I don’t know how many of you follow Mike Rowe on Facebook. If you don’t, consider adding him to your list. He’s wonderful. And just yesterday, he hit one out of the park. I’m embedding it here so that everyone can read it. It deserves that kind of attention:
If you’re looking for racism in the immigration debate, look to the Democrats who are projecting against Trump’s race-free words their own vile race hatred.
Donald Trump disputes that he used the word “shithole” when referring to countries the citizens of which do not confer a benefit on America when they immigrate here. He did, however, acknowledge that he used strong language to say that America does not have an obligation to take in immigrants that harm her. Outside of Blue enclaves, in which residents live behind high walls with alarm systems and security guards, ordinary Americans knew precisely what he meant — and were grateful to him for saying so.
As with all other debates (abortion, war, unions, etc.), Democrats are stuck firmly in a pre-modern past. In their mind, immigration is perpetually about the era from 1860 through 1910. Back then, in a pre-technological age, with a population half what it is now, America needed bodies and lots of them. We needed factory workers and street sweepers and house cleaners and tunnel diggers and bridge builders and horse drivers and, during the early 1860s, bodies to be thrown into the Civil War.
Nowadays, America’s needs are different. While there will always be a place for physical labor, the reality is that technology is (a) doing away with brute force labor, whether in farms, factories, or fast food and (b) making literacy a necessity for most aspects of American life.
Moreover, modern America has limited (to no) tolerance for people who can’t use toilets; who murder women for “dishonoring” the family; who murder gays just for being; who espouse murdering Jews as a central tenet of their faith; who murder and dismember albinos for good luck charms; who mutilate little girls by cutting off their external genitalia; who support general slavery or sexual slavery; and who have a disproportionate predilection for rape and pedophilia.
Does this mean that every person from those cultures holding those values is going to commit acts that are anathema in America?* Of course not! But if you’re calculating the odds that one person will be more simpatico to American culture than another, countries of origin matter. Some share our values or at least are not opposed to our values. East Asian immigrants have very different cultural practices from those in America, but their work ethic is in sync with the American work ethic and their cultural practices enrich, rather than attack, the American way of life.
It’s worth noting here that it’s not just countries mired in violence and corruption that give birth to values we don’t want in America. If I had a say in the matter, I’d also argue that, as a Constitutional country, we should have less tolerance for people from socialist countries who, having destroyed freedom on their shores, seek to import their socialism to ours. As far as I’m concerned, we should shut the door on Sweden and large chunks of Western Europe. Meanwhile, Poles and Hungarians are proving pretty damn stalwart.
I’m also hostile to people who advocate legitimately insane positions, such as, for example, those at Google who claim that they are simultaneously animals, people, and buildings. In their own way, these people are just as destructive as the rapists and murderers. And perhaps it’s not a coincidence that some of the loudest SJWs at Google seem to have come from outside of America. . . . [Read more…]
“Shithole countries” is accurate. The US deserves quality immigrants — and sick countries must stop using us as their sewer and address their own problems.
“Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Did Trump really utter that sentence with reference to places such as El Salvador (parent country of MS-13) and various African nations? Who knows? The report comes from the Washington Post, which is about as reliable as the National Enquirer used to be before it was slammed with a $1.6 million judgment when Carol Burnett sued it for libel.
Still, even while doubting the Washington Post’s journalistic integrity, the White House’s official statement makes it plain that, even if the President didn’t phrase the issue so brutally, he believes that America does not need to copy Europe’s suicidal impulses in bringing in immigrants who will drain the economy, change the culture and, perhaps along the way, conduct the occasional mass slaughter against American citizens:
Certain Washington politicians choose to fight for foreign countries, but President Trump will always fight for the American people. The President will only accept an immigration deal that adequately addresses the visa lottery system and chain migration – two programs that hurt our economy and allow terrorists into our country. Like other nations that have merit-based immigration, President Trump is fighting for permanent solutions that make our country stronger by welcoming those who can contribute to our society, grow our economy and assimilate into our great nation. He will always reject temporary, weak and dangerous stopgap measures that threaten the lives of hardworking Americans, and undercut immigrants who seek a better lie in the United States through a legal pathway.
