There were a lot of good quips about Mrs. Victoria B. Brown’s story of her oppression of her husband of fifty years in the Washington Post, the most amusing being Rod Dreher’s line

If somebody starts a Go Fund Me account to pay for Mr. Brown’s tab at his local bar, I’ll kick in.

I thought about doing a long essay on it, presuming he must be a good Catholic to stay with such a woman fifty years or perhaps that she seeing feminism cow people for most of her life is now cracking as it like the pre-2004 Redsox at the very edge of final success.  I even thought of waiting for Robert Stacy McCain’s inevitable article using the Washington Post piece to bolster his argument for men to avoid feminists but that’s when the cogs of memory awoke and I recalled a poem I once read from an old dusty book in the house which I was able to find online.

It’s by a 19th Century American Poet named Joseph Bert Smiley and he not only does better than I ever would on the subject but proves the point I’ve often argument that times and technology might change but people don’t.

For Mrs. Victoria B. Brown of Pennsylvania, I give you Joseph Bert Smiley’s classic:  St. Peter at the Gate:

ST. PETER stood guard at the golden gate,
With a solemn mien and an air sedate,
When up to the top of the golden stair
A man and a woman, ascending there,
Applied for admission. They came and stood
Before St. Peter, so great and good,
In hopes the City of Peace to win,
And asked St. Peter to let them in.

The woman was tall, and lank, and thin,
With a scraggy beadlet upon her chin; 10
The man was short, and thick, and stout;
His stomach was built so it rounded out;
His face was pleasant, and all the while
He wore a kindly and genial smile.
The choirs in the distance the echoes woke,
And the man kept still while the woman spoke:

“Oh, thou who guardest the gate,” said she,
“We two come hither beseeching thee
To let us enter the heavenly land,
And play our harps with the angel band.
Of me, St. Peter, there is no doubt—
There is nothing from heaven to bar me out;
I have been to meetings three times a week,
And almost always I’d rise and speak.
I’ve told the sinners about the day
When they’d repent their evil way;

I have told my neighbors, I have told them all,
’Bout Adam and Eve, and the primal fall;
I’ve shown them what they’d have to do
If they’d pass in with the chosen few;
I’ve marked their path of duty clear—
Laid out the plan for their whole career;
I’ve talked and talked to ’em, loud and long,
For my lungs are good and my voice is strong.

So, good St. Peter, you’ll clearly see
The gate of heaven is open to me.
But my old man, I regret to say,
Hasn’t walked exactly the narrow way;
He smokes and he swears, and grave faults he’s got,
And I don’t know whether he will pass or not.
He never would pray with an earnest vim,
Or go to revival, or join in a hymn;
So I had to leave him in sorrow there,
While I, with the chosen, united in prayer.
He ate what the pantry chanced to afford,
While I, in my purity, sang to the Lord;
And if cucumbers were all he got,
It’s a chance if he merited them or not.

But oh, St. Peter, I love him so!
To the pleasures of heaven please let him go!
I’ve done enough—a saint I’ve been.
Won’t that atone? Can’t you let him in?
By my grim gospel I know ’tis so,
That the unrepentant must fry below;
But isn’t there some way that you can see,
That he may enter who’s dear to me?
It’s a narrow gospel by which I pray,
But the chosen expect to find some way
Of coaxing, or fooling, or bribing you,
So that their relation can amble through.

And say, St. Peter, it seems to me
This gate isn’t kept as it ought to be.
You ought to stand by that opening there,
And never sit down in that easy chair.
And say, St. Peter, my sight is dimmed,
But I don’t like the way your whiskers are trimmed;
They’re cut too wide, and outward toss:
They’d look better narrower, cut straight across.
Well, we must be going our crowns to win,
So open, St. Peter, and we’ll pass in.”

St. Peter sat quiet and stroked his staff,
But spite of his office he had to laugh;
Then said, with a fiery gleam in his eye,
“Who’s tending this gateway—you, or I?”
And then he arose in his stature tall,
And pressed a button upon the wall,
And said to the imp who answered the bell,
“Escort this lady around to hell!”

The man stood still as a piece of stone—
Stood sadly, gloomily there alone;
A lifelong, settled idea he had
That his wife was good and he was bad.
He thought, if the woman went down below,
That he would certainly have to go;
That if she went to the regions dim,
There wasn’t a ghost of a show for him.
Slowly he turned, by habit bent,
To follow wherever the woman went.

