Wednesday, October 28, 2020

COVID-19 is the annual flu

Every winter, there is an epidemic of a new virus strain that infects the world. I has always been called the flu. This year it is called the coronavirus, or Wuhan virus, or Sars-Cov2, or COVID-19.

SciAm reports:

U.S. health officials are urging Americans to get their flu shots this year in the hopes of thwarting a winter “twindemic”—a situation in which both influenza and COVID-19 spread and sicken the public. But a new study suggests that there could be another key reason to get a flu jab this year: it might reduce your risk of COVID-19. The research, released as a preprint that has not yet been peer-reviewed, indicates that a flu vaccine against the influenza virus may also trigger the body to produce broad infection-fighting molecules that combat the pandemic-causing coronavirus.

The paper is in line with some other recent studies published in peer-reviewed journals that point to similar effects.

RT reports:
There has been a 98% plummet in flu infections this year, dispelling fears of a Covid and flu ‘twin-demic’ about which many had warned. Experts say we can thank masks and social distancing. But does this really add up?

Although there is no mass testing for flu as there is for Covid, the WHO says that surveillance of data from around the world shows flu rates collapsing everywhere. Australia essentially ‘skipped’ their flu season this year, with not a single case reported since July (their peak). In fact, flu has more or less vanished throughout the Southern Hemisphere, and early indicators suggest it will follow suit north of the equator. What can explain this unprecedented decline? ...

The scientific establishment is quickly forming ranks behind the theory that the flu has gone away because of Covid restrictions – especially masks, social distancing and lockdowns. They “overwhelmingly agree” that this is so; their certainty is remarkable at this early stage.

So the flu has somehow been miraculously eradicated, and replaced by a similar disease?

You are probably going to say that COVID-19 is not similar, because it is so much more deadly. But it is not more deadly in the under-age-50 population.

About every ten years or so, the winter flu strain is more deadly than usual. COVID-19 happens to be particularly deadly to obese diabetic nursing home residents.

The Great Barrington Declaration proposes a compromise in which low-risk people live normal lives. It is funny to see this attacked as unscientific by those who really just have policy disagreements. If you are a healthy person under age 50, then you would be much better off without all the lockdowns.

Tuesday, October 27, 2020

Borat not funny

I tried to watch the new Borat movie, but it is not funny at all. I am not even sure why it is supposed to be funny. The movie ends with Rudy Giuliani being tricked into an interview with a 24-year-old foreign reporter. I guess Giuliani is supposed to be embarrassed, but nothing happens. I tried watching some Saturday Night Live clips, but they are not funny either. You would think that Trump and Biden would be easy targets. The late-night TV talk show hosts do not even try to be funny anymore. They just do some partisan political name-calling, and pretend it is humor.

Monday, October 26, 2020

Origin of the Psychiatrist Goldwater Rule

Mary Trump writes in the Wash. Post:
n 1964, Fact magazine published an unscientific survey asking psychiatrists whether they thought the Republican nominee, Barry Goldwater, was psychologically fit to serve as president of the United States. The problem wasn’t that professionals felt the need to share their views of what they considered Goldwater’s dangerous ideas; it was the irresponsible and often bizarre analyses that were in some cases based entirely on rank speculation. “Goldwater is basically a paranoid schizophrenic” who “resembles Mao Tse-tung,” one offered. Another said that he “has the same pathological make-up as Hitler, Castro, Stalin and other known schizophrenic leaders.” A third said that “a megalomaniacal, grandiose omnipotence appears to pervade Mr. Goldwater’s personality.”

Embarrassed, the American Psychiatric Association (APA), in reaction to this debacle, established the “Goldwater Rule,” which barred its members from diagnosing public figures. It concluded that “it is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.” That’s fair, as far as it goes. But in March 2017, shortly after my uncle, Donald Trump, was inaugurated, the APA didn’t just reaffirm the rule — it expanded it past the point of coherence.

The reason for these ethics rules is that professional organizations, first and foremost, seek to protect the incomes of their members.

The embarrassing fact is that psychiatrists cannot reliably diagnose anyone, even if examined in person. So public diagnosis of celebrities just exposes the extreme subjectivity of their profession. Their comments about Goldwater did not even make any sense.

Everyone assumes that the psychiatrist organization is anti-Trump anyway. After all, so are the Democrat Party, Deep State, universities, unions, rich elites, Hollywood, TV networks, big tech companies, social media, govt workers, major newspapers, China, etc. And all the pollsters predict that he will lose in the biggest landslide in many years. So what is anyone worried about?

Mary Trump herself is some sort of psychologist with a longstanding grievance against the rest of the Trump family over some inheritance issues.

Sunday, October 25, 2020

Something wrong with the tests or the kids

Ibram X. Kendi is today's top Black anti-racism guru, and he writes in the Boston Globe:
is today's top Black anti-racism guru, and he had largely been discredited. Since then, lower test scores from Black and Latinx students have been explained by their environment: Their supposedly broken cultures, homes, schools, and families have made them intellectually inferior. Standardized tests have become the most effective racist weapon ever devised to objectively degrade Black and brown minds and legally exclude their bodies.

Why do Black and Latinx children routinely get lower scores on the standardized tests? Either there’s something wrong with the test takers or there’s something wrong with the tests. Why are Black and Latinx children routinely under-represented in the exam schools? Either there’s something wrong with Black and Latinx children or there’s something wrong with Boston’s admissions policies.

There’s something wrong with the test and the admissions policies. And to say there’s something wrong with Black and Latinx children is to espouse racist ideas. And those who say racist ideas, typically deny their ideas are racist. …

I agree with most of this. Black and Latino kids do score lower on IQ tests. Either they have less intelligence or the tests are defective. If you say the kids have less intelligence, you get accused of racism. Nearly everyone tries to deny racist ideas, so they back off saying that the kids have less intelligence.

Improving the tests gives the same results. So the tests are objectively degrading Black and brown bodies. Kendi can dance around this issue, because he knows that respectable White folks do not want to admit it. They would rather abolish the tests than admit to racism.

Saturday, October 24, 2020

Are we divided by Class or Race?

