity or respect for liberty or the truth, they are at best projecting, and at worst drawing attention away from their own misdeeds”), that’s why.

So – were those “exclusively for white people” stickers a progressive false flag?

Duh…:

[Austin lawyer] Adam Reposa posted the video on YouTube and made a statement on Facebook saying he was trying promote the issue of gentrification in East Austin. (Warning: The video contains explicit language)
“They’re getting pushed out, and pretty quick. This area of town is turning into white’s only,” Reposa said in the clip. “Not by law like it used to be, and everyone’s going to jump on, ‘that’s racist!’ ‘that’s racist!’ Man, this town, the way **** works is racist! And I knew I could just bait all of y’all into being as stupid as you are.”
Reposa went on to blast people for not getting the message.

“You’re just not smart enough to keep up with my argument!”

I started Berg’s Law as a joke, pretty much, back in 2004. But the more I see, the less funny they seem.

Except, of course, is that I still laugh my butt off at “progressives”.

Dear Entire Gay Movement

To:  The Entire Gay Movement:
From:  Mitch Berg, Irascible Peasant
Re:  The Mote

Dear Every Gay In The World,

I’m Mitch Berg.  I’m a conservative – but I can’t say as I’ve ever hated gays.  Indeed, I’ve probably done more to fight the overt, physical hatred of gays than most of you have.  And the simple fact is, after over a decade as a single parent, I have barely had time or energy to put into my own sexuality, much less bother with anyone else’s.

Now, I’ve had my beefs with you all – the whole “if you oppose gay marriage, you are teh bigot!” campaign was a crime against logic.

And while I don’t believe anyone would “choose” to be gay, there’s actually nearly no evidence that it’s genetic, either.  Most of what I’ve read makes me think it’s an adaptation.

And y’know what?  I don’t care; God loves you all, and it’s not for me not to, even if I were so inclined, which I’m not.

I don’t care much for “identity” movements, since they tend to politicize things that ought not be politicized.  But I get it; decades of repression, yadda yadda.  I’ll call it square.

But I’ll just say your whole “want to be accepted” thing would sit a lot easier with real humans if Dan Savage hadn’t appointed himself your spokesbeing.  Emphasis added by yours truly:

A few days ago, Savage told the Family Research Council’s Josh Duggar of “19 Kids and Counting” to “go f**k yourself” after Duggar posted a picture with Rick Santorum. Savage then made a child molestation joke against Pope John Paul II, and now he’s going after the GOP. After Ben Carson said that he believes being gay “is absolutely a choice” in an interview with CNN March 4, Dan Savage tweeted out: “Being gay is a choice? Prove it: Choose it yourself. Suck my dick.”

Dan Savage; anti-bullying crusader.

Please pass the word to Mr. Savage (and I ask this not because I think y’all have a secret underground network, but just on the off-chance that someone out there knows that big arrogant trained chimp) that he would seem to find cognitive dissonance more threatening than does the most inbred redneck.

And that’s a bad thing.

That is all.

Fashionable Bigotry

Conservatives and Christians have been saying it for years; there really is only one acceptable form of bigotry to our political class these days.

And as Maggie Gallagher at NRO shows, it‘s not just an idle complaint.  A disturbing number of the “educated” upper middle class hold some fairly intense bigotry against people of faith Christians.

“Restrict their ability to become judges, senators, representatives, member of Cabinet, military chief of staff and other powerful members of government,” said a man over 75 with a bachelor’s degree. “Should not be able to make decisions regarding the law, they should somehow have to be supervised if they are working with other people (drastic, I know),” said a woman under 45 with a master’s degree. “We should put in place mandatory extreme prison sentences for anyone or any group that attempts to take away civil liberties guaranteed by our constitution,” said a middle-aged man with a master’s degree. “Churches should not be allowed to provide orphanages and adoption programs,” said one elderly man with a doctorate. “I think we should restrict the indoctrination of children in religious dogma and ritual” said a middle-aged man with a master’s degree. Conservative Christians should “not be allowed to hold political office, be police etc., serve in the armed forces,” said another middle aged man with a doctorate.

Gallagher’s piece is actually a response to the movie “Kingsman”, which indulges in some pretty lurid eliminationist anti-Christianism.  And while Gallagher takes great (and probably correct) pains to note that it’s a minority opinion, nobody knows how minor the minority is:

“No academic inquiry has investigated how individuals from a highly educated and politically powerful subculture may express attitudes that dehumanize out-groups,” reports Yancey and Williamson. Until now. So I am concerned when Hollywood begins to gratify the kind of hatred on display by the minority of progressives, and for the same reasons Yancey and Williamson are concerned about the minority of socially empowered progressives who express open hatred, dehumanization, and even murderous fantasies about Christians. The fact that such views are openly expressed by even a minority of educated elites likely means that they are acceptable expressions in powerful subcultures.

There’s the rub; bigotry on the part of conservatives likely comes from its underclass; on the left, it’s from (at least parts of) its self-appointed “elite”.

Don’t believe me?  Ask President Obama to point you to a bigger, gun-clinging, snake-handling Jeebus freak.

It Gets So Very, Very Old

It gets old, always, always, always repeating “if a conservative said this, the media would collectively crap a cinder block”.

But it’s always true.

But former NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg said something that would put him squarely in David Duke territory; emphasis added for the dense and dazed:

“It’s controversial, but first thing is all of your — 95 percent of your murders and murderers, and murder victims fit one M.O. You can just take the description, Xerox it, and pass it out to all of the cops. They are male, minorities, 15 to 25. That’s true in New York, it’s true in virtually every city in America,” Bloomberg is heard saying in the newly released audio.

And his prescription?  Well, it’s meant to sound a little more benevolent than something a Klansman would say, but spiritually it’s the same exact thing:

“That’s where the real crime is,” he added. “You’ve got to get the guns out of the hands of the people that are getting killed. First thing you can do to help that group is to keep them alive.”

“Keep them alive” – by disarming the victims.

Forget dog whistles; this piece is full of racist foghorns.

And it puts an exclamation point on the most important premise related to the gun control issue today; it is today, as it was in 1968, and 1866 and 1842, an instrument of keeping ethnic minorities disarmed, helpless and in “their place”.

Rarely as they as obliging as to say it in as many words, as Bloomberg is recorded saying (and the media is doing its best to scrub all mention of the tape’s existence); even Heather Martens is smarter than that (thus far).

Do the world a favor; make sure a black DFL voter hears this.

The Scarlet Drawing

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Lot of talk from Liberals after the Charlie Hebdo killings about Free Speech doesn’t mean Without Consequences, it only means the government can’t punish you for saying it.

Private groups can still bring social pressure to cost you your job, your elected office.

And maybe your life, because you asked for it by drawing offensive cartoons.

When it comes to subjects dear to Liberals hearts like sluts, welfare and Muslims, Liberals claim to abhor social shunning because it has a chilling effect on Constitutionally protected freedoms but they don’t, really, abhor shunning; they just want to change who wears the scarlet letter.

Joe Doakes

In many ways, they are the new Puritans.