Bush Appointed Judge Wendell P. Gardner, Jr. Does His Part to Censor Free Speech

Pardon my passion, but this pushes a big button in me. In an act that I can only define as despicable, Bush-appointed Judge Wendell P. Gardner, Jr., sentenced several protestors to jail time on May 30 for exercising their First Amendment rights at the Supreme Court. How dare they! According to one of the protestors, Michael Foley, a history professor at City University of New York (interviewed by Common Dreams):

When a few people attempted to unfold a banner, and others attempted to expose their Shut Down Guantanamo t-shirts, the police went wild. It was mayhem, as they literally pounced on a whole bunch of people who had not yet said a word. I saw several officers tear the banner out of someone’s hands, even though it never got unfolded so you could see what it said. After all of this started to happen, about a dozen people on either side of the Great Hall knelt down — maybe to avoid being knocked over, maybe to pray — while others read a statement. I know I saw Susan Crane and Bill Streit try to read statements after the arrests began, but the police just snatched the statements out of their hands. There was so much noise from the police and their radios, though; one could not hear anything being said. I saw Nancy Gowan who had knelt down get practically body-slammed by a police officer and dragged away.

And further:

We were not disruptive in any way. And who knew that free speech would be restricted just steps from the Supreme Court chamber? You know, I teach the U.S. Constitution to undergraduates, and if you told me that an American could be arrested or exercising the right to free speech just twenty feet from where the justices decide First Amendment Cases, I would have said you were crazy.

True to form, the D.C. police acted brutally and without regard to human rights, Constitutional provisions, or anything else that might redeem them and make them appear less than the gangsters they really are.

As for Judge Wendell P. Gardner, Jr., he was utterly predictable.

NYC or DC More Corrupt? NYC Council and Mayor Adrian Fenty - Same as The Old Boss

Not needing more than ten minutes of googling research, I was able to effectively capture the feel for the ongoing and pervasive corruption in two major American cities--getting worse by the year, and yet, perhaps more ignored than ever--reminding you of the manner in which so many Americans will just turn off to bad news as it gets worse and worse. It's too much for them, too disruptive to their day, too surreal for reality.

Let's start with NYC, from Judicial Watch:

City Council members in New York have legally steered millions of tax dollars to relatives, spouses and friends thanks to a city measure that grants lawmakers large slush funds to be spent however they please.

Each of New York’s 51 council members gets a chunk of cash that can be spent at the discretion of the council member. Ideally, the money is supposed to provide valuable community services but no one bothers to follow up, leaving the system rife with fraud, corruption and conflict of interest.

So far, at least seven of the city’s 51 lawmakers have been caught distributing millions of public dollars to relatives, spouses and friends. One lawmaker, Larry Seabrook of the Bronx, actually gave nearly $1 million to a suspicious group—Bronx African American Chamber of Commerce—with the same address as his office.

A pair of councilmen from Manhattan and Queens, each gave questionable nonprofits $400,000. One group was operated by the lawmaker’s top aides and the other featured the councilman’s sister on the board of directors. A Brooklyn Councilman gave $356,000 to a nonprofit operated by his chief of staff, who got caught embezzling $145,000 and another Brooklyn councilman gave a group that employs his wife nearly $200,000

Now onto D.C., and mayor Adrian Fenty. A small sample of what is available:

What D.C. Elves Do With Your Taxes (Colbert I. King)

BNET number crunching on DC school waste

The soccer stadium fiasco led by Marion Barry

Colbert I. King, a respected columnist for the Washington Post, recently and strongly bemoaned the fact that while D.C. school students still lack basic stuff like buildings with heat and leak-free plumbing, Mayor Adrian Fenty and his cronies continue, no different than past regimes, to push the agenda of the city's corporate power brokers--you know, the gals and guys that want D.C. taxpayer funds to go for more important things like soccer stadiums and centers for the arts.

It's all in the record, for anyone to see. I suggest the Black and White left conduct their studies on the role city corruption plays in depriving Black youth of opportunities. But I doubt this will ever happen? Why?

You know why. It has something to do with religion.

"Denver! Denver!" Hillary's Campaign Throws a Collective Tantrum and Promises Scorched Earth - Starring Harriet Christian of New York

Howard Dean was shouted down, booed, and heckled by Hillary's supporters, as were other members of the Democratic committee that met recently to hash out the contentious Michigan/Florida delegate issue. Once it became clear that Hillary would not get the Michigan votes she wanted (where Obama was not on the ballot) her supporters chanted "Denver! Denver!" as a collective threat ... meaning, they will earth-scorch the Democratic party if Hillary doesn't get the delegates she wants.

Such behavior by the Hillary/Bill mob is now soooo beyond the pale. Her followers apparently will bring more war to this country if their candidate doesn't win. They will hand the RNC the victory they need to continue the looting of the American treasury and the killing of Americans.

Oh, and Howard Dean must now be the biggest misogynist in the universe, no?

Regardless, here is a bit of tragicomic relief. Is there such a thing as a liberal redneck? Let's ask Harriet Christian, a Hillary supporter from New York City:

And in case Harriet should forget:

Can We Trust This Man? Paul Zak of The Center for Neuroeconomics Studies Ways to Chemically Manipulate Human Beings Into Parting With Their Money

Headlines of studies conducted by Paul Zak, from the Center for Neuroeconomics Studies: OXYTOCIN INCREASES GENEROSITY IN HUMANS; OXYTOCIN INCREASES TRUST IN HUMANS; TRUST: A TEMPORARY HUMAN ATTACHMENT FACILITATED BY OXYTOCIN. Is Paul Zak discussing ways to manipulate hapless humans into accepting the invasion of a cannibalistic alien race? No, but close.

And what the hell is "neuroeconomics"?

Sounds like flim-flam? This is no joke. It is scary, and it's real. Paul Zak and his fun colleagues are actually testing and devising ways that will enable anyone (who can afford it)--and that includes unscrupulous corporate types, sales people, contractors, government officials, etc.--to easily and secretly air-born a brain chemical, oxytocin, into closed environments, and thereby fool intended victims into states of social ease and absolute trust. To quote one abstract from a CNS study:

Here we show that intranasal administration of oxytocin, a neuropeptide that plays a key role in social attachment and affiliation in non-human mammals, causes a substantial increase in trust among humans, thereby greatly increasing the benefits from social interactions.

Imagine the practical uses of "trust drugs" on everyday life. While atomizers in the ventilation systems of closed buildings spray liberal amounts of socializing, trust-inducing chemicals into the air, ignorant victims agree to buy even more car insurance than they really need, invest even more of their money in bad real estate schemes, and believe what Hillary Clinton is telling them no matter how idiotic it is.

Again, this is no joke. This stuff needs to be regulated, and quickly, before Paul Zak and CNS can begin selling "trust" for the noble purpose of helping our economy and facilitating good government. A mega-dose of trust juice will be necessary to convince me such research will ever be used for the good.

Internet Defamation Suit Tests Anonymity - Yale Females Have A Right To Sue for Slander

Last year, two women at Yale Law filed on suit that included subpoenas for 28 anonymous users of a website that has consistently attacked and defamed them. From the Reuters report:

Some posts made false claims about her academic record and urged users to warn law firms, or accused her of bribing Yale officials to gain admission and of forming a lesbian relationship with a Yale administrator, the court papers said ... The plaintiff said she believes the harassing remarks, which lasted nearly two years, cost her an important summer internship. After interviewing with 16 firms, she received only four call-backs and ultimately had zero offers -- a result considered unusual given her qualifications.

