51 thoughts on “News/Politics 9-8-18

  1. Obama should just shut it before he embarrasses himself any further.

    And then better men than him wouldn’t have to issue public corrections.

    —————

    And in case you don’t know who Kris is…..

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kris_Paronto

    “Kris “Tanto” Paronto is an American author and speaker as well as a former U.S. Army Ranger and CIA security contractor.[1] Paronto is known for his actions while part of the CIA annex security team during the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stephens and the CIA compound in Benghazi. He is featured in the book 13 Hours: The Inside Account of What Really Happened in Benghazi and is credited as a co-author. Paronto was portrayed by Pablo Schreiber in the film 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi. He is author of the 2017 self-improvement novel The Ranger Way: Living the Code On and Off the Battlefield.”

    Like

  2. Others bashed Obama as well. Liberals quickly rushed to Obama’s defense. That didn’t go well either. 🙂

    ———————————–

    ———————————–

    Which is false. Better men than him drew that duty. ..

    ———————————

    And O’Neill would know….

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_J._O%27Neill_(U.S._Navy_SEAL)

    “Robert J. O’Neill (born April 10, 1976) is a former United States Navy sailor. A former U.S. Navy SEAL and special warfare operator, O’Neill has claimed to have fired the head shots that killed Osama bin Laden during the raid on his Abbottabad compound on May 2, 2011”

    Like

  3. Conservatives from Ben Sasse to Tom Nichols all agree that the op-ed by Mr. Anonymous will be completely counterproductive and make it more difficult for sane aides to steer Trump away from idiotic behavior and decisions. On the other hand, the article made Dear Leader and the entire Cult go completely nuts so I completely understand why the author published it. At this point, there is no avoiding disaster, so we might as well maximize the laughs on the way down.

    Like

  4. The only ones that went nuts Ricky was you and the press. 🙄

    Unproven allegations from anonymous and cowardly leakers have that effect on you guys for some reason.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Like with the gender dysphoria study, more science is squashed for being accurate, but politically incorrect.

    https://quillette.com/2018/09/07/academic-activists-send-a-published-paper-down-the-memory-hole/

    “In the highly controversial area of human intelligence, the ‘Greater Male Variability Hypothesis’ (GMVH) asserts that there are more idiots and more geniuses among men than among women. Darwin’s research on evolution in the nineteenth century found that, although there are many exceptions for specific traits and species, there is generally more variability in males than in females of the same species throughout the animal kingdom.

    Evidence for this hypothesis is fairly robust and has been reported in species ranging from adders and sockeye salmon to wasps and orangutans, as well as humans. Multiple studies have found that boys and men are over-represented at both the high and low ends of the distributions in categories ranging from birth weight and brain structures and 60-meter dash times to reading and mathematics test scores. There are significantly more men than women, for example, among Nobel laureates, music composers, and chess champions—and also among homeless people, suicide victims, and federal prison inmates.

    Darwin had also raised the question of why males in many species might have evolved to be more variable than females, and when I learned that the answer to his question remained elusive, I set out to look for a scientific explanation. My aim was not to prove or disprove that the hypothesis applies to human intelligence or to any other specific traits or species, but simply to discover a logical reason that could help explain how gender differences in variability might naturally arise in the same species.

    I came up with a simple intuitive mathematical argument based on biological and evolutionary principles and enlisted Sergei Tabachnikov, a Professor of Mathematics at Pennsylvania State University, to help me flesh out the model. When I posted a preprint on the open-access mathematics archives in May of last year, a variability researcher at Durham University in the UK got in touch by email. He described our joint paper as “an excellent summary of the research to date in this field,” adding that “it certainly underpins my earlier work on impulsivity, aggression and general evolutionary theory and it is nice to see an actual theoretical model that can be drawn upon in discussion (which I think the literature, particularly in education, has lacked to date). I think this is a welcome addition to the field.”

    So far, so good.

