Leave a comment

Not Before My Morning Coffee: 5-2-18

Good “Hump Day” morning to ya, fellow Spectators!

No random newsfeed links this morning with your personally selected brews. Just a few very interesting reads:

Today’s unhinged liberal feminists have gone full schizophrenic bitches. “SHOW ME RESPECT!! … STOP SHOWING ME RESPECT BECAUSE I DON”T NEED YOU SHOWING ME RESPECT!!

Suzanne Venker: Chivalry is dead because women killed it

A friend of mine whose mother died recently was going through her parents’ memorabilia and unearthed a Western Union telegram from 1954 that her father sent her mother just before they married. Here’s what it said:

Darling, I shall be waiting for you at eight. With a lifetime of expectancy. My heart will be coming with you down the aisle. May God be with us tonight as we pray we will always be with Him. Thank you for becoming my wife. My love forever yours, Henry

Several days after I’d read this note, I came across this miserable tripe on Facebook: “Chivalry is harmful to both men and women,” relays the woman in the video. “because it reinforces this idea that women need to be helped or saved by a stronger man. And it takes away a woman’s agency.”

The video Venker cited by the feminist is filled with droning on and on about women being as strong and able as men with her nitpicky complaints about males being polite to her. Yet, the liberal feminists (who are the ones who killed ‘chivalry’) continue to not only make more and more paranoid schizophrenic demands on how they themselves are to be viewed and treated while allowing a very wide berth on how they themselves should be allowed to conduct their own behavior, but continue to inflict their paranoid schizophrenic demands on the thoughts and behavior of men. THAT is not “equal” status by any measure…

If there’s one common theme in the media today about the relationship between women and men, it’s the claim that there are no good (read: marriageable) men left. Well, gee, I wonder why that is?

It’s clear as day why that is. The relentless message from women and society that men have nothing special to offer—that not only is their income unnecessary, so is their chivalrous behavior—has built a wall between the sexes the size of Mount Everest.

Funny thing, though, the equality meme hasn’t translated to women paying for their own dinner or asking men to marry them. Why is that? Could it be that deep down, women know something’s lost when men and women are viewed as the same? Could it be there was something special about men being men and women being women?

It is the Marxist and Alinsky tactic in order to erase what has been built and replace it with their own ideology…

Victor Davis Hanson: Revolution and Worse to Come

Insidiously and incrementally, we are in the process of normalizing violence against the elected president of the United States. If all this fails to delegitimize Trump, fails to destroy his health, or fails to lead to a 2018 midterm Democratic sweep and subsequent impeachment, expect even greater threats of violence. The Resistance and rabid anti-Trumpers have lost confidence in the constitutional framework of elections, and they’ve flouted the tradition by which the opposition allows the in-power party to present its case to the court of public opinion.

Instead, like the French revolutionaries’ Committee on Public Safety, the unhinged anti-Trumpists assume that they have lost public opinion, given their venom and crudity, and are growing desperate as every legal and paralegal means of removing Trump is nearing exhaustion. Robert Mueller is the last chance, a sort of Watergate or Abu Ghraib that could gin up enough furor to drive down Trump’s poll favorability to the twenties and thereby reduce his person to a demonic force deserving of whatever it gets.

After the prior era of hysteria, between 2005 and 2008, when books and docudramas staged the imagined assassination of George W. Bush, and celebrities like Michael Moore and activists such as Cindy Sheehan reduced Bush to the status of a war criminal, the Left in 2009 demanded a return to normal political discourse and comportment, with the election of Barack Obama. A newly contrite and apologetic America was abruptly worth believing in again. In 2009, the CIA and FBI suddenly were reinvented as hallowed agents of change.

Bush careerists, including Clapper and Brennan, were now damning the very counterterrorism practices that they once helped put in place, while offering Obama-like politically correct sermons on the benign nature of Islamism. Surveillance and jailing were appropriate punishments for suspected Obama apostates (ask James Rosen or Nkoula Basseley Nakoula). The IRS was weaponized for use against Obama’s ideological opponents. Suggestions that the president was unfit or worse became near treasonous. Unity was the new patriotism. The assumption was that Obama had ushered in a half-century of progressive norms, not that he so alienated the country that he birthed Donald Trump.

The danger to the country this time around is that the Left has so destroyed the old protocols of the opposition party that it will be hard to resurrect them when progressives return to power.

We are entering revolutionary times. The law is no longer equally applied. The media are the ministry of truth. The Democratic party is a revolutionary force. And it is all getting scary.

If youth are not getting real history in the classroom they will quench their hungar for it by seeking it out…

Man Trying to Interview Every WWII Vet: ‘I Was Learning More From Them Than I Was in School’

A 20-year-old man is dedicating his life to speaking with every World War II veteran in order to share their experiences for future generations.

Rishi Sharma, founder of Heroes of the Second World War, says that the combat veterans are his “biggest heroes” and “kindred spirits.”

He said on “Fox & Friends First” that his mission is to meet and interview two to three combat veterans every day until the last one passes away.

“If I wanted to get in touch with some kind of useless celebrity, I would have to go through a thousand people,” Sharma said. “But to talk to someone who literally helped save the world, I can just call them.”

According to Sharma’s website, his interviews last up to six hours.

“The interviews are filmed but there is absolutely no commercial aspect to this as I just provide a DVD for the veteran’s use,” the website states.

