Bookworm Room

Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts.

Bookworm Beat 10/5/2018 — the “Leftists don’t speak for this woman” edition

by Leave a Comment

The Kavanaugh hearings have served a useful purpose in that they revealed the Leftists’ vicious and unbridled lust for power to all Normal Americans.

Bookworm Beat Benghazi LeftistsI’m delighted that it looks as if the Republicans, with help from Manchin and no help from Murkowski, will be able to drag Kavanaugh across the finish line. However, while Kavanaugh’s place on the Supreme Court will enhance that Court’s reverence for the Constitution as written, not just as Leftists desire it, the fissures in America have deepened, which the articles and videos below highlight.

The only bright spot is that, while the fissures are deeper, those on the Leftist side may find themselves more marginalized as those people whom Kurt Schlichter calls “Normals” are increasingly disgusted by the self-styled elites excess and hostility to both Normals and constitutional norms. And with that, some things for you to enjoy:

A reminder why Normals recoiled from the unfounded charges against Kavanaugh. This video is from a Catholic Women’s organization, but I think it readily applies to all women who don’t hate men:

I know that, since the day my son was born, I realized that boys, in their own way, are just as vulnerable as girls. I also realized that today’s social norms are incredibly hostile to men, tearing them down instead of cultivating their manly virtues.

A PragerU video reminds us that feminism is also bad for women. Not only is today’s Third Wave man-hating feminism bad for boys, it’s bad for girls too:

I don’t think we can make enough of the point Klavan advances that Third Wave feminism, instead of cultivating women’s virtues as things that contribute profoundly to the good of society, insists that women must be weaker versions of men. This has resulted in women who drink more, sleep around more, and insist on getting in the way on the battlefield, all while downplaying the one thing that they’re uniquely suited to do: nurturing. It’s ironic really that I say this, because I hate nurturing. But I’m good at it. It’s hardwired, whether I like it or not.

I was actually primed for Klavan’s message because years ago I read an excellent book called Female chauvinist pigs: Women and the rise of Raunch Culture by Ariel Levy, a very depressing book that first exposed me to a world in which young women try desperately, and in a soul-killing way, to compete with men when it comes to sexual excess and debauchery. Men used to think this was a good idea. Sex! Sex! More sex! However, when you look at the horribly damaged women this creates (see the Steve Crowder video, below, and what I have to say about it), men have to be having second thoughts. [Read more…]

The Kavanaugh martyrdom: when the Salem witch trial meets Mao’s Cultural Revolution

by 1 Comment

Brett Kavanaugh’s martyrdom before unfounded, bizarre, nonsensical accusations, is a Salem witch trial redux with hints of Mao’s Cultural Revolution.

Brett Kavanaugh Avenatti SwetnickThe ordeal of Brett Kavanaugh takes us back to the bad old days of the Salem Witch Trials, though our proggies add their own Maoist Cultural Revolution gloss.  If they succeed with Kavanaugh, he will be the first, not the last, to be hanged at Salem’s gallows hill.

And it is just in time for Halloween.  The parallels we are seeing with the Salem Witch Trials are striking.  Wild accusations.  No physical evidence, but the mere charges and their number by “wronged” women supposedly being the proof.  The townspeople thrown into mass hysteria, which plays out today with the mass hysteria the media is trying to create surrounding Brett Kavanaugh.

And as Corey Booker said yesterday, channeling Cotton Mather far more than Spartacus, facts proving innocence or guilt do not matter.  The sheer weight of accusations is sufficient to dispense with Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination.  Dispensing with Kavanaugh’s nomination because of that accusatory weight is a much more humane way of dealing with the accused sans trial than pressing him to death with heavy stones, as the Puritans did to Giles Corey in 1693.

Even the condemned in Salem were given more in the way of due process and a presumption of innocence.

Brett Kavanaugh, an eminently qualified jurist nominated for the Supreme Court, has, by all accounts, acquitted himself stalwartly and honorably as an adult.  And yet the progs and their media arm are throwing everything at the wall hoping that something — anything really — sticks so that they can keep him off of the Supreme Court, forcing another choice that could not possibly be confirmed prior to the November 2018 election . . .

So let’s do a quick review of the charges and the ever-moving goal posts. [Read more…]

The Kavanaugh, Ford, Graham, and Flake show open thread

by Leave a Comment

I’m working on deadline, but I would very much like to hear your take on the way the Kavanaugh nomination has played out for the last two days.

Brett Kavanaugh Avenatti SwetnickSomehow it always happens that, when the news is hot, I’m either out of town or, as is the case for the past two days, hit with mountains of actual paying legal work. I would love to comment in detail about yesterday’s and today’s events, but I simply can’t, because I’m on deadline.

Therefore, all of you need to do the commenting instead.

I’ll just say quickly:

Kavanaugh: I watched his opening statement and kept tearing up every time he teared up. I’m a sympathy crier, but I think my tears were real and were for the lives the Democrats’ scorched earth tactics are destroying.

I found him absolutely compelling. If you watch, his whole body is trembling with emotion. That’s not a sociopath. That’s an innocent man unjustly accused. And if you haven’t watched it, I recommend you do. I usually confine myself to reading things, which is a much faster way for me to get information, but in this case, Kavanaugh’s voice and affect are part of what needs to be seen:

Also, when Kavanaugh talked about weekly attendance at church, something occurred to me: I don’t know about Ford’s faith, but I do know that a man as devout as Kavanaugh believes that he has a soul. With that belief, he also believes that lying or committing unjust violent acts, such as rape or sexual assault, puts his immortal soul in peril.

Kavanaugh knows that he’ll have to answer in the next life for his acts in this life. Those of his attackers who don’t share his beliefs, whether Ford herself, Democrat Congress critters, or the generic Leftists attacking him have a different belief system. They believe that, if they can get away with evil, immoral acts, they’re home free. The thought of a final reckoning before God does not slow them down.

[Read more…]

Senator Lindsey Graham & The Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing

by Leave a Comment

This may well be Lindsey Graham’s finest hour.   If you did not watch the entire hearing, Sen. Graham gives an excellent summary in under 5 minutes.

The hearing “proved” nothing.  We know now, post hearing, no more about the truth or falsity of the charges against Judge Kavanaugh than had been reported in the press through Wednesday.  Christine Blasey Ford asserted; Judge Kavanaugh denied.  No one named by Ford as a witness corroborated Ford’s story, leaving but a bald allegation that none but the most rabid partisan proggie could possibly credit.  And perhaps by Saturday, it appears that Judge Kavanaugh will be voted onto the Supreme Court.

What the hearing did show was just how underhanded the Democrats are in Congress.  This hearing was never about whether Kavanaugh actually wronged Ford 36 years ago.  If that was the concern, Feinstein would have given Ford’s charges to the full Judiciary Committee within 24 hours of receiving them and the charges would have been fully investigated by the Senate.

No, this was about shamelessly abusing process to stop Senate approval of Kavanaugh until after the next Congress was seated, wholly irrespective of the truth or falsity of the allegations.  This is a tried and true tactic of proggies — think of every October surprise when a horrible accusation against a Republican opponent hits the media shortly before the election.  Most recently, Hillary and the DNC planted the Trump collusion narrative in the media just a few weeks the 2016 election.

This one might backfire.  Kavanaugh has a sterling reputation as a judge and a man.  Not a single witness during the confirmation hearing who knew Judge Kavanaugh questioned his character or fitness,  The guy is a boy scout. I can’t see how this does not have a huge impact on Republican turnout in the upcoming election.  Righteous indignation is a huge motivator.

And kudos to Senator Graham for laying it all out clearly.  He pulled no punches in calling out the progressive scum sitting at the table with him, describing how unfairly and unethically they had treated Kavanaugh since after the conclusion of the hearing.  I sincerely hope that Graham or someone on the Judiciary Committee files an ethics complaint against Sen. Feinstein and publicly seeks to have her censured, if not impeached, for her role in this travesty.  And to make sure the rest of America does not forget what she and proggies have done between now and voting day, 2018.  I am sure that there are many people out there who are horrified at the depths of naked proggie ambition and amorality.

#TravisAllenWriteIn — California voters should write in Travis Allen for Senator *UPDATED*

by Leave a Comment

With Dems revealing their unfiltered totalitarianism, and no Republicans on the California senate ballot, write in Travis Allen’s name for U.S. Senate.

Travis AllenUPDATE: I’ve learned, to my dismay, that California disallows write-ins during the main election. Please go here for a different strategy in California.

When Democrats successfully turned California into an Open Primary state, I argued that this would destroy true democracy in California. Spring primaries are the time during which people in a specific party can elect their standard-bearer. Then, as the election nears, these standard bearers make their case to the entire state based upon current social, political, and economic conditions.

In an open primary state such as California, though, open primaries turn the “primary” into a pre-vote before a November run-off. Aside from John Cox’s unexpected (and delightful) appearance on the gubernatorial ballot, come October and November, when voters start paying attention, Californians do not get to hear conservative voices raised on national issues.

The events of the last weeks reveal something else that’s dreadful about Open Primaries, beyond just silencing conservative voices. If last-minute events show that Democrats are unfit to lead in Congress, concerned Californians have no alternatives other than . . . Democrats. That’s precisely what’s happened in this election cycle.

Up until a few weeks ago, California conservatives had two choices if they wished to have a say in sending a Senator to Congress: Kevin de León, who is an openly hard Leftist, or incumbent Dianne Feinstein, who has always positioned herself as a moderate Leftist. For many conservatives, this Hobson’s choice would have resulted in their picking Feinstein as the lesser of two evils.

Now we know, though, that there is no “lesser of two evils” when it comes to the only choices in California for U.S. Senator. Kevin de León remains as hard Left as ever. Dianne Feinstein, meanwhile, has slipped into the equally evil category. First, she was revealed either as the stupid dupe of a Chinese spy or someone who was complicit in Chinese spying. (She did, after all, make bank on China during those same years.)

Bad as Feinstein’s China problem is, worse was yet to come. The Kavanaugh hearings have exposed Feinstein’s utterly disgraceful, morally bankrupt behavior regarding Christine Blasey Ford’s vague, uncorroborated charges against Kavanaugh. [Read more…]

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

by 6 Comments

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: [Read more…]