Finally, if all else fails, you can persuade him, in defiance of conscience, to continue the new acquaintance on the ground that he is, in some unspecified way, doing these people ‘good’ by the mere fact of drinking their cocktails and laughing at their jokes, and that to cease to do so would be ‘priggish’, ‘intolerant’, and (of course) ‘Puritanical’.
C.S. Lewis The Screwtape letters X
Sir Humphrey Appleton: All that the press and the people and their elected leaders want to know is who are the goodies and who are the baddies.
Sir Richard Wharton:The problem is that the interests of Brittain nearly always involve doing deals with people that the public think are the baddies…
Sir Humphrey Appleton:…and not helping the goodies occasionally when it doesn’t help us.
Back in the thirties, Stephen Vincent Benet wrote a famous story about Dartmouth’s most well known (with the possible exception of Dr. Seuss) graduate, Daniel Webster — The Devil and Daniel Webster. In that story, the devil is not portrayed as a scary figure in horns and a tail but as a more refined gentleman, ”a soft-spoken, dark-dressed stranger,” who “drove up in a handsome buggy.” That’s Bill Ayers these days.
It brought me to mind of one of the truths of the culture wars that has not changed, how popular culture shapes the ICK factor.
Back in the 30’s and all the way to the early 60’s in the movies & TV of old, it used to be the black hats vs the white hats.
You knew who the good guys were because they wore the white hats and the black guys had the black hats and perhaps mustaches. They let you know that it was good to marry the girl or honorable to fight and that GOD was a fine thing. That families had to stick together, people had to be self reliant and respect for parental authority mattered.
It short they promoted the judeo-christian culture that served the country so well.
While movies makers will tell you this no longer happens because they’ve “grown” or “matured” the actual fact is the movie and TV industry does exactly the same thing they did before on a regular basis, but promoting a different set of values more subtlety.
The idea is to cloak the cultural norms and mores that they wish to advance and those who practice them in a positive way, at best creating an acceptance of behavior that on its face would normally be unacceptable or at least create enough moral ambiguity among others to keep them from objecting too loudly. Can’t be judgmental you know.
On the opposite end other behaviors and social norms, particularly Christian ones are to be subjected to ridicule and promoters of such beliefs are invariably villains. The goal is to establishing any belief or behavior that resists the cultural changes that Hollywood wants as beyond the pale to the point where even them most trivial actions like say: speaking to a catholic group that promotes Catholic values as something not done by polite society.
That’s why in my mind the story of the attempt to Keep Dana Loeschoff the View. and the open letter of Dylan Farrow are one and the same. In both cases you have strong women ready to publicly advance a position diametrically opposed to the elites who now run Hollywood.
Dana Loesch is well spoken, confident and unafraid. The act of her making the pro-2nd Amendment case to a group of low information voters who never hear a contrary view is dangerous to the left, particularly as she is a person they might identify with.
There is the real possibility of her causing some of those women to say to themselves: “If this woman can say this and believe this and appear the view then maybe there’s nothing wrong with believing the same.”
Even worse for the left Dana Loesch might actually inspire the same courage she practices in standing up to these type in another. That for a group like media matters would be too terrible to contemplate, thus the Horns must go on Dana Loesch’s head and must stay there.
When he married his stepdaughter it was creepy enough but our celebrity culture did not reject him. Instead they, as they do, excuses the most outrages acts as almost comical the act of an eccentric fellow and it combined with our fear of being considered “puritanical” gave the public and the press leave to excuse and continue to celebrate Allen & those like him.
What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?
Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.
So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter.
Are you imagining that? Now, what’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?
…that’s a problem. It’s one thing for Cory Feldman to talk about Pedophiles in Hollywood without naming names, it’s quite another for a young woman to declare that a Hollywood giant and high priest of the cultural left has been fighting his own war on woman since before they coined the term in the bible of the cultural left (the NYT). Suddenly good feminists who would have no problem rejecting Allen if he was a Catholic priest or a republican pol are saying things like:
I hope they find resolution and piece.
Because to reject the Hollywood giant is to reject the culture he thrives in.
Even worse if Ms Farrow is allowed to make such statements and be judged credible, then what other silent voices might speak up? Might this damage the most effective tools the cultural left has to advance their cause?
This doesn’t bode well for my plans to add more writers in the long term but in the short term it certainly doesn’t do any good for paying the mortgage.
