One remaining man of principle
It’s hard not to be dismayed went you look at what’s happened to society. We now live in a country where almost everyone, including those in the elite media, has a view of reality that is completely shaped by their politics. Thus whether people believe decades-old accusations of sexual assault depends almost entirely on the relationship between the political party of the observer and the political party of the accused. There are days when I wonder if we wouldn’t all be better off if a giant asteroid hit Earth and put us out of our hypocrisy, er, misery.
But then I recall that there is one moral giant with a long and consistent record on sexual assault, regardless of the politics of the accused. I speak, of course, of Donald Trump:
Days after President Clinton admitted to having an inappropriate relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky, Trump said Clinton was a “victim” and critiqued the physical appearances of various women with whom Clinton had been accused of having extramarital relations at different times.
“It’s like it’s from hell, it’s a terrible group of people,” Trump said in an interview with FOX News’ Neil Cavuto on Aug. 19, 1998. . . .
“I don’t know if that’s a good thing in terms of what Starr has done or a terrible thing, I think it’s a terrible thing, actually,” Trump added, presumably referring to the former Whitewater independent counsel who expanded his investigation into the Lewinsky affair.
As far as his personal opinion of Clinton, Trump gave Clinton a strong rating.
My only quibble is that when Trump discussed Starr’s persecution of Clinton, he left out his sidekick, Brett Kavanaugh. Today, Trump continues to relentlessly defend any and all men accused of sexual misconduct; Rob Porter, Roger Ailes, Roy Moore, Bill O’Reilly and one other name I can’t recall.
Unlike 99% of Americans, he doesn’t let politics affect his moral compass, which never deviates from his core beliefs:
Trump: And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.
Trump: Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.
But Trump doesn’t stop there, he also understands the need for America’s President to mock and shame women who come forth with accusations of sexual abuse:
Playing to the crowd of thousands gathered to cheer him on, the president pretended to be Dr. Blasey testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee last Thursday. “Thirty-six years ago this happened. I had one beer, right? I had one beer,” said Mr. Trump, channeling his version of Dr. Blasey. He then imitated one of her questioners, followed by her responses about what she could not recall about the alleged attack.
“How did you get home? I don’t remember. How’d you get home? I don’t remember. Where was the place? I don’t remember. How many years ago was it? I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know,” Mr. Trump said, as the crowd applauded. “I don’t know — but I had one beer. That’s the only thing I remember.”
Trump and his crowd of supporters must have had so much fun! But there’s also a serious side to Trump; he understands the suffering endured by so many . . . er, people:
Asked if he had a message to men, the president said: “Well, I say that it’s a very scary time for young men in America when you can be guilty of something that you may not be guilty of. This is a very, very — this is a very difficult time.” . . .
Asked if he had a message for young women, he said, “Women are doing great.”
Trump has also reached out to foreign leaders who share his moral principles, like Philippine President Duterte:
Mr Duterte once joked about the gang rape and murder of an Australian missionary, suggesting that, because he was mayor of the town it took place in, he should have been allowed to go first. (US president Donald Trump has since said that he has a “great relationship” with the Filipino leader.)
In contrast to Obama, who preferred polite, wimpy leaders like Merkel and Trudeau, Trump likes tough guys like Italy’s Salvini:
Mr Salvini, Italy’s deputy prime minister and a Trump admirer, has also taunted female politicians. In 2016, at a political rally, he pointed to a sex doll on the stage and claimed that it was a “double” of Laura Boldrini, who was then president of Italy’s Chamber of Deputies. In a recent interview with Politico, Ms Boldrini said that she has received numerous rape and death threats in recent years, adding that Italy’s populists had targeted her because “I was a woman and I was advocating for refugees, for human rights, for women’s rights”.
And of course Putin:
Vladimir Putin’s international image was tainted today after it emerged he had let slip another of his infamous remarks – this time praising the president of Israel for alleged sex offences.”He turned out to be a strong man, raped 10 women,” the Russian president was quoted by Russian media as saying at a meeting in Moscow with Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert. “I never would have expected it of him. He has surprised us all, we all envy him!”
Israeli police announced on Sunday that the president, Moshe Katsav, could be charged with the rape and sexual harassment of several women.