St. Peter, standing on duty there,
Observed that the top of his head was bare.
He called the gentleman back, and said,
“Friend, how long have you been wed?”
“Thirty years” (with a weary sigh),
And then he thoughtfully added, “Why?”
St. Peter was silent. With head bent down,
He raised his hand and scratched his crown;
Then, seeming a different thought to take,
Slowly, half to himself, he spake:
“Thirty years with that woman there?
No wonder the man hasn’t any hair!
Swearing is wicked, smoke’s not good.
He smoked and swore—I should think he would.
Thirty years with that tongue so sharp!
Ho, Angel Gabriel! give him a harp—
A jeweled harp with a golden string.
Good sir, pass in where the angels sing.
Gabriel, give him a seat alone—
One with a cushion, up near the throne;
Call up some angels to play their best;
Let him enjoy the music in rest;
See that on finest ambrosia he feeds;
He’s had about all the hell he needs.
It isn’t just hardly the thing to do,
To roast him on earth, and the future too.”
They gave him a harp with golden strings,
A glittering robe, with a pair of wings,
And he said, as he entered the Realm of Day,
“Well, this beats cucumber, anyway!”
And so the Scriptures had come to pass
“The last shall be first, and the first shall be last.”

[The two priests arrive at the scene of the fight between Sean Thornton & Red Will Danaher]

Father Paul: Father, shouldn’t we put a stop to it now?

Father Lonergan: [Smiling, making fighting movements] Ah, we should lad, yes we should, it’s our duty. Yes, it’s our duty... [Smiles as a punch is heard]

The Quiet Man 1952

4th Doctor: The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views…which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering.

Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Pt 4 1977

A long time ago on my radio show I did an hour on the redefinition of marriage and the deficit.  This was back in ancient times when Barack Obama had for political reasons not “come out” for gay marriage and thus one could still publicly argue against it the entire media / left defining you as a racist, sexist bigot homophobe for stating facts that had been true for millennia.  (For the record I stand by my arguments against gay marriage that I made 10 years ago here)

Now you might think these two topics are as unrelated as you can get but I pointed out on my show that the insistence that there was nothing wrong with redefining marriage opened up huge possibilities for solving the deficit.

All we had to do is redefine what a “deficit” or a “balanced budget” or even “debt” was and viola suddenly deficits would be a thing of the past and we would be able to look forward to balanced budgets for the rest of our days.

The possibilities were endless and the best part of it was people wouldn’t have to vary their spending or borrowing habits one bit and if any person holding a debt objected why they were just not as enlightened as the rest of us.

The entire point of that monologue was to not only point out the insanity of redefining marriage but to also point out that once you decide you can redefine one word for the sake of one’s personal advantage you can redefine another.  Or as Kurt Schlichter prophetically  put it a few years later 

Liberals May Regret Their New Rules

I thought of that when I saw This piece by Stacy McCain about the conflict between lesbians and the Transgender community:

Lesbian feminists are being attacked as “TERFs” (trans exclusive radical feminists) because they don’t want to date men in dresses, nor do they want to cede control of the feminist movement to men in dresses. Transgender activists are insulting lesbians as “vagina fetishists.”

and they just can’t understand why this is happening to them.

The answer is in fact very simple.  The people who had no problem redefining the word “marriage” to satisfy their own narcissism and then tried to drive those who fought them from the public square (ask yourself why the Catholic Church is no longer allowed to deal with adoptions in Massachusetts)  are now shocked Shocked that other narcissists would choose to redefine word “woman” and by extension “lesbian” and bring the same public social and legal opprobrium upon them that they gleefully and self righteously applied to others who dared suggest that words actually mean things.

You see,  once one realizes that in one fell swoop by the act of redefining words one can:

satisfy one’s narcissism

turn one’s proclivities into virtue to be celebrated

turn mental illness into courage

and silence one’s enemies by both cultural and legal censure 

you’re not like to let simple things like biology or objective reality stop you.

Now Stacy McCain who has been the target of radical feminists and Christophobic folk for daring to take his protestant faith seriously is right when he stand up for those radical feminists, who despise his very existence,  on constitutional grounds

By the way, a conservative need not endorse homosexuality to believe that lesbians should not be insulted as “TERFs,” etc. What is at issue here is a matter of basic liberty. The First Amendment, which guarantees both freedom of speech and freedom of religion, likewise safeguards the principle of freedom of association. In guaranteeing “the right of the people peaceably to assemble,” our Constitution expresses this principle. A woman who chooses to avoid intimacy with men is exercising her basic liberty and, while we might lament her choice, the friends of liberty cannot in good conscience compel her to do otherwise. Forcing citizens to associate with others against their will is not “social justice.”

The Christian is as free to eschew association with non-believers as the homosexual is free to eschew the companionship of the opposite sex. For decades now, the Left has accused Christian conservatives of seeking to “impose their morality” on others. But what is it that transgender activists are attempting to do now? Aren’t they attempting to compel others to do their bidding, and to silence their critics?

And my friend Cynthia Yockey, the conservative lesbian is doing yeoman’s work in shedding light on this insanity, you really should be reading her blog and financially supporting her efforts to fight back.

But while I agree with Stacy McCain’s first amendment arguments defending the radical feminists targeted in this effort, applaud Cynthia Yockey’s efforts to make this fight on behalf of her fellow lesbians who refuse to redefine what a lesbian, man or woman is and , as a faithful Catholic have sympathy for folks like Julia Diana Robertson for the abuse she and other feminists, both straight and gay are getting for these actions, I can’t help but think that the shock that radical feminists and lesbians have as they suddenly find themselves victims of the terror they helped unleash must be the same that Maximilien de Robespierre felt just before blade of the guillotine that he had used to eliminate so many “enemies of the revolution” beheaded him.