A few points:
1. The president is correct that we currently have virtually unlimited immigration from truly appalling countries that suffer from high crime rates; significant contagious disease problems; mass illiteracy; a tendency towards pedophilia, and, in the case of those African nations, a healthy dollop of early medieval Islamism, complete with the accompanying pathologies of misogyny, homophobia, antisemitism, anti-Christianity, anti-Hinduism, and anti-anything-Westernism (except, of course, very pro our welfare system). Why in the world would any sane modern country want to allow mass migration from those places via chain immigration and visa lotteries? Europe and England, which long since left sanity far behind, give us a graphic illustration of the end point for insane immigration policies.
Saying this does not mean that a humane nation that believes in infusing itself with immigrants should ban people from some of the world’s worst countries. But shouldn’t we get to pick whether we invite in a hard-working, pro-American family man or woman versus having thrust upon us the MS-13 gang member who’s related to a whole passel of other MS-13 gang members already living here or the Islamic fundamentalist who wins a random lottery and brings in his wake 30 equally fanatic family members?
The reality is that in shithole countries, there are (sadly) a lot of people who are not only of no benefit to America, they cause active harm when they come here. Let’s not forget how illegal immigrants commit crime vastly disproportionate to their numbers and how immigrants from rural and Islamist hellholes, whether legal or illegal, are completely over-represented when it comes to sex crimes against children. (And I’m too lazy too look up a link for either of those claims but, if you make the effort, you will see that I am correct.) And none of the above even touches upon the economic costs they inflict on America. (And again, you can find the links if you wish.) [Read more…]
I want to share with you a visit I took to a remarkable school that, through respect and high expectations, raises children up from broken public schools.
Regular readers know that I am not a fan of public schools. I’m a product of public schools as are my children. All of us were fortunate enough to come from literate homes so that we thrived academically despite, not because of, most of our teachers.
As it is, math and chemistry passed me by entirely. My last math teacher was a foul, mentally disturbed man, while my chemistry teacher was counting the days until retirement. Given that those were not strong subjects for me under the best circumstances, these teachers’ academic ministrations did not serve me well. My children, raised in a more affluent community than I was, have fared better in the STEM classes (better schools) but have been ill-served in the liberal arts, which tend to dish up ideology more than knowledge and skills.
People unfortunate enough to be around me when one of my kids’ teachers does something of which I disapprove (a common occurrence) will be treated to one of my tirades about the fact that these people are, for the most, part lazy, uninformed, and overpaid. I especially hate the “uninformed” part. In our fancy school district, we have English teachers who don’t understand subject-verb agreement; history teachers who only know what they recite from their teacher’s copy of the textbook; and science teachers who accept unquestioningly the whole anthropogenic global warming shtick even though all of the predictions have proven wrong. People like this irritate me.
Today, though, I attended a different kind of school, a school so good in its own way that I forgive it even if it does unquestioningly accept anthropogenic climate change or mess up subject-verb agreement. For twelve years, a libertarian friend of mine has been passionately involved with Northern Lights School (“NLS”) a private school in Oakland.
The school started in 1989 when four educators came together to create an alternative to the disastrous Oakland public school district. They looked at the poor children trapped in those schools and thought (rightly) that these children deserved better. Incidentally, when I used the word “poor” in connection with the children, I was not referring to their economic status, even though NLS is an educational haven for students who come from economically disadvantaged homes. Instead, I use “poor” in the sense of “tragic,” meaning helpless beings caught in an untenable education system that grossly under-serves them. [Read more…]
Damore’s and Gudeman’s lawsuit against Google reveals an Orwellian world in which intolerance = tolerance and intellectual diversity = thought violence.
One of the things that made George Orwell such an extraordinarily good writer was that he put clever, memorable phrases in the mouths of tyrants to expose the vast hypocrisy underlying totalitarian thought, all of it expressed through folding, spindling and mutilating language:
“All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.”
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”
When not writing in character for his novels, Orwell’s essays described what totalitarian “thought leaders” were doing and the consequences flowing from their linguistic manipulation and misleading slogans:
“Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
“Orthodoxy means not thinking — not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
I won’t belabor the point. You get the drift.
I mention Orwell because Google, a company that has a disproportionate hold on the flow of information in America and that willingly misrepresents and censors information caught in its net, is a company that has achieved Orwellian perfection among its upper echelon employees. This is not guesswork on my part. I know this because I took the time to read the 161-page complaint that James Damore and David Gudeman filed against Google claiming workplace discrimination against them based upon race, gender, and diversity of thought.
The complaint does not make for pretty reading. That’s not the fault of the attorneys who wrote it. For attorneys, they did a very good job.
