As you probably know by now Tim Allen’s series Last Man Standing is going to be returning to TV on Fox after ABC cancelled the popular show without explanation, but insisting that it had nothing to do with its conservative bent.

I don’t watch a lot of TV these days thanks to a 2nd shift job and other concerns but I want to briefly note something.

Instapundit’s piece on this linked to the Hill:

Allen, an outspoken Republican, starred as a right-leaning character on the sitcom. Shortly after ABC canceled the series last year, critics questioned whether the show got the ax because of Allen’s political views.

“There’s nothing more dangerous to me, especially in this climate, than a funny, likable conservative,” Allen said while discussing the show’s cancellation in an interview last year.

ABC denied politics played a role in the cancellation. The network’s entertainment president, Channing Dungey, said in 2017, “politics had absolutely nothing to do” with the network nixing the series.

“We have actors on our shows who have all sorts of different political views,” Dungey said.

The story is good, but the real story is the fact that a piece on the return of a comedy to TV isn’t from trade magazine like Inside Hollywood or Variety but it is at the Hill

Take a look at the list of categories at the Hill from this drop down graphic

There are a lot of categories for news and political stories there, but none of them involve sitcoms and unlike Roseanne which had a hook to the President, there is no indication that Last Man Standing is going to have any direct link to the president to play off of. Yet the Hill choose to report on it.

What does it say? It says this.

The media and the left are so united in their public and professional hatred of conservatism in general and President Trump in particular that a single sitcom that might just display those values without mocking them, even while ignoring the President is big enough news for a national political journal to cover.

That’s the real story.

Roseanne Cast pre-revival via Wikipedia

Yesterday the only story in the news seemed to be the rating for the revival of the show Rosanne which blew away all competitors all expectations and worst for the media and the Hollywood left blew away the entire narrative that they had been trying to build since November of 2016 and had managed to carefully build up over the last several months since the Parkland shooting.

The overwhelming numbers suggest that the no matter how much the media spins, how much the stars proclaim and how much the elites talk about how the public rejects all things Trump that the ordinary people, who work the jobs that have been giving bonus’ since the Trump tax cut, who have found either better employment than they had in the Obama years or have rejoined the job market now that employers are scrambling to find and/or keep staff are a force to be reckoned with in the market place.

The numbers also revealed other memes of the left to be hollow, after all the same entertainment alternatives exist for Rosanne as do other programs and events (like the NFL for example) and yet people still watched in droves.  Think the league will be anxious to get Kaepernick a job after that?

It’s also a blow to the idea that unless you are marketing to NYC or LA audience you can’t win:

 The only marquee city from a blue state in the Top 10 was Chicago at No. 5 — the area where the series is set. ABC focused some of its marketing efforts in the region with a preview of the revival at the 54th Chicago International Film Festival.

 

The top market of the country, New York, was not in the Top 20; No.2 Los Angeles was not in the Top 30. And yet, Roseanne delivered the highest demo rating for any comedy telecast in 3 1/2 years, since the fall 2014 season premiere of TV’s biggest comedy series of the past five years, The Big Bang Theory.

It’s also a blow to companies like Facebook, Twitter, Delta, Enterprise Rent-a-Car and Dicks who have either systematically suppressed a good chunk of their customer base or took public positions against them.  It reminded advertisers in general and the competitors to these companies in particular that there is market share to be had that the left is offering on a silver platter and they need only reach out to take it.  They don’t even have to endorse the right, they simply have to treat us like a customer to be served rather than an audience to be lectured to.

And while Hollywood studios are not likely to be all that anxious to green light other conservative projects the numbers are going to be a powerful argument for smaller programs (or cancelled ones like Last Man Standing) that they are worth the time and notice of advertisers whose primary goal is getting eyeballs without being tainted by the latest facebook scandal or the drive to repeal the 2nd amendment that our friends on the left are scrambling to deny.