This is one of the disadvantages of thinking that the lessons of history are all just the ravings of a patriarchal past that have no application for the present, you don’t realize that revolutions always eat their own.

I’m sure there will be a few in the Christian right who will join the fight like Stacy McCain who closes his piece saying;

 It is truly astounding to find myself defending lesbian feminists against transgender totalitarians.

Like I keep saying, people need to wake the hell up.

and will will speak up for the like of Ms Robertson and company, but I suspect that the vast majority of Conservative Catholics and Protestants who have spent the last decade being told they are beyond the pale from the likes of them and their allies and have had the full force of both culture and government brought against them will watch their oppressors with Schadenfreude for a while more as this verse from Proverbs comes to pass

Those who trouble their household inherit the wind,

Personally I think that the same rule from the Catechism of the Catholic Church on homosexuality applies to our transgender friends who like gays and lesbians are children of God whose sins Jesus Christ died for.

 2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

And remember the same people “triggered” by this blunt statement of the teaching of the Catholic Church  “hate speech” would be triggered by this movie clip too:

Aren’t we so lucky to be ruled by the values of the most narcissistic generation vs the values of the greatest one?

Lang’s Skokie office in 2006

Illinois cannot cope with the present, let alone with the future, so it’s fighting a symbolic battle from the past.

Here’s a little history lesson: In 1972 Congress submitted the Equal Rights Amendment to the state legislatures, which read:

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

There was a rush of states falling over year other to ratify would have been the 27th Amendment before the seven-year deadline for passage, which in an unprecedented move, was extended by Congress for an additional three years. Thirty-five states–nearly all of them did so in the first year after congressional passage–ratified the ERA. Then opposition, led by conservative firebrand Phyliss Schlafly, who ironically lived in Illinois at the time, focused on such concerns that in an ERA America, women would be eligible for a military draft and gender-specific bathrooms would be abolished.

Blogger with Schlafly in 2006

Illinois did not ratify the ERA.

Three states, in a move never tested in a federal court, later rescinded their ratifications. No states ratified the ERA during the extension period and the Equal Rights Amendment died in 1982, three states–or six–short of what was needed to be enacted.

Or did the ERA really die?

Last year, thirty-five years after the deadline expired, Nevada ratified the ERA. And last month the Illinois state Senate voted to do the same. In the House, Rep. Lou Lang (D-Skokie), who nominally represents me in the lower chamber, is the sponsor for the ERA there. It’s a pet cause of Lang, a consummate left-wing political hack. He’s the House deputy majority leader, in reality, he’s the head waiter for House Speaker for Life Michael Madigan (D-Chicago), who Reuters says is “the man behind the fiscal fiasco in Illinois.” Where is Lang’s pension fix? Illinois has one of the worst-funded public-worker pension systems of the fifty states. Its credit rating is the lowest of any state ever. Why? Pensions of course. And those generous retirement plans are in reality deferred compensation in exchange for public-sector union support of the Democratic Party. Yes, a couple of Republican governors, Jim Thompson and Jim Edgar, are also partly culpable. Illinois’ pension bomb, both at the state and local level, and the tax hikes to attempt to pay down that debt, are a millstone for the state and the reason the Prairie State is suffering from declining population.

Other than more tax increases, Lang has no solution to solve the pension crisis. And yes, he’s definitely part of the problem as Lang has been a state legislator since 1987.

What to do?

If you’re Lang, you create a distraction with a nostalgic, for the left that is, flavor. Ratify the ERA. The Democratic nominee for governor, JB Pritzker, is on board.

Of course Congress could vote to pass, with identical wording, a new Equal Rights Amendment. Lang can just call his pal US Rep. Jan Schakowsky, his (and yes, my) representative in the US House. She’s an even bigger leftist than he is. Then the states can have another go-around. That’s what the our nation’s founders would want.

On the other hand, passing an constitutional amendment is very difficult to do. In 229 years it’s only been accomplished 27 times. But the US Constitution has in reality been amended thousands of times–by the courts. Same-sex marriage was legalized in such a manner, as was abortion.

Other than making women eligible for a military draft, what would the ERA do?

Ruins of a LaSalle, Illinois bridge

But that’s not the point. Liberals are obsessed with symbolism.

After the 9/11 attacks author Tom Clancy expressed this notion better, telling Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, “The political left is, you know, they deal in symbols rather than reality.”

The ERA is a symbol.

“The general difference between conservatives and liberals is liberals like pretty pictures and conservatives like to build bridges that people can drive across,” Clancy continued. “And conservatives are indeed conservative because if the bridge falls down, people die. Where as the liberals figure, oh, we can always build a nice memorial to them and make people forget it happened and it was our fault. They’re very good at making people forget it was their fault, all right.”

