Posted by Christopher Johnson | Friday, September 30th, 2016 | Uncategorized | 22 Comments
The New York Times, a month ago:
Several strategists said Mr. Trump’s fate in Ohio would turn less on the absence of Kasich operatives than on the fundamentals of the campaign. No candidate since 1960 has made it to the White House without winning Ohio. And while Mrs. Clinton could afford to lose there given her advantage in other battlegrounds like Virginia and Colorado, Ohio is a must-win for Mr. Trump.
He is doing well with white working-class voters in Democratic strongholds like Youngstown, where industrial jobs have vanished, and in rural counties along the Ohio River. President Obama won Youngstown’s Mahoning County in 2012, but Mr. Trump is expected to convert many voters to his cause.
But the populations in these counties are relatively small. Mr. Trump’s gains there would be outweighed by the significant losses he is expected to face in the suburbs of major cities, especially Columbus, strategists said.
Chaser. The New York Times, yesterday:
After decades as one of America’s most reliable political bellwethers, an inevitable presidential battleground that closely mirrored the mood and makeup of the country, Ohio is suddenly fading in importance this year.
Hillary Clinton has not been to the state since Labor Day, and her aides said Thursday that she would not be back until next week, after a monthlong absence, effectively acknowledging how difficult they think it will be to defeat Donald J. Trump here. Ohio has not fallen into step with the demographic changes transforming the United States, growing older, whiter and less educated than the nation at large.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Friday, September 30th, 2016 | Uncategorized | 5 Comments
Here’s another explanation for Donald Trump that will go right over your heads.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Thursday, September 29th, 2016 | Uncategorized | 11 Comments
Gary Johnson is not a plausible option.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Thursday, September 29th, 2016 | Uncategorized | 17 Comments
by Percy Bysshe Shelley
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: ‘Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear —
“My name is Obamandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!”
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.’
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Thursday, September 29th, 2016 | Uncategorized | 14 Comments
I had two reactions to this story. Apparently, a lot of men are, in fact, blithering idiots. And a disturbingly high number of these blithering idiots actually pay for this; I’d need to receive six figures just to consider the idea.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Wednesday, September 28th, 2016 | Uncategorized | 16 Comments
NFL games in primetime are seeing a sharp audience drop through Week 3, while Sunday afternoons are a mixed bag. Fox is the only TV partner seeing an uptick compared to the same period last season. Fox is averaging 20.43 million viewers through Week 3, up 1% from last year. The net was boosted by the Giants-Cowboys game featured in Week 1’s national window, as well as Redskins-Giants featured in Week 3’s singleheader. The L.A. market has not yet delivered for Fox. The Week 3 Rams-Buccaneers matchup drew a 6.1 local rating in L.A., with the figure being half of what Fox drew for Seahawks-Rams in Week 2. However, Rams-Bucs did have to air up against Vin Scully’s final call at Dodger Stadium and SoCal fans watching the Chargers-Colts game on CBS. Meanwhile, CBS is averaging 17.4 million viewers through Week 3, which has included two national windows. That figure is down 5% from 18.26 million viewers at the same point last season. CBS’ two national windows are down 5%.
Like I said previously, I’ve basically given up on the SJWFL. It’s pretty easy to do when you live in a town that’s been effed over by the SJWFL for as long as this one was.
Lately, while I briefly check on SJWFL games from time to time, I spend my Sunday afternoons watching anything else. Whatever afternoon sports programming NBC broadcasts, whatever rerun of whatever sitcom from the 60’s through the 80’s that happens to strike my fancy, old Walker Texas Ranger episodes, that kind of thing.
And I’m actually amazed at how little I miss it.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Wednesday, September 28th, 2016 | Uncategorized | 22 Comments
Congratulations. You officially have one, says Angelo Codevilla, in one of the best explanations of how and why this country got where it currently is that I’ve seen. Here’s a taste:
Over the past half century, the Reagan years notwithstanding, our ruling class’s changing preferences and habits have transformed public and private life in America. As John Marini shows in his essay, “Donald Trump and the American Crisis,” this has resulted in citizens morphing into either this class’s “stakeholders” or its subjects. And, as Publius Decius Mus argues, “America and the West” now are so firmly “on a trajectory toward something very bad” that it is no longer reasonable to hope that “all human outcomes are still possible,” by which he means restoration of the public and private practices that made the American republic. In fact, the 2016 election is sealing the United States’s transition from that republic to some kind of empire.