Now to be sure some of these numbers can be attributed to nostalgia and there is always the chance (indeed the probability) that the show will decide to lurch left at some point but for now if I’m the media/left that has owned the culture and I spend the day looking at the rating numbers and the seemingly unending buzz, I’d be afraid, very afraid.

Linus Larrabee: This, this is my home, no wife would ever understand it.
David Larrabee:  Well neither can I You’ve got all the money is the world.
Linus Larrabee:  Well what’s money got to do with it? If making money were all there was to business it hardly be worthwhile going into the office. Money is a byproduct.
David Larrabee:   But what’s the main objective, power?
Linus Larrabee:  Ah, that’s become a dirty word.
David Larrabee:  Well then What’s the urge, you’re going into plastics now, what will that prove?

Sabrina 1954

A while back I was visiting a friend at his employment (he was a golf pro at a country club) when his daughter who was in college at the time, walked in.  I asked her about her major and what she was doing and she answered she was doing economic and already had a part time job at a brokerage, however she said it with some guilt as her classmate derided her job choice, one of the horrible side effects of the current socialist higher education system filled with liberals who decry Western Civilization, Christianity and Capitalism.  Personally I think they were jealous of the money she was already making to pay back student loans, but nevertheless I told her she should be proud of her job, because if she did it well, people who saved money their entire lives would be able to live a comfortable retirement, and if she did it really well people would have money to invest in companies that produce the jobs that feed families.

I must have done a good job explaining it because she immediately lit up and told me that she never thought of that, nobody had ever explained it to her that way before, which means that obviously she had never seen the 1954 movie Sabrina staring Humphrey Bogart, Audrey Hepburn and William Holden about a chauffeur’s daughter (Hepburn) who falls in love with the playboy son (Holden) of her father’s employer who doesn’t notice her until she returns from cooking school in Paris just in time to throw a wrench into the plans of his older serious brother (Bogart) who has plans to use his brother upcoming 4th marriage to secure a business deal.

The movie also features both Raymond Bailey and Nancy Culp just under a decade before they would become the comedy team of Mr. Drysdale and Miss Jane on the Beverley Hillbillies, but I digress. Hidden within the 113 minutes about love, life and personal growth is a speech by Bogart’s character Linus Larrabee that perfectly describes what Capitalism is and what it does.  It’s a speech that every college student in America should be required to watch.

For those who don’t have the patience to sit through the full minute here is the key quote.

A new product has been found, something of use to the world, so a new industry moves into an undeveloped area. Factories go up, machines are brought in, a harbor is dug, and you’re in business. It’s purely coincidental of course that people who never saw a dime before suddenly have a dollar, and barefooted kids wear shoes and have their teeth fixed and their faces washed. What’s wrong with the kind of an urge that gives people libraries, hospitals, baseball diamonds and, uh, movies on a Saturday night?

Back in 1954 when this picture was made when the ruins of the 2nd World War were still visible,  25 year olds could remember the great depression, the devastation of flu pandemics, life before electricity, movies, radio, phones and even ravages the Civil War were still in living memory, Americans knew and understood this facts of life explained in this speech and were pleased to gift their children and grandchildren a Pax Americana and a booming building economy to escape these pains.

Alas having been delivered from these horrors the children and grandchildren of those in the west who endured them in the west in general and of America in particular decided they knew better than those who overcame them and instead of embracing the lessons of that generation enrolled in the Kindergarten of Eden where they were taught that peace and prosperity were a birthright and that anything society that didn’t produce their heart’s desire was oppressive and evil.

As Robert Heinlein once wrote:

“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

“This is known as ‘bad luck.’”

This “bad luck” is what is affecting the Venezuelan people and it’s origin was the same socialism that the academics teaching our children uniformly cheered when it was implemented and then when this happened…

 As The New York Times reported, “Venezuela was once one of Latin America’s richest countries, flush with oil wealth that attracted immigrants from places as varied as Europe and the Middle East.”