    Once we had written up our findings, Sergei and I decided to try for publication in the Mathematical Intelligencer, the ‘Viewpoint’ section of which specifically welcomes articles on contentious topics. The Intelligencer’s editor-in-chief is Marjorie Wikler Senechal, Professor Emerita of Mathematics and the History of Science at Smith College. She liked our draft, and declared herself to be untroubled by the prospect of controversy. “In principle,” she told Sergei in an email, “I am happy to stir up controversy and few topics generate more than this one. After the Middlebury fracas, in which none of the protestors had read the book they were protesting, we could make a real contribution here by insisting that all views be heard, and providing links to them.””
    ——

    “No sooner had Sergei posted a preprint of our accepted article on his website than we began to encounter problems. On August 16, a representative of the Women In Mathematics (WIM) chapter in his department at Penn State contacted him to warn that the paper might be damaging to the aspirations of impressionable young women. “As a matter of principle,” she wrote, “I support people discussing controversial matters openly … At the same time, I think it’s good to be aware of the effects.” While she was obviously able to debate the merits of our paper, she worried that other, presumably less sophisticated, readers “will just see someone wielding the authority of mathematics to support a very controversial, and potentially sexist, set of ideas…”

    A few days later, she again contacted Sergei on behalf of WIM and invited him to attend a lunch that had been organized for a “frank and open discussion” about our paper. He would be allowed 15 minutes to describe and explain our results, and this short presentation would be followed by readings of prepared statements by WIM members and then an open discussion. “We promise to be friendly,” she announced, “but you should know in advance that many (most?) of us have strong disagreements with what you did.”

    On September 4, Sergei sent me a weary email. “The scandal at our department,” he wrote, “shows no signs of receding.” At a faculty meeting the week before, the Department Head had explained that sometimes values such as academic freedom and free speech come into conflict with other values to which Penn State was committed. A female colleague had then instructed Sergei that he needed to admit and fight bias, adding that the belief that “women have a lesser chance to succeed in mathematics at the very top end is bias.” Sergei said he had spent “endless hours” talking to people who explained that the paper was “bad and harmful” and tried to convince him to “withdraw my name to restore peace at the department and to avoid losing whatever political capital I may still have.” Ominously, “analogies with scientific racism were made by some; I am afraid, we are likely to hear more of it in the future.””
    ——————–

    It’s almost like they’re anti-science…..

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Anatomy of a Fusion smear.

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/09/anatomy-of-a-fusion-smear-1.php

    “This past weekend I noted the Wall Street Journal editorial decrying the wrong done to Cleta Mitchell in connection with the Russia investigation(s). Cleta is the prominent Foley & Lardner partner and campaign finance expert. The Journal editorial is “Anatomy of a Fusion smear” (truncated but accessible here on Outline). It appears that the Fusion smear was planted in his accustomed style by Glenn Simpson with a few of his friends at McClatchy.

    I am continuing the exploration of this smear in a few more posts that take us to the Russia hoax engineered by Glenn Simpson as a Clinton campaign contractor. I am continuing this series under the same heading as the Journal editorial. Working on this series I have come to understand that it is Glenn Simpson’s world and we’re just living in it.

    Simpson’s friends at McClatchy are reporters Peter Stone and Greg Gordon. In their March 15 article “Lawyer who worked for NRA said to have had concerns about group’s Russia ties,” they disseminated a fraudulent story about Cleta in Simpson’s continuing campaign to undermine the 2016 election.

    Stone and Gordon allow Simpson to cloak himself under the veil of anonymity. He is vaguely described as one of two “sources” of the story/smear. Stone and Gordon say that they grant the sources anonymity “because of the sensitivity of the matter.” In any normal understanding of the language they employ, that is a bald-faced lie. They grant Simpson anonymity because he is a paid operative and identifying him by name would allow readers to evaluate his allegations for what they are worth.”
    ———-

    Here’s the Journal piece truncated by Outline.

    And further proof that Adam Schiff is a liar.

    https://outline.com/YwRZds

    “A spokesman for Adam Schiff, ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, says the “Minority did not speak with Mr. Simpson or Fusion GPS about this,” though he declined to disclose who named Ms. Mitchell. Our sources say they can’t remember Ms. Mitchell coming up in any of the documents collected or witness interviews conducted for the investigation. So how did Mr. Schiff get his tip? Fusion’s media friends? Mr. Ohr? The FBI? Fusion GPS and Mr. Simpson did not answer a request for comment.