The reason it is such a disturbing document is because it’s very clear that a significant majority of Google’s upper management — and it goes without saying that these employees are all products of modern academia — are hard Leftists and vigorous Social Justice Warriors. They subscribe enthusiastically to a world that uses censorship in the name of “freedom,” “peace,” and “knowledge.” [Read more…]
2018 is rife with possibility, so the Watcher’s Council took a crack at New Year’s predictions. In this post, I offer both pessimistic and optimistic views.
As the old year dies away, and the New Year comes in with a bang, at WOW! Magazine, the Watcher’s Council’s site, a few of us had some predictions to offer for 2018. They are informed, thoughtful, and amusing. Here’s my contribution:
I have two sets of predictions, depending on whether I’m in an optimistic mood or not. I’ll start with the pessimistic predictions, so that I can end on a cheerful note with the optimistic ones:
Pessimistic possibilities in 2018 and beyond:
Mueller manages to pull together a package showing that Trump (who Wolff claims in Fire and Fury didn’t even want to win the presidency) nevertheless colluded with Russia and then engaged in obstruction of justice to hide this fact. Despite the complete absence of evidence to support either charge, the media, which remains peculiarly powerful despite open its bias and insanity, manages to convince the bulk of the American people that Trump is not fit to be president, forcing a Nixonian resignation.
The moment Pence steps into Trump’s shoes, the Progressive Wolff pack begins a sustained attack against him, alleging that his hostility to gays shows that he is mentally ill and must be pushed out of office.
With the unending chaos surrounding the Oval Office, the American people attempt to clean house by handing both the House and the Senate to the hard-Left, Progressive wing of the Democrat party. If the timing on this works out well, Pence’s being pushed out of office coincides with Nancy Pelosi having retaken her position as Speaker of the House. She is now President Pelosi.
At this point, two things can happen. First, flush with power, Pelosi clings to her new position like a tick embedded in a pig’s ear. Alternatively, having ascended to the White House, she appoints Michelle Obama as her Vice President and promptly resigns. Michelle Obama is now president of the United States and, for the first time, is really, really proud of her country. [I wrote this before the Golden Globes. since the Golden Globes, it’s clear that Oprah will give Michelle a run for her money in this dystopian fantasy. [Read more…]
Leftists live in a world that sees Hillary as a martyr, Trump as insane, and Oprah as presidential material. For us Normals, ridicule is an easy weapon.
When I have a few moments, I’ll write about what a disaster Oprah is and how unfit for president. Until then, this video clip will suffice.
Oprah’s solution to racism; Old white people “just have to die”.
What a horribly divisive message. pic.twitter.com/NOtaft2xxf
— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) January 8, 2018
If the clip won’t load, you can see it here. I guess we should just be grateful that she’s contemplating a natural death for wrong-thinking people, rather than advocating for government intervention. But wait; as sure as night follows day, once a Leftist aggregates just enough power, that will come too.
Also, Matt Walsh wrote the best Golden Globes review I’ve seen today.
A year after the collusion story against Trump took hold, we know it’s fake and it’s boomeranging with potentially serious consequences against Democrats.
The year 2017 started with the Proggies pushing the “Trump colluded with Russia” narrative to overturn Trump’s election. 2017 ended with the collusion narrative in tatters and on its way back to bite the Proggies in the posterior, if indeed, as it seems, the entire investigation, including FISA warrants, was a joint operation of the DNC, Hildabeast, Fusion GPS, and the FBI to criminally misuse the legal system to undermine Trump, both during the campaign and then after the election. It makes bugging the DNC headquarters at the Watergate Hotel look quaint in comparison.
So, 2018 starts with the Proggies unable to push the collusion narrative, tied as it is to the Steele dossier, to undermine Trump. Instead, the Proggies are on the defensive, doing their best to claim that the Steele dossier was merely ancillary to the collusion investigation. It is quite the enjoyable “shirt collar” moment.
Going full circle to the moment Trump fired Comey, the new hotness is, once again, that Trump obstructed justice. The only thing that comes anywhere close to a colorable obstruction claim was Trump’s telling Comey that he hoped the FBI could see its way to treating Michael Flynn with leniency. As I pointed out here at the time, Trump’s words, as well as Comey’s contemporaneous interpretation – that he was not being ordered to end the investigation of Flynn – always meant that the event cannot serve as the basis for an obstruction of justice charge. Period.