“But after President Hugo Chávez vowed to break the country’s economic elite and redistribute wealth to the poor, the rich and middle class fled to more welcoming countries in droves, creating what demographers describe as Venezuela’s first diaspora.”

Now, in their absence, things have gotten worse, and it’s poorer Venezuelans — the very ones that Chavez’s revolution was allegedly intended to help — who are starving. Many are even taking to boats, echoing, as the Times notes, “an image so symbolic of the perilous journeys to escape Cuba or Haiti — but not oil-rich Venezuela.” 

Well, Venezuela was once rich. But mismanagement and kleptocracy can make any country poor and Venezuela — as is typical with countries whose leaders promise to soak the rich for the benefit of the poor — has had plenty of both. And now, though Hugo Chavez’s family has grown fabulously wealthy, the poor have nothing.

…denied that it was actual socialism.

This is what half of our society has forgotten to our determent as a whole.

Update:  In comments Stephen hands notes ” most rich men are not selfless, celibate vocationers like Bogie’s character but covetous idolaters and warmongers”, however I note that the jobs and economic prospects created by industry are the same regardless of the virtue or lack thereof of the person advancing them.  Of course Milton Friedman said it much better.


If you’d like to continue to support independent journalism, please consider hitting DaTipJar here.



Consider subscribing.  If we can get 92 more subscribers at $20 a month I can do this full time without worry.


Choose a Subscription level


Finally might I suggest my book  Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer makes an excellent Gift.

If Hillary Clinton opened up a hamburger joint, would you eat there? If George Soros wrote a book and went on tour, would you buy his book and wait in line at Barnes & Noble to have him sign it? Did you run out and buy a Dixie Chicks album after they attacked George W. Bush?

Why, then, do conservatives continue to support Hollywood when the vast majority of people in it are pushing a left-wing agenda? Many of them spend more times promoting their political narrative than making movies and television shows. Most of them allow those narratives and agendas to leak through in their performances and movie choices.

As I write this, the Golden Globes are being watched by millions of Americans. A good chunk of those watching are conservatives. This isn’t intended to condemn any of you; I had aspirations to be part of the Hollywood world at one point in my life and even moved to southern California to pursue it. Over the last decade, I watched as the liberal underpinnings of Hollywood emerged into blatant attacks on many of the things that I believe. Recently, the progressive rhetoric has reached a crescendo to the point that they don’t even try to pretend they’re only entertainers. They’ve come out feverishly opposed to the philosophies that make America awesome and in favor of the socialist, lawless, liberal ideology that is leading us towards oblivion.

There are few institutions that are easier to generalize than Hollywood. Save for a handful of brave and outspoken conservatives, the vast majority of actors, directors, and producers are as left-wing as they come. Last year brought more of them out of the political closet as the fear of Donald Trump prompted policy commentary from the strangest places. Today, they are outspoken and angry.

Most of Hollywood is pro-choice. They support the ideas of giving greater rights to members of the LGBTQ community than to average Americans. They want open borders as long as the illegal immigrants aren’t in their neighborhoods. They want total gun control except for their bodyguards. They oppose school choice while their children go to private schools.

They support Obama, oppose Trump, and they’re going to do everything they can to subvert his presidency.

As conservatives, we should not support them. We shouldn’t buy tickets to their movies. We shouldn’t bump up the ratings on their television shows. We shouldn’t be fawning over them at awards shows or idolizing them in any way. Like it or not, they have power through influence of their huge audiences. Some of them reach millions of people every day with their ideologies.

It’s hypocritical for us to condemn their politics but support their careers. Every time we buy a ticket to movies written, directed, and performed by liberal activists, we’re giving them money that will be used to promote their agenda. How many of them gave to Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and other liberal politicians? Which ones held fundraisers to promote the progressive agenda? We empower them to attack our philosophies.