Soon, Trump will be joined by a fellow traveller in Brazil:
Mr Bolsonaro has exploited their fury brilliantly. Until the Lava Jato scandals, he was an undistinguished seven-term congressman from the state of Rio de Janeiro. He has a long history of being grossly offensive. He said he would not rape a congresswoman because she was “very ugly”; he said he would prefer a dead son to a gay one; and he suggested that people who live in settlements founded by escaped slaves are fat and lazy. Suddenly that willingness to break taboos is being taken as evidence that he is different from the political hacks in the capital city, Brasília.
It’s so refreshing that politicians are now able to ignore taboos against racism and rape jokes.
PS. Do I have to say the preceding was a pathetic attempt at satire? I suppose so. If you want some seriously good satire, read Will Wilkinson’s set of tweets on Trump as a Shakespearean figure—it’s great. If you don’t understand the context, you may need to look at the NYT’s recent demolition of Trump’s entire business career. Yes, it was also built on a pack of lies and fraud, plus frequent bailouts from daddy. I know; how can you demolish a reputation that is already a mere pile of rubble?
PPS. And let’s not forget the National Review, who seems to think the biggest problem with the GOP is Jeff Flake. Or CNN News, which never met a female accuser they did not believe. Or the “trendy” parts of the academy, which was again discredited in an hilarious update of the Sokal Hoax.
I feel I’m overdosing on cynicism. I need some sort of medication to deal with those 6-hour lulls in the news cycle where nothing Onion-level insane happens in the world. Perhaps if I go kayaking in New Zealand and get slapped in the face by an octopus wielding seal, it will shake me out of my ennui.
Tags:
3. October 2018 at 12:24
Seriously though Scott you should come to New Zealand
3. October 2018 at 12:56
I agree with you on almost all of your analysis. And agree with a lot of your critiques of Trump.
I do think you are far too into the metoo movement. Young males in our society are facing a lot of challenges and part of it is the metoo movement. Now there are things that are wrong, but there are a lot of mentally ill girls out there and that is a big reason why the majority of allegations end up being false.
But on Trump I think he’s the most successful potus we’ve had in decades. Maybe by pure luck. He hasn’t done anything stupid like obamacare of an iraq war. Tariffs are dumb but they matter a lot less. I don’t like the budget deficits he’s running. Trump is right to yell at the FED for hiking rates, but he should be pairing that with shrinking the deficit.
That being said the economy is the best its been in 20 years. No major policy errors from the White House. And quite frankly I think Trump is hilarious; it would be curious if he was being hilarious on purpose or he’s an idiot; but either way he’s very entertaining.
Also he elected Powell to the FED. Who turned out to be a great pick. Bernanke was likely smarter, but in 2008 when the crisis hit he didn’t fully pull out the papers he wrote on japan. Yelllen was boring though solid. Powell seems to have the forceful personality to act strongly and seems to be in the ngdp category. funny to think trump seriously consider the I believe estee lauder heir. Whether he was lucky or trump was smart would be interesting to know.
3. October 2018 at 13:02
taboos against racism and rape jokes.
This is an open admission of religious belief.
The belief being that white men should be at the bottom of the social totem pole.
And anyone who disagrees is an infidel who should be stoned. Or at least made unemployable.
3. October 2018 at 14:32
Hi Scott … I think part of your disillusionment may stem from the change in the zeitgeist in recent years, which itself has been a function of the change in our understanding of many aspects of sociology and anthropology — which were willfully distorted in the 20th century. The Neoreactionary blogs have done a fabulous job of re-crafting the general understanding of truth in the social sciences. Those who don’t read them will be left constantly frustrated by what appears a never-ending onslaught of viciousness from the right. A good starting point might be Steve Sailer’s blog at Unz.com. He is widely read by journalists on both sides of the aisle, but almost never quoted.
3. October 2018 at 16:11
It’s hard not to be dismayed went you look at what’s happened to society. We now live in a country where almost everyone, including those in the elite media, has a view of reality that is completely shaped by their politics. — Scott Sumner
Well, now you agree with me.
This is why I said the Heritage Foundation’s ratings of Singapore were dubious or why liberal think tanks always come to predictable conclusions. (Singapore economists, published in the Singapore Economic Review, report that the Singapore economy is the most highly managed and regulated on the planet, nearly. Even beyond management and regulation, the government of Singapore owns all the land is built 80% of the housing and owns all the hospitals and is a major investor in many Singapore-based businesses. The national policy of Singapore is to obtain current-account trade surpluses.)