The ultimate blame for Illinois’ pension debacle and the resulting people-drain lies with the left.

And Illinois is a collapsed bridge.

Will passing the ERA make Illinoisans feel better?

John Ruberry is a fifth-generation Illinoisan, who, with a 401(k) plan, is funding his own retirement. He regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

radical feminists protested against pornography for many years until — with stealth funding from the pornography industry, including Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Foundation — there emerged in the 1980s what is now known as “pro-sex feminism,” sometimes called liberal feminism to distinguish from (the original) radical feminism. That the women’s movement was co-opted by the porn industry is a fact that Women’s Studies majors usually don’t learn until their sophomore or junior year, if they learn it at all, because this is one of the shameful secrets that the feminist cult doesn’t like to mention, and radical (anti-pornography) feminists have been marginalized within their own movement.

Robert Stacy McCain Special Snowflake™ @Belle_Knox and Make-Believe Feminist ‘Empowerment’ 2-27-14

Very shortly I will be old enough to qualify for senior citizen discounts all over the nation and I’ve been thinking about my life as I hit its seventh inning stretch when I saw this tweet (via instapundit) by Ben Shapirio

This brought to mind an old post on the Sexual revolution:

In days past a man who wanted a women was expected to be a good provider, to be able to support not only a wife but an entire family through the sweat of his brow. He was expected to call on a woman, likely with a chaperone to keep an eye on him to offer self-control and to slowly but surely win approval of both the woman and the family to some degree before advancing to the next step.

And if he advanced prematurely or attempted to attain a conquest otherwise he was subject to the disapproval of culture or a shotgun to the back to make sure he did the right thing. The right thing being marriage, and if you finally secured a wife after meeting all these requirements divorce was not considered proper or acceptable culturally.

The reason why this combination of restraints and incentives was effective is due to a simple truth that has never changed:

Men want sex and want it badly and as much as men want sex teenage boys & men want it obsessively to the point where they were willing to allow themselves to be pushed toward responsibility, hard work and respectability for the chance to get it.

Thanks however to the sexual revolution, none of this is necessary anymore.

When I was a kid you had to hide a “dirty magazine” (a friend of mine kept a stash in a trash bag in the woods near his house) today you would be hard pressed to find a boy who had not seen hard core porn online by the age of 12 and thanks to the sexual revolution girls are not only taught at a young age that virtues like modesty or chastity are not only prehistoric but a form of oppression but we have a society that actually teaches that one who critiques having sex on camera for the masturbatory pleasure of men to pay for college is worthy of contempt.

In short men all the sexual desires that once motivated men  from nudity, to sex without commitment are now available without the effort of self improvement and the idea of women and girls engaging in this conduct that provides this to men in high school, college and even before is not only considered “empowering” but the failure of a young women to do so makes one odd.

All of this has happened in the space of two generations and by a not odd coincidence in my opinion, coincides with the growth of “woman’s studies” programs in universities all over the nation.

So as I near the date of my senior citizen discount and look back at this change I have a question for all the woman’s studies programs out there and the women in them:

How has the normalization and mainstreaming of promiscuity among young women and the removing of the sexual incentive system restraining men over the last 40 years empowered women and brought them better, more fulfilling lives?

I submit and suggest that it has not.

Update: If I had emailed Ed Driscoll of Instapundit and asked him to put up a post to prove my point today I couldn’t have done better than this:

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: Male Student Accuses Female Student of Sexual Assault. She Says He Wanted Revenge.

Doe woke up, realized they had engaged in sexual activity while they were both drunk, and feared that she would file a complaint against him, as she had done to his friend. Panic-stricken, he felt he had no choice but to beat her to the punch.

How’s all that empowerment working out for ya?

At Robert Stacy McCain’s site there is a post about some amazing developments in Canada concerning their version of the “Woman’s March” in Vancouver BC (which has apparently changed a lot in the 30 years since my wife and I spent a day of our honeymoon there). A feminist site has details.

To be clear, a woman is being threatened with violence and legal repercussions for stating, at a march for women, that women are female, and for challenging an ideology that claims gender is internal and biological rather than imposed by a patriarchal society. Not only have women been told they may not center their female bodies at the numerous women’s marches across the world, but when they dare to challenge the idea that trans-identified men should be centered at these marches, they are being pushed out and targeted.

There is a lot to be said about the consequences of liberal women under social threat or social opprobrium when they are brave enough to state basic facts of biology willing due to fear for their safety, or fear of social opprobrium etc etc etc but the most fascinating thing about the Canadian “woman’s march” not only giving a speaking spot to a transgender “dominatrix” for hire was this part of his/her speech concerning what he/she can contribute to the woman’s movement (all emphasis mine):

When you welcome us into your spaces, and allow us to be open and honest, you’ll find that we have so much knowledge to bring you, and not just about how to have amazing sex. We can teach you life skills, like how to take amazing selfies, how to use bitcoin, how to build a following on social media.

Let me be blunt: No conservative woman would be stupid enough to consider that a list of “life skills” and no liberal woman with any sense left in her would consider these “skills” ones that their daughters need to know to get by in the world.