We need to make better entertainment choices. As much as I’d love to call for a boycott, it’s unrealistic. As conservatives, we can choose to watch movies by those who aren’t fighting us. They don’t even have to be outspoken conservatives as long as they’re not militant liberals. There’s a reason that Mark Wahlberg seems to be in every patriotic retelling of real events from Lone Survivor to Patriots Day. Clint Eastwood directs a movie every year or two. Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson could be the next Ronald Reagan. Chris Pratt and Denzel Washington might not speak too much about politics, but they’re open about their faith.

We have choices. We don’t have to kiss the ring of the Hollywood elites or risk boring ourselves with Fox News all night. If we spend our entertainment dollars supporting people and stories that align more closely with conservative philosophies, Hollywood will eventually take the hint. Even if they don’t, at least we can feel better knowing we’re not supporting the engines of our own demise.

I’m a big fan of the Producers (although I go for the Zero Mostel / Gene Wilder version more) and Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane are always funny.

But after seeing this video

via Instapundit. Isn’t the “Plan” being listed pretty much what happened with Jeb Bush and to a lesser $ degree Rick Perry and Chris Christie? A candidate that wasn’t going to win that raised tens of millions dollars from a lot of suckers that made said consultants rich?

Isn’t that pretty much what the Marco Rubio team is doing right now?

That’s the problem with the skit, the reality the “secret plan” is actually what goes on all the time. A more accurate video would be this from the 1983 movie Trading Places.

Now in fairness a political campaign is hard and long like Max Bialystock many consultants put in a lot of effort for that money in the political version of little old lady land.

But in the end compared to Mike Murphy Bialystok & Bloom are pikers.

Closing Thought 1: The reality is the skit isn’t about attacking Trump, it’s about attacking the Trump voter, isn’t the contempt for said voters by elites what motivated our current situation in the first place?

Closing Thought 2: Given what we’ve seen from this skit could have easily been made in 2008 about Obama, but the makers would never have the guts.

*****************************************************************

Tonight I’m back to work but today I’m back trying to get that elusive $61 a day for DaTipJar.

We were slightly short Thursday and Friday but Saturday DaTipJar got less support from the people than the Marco Rubio campaign.

I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us get back on our $61 a day ($10 toward that goal so far) and maybe make up the $100 we’ve fallen behind since Thursday please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. We are currently 116.3 subscribers at $10 a month to make our goal every day without further solicitation but the numbers are even more interesting:

If less than 1/3 of 1% of our February readers this month subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

If less than 2/3 of 1% did, I’d be completely out of debt and able to attend CPAC

If a full 1% of our February readers subscribed at $10 a month I could afford to travel across the country covering the presidential race this year in person for a full month.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



One of the great action movies of the 50’s was the 1958’s The Vikings staring Kirk Douglas, Tony Curtis and Janet Leigh. If you like action, adventure and a touch of comedy, you’ll want to watch it.

At a key point of the picture viking prince Einar (Kirk Douglas) prays to Odin the Viking God. The princess (Leigh) he has fallen in love with has been stolen away from him by the slave Eric (Curtis) who is responsible for the loss of his eye and in the chase his father (Ernest Borgnine) was drowned. He prays for a sign to convince his reluctant warriors to pursue them to England.

He is rewarded with by the sudden appearance of Eric who tells him their mutual enemy King Aella is holding the princess Morgana and offers to lead him there so they can attack his castle.

Einar returns to the vikings chamber and makes the speech that finally convinces his men to attack which begins:

Make no mistake, I hate this man more than anyone alive, but he can lead us to Morgana.

That speech instantly came to mind when I saw this story concerning Lindsey Graham:

With the Super Tuesday results in, Sen. Lindsey Graham said Sen. Ted Cruz may be the GOP’s last hope to keep bombastic front-runner Donald Trump from the Republican nomination for president.

