Wednesday, July 17, 2019

More Democrats have turned extremist

NY Times columnist Paul Krugman writes that a political party can win elections by saying "nigger nigger nigger". The Atlantic mag says the same. That has become the Democrat strategy.

It is rare to hear a Republican say anything about race, as Republicans do not appear to even think that racial issues are important. But listen to the Democrats, and its nigger nigger nigger all the time.

Plus, Democrats are now the Party of Open Borders. Someone tried to convince that this was a straw man, by pointing to this Elizabeth Warren essay on immigration reform. But the only reforms she advocates are to eliminate all limits on non-white immigration. So it is all open borders, and racially inflammatory language.

Tuesday, July 16, 2019

We are all descended from invaders

Nat. Geographic reports:
Now scientists are delivering new answers to the question of who Europeans really are and where they came from. Their findings suggest that the continent has been a melting pot since the Ice Age. ...

In an era of debate over migration and borders, the science shows that Europe is a continent of immigrants and always has been. “The people who live in a place today are not the descendants of people who lived there long ago,” says Harvard University paleogeneticist David Reich. ...

In Britain and some other places, hardly any of the farmers who already lived in Europe survived the onslaught from the east. In what is now Germany, “there’s a 70 percent to possibly 100 percent replacement of the local population,” Reich says. “Something very dramatic happens 4,500 years ago.” …

“To me, the new results from DNA are undermining the nationalist paradigm that we have always lived here and not mixed with other people,” Gothenburg’s Kristiansen says. “There’s no such thing as a Dane or a Swede or a German.” Instead, “we’re all Russians, all Africans.”
The nationalist paradigm is that a nation must defend its borders, or else it will be wiped out by invaders.

The DNA results prove this. Become a fierce nationalist, or be exterminated. That is the history of Europe.

All I hear from Democrats today is that they want to replace the American White population with non-whites. There is not even one Democrat presidential candidate who has a policy position to put limits on non-white immigration.

Monday, July 15, 2019

Celebrating the Fourth is White, a typical leftist site, posts this anti-Trump rant:
Donald Trump is one of the best storytellers in recent political memory because of his skill in manipulating the emotions of the audience. ... Trump's Fourth of July event was a great example of these gifts. ...

White Christian conservatives are a key constituency for today's Republican Party, and many of them apparently believe that Donald Trump is a messenger and savior sent to them by God. White conservatives, especially right-wing Christians, also believe they are in a literal, existential struggle for survival against black and brown people and "the secular world."

Donald Trump has combined these attributes and further weaponized them in the form of overt white supremacy and white identity politics. In this right-wing social imaginary Donald Trump stands as savior and father figure. Loyalty and obedience to Trump provides life and salvation to his followers.
This essay does not even quote anything from Trump! Instead it complains that his recent July 4 speech did not say anything about immigrants.

Got that? A white politician is a white supremacist if he fails to credit non-white immigrants.

Trump never says anything white supremacist, or white nationalist, or white identity political. It is the Democrats and his other enemy who inject anti-white racial matters into everything.

The NY Times has an article by a black woman who says she was bused two hours a day, and it worked because nobody can learn anything in a predominantly black school. It narrowed the white-black test scores, she says.

This article is much more white supremacist than anything Trump says. It is anti-white identity politics. It is written to boost the chances of Kamala Harris, who doesn't have much going for her except that she is a non-white female. She has a white grandparent and a Jewish husband, but she is campaigning on anti-white, anti-male identity politics.

Sunday, July 14, 2019

Everyone is disassociating with Epstein

There is a big rush to disassociate with Jeffrey Epstein, and here is Steve Pinker:
My review of the history of rape and battering in The Better Angels of Our Nature  ... The lengthy section lauds feminist writers like Susan Brownmiller who first documented the prevalence of rape and the historic indifference to it, and who called for concerted measures to eliminate it. ...