Defendants in Internet defamation actions will claim that revealing identity for the purpose of a defamation suit is not necessary and, in fact, is a violation of their right to free speech under the First Amendment.

Of course, we know there is no reason to hide if the truth is spoken. Those who hide their identities online cry First Amendment usually because they are lying, and they wish to obscure their true motivations. Otherwise, why resist so doggedly? Why demand a First Amendment right to slander others for purposes of utterly ruining them?

In this case, I affirm freedom and responsibility. If your speech online affects the personal lives of others in a negative way, and taints the way they are perceived, then be up front, or else shut up.

Devah Pager of Princeton and Algernon Austin of EPI Use White Racist Stereotypes To Explain Issues Crucial To The Black Community

At the risk of further alienating my liberal friends in New York who have knee-jerked me all the way into a hell reserved only for the vilest conservatives, I feel I must once again make what I consider to be valid observations of the Black and White left, reveal a few inconvenient truths, and then compare them, when appropriate, to the hard-line right.

So what is wrong with the Black and White intellectual left in America? Can they ever be unbiased? Non-racist? Can they ever dream of anything other than a simplistic Ebony Magazine-Al Sharpton view of White racism as a catch-all explanation for one of the single biggest and most embarrassing circumstances facing the Black community, namely, the disproportionate rate of Black youth incarceration and education failure?

Algernon Austin of the Economic Policy Institute, in his 2006 article, Don't Blame Black Culture for Economic Decline (Why Bill Cosby is Wrong), references a study by Princeton Professor of Sociology Devah Pager that purports to prove old fashioned White racism alive and well and preventing Black youth from obtaining entry-level jobs. Steve Horowitz, author of an article reviewing Devah Pager's 2007 book which includes the study ( Marked: Race, Crime, and Finding Work in an Era of Mass Incarceration ), allows passion to overcome him when he notes:
The Princeton professor isn’t the first to point this out [that Black males spend way too much time in prison], but she does well to bring this up in context of her research for two reasons. First, all Americans should be outraged by these facts. They should be shouting this information from the rooftops, demanding explanations from their elected officials, and actively working for solutions. Why is America incarcerating so many people and why are so many of them black?

The view of Devah Pager and Steve Horowitz, based on my experience, pretty much sums up the viewpoint of White liberal America ... Soooo it's the fault of America? It's the fault of that abstract entity no two people can define the same way? Huh? ... And Americans should be outraged! Yes. Americans should be outraged that the Black and White left in America avoid and deny the complex circumstances that work to prevent Black youth from achievement. And why? Because most of these well-documented facts by unbiased and balanced studies point to issues other than White racism as determining factors for failure and incarceration. In other words, they violate principles of the Religion of The Eternal Victim that have gripped much of Black America and their White supporters. And God help us all, some of these facts actually fault the Black community, Black leaders, and Black culture as having some responsibility ... Now, I just have to avoid the snipers! Making statements like these is kinda like revealing to hardcore Christians their ongoing hypocrisy for supporting the Iraq War.

Stepping outside the confines of the Religion of The EV, let's breeze over a few things that tend to contradict its beliefs, i.e., that tend to show compelling evidence that forces other than White racism are at work. Anyone at anytime, can research the many instances of intense and pervasive government corruption that have plagued the city of Washington, D.C.--from the trial of Mary Treadwell (Mayor Barry's wife) and her cronies to the more recent Washington D.C. Tax Office scandal--and conclude quite readily that the Black government of D.C., empowered to help the Black community of D.C., instead did just the opposite for the better part of three decades. By means of fraud, embezzlement, abuse of power, and wasteful spending, the politicians and bureaucrats of D.C. stabbed the Black community in the back so many times that only through a miracle of denial (related to blaming the White racism of Congress) have the Black community of Washington been prevented from taking to the streets in massive protest. The D.C. Tax Office, once the investigation was complete, was found to have brilliantly siphoned off 40 million or more of public funds before getting caught. And this is just for starters!

In other words, the Black government of D.C., supported by the Black elite of D.C. and the Black and White media, willfully and knowingly deprived its citizens of those funds necessary to maintain their communities and their schools, and in the most shameful manner imaginable. Not a single member of The Religion of The Eternal Victim will ever admit that conditions such as these play a role in the subject at hand. They will laugh at you, accuse you of being a racist, avoid you, become enraged, argue illogically, but never an admission. Once more, the Black and White left of America remind me of Evangelical behavior at such time you provide them undeniable proof of evolution.

But now let's return to Devah Pager of Princeton. It appears Devah Pager has failed, and in remarkably obvious fashion, to examine studies by groups in her own backyard of Princeton, studies that offer a viewpoint on Black youth that contradict her conclusions and those of her followers like Steve Horowitz. From the Future Of Children website:

A more important explanation focuses on respect: low-income men often fail to work because doing so would violate their self esteem. Black youth, for example, typically demand higher wages before they will work than whites with the same qualifications. Economists might say that they have a higher “reservation wage”—the wage that would induce them to accept a job. But this framing again suggests a quality of calm calculation that is lacking. Actually, passion reigns. Black youth will often refuse to work for “chump change” even if it means not working at all. Or they accept jobs but then find them unrewarding or abusive. So they leave them in a huff or are fired.

And further:

Low-skilled blacks feel that employers treat them as expendable, firing them at the least provocation. To the employers, however, it seems that the men simply “don’t want to work.” So bosses grow wary of hiring them, particularly minorities and ex-offenders. They often hire women or immigrants instead. One cannot call such preferences racist, because black employers voice the same complaints as whites.

Okay, now another comprehensive and scholarly study that also presents a more complex picture than Devah Pager, Algernon Austin, and their supporters would have you believe. It is put together nicely in a book entitled, The Meaning of Race for Employers, by Joleen Kirscheman and Kathryn Neckerman. Here is a slice:

Despite Black's disproportionate representation in the urban underclass, however defined, analyses of inner-city joblessness seldon consider racism or discrimination as a significant cause ... Lacking the mainstream role models they once had, inner-city blacks no longer learn and value the habits associated with steady work.

Because of this viewpoint that life is more complex than the Religion of The Eternal Victim will have you believe, the Black and White left will accuse me of being a racist, of supporting the White racist conspiracy, and will readily accuse any Black American of being a race traitor if she or he dares to voice any agreement with my viewpoint, or let's say, with the viewpoint of anyone who doesn't accept the basic beliefs of the Religion.

Yes, been there, done that ... I'm wistfully taken back to a telemarketing job I once had and the group of Jesus freaks there shouting at me viciously in the lunch room that I was going to hell because I didn't accept their version of reality.

Back to my motto. The truth will piss you off.