“You know Ted Cruz is not my favorite, by any means,” Graham told CBS Tuesday night. “But we may be in a position where we have to rally around Ted Cruz as the only way to stop Donald Trump, and I’m not so sure that would work,” noting Sen. Marco Rubio and Ohio Gov. John Kasich are no longer viable

Graham is a vocal critic of Cruz. He has called Cruz the least respected senator and has accused Cruz of getting a head at the expense of the party.

A “Vocal Critic”? That’s putting it mildly, as allahpundit reminds us:

“If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.” It also tells you a lot about how grim nominal Rubio allies have grown about his chances. When one of Congress’s most notorious super-hawks — and a fellow member of the Gang of Eight — is looking ahead to a Trump/Cruz race, says James Poulos, you know Rubio’s in trouble

Let’s be blunt when I close my eyes I can see Lindsey Graham, among a meeting of GOP establishment people starting giving the Kirk Douglas speech starting:

Make no mistake, I hate this man more than anyone alive, but he’s our one chance to defeat Trump.

And he’s right the only chance for the GOP to defeat Trump is Cruz but But what I really want to see if Graham and Cruz mimic Einar & Eric and form an alliance to defeat Donald Trump and win, their subsequent fight to the death.

I suspect we won’t discover that Graham and Cruz are secretly brothers.

Closing thought, why has Lindsey Graham reached this point? Because regardless of anything else, Lindsey Graham knows how to count, but that’s another post.

Professor Horatio Smith:  The trouble with us Mr. Maxwell is we don’t understand women.

Pimpernel Smith 1941

Is this hideous parody of “higher education” worth $46,417 a year?

RS McCain 2016

When I saw this post at Stacy McCain’s site concerning a rather quiet settlement in the Washington & Lee case:

Washington and Lee University has settled a lawsuit filed by a former student who claimed he was unfairly kicked out of school based on an allegation of sexual assault.

The student, who was identified only as John Doe in court records, had challenged a campus judicial proceeding that led to his expulsion.

W&L and the student have “compromised and settled all matters in controversy,” according to a motion filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Lynchburg.

Both sides are asking Judge Norman Moon to dismiss the case. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

Last April, Moon denied a motion by the university to throw the case out, saying that the allegations made in the lawsuit, if “taken as true, suggest that W&L’s disciplinary procedures, at least when it comes to charges of sexual misconduct, amount to a practice of railroading accused students.”

And this write up concerning motive:  

Holding the false accuser accountable isn’t part of the feminist agenda, because to tell the whole truth about such matters might give a clue to why women sometimes do lie about rape.

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

If you read John Doe’s complaint against Washington and Lee, you can surmise that the accuser was interested in a serious romantic relationship with John Doe, but he seemed to treat their two hookups as merely casual sex. When he later got serious with another girl, we may further surmise, his accuser regretted her previous liaisons with John Doe — she felt used, a “pump-and-dump” — and it was this sense of  regret, and a desire for revenge against the boy who had treated her badly, that inspired her to accuse him of sexual assault.

I couldn’t help but think of the classic movie Pimpernel Smith from 1941.

In the movie which takes place in spring of 1939 Leslie Howard plays Professor Horatio Smith a 40 something seemingly absent minded archaeologist and confirmed bachelor who only interest in women is in a statue of Aphrodite Calapeso that he dug up on the Island of Lesbos which he habitually and obsessively admires in the Cambridge Museum of Antiquities to the point where on discovering a speck of dust berates curator Jordan as a Vandal and Visigoth (terms which I suspect students at William & Mary may not recognize these days).  He is so obsessed with his statue and so absent minded that he finds himself missing classes and lectures.

Jordan:  Professor The college school just called for you Sir, you’re late.

Prof Smith: Late for what

Jordan:  Your lecture sir

Prof Smith:  Don’t be ridiculous  my lecture isn’t until Friday

Jordan: But Today is Friday sir.