Electing either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump cannot change that trajectory. Because each candidate represents constituencies hostile to republicanism, each in its own way, these individuals are not what this election is about. This election is about whether the Democratic Party, the ruling class’s enforcer, will impose its tastes more strongly and arbitrarily than ever, or whether constituencies opposed to that rule will get some ill-defined chance to strike back. Regardless of the election’s outcome, the republic established by America’s Founders is probably gone. But since the Democratic Party’s constituencies differ radically from their opponents’, and since the character of imperial governance depends inherently on the emperor, the election’s result will make a big difference in our lives.
The overriding question of 2016 has been how eager the American people are to reject the bipartisan class that has ruled this country contrary to its majority’s convictions. Turned out, eager enough to throw out the baby with the dirty bathwater. The ruling class’s united front in response to the 2008 financial crisis had ignited the Tea Party’s call for adherence to the Constitution, and led to elections that gave control of both houses of Congress to the Republican Party. But as Republicans became full partners in the ruling class’s headlong rush in what most considered disastrous directions, Americans lost faith in the Constitution’s power to restrain the wrecking of their way of life.
In fact, the United States of America was great because of a whole bunch of things that now are gone. Yes, the ruling class led the way in personal corruption, cheating on tests, lowering of professional standards, abandoning churches and synagogues for the Playboy Philosophy and lifestyle, disregarding law, basing economic life on gaming the administrative state, basing politics on conflicting identities, and much more. But much of the rest of the country followed. What would it take to make America great again—or indeed to make any of the changes that Trump’s voters demand? Replacing the current ruling class would be only the beginning.
Because it is difficult to imagine a Trump presidency even thinking about something so monumental as replacing an entire ruling elite, much less leading his constituency to accomplishing it, electing Trump is unlikely to result in a forceful turn away from the country’s current direction. Continuing pretty much on the current trajectory under the same class will further fuel revolutionary sentiments in the land all by itself. Inevitable disappointment with Trump is sure to add to them.
We have stepped over the threshold of a revolution. It is difficult to imagine how we might step back, and futile to speculate where it will end. Our ruling class’s malfeasance, combined with insult, brought it about. Donald Trump did not cause it and is by no means its ultimate manifestation. Regardless of who wins in 2016, this revolution’s sentiments will grow in volume and intensity, and are sure to empower politicians likely to make Americans nostalgic for Donald Trump’s moderation.
Needless to say, read the whole thing.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Tuesday, September 27th, 2016 | LGBT+54 | 19 Comments
You know that received wisdom and Absolutely Settled ScienceTM about how homosexuality isn’t a choice, that homosexuals were born that way, nothing they can do about it, etc.? Yeah, well, uh…never mind. Our bad:
A top researcher with the American Psychological Association (APA) and lesbian activist has acknowledged that gays are not “born that way.”
Dr. Lisa Diamond, co-editor-in-chief of the APA Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology and one of the APA’s “most respected members,” says sexual orientation is “fluid” and not unchangeable.
As clinical psychologist Dr. Laura A. Haynes summarizes Diamond’s APA Handbook chapters, her book and YouTube lectures, “The battle to disprove ‘Born that way and can’t change’ is now over, and (Diamond) is telling LGBT activists to stop promoting the myth.”
Contrary to the typical argument that homosexuals are “born gay” as “who they are” and cannot change, the APA officially recognized sexual orientation change in 2011.
Diamond summarized relevant findings in a lecture at Cornell University (2013), stating that abundant research has now established that sexual orientation — including attraction, behavior, and self-identity — is fluid for both adolescents and adults and for both genders.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Tuesday, September 27th, 2016 | Politics | 29 Comments
Want to feel depressed about the future of this country but don’t know how to go about it? One obvious answer is to reflect on the fact that either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States. But a much better way is to read the Lincoln-Douglas debates.
Think of it. By today’s standards, both Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas were completely uneducated men. Yet in 1858, during the US senatorial election, these two men crisscrossed Illinois, debating the single most important issue facing America, slavery. Each of them spoke at great length and each exhibited an intellectual depth that would blow ALL modern US presidential candidates from both parties completely out of the water.