    Ms. Mitchell says the fallout for her goes beyond inconvenience and a false allegation. Mr. Schiff’s team in May sent her a letter demanding testimony and documents, though no one in Mr. Schiff’s office alerted her before naming her in an official document.

    She received similar demands from Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr, who wanted Ms. Mitchell to turn over records related to “the transfer of money, or anything of value” between her and several Russians. After Ms. Mitchell in May responded that she had no information related to any of those Russians and accused the committee of being duped by “Glenn Simpson & Co.,” she heard nothing more.

    But social media attacks on her haven’t ended. “That allegation impugns my ethical integrity and professional reputation,” she says, one reason she’s calling for Mr. Simpson to be prosecuted for lying to a federal official.

    The Russian collusion accusations ginned up by Fusion at the behest of a law firm working for the Clinton campaign haven’t been corroborated despite two years of investigations. But no one should forget the smears that they and their media mouthpieces peddled along the way.”

    Like

  7. I went there for the story, but I stayed for the comments. 🙂

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/14-days-prison-mean-papadopoulos-puzzle-222431917.html

    “When I was a kid I got grounded longer than that for getting home late.”

    “14 days for $28 million – $2 MILLION a day,”

    “Well, it was either 14 days, or he was grounded for a month with no TV………”

    “Boy you Democrats sure are winning this one…”

    “Whatever happened to the Russia investigation?”

    “Mueller: “I’ll show you, I’ll spend millions for a 2 week jail sentence.””

    “Obviously, a pretty serious offense. What did he lie about? Using Splenda in his coffee instead of sugar?”

    “Pretty long article for such a nothing burger.”

    “Wow… Big win for the Blue Wave huh?”

    “Robert Mueller gets somebody in prison for 14 days, while Donald Trump is about to get somebody on the Supreme Court for three decades……. Fair Deal………”

    “so 18 months of investigation 25 million spent no collusion and 14 day prison term.”

    “Mueller losing….bigly”

    Liked by 2 people

  8. The other day, an Anonymous on here commented that Somalia is a libertarian paradise.

    No, it isn’t. I don’t remember the details, but a couple of my libertarian friends have written about why it isn’t. The Non-Aggression Principle, a guiding principle of libertarianism, was probably mentioned.

    Like

  9. Kizzie, That was HRW responding to my statement that many of my successful young friends are becoming increasingly libertarian. Those young friends would love to see political debates between Ben Sasse and Bernie Sanders on the relative merits of free enterprise and free trade vs. democratic socialism. Instead we are likely to get more Booker, Harris and Trump trading baseless charges and highlighting issues such as NFL kneeling in attempts to appeal to fire up their followers.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/07/harris-booker-kavanaugh-supreme-court-810654

    Like

  10. When someone flunked Intro to Macroeconomics, his cultists are going to get fewer Christmas presents.

    Like

  11. We are not “headed toward a place”. We have arrived. Go ahead, Trump, Booker and Harris! Indoctrinate your zombies!

    Like

  12. Yeah that was me. I stopped debating libertarians and just tell them to move to Somalia a libertarian paradise. A bit of a cheap shot but libertarianism deserves it. Its a childish selfish philosophy. Left wing libertarians, anarchists, talk about the non-aggression principle but my Calvinist childhood doesn’t allow me to have a optimistic view of human nature.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. If 14 days in jail is winning, Trump supporters have really lowered the bar. Compare Mueller’s success to the Benghazi investigation…..
    And Obama was clearly referring to the Republican investigation of Benghazi as conspiracy driven not the actual act. To pretend otherwise is to be disingenuous.

    Like

  14. Ricky,

    To equate Harris to Booker is an insult to Harris. I like the woman, Booker I think has very little substance. After 50 years on this planet and watching mostly men abuse power and demonstrate incompetence, I think its time to let women run the show. Harris would do well. Like Warren she does her homework and comes prepared. Unlike Warren, Harris is more relatable.