Prof Smith:  Good heavens!  Extraordinary!  What happened to Thursday?

Jordan:  We had it Yesterday Sir

Professor Smith however has a secret, the reason why he is missing full weeks of lectures and spending so much time in Germany is not due to his archaeological efforts.  It’s because he is (as the title suggests) secretly smuggling German dissidents out of the country under the noses of the Nazis.

So when he plans a new expedition to Germany with some of his students to cover his activities he first conspires to make sure that none of the females students are present in his class before his offer is made.

Professor Horatio Smith:  Greek women moreover were condemned to habitual seculison, an admirable practice, which unfortunately is not followed in this university.

Female Student:  Do you object to our presence here professor?

Professor Horatio Smith:  Oh I can’t object, I can merely deplore it.

This has the effect of causing the female students in the class to walk out, at which point the asks the remaining students in any would like to accompany him to central Europe where he is looking for evidence of an early Aryan civilization.  He makes it clear that women are not welcome.

Mr. Elstead:  Would I be allowed to bring my young sister sir?

Professor Horatio Smith:  No Mr. Elstead I’m looking to avoid the company of females in general and young sisters in particular.

In Germany his students are overwhelmed by the pace he keeps and when they try to distract him at a chalie at the German Swiss border with an attractive young serving girl he expresses only annoyance and distraction.  (yet still manages to sneak out, despite the presence of a german guard and aid a dissident across the border & get back in time to escape detection).

His students eventually figure out what is going in and insist on helping but when the Gestapo head General Von Graham finds a clue indicating that the man they want will be at a reception held by the British Embassy to which he is invited that things get interesting. His agents including a Miss. Cole who we later discover is the daughter of an imprisoned Polish editor who has been promised her father’s freedom if she can track down the mysterious man helping dissidents escape, attend and while most of his agents suspect various people, she, after an encounter with Professor Smith’s american student Maxwell, becomes convinced that Smith is her man. They scoff but she is convinced.

The story turns when she visits Professor Smith’s bedroom, much to his annoyance after the event. She proclaims she has figured out who he but doesn’t want to turn him in so she offers him an ultimatum:

Ms. Cole:  Before I go you’ve got to choose.  Either you help my father to escape or I’ll go straight to the Gestapo and tell them what I know.

Professor Smith:  Very well go there quickly I hope they prove less skeptical than I.

He goes into the bathroom to get a towel and finds she has broken down in tears on his bed over the choice between betraying her principles or leaving her father in the hands of the Nazi., but Smith unsure of her story is having none of it.

Professor Smith:   What on earth are you crying for?  What have I done?  You’ve brought this all on yourself.  I didn’t ask you to come here I’m horrified at the idea of a strange woman in my rooms and a woman in tears at that.  Or ARE they tears? [she raises her head, showing her tears are real] yes  they are,  well they don’t have any effect on me, believe me.  Here  mop them up with that, you look awful.  And don’t try any more fairy tales with me. [she runs out leaving her bag] here you’ve forgotten your…

The next morning he finds himself changed and when one of his agents reports that she is in fact the daughter of the dissident as she claimed crashes a luncheon date one of his students had with her returning her handbag and replacing her spilled powder he asks a rather direct and revealing question to his student in front of her face:

Professor Smith:  Mr. Maxwell if you heard a very remarkable man had been imprisoned by the Nazis, what would you do?

Maxwell:  My damndest to get him out.

Professor Smith:  Now isn’t that remarkable.  Every now and then he and I have exactly the same idea.  

Ms. Cole:  [Wearing an expression of shock and relief] Could I have some water please

Professor Smith:  Certainly not, Vorak some champagne 

As you might guess the Gestapo chief, who had scoffed at her suspicion of Smith who he considers a fool changes his tune when she reports back that she was dead wrong…

General Von Graum:  I didn’t believe her Marx, I didn’t believe her.  But I do now, that idiotic archeologist.