Losing The Race: Self-Sabotage In Black America - Algernon Austin of The Economic Policy Institute Still Blames Whitey

"Are black students really afraid of 'acting white'?" Algernon Austin asks in The Daily Voice. According to him, the answer is NO. Austin is director of the program on race, ethnicity and the economy at the Economic Policy Institute, and apparently, based on a read of his recent article, a man who carefully avoids the complex issues affecting black student performance in American schools. After a long piece that omits any possible evidence, study, book, or dialogue that does not support his facts, he predictably summarizes his argument by blaming black student problems on nothing more obvious than White racism:

Adults concerned about raising black student achievement have two options: we can get back into the civil rights business of confronting the social and economic inequalities that produce the achievement gap or we can cling to convenient stereotypes and keep on blaming black students. Blaming black students certainly means less work for us.

In other words, black communities, leaders, families, and students bear zero responsibility for underachieving black student performance on all levels over the past 20 years. This is an age-old and seriously flawed observation, among others that have acquired cult-like status among the Al Sharpton racists. But nothing dispels such notions faster and more powerfully than John McWhorter's classic, Losing The Race: Self-Sabotage In Black America. To quote John McWhorter:

Victimology is seductive because there is an ironic and addictive contentment in underdoggism. However, it also inherently gives failure, lack of effort, and even criminality a tacit stamp of approval. In addition, because focusing on the negative debases the performance of any human being, focusing on remaining aspects of victimhood rather than the rich opportunities before us is a ball and chain restraining any effort to move ahead.

And no scholarly note here, but still, an interesting comment on Amazon.Com by one of the books many supporters, D. A. Martin:

For years I have grown sick and tired of liberal "blacker than thou" pseudo-intellectuals who claim to have MY best interests at heart as a Black American. They blame all of our problems on racism, constantly making us out to be victims - even 30-plus years after the Civil Rights Movement! Yet, they are never willing to turn the microscope on us as Black Americans and how we should take responsibility for the ways in which we do ourselves in, but are quick to try to censor, berate, and/or brand as a "traitor" someone like McWhorter for doing so, all for the so-called crime of "airing our dirty laundry."

Though I'm not Black, this comment resonated with me. Why? Because I've heard these same comments myself, made privately to me by Black friends and associates who are exhausted by the stereotype White liberals force on them via academia and the media. It seems that Algernon Austin, even many years after John McWhorter's ground-breaking book, even after the studies, many anecdotes, and hot debate on these issues, continues to adopt a simplistic and convenient racist stance, i.e., he exclusively faults White people as the ultimate cause of all Black failure in America.

As human beings, we need to begin openly and forcefully rejecting such notions, for the sake of defeating racism in all its forms, whether it derives from White liberals or Black intellectuals. If not, meaningful change and dialogue will remain impossible.

Hillary vs. the Patriarchy. Remembering Erica Jong and Her Idol-Worship of Hillary in The Washington Post

The anti-democratic feminist viewpoint of Hillary-can-do-no-wrong-and-if-she-appears-to-do-so-it's-only-a-lie-of-the-patriarchy, was perhaps best represented by author Erica Jong back in Feb. who told us she can doubtless trust Hillary no matter what contrary information comes her way. Anyone who criticizes Hillary MUST be lying!

Fair and balanced as Fox News, eh?

It's amazing how the left continues to ape the right in its zeal to censor and avoid. AND THAT IS WHY I CANNOT STOP TALKING ABOUT DEMS AND HILLARY!

Anyway, to somone like Erica Jong, Hillary is nothing less than a mythical Wonder Woman--using her bracelets to deflect bullets fired by the imaginary snipers of Bosnia and her political "magic lasso" to hypnotize Americans into forgetting she voted with the big corporate bankers to saddle Americans with 30% credit card rates (among other things)! Her love of Hillary gives her enough radar to locate and denounce all lurking, omnipresent extremist misogynists, i.e., all those men and their female stooges who do not idol-worship her like Erica does. But Ms. Jong, like the other Hillary supporters who refuse to see Hillary for what she has become, who refuse for example to even denounce her Bosnia lie and chalk it up with a casual shrug and a What do you expect?, are all doing their part to bring about the ruination of their country in the same way Bush supporters did in the early years. As evidence mounted that Bush was a sociopathic moron, they just shrugged.

By excusing the lies, the Hillary apologists in effect become willing co-conspirators, corrupt campaign aides in the field. Hillary was supposed to be different, better, not a Dem version of George Bush!

Why is it so difficult for "feminist democrats" and "progressive men" to see that?

Hillary's Interest Rate Freeze

I still find it odd that many of the relatively intelligent people I know never caught on to the obvious lie inherent in Hillary's campaign promise to freeze interest rates ...

She can't. The Fed chief can.

Plato???

Time Magazine May 26, 2008 - Surviving The Lean Economy - What Will The Next President Do? Justin Fox Thinks About It

Time Magazine is running a story designed to sell lots of copy in these lean times: How the Next President Should Fix the Economy, by Justin Fox. Okay, so what does Justin Fox really know? It turns out that this Time Magazine fellow is a Reagan supporter of extreme vision. I wonder how old he is?

He begins his article by erroneously giving Ronald Reagan credit for creating a robust economy in the 80's--as if making speeches, dozing at staff meetings, riding horses, vacationing constantly, and running the nation with Nancy's psychics had any real effect? Justin does give credit to Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker (thank you!), the primary force for straightening things out and stopping the rampant inflation Carter had generously inherited from Richard Nixon. Lets' get some real perspective. I was there ... I lived and worked in Reagan's Washington ... And please don't forget the utter failure of supply side economics as Reagan ran record budget deficits and ballooned the size of government because the complexities of arithmetic were beyond his capacity. Justin notes the ultimate failure of the cuts, yes, but forgets the billions in taxes drained out of American paychecks needed to correct the problem.

Next, our Justin, in the context of bemoaning the wreckage created by income disparity vs. taxes, states: "Another potential path, although it hasn't been a theme in the campaign so far, would be a big effort to repair the country's crumbling infrastructure — which would create lots of jobs that couldn't be outsourced overseas and would also deliver long-term economic benefits." Um, ok, so who exactly is going to design, implement, and maintain such a vague and grandiose Great Society plan of repairing "infrastructure"? The same gov officials and incompetent asses who are running Iraq and the latest post-Katrina efforts? And by the way, why in the blazes isn't someone with half a brain talking about cutting the obese size of government? If we didn't feed the Federal Fat Boy with so much green salad he would be forced to lose weight and save us lots more taxes. What a radical concept!

As a matter of fact, I favor a new law that would fine, terminate, and even imprison any one of hundreds of thousands of Washington government career types, officials, managers, and political appointees who knowingly and willingly defraud the American treasury by engaging in waste, sloth, and abuse of power. Why not? We might save a few hundred billion per year at least. Heck, the Pentagon alone might be terrified into engaging in real integrity. Corruption in Washington is so devastating to the Treasury that the concept of it is unbelievably surreal.

Moving on to blame home owners for their part in ruining America, Justin Fox of Time Magazine states: "The mess has also caused some economists to question why we subsidize housing so heavily in the first place. The tax deduction for home-mortgage interest alone costs the government about $80 billion a year, and most of that benefit flows to the wealthiest 16% of taxpayers, according to the Tax Foundation ... " Costs the government? What's wrong with this attitude??? Is he telling us that our problems can be solved by giving even more tax billions to our incompetent, lazy, and utterly irresponsible government? Show me one study that proves more revenue makes governments less likely to waste that revenue!

Where is Thomas Jefferson when we need him?