Indeed, it seems that the Proggies’ primal scream of “obstruction,” always inchoate, now extends far beyond, Flynn. The latest narrative is that Trump, to win the 2016 election, tried to obstruct the entire investigation into collusion between his administration and Russia. Leaving aside, for the moment, that it seems ever more likely that the investigation is itself unlawful, the Proggies are suddenly claiming that they are in possession of new evidence that Trump obstructed everything. This charge comes from the latest op-ed in the Times, Did Trump Obstruct Justice? [Read more…]
I think Chuckles the Clown sums up this illustrated edition: “A little song, a little dance, a little Seltzer in your pants.” It’s a mish-mash.
The University of British Columbia apologizes for the fact that its online application is so old-fashioned it contemplates only two sexes: male and female.
The college application process can be an eye-opening experience. Yesterday I blogged about the fact that the University of Oregon gives applicants two options when it comes to admission essays: (1) identify yourself as a victim or an oppressor or (2) explain how you will add to the school’s endless lust for diversity.
Today, it’s my proud duty to inform you that the University of British Columbia is terribly sorry that its currently constructed online application is so primitive that it contemplates only two sexes. No, I’m not kidding:
Currently only two gender designation options are available within the UBC Student Information System. Access and Diversity works with the University to create an inclusive living and learning environment in which all students can thrive and is currently exploring how to better accommodate students with non-binary gender identities within this database. For more information about available supports and services, please contact Access and Diversity.
My Little Bookworm was baffled that I would care about objective facts — in this case, objective facts being the scientifically irrefutable fact that, barring an infinitesimally small number of anomalies, human sex is binary: male and female. While he (thankfully) doesn’t believe in more than two genders, Little Bookworm doesn’t understand why it’s a problem to allow people to claim that there are more than two sexes. I explained to him that, once objective facts are devalued, one is only left with subjective emotions — and the person with the loudest hollering or the biggest gun always wins that argument. I’m not sure that this world view resonated with my 21st century youngster, though.
Here are two more thoughts about the application process, not just at the University of British Columbia, but at all of these colleges and universities: [Read more…]
The University of Oregon has two types of applicants: victims and oppressors — and the latter should identify themselves and their repentance immediately.
Describe an experience with discrimination, whether it was fighting against discrimination or recognizing your contribution to discriminating against a person or group. What did you learn from the experience? In what ways will you bring those lessons to the University of Oregon? (Emphasis mine.)
Please note that the second option in the above essay prompt — “recognizing your contribution to discriminating against a person or group” — implicitly includes a Maoist type of confession and re-education. I don’t know about you, but I find that prompt extremely disturbing insofar as it reveals that the University’s admission committee has lumped all of its applicants into two categories: oppressor and oppressed. [Read more…]
The Gorilla Channel spoof of Michael Wolff’s Fire and Fury is a gift that keeps giving because it reveals the Left as credulous, incurious, and hate-filled.
Between actual paying legal work and endless college application forms for one of the Little Bookworms, this is my first quiet moment at the computer. Since neither the legal work nor the applications are done, you’ll get nothing profound from me today. Instead, I offer you a variety of Gorilla Channel jokes, some other laughs, and a few things to make you think.
Here’s the parody tweet that started it all:
Wow, this extract from Wolff’s book is a shocking insight into Trump’s mind: pic.twitter.com/1ZecclggSa
— the gorilla channel thing is a joke (@pixelatedboat) January 5, 2018
The original Gorilla Channel:
And the jokes are irresistible, starting with credulous Leftists making fools of themselves through confirmation bias:
Today’s Left accords great intellectual respect to Democrat actors but I can remember a time when the Left openly called at least one actor (Reagan) stupid.
Those of us alive during the Reagan era, whether when he was California governor or United States president, remember that a consistent insult that the Democrats hurled at him was that he was “an actor.” This was understood to mean that Reagan was stupid and ill-informed because actors — mere puppets who repeat words other who put in their mouths and who, often, barely graduated from high school before heading for Hollywood — could not be expected to know facts, understand complex systems, have moral principles, or function in an executive capacity.
Given the disdain for Reagan’s pre-political career, it’s amusing today that Democrats give such political deference to actors, a thought that occurred to me when I read Mark Tapson’s excellent Truth Revolt article this morning about two of Hollywood’s top-tier actors: [Read more…]
My first illustrated edition for 2018 and it’s a doozy. I know you’ll get some good laughs with this one as well as some big smiles and thoughtful moments.