13 tip jar hits as $25 will change all that, care to be one of them?
If so then Hit DaTipJar below.
Only 55 3/4 more subscribers @ at $20 a month are necessary to secure the cost of DaMagnificent Seven & my monthly mortgage on a permanent basis. If you think blogs like this willing to highlight the double standard of the Democrats & media online & on radio are worth it, please consider subscribing and suggesting a friend do so as well.
No person deserved the lifetime achievement award more than Glenn Reynolds most of us wouldn’t exist without him.
But the highlight for me was the best kept secret award. Yid with lid was the runner-up but when they announced the winner as my friend Karen the Lonely Conservative I was so busy clapping with joy I forgot to film.
I made up for it with an interview directly after.
That was simply wonderful Karen deserves more credit than she gets
Piers Morgan fresh from being spanked by Ben Shaprio decided to have another go of it yesterday
Mr. Morgan’s forlorn hopes that Dana Loesch and Scottie Hughes would be an easier marks than Mr. Shaprio and the comedy value of the video not withstanding the most interesting feature of this interview is Mr. Morgan’s obsessive fear of the average citizen armed with tanks.
While I’m not aware of any mass murder taking place using a tank, I was intrigued since I am aware of private collectors actually owning tanks. So lets look at the whole question for a moment.
First of all, being of a certain age when someone says “Tank” I don’t think of Modern Armor, I think of Sherman Tanks and World War 2. So lets go there.
On July 17, 1940, exactly one month after receiving their orders, they delivered the cost estimates for the M2A1 tank.
The Army reviewed the estimates. Chrysler had figured on a production ability of 10 tanks per day. After review, the Army said it could pay for 5 a day. They also said that the armor plating tools and related machinery would not be included.
Refiguring the estimates, Chrysler put a cost per tank of $33,500. The corporation was protected by an escalator clause which would offset this price should labor and material costs go up.
Ok we have an estimate of $33,500 for a Sherman Tank new off the Assembly line circa 1940. Converted to 2012 dollars that comes to $540,000.86
However rather than adjusting numbers let go out and see what people are actually paying for Sherman Tanks today. You can find that information pretty easily and that’s when the problems begin….
One of the most popular vehicles for MV enthusiasts, but probably the least collected is the Sherman tank. Everyone says they want a Sherman tank—that is, until they see what one costs to buy and maintain.
Sounds a lot like a Chevy volt but I digress…
In setting a solid price Military Vehicles Magazine has a 1-6 scale on pricing 1 being near perfect to 6 a parts vehicles unrestorable. As we are addressing Mr. Morgan’s apparent fear of citizens running rampant with tanks lets examine a price ranges in condition 4 (Functional) or above.
A tank in #4 Functional condition according to Military Trader.co goes for $175,000 in Pristine condition (#10 the price goes to $300,000 which means a Sherman Tank in 1940 was a poor investment as even in Mint condition it came no where near it’s inflation related cost.
And lets remember that this doesn’t include oil, bullets, shells, parts in case of trouble (you can buy a parts tank #6 at $95,000) and let not forget that A Sherman gets .8 miles per gallon. With a range of 130 at 3.33 a gallon that a lot of gas money before they can get to Piers house.
Given these price points, an economy with a growing population on food stamps and the fact that for a whole lot less a deranged mass killer could whip up something a lot more effective and deadly I submit and suggest that Piers Moran’s fear of Tanks is a tad overstated and if he continues to exhibit symptoms of said phobia he obtain professional help
And under no circumstance should he watch this movie clip from the 1984 film let alone the entire picture.
Via Unedited politics we have video of Senators John McCain (R-AZ) Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) impromptu press availability after talking to Susan Rice today on Benghazi.
Senator Graham makes a good point about John Bolton and I think Senator Ayotte hits it out of the park with this statement:
Just to be clear, when you have a position when you’re Ambassador to the United Nations, you go well beyond unclassified talking points in your daily preparation and responsibilities for that job. And that’s troubling to me as well why she wouldn’t have asked.: ‘I’m the person that doesn’t know anything about this I’m going on every single show’ but in addition the fact that it’s not just the talking points that were unclassified but clearly as part of her responsibility as an Ambassador to the United Nations she reviewed much more than that.
That’s a point that nobody seems to be making, it’s as if all of this happened in a vacuum but while the words were strong and mean trouble for the administration there are two things about this video I find most interesting.
