Archive for 2016

IN THE FUTURE, EVERYONE WILL BE HITLER FOR 15 MINUTES:

The election is over and Trump supporters are trying to mind their own business, as usual. Meanwhile, Clinton’s supporters are on the streets to protest people who act the way they are acting. How did things get this crazy?

Well, most of it has to do with Clinton’s persuasion experts and supporters framing Trump and his supporters as the next coming of Hitler. . . .

With this kind of messaging you should not be surprised to see crowds attacking Trump supporters. The attackers feel they have the moral authority to do so. Here’s a fresh example where a group of Clinton supporters repeatedly beat an older Trump supporter on camera. The scary part is that they appear to be proud of it, as though it is morally justified.

Just like with the Hutus and the Tutsis. Hey, who was President when that happened?

HEH:

screen-shot-2016-11-10-at-6-40-31-pm

Almost as good as this one:

matt_yglesias_memory_hole_10-26-16-5

Hard to say who’s more fun, Matt Yglesias, or Paul Krugman. What can I say, the world would be a sadder place without them and their predictions!

OF COURSE IT IS: Police: Reported hate crime against woman in Muslim headscarf was a hoax. “A young Muslim woman claimed she was attacked and robbed of her headscarf and wallet by two men, one of whom wore a Trump hat, but police are now saying it was a hoax. The attack supposedly took place in Louisiana where the woman is a student.”

NBC fell for it, of course. “This story really checks all the boxes. It took place in the south. It appeared to involve obvious bigotry by the thieves. And, of course, there’s a connection to Trump. The ACLU of Louisiana quickly put out a statement condemning the attack.”

But it never happened. Maybe the ACLU shouldn’t be so quick to make unfounded accusations that smear people based on their political affiliations, since they’re a civil liberties organization. . . .

ARE VITAMIN D DEFICIENCIES less common than thought? I’m not going to stop taking it.

“COMMENTARY: THE UNBEARABLE SMUGNESS OF THE PRESS,” as diagnosed by Will Rahn, who came to CBS News via the Daily Caller:

So much for that. The audience for our glib analysis and contempt for much of the electorate, it turned out, was rather limited. This was particularly true when it came to voters, the ones who turned out by the millions to deliver not only a rebuke to the political system but also the people who cover it. Trump knew what he was doing when he invited his crowds to jeer and hiss the reporters covering him. They hate us, and have for some time.

And can you blame them? Journalists love mocking Trump supporters. We insult their appearances. We dismiss them as racists and sexists. We emote on Twitter about how this or that comment or policy makes us feel one way or the other, and yet we reject their feelings as invalid.

It’s a profound failure of empathy in the service of endless posturing. There’s been some sympathy from the press, sure: the dispatches from “heroin country” that read like reports from colonial administrators checking in on the natives. But much of that starts from the assumption that Trump voters are backward, and that it’s our duty to catalogue and ultimately reverse that backwardness. What can we do to get these people to stop worshiping their false god and accept our gospel?

We diagnose them as racists in the way Dark Age clerics confused medical problems with demonic possession. Journalists, at our worst, see ourselves as a priestly caste. We believe we not only have access to the indisputable facts, but also a greater truth, a system of beliefs divined from an advanced understanding of justice.

As Rahn writes (and it’s astonishing his article got published by a news division whose president is the brother of Obama’s disastrous middle eastern guru Ben Rhodes),  “The mood in the Washington press corps is bleak, and deservedly so.”

How bleak? This was a tweet CBS published, and then deleted yesterday:

cbs_trump_9-11_11-10-16-1

Found via Kate of Small Dead Animals, who has video of Milo Yiannopoulos surveying the departed lifeboats from the MSM’s Titanic as Trump was accepting his victory early Wednesday morning.

UPDATE: And again: No, THIS is deplorable: Mother Jones’ Clara Jeffery compares Trump’s win to 9/11.

FLASHBACK: Trump has only himself to blame for likely loss. “There is no electoral path to the presidency left for The Donald. He knows there isn’t. So now he is trying to de-legitimize the election by claiming that it has been rigged by a shadowy global conspiracy to prevent him becoming president of the United States.”