Finally, our Time Magazine writer notes health care costs as a huge problem, and without offering any real solution, says: "It is possible to conceive of a system that brings the 47 million uninsured into the fold, improves medical outcomes and costs less than what we've got now." Well, is it possible? I can't help but conceive of a "system" run by the health care power brokers to serve only themselves and bankrupt what is left of middle-class America. There is no Tinkerbell, no magic wand that will convert one-track-mind sociopathology into responsible citizenship. Are you listening Justin? It won't work. Look up stats and studies on how many hundreds of billions that health care businesses and corporate hospitals have ripped off from Medicare alone! After Reagan became leader, predatory corporate parasites migrated in unprecedented numbers into Washington and began securing a fortress of great magnitude within our capital.

Yes, it's true. You must defeat the infection before you can heal the body.

And btw, stop worshipping Reagan. He wasn't the man you believe him to have been.

Time To Begin Prosecuting The Prosecutors - James Woodard of Texas Still Not Free

James Woodard, a black man, was dishonestly convicted of raping and murdering his girlfriend in 1981 and sentenced to life in prison. He was released on April 29, the 17th Dallas County inmate to be exonerated by DNA testing. According to CNN: "The jury believed Woodard was the last person seen with the victim. But according to court records, there were two other men that were with her. Police never followed up on the lead and prosecutors never shared the information with defense attorneys, even though they were legally obligated to do so."

Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins has gone on record as saying that corrupt prosecutors ought to be punished. Watkins wants to make it a crime from now on for prosecutors to knowingly hide or suppress evidence that could help a defendant. Naturally, many in the legal community there are alarmed by his comments, and especially those who are guilty of crimes against innocents.

Woodward told CNN: ""I think he should pay a penalty. I paid 27 years. He took my life away from me. What's the difference if it's by a gun, by words or by lies?"

I could not agree more!

After Years of Skimming, Stealing, and General Mismanagement, Governments Create Pension Fund Nightmare

It's spreading like a case of budgetary muscular dystrophy and it cannot be exaggerated. Local and state govs around the U.S. are floundering and vampirishly draining pension funds to cover for their mistakes, and in many cases, outright criminal behavior. And this has been going on a long time. The Washington Post reported just recently that both Maryland and the state of Virginia have "redirected" hundreds of millions per year out of employee pension funds and as a consequence are now avoiding a crisis created not only by their predatory behavior, but by the downturning economy. As the tide of wealth recedes, the hulls of old wrecks grow more visible, and the cries of denial must grow ever louder to compensate.

And further:

By their own assessment, state and local governments acknowledge that their funds for retiree benefits are increasingly falling behind, with the number that are severely underfunded soaring to 40 percent in 2006, a five-fold increase from 2000, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

From as early as 2006, as reported by THI :

• The City of San Diego was embroiled in its worst financial crisis ever, with an estimated pension deficit of $2 billion threatening to consume as much as one-third of the city's general fund. The city's failure to properly disclose pension liabilities prompted a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigation and led to the suspension of the city's credit rating. So far eight former pension officials have been charged with criminal corruption by the U.S. Attorney's Office and state District Attorney's Office.


• In Illinois, taxpayers faced a pension deficit estimated at $38 billion--the worst in the nation.


• The state of West Virginia faced a $5.5 billion pension deficit and an additional $3.3 billion in unfunded workers' compensation liabilities--a total deficit nearly three times the state's annual $3.1 billion general fund budget.


• In California, the teachers' retirement system faces a shortfall of more than $24 billion, and the state's combined contributions to the public employees' and teachers' plans now exceed $3 billion per year.

Are we all going to bend over and take it in the ass as usual? I have zero love for bureaucrats, but even less for stealing.

“Toast!” blared The New York Post - Is The Punditocracy Right This Time?

It can't be doubted. Assuming a truck doesn't run over Obama, he's gripped the Dems by the short and curlies. He will be the party nominee to run against McCain--despite the best efforts of Fox News, Limbaugh, and the rest. And that is satisfying to me, knowing that the great and powerful neocons of Oz and their flying monkeys were not sufficient to stop Obama, not to mention the efforts of bribe-bundling trolls like Robert Zimmerman of NY who like others in Hillary's campaign did his best to make Reverend Wright into another Willie Horton.

But Hillary won't give in. Just today, Geoff Garin, her lead strategist, told reporters, “We think the results last night [Indiana] strengthen the case that she will be the strongest candidate for the Democratic Party in November.”

Obviously, her camp followers, still in denial, won't stop fueling her ego.

Reverend Wright or White? Hillary Clinton and Her Sleazy Campaign Guns Arranged The National Press Club Meeting.

If you don't see the connection between Hillary and this latest sleazy attack on Obama via Reverend Wright, you are either very foolish or brain washed by Hillary. I once supported her, but this latest tactic is no better than the Karl Rove push-polling crap that propelled George Bush to the White House in 2000.

Yes, it's that bad!

Are we doomed to elect only the most prolific and outrageous liar, namely Hillary Clinton? Are we that corrupt as a people? Are we that stupid?

But back to the press club incident with that "black man" Reverend Wright (is he really black?). If Brit Hume can be believed:

It turns out the woman who organized Reverend Jeremiah Wright's event at the National Press Club, Monday, is a Hillary Clinton supporter. Barbara Reynolds is a member of the Press Club's Speakers Committee and coordinated the event which some critics suggest did irreparable harm to Barack Obama's campaign.

On a blog linked to her Web site, Reynolds wrote in a February post "my vote for Hillary Clinton in the Maryland primary was my way of saying thank you." She also wrote Obama’s theme of hope is "not based on facts." And, in a later entry she hit out at his handling of the Reverend Wright controversy saying, "the senator is fuelling the media characterization that Reverend Doctor Wright is some retiring old uncle in the church basement."





I despise the media, even more than Hilary Clinton.

Wild Women of Wongo - Comic Relief

T K Kenyon - Sexist or Martyr? Look to The Novel "Rabid!"

T K Kenyon, a "writer" with a penchant for sexist raving, represents all I abhor about second wave feminism. Matter of fact, her intolerance, lies of omission, and judgment tainted by lack of sense and extreme narcissism, remind me of a contemporary media darling on a spectrum somewhere between Ann Coulter and Nancy Grace. Recently, in a blog post, I took her to task for bashing men who didn't agree with her opinion that Doris Lessing should have won the Nobel. She responded in her typical fashion by avoiding the major points, martyring herself (because she thrives on victimhood), and then reaffirming the male conspiracy in NYC to hold down women in the publishing world. She is obviously looking for a commentator spot on CNN, but she isn't going to get it.

But is there a deeper pathology behind all this?

Is T K Kenyon's hatred of men really covering for something more severe than a need to escape responsibility and scapegoat half the human race? I recommend a first chapter dose of her strident, stomach-heaving, all-men-must-die novel, RABID, for an answer. Please, read it! Here is an appetizer:

A caged ape rattled her ribs and her stomach snapped like an angry bull shark surging through chum ... the bastard, the goddamn cheating bastard.

If I were T K Kenyon's hub I would not only cheat on her but run screaming to the nearest bar! RABID is indeed a scary work of fiction, extreme and disturbing on a level hard to explain.

You must experience it, then go have a drink!