But of course liberal woman find themselves in a catch 22, they used the rejection of reality as a sword to use on traditional values, western culture, western civilization and those who admire it, so they find themselves unable to deal with it when that rejection of reality is turned on them.

Of course the future belongs to those who show up In a generation or two these narcissists will die out and be marginalized and people will marvel that so man were willing to play along with this game.

Closing thought: If you wonder why middle eastern immigrants cling to a misogynistic radical Islamic ideology rather than embrace western culture this is your answer.

Major Pintz: These are today’s recruits, sir. Not much to pick from I’m afraid.
Col Klink: Well, as they say, beggars can’t be choosers. I’ll take them.
Major Pintz: Get these men uniforms, Sergeant, and have them report to me at once.
Sgt: Jawohl, Herr Major.
Col Klink: We are certainly scraping the bottom of the barrel these days.

Hogan’s Heroes The Swing Shift 1967

Over at Stacy McCain’s site there is yet another story of yet another one of the people I refer to as “Stacy’s Women” that is the various disturbed people that he regularly writes about:

OK, I’ll explain what and who inspired this rant. Rachel Sather graduated last year from CUNY-Hunter College. And she is crazy:

I’m very open about living with Borderline Personality Disorder. It’s a lot more common than people assume, with 1.6% of the general population living with BPD, most of whom are women. . . .
Between the psychotic episodes, addicting coping mechanisms, and the seemingly endless mental fog that comes with BPD, its incredibly difficult sometimes to maintain a healthy life. . . .
Thanks to social networks like Tumblr, there’s a whole network of bloggers that share their experiences with BPD. . . . The fact that I have learned more about my illness from Tumblr than someone with a Masters in psychology made me realize that not enough people were talking about it.

Great. You’re having “psychotic episodes” and “endless mental fog,” but you’ve got a college diploma and lots of friends on Tumblr. 

Now as a rule my only really interest in such people is that I pray daily for “Stacy’s Women” as a group on the 4th Glorious Mystery (and ask my late mother, mother in law & aunts to pray for them too) but it hit me today that while they may or may not be grateful for those prayers there is one person that Stacy’s women should be thanking their lucky stars for.

That person is President Donald Trump.

This might seem completely counter intuitive, after all President Donald Trump symbolizes all that they hate, but consider one of the facts of life.

In this modern world if you are looking for employment beyond something that involves the question “Would you like to upsize your combo meal?” you have to get past an HR department.

Now if you’ve graduated from a good college it’s very likely that your resume might be one of those flagged by a HR as one to check out.  But once your name is out of the pile, then comes the google search:

“Hello, world, I’m a queer who has psychotic episodes!” Is that how you want to introduce yourself to every stranger with an Internet connection? Are there actually people who could read that self-description without thinking, “Wow, better stay away from that weirdo”? And what about the ex-boyfriend with whom she had the “overall terrible experience”? Does he realize that Ms. Sather’s interest in him was “psychological attachment” symptomatic of her mental illness?

Y’know, some people had problems with sex before the Internet existed. They either solved their problems or they didn’t, but few of them advertised their problems to the entire world because (a) they didn’t have the means to do so, and (b) they weren’t completely crazy.

Now I can’t speak for HR departments everywhere but if you choose to advertise a bunch of personal problems, it’s not all that likely that HR and the manager looking to hire will be just dying to have you in for a chat.

And I haven’t even gotten started on the political stuff that screams to the corporate world that you are a lawsuit just waiting to happen.

However thanks to President Donald Trump Stacy’s Women have an ally that has the capacity to lessen if not cancel out all those legit worries. The Trump Economy!

In an economy with unemployment under 5% the labor market is tight. In an economy with unemployment under 5% AND growing at 3% or better that market is tighter.

Now picture an economy with unemployment under 5% that growing at 3% or better further stimulated by a corporate tax rate dropped by 40% to spur business growth and a drop in personal tax rates meaning that the average person has extra money to spend.  Like this:

CBS reported that Christmas sales reached $598 million this year, up $33 million over last year, for a 5.8% gain.

That is the biggest gain in Christmas sales in a dozen years.

And that’s not even considering what the ebbing of the flow of illegal immigrants does to said market.

In a labor pool where Kurt Schlichter’s “normals” are already snatched up everybody else gets a 2nd look.  Hey with a labor pool thin enough a college grad, even one with borderline personality disorder who has occasional psychotic episodes, not only avoids the circular file but might suddenly become a catch

It’s Donald Trump, not their liberal professors who will made this possible and every single one of these people who find themselves with a good job instead of manning a drive up window owe him a debt of gratitude that he will never collect.

Harvey Weinstein image by DAvid Shankbone via Wikipedia
An important point needs to be made concerning the continuing exposure of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual crimes and the finger pointing of leftists over the wall of silence.

If Hillary Clinton had been elected none of this would have come out.

Do you think for one moment that the NYT which had killed the Weinstein story once already would have dared to move forward knowing that a friend an ally of Mr. Weinstein was in the White House, running the justice department etc etc etc. Would they have dared to expose a story that would have crippled a Hillary Presidency?

I think not.

Every single woman who now has the courage to come forward about Weinstein owes Donald Trump the man they hate, the man they demonized, the man they did all they could to defeat, a huge thank you because without his election there is no Times story and they do not have the ability to openly say the truth about Weinstein.

And I submit and suggest that every one of us in the new media on the right should remind them of this fact every single day.

Update:
A question for the Hollywood left and feminists: Even if it meant that Harvey Weinstein was not exposed and would still preying on women do you still wish Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 instead of Trump and why?


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

Harvey Weinstein image by DAvid Shankbone via Wikipedia

At first glance it’s looks like the Harvey Weinstein story, from a journalistic standpoint  seems more and more like the John Edwards Story, where liberal journalists were uninterested in telling a story that might harm their allies

An explosive scandal had been kept out of the press for months at a time when the man at the center of it was an important player in national politics. Why? Young thought it was because the Edwards camp so tightly controlled information that journalists weren’t able to find sources to corroborate the Enquirer’s reporting. Perhaps that was part of it. But the fact was, many editors and reporters just didn’t want to tell the story. They admired Elizabeth Edwards. They saw no good in exposing John Edwards’ sordid acts.

Journalists saw no good in exposing the sordid acts of a former, senator, vice presidential and presidential candidate.

And while there is certainly a bit of that in the Weinstein story the more I think about it the more it seems that this was all about capitalism in the Tina Brown vein.

About five years ago I did a series of piece of Tina Brown at Newsweek and Salon and her ability to coax millions out of liberals for magazine empires that never seemed to make a buck:

Unless I’m missing something all that happened is an attractive blond managed to convince some man into spending a lot of money to stake her in a business, she used said business to enhance her reputation and when she proved unable to succeed in it dumped it on the first sucker willing to take it off her hands.

It looked a lot like liberal were willing to throw away money to advance liberalism 

Alas, there’s only one Tina and probably lots of would-be media moguls out there with millions of dollars to throw away on glitzy media operations. Send me an e-mail and we’ll do lunch.

But if you decide instead to hit Vegas and blow your millions on blackjack and hookers, I’ll understand.

A while back a few of us thought that if liberals were willing to play angels to advance liberalism conservatives should think about it too:

Jimmie has calculated — and I agree with his calculations — that you could run a pretty spiffy little conservative New Media operation for $500,000 a year if you knew what you were doing. But the problem is connecting (a) people with $500,000 to (b) people who know what they’re doing in terms of online news.

If you grant that Jimmie and I are correct about this estimate, do the math yourself: For the $4 million that the permatanned RINO Charlie Crist collected during that single three-month span of 2009, you could fund eight spiffy little New Media operations for a year (or four such operations for two years). And FEC contribution limits do not apply to people making “investments” in news operations, so that the rich Republicans would not be restricted in their generosity toward New Media, as they are toward political candidates.

Soros has figured this out. Rich Republicans have not.

…figuring it would be a better investment than say 15-30 mil on  Luther Strange

But all the arguments that folks like us were a better investment than a Tina Brown presumed that the motive for such investments were to advance ideas rather than sheer capitalism.  For the establishment a guy like Strange was an investment in keeping the gravy train, a very capitalistic motive and as Stacy McCain noted yesterday the whole “liberal angel” thing with Weinstein seems to be all about capitalism too. (emphasis mine)

Rebecca Traister of New York magazine recounts her own confrontation with Weinstein’s violent abusive behavior — her called her an epithet and shoved her boyfriend down the steps at a party in 2000. She tries to explain why Weinstein’s behavior was never previously reported, including the fact that “there were so many journalists on his payroll, working as consultants on movie projects, or screenwriters, or for his magazine.” Talk magazine, with Tina Brown as editor, was published 1999-2002: “The cover story of the debut issue was an interview with Hillary Clinton.” In less than three years, Talk lost an estimated $50 million. This was simply another aspect of Weinstein’s power. He was willing to throw away money on a slick magazine with a big-name editor in order to buy influence among journalists. And guess what? It worked. Contrary to their own smug opinions of themselves, the journalistic elite aren’t the most ethical people on the planet.

That fifty million makes a whole lot more sense now.  Apparently this wasn’t a question of spending money as a “liberal angel” helping the cause of women, gays  and the left, it was paying the price for being a “lecherous devil” buying off journalists who readily decided their silence  was worth it for the job, the office, the prestige, the access , the parties etc etc etc all the while telling themselves they were fighting to save the world from the evil conservatives who were trying to oppress women et/al.

This was sheer unadulterated Capitalism and apparently Mr. Weinstein got his money’s worth for decades.