The World Socialist Web Site refutes the NY Times:
The 1619 Project has been a case study in historical ignorance and dishonesty. Silverstein’s latest exercise in self-justification continues the pattern of falsification and evasion. When the 1619 Project was criticized as poor journalism, Silverstein claimed it was history; and when it was criticized as bad history, he claimed it was mere journalism. Now, when it is proven that the 1619 Project’s central thesis is false, Silverstein announces that the argument was merely metaphorical and not meant to be taken literally.

In the end, the New York Times’ argument is a variation of a crooked politician’s age-old evasion: “We know that you think you know what we said. But what you read is not what we meant.”

A new Quillette essay is titled, What Divides Us Is Class, Not Race.

What these essays have in common is a rejection of commonly-held ideas that we are divided by race today. Apparently both Marxists and right-wingers would rather look at class than race.

They are of course correct that paying reparations will not remedy the systemic racism that killed George Floyd. There is no such systemic racism. Floyd died of a fentanyl overdose.

And surely the NY Times realizes that the 1619 Project is falee in its main premises, but promotes it anyway for ideological reasons.

I think the problem here is that eliminating racial discrimination does not eliminate racial animosity, envy, and differences.

Friday, October 23, 2020

Candidates asked about The Talk

From last night's debate:
All right. Let’s talk about our next section, which is race in America. And I want to talk about the way Black and Brown Americans experience race in this country. Part of that experience is something called the talk. It happens regardless of class and income, parents who feel they have no choice, but to prepare their children for the chance that they could be targeted, including by the police, for no reason other than the color of their skin. Mr. Vice President, in the next two minutes, I want you to speak directly to these families. Do you understand why these parents fear for their children?
Yes, regardless of class and income, White parents have to tell their kids that Black and Brown people will hate them for their skin color. And that Whites are not safe in a lot of Black and Brown neighborhoods. That Black men rape White girls, but White men do not rape Black girls. That Blacks commit murder and other violent crimes at far higher rates than Whites.

White and Black parents have to teach their kids to be polite to police officers. They explain that it is foolish to violently resist arrest, or to otherwise attack an armed police officer. That is a way to get killed.

White parents take this advice even farther, and teach their kids to be polite and respectful to everyone. And not to violently attack someone who is just doing his job, whether a police officer or not.

Here is a non-black version of the talk.

PBS TV broadcast some race-related advice, An essay on the importance of interracial friendships. I am afraid we are going to be subjected to more of this, from our Black overloads. The rant was from a Black woman, telling White people that they ought to all go out and get Black friends. Not only that, but she was full of opinions about what Blacks wants out of the friendship, and what Whites should be discussing and not discussing with Blacks. The more she talked, the more I didn't want to have anything to do with her. And yes, I would have disliked a White woman with her attitudes, altho it is hard to imagine a White woman with such screwed-up views.

Thursday, October 22, 2020

Election Doomsday Scenario

Historian Clayton Cramer writes:
The only realistic scenarios are:

1. Trump handily wins the election, and by sufficient margin that the Democrats realize that they will sound like sore losers again. I consider this most likely.

2. Biden wins easily, at which point Trump will Tweet about election fraud and leaves office having given us a four year respite. I consider this least likely.

3. The results are unclear, and between election day and Dec. 14, when the Electoral College meets, the Democrats "find" millions of votes. This will have to be so massive that Trump refuses to recognize this fraud. The Democrats use their ownership of many Obama's generals to call for a military coup d'etat, likely branding them as fascists for a generation. If Trump is smart, he will federalize National Guard units in friendly states, and call up the unorganized militia. I think several million armed Trump supporters could be in DC in a day to prevent such a regular military coup. Many lower-ranking officers and enlisted men would refuse their orders and perhaps even switch sides as happened during the 1877 railroad strikes, where organized state militias refused to open fire on strikers, and in some cases changed sides. This is a doomsday scenario, with tanks and aircraft following the Commander-in-Chief's orders against Army units loyal to the DNC.

This leads to civil war. A mixture of responsible adults and likely some lunatic fringe groups set up free fire zones around federal government buildings to stop federal law enforcement. Few bureaucrats or office workers will risk death from snipers to go to work.

The doomsday scenario seems unlikely, but what if it has a 10% chance of happening? That might be enough to arm oneself, or move to a friendly state.

Look at this chart:

The infection fatality rate in some states is vastly higher than for some other states. Do we have a good explanation for this? If not, what do we know?

Plenty of Democrats argue that we could have done a better job of fighting COVID-19. This chart would seem to imply that if Connecticut had done what Nebraska did, then a lot of live would have been saved. But what was that, if anything?

No one knows. There is not even a clear consensus on whether lockdowns, hand washing, and masks had any significant effect in fighting the disease. Probably they did some good, but how much?

Wednesday, October 21, 2020

Explaining multigenerational poverty

Noah Carl writes in Quillette:
Lawrence Mead, a long-time proponent of welfare reform, is a professor of politics and public policy at New York University. On July 21st this year, an ill-advised article he had written, ‘Poverty and Culture’, appeared in the academic journal Society.

The article began by asking, “Why do so many Americans remain destitute… even when jobs are available?” According to Mead, the answer is not “social barriers, such as racial discrimination or lack of jobs,” but rather “cultural difference.” Noting that “the seriously poor are mostly blacks and Hispanics,” he argued that such individuals have not internalised Western norms of individualism. As a consequence, he maintained, “they are at a disadvantage competing with the European groups—even if they face no mistreatment on racial grounds.”

Regarding the claim that “black social problems” are due to “white oppression,” Mead argued, “By that logic, the problems should have been worst prior to the civil rights reforms in the 1960s.” Yet in his reading of events, “The collapse of the black family occurred mostly after civil rights rather than before.” Hence Mead not only suggested that Western culture is better than non-Western culture, at least when it comes to getting ahead in America, but also that higher poverty rates among blacks and Hispanics are attributable to factors other than racial discrimination. As you can imagine, this message was not warmly received.

If Mead were wrong, then other scholars would publish articles pointing out the errors. They would publish evidence of serious multigenerational poverty being caused by racism, if such evidence existed.