Given my longstanding distaste for everything Epstein, it’s galling to be publicly associated with him based on some photos and mutual associates, but I suppose this is one of the dubious perquisites of fame (by academic standards).  And it’s a particular hazard in the era of social media — last year I was featured in a New York Times op-ed by Jesse Singal called “Social Media Is Making Us Dumber. Here’s Exhibit A”; this year I appear to be Exhibit B.
It is funny that he thinks that this somehow exonerates him.

Pinker is despised by the Left because he meets this definition of being red-pilled, and because he acts like a closet neo-nazi. If he is going to write a scholarly work on violence, he is going to pay homage to feminism. He has to, if wants to continue as a respected Harvard professor.

So obviously he is going to disavow Epstein.

I do not agree with guilt-by-association, but leftists do. I am not blaming him, but a lot of leftists are portraying Epstein as the world's greatest evil, and blaming everyone connected to him.

This is just another leftist media frenzy over stale and dubious accusations.

They say that a search of his house uncovered some child porn, but that is the surest way to frame someone. The evidence never becomes public, and the target goes to prison for life.

The most interesting question here is how Epstein made his money. He appears to be extremely rich, without any honest source of income. I have never heard of someone making so much money, while being interconnected with a lot of famous people, without any obvious explanation. Now there are rumors that he was an extortionist, blackmailer, con man, swindler, etc. I assume that we will find out the sources, as the feds are good at tracing money. They may not figure out why others were willing to invest money with such a goofball. Did we ever get an explanation of why people trusted Bernie Madoff?

Update: Inside Higher Ed piles on with Pinker attacks. I think that Pinker's enemies are not willing to say why they really hate him.

Saturday, July 13, 2019

Twitter and Amazon increase their censorship

Twitter announces that it will not ban messages critical of religion:
We create our rules to keep people safe on Twitter, and they continuously evolve to reflect the realities of the world we operate within. Our primary focus is on addressing the risks of offline harm, and research* shows that dehumanizing language increases that risk. As a result, after months of conversations and feedback from the public, external experts and our own teams, we’re expanding our rules against hateful conduct to include language that dehumanizes others on the basis of religion.
The word "research" is just a euphemism for some Jewish opinion articles.

This would appear to ban a Christian saying that non-Christians will go to Hell.

And Amazon is now banning some self-help books:
After Amazon knuckled under pressure from LGBT activists to ban books offering help to those dealing with unwanted same-sex attraction, ...

Among the banned books are several by Catholic psychologists Joseph Nicolosi and Gerard Van Aardweg, as well as autobiographies of individuals who left active homosexuality.

“We are outraged that a smear campaign by one individual (who stated here that he never read these books) could convince Amazon to censor all books, audiobooks, and Kindle material related to our experiences and viewpoints,” reads the petition. ...

Here are the books known to have been banned by Amazon, which former gays and lesbians are demanding be restored:

Shame and Attachment Loss: The Practical Work of Reparative Therapy, by Dr. Joseph Nicolosi;

Restoring Sexual Identity: Hope for Women Who Struggle with Same-Sex Attraction, by Anne Paulk;

The Battle for Normality: A Guide for (Self-)Therapy for Homosexuality, by Dr. Gerard J. M. Van Den Aardweg; ...
Note that these bans are not based on anything being false, or dangerous, or infringing, or illegal, or anything like that.

Again, this bans some mainstream Christian opinions.

You might argue that these books have no proven effectiveness. But most of psychology and most self-help books have no proven effectiveness. These books are not any worse than the typical books in this genre. If Amazon were to ban ineffective books, a lot would have to go.

Friday, July 12, 2019

Women cannot distinguish fantasies from reality

A Nautilus article explains why imagination and memories are so similar in the brain:
It’s long been common knowledge that imaginings are re-combinations of bits from memory. But now we’re seeing that the act of recalling something that happened to you looks very much like what happens when you imagine something new.
A large number of women have fantasies about having sexual relations with the President. After a while, it becomes impossible for the women to distinguish the memory of a real event from the memory of a fantasy.