Update: accidently put a gallery from a previous post at the bottom and fixed two sentences with redundant words.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

Monday morning was a contradiction, because Sunday had been so busy there had been no real time for the letdown of the high from Saturday’s Buffet Books and Blather event but as I hit the adoration chapel after daily mass there was a sense of urgency as Stacy’s TV appearance so I cut my prayer time down figuring I could get my decades in during the course of the day heading back to the house hoping that Stacy wasn’t completely in the zone.

This statement requires some clarity for those who have never shared a room with Robert Stacy McCain.  One Stacy McCain starts writing on a subject he enters a zone where it is nearly impossible to get his attention on anything else.  You won’t get him out of hotel room , you aren’t going get him to leave a McDonald’s to avoid the rush hour, and even getting out of the house for a TV appearance can be iffy.

Fortunately Stacy while writing had been pretty much prepared so when we left the house at 11 we figured there was plenty of time to make it to the studio in Worcester even when picking up gas for the car and a coffee for Stacy.  If only the traffic , namely the construction on I190 had cooperated, but in the end I dropped Stacy McCain off at the studio at noon on the button and headed over to the parking garage a block away and walked to the studio.

Stay was still out front, as Mrs. Finn was also delayed, when she did arrive her producer had still not arrived so it meant further delays but Stacy filled it with stories and conversation that continued to hold our host’s attention.

When he did arrive it was decided to tape a pair of shows back to back as this would be her only chance to have Stacy live in studio so they recorded two shows back to back but even with two shows it was impossible to cover all that Stacy had to say about feminism and culture.

When the shows were done it was time for more Mexican food. It turned out that the nearest restaurant was back across from the DCU center the site of yesterday’s event, so we walked the four blocks over. When we got there I was surprised to find Alan Napelton the head of the Catholic Marketing Network whose event I had covered in Chicago the previous month and who I had only managed to speak to for a few minutes the day before at the bar next to the place where we were seated. I took advantage of the moment to have the meeting that I had hoped to have the day before with him while Stacy shared a lunch with Mrs. Finn still regaling her with stories of which he has a seemingly inexhaustible supply.

When everyone was done eating it was getting pretty late in the day and we still hadn’t gotten to UMass Amherst which was on Mr. McCain’s “must do while I’m in Massachusetts list” so after saying our goodbyes to Mr. Napelton we hustled the five blocks back to the parking garage where we parted company with Mrs. Finn and headed west.

We arrived in Amherst near 6 pm and found ourselves at the Franklin Dining center where we got our bearings. As always the first thing we did was check out the bulletin boards to see what the feel of the place was and that fell wasn’t just left, but ultra ultra left.  Flyer after flyer advocated everything from the various gay, bisexual , Islamic, Socialist, and Transgender clubs but oddly not a single sign up or poster for the college republicans (we had our suspicions why but that’s for later in the story).

The plan was for Stacy to touch bases with the president of the college republicans and basically repeat what he had done at Harvard College the previous Thursday, however the delay in getting there complicated matters and the College republicans president was not available, however the VP of the college republicans had some free time so we drove over to her dorm area, picked her up and headed back to a lounge area where Stacy conducted an interview on audio.

And I interviewed Miss Bishop directly after Stacy on camera

where we discovered that the reason why there were no posters for sign ups for the college republicans is the no-hate on campus meme

Republicans and Americans excluded of course
that we saw plastered all over the place apparently doesn’t apply to the college republicans whose sign up posters were constantly torn down so as to make it a waste to put it up as nobody would ever be scolded or caught for it.

Apparently while we were at UMass Amherst on 9/11 the student body did not confine their suspension of the “no hate” policy to the GOP but extended it to the US itself:

The banner, which first caught students’ and officials’ attention yesterday morning, was slung above a doorway on Valentine Dining Hall and read in large, capital letters: “There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people,” a quote that is largely attributed to American historian Howard Zinn.

Below that was the phrase: “In honor of those killed and displaced by America’s so-called ‘war on terror.’ ”

There are 3000 Americans who might have taken umbrage at the “so called” in that banner that is if they hadn’t been slaughtered 16 years prior to the day.

But this was unknown to us at the time, for now we contented ourselves with our interviews discovering that like Harvard UMass had plenty of conservatives in the closet but unlike Harvard the percentage willing to go on record was 1/6 of 1% vs Harvard’s 2%.

However like the students at Harvard young miss Bishop defended both her school and the education she got there even though it seemed that when it came to college republicans clear love their alma maters said love was apparently not returned.

By the time we finished it was well after dark so after thanking Miss Bishop for giving us so much time on such short notice, we headed toward home stopping only in Gardner for one last Mexican meal and a chance to record one more segment for the podcast (available here) with Stacy while we had the chance.

For it would not be so many hours before we would be heading for the airport our adventures in Massachusetts concluded.

In the end we had covered the state several times, Boston, Cambridge, Lexington, Worcester, Amherst, Gardner Leominster and of course Fitchburg, we had put almost as many miles on my car as we did during the Scott Brown election (and said car died when it returned from taking Stacy home) and in addition to our events and speeches we had done some first class shoe leather reporting with the stories to back them up.