That is not what happened. The publisher was pressured to retract the article. It had reveal unmentionable truths.

Considering what theories could be given, this academic article was not particularly offensive. It could have said that Blacks have low IQ or are genetically inferior. It did not.

Tuesday, October 20, 2020

Why Ben Shapiro is voting for Trump

Ben Shapiro explains I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016. I am in 2020 — here's why.

He was a Trump-hater Republican in 2016, and still has a bunch of silly gripes about Trump's style and personality. And I have a number of disagreements with Shapiro.

There are dozens of reasons why the Trump presidency has been excellent, and a Biden presidency promises to be a disaster. Shapiro lists enough to fill 8 minutes. He could probably go on for 80 more minutes listing more examples.

Meanwhile, the NY Times has a bunch of articles complaining about QAnon, including one saying:

I’m a gay, Jewish Democrat — the perfect target for an internet cult obsessed with pinning pedophilia on gays, Jews and Democrats. ...

Given the long and slanderous history of society accusing gay men and Jews of harming children, we are the easiest targets. ...

All this is a great way for Republicans to distract their base

He is complaining because he sponsored a California law to allow a 24-year-old man to sodomize a 15-year-old boy without being put on the sex-offender registry. Because QAnon criticized him for this, and for various other opinions, the major media platforms are banning QAnon.

I happen to think that too many people are on the registry already, but his law only benefits homosexual offenders. I don't know about that "long and slanderous history", but the Democrat Party is the party pursuing these crazy laws and policies. Trump is helping to bring our society back to normal.

Ben Shapiro is an orthodox Jew, and he does not support these laws that promote homosexual relations between adults and minors.

Monday, October 19, 2020

Bari Weiss denounces today's leftists

Bari Weiss has left the NY Times because it was not Jewish enough, and now writes this for a Jewish magazine:
There is also the X factor of Donald Trump, which is impossible to overstate. Understandable hostility toward him has prevented many Jews from seeing the problem on the other side. To even look away from the obscenity in the White House for a moment strikes many, as they have told me, as irresponsible or beside the point.

I share with the majority of American Jews’ disgust toward Trump and Trumpism, which has normalized bigotry and cruelty in ways that have crippled American society. That truth doesn’t detract from another: There is another danger, this one from the left. And unlike Trump, this one has attained cultural dominance, capturing America's elites and our most powerful institutions. In the event of a Biden victory, it is hard to imagine it meeting resistance. So let me make my purpose perfectly clear: I am here to ring the alarm. I’m here to say: Do not be shocked anymore. Stop saying, can you believe. It’s time to accept reality, if we want to have any hope of fixing it.

So Trump is our only hope to stop Biden from ruining the country, but Jews hate Trump and will vote for Biden.
Racism was evil because it contradicted the foundations of this worldview, since it judged people not based on the content of their character, but on the color of their skin.
It is a little funny to hear her babble about racism, as Judaism/Zionism would also be evil under that standard.
No one has yet decided on the name for the force that has come to unseat liberalism. Some say it’s “Social Justice.” The author Rod Dreher has called it “therapeutic totalitarianism.” The writer Wesley Yang refers to it as “the successor ideology”—as in, the successor to liberalism. At some point, it will have a formal name, one that properly describes its mixture of postmodernism, postcolonialism, identity politics, neo-Marxism, critical race theory, intersectionality, and the therapeutic mentality. Until then, it is up to each of us to see it plainly. We need to look past the hashtags and slogans and the jargon to assess it honestly—and then to explain it to others.

The new creed’s premise goes something like this: We are in a war in which the forces of justice and progress are arrayed against the forces of backwardness and oppression. And in a war, the normal rules of the game—due process; political compromise; the presumption of innocence; free speech; even reason itself—must be suspended. Indeed, those rules themselves were corrupt to begin with—designed, as they were, by dead white males in order to uphold their own power. ...

In fact, any feature of human existence that creates disparity of outcomes must be eradicated: The nuclear family, politeness, even rationality itself can be defined as inherently racist or evidence of white supremacy, as a Smithsonian institution suggested this summer. The KIPP charter schools recently eliminated the phrase “work hard” from its famous motto “Work Hard. Be Nice.” because the idea of working hard “supports the illusion of meritocracy.”

She is right about a lot of this.
By simply existing as ourselves, Jews undermine the vision of a world without difference. And so the things about us that make us different must be demonized, so that they can be erased or destroyed: Zionism is refashioned as colonialism; government officials justify the murder of innocent Jews in Jersey City; Jewish businesses can be looted because Jews “are the face of capital.” Jews are flattened into “white people,” our living history obliterated, so that someone with a straight face can suggest that the Holocaust was merely “white on white crime.”
I would not mind her sticking up for her Jewish ethnic identity, if she were to similarly support Whites sticking up for their ethnic identity.

Sunday, October 18, 2020

What stopped American social progress

David Brooks writes in the NY Times:
“The Upswing,” a remarkable new book by Robert D. Putnam and Shaylyn Romney Garrett, puts this situation in stark relief. A careful work of social science, the book looks at American life from about 1870 to today across a range of sectors that are usually analyzed in separate academic silos.

The first important finding is that between the 1870s and the late 1960s a broad range of American social trends improved: Community activism surged, cross party collaboration increased, income inequality fell, social mobility rose, church attendance rose, union membership rose, federal income taxes became more progressive and social spending on the poor rose.

Many of us think that the gains for African-Americans only happened after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but Putnam and Garrett show that the fastest improvements actually happened in the decades before. Black school attendance, income gains, homeownership rates, voter registration rates started rapidly improving in the 1940s and then started slowing in the 1970s and 1980s.

The American century was built during these decades of social progress. And then, around the late 1960s, it all turned south.

Over the past 50 years, the positive trends have reversed: membership in civic organizations has collapsed, political polarization has worsened, income inequality has widened, social trust has cratered, religious attendance is down, social mobility has decreased, deaths of despair have skyrocketed and on and on.

So what happened in the 1960s? The authors are unable or unwilling to say.

Until the 1960s, the USA was predominantly a White Christian nation, with a fairly homogeneous population. Most were descended from northwest Europeans. Then we had a series of anti-White-Christian political movements, and started a program of flooding the country with non-whites and non-Christians from other countries. These trends explain most of the bad trends that the book describes.

Another NY Times article describes how "white supemacist" has become the preferred anti-White racial slur:

Ten years ago, white supremacy frequently described the likes of the Ku Klux Klan and David Duke, the neo-Nazi politician from Louisiana. Now it cuts a swath through the culture, describing an array of subjects: the mortgage lending policies of banks; a university’s reliance on SAT scores as a factor for admissions decisions; programs that teach poor people better nutrition; and a police department’s enforcement policies. ...

“It is not hyperbole to say that white supremacy is resting at the heart of American politics,” Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor of Princeton, a socialist activist and professor of African-American studies, said in a speech in 2017.

Even tho Whites are supposedly supreme, the NY Times insists that White do not have sufficient culture to merit a capital W, even thocultural signposts are found outside the Black-white divide. it capitalizes Black:
cultural signposts are found outside the Black-white divide.
According to the best-selling book on this subject, white supremacy refers to non-whites seeing whites as superior, and all whites are inherently white supremacist. It is just a way of saying non-whites envy white skin, and there is nothing whites can do about it.

Saturday, October 17, 2020

Reasons for voting for Pres. Trump

These are the major reasons for voting for Trump. Peace. Pres. Trump has brought us 4 years of peace. Joe Biden has a long history of supporting failed wars and other foreign policy disasters. Prosperity. Trump has done more for the economy than any President since Reagan. Health. Trump has improved our health care system, and superbly managed the COVID-19 crisis. Free speech. Forces on the Left are systematically removing free speech from the internet, TV, etc. Trump is the primary opposition to these restraints. Law and order. The Democrat Party is promoting crime and riots in the city streets. Corruption. Biden used his VP authority to force Ukraine to fire a prosecutor, as demanded by a company paying his son. Democrats lied to the courts to spy on his campaign. Democrats brought bogus Russian investigations and impeachment efforts. Race relations. Biden promises to make Whites pay Blacks for slavery reparations. Trump has done more for Blacks than any recent President. America First. The American President should stick up for Americans. Courts. Trump has appointed judges who actually follow the law. All this is rather compelling, but it understates the situation. The world is being taken over by lizard people and AI bots. Donald Trump is the last honest man, fighting for a free humanity. For another view, see this Keith Olbermann video from about a week ago. He will not be satisfied with winning the election. He says Trump's supporters must be forceably removed from our society. If he gets his way, there will be a bloodbath.

Friday, October 16, 2020

Finland bans men sending certain pics

Our free speech rights are being abolished.

The London Daily Mail reports:

Finland will jail men who send unsolicited 'd**k pics'

Ministers want to change Finland's sex harassment laws to include 'd**k pics'
Current law means physical touching must take place in sex harassment cases
New law would include harassment via speech, text message, or photograph
Offenders could be punished with a fine or a maximum of six months in jail

It would make more sense to punish women sending cleavage pics.

This sums up the decline, and feminization, of Western Civilization. A man should be able to proudly show off his manhood.

Even worse, his organs can be imprisoned:

A security flaw in an internet-enabled male chastity device allows hackers to remotely control the gadget and permanently lock in wearers, researchers disclosed today.

The Cellmate Chastity Cage, built by Chinese firm Qiui, lets users hand over access to their genitals to a partner who can lock and unlock the cage remotely using an app. But multiple flaws in the app’s design mean “anyone could remotely lock all devices and prevent users from releasing themselves,” according to UK security firm Pen Test Partners.

Even worse, as the chastity cage does not come with a manual override or physical key, locked-in users have few options to break out. One is to cut through the cage’s hardened steel shackle, an operation that would require bolt cutters or an angle grinder, and that is made trickier by the fact that the shackle in question is fastened tightly around the wearer’s testicles. The other, discovered by Pen Test Partners, is to overload the circuit board that controls the lock’s motor with three volts of electricity (around two AA batteries’ worth).

This story sounds like a joke, but it is not. It is the future. They keep devaluing our genitals until ultimately our AI overloads will put them in a remote-controlled vice. If you express support for Donald Trump, say bye-bye to your testicles.

ACB got asked by a female Democrate Senator:

since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
Only church-going women will be able to pass this test. A man should never make a request for sexual favors unless he is 100% certain that they will be accepted, or he is someone with an orientation that does not permit any choices or preferences.

Thursday, October 15, 2020

Face masks are ineffective against COVID-19

It is plausible that face masks help prevent disease, but scientific proof is lacking. The CDC and others cite a JAMA study for authority:
Americans are increasingly adopting the use of cloth face masks to slow the spread of COVID-19, and the latest science may convince even more to do so.

In an editorial published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), CDC reviewed the latest science and affirms that cloth face coverings are a critical tool in the fight against COVID-19 that could reduce the spread of the disease, particularly when used universally within communities.

That refers to this JAMA article:
In this issue of JAMA, Wang et al present evidence that universal masking of health care workers (HCWs) and patients can help reduce transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. ...

However, after the universal masking policy was in place, the proportion of symptomatic HCWs with positive test results steadily declined, from 14.7% to 11.5% (a mean decrease of 0.49% per day). Although not a randomized clinical trial, this study provides critically important data to emphasize that masking helps prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

Got that? Positive test results only declined from 14.7% to 11.5%!

This was published in the second-most prestigious American medical journal, but it is really a crappy study. The effect was barely measurable, and there was no control group.

While one particular Massachussetts hospital did show a slight decline in positive tests, the other hospitals were showing larger declines at the same time. The declines could have been due to increased testing, less disease prevalence, or even just containment of one outbreak. I don't know.

This is a junk study, and it should not have been published without a control group. And it certainly should not have been used to set national policy.