Of course, now that he’s won, it’s Democrats trying to de-legitimize the election.

NO PIMPING IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL RECONCILIATION: A paraphrase of an assessment of Elijah Cummings’ behavior found in the linked article:

Elijah Cummings, the Maryland Democrat who pimped his own reputation to protect the Clintons during investigations of Hillary’s email server and the Benghazi terrorist massacre of 2012, tried to cover for the Clintons again. This time in the name of national reconciliation. “After everything our country has just been through—and particularly given that Donald Trump and [House Speaker] Paul Ryan have both called for healing our nation’s divisions — I think the American people deserve more from Congress than to continue squandering taxpayer dollars on these baseless Republican accusations and partisan attacks,” he said in a statement, according to The Washington Post.

Yes, Cummings harmed his own reputation. Read Part IV of the Select Committee on Benghazi’s report. You’ll find indications that several things Cummings said and did vaguely stink of obstruction of justice.

Obama had better not pardon Hillary Clinton.

At the moment Rudy Giuliani is delivering that message.

On an appearance Thursday on “Fox & Friends,” Giuliani said there is simply too much at stake for the questions swirling around Hillary and the Clinton Foundation to go unanswered. Washington is already buzzing with the possibility that Obama could grant Clinton some kind of a pardon to protect her from prosecution after Attorney General Loretta Lynch is no longer in charge of the Justice Department. Justice demands those questions be answered, Giuliani told the panel.

Indeed. Trump’s voters overlooked his words. They did not overlook her crimes.

TRUMP/OBAMA MEETING, SCHEDULED FOR 10 MINUTES, WENT FOR 90. That’s because it took Obama that long to explain the whole alien invasion thing. Trump nearly let the cat out of the bag with his reference to “high-flying assets,” which of course refers to our new fleet of Cheddite-projector powered space interceptors.

I’M NOT SAYING THAT IT’S ALIENS. BUT IT’S ALIENS: Saturn’s North Pole Just Changed Color And Nobody Knows Why. “Just when you thought our planet had enough doomsday problems to grapple with, Saturn went ahead and changed colors on us. Specifically, Saturn’s north pole—a hexagonal vortex that Gizmodo claims could swallow our planet whole. While no one knows for certain how Saturn’s north pole came to be this way, scientists have been tracking its shifting hue thanks to the Cassini Imaging Team, a probe that has been circling the planet since 2004. Based on images beamed back from Cassini, the hexagonal pole was blue back in 2012; since then it’s progressed into bright gold.”

Obviously the construction nanobots have entered a new phase. More here.

THE REVENGE OF SCOTT BROWN: Election 2016 — It All Started With Obamacare.

As Trump’s critics have noted, it’s always sad to see a populist huckster selling snake-oil that he doesn’t believe is true, uttering the same old lies over and over again, figuring the rubes won’t notice when what he’s offering turns out to be vaporware.

SOME PRETTY GOOD ADVICE FOR UPSET DEMOCRATS FROM CRACKED:

2. Half of America did not, in fact, just reveal themselves to be closet Nazis.

My family back home aren’t Nazis. Neither are their neighbors. This is the last thing many of you want to hear at the moment, and that’s fine — feel free to bookmark this and read it a few months from now. But you can see the numbers for yourself, if you go issue by issue. Shit, at least three Trump states just voted to legalize marijuana, maybe more by time you read this. This is not your grandfather’s GOP. This is something different.

The truth is, most of Trump’s voters voted for him despite the fact that he said/believes awful things, not because of it. That in no way excuses it, but I have to admit I’ve spent eight years quietly tuning out news stories about drone strikes blowing up weddings in Afghanistan. I still couldn’t point to Yemen on a map. We form blind spots for our side, because there’s something larger at stake. In their case, it’s a belief that the system is fundamentally broken and that Hillary Clinton would have been more of the same. Trump rode a wave of support from people who’ve spent the last eight years watching terrifying nightly news reports about ISIS and mass shootings and riots. They look out their front door and see painkiller addicts and closed factories. They believe that nobody in Washington gives a shit about them, mainly because that’s 100-percent correct.