1. At 3:09 as soon as Senator Graham finishes but before Senator Ayotte begins to speak a reporter tries to question Graham. When Senator Ayotte is done speaking questions are directed to Senator Graham but none to Senator Ayotte.
2. This video was uploaded to a Youtube Chanel called: Buzz Source. The Chanel has over 1.2 Million combined views of its videos. As of 2:10 pm the title of this video is: ” McCain And Graham Still ‘Significantly Troubled’ By Rice’s Statements On Benghazi After Meeting With Her”
Maybe it’s just me but I saw three Senators there and Senator Ayotte seems to be just as troubled as her colleagues yet for some reason she doesn’t rate mention in the title or description or worthy of a question from the assembled press.
Now if these were Democrats complaining about say Condoleezza Rice we would be told how sexist it is to be excluding the one women in this event from questions or even mention, but as these are Republicans complaining about Susan Rice Senator Ayotte will be safely ignored and excluded as her presence doesn’t serve the “old white men” meme. As Dana Loesch noticed in an exchange with MSNBC host Torue:
@dloesch McCain and Graham have obviously been the loud leaders of the anti Rice movement. But women can activate sexism against women.
Obviously? Apparently Torre missed the initial press conference where Senator Ayotte was present and frankly towered over Senator’s McCain & Graham. saying this:
Let’s also not forget that, I think you all appreciate you don’t end up on every single major Sunday show without affirmatively putting yourself out there of wanting to carry forward a message on behalf of the administration.
Here is the full video in case he missed it:
Dana Loesch continues to notice her even if Torre doesn’t
Oh look, Sen. Kelly Ayotte is on television again talking about Amb. Rice. She’ll continued to be ignored so the left can play sex card.
Nonunion Ala. crews turned away from Sandy recovery
You’ve got to be kidding me
Crews from Huntsville, as well as Decatur Utilities and Joe Wheeler out of Trinity headed up there this week, but Derrick Moore, one of the Decatur workers, said they were told by crews in New Jersey that they can’t do any work there since they’re not union employees.
The crews that are in Roanoke, Virginia say they are just watching and waiting even though they originally received a call asking for help from Seaside Heights, New Jersey
I thought Chris Christie was infamous for taking on the unions? Some via Twitter have speculated that Gov. Christie may be unaware that this is happening. I’m willing to extend him the benefit of the doubt for then, but now after this story has blown up online there can be no ignorance of the matter. People need help. Sandy didn’t happen in August or early September like Katrina, Ike, and Irene. It’s November now. People are cold.
I get that he’s a moderate, but none of this should matter right now: people need help. If Christie doesn’t indignantly react with the fire of a thousand burning suns over this insanity, his reputation as a fighter for the people will be at stake.
The right thing is usually the smart thing, this should be reversed at ONCE and if anyone is planning on running against Christie in 2020, this is an ad pre-made.
I wonder if the people still suffering agree with this?
On Wednesday, while visiting cleanup efforts in New Jersey in the company of Gov. Chris Christie, President Barack Obama vowed: “We are not going to tolerate red tape, we are not going to tolerate bureaucracy.”
Unless, of course, that red tape is enforced by Obama’s union cronies. Then stranded residents have to wait.
First, a comment from a Twitchy reader: “I’m from Jersey. I had to work with an IBEW crew for years in Hackensack. (Sopranos Country). Trust me, these guys can be filth. Not all of them, but many of them don’t give a *blank* about anything but themselves and the union. Violence is always an option. In Jersey its just a way of life. Sorry to the good people who wasted their time driving north expecting union scum to appreciate the help.”
A final thought: the news report I quoted at the beginning of this post says that the Alabama crews “received a call asking for help from Seaside Heights, New Jersey,” but that “they were told by crews in New Jersey that they can’t do any work there since they’re not union employees.”
This gives rise to several questions: who exactly called these crews to invite them to come to New Jersey? Was it the local government? And if it was union crews in New Jersey who told them they couldn’t work there, who gave the New Jersey crews that authority? Why didn’t the government or whoever made the initial call to the Alabama crews step in and make sure they were put to work?
Those New Jersey crews had better hope none of their neighbors are waiting for utility repairs. They need to get their priorities straight. Worry about putting their neighborhoods put back together now, worry about the unions later.
The Right thing is usually the smart thing. To my union friends…this is the WRONG thing.