    Like

  15. Gender dystopia……

    There are legitimate cases of trans both biological and psychological. The difficulty is determining a legitimate case. I have a female student who wants to transition to male. She’s fairly relaxed about it and her mother is lukewarm. She has some mental health issues and rumors of past abuse. When there are other issues involved, i think caution should be exercised. In the meantime, I see no harm in calling her by a new name etc. Last year, a friend had a boy transitioning to a girl. She went all in, dressed like a girl etc. She had a very nice grad dress….the parents were fully supportive. Personally i thought he was gay and autustic so I hope they wait until after puberty before surgery.

    Its interesting to note most kids see nothing strange in her coming out. Mind you, the class also has a lesbian who came out last year and has several piercings by the age of 13. We also have a 13 year old boy who cries when his mother leaves and will often refuse to come to class. The list goes on…..

    Like

  16. HRW, I confess I am not an expert on Democrat Senators, but I wasn’t impressed with any of them during the Kavanaugh hearings. Here is the 2020 Democrat nominee … if he can beat Cruz.

    A white Obama with a Mexican name. He is running as the anti-Trump, running a positive upbeat campaign, selling the typical liberal stuff, but doing so in a winsome manner.

    Like

  17. HRW – I guess it depends on which libertarians you talk to. From what I have read, there are a number of different perspectives among them. The ones I am involved with on Facebook are deep-thinking, mature people who care about human flourishing, and believe in helping others, and really do believe in the NAP. Whether their philosophy is right or wrong, they believe it is best for the most number of people. Their hearts are in the right place.

    Like

  18. HRW, Some conservatives believe that major institutions with a liberal bias suppress data that conflicts with their beloved myths in the same ways that The Trump Cult has created ridiculous fairy tales to explain how Mueller is the villain and Trump is being railroaded.

    Two examples:
    1. For years the major media has underreported the fact that the vast majority of the sexual abuse in the Catholic Church has involved male priests and teenage (not child) male victims. We suspect this has been suppressed for fear of offending the homosexual community.

    2. The gender dysphoria study by the Brown University professor which was recently suppressed is just one example of bias in favor of the politically correct version of “transgenderism”.

    My son has said that both homosexuality and transgenderism are in part fads, relentlessly promoted by the dominant media and popular culture. He also believes that the relentless promotion of transgenderism by the left and the dominant media was a major reason many on the Right lost their minds and turned to Trump. That is of course ironic given Trump’s support for perversion, sexual assaults, Playboy magazine, porn stars, a strip club, etc.

    Like

  19. How it fits together:

    If the Washington Post, the New York Times and CNN and virtually all of popular culture has told people that Bruce Jenner is a “woman”, those same people may not believe it when they are told by those same sources that Trump is a pathological liar, a demagogue and an infantile con man. Of course, anyone who is paying much attention should be able to recognize those obvious facts, but Fox and the rest of the alternative media (plus odd pro-Trump “religious” leaders) lure otherwise rational and sane people right into The Cult.

    Like

  20. I don’t doubt libertarians’good intentions but they’re plain wrong. My anarchist and libertarian friends are nice people but they have a naive view of human nature.

    Like

  21. Your son isn’t entirely wrong but psychological and biological conditions are not entirely a fad. I see parallels to the sudden increase in multiple personalities disorder and repressed memories. These are very real phenomena but suddenly it was everywhere in the 90s. Gender dysphoria is very real but not nearly as prevelant as the data now suggests.

    As for homosexuality, its consistently around 2-4% of the population. And its been my experience in middle school…..about 1-2 students per year.

    Like

  22. Libertarians and libertarian-leaning conservatives, like socialists, tend to advocate that changes be made incrementally. A modest example:

    Like

  23. HRW, I think my son would agree with you that the “fad” element explains only a percentage of the occurrences. For years, I had read the 2% to 4% figure for homosexuality that you cited.

    Here is evidence of the fad element:

    https://features.thecrimson.com/2016/senior-survey/demographics-narrative/

    Another whole area of study which is now suppressed is any study regarding the first 2% to 4%. This includes evidence that young males who are sexually assaulted by males are much more likely than the rest of the male population to become homosexuals. Clearly, there is more to it than being “born that way”. Prior to the last few decades, researchers were allowed to study factors leading to homosexuality, but no more. That area of study is forbidden in the West, even as Trumpkins do not allow themselves to think about what the FBI should have done when it received reports of Russian interference in the election and Russian contacts with various Trump aides.