This is why I say, macroeconomics is just politics in drag.
How to become happy and not cynical regarding the American political and economic scenes?
Regard the stage as entertainment.
The Kavanaugh Gong Show has been fun.
The only time I am saddened by the American scene is when we drop bombs on people, evidently a matter of fleeting concern all around.
3. October 2018 at 18:09
Kgaard,
“The Neoreactionary blogs have done a fabulous job of re-crafting the general understanding of truth in the social sciences. Those who don’t read them will be left constantly frustrated by what appears a never-ending onslaught of viciousness from the right. A good starting point might be Steve Sailer’s blog at Unz.com. ”
I have at some point read bits and pieces of these and initially, innocently so to speak, I loved the exploration of new ideas. I love the concept of human biodiversity, it seems kinda obvious. And scientifically speaking, a lot of revolutionary news comes out of genetics. It has great potential to a better understanding of human reality and experience. Unfortunately, these places became quickly populated by your tired old, truly reactionary, racist and sexist scum that found their perfect excuse in misconstruing any finding for their purposes and deleting any nuances. Think commenter Rob above.
This is about the same thing that had earlier happened to libertarian movements/blogs/sites/societies: within a few years, I couldn’t stand to read them any more either because they had become fig leaves for crypto-fascists. You know, the type that pretends to hate government in every respect and then goes on to applaud police brutality and denying people freedom of movement. Think of it: the freedom to move must be the most basic freedom of them all – and enforcing strict immigration policies must be the most anti-libertarian policy there is. But I disgress.
As for Unz, maybe Steve Sailer is readable on occasion, the rest of it reads suspiciously like Russia Today. Like RT it revels in provocative alternative viewpoints that superficially seem to broaden your mind, until you realize that it’s being “broadened” in a single, carefully curated direction. So, thanks but no thanks.
3. October 2018 at 18:22
MBKA … Yes your critiques get to the crux of the matter. As Nick Land said in his initial opus on Neoreaction, “You are always only 2 clicks away from a white power website.” That is just the way it is in exploring the new right. But it’s still a bad idea to avoid their ideas — because the best science is being done on the right. And that is why politics is moving right. Gen Z (the generation after Millennials) is easily the most right-wing generation in 80 years. They’re not dumb. They process the reality they see in front of their faces.
I think too it’s important to recognize the sheer scale of the corruption of science in the 20th century. With the collapse of the monopoly on distribution of information (which began around 1995) the whole edifice is imploding. The process of re-aligning social mores with scientific reality is probably just getting started. And, as they say, politics is downstream from culture. So one would have to expect the political right to keep strengthening. Certainly we see that in Eastern Europe, the US, parts of western Europe, Philippines and now Brazil.
3. October 2018 at 19:03
Kgaard: no one in Gen Z is old enough to vote yet (depending on where you draw the boundaries). It’s certainly WAY too soon to know how an entire generation will be voting. Also it’s always too soon because you can’t make that kind of sweeping generalization.
You’re projecting from the places you like to read online like Unz to a broad movement. It’s not.
3. October 2018 at 19:15
MSGKings … Well actually I think the empirical data are already coming out and they are pretty shocking. It never occurred to me that Gen Z WOULD be right-wing — I assumed they would be even more left than Millennials. But the polling results of the Trump election among high-schoolers was mind-exploding.
You can sort for race and gender for an 80,000-student poll. Of most interest, white girls — who you’d expect to be 80-20 for Hillary — went for Trump 37-32.
https://public.tableau.com/profile/mycollegeoptions#!/vizhome/PresidentialPolling-Fall2016/PresidentialPolling2016
This was done by the Hispanic Heritage Org in conjunction with another group. Their main point is that youth always predicts the future and Gen Z can start to vote in 2020.
3. October 2018 at 19:35
Cynicism is *excessively* negative; you’re not being cynical when your views are accurate.
3. October 2018 at 19:51
Kgaard,
“But it’s still a bad idea to avoid their ideas — because the best science is being done on the right.”
I really don’t think there is a left and right in there at all. You cant get an ought from an is. “The science” doesn’t justify or demand anything. Example, you can fully accept that global warming is real and still rationally argue to ignore it, for now.
Both the right and the left are making the mistake to confuse the descriptive with the normative. And thus, the right gloats whenever racial differences are documented because they hope to discredit certain groups and curtail universal rights. And the left denies the results in sheer panic that this might justify such action. But rights are not defined from merit but from personhood. All humans to be treated equal before the law. Any moron can vote as long as they’re a person, same for everything else. There is no reason to believe that, say, a higher IQ person is ipso facto a more valuable person (besides: valuable for what? Corporate profit maximization? Cuddling? Farming?). Yet, both the left and the right believe that this is so. As a result, the left denies IQ differences and the right thinks they found the justification to start putting people into camps again.
You can draw the exact opposite normative conclusions from one and the same research. For example, I take biodiversity as valuable diversity in human skills and deficiencies. Note, diversity is qualitative, not quantitative. So, diversity to me means, a toolbox with more tools and a higher resilience to unexpected novel problems. To the right winger, diversity means a less homogeneous society (true), and since they don’t like that on an emotional level, they declare that diversity is bad – a normative act coming from their feelings, not from any science. The conclusion only holds if you like homogeneous societies, where every tool in the toolbox is a variety of hammer. Me, I don’t like homogeneous societies and I’d like more tools in the toolbox. If every tool in your toolbox is a hammer and all you really need is pliers, then even some pretty crappy pliers will be a great addition.
3. October 2018 at 20:02
MBKA … I think one of the big insights of Neoreaction is that, regardless of the race-and-IQ issue, it’s clear that people vote their DNA. The promise of multi-racial society was that we would become color-blind and people would not vote their DNA. But that is not what happens. So the more diverse a society, the more tension. Heartiste keeps a running collection of links to scientific papers supporting the mantra that “diversity + proximity = war.” This is not what anyone wants to hear and so the data are suppressed. But again, people can process what they see with their eyeballs.
The same holds with men and women, or with marrieds and singles. One of Sailer’s interesting observations is that the Dem/Rep voting gap between married and single people is wider than the gap between men and women. There is a tremendous amount of information in there. The policy implications to be drawn are nearly all conservative.
3. October 2018 at 20:40
Kgaard,
I really appreciate the discussion… but again I have to disagree. The current wave of nationalism doesn’t vote for their DNA at all, they vote for national identity, a completely abstract concept that never existed before book printing and more explosively, the more modern forms of mass media. Benedict Anderson is very readable on that, and very convincing, in “Imagined Communities”. We know very well that nationality has hardly anything to do with DNA. We could already infer this from history but we know it directly from DNA as well.
Within nations, men don’t particularly vote for men more, nor do women vote more for women
Some of the most stable societies on this planet are the most multicultural and multilingual – Switzerland anyone? Or the US for that matter? Or the United Kingdom of 4 tribes, culturally and linguistically far apart before they all ended up speaking English anyway? Conversely, some of the currently most “homogeneous”, “natural nations”, were historically the most divided and most bitten by endless internecine warfare – Germany springs to mind.
So, no, I don’t see your conclusions – at all.
There are trade-offs between diversity and stability, but the better approaches to this will tell you that societies such as the US, i.e. highly diverse, seem to represent a near optimum regarding the outcomes, and the trade off between tension and fertility. Example, Ashraf and Galor, 2011, ‘The “Out of Africa” Hypothesis, Human Genetic Diversity, and Comparative Economic Development’ for a nice try.
3. October 2018 at 20:42
@Kgaard: what does ‘vote their DNA’ mean? And what insight does that idea confer?
I object to the framing anyway. We’re not the least bit diverse. We are all humans. Our similarities are far greater than our differences.
3. October 2018 at 20:48
Yes, all nations were cobbled together by force. That’s why they invented flags — to give people a sense of common identity.
But the examples you give are sort of cherry picking. The DNA gap between the various types of original German or British-Isles inhabitants is extremely narrow relative to between any of them and, say, Pakistanis or Nigerians or Jamaicans. That’s what the issue is today.
I mean just look at what is happening. Look at Sweden, Hungary, Denmark, Brexit, Trump, Bolsonaro. The idea this is somehow a “mistake” or “not really happening” or some form of misguided evil is willfully ignoring the reality on the ground and in the science. I am not pointing fingers at you in particular because you’re willing to discuss it. But most aren’t. And they are going to be run over by the future.
Regarding Switzerland, here again the DNA spread between an Italian Swiss and a German or French Swiss is not that wide. But the Africans pouring into Lausanne and Geneva … I mean … the DNA gap there is a chasm. That is what’s at issue.
3. October 2018 at 21:01
Scott, long time reader, zero time commenter.
It sounds like you need to go camping. Get offline for a bit and breath some fresh air and then sit around the campfire with friends.
3. October 2018 at 21:53
@Kgaard: The changes are happening sure, but human tribes have always changed, intermixed etc. The world will be very different in the future, but future us will like it because it’s what they know. You will be long gone.
And they will be wealthier and less violent than we are.
Try some Matt Ridley “The Rational Optimist”
@mbka: Really good posts.
3. October 2018 at 22:16
Kgaard,
OK so let me discuss your examples instead, so that I may not be cherrypicking.
Sweden: lots of refugees
Hungary: didn’t accept any refugees
Denmark: lots of refugees but also quite restrictive policies by traditional parties going on for a while now
Brexit: lots of people from all over the former empire, trend has been going on for a century, peacefully. Now “The people” move to kick out fellow Europeans, while keeping the Pakistanis. DNA??
Trump: not a refugee in sight in the US. The refugee numbers the US take in, in proportion to country size, are pretty exactly 1/100 of what the Germans took in. Some take offense at Mexicans but Canadians are hated even more, apparently. DNA? Hard to believe. “Latinos” are basically European DNA, Mayan DNA is much more rare in Mexicans.
Bolsonaro: Multiracial society for centuries, no recent immigration waves. That being said, Wikipedia says that “The increase in Bolivian immigrants in Brazil is one of the social consequences of the political crisis affecting that country.” Is Bolivian DNA that different? Same religion too, latin culture etc. Besides, far more people come from Portugal (277,000 p.a.) and Japan (90,000ish) each year than from Bolivia (1,500 monthly = 18,000 p.a.), if you believe the numbers on the same page. Into a country of 190 Mio., mind you: they’re being “diluted” by Bolivians at the whooping rate of 0.0094% annually.
I see no trend other than every once in a while “the people” get a collective fit worldwide and elect dangerous people because they’re bored with the previous path to prosperity. Same thing with WW1 and its aftermath – no large scale immigration from the middle East back then, while the DNA difference between the French and the Germans seemed to matter a whole lot. After WW1 then, half* of European nations turned fascist all by themselves, even before being invaded by Hitler.
*not exactly half, but a whole lot.
3. October 2018 at 22:26
@msgkings
Thank you.
3. October 2018 at 22:40
Re-reading the Wikipedia entry on recent trends in immigration to Brazil, the entry and the numbers don’t tally up – first they say most immigration now is Chinese and Koreans, then in the same paragraph the table says it’s mostly Portuguese and Japanese, as of 2012. As for Bolivians, the context implies they are blamed for problems, but the sentence implies they come because of problems in Bolivia. Either way, the numbers don’t imply any much significance. Japanese must have the most alien DNA to Brazil, yet they have always immigrated in significant number and no one seems to complain about them.
4. October 2018 at 02:11
Will Mao jackets make a comeback?
“Xi Jinping makes a Maoist bet on China’s economy”
Call for ‘self reliance’ reflects resolve to never bow to Donald Trump
KATSUJI NAKAZAWA, Nikkei senior staff writer
October 04, 2018 08:51 JST
I notice Kim, the N. Korean leader, does not bow to Western fashions (or appropriate Western fashions, depending on your viewpoint).
Keep an eye on dress. BTW, the Mao jackets look a lot more comfortable. Who convinced Xi and others to wear suits and ties?
4. October 2018 at 02:37
I just love it how the likes of mbka are just stumped as to why tribalistic attitudes are on the rise.
I mean, all right-thinking people know that people are fungible – so the sudden flood of third world scum cannot possibly be the cause.
Some people were dropped on their heads.
Others were thrown against a wall.
4. October 2018 at 07:30
Too bad Franz Kafka isn’t around to do something with the Kavanaugh proceedings.
4. October 2018 at 12:01
@mbka
Are you just making up things, when science does not match your narrative?
You said: “Hard to believe. “Latinos” are basically European DNA, Mayan DNA is much more rare in Mexicans.”