A recent accuser got a lot of publicity, and many wondered whether she was telling the truth. That is the wrong question, as it is unlikely that she knows whether she is telling the truth. Her book told a lot of wild stories, so she probably has many fantasies and real experiences, and she cannot distinguish them. A reporter found a couple of women who said that she should be believed, but of course they say that all women should be believed.

Netflix has convinced the public that a confession could be a false confession, even if it is videorecorded in the presence of parents and lawyers and results in a long prison term. If so, then a MeToo confession can be a false one also. If someone might confess falsely and get a 40-year prison term, then someone might confess falsely to get a million-dollar book contract.

Here is a MeToo allegation in today's news:
For a year, Araoz said, she was brainwashed into giving Epstein massages while wearing only her underwear. He would masturbate until he finished — and then leave her $300.

But in 2002, Araoz claimed, Epstein told her to remove her underwear because he wanted to “try something a little bit different.”
Epstein is a creep with deep pockets, and the vultures are closing in on him. It sounds as if the accuser suddenly remembered this story after 17 years, and after signing a deal with a lawyer to make a claim.

Thursday, July 11, 2019

NY Times quotes Roissy blog

This blog is getting some unwanted attention from this NY Times article:
The technological frontiers being explored by questionable researchers and unscrupulous start-ups recall the discredited pseudosciences of physiognomy and phrenology, which purport to use facial structure and head shape to assess character and mental capacity.

Artificial intelligence and modern computing are giving new life and a veneer of objectivity to these debunked theories, which were once used to legitimize slavery and perpetuate Nazi race “science.” Those who wish to spread essentialist theories of racial hierarchy are paying attention. In one blog, for example, a contemporary white nationalist claimed that “physiognomy is real” and “needs to come back as a legitimate field of scientific inquiry.”
This is not a reference to this blog, but to the now defunct Chateau Heartiste blog. It was banned by Wordpress, without public explanation. I doubt that it was banned for white nationalism, as I never saw him express such views.

However he wrote about beauty and ugliness a lot, and he discussed social trends. Yes, many of his opinions would be called racist by the NY Times leftists. He said a lot of things that leftists despise.

It is outrageous that his blog was banned, as it was filled with fascinating insights about human nature. He often did cite scientific studies to back up his views.

I just quoted his comments on physiogonomy in 2016 as provocative. Most everyone does make some judgments based on appearance.

The NY Times says:
Affect recognition draws from the work of Paul Ekman, a modern psychologist who argued that facial expressions are an objective way to determine someone’s inner emotional state, and that there exists a limited set of basic emotional categories that are fixed across cultures. His work suggests that we can’t help revealing these emotions. That theory inspired the television show “Lie to Me,” about a scientist who helps law enforcement by interpreting unforthcoming suspects’ expressions.

Dr. Ekman’s work has been criticized by scholars who say emotions cannot be reduced to such easily interpretable — and computationally convenient — categories.
Ekman does seem to overstate what can be done with his approach, and reading the emotions of others can often be wrong.

But nearly everyone reads emotions from facial expressions. Some claim that dogs can do it. If you cannot do it, then psychiatrists say you have autism.
If physiognomy gained traction, “one will hang children before they have done the deeds that merit the gallows,” Lichtenberg wrote, warning of a “physiognomic auto-da-fé.”
Soon AI systems will be predicting criminality based on DNA, faces, habits, friends, health, and anything else available to the surveillance state.

Tuesday, July 09, 2019

Jews want Holocaust education mandatory

RT reports:
The World Jewish Congress is pushing US lawmakers to make Holocaust education mandatory in all schools, citing statistics from a 2018 poll revealing half of millennials can’t name a single Nazi concentration camp.

The WJC started a petition calling on Congress to “make Holocaust education mandatory in every school in the United States,” that has garnered 8,500 signatures so far. The petition points to a rise in antisemitism and warns that “the horrors of the Holocaust are fading from our collective memory, especially among millennials.”

It refers to statistics found in the 2018 Holocaust Knowledge and Awareness Study which surveyed 1,350 Americans aged 18 and over and found 49 percent of millennials and 45 percent of adults couldn’t name a concentration camp or ghetto in Europe during the Holocaust. It also revealed that 41 percent of millennials think the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust was two million or less, rather than six million.
I am just posting this as an example of how Jews think. Draw your own conclusions.

Feminist rabbi wants open borders

The Boston Globe reports:
A lively and fast-moving stream of about 1,000 Jewish activists and others shut down traffic in the heart of the city during rush hour Tuesday evening, chanting, singing, and drumming to protest immigrant detention in the city and across the country. ...

Many of the demonstrators were young, wearing prayer shawls and head coverings, and drawing on lessons learned in Hebrew school ...

“I think it’s particularly important for Jews, who face anti-Semitism, and have an ancestral history of trauma, to speak out on behalf of other people,” said Rabbi Becky Silverstein, who wore a prayer shawl and carried a shofar, a ram’s horn used during some Jewish holidays.
Here is yet another example of feminist leftist Jews seeking to impose their weirdo beliefs on the rest of us.

In particular, she makes a delusional charge of "anti-Semitism" to justify exterminating White Christians. This Jewish group has the slogan "Never Again" to mean that they will never again miss a chance to seek the demographic displacement of White Christians. They adamantly say that ICE must not stop non-white migrants from invading the country.

In America, of course. It is okay for Jews to block migrants moving to Israel, because that is how Israel maintains a Jewish ethnostate.
In June, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., weighed in, releasing a statement that it “unequivocally rejects efforts to create analogies between the Holocaust and other events, whether historical or contemporary.” That prompted more than 400 scholars of the Holocaust and genocide to rebuke the museum, saying that its position “makes learning from the past almost impossible.”
I am not sure which side of this is more absurd. Either way, it is clear that Holocaust stories are only to be used to advance political agendas against gentiles.

Monday, July 08, 2019

Red Pill people seek facts

The Rational Male writes:
Red Pill people generally bring the following assumptions to a debate:
  • They believe that there is exactly one reality, and that truth is what accurately describes that reality. The better a statement describes reality, the more true it is. They are factual absolutists.
  • They believe that whether something is “good” or “bad” is a matter of opinion, and that all systems of morality are things societies invented to get a result, and it is therefore pointless to argue about whether something is “evil” or not, instead of about what effect it has. They are moral relativists. ...
Blue Pill people generally bring the following assumptions to a debate:
  • They believe that reality is subjective, and what is “true” is simply a matter of who you ask. What is called “truth” is simply a codification of someone’s perspective, and it is therefore pointless to argue about what is “true“. They are factual relativists.
  • They believe that there is exactly one set of moral laws, which human beings have gradually discovered in a historical climb towards ethical perfection (or degeneration). Certain people are ethically better or worse based not only on what they do, but also on what they believe. They believe that different ethical systems exist, but they can be ranked from ethically worst to ethically best based on a sort of meta-ethics whereby they can be tested for degree of compliance with the one absolute set of ethics that underlies reality. They are moral absolutists.
He is on to something here.

Like the Red Pill people, I often post about human nature, and I am primarily concerned with just understanding the facts. I am not trying to get men to behave more like women, or vice-versa. Just to understand their nature. Blue pill people do not accept facts about human nature.

It is only the Blue Pill people who go around condemning others for stating facts.

Others use the term Red Pill somewhat differently. Usually it means accepting realities of human nature, in spite of almost everyone telling convenient lies.

Sunday, July 07, 2019

Deus Vult

29 societies of Medievalists have made a statement relating Medieval scholarship to "white supremacy" and the Crusades. It says:
Every generation of scholars creates its own interpretations of the past.
It is hard to tell what the real issue is, because it does not cite or link to whomever it is criticizing.

Reading between the lines, it appears that nearly everyone who seriously studies Medieval history comes to the following conclusions:

1. 3000 years ago, the most advanced civilizations were in Middle East, Persia, India, and China. Europe was lagging.

2. During Europe's so-called Dark Ages, it built a civilazation that was to leap frog far ahead of those outside Europe.

3. The primary ingredients for success were White people and culture, Christianity, and a willingness to fight for their beliefs.

4. The success was not based on any technology, natural resources, or conquests.

5. The Crusades and related battles kept Moslems and Jews from taking over Europe, as they would have ruined it.

If these conclusions are wrong, then I expect that the politically-correct Medievalists would try to rebut it. Instead they just say that they are free to create their own interpretations and things like this:
Scholars disagree about the motivations of the Crusades — or, indeed, whether the idea of “crusade” is a medieval one or came later — but it is clear that racial purity was not primary among them.
Sure, the Crusades were more about religious purity than racial purity.

White Christian Europe achieved greatness in the last 500 years, while the Islamic world declined. Various explanations have been given. I do not know which is best, but I am pretty sure I won't get it for those 29 Medievalist societies. They have already said that they oppose discussing scholarship that "hurts people in the present". I am pretty sure that any good explanation will cause bigotry complaints.

Saturday, July 06, 2019

Daily attacks from the NY Times

A Jewish NY Times columnist writes:
The United States and Britain would then be led by men with striking similarities, and not just on the hair front: two charlatans and narcissists with flimsy notions of the truth, utterly unprincipled, given to racist slurs, skilled practitioners of the politics of spectacle, manipulators of fear, nationalist traffickers in an imaginary past of radiant greatness, fabulists of reborn glory, with giant holes at their centers where conscience and integrity went missing.
Of course he would be claiming anti-semitism, if anyone said this about a Jew.

Another Jewish NY Times columnist praises a German woman as a heroine, because she smuggles African migrants into Italy.

Another Jewish NY Times story complains that the better NY schools have white teachers, and hence not diverse enough.

There is a big article complaining that the most prominent art critics are white. It counts Jews and gays as being white.

Another NY Times column complains that close to half of Republicans view the news media as “the enemy of the people.” He complains that Republicans are against the First Amendment, but nearly all the forces of censorship in America today are from Democrats. He praises Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, and Lincoln, but of course all of them would be considered White supremacists today.

There are probably a bunch more anti-white anti-gentile articles in today's paper, but that is all I read so far. This garbage is printed every day. If there were prizes for hate speech, the NY Times would be winning.

Update: This comment explains how censorship has become almost entirely an activity of the Left:
Say what you will about the right but I've never had a right wing website censor me, hell go to any right wing website and say you're a Bernie Bro and see what happens...they will make fun of you, probably call you a moron , but they won't censor you.

Now go to a left wing website like HuffPo or Daily Kos and say you are for any right winger or their stance and see what happens...I'll yourself erased pretty damn quickly didn't ya?

You don't see the right calling to ban Colbert or Maddow or anybody else, oh they will make fun of them and make memes, I personally enjoyed the "Rachel Madcow Russia meme" where they spliced together how many times she said Russia on one episode, I quit counting at like 23 and it just kept going, but they don't censor. Its the left you see calling for shadowbans, removing those they do not agree with from platforms, and erasing people from history like a good Stalinist.

And when it comes down to it if the choice is a bunch of assholes where I'm allowed to point and say "they are a bunch of assholes!" or a bunch of social justice Marxist wannabes that tries to erase anything they don't agree with as "badthink"? I'll go with the assholes, at least they aren't trying to tape my mouth shut, dox me, or bash my head in with a bike chain because i don't buy their bullshit.
That's right. The Right believes in free speech, while the Left believes in censorship. I occasionally see articles by leftists criticizing Facebook and Twitter for censorship, but they always urge a different and more aggressive form of censorship.

Friday, July 05, 2019

Whitewashing of American history

Artnet news:
For decades, a series of murals illustrating the life of George Washington on the walls of a San Francisco high school has been the subject of heated debate. Some say the 13-panel painting, which depicts violence against Native Americans and slaves, should be taken down. Others believe the work of art, which was painted nearly 90 years ago by Russian-born artist Victor Arnautoff — a noted critic of the whitewashing of American history — is an invaluable teaching tool.

Last week, the city finally settled the issue. The San Francisco Board of Education voted unanimously to cover up the murals at George Washington High School — a project that will cost as much as $845,000 in taxpayer money. Not everyone is pleased with the decision. ...

The school board still has to decide whether it will paint over the mural or cover it with paneling. The latter option would cost between $600,000 and $845,000 and would be completed within two years, according to the Times. Painting, while ostensibly cheaper, would first necessitate an environmental impact study, which would run roughly $500,000. The timeline for this option is unclear.
The mural should have been destroyed a long time ago for being Commie propaganda. But paying $500k just to destroy it? Can't we do anything for reasonable cost anymore?

My guess is that there will be lawsuits over this, so that it will eventually cost $2M and 5 years. Or worse.

But apparently computer programming can still be done on the cheap. According to this article, Boeing 737s were crashing because it outsourced critical programming to $9 per hour Indian coders.

The revisionist history continues:
Thomas Jefferson Day has been canceled for Toxic Male Whiteness in Charlottesville, where Jefferson invented the American college campus with his landscape design for the University of Virginia.
So what American heroes are left? Not Martin Luther King, Jr., as he has been revealed to be a Commie fellow traveler and a philanderer, and even egged on a rape, if these sources are to be believed.

BTW, the NY Times has yet another Jewish rant about how Trump is like Hitler and how it is fascist to resist the demographic replacement of whites by non-whites. It concedes that Trump is not as bad as Hitler, but persists in the analogies nevertheless. It says Trump is not anti-Semitic, but he is interfering with Jewish plans to exterminate white gentiles. It is amazing how the mainstream media is now so open about such opinions.

Thursday, July 04, 2019

The Struggle for Gay Rights Is Over

From an Atlantic mag essay:
The Struggle for Gay Rights Is Over

For those born into a form of adversity, sometimes the hardest thing to do is admitting that they’ve won. ...

America is rapidly becoming a post-gay country. Gay people were once policed as criminal subversives, depicted in the popular culture as deviants, and pathologized by the medical establishment as mentally ill. Now most of America views homosexuality as benign. ...

On television, one cannot change the channel without coming across prominent lesbian and gay characters. ...

Every day seems to bring welcome examples of how Americans are becoming more relaxed about sexual orientation. ...

Nonetheless, hysteria about America’s supposedly deepening homophobia flourishes. Earlier this year, an academic journal quietly retracted a study by a Columbia University professor purporting to show that living in areas with high levels of antigay sentiment reduces gay people’s life expectancies by a dozen years. Before it was withdrawn, the paper was cited 141 times in other academic publications.
It is a little bizarre how the LGBT crowd claims that they are persecuted. They have gotten everything they want, and they control the media.

Likewise, it is strange to hear feminists complain, when they have gotten their feminist utopia.

Obviously these groups are going to complain endlessly, no matter what. It is their religion to complain about being persecuted.

Wednesday, July 03, 2019

Name-calling against this blog

A reader accuses this blog of being anti-semitic.

Almost every day I see the mainstream media attacking President Donald Trump in the harshest terms. They lie about him almost every time. Most of the time they are Jews, working for Jewish-dominated organizations, like the NY Times or CNN. Sometimes they are politicians, like Schumer, Nadler, and Schiff.

Jews aren't the only Trump-haters. There are also Mormons, Moslems, blacks, and others. I attack them on this blog also for their political stances. But the mainstream media is dominated by Jews, so they get the most attention.

So 90% of the media is Jews attacking Trump, and I defend Trump, and that makes me anti-semitic?

No, that is not a criticism. That is just throwing epithets. Jews go around launching ridiculous political attacks on everyone, and they should not be immune from criticism. There are far more examples of Jews attacking Trump than anyone attacking Jews.

We live in a world now where Nike says that the American flag is a white supremacy symbol. CNN just had a program on white supremacy, titled "The State of Hate". I did not see a free copy online, but you can listen to one of the main interviews on Youtube.

A funny part of the interview was that CNN's Fareed Zakaria (GPS) was very eager for Jared Taylor to classify him as White, Caucasian, and intelligent. Taylor said that Zakaria had a Harvard PhD, and therefore was probably very intelligent, and that some groups do have higher average IQ than Whites.

Zakaria said that he was descended from Aryan invaders of North India several millennia ago, and is therefore Caucasian. Those invaders developed a caste system in India just to maintain separation of the Aryans from the native Indians at the time. It is true that when the world is divided into the Caucasian, Oriental, and Negro races, Indians are considered Caucasian. Zakaria also spent a lot of time arguing about whether Hispanics should be considered White.

I don't know the point of all Zakaria's arguments were. Obviously we now have DNA tests to objectively determine someone's ancestry. It is not debatable. The discussion was probably edited out of the CNN broadcast, as he seemed foolish. If he understands how his fellow Indian Aryans maintained their ethnic distinctiveness, then he presumably understands how other groups wish to as well.

Monday, July 01, 2019

Law professor brags about her weirdo mothering

It is amazing what Jews promote as maternal values.

The NY Times published an op-ed by a divorced Jewish law professor who brags that in 2013 she abandoned her children in favor of freeing a black man from prison.

The kids weren't really abandoned, as they have a father, but he is another Jewish lawyer who is probably also pretending that dismantling the White society is a virtue.
I’ve Picked My Job Over My Kids
I love them beyond all reason. But sometimes my clients need me more. ...

My son was one of the last children to speak. He stood up and, in a clear voice, said: “I appreciate my parents for being lawyers because they get people out of jail. ...”
This is sick. At the same time, the author's sister, Emily Bazelon, another Jewish lawyer writer, was on PBS TV News supporting wild and unsubstantiated against Donald Trump and others. She had no mention of the possibility that he might be innocent, and seemed only concerned about the accusers feeling bad because their stories are questioned.

It is obvious that these feminist women have no actual concern for innocence or justice. They are just working to promote their political agendas.

RT reports:
Whether one agrees with Trump’s idea to build a wall on the US-Mexico border or not, “he is at least looking for a solution,” Putin said, while the proponents of the so-called liberal values are “not doing anything,” insisting that everything is just fine even as unprecedented numbers of migrants come across their borders.

"So, the liberal idea has become obsolete. It has come into conflict with the interests of the overwhelming majority of the population."

The same thing is happening in Europe, the Russian president said, noting that other leaders he spoke with saying nothing can be done because there are laws.

“Well, change the laws!” he said.
Putin is right. The liberal idea has had a gone run, but now it is in conflict with the interests of the people.

The regular NY Times opinion columnists are not supposed to reveal their voting preferences, but usually it is obvious anyway. David Brooks has somehow made a second career pretending to represent Republicans on PBS TV and NPR Radio. They frequently have two guests giving political commentary, implying that one is the Democrat and one is the Republican. When asked about whether he is a Republican, he would coyly say that the NY Times does not allow him to say.

Today Brooks writes:
I could never in a million years vote for Donald Trump. So my question to Democrats is: Will there be a candidate I can vote for?
Apparently he is much more in agreement with Trump than the Democrat candidates.

So why does he hate Trump? I have read dozens of his columns on the subject, and here is the best explanation I can see. Trump is Jewish, and the tribe has made a collective decision to do everything to undermine Trump. Brooks is far too much of a dishonest creep to say this explicitly, but he fails to give any coherent arguments against Trump either.

It is not even that Trump ever does anything contrary to the Jews. But Jews like Brooks and the NY Times management firmly believe that the Jews should control politicians, and they don't control Trump. So they hate him.