    Like

  24. HRW – One of my libertarian friends says it is precisely because he understands human nature that he is for smaller government.

    Here’s something he wrote a while back:

    “It was not a private citizen or a private business that put accused witches to death in Salem. It was the government.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that relocated Native Americans along the Trail of Tears. It took a government to do that.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that issued the Dred Scott Decision. It was the judicial branch of the government.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that waged the Civil War. It was rival governments.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that starved millions of people in Ukraine in 1932-1933. It was a government.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that tried to exterminate the Jews of Europe. It was a government.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that attacked Pearl Harbor. It was a government.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that put Japanese Americans into internment camps during World War II. The government did that, too.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that erected the Berlin Wall. It was a government.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that terrorized Cambodia from 1975 to 1979. It was a government.

    It was not a private citizen or a private business that attacked protestors in Tiananmen Square. It was a government.

    Therefore I would ask all my friends to stop telling me that you cannot trust private citizens or private businesses with freedom but you can trust governments with power. I would like you to stop telling me that we need the government to protect us from the harm caused by private citizens and private businesses.”

    Like

  25. Ricky (3:11), yep.

    And sadly, many news consumers have become so tainted and used to reading/hearing only what they want to hear at this point, that even when there is fair reporting, they call it fake news and attack reporters anyway, I suppose because they dare to include both sides of an issue.

    It’s almost a no-win situation for journalists nowadays. Most of us have been vilified by people on both sides, depending on what the story is and what their particular views are.

    Like

  26. Donna, I agree. You have the ideologues on the Left, the Trump Cultists in place of what used to be the Right and a huge number that are just ignorant and apathetic. However, there are still a few who appreciate good journalism. Many of the successful young are bright and open-minded. When they look at the taxes being withheld from their paychecks, they begin to mistrust their leftist former professors. Every time Trump opens his mouth they begin to mistrust their Trumpkin relatives. They are skeptical, but many are voracious readers and they are searching for truth. They present an interesting and important challenge for good journalists and good pastors.

    Like

  27. Suspicious of and estranged from his other advisors, Trump cozies up to his brain trust:

    Like

  28. So Ricky, does it make you feel good about yourself to put down 2 women you never met solely for political reasons?

    That’s pretty sad.

    You need help, like professional help. Seriously.

    Like

  29. Who said I was putting them down? They probably do know more about the economics of trade, the importance of he Western Alliance and the trustworthiness of Kim and Xi than does Dear Leader.

    In addition, they wouldn’t put their advice down in a memo or brief that Dear Leader would never read. They would incapulate their thoughts in a rhyme or a rap that Dear Leader could Tweet out to The Cult.

    Like

  30. Kizzie, I don’t doubt the sincerity and good intentions of libertarians. On the left and right they are well versed in the failures of the state. But they miss the other side of the picture.

    First, businesses don’t exist unless there is a state. Corporations etc are a legal fiction.

    But more importantly, the modern state brought us increased life expectancy, decreased infant mortality, mass vaccination, the disappearance of smallpox, the decline of everyday violence, rule of law, etc. All of these are thanks to govt not individuals and certainly not businesses. Govts make mistakes but they also improve our lives. Its a question of balance.

    Look at where the state doesn’t exist. The failed states such as Somalia, Yemen, CAR, Haiti etc are violent with poor health outcomes and lack a rule of law necessary for individuals to thrive. Outside of a state, honour codes perpetuate violence, lack of law minimizes trade to barter only, life expectancy is minimal, etc.

    We need a state, the only argument should be to their purpose and size.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. I don’t think Ricky is making fun of Diamond and Silk personally just the fact they are out their element. We all play roles in our lives. I’m a teacher, father, boyfriend, ex, coach, union steward, etc. I can play other roles if need be such as guidance counselor but i can’t be an electrician.

    The ladies are reality tv stars not political leaders or commentators. Too see them play that role is so strange it invites laughter or attempts at humor.

    Like

  32. HRW – I agree that we need a balance between enough government and not too much, and I think a lot of (most?) libertarians would agree.

    I have flirted with libertarianism for a while, getting close, than moving away a bit, without completely rejecting the whole shebang.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.