Here is relevant information from a paper that uses actual science:
“For mtDNA variation, some studies have measured Native American, European and African contributions to Mexican and Mexican American populations, revealing 85 to 90% of mtDNA lineages are of Native American origin [53, 54], with the remainder having European (5-7%) or African ancestry (3-5%) [54]. Thus the observed frequency of Native American mtDNA in Mexican/Mexican Americans is higher than was expected on the basis of autosomal estimates of Native American admixture for these populations i.e. ~ 30-46% [53, 55]. ”
https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-11-293
This says the for Mexican Americans, maternal lineages are derived from native American/Amerindian women that contributed 85-90 percent of the mitochondrial DNA, whereas other results like Y-chromosome estimated only 30-46% native ancestry. This lower estimate that represent the paternal lineages is very different from your claim: [“Latinos” are basically European DNA, Mayan DNA is much more rare in Mexicans]
Also see:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/mexico/1828568-what-ancestry-do-most-mexicans-have-22.html
http://www.academia.edu/4360664/The_Genetic_Impact_of_Aztec_Imperialism_Ancient_Mitochondrial_DNA_Evidence_from_Xaltocan_Mexico
Your claim about Mexican ancestry might be somewhat accurate, if by Mexicans, you mean presidents of Mexico.
If you had actually interacted with Mexicans of different socio-economic backgrounds, like I have, it would be obvious that your claim was nonsense, based on physical appearances.
4. October 2018 at 12:58
Everyone, Nice to see a set of comments on race and IQ that have nothing to do with the post.
Nick, I plan to at some point.
Sean, You said:
“why the majority of allegations end up being false.”
Is this some sort of joke? Or do you live in an alternative reality? Sure, I’ve personally known of a case of a false allegation. But the majority? That’s just silly.
Kgaard, What does Steve Sailor have to do with this post? I’ve read a few of his things, and don’t recall any rape jokes.
And the “best science” has nothing to do with the alt-right. Alt-right people like Steve Bannon dislike the Asians who do so well in Silicon Valley.
You said:
“So the more diverse a society, the more tension.”
Yes, the “tension” here in Orange County in unbearable. Irvine is a hellhole.
Ben, I was thinking of you when I mentioned bias.
Eric, I’d like to get away, but Trump is just too much fun to ignore. I’m addicted.
4. October 2018 at 14:08
@ssumner,
If you want an actual response to your TDS, here you go:
“Today, Trump continues to relentlessly defend any and all men accused of sexual misconduct; Rob Porter, Roger Ailes, Roy Moore, Bill O’Reilly and one other name I can’t recall.”
Trump stopped defending Bill Clinton’s behavior in 2016, and accused Hillary Clinton of sl*t shaming.
Also, I am not aware of Trump defending Weinstein or the Central Park 5.
4. October 2018 at 14:19
Now you get it.
4. October 2018 at 14:39
“Now there are things that are wrong, but there are a lot of mentally ill girls out there and that is a big reason why the majority of allegations end up being false.”
Wow. This is something written by a human, in America, in 2018.
4. October 2018 at 14:55
@Matthew W: Only the 2018 part is definitely true.
4. October 2018 at 16:49
I don’t know what to say Scott … There is a whole movement afoot. The niceties of the 20th century are being overthrown before our eyes. 2016 was a repeat of 1865, but the other side won. (That is the Strauss and Howe interpretation and I think it’s very good.) So the 21st century is not going to look like the 20th in terms of what is considered good, right and correct. Arguing about it is not fruitful for anyone involved, because nobody ever convinces anyone anyway. We vote our DNA and argue our DNA.
4. October 2018 at 17:34
OT, but way interesting:
Tyler Cowen just linked to a Bloomberg story detailing a successful Communist Chinese effort to implant spy chips into motherboards widely used in the US.
When it comes to supply chains….there is a lot to ponder.
4. October 2018 at 17:47
It seems like it took a good bit of research and time to write this.
4. October 2018 at 19:31
@ssumner
Bannon isn’t alt-right.
Now, to be fair, Trump has had his slip-ups. He accused Anthony Weiner of being a pervert and famously invented #MeToo before #MeToo by inviting Bill Clinton’s accusers into the audience of the second presidential debate. And let’s all not forget Ted Cruz.
Amazing. And given I didn’t even comment on the post when this occurred, this seems to be a chronic feature of your comments section, Scott.