TK Kenyon's Misandry, Carol Lloyd Of Salon Attacks Doris Lessing

Now that we're on the subject of Doris Lessing and misandry (see posts below), a good example of exactly the type of sexist feminists Lessing refers to have recently published their thoughts on Internet. One is a writer named TK Kenyon, the other a writer for Salon, Carol Lloyd. Both appear to be practicing overt sexism and misandry without a moment's hesitation--the former because she labels anyone of male gender a misogynist who doesn't like Doris Lessing's writing, and the latter by implying that Lessing's viewpoint on contemporary feminism can't be taken seriously because she fails to specifically address favorite feminist issues. After all, how dare Lessing challenge the viewpoint that all men are anything less than snails and puppy dog tails?

In a recent blog post on the subject of Lessing, TK Kenyon refers to all men (no distinctions made--cause we know all men are alike, right?) who don't like Lessing's writing or feel Lessing should not have won the Nobel Prize as: 1) Male chauvinist idiots; 2) Sci-fi hating snobs; 3) Devious misogynists; 4) Self-appointed literati; and of course, 5) Sexists.

The true sexist deceit being practiced here by TK Kenyon is obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than 20. NEWSFLASH: there are also lots of women who don't like Doris Lessing's sci-fi-ish work (see one of them at Powell's Books). Kenyon dishonestly pretends, for the sake of a rousing male bash, that only men are capable of disliking Lessing's work, but as a feminist sexist, her viewpoint is predictably absurd. Next, she jumps from this unsupportable conclusion to suggest a conspiracy of "male chauvinist idiots" who are attacking Lessing simply because they don't want to see a woman win a Nobel. Is this intelligent? Every time a writer wins a Pulitzer or a Nobel loads of critics come shrieking out of the woods to bitch about it. So what? But no amount of context or inherent foolishness of viewpoint will stop a TK Kenyon-like feminist from seeking publicity or pretending to take the moral high ground before her peers and admirers (just ask Nancy Grace).

Nevertheless, the first bit of comedy derives from Kenyon's comparison of Lessing to Vonnegut and how they both suffered similar "unfair" criticism regarding their sci-fi. Well, ummmm, there you go. Vonnegut suffered the same fate, according to Kenyon--and his critics, by definition, were not woman haters. Doesn't Kenyon contradict her premise somewhat when she uses this example? Yes? No?

Now, on to Carol Lloyd of Salon. In reference to the Guardian article on Doris Lessing, Carol savagely rakes Lessing over the coals for her viewpoints expressed in the Guardian:

On which imaginary planet is she residing? And what about domestic violence, rape and the scores of countries in which women are quite literally second-class citizens? As evidence of this ubiquitous male-bashing, Lessing recounts being in an elementary-school classroom in which a teacher was telling her 9- and 10-year-old students that wars are a result of men's innate violence. Yeah that's pretty stupid stuff, but ... can we really extrapolate on the failings of feminism from the silly comments of an elementary-school teacher?

Ok, well, the fact that Lessing did not specifically address domestic violence, for example, does not negate her viewpoint as expressed in the article. Carol Lloyd, rather than acknowledge the sexism inherent in second wave feminism, bashes Lessing for not seeing all men in the same light that she sees them--as abusers and woman beaters. Lloyd's dishonesty resides in the fact that she herself fails to acknowledge well-known facts regarding domestic violence, namely, that more mothers are guilty of child abuse and neglect fatalities in the home than fathers. According to the biggest child violence study in America conducted by HHS, women acting alone as child abusers comprise a far larger percentage of all perpetrators than men, 40 percent vs. 18 percent. Yes, that is correct. Hate to bring the wall down on you, Carol, but talk about power relationships? Why don't you complain about Lessing not addressing this fact also? Maybe because it makes women look bad and not men? But it makes no more sense to suggest that women as a whole are child killers than it does to suggest that men are woman beaters. Lessing was right to draw attention to the extremism of second wave feminism.

The second comical thing is the fact that Carol Lloyd, herself a sexist feminist, should fairly classify as a misogynist (as defined by Kenyon) simply because she finds serious fault with the writing of Doris Lessing. So as I noted previously, there are plenty of women who don't like Doris Lessing's writing. Other human beings who are not MEN don't like Lessing. Yes! I know them. And obviously, they're not misogynists!!!

Let's stop all this female redneck man-bashing. I agree with Doris. It's getting dumber and dumber and making everyone look like asses. Also, to TK and Carol, people should feel free to express opinions without being insulted. Debate is fine, but bashing is not.

Another Doris Lessing - This One Decries Feminist Sexism

Praise be! I just stumbled into an article posted by the Guardian which appears to confirm that not only does Doris Lessing object to second wave feminism, but STRONGLY objects. Fair is fair, so I must quote this article below:

The novelist Doris Lessing yesterday claimed that men were the new silent victims in the sex war, "continually demeaned and insulted" by women without a whimper of protest ... Lessing, who became a feminist icon with the books The Grass is Singing and The Golden Notebook, said a "lazy and insidious" culture had taken hold within feminism that revelled in flailing men.

And further:

"I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed," the 81-year-old Persian-born writer said yesterday ... "We have many wonderful, clever, powerful women everywhere, but what is happening to men? Why did this have to be at the cost of men?"

And further:

"I was in a class of nine- and 10-year-olds, girls and boys, and this young woman was telling these kids that the reason for wars was the innately violent nature of men ... You could see the little girls, fat with complacency and conceit while the little boys sat there crumpled, apologising for their existence, thinking this was going to be the pattern of their lives." Lessing said the teacher tried to "catch my eye, thinking I would approve of this rubbish". She added: "This kind of thing is happening in schools all over the place and no one says a thing."

And further:

"It has become a kind of religion that you can't criticise because then you become a traitor to the great cause, which I am not. It is time we began to ask who are these women who continually rubbish men. The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests ... Men seem to be so cowed that they can't fight back, and it is time they did."

I can't help but wonder if Doris Lessing really wrote that foreword that I mention below? ... Very suspicious.

Et Tu Doris? Truth or Sexism?

I have not read this book, but according to a review at Powell's Books, Doris Lessing states in her foreword that men:

... lack the solidity of women, who seem to have been endowed with a natural harmony with the ways of the world....Men in comparison are unstable, and erratic. Is Nature trying something out?

This sounds right out of the mouth of Maureen Dowd and extremist feminists who proclaim it's nature's intent that men should become extinct. Well, wait a minute! Here is a statement by none other than Doris Lessing which is so general that it effectively negates itself, i.e., she would be more accurate if she had said "Men are accountants" or "Men are firefighters," but even these statements are markedly false as stated because of the implication made that most, if not all men, are accountants or firefighters. Thus, Men are no more "unstable, and erratic" than they are heroic and honest. I have to argue on this basis alone, the Lessing statement qualifies as absurdly sexist.

After I read it, I immediately flashed to past memories of a favorite woman boss of mine who was a Devil Prada monster of the worst kind, and to the vision of a mother violently abusing her child outside my office while simultaneously browbeating her husband into total submission. If you are out there, Doris, I highly recommend a reality check in the form of Phyllis Chessler's Woman's Inhumanity to Woman. As Library Journal notes:

Second Wave feminists have for 30-plus years operated under the assumption that sisterhood is powerful. Indeed, women acting in concert have forced society to redefine gender, domestic relations, and the workplace. Still, despite huge gains in public visibility, female ascendance has been hampered by a rarely acknowledged reality: women often betray, hurt, and humiliate one another. Mothers stymie daughters, biological sisters compete, girlfriends gossip maliciously, and women bosses exert arbitrary and capricious authority.