That pressure was building and building all around us, and we kept ignoring it. We media types were baffled when Trump won his first primary, and then his second, and then his third. We desperately tried to figure out how the system had failed. We were bemused when he won the nomination, then when he continued to hang around in the polls, we had approximately the same reaction one would have to seeing an invisible dagger floating across the room, aimed right at our fucking face. “How is this happening?!?”

Stop being baffled. Understand why it happened. Do the opposite of panic. Work through the problem.

Related: Trump won because college-educated Americans are out of touch: Higher education is isolated, insular and liberal. Average voters aren’t.

The most important divide in this election was not between whites and non-whites. It was between those who are often referred to as “educated” voters and those who are described as “working class” voters.

The reality is that six in 10 Americans do not have a college degree, and they elected Donald Trump. College-educated people didn’t just fail to see this coming — they have struggled to display even a rudimentary understanding of the worldviews of those who voted for Trump. This is an indictment of the monolithic, insulated political culture in the vast majority our colleges and universities. . . .

Sometimes the college-educated find themselves so unable to understand a particular working-class point of view that they will respond to those perspectives with shocking condescension. Recall that President Obama, in the midst of the 2012 election cycle, suggested that job losses were the reason working-class voters were bitterly clinging “to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” The religious themselves, meanwhile, likely do not chalk their faith up to unhappy economic prospects, and they probably find it hard to connect with politicians who seem to assume such.

Thus today’s college graduates are formed by a campus culture that leaves them unable to understand people with unfamiliar or heterodox views on guns, abortion, religion, marriage, gender and privilege. And that same culture leads such educated people to either label those with whom they disagree as bad people or reduce their stated views on these issues as actually being about something else, as in Obama’s case. Most college grads in this culture are simply never forced to engage with or seriously consider professors or texts which could provide a genuine, compelling alternative view.

For decades now, U.S. colleges and universities have quite rightly been trying to become more diverse when it comes to race and gender. But this election highlights the fact that our institutions of higher education should use similar methods to cultivate philosophical, theological and political diversity.

A bunch of InstaPundit readers who are students or faculty at various universities have been forwarding me emails about dealing with the “shock” “fear” and “dismay” that people on their campuses are supposed to be feeling. These emails generally either come from, or are copied to, the school’s “Office of Diversity and Inclusion” or some such. Yet the notion that a candidate supported by a big electoral majority is somehow beyond the pale — so much so that merely contemplating the election results is psychological trauma — is itself a slap in the face at the notion of diversity and, of course, a way of excluding the (many) students at these institutions who supported Trump from the university community. This should be a wakeup call for higher education, but I predict that the snooze button will be hit again.

TO BE FAIR, THAT IS TRUE IN HER CASE: ‘White people ruined America’: Samantha Bee takes aim at Caucasian voters after Donald Trump’s win over Hillary Clinton.

Perhaps Bee should take a careful look in the mirror, and then go shop at the Gap.

Flashback: Hillary Clinton’s Samantha Bee Problem: “Something like this happened once before: In the 1960s and 1970s, the culture shifted decisively leftward, but American voters shifted to the right and answered a cultural revolution with a political Thermidor. That Nixon-Reagan rightward shift did not repeal the 1960s or push the counterculture back to a beatnik-hippie fringe. But it did leave liberalism in a curious place throughout the 1980s: atop the commanding heights of culture yet often impotent in Washington, D.C.”

WE STOPPED HILLARY: “Well, that could have gone a lot worse,”  Kurt Schlichter deadpans:

There’s more good news. For at least the next four years we’ll see a renewed interest in that quaint concept called “checks and balances.” Watch for Donald Trump – excuse me, President Donald Trump – to be the most checked and balanced chief exec ever. And that’s terrific.