Let’s face it. That…performance last night was a lot of things but a debate wasn’t one of them. US presidential debates haven’t been actual debates in decades. What they have been is an utterly-predictable form of theater.
Speaking in two-minute chunks, hoping to get a zinger in or get your opponent to commit some kind of “gaffe” for the press to latch on to. All the cross-talk. The facial expressions one candidate displays while the other is speaking. At the conclusion, partisans of both candidates rushing to declare that their candidate obviously “won.”
Been there, done that. Lather, rinse, repeat. Etc.
So what do we do about it? If we want to make these things matter again, here are two suggestions:
(1) Eliminate the role of the moderator – Since both candidates will address the same question, all questions will be known in advance. So the only thing the moderator will do is introduce the questions and perhaps warn the candidates when their allotted time is almost finished. When it is, the candidate’s mike is to be immediately turned off and the next question addressed.
(2) Completely uninterrupted speaking time – Each candidate will be given fifteen minutes to answer a particular question, to be used in any manner he or she prefers. Each candidate will also be given five minutes of response to the other.
Here’s the kicker. Whenever one candidate is talking, the microphone of the other will be shut off. Not only that, but when one candidate is speaking, the face of the other will not appear on the TV screen, eliminating the influence of eye-rolling, arrogant smirks or similar gestures.
What are the chances of any of this actually happening?
Why? Today’s American news media thinks in sound bites so one can’t expect that their limited intellects will be at all happy about having to listen to arguments and seriously ponder questions. Also, a debate format like this one basically takes the media completely out of the equation.
Because the candidates won’t be talking to them. They’ll be talking to us.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Monday, September 26th, 2016 | Presidential Election | 96 Comments
If any of you guys want to provide running commentary of tonight’s debate, do it in the comments here. Either Bill or I will be around to tidy things up and perhaps provide a comment or two ourselves.
From Bill – PLEASE keep your comments relevant. Discuss the issues raised; answers given; posture and poise of the candidates – let’s not end up wandering off into “Bush did this” or “Obama caused that”
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Monday, September 26th, 2016 | Stupid People | 16 Comments
American higher education, ladies and gentlemen. But you’ll have to haul it to the landfill yourself:
An RA at the University of Kansas was advised against incorporating an image of a gorilla into a jungle-themed floor decoration because the animal apparently represents “a very masculine image.”
In an email obtained by Campus Reform, a university employee with the school’s student housing department writes to a resident advisor, who wishes to remain anonymous, to explain to him that he cannot use an image of a gorilla for a routine floor decoration.
“I think it would be best if your floor chose a different theme animal to be more inclusive,” Assistant Complex Director Dale Morrow wrote in an email at the start of this academic year. “First, gorillas represent a very masculine image, and I feel that this would not be inclusive to all of our residents on that floor.”
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Sunday, September 25th, 2016 | American Legends | 9 Comments
RIP, Arnold Palmer.
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Saturday, September 24th, 2016 | Home of the Oppressed | 25 Comments
A Young Americans for Freedom chapter meeting at the University of Kansas erupted into shouts and chaos Thursday when students from outside of the club barged in to protest a remark by the group’s president.
The disruption took place in response to a video that student Micha Cox posted on Facebook earlier this week claiming that she was harassed while walking home because she is a transgender.
Students then arranged a “Stand with ME” event to take place on September 27 to stand “in solidarity against the injustices that continue to happen in this country.”
Gabriel Lepinski, the chairman of the YAF chapter, then shared the event page with group members, saying, “this is why this group is so important. Facts don’t care about your feelings, even if you shout them as loudly as you can on wescoe beach”(a central location on campus where students come together to meet).
Following that exchange, many of the students involved with the Stand with ME event showed up at the second YAF meeting of the semester, three of whom were invited after asking how to attend, to which Lepinski responded by asking only that they “bring an open mind and respect everyone there.”
Lepinski says he welcomed these students for a discussion, but “it dissolved into them arguing with us for being white supremacists because we are white.”
“I don’t study in the library because I don’t feel comfortable with people always wondering what my gender identity is and how I express myself, and I don’t feel comfortable being in classrooms where I am supposed to speak as a transhuman and as a queer person as all queer people,” one student whined. “That shows you that there is a problem with this institution about there not being—that these students are not being taught that they are supposed to create safe spaces.”