Have you ever wondered why the left always seemed to take the side of the totalitarian states during the cold war. Well look at what’s happening on twitter and wonder no more:
Last night Twitchy reported that liberals had launched an assault on conservative Twitter users, reporting them as spam to trigger account suspensions and renewing their abuse of the flag-spam feature when conservative accounts were reinstated.
You can usually tell spam when it comes, you look at the account, it 0-10 followers and tweets out the same link to different folks hoping you will click on it (they also as a rule have an image of an attractive lady but I digress) Our friends on the left after seeing conservatives on twitter beat them time and time again have decided to abuse the reporting system to shut down debate:
the Left has begun organizing stalker mobs to falsely report conservatives for “spam”/”abuse,” in order to silence the Right on Twitter. Why?
Silencing opposition is the Left’s only hope for success.
If conservatives are permitted a fair chance to critique the Left’s agenda, to expose the Left’s tactics and demonstrate the failure of the Left’s policies, the Left loses. Not content to dominate academia, public schools, the entertainment industry, book publishing and the mainstream news media — all of which cultural institutions are characterized by an overwhelming liberal hegemony — the Left is now determined to silence conservative opposition in the few bastions of freedom that remain: Talk radio, cable TV and the Internet.
Here’s the problem. There actually is a ton of spam on Twitter, usually triggered by key words picked up by autobot searches. In the ideal model — and one that had been working fairly well until now — legitimate Twitter users would report the spam, and Twitter would suspend the accounts. That keeps traffic moving smoothly (a performance level that Twitter occasionally fails to maintain anyway) and disincentivizes spammers, at least to some extent. Now that the Left is abusing the spam mechanism, Twitter will almost certainly have to suspend its use, which means the only people who will win this game are the spammers, and we’ll have no way to deal with the flood of annoying marketing messages.
If Twitter is playing along with this nonsense it might even be actionable. I wonder what will happen if our sides lawyers start contacting Twitter and the people doing this. It would be….interesting.
As the truth of the left’s prospects in this election become more apparent expect more of this because the bottom line is our friends on the left can’t compete in the market place of ideas so they want to shut it down. These are the tactics of the Soviet Union, Cuba and Communists throughout history afraid of the voice of the people and the prospect of them hearing any message other than their own. It’s the tactic of fear and that means one thing:
As Andrew Breitbart pointed out the real battleground for America is in the culture as it was demonstrated in the last few days.
The left has gone all out to portray any opposition to the new Government mandate on Catholic Institutions as an “attack on women”. American’s United for life call this “con” for what it is:
While AUL was pointing out this con, the left was perpetuating a second literal one on GOP members.
The aptly named Sandra Fluke aptly since none of her actions were a 30-year-old activist was portrayed as a 23-year-old co-ed by the left and her supporters held a Mock hearing on Capital Hill to bemoan the idea that Georgetown, a Catholic College would not pay for her birth control at $1000 a year. As Jammie Wearing Fool discovered:
In one of her first interviews she is quoted as talking about how she reviewed Georgetown’s insurance policy prior to committing to attend, and seeing that it didn’t cover contraceptive services, she decided to attend with the express purpose of battling this policy. During this time, she was described as a 23-year-old coed. Magically, at the same time Congress is debating the forced coverage of contraception, she appears and is even brought to Capitol Hill to testify. This morning, in an interview with Matt Lauer on the Today show, it was revealed that she is 30 years old, NOT the 23 that had been reported all along.
In other words, folks, you are being played. She has been an activist all along and the Dems were just waiting for the appropriate time to play her.
And play her they did, when Rush Limbaugh crunched the numbers and used the adjective “Slut” to describe her, not a gentlemanly word, the left pounced, but Rush stood firm. As Stacy McCain pointed out.
If we remove “slut” from our discourse, we thereby discard half the reward of chastity, namely the superiority of prestige that the virtuous woman should rightly enjoy in comparison to those who are less virtuous. And, I must hasten to add, we also degrade our discourse if we misuse “slut” as an ugly synonym for “woman I don’t like,” as the Left uses the word against conservative women who have never done anything to deserve a reputation for promiscuity.
The degradation of language is one of the weapons of totalitarianism.
Now I’m a big proponent of acting like a gentleman so I wouldn’t have said what Rush did, but I decided to ask some specific questions:
I think these are very good question and I’d love to hear the answers as would Amy Farah Fowler::
Sheldon: Based on the number of awkward encounters I’ve had with strange men leaving her apartment in the morning plus the number of times she’s returned home wearing the same clothes she wore the night before…
Penny: OK Sheldon I think you’ve made your point…
Sheldon: ..So we multiply 193 – 21 men before the lost of virginity so 172 times .18 gives us 30.96 sexual partners. Let’s round that up to 31.