Marx:  sir

General Von Graum:  But we’ve got to have proof.

..and he sets a trap for both of them.

Will they fall into the trap?  Can they spring her father and his friends from the concentration camp?  And even if they do can they and Ms. Cole escape the Gestapo’s wrath and get out of Germany alive?

Rather than spoil the ending I’ll embed the film at the end of the post but the question becomes, what does all of this have to do with the Washington & Lee case. Just this:

In the movie Professor Smith deplores the presence of women on campus likely due to his own myopia .  With our modern eyes we, even knowing that he is secretly risking his life to foil the greatest  villains in modern history, as backward and wrong.  Yet perhaps the character who could see far enough head to foil the Nazi might have anticipated the situation at Washington & Lee:

Washington and Lee, whose history stretches back to its founding before the American Revolution, was for more than 200 years an all-male school, and did not admit its first female undergraduate student until 1985. Scarcely 30 years after that, half the university’s enrollment is female, and any male student who enrolls there knows he will be immediately expelled if his ex-girlfriend decides “regret equals rape.” This is why parents pay for their sons to attend Washington and Lee (annual tuition $46,417), a school where “equality” means that male students have no rights at all.

At a school whose namesakes were honorable men, there is now not a shred of honor or decency left. The modern worship of “equality” has destroyed everything honorable about Washington and Lee, where corrupt administrators supervise dishonest faculty in the miseducation of their perverted students. Parents thinking of sending their children there should check out the Washington and Lee University Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning (LGBTQ) Resource Center. Maybe your child will want to enroll in the Women’s and Gender Studies (WGS) program at Washington and Lee University.

Is this hideous parody of “higher education” worth $46,417 a year?

Given today’s political correctness there is some danger, to objecting to or even deploring how far a once great university has fallen. although the real world risk doesn’t yet extend to the degree that the fictional Professor Pimpernel Smith did in combating his Nazis.

Fortunately for the parents of young men looking at higher education, they need not publicly object or deplore the situation, they can simply choose to spend their hard earned money elsewhere.

A closing note. This film which Leslie Howard, produced, directed and starred in, released in London while England was still fighting the Nazis alone, would be one of his last. Howard would die two years later shot down by German fighters over the Bay of Biscay.

****

Given where the economy is rather than where the MSM pretends and what peole owe these days to those who have kicked in (particularly subscribers), thanks much.

If however you have not & are both able and inclined I’d really appreciate it if you’d help me get over days of work lost due to illness or just start February stronger by hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Subscription level



Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

After a very good day’s sleep I turned on the TV and found this scene from Animal House playing.

Watching for a little while and thinking of the Star wars fanaticism that’s been going on it hit me that both of these movies came out in the late 70’s. It was a time when many of the 60’s generation had young kids who because of their parent’s decision to foolishly abandon christianity had no real exposure to religion.

By an odd coincidence both of these excellent movies became more than movies, they became ways of life.

At colleges all over the nation the primary purpose of college to many became to get drunk and score. Meanwhile kids who normally moved from one popular movie or TV show to another (remember the Davy Crockett caps) stayed with Star Wars to the point where it wasn’t abandoned in adulthood and was even passed onto the next generation.

Now there is nothing wrong with enjoying a great comedy or action movie, both of these pictures were a lot of fun but it’s not healthy to replace your moral code with them.

Consider this famous scene from Animal House

The Dean’s words: “Fat drunk & stupid is no way to go through life son.” Is excellent advice that any parent worth a damn would give his or her kids, but HE is considered the villain in this scene, the person to be defeated and ignored.

As a gag or joke, that’s fine, as a way of life, that’s disaster.

Meanwhile for people who have decided that the wisdom of generations concerning the Church and Christ and public events such as the miracle of he sun at Fatima seen by thousands are to be discounted find themselves engrossed in the “force” & “jedi” mysticism. Something that feeds the need for thing beyond themselves without actual commitment to anything but buying the latest toy.