Cox, who was also present for the conversation, declared emphatically that “safe spaces are a necessity” and making clear that she would brook no dissent on the matter.
“It’s not a question. It’s not for you to say. It’s not for anyone else to say. Safe spaces are necessary because the institution that we’re at is not a safe space in its entirety,” she claimed. “We have to carve out places and fight for places that we feel safe because not only will we get harassed, we’ll be murdered, we’ll be all this stuff and discriminated against because we have to do that. It’s not because we want to.”
Posted by Christopher Johnson | Saturday, September 24th, 2016 | Presidential Election | 81 Comments
The Washington Post lets “conservative Christian” Erick Erickson use a considerable amount of its column space in order to thank God that he is not as other men are:
I realize saying Clinton’s candidacy is, in my view, “anti-American” offends some or comes off as hyperbolic, but I think her candidacy is fundamentally anathema to and in opposition to basic, historic American values. I believe the founders of this country recognized individual liberty as negative liberty. It was not what individuals could do if government helped them that made this country great. Rather, it was what individuals could do if government left them alone.
Clinton’s vision of a leviathan nanny state runs counter to those ideals. She would expand the government, engage the government in social experimentation and advance the agenda of the sexual revolution against the church. I am under no delusions. With Clinton as president, the church in this country will be in for a difficult time, besieged from the outside. The forces of Mordor will be fully on the march.
With Clinton, the Supreme Court will fall into the hands of the left for a generation at least. The devastation to our social fabric will know no end. Trading in the idea of negative liberty, Clinton and a left-wing Supreme Court will pursue expansionist federal policies and concepts of positive liberty that advance the individual prurient interests of those who behave deviantly against the church in ways the founders would not have anticipated and no rational person would think wise. But Clinton as president will mean the insane have taken over the asylum.
This is where the “but” goes.
The American spirit eschews the idea of a strong man in Washington fixing all our problems. We are supposed to be against the imposition of values set by Washington and instead should embrace our heterogeneity as a people. Not only does Trump not do that, but his views pervert the liberal order of things as much as Clintonian illiberalism. Clinton offers neither safety nor freedom and Trump offers safety at the expense of freedom. While I see Clinton as having no virtue, I see Trump corrupting the virtuous and fostering hatred, racism and dangerous strains of nationalism.
Of course you do.
More importantly, while I think Clinton will do long-term damage to the country, I believe Trump will do far more damage to the church, which must be my chief priority. A Clinton administration may see the church besieged from the outside, but a Trump administration will see the church poisoned from within.
When I see Christians defining deviancy down to justify a political decision, I see a real problem for the church. When I see Christians saying we have license to choose bad men because God chose bad men, I see the sparks of apostasy. Many of my friends have turned themselves over to the anger Trump displays. I see friends on Twitter in meltdown, tweeting profanity at others, spending their time on radio attacking friends by name for refusing to yield. That is not healthy. But not only is it not healthy, it reeks of desperation.
Hey, kids, what time is it? It’s time to put the Lord our God to the test.
The level of fear many of my friends have toward what a Clinton administration may bring has turned to desperation and desire for a protector. But we already have one and neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39)
So many pastors who email me to beg me to reconsider and so many others who write do so because they think this is the last best chance to get this nation right. They think we will turn a corner after which we cannot turn back. While I concede they may be right, what I see is a level of desperation causing them to place their trust in one strong man instead of God. And, in truth, I do not concede they are right, but have concluded we are already past the point of redemption when the best either party can do is offer up Clinton or Trump. The seriousness and virtue of the voter is in the grave already and my Christian brethren for Trump yearn for an idolized past that never existed in a future that is not theirs, but God’s, to shape.
After all, Trump’s a really bad guy and stuff.
This is the inerrant word of God and Christians are choosing to ignore it because they have convinced themselves they are not electing a priest, but a president.
We’re…um…not electing a priest, Erick.
Therefore they have segregated the commands of their faith from the desires for themselves. I cannot bifurcate my faith in that way. I cannot in good conscience support anyone who bears the name of brother when he is unrepentant of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard or swindler.