That above all else, made the week worthwhile, because first hand reporting and seeing things for yourself is what this business is all about. The gallery follows the Tip Jar Pitch.

Robert Stacy McCain in Massachusetts the Story so far:

9/15 Interviews from the EWTN Family Celebration in Worcester Williams, Warsaw, Grodi, Conroy, Radlicz and Pacwa
9/14 Robert Stacy McCain In Massachusetts Day 5: EWTN & Many Colleges
9/13 Robert Stacy McCain in Mass: Day 4: Buffet Books and Blather
9/11 Robert Stacy McCain in Mass Day 3: Tom Jones in Lexington
9/9 Robert Stacy McCain in MA Day Two: Shock and Awe at Harvard University
9/8 RSM in MA Day 2: Reverses, Feminists in NYU & The Kids at Espresso Pizza
9/6 Robert Stacy McCain Now in Massachusetts

At the Other McCain

9/12 Fear and Loathing at Logan International: Massachusetts is Depraved and Decadent
9/9 Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It
9/8 VIDEO: Kent Haeffner, President of Harvard University College Republicans
9/7 Heading to Harvard Yard
9/6 Fear and Loathing and BWI


My time with Stacy McCain resulted in 8 posts of original reporting and one large event livestreamed. I think it was good and worthwhile work worth the time, effort and expense involved. If you agree please hit DaTipJar Below and let us know you appreciate real actual reporting done by the new media and are willing to support it.



Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



Remember your subscription pay our Magnificent Seven writers each month

RH (NG36B) (Saturday Afternoons):
Zilla of the Resistance (Friday Evenings):
Jerry Wilson (Thursday Evenings)
JD Rucker (Thursday afternoons and Sunday Evenings)
Fausta Wertz (Wednesday and Friday Afternoons)
Juliette Akinyi Ochineg (Baldilocks) (Tuesday and Saturday evenings):
Chris Harper (Tuesday afternoons):
Pat Austin: (Monday Afternoons)
John (Marathon Pundit) Rubbery: (Sunday Afternoons):

And Don’t miss our Part Time Riders either
Ellen Kolb (1st & 4th Wednesday Afternoons each month):
Jon Fournier: (3rd Wednesday Afternoon each month)
Michigan Mick: (1st & 3rd Monday Evenings each month)
Tech Knight (2nd Wednesday Each Month)

Time to interrupt my final two Stacy McCain posts to comment a little on the issues of the day/week.

There have been attacks in London and Paris this week.  In Paris the target was just one policeman in London the underground but the most amazing thing about both attacks is the continuing unwillingness of either people to fight back.

There was an altogether different incident in London this week as well where Transgender activists, beat up a 60 year old woman recording a feminist event at Hyde Park drawing the approval of at least one democrat candidate for congress in Massachusetts.  Apparently the new British culture of not fighting back doesn’t just extend to Islamist terror.

Ben Shapiro spoke at Berkeley this week and wrote of the lesson of his speeches.  The most important is one that our British friends might take not of, if the police are allowed to enforce the law, law  order and freedom of speech are upheld.

I suspect that the only thing I find less remarkable than this facebook story concerning targeting ads based on phrases concerning “jew hatred” is not very remarkable assumption b pro-publica that such a person would be on the right.  It has is a firm resolution of the media/left to ignore the rising antisemitism in their ranks for even very longer than my own resolution to not set up an account on facebook.

I’m old enough to remember when the media/left insisted that Scooter Libby had to be jailed over the Valerie Plame affair.  Strangely enough Susan Rice’s activities don’t seem to excite any worry at all to them, after all her targets were their political enemies.

The Red Sox failure to punish those behind the banner incident beyond ejection is going to encourage more of this at more Redsox Patriots Bruins and perhaps even Celtics games.  And while I agree with the Herald that it will hurt the left in the long run, it will also make these games much less enjoyable for those who enjoy sports so I don’t like the trade off.

Speaking of things that are bad press for the left it’s quite correct that Bernie Sanders who thought single payer was too expensive when the country’s population was smaller has frightened the left into signing on.  It’s things like this that are the best allies of a GOP that fails to satisfy it’s voters and a president who might consider doing the same.

Even worse for the left is the fact that many on their side, young, hip and of color are questioning it.  How soon will we see rebelling against the left PC become the next cool thing for the eternally bored young?

Andrew Breitbart told us that politics is downstream from culture, Phelim McAleer with his Ferguson play has taken these words to heart and is going to make sure some of that truth gets downstream.  Would that more of those on the right, particularly those who waste their funds on consultants, did so too.

Finally I find reading “Chelsea” Manning play the victim over losing a visiting fellowship at the Kennedy School at Harvard when she will still be given a speaking slot at the most prestigious  almost as amazing as the initial invitation.  Then again considering what I saw at Harvard last week, the idea that the Kennedy School, as in John Fitzgerald Kennedy war hero,  would honor a traitor who is only free from a 35 year jail sentence because we elected a president with a great affection for enemies of America does not seem that amazing at all.