Here is more CDC advice:

On Sept. 16, our esteemed CDC Director, Dr. Robert Redfield, told tried to sell our Senate — and the rest us — a fresh bottle of snake oil on the subject of universal masking. “Masks are the most important, powerful public health tool we have,” Redfield said, holding a surgical mask — not an N95 mask — in his hand. “And I will continue to appeal for all Americans, all individuals in our country, to embrace these face coverings.” “These actually, we have clear scientific evidence they work, and they are our best defense. I might even go so far as to say this face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine.” Curiously enough, a meta-study published by the CDC in May of this year included the following conclusion about measures for containing influenza — a coronavirus — including wearing face masks: “Evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of lab-confirmed influenza.”
So the CDC contradicts itself.

Wednesday, October 14, 2020

Times to be delusional

Mark Joseph Stern writes in Slate:
She then elaborated: “I do want to be clear that I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference.”

Barrett’s use of “sexual preference” alarmed many viewers, myself included, for good reason. The archaic phrase suggests that sexuality is a choice, that gay and bisexual people simply prefer to partner with people of the same sex — a preference that, with enough willpower, can be changed. As Jesse Bering explained in 2013, the term is similar to other expressions, like “the gay lifestyle” or “avowed homosexual,” that were once common but are now considered offensive. These phrases play into the anti-gay canard that sexual minorities are not a discrete and insular minority deserving of constitutional protections but rather deviants who should not be rewarded for their aberrant sexuality.

Today, the term “sexual preference” has almost universally been replaced with “sexual orientation,”

Wow, he is alarmed at the suggestion that people might have some personal autonomy?

He specifically denies that bisexual people are able to exercise a lifestyle preference. The term "bisexual" is commonly defined as one attracted to both sexes. Those people don't have sexual relations with everyone they are attracted to, so they make some choices, based on their preferences.

If she really wanted to alarm him, she should have said, "I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation, because there is no such thing."

Wajahat Ali writes in the NY Times:

But I marvel at the hypocrisy of Republicans who are expressing shock and outrage over this, after the way the right has treated Muslims. President Trump responded to the alarm over Judge Barrett’s nomination by accusing Democrats of bias against Catholics and “basically fighting a major religion in our country.” This is rich from the man who is running against Joe Biden, a Catholic; who promoted a Muslim ban; and who told America, “I think Islam hates us.”
So the NY Times thinks that it is hypocritical for Trump to run against one Catholic, and appoint another Catholic to the Supreme Court.
I can’t help wondering: How would Republicans behave if Judge Barrett were a Democrat whose strongly held religious beliefs came from Islam instead of Catholicism?

We all know how it would go.

Republicans would demand she prove that she was not “working with our enemies.” That’s what Glenn Beck, the conservative radio host and conspiracy theorist, called for when Keith Ellison was elected as the first Muslim to Congress.

Ellison is working with our enemies.

Yes, an Islamic appointee would be a lot different. Islam is contrary to our whole civilization. We should not have an Islamic justice. Catholicism presents no such conflict, except on a few minor issues like the death penalty.

Jerry Coyne writes:

I was thinking last night about someone who asked a fairly prominent religious scientist — not Francis Collins — if he believed in the literal resurrection of Jesus.  The scientist refused to answer—and it wasn’t on the grounds that he kept his religion private. Rather, it was the equivalent of this person, who publicly and openly professed his Catholicism, saying, “I don’t want to answer.” When you get down to the actual claims of Catholicism, or of religion in general, scientists often take the Theological Fifth, in effect saying, “This far and no farther.”

Now why did the guy refuse to answer the question? After all, if you go around saying you’re a Catholic, and arguing about how your Catholicism comports with science, why would you refuse to answer a question about what bits of Catholicism you believe?

Now I have my theory about this, which is mine. It’s that this person really truly believed in the Resurrection, but wouldn’t admit it in public because it would make him look credulous and superstitious. It didn’t comport with his evidence-based attitude towards his scientific beliefs.

Yes, some Catholics are reluctant to spell out their beliefs in public. But you could say the same about most academic leftists. You don't hear them say what they really think about George Floyd, for example. Book review:
This book, The Discovery of the Individual, only scratches the surface of the incredible novelties Europe saw during the long Middle Ages. The point of this article is simply to outline the importance the search for the inner being of humans was to men in the Middle Ages; what it means to have individuality, personality, to be inner-directed rather than faceless, impersonal, controlled by forces and emotions beyond one's understanding. Only if we understand the psychology of Western man will we understand the nature of the forces trying to destroy this unique man, replace him with masses of migrants from Africa and Asia with a poorly developed sense of inner being and personality.
Isn't that what is really wrong with ACB? She has an inner being, in line with a European religion and culture that go back to the Middle Ages.

Update: Since posting this, Newsweek notes:

The Merriam-Webster dictionary updated its definition of the word "preference" on Tuesday, to include that the word is considered offensive when referring to someone's sexual orientation.

The change came following Amy Coney Barrett's use of the term during day two of her Supreme Court confirmation hearings, and was noticed immediately by journalist Steve Krakauer, who took to Twitter to highlight the recent update of the definition.

Nevertheless, ACB continued to talk about preferences and choices that she made in her life.

Tuesday, October 13, 2020

UN WHO disavows lockdowns

Fox News reports:
The World Health Organization has warned leaders against relying on COVID-19 lockdowns to tackle outbreaks — after previously saying countries should be careful how quickly they reopen.

WHO envoy Dr. David Nabarro said such restrictive measures should only be treated as a last resort, the British magazine the Spectator reported in a video interview.

“We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” Nabarro said.

“The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

Nabarro said tight restrictions cause significant harm, particularly on the global economy.

“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never, ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.

I think that there will eventually be a consensus that the lockdowns did more harm than good.

A couple of recent studies blame blame 225,500 American deaths on COVID-19, but the disease itself was only a contributing factor in 67% of them. They say:

The other pandemic-related deaths are due to:

People not getting care in emergency situations—for example, "the patient with chest pain who's scared to call 911 because they don't want to get the virus, and dies of a heart attack," Woolf said.

Patients dying from chronic conditions like diabetes, cancer and heart problems, because they didn't have access to the medical care that had helped them control their health problems.

People suffering from pandemic-related anxiety, depression or stress who either die by suicide or die from an accidental overdose.

"The opioid epidemic hasn't gone away," Woolf said. "People under stress trying to cope with the strains of this pandemic may have taken a drug overdose and died. We suspect some of those excess deaths are from these other causes."

The number of deaths that were directly caused by the virus could be as low as 6%.

Update: Another study shows that masks are ineffective.

Monday, October 12, 2020

More Jewish control over permitted thought

CNN reports:
The Commission on Presidential Debates on Friday canceled the second debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden after the President declined to do a virtual debate despite concerns over his Covid-19 diagnosis, organizers said. ...

But Biden’s campaign rejected their proposal, with campaign spokeswoman Kate Bedingfield saying in response, “Donald Trump doesn’t make the debate schedule; the debate commission does.”

She is signaling that Biden is just a puppet. Apparently he cannot do a debate without taking orders on how to do it.

The London Guardian reports:

The government has accused universities in England of ignoring antisemitism and ordered them to adopt an international definition before the end of the year or risk having funding cut off.

Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, said in a letter to vice-chancellors that it was “frankly disturbing” that so many universities had failed to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism. ...

A freedom of information request by the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) found that only 29 out of 133 universities had adopted the IHRA definition, and 80 said they had no current plans to do so.

Universities have objected to adopting the definition on the principle of academic autonomy, and in other cases because of conflicts with freedom of speech requirements, which are also strongly backed by Williamson’s government. ...

“If I have not seen the overwhelming majority of institutions adopting the definition by Christmas then I will act,” Williamson wrote.

So English universities have to accept some Jewish definition of some religious belief?

Axios reports:

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced Monday that the tech giant would be expanding its hate speech policies to ban any content that "denies or distorts the Holocaust.
Okay, I will just assume that whatever I read about the Jewish Holocaust is just some religious belief, with no contrary analysis permitted. Some European countries have laws enforcing those beliefs.

I do not want this blog to be banned, so I will block any comments that give nonstandard opinions about the Jewish Holocaust.

This post claims that the NY Times is pushing some Holocaust denialism.

Sunday, October 11, 2020

Characteristics of white supremacy culture

This isn't new, but I just found it. Leftists commonly say that race isn't real, and is just a social construct. They might say that Whites have no culture, but sometimes they explicitly reject White culture. If it is not about skin color, what is it about?

This summarizes gripes about White culture:

Below is a list of characteristics of white supremacy culture which show up in our organizations. Culture is powerful precisely because it is so present and at the same time so very difficult to name or identify. The characteristics listed below are damaging because they are used as norms and standards without being pro-actively named or chosen by the group. They are damaging because they promote white supremacy thinking. They are damaging to both people of color and to white people.
These are complaints about modern civilization. I think that it would be great to have an open debate about the merits of White culture, without mentioning skin color.

Saturday, October 10, 2020

Talk radio is at the heart of Trumpism

From a NY Times op-ed:
This suspicion that elite institutions — the media, universities, government, Big Tech — are run by hostile liberal gatekeepers seeking to silence conservative voices continues to fuel right-wing anxiety. It also helps explain conservative support for Mr. Trump, who can be accused of many things but not of failing to speak his mind.
Suspicion? It is true that those are run by hostile liberal gatekeepers.

As the article explains, the notable exception is talk radio.

It is funny how left-wing talk radio hosts have failed. In my opinion, it is mostly because leftist political figures are in denial about basic truths, and have to say stuff that they don't believe. They cannot keep it up for 3 hours like Rush Limbaugh. They cannot handle the occasional caller who destroys their arguments. They don't have enough protection for their phony policies.

If Pres. Trump gets re-elected, he should think talk radio, because he does not get a fair shot anywhere else.

Friday, October 09, 2020

Ideology politics are dead

Voz Day writes:
Ideology politics are dead. Idea wars are reserved for homogeneous societies, not multiracial, multiethnic, multireligious, war zones. The culture wars are intrinsically interidentity, and anyone who is still babbling about Left and Right, or Liberal and Conservative, is simply demonstrating the extent to which they fail to understand their own reality. Social Justice is Satan's Justice.
If he is right, then democracy in the USA is doomed. Most campaigning this year is not trying to persuade anyone of ideas. It is about playing identity politics, and getting out the vote in the friendly demographics.

Thursday, October 08, 2020

The VP Debate

I only watched a fraction of the Vice Presidential debate, and I am amazed that anyone would vote for Kamala Harris.

She spent much of the debate blaming Pres. Trump for COVID deaths. But in the opening question, she was asked what a Biden administration would do differently, and she had nothing. She never had any explanation for how anyone could have done better than Trump.

Pence said that several vaccines were in Phase III trials, but Harris said that she would refuse to take a vaccine that the Trump administration approved!

Harris also repeated an assortment of racist and white supremacist lies. Pence calmly refuted her.

At one point, Harris refused to say whether Democrats would try to pack the Supreme Court with leftists, and tried to justify her position with some story about how Abraham Lincoln delayed making an appointment while fighting a civil war in 1864.

Remember, she was picked because she passes as a Black women. Actually, she has no kids because she was a mistress to Willie Brown during her fertile years, and she is half Jamaican and half Indian.

Elsewhere, The Hill reports:

Actress and progressive activist Jane Fonda said in a video posted Tuesday that the coronavirus is "God's gift to the left,"
Trump himself says
I think this was a blessing from God, that I caught it. It was a blessing in disguise.
He may be right.

Wednesday, October 07, 2020

France is banning virginity tests

The MacArthur Foundation has announced this year's genius grants. Just look at the list. They are not giving grants to geniuses anymore. These are political grants to leftists and white-haters.

The UK BBC reports:

The French government plans to introduce jail terms and fines for doctors who provide controversial so-called "virginity certificates" for traditional religious marriages.

It is part of draft legislation aimed at reinforcing French secular values and combating what President Emmanuel Macron calls "Islamist separatism".

But the French abortion advice group ANCIC says stopping "virginity tests" requires broader educational work.

The UN says such tests must be stopped.

The French Interior Ministry says the bill - not yet fully debated by French politicians - proposes a year in jail and fine of €15,000 (£14,000) for any medical professional who issues a "virginity certificate".

According to France 3 TV news, about 30% of French doctors say they have been asked for such certificates and most of them refuse.

The World Health Organization says the practice of inspecting the hymen visually or with fingers cannot prove whether a woman or girl has had vaginal intercourse or not. It also violates her human rights, the WHO says.

Of all the dozens of things wrong with Islam, this is what they choose to criminalize? How do these tests violate anyone's rights?

It appears to me that the objections are coming from slutty women who hide their sluttiness, and are scared about any trend that might call attention to such sluttiness.

CNN reports:

The leaders of Greece's neo-Nazi group Golden Dawn were found guilty Wednesday of forming and running a criminal organization under the cloak of a political party, in a landmark decision hailed as a victory for democracy and human rights. a large crowd of people at a train station: Riot police used water cannon during clashes with anti-fascist protesters after the Golden Dawn leadership was found guilty in Athens on Wednesday. © Ayhan Mehmet/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images Riot police used water cannon during clashes with anti-fascist protesters after the Golden Dawn leadership was found guilty in Athens on Wednesday.

Following a marathon trial lasting five-and-a-half years, an Athens court deemed that crimes by Golden Dawn members including murder, attempted murder, assault and possession of weapons were not the actions of individuals operating on their own initiative. Instead they were directly planned and ordered by a party leadership that employed violence to eradicate perceived enemies.

I don't know anything about this, but I don't believe anything from a 5.5 year trial. If they were really committing murder and other real crimes, it would not take 5.5 years to show it in court. This is obviously political suppression, because authorities are afraid of who might win elections.

Tuesday, October 06, 2020

The President goes outside, NYT complains

Did you know that when the President get a flu or something similar, he has to take orders from a low-level attending physician on whether he can go outside?

The NY Times complains:

“Every single person in the vehicle during that completely unnecessary Presidential ‘drive-by’ just now has to be quarantined for 14 days,” Dr. James P. Phillips, an attending physician at Walter Reed, wrote on Twitter. “They might get sick. They may die. For political theater. Commanded by Trump to put their lives at risk for theater. This is insanity.”

In a telephone interview on Sunday night, Dr. Phillips also said the trip raised the alarming question of whether the president was directing his doctors.

At what point does the physician-patient relationship end, and does the commander in chief and subordinate relationship begin, and were those doctors ordered to allow this to happen?” he said, noting that it violated standards of care and would not be an option open to any other patient.

The physician-patient relationship is one where the physician advises the patient, and the patient decides what to do. The President can do outside if he wishes, even if it is against medical advice.

The presidential debate had Joe Biden complaining about Trump going outside.

He came out of his bunker ... it was a disgrace. ... used everything as a dog whistle ...
It was good that he came out of his bunker. No, it was not a dog whistle.

The polls show Biden's lead is bigger than ever. 14 points in one poll. I am not sure the voters have thought this thru. If Biden is elected, then anyone can take him out at any time by infecting him with the Wuhan virus. Trump should be immune, because he will have already recovered from it.

I do not believe the polls. I think that Trump will do better than the polls indicate, and could still win.

Monday, October 05, 2020

Two Jews consider moving to Canada

The Times of Israel reports:
By 11:42 a.m. on the morning after US President Donald Trump refused to condemn white supremacists during the presidential debate, Heather Segal had received four inquiries from Americans interested in moving to Canada. Two of them were Jewish.

Segal, an immigration lawyer in Toronto, knows there’s always a spike in inquiries during US election years. But in her 25 years of experience, it’s never been as big as it is now.

The Jews perpetrate a hoax that Trump refused to condemn white supremacists, and now two Jews are interested in moving to Canada?

This sounds like a joke. Trump condemned white supremacy several times in the debate, and never refused. You would have to be mentally retarded to think that he refused.

Biden has based his whole campaign on Jewish hoaxes about what Trump supposedly did or did not do. Biden even brought up injecting bleach, during the debate.

And now it is news that two Jews inquired about moving to Canada?!!

“In my life, I have never seen what I’m seeing,” said Segal, who is herself Jewish. She said she hears the same fears from one Jewish American after another.

“What they echo to me: ‘We’ve seen this before,’” Segal said. “‘I’m not going to get stuck. I’m not going to get caught. We know how this goes. There’s going to be a civil war. It’s going to be the end of democracy. I’m very concerned for our future. I don’t want to wait and see what happens. My grandparents left Poland in World War II.’”

According to all the polls, Joe Biden is almost certain to be the next President. So they are presumably concerned that Pres. Biden will let BLM and Antifa riot in the streets, and incite a race war.

Sunday, October 04, 2020

Gloria gives White-hating interview

In an interview, famous feminist Gloria Steinem seems to get life insurance mixed up with health insurance>
Watson: What was the perspective of the insurance industry?

Steinem: Well, they had to race equalize their actuarial tables. If they also had to sex equalize their actuarial tables, then they would have to stop … for instance, a woman who doesn’t smoke may pay a higher premium than a man who does smoke because she might live longer, all right? They would have to stop doing that.

No, actuarial tables show that women live longer than men, so that is why they would pay less for life insurance.

Health insurance is another story, as pregnancy can be expensive. Steinem did not marry until well past her child-bearing years, and never had any kids. She reportedly had a long-term Black man lover whom she never married. Marriage would have endorsed the patriarchy, or something like that.

She goes on to attack Whites:

And also I think it’s probably key that we are becoming a majority-nonwhite country. The first generation of babies who are majority babies of color has already been born. This seems to me great. We’re going to look more like the rest of the world.
She is part Jewish. This is an example of what some people call advocacy of White Genocide. She says it is "great" that Whites are being culturally and genetically exstinguished, and replaced with non-whites.

This is like saying: It would be great if Hawaii were to be repopulated with White people, so that the nonwhites are marginalized and Hawaii becomes a White-dominant state like the great White countries of the past.

Or: It would be great if Jews diminished to a minority in Israel, so Moslems would take over and make it more like other Mideast countries.

Meanwhile, the Wash. Examiner reports:

The Department of Homeland Security will grant millions of dollars in funding to outside organizations focused on combating far-right extremism and white supremacy. a sign on the side of a fence © Provided by Washington Examiner

The department's program, called Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention, agreed to provide $10 million in grants to organizations including Life After Hate, which was founded by reformed white supremacists and helps people trying to leave the far right, the School of Communication at American University to develop a strategy for combating disinformation circulated by the far right online, and others, according to the Wall Street Journal.