Penny: OK Sheldon you are SO wrong, that is not close to the real number..(to the waitress)…I’m gonna need a drink over here…
Amy: This is very interesting cultural perceptions are subjective: In your mind Penny: Are you a slut?
Obviously we need to organize a boycott of the Big Bang Theory, STAT!
I’ve not heard a single Republican politician stand up to the media narrative on this. Instead of projecting surrogate modesty towards Fluke, they project it towards Limbaugh, who is calling the truth for what it is. Fluke, a 30 year-old (presented as a 23 year-old college coed by the media) women’s activist/professional student, is likely not having monogamous sex with the same man approximately 2.74 times a day, every day, for three straight years (in order to satisfy the calculations about which she felt confident enough to present during a congressional testimony). If she is, kudos! But promiscuity is not the hallmark of a virtuous woman. Is it Limbaugh’s fault for pointing it out or Fluke’s fault for the behavior? It’s a rhetorical question and the answer proved Limbaugh’s entire point.
The real war on women is being perpetuated upon us by our own sex; women who seek to place us under the control of a pimp-daddy government by demanding it cover all our needs, in exchange for control, or force private entities to do so in its stead.
I think all of this is a sign of what I was talking about yesterday. The Democrats and the media know that President Obama and the Democrats only win if they are not talking about their record.
This is yet another manifestation of this, and if we fall for it, the more fool us.
the President’s budget, again, is a turd, while Harry Reid’s constipation rages and he won’t even leave one. The deficit is about to wrap around the moon. &c, &c, &c.
This entire contraception debate is a twofer: it both destroys and distracts. When you understand that the Administration is purely about destroying this country, all of this idiocy comes into diabolical focus.
What will Sandra Fluke’s Czar title be in the next Obama Administration? I like Postmodern Absurd Distraction Czar. Your suggestions in the comments.
For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.
I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone’s bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.
I predict that Rush’s apology will be produce the same calming effect as Molly Norris’ and Barack Obama’s apologizes to radical Islamists.
Update 3: On further reaction I think Rush is about to Breitbart the MSM, and the left. They will not accept his apology and he will open his show noting the similarities in the reaction to his apology by the left and the reaction of Afghans to Obama’s apology.
My husband and I had to attend a late mass today, and we managed to make it to the last available mass at parish in the next town. We haven’t gone to this parish in a while, and as we drove the main thoroughfare we were shocked to see how many businesses were gone — restaurants that had been around for 20 years — closed. Small businesses my kids used to patronize — shuttered and disappeared. Even realtor offices were closed — not surprising given the market, but still.
Medical office “parks” had signs advertising available space. The gas prices were the highest we have seen in our lifetimes. My husband remarked that those businesses having managed to stay open with gas at $3.50 a gallon might yet see their doors close as already-struggling customers have to re-budget and re=-prioritize their spending, and everyone needs $4.50 a gallon gas to get to work or — as is often the case, to just go look for work.
Very depressing. And I don’t think we’re anywhere near out of the woods yet.
For the left there HAS to be a different crisis, because they certainly don’t talk about this one.
Secondly let me direct you to the following lines from my latest Under the Fedora Column that the Conservatory decided to run a day early.
I think the left has overplayed this. Rush’s phrasing was ungentlemanly, but women aren’t dopes. They might not like what Rush said, but they know what $83 a month for birth control means, and voters in general are even less likely to be in favor of paying that $83 a month per woman.
It is time to take a stand against the left-wing tactic of going after advertisers. Carbonite is the company on which to make that stand.
First, Carbonite is so associated with Rush that it must have a high number of Rush listeners as subscribers. Far more, I suspect, than those who love to hear Ed Schultz call the Tea Party names. So a reaction can be effective.
With or without Carbonite Rush still has 20 million loyal listeners I suspect that companies like Carbonite that didn’t like the pressure from the left will like the mass cancellations and the non-existent renewals of those 20 million a whole lot more.
Update 2: Let me make this clear, I think Romney is the GOP candidate that has the best chance of being defeated by Obama, even so even if Mitt won’t beat Obama the way New Orleans spanked the Colts yesterday he will still make him a one term president.