“I started ditching class to go do interviews because I was learning more from the veterans than I was in school,” Sharma said.

He emphasized that it’s important to meet the veterans who have given people today the opportunity to live their lives as they choose.

To this: Dennis Prager: The Left Is Merciless at Keeping Conservatives in the Closet

The dominant force in America and many other Western countries today is fear of the left.

This is a result of the fact that the most dynamic religion of the past 100 years has been neither Christianity nor Islam. It has been leftism. Whoever does not recognize this does not understand the contemporary world.

Leftism—in its incarnations, such as Marxism, communism, and socialism; expressed through egalitarianism, environmentalism, and feminism; in its denigration of capitalism and Western civilization, especially America and Israel; in its supplanting of Christianity and Judaism; through its influence on Christianity and Judaism; in its celebration of race; and in its replacing of reason with romanticism—has almost completely taken over the news and entertainment media and institutions of education.

There is a largely (though not entirely) nonviolent reign of ideological terror in America. In almost every area of life, people fear antagonizing the left.


I have called contemporary conservatives in America Marranos, the name given during the 15th-century Spanish Inquisition to Jews who hid their Judaism while appearing to be Catholics, lest they be persecuted. I do not compare the consequences: Losing one’s friends or employment is not the same as losing one’s home or one’s life. But otherwise, the label is apt…


Why the left will continue to use and abuse the legal system to silence opposition? Well, because they are being trained to do so…

Mark Pulliam: Who Runs The Legal Academy?

It’s worse than you thought; the lunatics license the asylums in addition to running them.

The most disturbing detail that emerged from the coverage of Professor Josh Blackman’s widely-publicized shout-down by leftist protesters at CUNY Law School was that CUNY law dean Mary Lu Bilek—who defended the disruptive mob as “reasonable” and engaging in “protected free speech”—serves on an ABA “site visit team.” Indeed, her official CUNY bio states that Bilek “served on the ABA Special Committee on the Professional Education Continuum, and chaired the Section on Legal Education Diversity Committee.” An academic who can’t tell the difference between a reasoned debate and the “hecklers’ veto” is a honcho with the organization responsible for accrediting law schools? That struck me as odd, so I dug deeper.

Bilek, it turns out, has a long progressive resume, albeit entirely consistent with the left-wing agenda of the ABA. One reason that law schools are becoming monolithic social justice academies and ideological echo chambers is that the ABA—in its capacity as regulator—is pushing them to do so. When I looked at my alma mater (the University of Texas law school) recently, I was staggered by the extent of the internal bureaucracy dedicated to “diversity and inclusion,” including a full-time administrator devoted to “student affairs, inclusion and community engagement” and a dean-appointed “committee on diversity and inclusion.” (This is in addition to race-based preferences in admissions that UT has fought hard to continue.)

I was initially curious about why a publicly-funded law school that continually complains about inadequate legislative funding would expend its scarce resources on a subject seemingly unrelated to the school’s core mission: teaching students to be competent lawyers. Then I discovered that the ABA has made “diversity and inclusion” one of its accreditation standards.

Not a “sexist” query. With Clinton’s yearlong bizarre health and behavior during the 2016 election campaign, that to this day has not been answered, it had to be just one of a couple issues the woman was obviously not handling too well during that time (and perhaps to this day)…

AoSHQ: Oh My: National Review Finally Asks, “Does Hillary Clinton Drink Too Much Alcohol? And Did the Media Cover This Up?”

For about a year, John Ekdahl was on a lonely one-man beat covering this story. He pushed out a lot of pictures showing Hillary drinking and sometimes even looking glassy-eyed and, um, “happy.”

Hillary Clinton logged 150,000 miles of flying, half of which were logged on an airplane. The others were logged on her couch.

Ekdahl noted that during her campaign coverage, the NYT’s Amy Chozick said something like “She can really drink.” Chozick said this almost like it was a good thing, like it was Hillary showing she had a personality and could hang with the boys, but a lot of people associated with John Ekdahl’s Institute for Leading Thought-Leadership raised their eyebrows at this estimation of Hillary’s alcohol tolerance.

Tolerance? Or appreciation?

Well, Google it. The internet is full of three sorts of pictures of Hillary Clinton:

1. Hillary nodding;

2. Hillary falling;


3. Hillary drinking.

For years, people have ignored John Ekdahl’s seminal investigations into this area…


Despite a reporter covering her letting us know she likes to drink, and despite an email from Palmieri instructing the staff to “sober her up.”

No one in the media asked the obvious follow-up questions or treated this as anything more than a silly internet conspiracy theory meme.

Combine that quote, and all the pictures of Hillary enjoying a cocktail or five (see below) with what didn’t get reported, and you have a genuine scandal — only partly about Hillary’s level of alcohol consumption.

Mostly, it’s about what the press knew but decided to hide from the public.
I know I’m writing this in a humorous way, but this is actually a question I’ve had for two years, and I’ve never seen the media touch it…

Remember, we were not, and still aren’t, permitted to question anything personal about Hillary Clinton’s health or bad habits. But digging up consensual adult relationships with strippers and Playboy bunnies in Trump’s past (and the typical handling of scandal with a money-gag) is fair game, even if Bill Clinton’s habitual sexual offenses, and Hillary’s gestapo-like silencing of his victims.

This morning’s NBMMC post brought to you by: When liberals get “rights” horribly wrong…

Go out and make it a great mid-week, Spectators!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: