Fat models on magazine covers — we’re being prepared for the “hungering.”

A tongue-in-cheek look at what it means that Leftists want low production farming (no pesticides, no GMO, etc.) and have a new reverence for fat models.

Fat Models Tess HolidayThe elite always casts itself in opposition to the hoi polloi. It has done so since time immemorial.

In prehistoric times, back about 25,000 years ago, when starvation was the norm, the most revered female figures were fat, really, really fat, as you can see from these pictures of several Paleolithic Venuses. Similar ones can be found all over Europe and most ancient cultures have little fat feminine figures that were obviously meant for worship or luck:

(Is that a pussy hat this golden lady is wearing?)

These women were special — they were well-fed, healthy, and obviously fecund — unlike the scrawny, unhealthy ordinary people who worshiped avoirdupois from afar and with envy.

The Middle Ages were famous for (among other things), their sumptuary laws, the sole purpose of which was to use the power of the state to ensure that peasants didn’t look like aristocrats. The illustrations in Les Très Riches Heures du duc de Berry (circa 1416) illustrate nicely the divide between laborer and aristocrat (although the peasants were cleaned up for this exquisite book): Continue reading

Bookworm Beat 9/18/2018 — the Kavanaugh fraud edition and open thread

Leftist responses to Ford’s accusations against Kavanaugh indicate pretty strongly that they know they’re fraudulent, plus much more on current topics.

KavanaughOn the Kavanaugh accusations, the Left’s line is “don’t ask so we won’t have to tell.” Actually, that’s not quite what Clown News Network reporter Chris Cillizza said. When reminded that Republicans would like to investigate the huge holes and inconsistencies in Christine Ford’s narrative, this is what he said:

Remember, in the Left’s America, the standard is the due process rights do not extend to Republicans. This is because they know that, in the face of fraudulent accusations, due process would expose the fraud. The only way to prevail on stale, uncorroborated, vague accusations is to use a new standard, one that applies only to conservatives, never Leftists:

Ford has nothing to gain? Really? Except for the fact that, as a hard Left person, she may effectively knock out a conservative Supreme Court nominee. Or even if he gets appointed, she will have tainted him in the eyes of half of America, not to mention his own children’s eyes.

And she has everything to lose? Really? When we know she’ll be endless feted on the Left, with invitations to A-List Leftie parties, huge book deals, etc.? I mean, look at the traction a sleazy porn star gained from smearing Trump.

And women never lie? Really?

Apparently a simulacrum of due process is passé for our media solons when they can profit off smears against conservatives.

Debra Katz, Ford’s lawyer, adds a new wrinkle to how due process plays out in Leftist America (emphasis added):

During the interview, Katz revealed that there was another girl present at the party, which allegedly took place in 1982 while Kavanaugh was attending Georgetown Prep. Ford previously told the Washington Post that there were four boys at the party but never indicated if there were other girls beside herself.

“While we have you, perhaps you can help us fill in the blanks on some of her story. She says that she was at a party in probably 1982 in Montgomery County, Maryland. She says that there were four guys there, these are high school students, as was she. There were four guys there. Were there any girls there that day?” anchor Alisyn Camerota asked.

“Yes, there was another girl at this party, yes,” Katz said.

Camerota asked if Ford has tried to talk to any of the other partygoers to see if they will corroborate her story, but Katz declined to place the burden of proof on her client.

“That’s not her job to do that. If this is going to be investigated, it should be done by investigators,” Katz asserted.

Having put out a vague, uncorroborated, confusing narrative, Ford’s job here is done. It’s up to Kavanaugh to prove a negative attached to a gossamer allegation that can be rejiggered to fit any time line and location in the early 1980s.

But in the race to the bottom, Ana Marie Cox may still beat out both Katz and Dowd:

We need to judge Brett Kavanaugh, not just by what he may or may not have done, but how he treats a woman’s pain. And that is something I’m going to be paying attention to on Monday. How does he respond to what’s happening. Whether or not he agrees that this happened with her, does he take her pain seriously? Do the people interrogating her pain take her pain seriously? Now, I’ll give you a spoiler alert, I don’t think Brett Kavanaugh takes women’s pain very seriously, and I know that because of the decisions he’s made as a judge.

Ben Shapiro has the correct take on that outrageous statement:

This is a morally abhorrent statement. So if a woman falsely accuses a man of rape, we don’t judge him based on whether he actually raped her – we judge him based on whether he feels the pain of a person falsely accusing him of rape. The real question of the Duke lacrosse case, by this standard, wasn’t whether a stripper was actually raped – the question is whether the members of the Duke lacrosse team were sensitive to her feelings while she was falsely accusing them of rape.

That would be an insane statement enough. But Cox goes even further: she already knows that Kavanaugh won’t meet her standard of sympathy because he hasn’t decided cases how she likes on key “feminist” issues, presumably like abortion. Now, never mind that Kavanaugh hasn’t actually signaled that he’d be willing to overturn Roe v. Wade. Think about the underlying contention: we can tell whether you are a bad person by your level of sympathy for a rape accuser whom you believe is lying about you, and we can judge your level of sympathy by looking at your political decisions. The logic is simple: if you’re a person who disagrees with Ana Marie Cox, you can be slandered as a rapist, and any attempt to rebut such accusations will amount to a lack of sympathy.