Again as a fun distraction it’s fine, as a replacement for Christ, it doesn’t work. Take a look at the line of fanatics waiting to see the next installment in their gospel, how many of them do you think know anything of the real one?

As a creature with a soul man instinctively has a need for God, and when you take God away from him , he tries to find something to replace him with.

Again I like both of these movies and everybody know that I’m a big Doctor Who fan and if you want to enjoy and be entertained by the Star Wars or Doctor Who franchises that’s fine. Likewise if you want to laugh at Animal House and the genius of John Belushi that’s great.

But if you use any of these three as a “how to” for life, you are going to be disappointed and your culture will suffer.

Unexpectedly

One of an occasional series of articles comparing the Bush Years vs the Obama Years:

Barack Obama’s administration has described itself as a “Strong Defender of the First Amendment” Meanwhile the left routinely called George Bush a foe of the 1st Amendment  Let’s take a look at the two:

 

In 2001 Comedy Central premiered a series called That’s My Bush.  It starred Timothy Bottoms , Carrie Quinn Dolan, Marcia Wallace, Kurt Fuller John D’Aquino and Kristen Miller and was created by the South Park Team of Trey Parker & Matt Stone.

Now consider this news from last week via the Huffington Post

Univision host Rodner Figueroa was fired Wednesday after comparing first lady Michelle Obama’s appearance to that of someone from the cast of the “Planet of the Apes.”

The Emmy-winning host was dismissed over the racist remark said during his live segment on the entertainment news show “El Gordo Y La Flaca,” HuffPost Voces first reported. Univision confirmed the news via e-mail earlier today.

Figueroa’s comment came while talking about make-up artist Paolo Ballesteros’ viral undertaking of transforming himself into female celebrities. The fashionista, known for his critical “Fashion Police”-style remarks, analyzed Ballesteros’ transformation for Michelle Obama with an original photo of the first lady beside it.

“Mind you, you know that Michelle Obama looks like she’s part of the cast of ‘Planet of the Apes,’ the film,” Figueroa said.

Even more interesting is this update (emphasis mine):

UPDATE 3/12 6:00 p.m.: In an extensive open letter to the first lady, Figueroa offered a formal apology for what was said but explained that it had been taken out of context. He also said he was verbally notified that he was being fired because of a complaint from Michelle Obama’s office and that he felt Univision had publicly humiliated him.

Now consider the following.  Mr. Figueroa made a single remark, perhaps in poor taste,  poking fun at Mrs. Obama’s appearance, and it drew a complaint from the First Lady’s office and resulted in his dismissal.

On the other hand That’s My Bush mercilessly poked fun at the President & the first lady.  As you might guess from a series made by the creators of South Park a lot of these jokes were not what one would consider tasteful.

Yet despite the cries of the left about the repressive Bush years not only did the show run a full season but if you click on the names of the actors in every episode you will find that with a single exception all have continued to work regularly since the end of the series to the present day or until their death and South Park has completed its 18th season on the air.

Tell me given this comparison which administration respects the first amendment right to make fun of the president & his family and which one does not?

 

 

My latest for Watchdog.org talks about the new Taxes proposed by Barack Obama and how they identify him not as a man pretending to be a king, but as a neighborhood boss:

I’ve seen many portrayals of President Obama as an absolutist king due to his penchant for unilateral policy decisions made over the heads of Congress. Glenn Reynolds often reposts an image of Obama in the likeness of Louis XIV, with the common tagline being “You should be thanking me.”

What I see, however, is a classic graduate of the Chicago school of criminal governance, an old-fashioned neighborhood boss. This sort of boss man attitude is evidenced in Obama’s plan to put into law ten new taxes.

If you want to read the rest including quotes from Casino, Godfather II, Goodfellas, Analyze This and even Chris Christie, you’ll have to go to Watchdog.org and check out the Watchdog Arena.