Next, a dose of In The Company of Women for dessert.

NOTE: Evil and assholish-ness are NOT gender specific! And I refuse to join the band of Second Wave feminists who pretend this is true. I know it's a method of bonding for some. If you can sit around and blame the husbands and male bosses and boyfriends and fathers for all your problems, then you have something in common, yes? It reminds me of Neocon rednecks hoisting a beer and blaming all America's problems on Democrats.

I can't do that. I blame everyone for my problems. No one is singled out.

Neocon Norman Praises Bush, Wants More War

The neocon Norman Podhoretz has just "authored" a new book called WORLD WAR IV (I'm not linking to it, sorry) wherein he argues stupidly for a continuous Bush-like war against Muslim "Islamofascists." From The New York Times:

[Podhoretz] declares that the current Iraq war is only one front (Iran being another) in what he calls “World War IV,” a “long struggle against Islamofascism,” which like the cold war (the one he counts as “World War III”), “will almost certainly go on for three or four decades.”

And more:

Mr. Podhoretz, who last summer called upon President Bush to use military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear arsenal, writes in these pages of all the “progress” that is being made in neighboring Iraq, embraces the Bush administration’s aggressive policy of pre-emption and asserts that George W. Bush will one day be recognized “as a great president,” an heir not just to Truman but to Lincoln as well.

Besides being moronic, his view of the anti-terrorist strategy and Bush is as near to insane as you can get. How can you argue with such utter tripe without getting slop on you? This is neoconism gone deep end, so deep end that every neocon with an IQ greater than 20 should rebel and question their religion.

Are White Academics Attacking Black America? Did Ebony Magazine Help Invent "The New Racism"? Am I Delusional?

On the heels of intense and ongoing racist bloggery following the now infamous Duke Rape Hoax in North Carolina, I've been researching why it always seemed to me that starting in the 1990's a significant portion of middle and upper class Black Americans began to believe they were the constant victims of a definable and obvious "new racism" on the part of middle and upper class Whites. Recently, I backed into this article from 1996 by Hans J. Massaquoi that appeared in Ebony--a magazine that never stops insisting that a White racist lurks around every corner. And yes, this is NOT an exaggeration. Ebony Magazine spends more time fanning the flames of racism than the White House spends on making us afraid of terrorists. A quote from that 1996 article in Ebony as follows:

After years of hard-won gains made by some talented and upwardly mobile Blacks, a new wave of racism has been sweeping the nation that is threatening to turn back the clock. In the resulting anti-Black climate, Black achievers have become the frequent targets of inappropriate behavior on the part of Mutes that ranges from mindless disrespect to overt hostility and physical abuse. The result is that no Black person is too distinguished, too famous or too rich to be spared by the resurgence of overt bigotry.

Mutes? ... The story also quotes a claim by ex-governor Wilder of Virginia that he was suddenly and brutally assaulted by an airport security guard simply for pointing out that his suspenders might have caused a beeping alarm--a story that seemed to be absurdly exaggerated but was nevertheless "settled" to avoid the kind of publicity that Wilder could muster before going to court.

From Ebony Magazine in 1991:

The "new racism" is the term some observers use to describe the recent attacks-some subtle, some not-so-subtle-on Black progress. It is evident on predominantly White college campuses, where Black students and faculty face mounting hostilities. It is evident in corporate suites, where Black executives are butting their heads against glass ceilings that prohibit their advancement. It is evident in national polls that indicate White Americans-despite the overwhelming evidence of their individual prejudices-continue to labor under the mistaken belief that discrimination has been completely eradicated. And it is most evident in the nation's neighborhoods, where resistance to integration still runs deep.

So how about an example from today? There are plenty of reasoned approaches to racism by black commentators, but It seems, in some quarters, that the insistence on racism getting worse has become even more strident, perhaps to point of dementia? Well, okay, you decide. Here is a 2007 quote from BlackCommentator.Com, a very popular black website:

Black faculty, the few left, capitulate so as not to lose their jobs, homes, cars, and expensive clothes! Worse, whites have taken over Black studies and white women teach and write (they have control over the journals) about black women authors...there are white chairs of African Americans studies and white women have taken hold of Black women's literature as if it is their own. Black women or men who bring the history of oppression and resistance, bring a political consciousness to academia, or what they call 'an attitude' are not wanted." Indeed, this is "an insidious way to annihilate Black people."

Whites have taken over Black studies? Um ...

Comic Relief - Uncle Jay Takes on Congress

Comic Relief - Jesus vs. George Bush

LEAVE GENERAL BETRAY-US ALONE

My Country Tis Of Anomie - Part 2

an·o·mie [an-uh-me] : lack of moral standards in a society ; social instability resulting from a breakdown in values; alienation experienced by a person or class as a result of lack of ideals.
________________________

• Should this be news? During the Bush regime, the number of criminal cases pursued by the EPA against major polluters has experienced an incredible and frightening decline. According to the Washington Post, "the number of civil lawsuits filed against defendants who refuse to settled cases was down nearly 70 percent between 2002 and 2006, compared with a four-year period in the late 1990's ..." As the ex-director of EPA's Office of Civil Enforcement, Eric Schaeffer, put it, "You don't get cleanup, you don't get deterence." ... This scenario is all too familiar. Only Reagan could have possibly caused more damage to EPA after appointing the infamous Ann Burford.
  
• The dying of Slavic Village, Cleveland, is a microcosm of big city problems going into 2008. Another reason for Americans to deny a curious and epidemic form of positveness--the kind of mentality that refuses to hear anything "negative" about the world around them. Regardless, what was once a thriving community has been severely tainted--courtesy of real estate agents and developers out to make a sub-prime dollar--and is now in danger of becoming a wasteland with hundreds of foreclosed homes and streets made dangerous by drug dealers and criminals out to feast on the carcass. But does everyone know that? Compare the yahoo page of positivism about Slavic Village vs. the reality expressed here. My country tis of anomie.
  
• According to Politcal Animal, Cheney's pro-war lobbying organization, Freedom's Watch, is not only on the move and pushing for more Iraq war and a new front to open against Iran, but FW is also (according to the New York Times), being heavily funded by right-wing Jewish donors , one of the funders being Sheldon Adelson, a Las Vegas tycoon. Wow! Just even more signs that we live in a true democracy. Perhaps the White House should move to Vegas.

Bottle Billions At Stake -- Will Pro-Bush Saxby Chambliss Bring Osama Bin Laden Into This?

For years, health groups and concerned parents have been battling county and state bureaucracies over junk food sales in American public schools. Definitive studies have proved that junk food and bottled drinks (including so-called sports drinks like Gatorade) are not only unhealthy but lead to depressed grades and OBESITY! Reality check--the brain needs real nutrients to operate properly and the body needs healthy food to prevent heart disease. DUH. Now Senator Harkin has introduced a bill that would force the U.S. government, specifically, Dept. of Agriculture (God save us all), to set appropriate standards for food nutrition in schools. Course, that won't prevent the bureaucrats from writing "rules" to dilute the law, and besides, who is going to enforce it? DOA? ... Ok, ok, it's still a good idea and a great step, yes.

Regardless, the lobbyists representing Coca-Cola, Pepsi and other bottlers (annual sales of sports drinks reached $7.5 billion in 2006) are naturally lying through their green Gatorade teeth and claiming that that sports drinks and sweetened waters are lower in calories and actually good for high school students and young athletes, and they're going all out spending millions in marketing to prove it. A TV ad for Gatorade, e.g., has NBA player Kevin Garnett slapping around like a stupid milkman and setting Gatorade bottles at the doorsteps of homes just filled with handsome active models impersonating parents.

Anyway, all concerned parties are on board with Harkin's bill. More than 100 organizations, from the American Federation of Teachers to the Yale Prevention Research Center, support the new law. BUT GUESS WHO IS IN THE WAY? Why is it that it seems easier to sign up a member of the Republican party to defeat anything that might really make a difference to human health? Is that true or am I delusional? Pro-beverage lobbyists, shareholders and execs are betting their money on pro-bev politicians like ranking Republican member, the grand and honorable Senator Saxby Chambliss. And btw, he represents Coke's home state of Georgia. It's the real thing, Coke is.

I do declare, Saxby, yoh razah-thin lips been kissn' that ass o glass for waaay too long!

I must remind everyone that Chambliss is the George Bush political clone who beat Max Cleland in Georgia by running absurd attack adverts associating Cleland with photos of Osama Bin Laden--and simply because Cleland was attempting to be sensible about the Iraq war. So with his connections to terrorists, maybe Chambliss can now ask Bin Laden to return and pose with Harkin or perhaps members of the Amercian Federation of Teachers. That should turn the tide for Coke, obesity and stupidity notwithstanding.

One Last Jena 6 Reality Check Courtesy AP

I just had to quote this from Tod Lewan, an AP national writer, who recently published an article on the Jena 6 story. After researching court testimony, interviews with teachers, officials and students at Jena High, and public statements from a U.S. attorney who reviewed the case for possible federal intervention, these facts came out:

• The so-called "white tree" at Jena High, often reported to be the domain of only white students, was nothing of the sort, according to teachers and school administrators; students of all races, they say, congregated under it at one time or another.
• Two nooses - not three - were found dangling from the tree. Beyond being offensive to blacks, the nooses were cut down because black and white students "were playing with them, pulling on them, jump-swinging from them, and putting their heads through them," according to a black teacher who witnessed the scene.
• There was no connection between the September noose incident and December attack, according to Donald Washington, an attorney for the U.S. Justice Department in western Louisiana, who investigated claims that these events might be race-related hate crimes.
• The three youths accused of hanging the nooses were not suspended for just three days - they were isolated at an alternative school for about a month, and then given an in-school suspension for two weeks.

Reality check time! When will the media, Al Sharpton, Jackson and company stop polarizing America for the sake of a good story and ratings?

In Lynch Mob America, Wrong Makes Right Once Again - Jena 6 Debacle and Racism

What is really going on in Jena, LA, given today's hyped news coverage? It appears once again as if the media is creating a black and white story rather than presenting ALL the facts. Why let facts get in the way of a good story? But just to sober things up a bit, a few important facts that are not being talked about because they might lead to inconvenient conclusions upsetting to lynch mob America:

• The white victim, Justin Barker, according to court documents, was slammed in the back of the head by a blunt force. Was it a fist, a bat, a stick? Who knows, but he was knocked unconscious and the Jena 6 began "to kick and stomp his lifeless body." Barker spent about three hours in a local emergency room for treatment of injuries to his head and face. According to spokespeople for the Jena 6, this attack was justified because of white racism in Jena. In other words, the attackers can't be held reponsible. Barker was kicked and beaten by black jocks (yes, they're all athletes) and long after he was unconcsious. So this behavior is justifiable?


• The Jena 6 reporters claim that The Jena 6 attackers, especially Mychal Bell (a local football star), were charged unfairly for the crime. Well, guess what? The mainstream media isn't reporting the fact that good ole Bell is an extremely violent human being. According to Wikipedia, "A request to lower Mychal Bell's $90,000 bond was denied on August 24, 2007, due to his juvenile record, which showed that he had been previously convicted of four other violent crimes. Bell was put on probation for a battery that occurred December 25, 2005, and he was later convicted of yet another battery charge and two charges of criminal damage to property."


• Also, according to supressed sources and Wikipedia, another little known fact: "The case sparked public outcry, as court-appointed public defender Blane Williams, himself an African-American, did not call a single witness in his attempt to defend Bell ... Much has been made of the fact that all members of the jury were white, however, an all-white jury was impaneled after none of the 350 blacks in LaSalle Parish who were called for jury duty showed up to participate in the trial.

So, a summary of the facts which create an inconvenient amount of gas for some of you: the jury was white because the black community refused to care enough to participate; Bell's defense attorney was black; Bell is a violent felon with a history; and finally, the Jena 6 acted in manner that was both cowardly and vicious.

Please keep all this in mind as the media does it's thing and the usual mouthpieces spout their rhetoric. By the way, the white students who hung the ropes from the tree should have been expelled, yes! Because they were not expelled did not give Bell and his jock cronies license to gang-assault somoene just because he was white. If anyone believes that Bell and the Jena 6 are innocent victims of white racism, please speak up here and tell me why, k?

____________

What Do We Expect the Bush Bureaucrat General To Say?

I'm not going to waste time blathering on at length about the BS that General Petraeus is vomiting on Capitol Hill along with Ambassador Crocker (don't get me started). Of course, the surge is working! But why can't someone get to the f'n point already? Have we changed centuries of blood feud culture? Have we calmed their thirst for power? Have we stopped the influence of Iran and Syria? Have we stopped the influence of terrorist leaders? Have we changed their opinions about American infidels? Have we created an Iraqi government the country will accept as legitimate? Can we point a gun at their heads forever? Do we expect the bureaucrat general to agree with the Dick Cheney 1994 comments (see video below this post) noting an Iraq invasion as a waste of time and life?

The answer to all of these questions? You already know. Write the Dems and any elephants with half a brain and a speck of morality. Tell them to END THE BULLSHIT. Damn the Bush legacy!

BTW, below is a video with Keith Olbermann who comments on the White House editing of the September Petraeus report to Congress. Worth watching.

1994 - A Very Different Dick - Don't Attack Iraq!

I know this is old news, but I want it as a reference while other points are made. Also, some people have still not seen this!

What Do ALAS Feminist Bloggers Have in Common With Rush Limbaugh Supporters?

This is in relation, once again, to the Duke Rape Case. I find a terrible and frightening similarity between nuggets of anonymous thought on a popular feminist blog called ALAS, and the kind of stuff you read on the radical right blogs, i.e., a strategy of shoot first and keep shooting till your hand goes cold. They readily accepted the false claims and statements of Nifong and Mangum with the same zeal and unquestioning vigor that Rush Limbaugh junkies accept the words of their master as absolute gospel. Course, the media disinformation, Nancy Grace, and others, are to blame for much of this, but still. You judge for yourself. Is this typical of feminist thinking or just typical of human beings who reinforce each other's wrongness? ... These comments are from last spring. Posters are commenting on the "guilt" of the lacrosse players.

• Q Grrl Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 7:36 am The entire Duke lacrosse team has shat on the community for years — turn around is fair play.


• Rachel S Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 6:41 am One of the things that I find ironic is that these people who are so quick to point out alternative theories and suggest that this never happen are prognosticating (sp) about evidence that is either wrong or simply not there.


• Antigone Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 7:20 am I don’t doubt that the girl was raped.


• Shannon Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 7:21 am I think the victim deserves someone to take her side for once. These guys can get a fancy lawyer, and are protected by their status. Nobody is calling them into account for their rowdyness or loud partying, and saying that is why they raped the woman, but the woman is being bashed by rape apologists right and left.


• Q Grrl Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 8:38 am What part of the crime do you disbelieve? Barring non-consensual sex, what about the beating and strangulation? These men, specifically the lacrosse team, have proven, year after year after year, their willingness to engage in illegal and disruptive behavior, with little to no regard to the consequences. Suddenly, when the crimes escalate (or are finally reported) these men are innocent until proven guilty? Honey, they’ve been proving their guilt for years. Hell, they’ve already copped to criminal activity the night of the party, so I’m really not sure what “innocence” of theirs you’re trying to shore up.


• Ampersand Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 9:52 am But it seems incredibly unlikely that all of them are innocent (even if none of them committed the rape, some of them may have important knowledge that they’re withholding, such as descriptions of other guests at the party). Under the circumstances, and given the severity of the crime, I don’t think the use of public shaming by the DA is out of line.


• geoduck2 Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 10:03 am What is it about this case that is hard to understand? The police found 4 fingernails & her cellphone and her makeup bag in the house. (They held her from behind with an arm around her neck. Her nails broke off as she tried to pull away the arm that was cutting off her airway.) The medical examination found tearing and injuries consistent with rape. Her father says that her face is bruised ... A court standard is innocent until proven guilty. But we are all free to take and judge the information available to us.


• ms. jared Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 11:10 am thank you for this post. i too have noticed how quick everyone is to say “don’t rush to judgement” but it seems it’s only reserved for rape. we can “rush to judge” ken lay and tom delay and every other criminal ASAP but when it comes to rape we’re all supposed to immediately dismiss the victim’s claims and wait for the courts to decide.from what i’ve read and from past experience, i am much more inclined to believe her and i do.


• anon Writes: April 3rd, 2006 at 1:14 pm I posted the below on Rachel’s Tavern, but I think it is relevant to this discussion. The way I see it, you basically have 2 kinds of people - those who are able to believe that such heinous acts can be committed by “basically good kids” and those who are not willing to believe it, which leads them to concoct elaborate schemes for explaining the rape and beating of this woman (which as far as I can tell is not in question - the only thing that IS in question is the who) ... Similarly, I think the men on the Duke Lacrosse team who allegedly raped the young woman have some sort of explanation in their heads that absolve them of responsibility. They may believe these rationales so completely that they are probably puzzled by the outrage and outcry. They may have lied to themselves so completley that they have begun to really believe it.

And then, many months later, when it had become overwhelmingly clear that Nifong and Mangum were lying and that the lacrosse players were innocent (even Susan Estrich had backed off), we have comments by many of the exact same people, even as recently as June. The comments in parens are mine:

• Whether or not the Duke Lacrosse Players committed rape that night--I now believe they did not, although of course I could be mistaken--thinking that an inconsistent narrative shows no rape took place is wrong. (OMG! After it had been shown that Mangum lied repeatedly to protect herself and destroy the lives of others--and btw, inconsistent story demonstrates false testimony in other crimes so why do these people not see this as evidence of lying, especially in this case where the lies on the part of Mangum were so numerous and profound?)


• With trepidation, I’m not limiting the comments here to feminists. (In other words, these people fear opinions that might contradict their own?)


• If it can be proven that Nifong withheld evidence and lied to the judge, he should be disbarred and, ideally, put behind bars. (OMG! IF? IF? IF? Who is she kidding?)


• THIS POST IS A FEMINIST, PRO-FEMINIST AND FEMINIST-FRIENDLY ONLY THREAD. (Regarding an ALAS post that slams everyone as a "vulture" who claims false rape charges potentially hurt real victims--in other words, this poster seems to be saying, "Just tell me what I want to hear." I have friends who work in rape crisis centers who say the same thing. I guess they're vultures too?)


• I stand by most of my past posts on this subject. But I no longer believe Mary Doe was raped that night. Nor do I believe she wasn’t raped. I’m now an agnostic on this question. (She is "agnostic" on the subject! No evasion here.)

Enough. Now, I can't talk compare this to Rush Limbaugh supporters without wanting to vomit, so I'll just leave that part out. But a big question remains. Have these people become just what they hate, i.e., ignorant, narrow-minded sexists?

You tell me.

"Until Proven Innocent" - A Must Book for "Liberal" Hypocrites - Ugly and True

I've gave up on the left many years ago, and the right long before that. What I'm left with now are feelings of revulsion and impatience, for I find them both horribly hypocritical and self-serving. Whatever happened to reason, I ask you? Nevertheless, you must buy and read the nonfiction book, Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case. The book was written by Stuart Taylor, a columnist for National Journal, and K.C. Johnson, a history professor at Brooklyn College and CUNY.

No book could possibly do a better job of documenting and shining a glaring spotlight on the radical left of the Duke Campus--a group of lynch-mob academics who were determined, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, to condemn three innocent people simply because they were white and male. The evidence cannot be refuted. It's UGLY and it's TRUE. Only the biggest ostrich on earth could hide from these facts.

Courtesy of a great article on UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT on NPR, a slice or two from Chapter 8:

For many months not one of the more than five hundred members of the Duke arts and sciences faculty—the professors who teach Duke undergraduates — publicly criticized the district attorney or defended the lacrosse players' rights to fair treatment. Not even after enough evidence had become publicly available to establish clearly both the falsity of the rape charge and the outrageousness of Nifong's actions—widely seen as the worst case of prosecutorial misconduct ever to unfold in plain view. But, as some admitted privately to friends, they were also afraid to cross the activists—black and female activists especially—lest they be smeared with charges of racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, or right-wingism ...That's what would happen to a chemistry professor who—months after the team's innocence had become clear—became the first member of the arts and sciences faculty to break ranks with the academic herd. It took less than twenty-four hours for the head of Duke's women's studies program to accuse him of racism in a letter to The Chronicle.

The book goes further to note the contribution of a special Duke faculty member, Houston A. Baker Jr., a professor of English and of African and African-American Studies.

Baker was in demand among TV hosts such as MSNBC's Rita Cosby and CNN's Nancy Grace. He was also quoted in newspapers local and national, including The New York Times and USA Today ... Baker provided a window both into his soul and into the indifference of many academics to fact after a critic e-mailed him, "You will owe a big apology when the truth comes out, but I doubt you will be man enough to issue it." Retorted the professor: "Who is really concerned about whether a woman was actually raped or not? Are you a perfect idiot?" Baker tossed out a litany of false charges of misbehavior by lacrosse players, such as that they had "beat up people who were gay," before closing: "... You live in a white supremacist fantasy land. . . . Whew! Have you read recently? Anything? . . . And, get over yourself, buddy. Get smart before you write to a professor, OK. Read SOMETHING."

Thanks guys, for "Until Proven Innocent." Thanks to National Public Radio for bubbling this book to the surface.