100% of the riots have been driven by left-wing hate groups, not right-wing. This is just govt subsidized political propaganda.

Saturday, October 03, 2020

Explaining White Supremacy

I posted that "white supremacist" is a racial slur, as no one calls himself one. So I consulted the site that comes closest to it that I could find.

Andrew Anglin was deplatformed for pro-white views, and he writes:

“White supremacy” appears to be a term that just refers to “normal white people in general.” I do not think this is a meaningful term beyond simply being a slur for white people who do not ascribe to extremist Marxist policies. ...

Yes, I care about white people, yes I believe that America is a white country and should remain that way, and yes, I believe that making America less white is an unambiguously negative phenomenon. I’m also particularly unhappy with the way that Marxist Jews have taken over every institution of power in my country and used it to attack white people and Christianity. I am extremely unhappy with the rapid pace of social change, including the empowerment of women and homosexuals which has led to an absolute collapse of the family, creating a totally unsafe environment for children.

But none of that is especially controversial among normal people and it isn’t radical. It certainly isn’t the “pure evil” that the media is portraying it as. ...

Donald Trump is a “white supremacist” by the definition they are giving. He is pointing to a historical America that was safer, healthier, more fun, more creative, more godly, more beautiful, and better for children than the America we have now, and saying that we should be working to return to that America, instead of doubling down on the “progressive” agenda which has resulted in such monumental human suffering and destruction of the creative and spiritual impulses of the people.

If you’re a white person who disagrees with the way this country has been transformed, you disagree with the riots, you disagree with the hatred shown by the media against normal white families, then you are who they are referring to when they say “white supremacist.” You are who they are condemning as evil. And they are going to come for you, just as they have come for me. They are going to destroy your life, as they have destroyed my life. In this future world that they are building, there is no place for anything of the old world, and that includes any type of normal, healthy masculinity, any type of natural, normal family values, any protections of the innocence of children, any form of open creative expression, and the very concept of beauty.

He is right about this.

The word "Nazi" is similar in that no one calls himself a Nazi. I thought that Hitler's Nazi Party did, that that is not even true. I just learned the term "Nazi" is a Commie term. It was not used by the Nazis themselves.

Friday, October 02, 2020

Apologizing for College Football

This looks like a joke, but it is not. An essay in Inside Higher Ed:
Why America Needs College Football -- Part 2

Matthew J. Mayhew apologizes for an article that he recently wrote for Inside Higher Ed and describes beginning a long process of antiracist learning.

By Matthew J. Mayhew
September 29, 2020

It doesn’t. I was wrong. And even worse, I was uninformed, ignorant and harm inducing.

I recently led a piece in Inside Higher Ed titled “Why America Needs College Football.” I am sorry for the hurt, sadness, frustration, fatigue, exhaustion and pain this article has caused anyone, but specifically Black students in the higher education community and beyond.

I am struggling to find the words to communicate the deep ache for the damage I have done.

It doesn’t. I was wrong. And even worse, I was uninformed, ignorant and harm inducing.

I recently led a piece in Inside Higher Ed titled “Why America Needs College Football.” I am sorry for the hurt, sadness, frustration, fatigue, exhaustion and pain this article has caused anyone, but specifically Black students in the higher education community and beyond.

I am struggling to find the words to communicate the deep ache for the damage I have done.

The essay keeps getting worse and worse. His original essay did not say anything pejorative about Blacks or anyone else. The only complaint came from leftist White professor.

Is this the future? Is everything we say going to scrutinized by antiracists dreaming up crazy arguments about how others might be offended? Will we all have to publicly confess sins we never committed? This reads like something out some East German or Red Chinese gulag.

Thursday, October 01, 2020

Jews are Hysterical about White Supremacy

The Jewish press today is filled with stories about White Supremacy. See for example this top NY Times story, as well as about ten other stories in the same paper.

So what does the term mean?

The first thing to understand is that the term is almost entirely used as a racial slur. Nobody calls himself a "white supremacist".

If you define the term as someone who advocates the political supremacy of the White race over non-whites, then it is almost impossible to find anyone who matches that definition. It is easier to find Jewish supremacists, or Black supremacists, or Chinese supremacists.

The term is almost entirely used by the anti-racist left, and they use the term to mean all White people. They consider Joe Biden to be a White supremacist, as they are especially contemptuous of White who claim to be not racist.

Biden himself just used the term to refer to a 17-year-old Illinois boy, just because he is White and supported the police.

In the debate, Biden asked Trump to condemn White supremacists, and Trump said "Sure". Then Biden asked him to tell them to "stand down", and Trump said "Sure" again. Then Biden asked Trump to specifically ask the Proud Boys to stand down, and Trump did that also. But when Trump brought up the threat from Antifa, Biden refused to condemn Antifa, saying "Antifa is an idea, not an organization."

When Blacks complain about White supremacy, they usually talk about slavery or Emmett Till or some other issue that no one alive can relate to.

When Jews complain about White supremacy, it is often about a handful of protesters at a Charlottesville 2017 rally who chanted "Jews will not replace us." The chant referred to Jews advocating immigration programs to replace Americans with non-whites.

I haven't seen dozens of Jewish articles complain about that Charlottesville rally, but none of them deny that Jews seek immigration of non-whites to replace Americans. In fact they all seem to advocate a form of Jewish supremacy, where Jews cannot be criticized for their anti-White policies.

Pres. Trump is probably the least racist President we have had in a long time. All this Jewish talk of White supremacy is just code for other Jewish policy goals.

Update: Orthodox Jewish commentator Ben Shapiro aften attacks Trump and White supremacy, and he has a good video demonstrating that Trump repeatedly denounced White supremacy in the debate.

Obviously something else is going on here, when so many in the news media say just the opposite of what happened. One explanation is that they are Jewish supremacists.

Update: Ann Coulter explains the Proud Boys. They are not White supremacists -- they are not even White!