And do remember that, despite all the shrieks of outrage from the left about a hazy 35(ish) year old uncorroborated story with holes large enough to drive a freight train through, the Left has been utterly silent about recent, credible, corroborated claims against DNC apparatchik (and AG candidate in Minnesota) Keith Ellison:

Moreover, not only haven’t they believed the woman, they’ve set out to destroy her. Continue reading

Sunlight is the best disinfectant: Trump’s order declassifying documents

Trump’s order declassifying documents related to the “Russia Collusion” narrative is the best way to destroy Deep State bullies and reveal government rot.

Illustrated edition Trump not a sexual predator Congress Mueller declassifying documentsI am delighted that Donald Trump issued a sweeping order declassifying a huge bolus of documents related to the Russia probe:

The documents ordered declassified are a handful of pages of the June 2017 application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to continue surveillance of Trump campaign aide Carter Page, which originally began in 2016. Trump also ordered all FBI reports of interviews prepared in connection with all surveillance applications of Page be declassified and released.

Trump also ordered that all FBI reports of interviews prepared in connection with all Page surveillance applications be released.

Trump also ordered the declassification of all FBI reports of interviews DOJ official Bruce Ohr prepared in connection with the Russia investigation. Ohr had a close relationship with former British spy Christopher Steele, the author of the dossier connection Trump to Russia. Steele was hired by Fusion GPS, the same opposition research firm that Bruce Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, was contracted by.

Trump also directed the Justice Department and FBI “to publicly release all text messages relating to the Russia investigation, without redaction,” of Comey and Ohr, as well as former FBI Deputy Director Andre McCabe.

The text messages of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were also ordered to be released without redaction. Strzok and Page were both part of the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, as well as the Russia investigation.

Sadly, the DOJ and FBI can still drag their feet on this (which I guess explains why he issued the order now. making it a September surprise, and not closer to the election): Continue reading

Is the accusation against Kavanaugh the culmination of a set-up from 2012? *UPDATED*

A 2012 New Yorker piece naming Kavanaugh as a potential Romney pick for the Supremes may provide the genesis for Christine Ford’s questionable accusation.

Brett KavanaughBy now you’ve all heard that Christine Blasey Ford is the woman accusing Kavanaugh of attacking her 35 years ago, a claim he strenuously and absolutely denies. Her story is a bizarre pastiche of precise details and huge memory holes. It’s also got a big lie planted right in the middle, which is Ford’s claim that she always meant to be private and only went public now because she couldn’t hide anymore.

That’s bull crap. The moment Ford sent a letter to a Democrat pol, she knew with absolute certainty that this would be a big deal, that her name would emerge, and that she’d become the Democrats’ new darling.

But this post is going to focus on one of the more weird things about Ford’s accusation against Kavanaugh, which is the fact her therapist’s notes date from 2012:

Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room. (Emphasis mine.)

Put aside for now the fact that the notes don’t jive with the accusations Ford is making. Focus, instead, on that date: 2012.

It’s a weird date. Keep in mind that Ford, aside from being a Bernie supporting academic, is a psychologist. Part of getting a degree in psychology is going through analysis. One would think that, even if, as a shy 15-year-old, Ford was too afraid to go public with her charge against Kavanaugh, when she went through psychoanalysis on her way to her degree, she would have spoken about this alleged assault, especially because she says it traumatized her for years. But she didn’t. Instead, suddenly, in 2012, she’s bathed in flop sweat from an incident decades before.

So what happened in 2012? Coincidentally (or not), 2012 was another election year.

In 2012, Romney ran against Obama. Up until his 47% gaffe, Romney was doing well. He actually had a shot of winning.

For the Democrats, as has been the case since Bork, having a Republican in the White House, especially with the ever-aging but never retiring Ruth Bader Ginsburg a perpetual risk, raised the specter of a conservative judge getting appointed to the Supreme Court. With that in mind, one Twitter user, who must have an amazing memory, remembered something interesting he’d read back in 2012: Continue reading

Pat Condell on the UK elite’s disgraceful response to Brexit

Pat Condell has an exceptionally clear view of the British elite’s shenanigans when it comes to circumventing Brexit — and what Brits are losing.

Pat Condell on BrexitI’ve had four people send me this Pat Condell video, and it really is worth watching. British people ought to be up in arms about what’s going on. It’s one thing to elect politicians who make and break promises. It’s another thing for the majority to vote for a specific policy and then to have the political elite refuse to enforce it.

Now, of course, these elites are demanding a new vote so that the “stupid, racist, hate-filled British mob” that believes in self-governance and individual liberty can go back to the voting booths and get it right — which means, going Left and handing British sovereignty over to Leftist bureaucratic hacks in Belgium forever. (In other words, the typical Leftist tactic that sees them losing in the voting booth and then demanding recounts forever until they win, at which point the recounts end.)

I seem to remember someone wise writing

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Condell thinks the average Brit is mad and willing to act, but I have my doubts. I think that, if someone took an x-ray of the average Britisher’s backbone it would be indistinguishable from a photo of a limp strand of spaghetti.

So, with that intro, here’s the video: Continue reading

One Time Payment Options