At least you admit it.
Aw, people draw conclusions you don’t like, but can’t rebut. Nice going, mbka.
4. October 2018 at 20:36
Can I believe that truly “the best and the brightest” people will do their job what they have to do?
5. October 2018 at 04:37
“French police have opened an investigation into the reported disappearance last month of Meng Hongwei, the Chinese head of the international police organization Interpol, sources close to the inquiry told European news outlets on Friday. Meng was last seen leaving for China from Interpol’s headquarters in Lyon, southeast France, in late September, the source said. His wife reported him missing.”
Well, they say Xi and Putin are BFFs….(and Trump wants into the club?)
5. October 2018 at 05:34
Kgaard,
the niceties of the 20th Century? You mean the second half presumably, because the first half was one of the worst periods in history ever. Even later, til the 90s, nearly half the planet wasn’t doing so great, with the USSR and Maoist China doing their thing. I don’t see people voting their “DNA” either, I gave you many reasons why. Yes, people now seem to repeat the early 20th century, and yes, a belief in nations, “fake DNA” if you will. Real biology has nothing to do with it, it’s all in the head, and if anything then I believe it’s the need for shared identity. That identity isn’t a natural thing mind you, it’s made up.
Viking,
very interesting re: genetics in Mexico, thanks for the links, of course it won’t change my conclusions, because I like diversity. The mtDNA data you cite btw likely don’t say what you think it says. Imagine a world where native Mexican women have children exclusively with European males. The first offspring generation would have 100% native mtDNA but just 50% overall native genes… If the same thing were to repeat another generation, European dads only and mixed race moms from the 1st offspring generation, you’d still have 100% native mtDNA … but just 25% native genes. Hence the discrepancy with the other methods that give a much lower native ancestry number than the mtDNA number, down to 30% according to what you cite.
5. October 2018 at 07:47
Speaking of men of principle, Salim Furth explains;
https://economics21.org/carson-housing-furth?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_campaign=9302e39e1d-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_10_05_12_24_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3c0289e5fc-9302e39e1d-287020937
———–quote———
In 2016, President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers prepared a white paper that was remarkable in that it gently criticized the President’s own housing policy: “While President Obama’s budget calls for increasing investments to provide affordable housing and end family homelessness, HUD’s existing project-based and housing choice vouchers could serve more families if the per-unit cost wasn’t pushed higher and higher by rents rising in the face of barriers to new development.” In the face of local land-use regulations, which drive up the cost of rent, HUD policies were ineffective.
The new Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Ben Carson, aims to succeed where the Obama administration failed. Carson’s department intends to revise one of the landmark housing policies implemented by the Obama administration, a regulation known as “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” (AFFH). Implemented in 2015, AFFH was based on vague language in the 1968 Fair Housing Act that requires that HUD comply with the spirit of “fair housing.” The Obama administration argued that the requirement extends to grantees—states and localities that receive funding from HUD must also comply with the spirit, as well as the letter, of the law.
Carson’s HUD suspended AFFH in 2018 and plans to reframe it to challenge the exclusionary land-use regulations of cities and counties that receive HUD funding.
————-endquote———–
Just one more reason to be grateful that Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton
5. October 2018 at 09:03
Not lame at all Scott, this one put a smile on my face, and I even LOLed a bit. Well done!
5. October 2018 at 09:05
Also, Trump still hasn’t pardoned Dennis Hastert, whom even you, Scott, said was railroaded.
6. October 2018 at 04:36
Scott, would like to see your takedown of this article by David French:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/kavanaugh-case-for-confirmation-allegations-explained/
What am I missing? Is there anyway that Kavanaugh could prove his innocence to you? For me there has to be corroborating evidence to deny him the confirmation, but I could be a weirdo like that.
6. October 2018 at 09:37
@Hoosier: well, it’s a job interview not a trial, so no ‘proof’ is needed. No matter, he’s getting confirmed.
And Reps should be jazzed, the controversy has closed the enthusiasm gap right before the midterms. Dems projected gains have come down significantly lately.
7. October 2018 at 12:13
“He said he would not rape a congresswoman because she was “very ugly”
I’m brazilian and this quote is fake news. But I know we can’t expect more from american media
7. October 2018 at 18:46
The Kavanaugh case (and even more so the Trump case) is the Dreyfus affair of our time.