Oh, and the media will re-discover curiosity about governmental misconduct and inefficiency again – once the collective weeping ends. Watching their faces collapse like the Nazis in Raiders of the Lost Ark when President-elect Donald Trump crossed 270 was one of the great moments of my life. Their collective pain is our collective joy. And they have a long time and a lot of hard work ahead if they hope to ever regain our trust – but, of course, I have zero confidence that they even understand how completely they have destroyed their own credibility. A few professional journalists knew what was coming – Salena Zito saw what was happening because she left the comfortable cities and went out to actually talk to the people who just shocked the world. Any media outlet interested in actually covering America should swoop her up.

Back to savoring.

Savor the whole thing.

THE NARRATIVE CHANGES TO FIT THE NEEDS OF THE MOMENT: “I am already seeing Democrats blaming the Electoral College, which until a few hours ago was hailed as the great protector of Democratic virtue for decades to come, and Republicans were silly for not understanding how to crack the blue ‘wall.'”

Dems were praising the Electoral College just before the 2000 election, too, back when they thought Al Gore might win the electoral vote but lose the popular vote. They turned on a dime when the reverse happened, of course.

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: U. of Michigan Gives Students Play-Doh, Coloring Books To Cope With Trump. Similarly, “At Tufts University, arts and crafts were on offer. And the University of Kansas reminded students via social media of the therapy dogs available for comfort every other Wednesday.”

Politics as a substitute religion rarely brings much happiness. And again, the question from Charles C.W. Cooke, someone who didn’t support Trump either, should be asked to both students and the teachers who nurtured these screaming campus garbage babies, as Iowahawk memorably dubbed them: “Has Donald Trump’s remarkable rise done anything to change your mind as to the ideal strength of the State?”

UPDATE: Seen on Twitter today:

when_everyone_gets_a_trophy_11-10-16-1

BRENDAN O’NEILL: The sneering response to Trump’s victory reveals exactly why he won. “This response to Trump’s victory reveals why Trump was victorious. Because those who do politics these days — the political establishment, the media, the academy, the celeb set — are so contemptuous of ordinary people, so hateful of the herd, so convinced that the mass of society cannot be trusted to make political decisions, and now those ordinary people have given their response to such top-down sneering and prejudice. Oh, the irony of observers denouncing Middle America as a seething hotbed of hatred even as they hatefully libel it a dumb and ugly mob.”

EVERYONE IS CONSERVATIVE ABOUT WHAT HE KNOWS BEST—EVEN THE LONDON GUARDIAN!

Here’s a video of [Naomi] Klein and the Leap crew laughing when a supporter asks them how they expect to pay for this grand “green,” social justice scheme…That’s why this punchline is priceless:

At the very bottom of this blather about sharing and caring and “redistribution” and a “real left,” we see this text, highlighted, and complete with Amazon’s proven “give us money” orange buttons at the bottom:

Since you’re here … we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading the Guardian than ever but far fewer are paying for it…

And there you have it:

Socialism. Why it can’t work.

Read the whole thing.

(Classical reference in headline.)

SORRY, ANTI-TRUMP PROTESTERS, but this is what democracy looks like.

UPDATE: From John Althouse Cohen:

It doesn’t matter that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, just as it didn’t matter that Al Gore won the popular vote.

In both cases, I would have preferred the Democrat over the Republican. But I lost, and I can only accept the results of the election — just as so many people were urging Donald Trump to do if he lost. The same people would have been outraged if Trump had refused to accept the results after winning the popular vote but losing the Electoral College.

If you want to switch from the Electoral College to a popular-vote system, put your money where your mouth is. Do the hard work of lobbying for a constitutional amendment. This would take a long time, and you’d have no assurance that it would end up favoring candidates you happen to like. But it would be more effective than ad hoc complaints about the results of a particular election.

This is not just a legal technicality. When you look at the popular-vote totals, that’s not what it would be under a system where the candidates were trying to win the popular vote. In that hypothetical alternative universe, all sorts of things would be different, and there’s no telling what would have happened. The campaigns would have focused on places like California and New York instead of Nevada and New Hampshire. . . .

The only thing the candidates were trying to do was to win the Electoral College, so that’s the only fair basis for judging their results.

Yes.