But you don’t understand. While Hillary Clinton
will may maniacally destroy as much of the Christian church as she possibly can and probably will, with her Supreme Court choices, be allowed to get away with it, the election of Donald Trump will result in Christianity being WIPED FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT!! AAAAAAAUUUUUGGGHH!!
That I see so many Christians justifying Trump’s immorality, defining deviancy down, and turning to anger and despondency about the future tells me I cannot in good faith support Trump because his victory would have lasting, damaging consequences for Christianity in America. We harm our witness by embracing the immoral, unrepentant strong man. We harm our American virtue by buying into the idea that one man can make America great again. Further, we risk losing Donald Trump’s soul for the sake of our selfishness.
Lastly, for those who compare Trump to Cyrus, God never asked his people to support Cyrus’s cause, only to accept him as their ruler. God never asks his people to choose between the lesser of two evils. God uses all men, from pharaoh to Trump. And he can do so without making Christians endorse the person’s sins. God did not tell the Jews to throw open the gates of Jerusalem for Nebuchadnezzar. God did that himself. God shut the door of the ark and brought the rain and dried again the land. He holds the entire universe in the palm of his hand. God can see us through all things if we aren’t so busy pretending his will and exercising pretended divine authority. His will be done. If God wants Trump in the White House, he does not need me. To think otherwise is to think God is not God.
Or to believe that you don’t take the words of God Incarnate anywhere near as seriously as you think you do. Again with the putting the Lord your God to the test; what’s up with that, Erick?
I have two major problems with Erickson’s piece (actually way more than two but I like to leave some meat on the kill for the rest of the herd to devour). The first is this.
“God never asks his people to choose between the lesser of two evils,” Ricky? First of all, where in the Bible did you read that? Second of all, even if I conceded you the point, it only means that you and I have been doing Christianity wrong.
Because “lesser of two evils” is how life works on this side of Heaven, jackass. Do you think that I loved the idea of voting for Ford, Bush I, Dole, Bush II, McCain or Romney? The ONLY reason I voted for any of those men was because the possibility of electing a Democrat to the presidency was, is and probably will be until Christ returns, too horrible to contemplate.
Which brings up my most serious objection. Who’d you vote for in 2008, Erick? I assume it was McCain who was on his second wife and, as far as I know, has never repented of his adultery.
I guess you went for Romney in 2012 even though his “conservative principles” were thinner than Trump’s are now. Dude, that stiff used to proudly march in homosexual “pride” parades and call himself pro-
abortionchoice. Never mind the fact that the guy wasn’t even a Christian at all, Ricky.
Yet here we are in 2016 and “conservative Christians” like Erick Erickson SUDDENLY get the spiritual vapors over the Christian street cred of the GOP candidate and clutch their pearls while collapsing on their fainting couches at the prospect of actually voting for him. The spiritual meat on a candidate’s bones SUDDENLY makes all the difference in the world.
Seems a tad hypocritical.
Let me spell it out for you. In two more months, the United States will
select the Presiding Bishop of the United States of America. We will pick this country’s First Civil Servant.
And that’s all we’ll be doing.
In the meantime,
Drama Queen Erick, if you should happen to see this, you might want to read the Bible quote that is the title of this post. Spoiler alert but Our Lord never much cared for ostentatious public piety.
Posted by Bill (not IB) | Friday, September 23rd, 2016 | Hypocrites Unlimited | 41 Comments
Gosh, you gotta love California, and the folks who lead the way for those plebes and ignorati in the rest of the USA that haven’t a clue about the proper way to approach life.
And, how joyous to note the extent of hypocrisy by our “betters” on the Left Coast, which serves to provide direction to one and all in the remaining 49 – do what you want, and to hell with everyone else.
I just put up a post on how California, in the ongoing quest to make sure that all environmentally offensive behaviors are properly controlled, will henceforth be regulating bovine flatulence. (Gotta wonder – will there be a quota of “x” number of farts per day per cow; or will it be “volume” based?)
Anyways, it’s clear that the environment is important to Californians.
But – someone didn’t get the message:
Seems as though a homeowner in the Beverly Hills/Bel Air area used 11,800,000 gallons of water in one year – while California is in the midst of a massive drought.
That’s right – nearly 12 MILLION gallons of water in one year.
But remember, the folks out there in California are our betters – they set the evironmental examples that every else is expected to follow.
I wonder just how much water it takes to fill “the cement pond”?