NYT’s Version of FNC

nyt-2016_10_27After Mad Dog’s dustup with Newt, and amidst Mad Dog’s big league salary negotiations, the Liberal Establishment is wasting no time in trying to sway FNC to their liking.

From Breitbart:

In a piece exploring AT&T’s pending $85 billion acquisition of Time Warner, top media journalist and author Michael Wolff floats an interesting theory: namely, that if either former News Corp. COO Peter Chernin or current CNN chief Jeff Zucker don’t replace outgoing Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes, Zucker could be tapped by Rupert Murdoch’s sons to replace Roger Ailes atop Fox News.

Man, we are long overdue for FNC 2.0…. and/or a (gasp!) second conservative leaning cable news channel.


Where are thou, Breitbart TV?

Posted in MSM, NYT | Leave a comment

After November: George Packer

Writing in The New Yorker, which by definition means a liberal perspective, George Packer has a long piece with some interesting passages (“Hillary Clinton and the Populist Revolt: The Democrats lost the white working class. The Republicans exploited them. Can Clinton win them back?”).

Packer’s focus is on the White Working Class (WCC), but first he needs to humanize this abstraction, doing so by profiling one Mark Frisbie:

Americans like Mark Frisbie have no foundation to stand on; they’re unorganized, unheard, unspoken for. They sink alone. The institutions of a healthy democracy—government, corporation, school, bank, union, church, civic group, media organization—feel remote and false, geared for the benefit of those who run them. And no institution is guiltier of this abandonment than the political parties.

Of the failure of globalism’s cheerleaders:

Earlier this year, an economist named Branko Milanović published a book called “Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization.” It’s a progress report on the “system” that Friedman heralded. Milanović analyzes global economic data from the past quarter century and concludes that the world has become more equal—poor countries catching up with rich ones—but that Western democracies have become less equal. Globalization’s biggest winners are the new Asian middle and upper classes, and the one-per-centers of the West: these groups have almost doubled their real incomes since the late eighties. The biggest losers are the American and European working and middle classes—until very recently, their incomes hardly budged.

Of Super Zips, where most liberal elites have their abodes:

The moral superiority of élites comes cheap. Recently, Murray has done demographic research on “Super Zips”—the Zip Codes of the most privileged residents of New York, Washington, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. “Super Zips are integrated in only one way—Asians,” he said. “Blacks and Latinos are about as scarce in the Super Zips as they were in the nineteen-fifties.” Multiethnic America, with its tensions and resentments, poses no problem for élites, who can buy their way out. “This translates into a whole variety of liberal positions”—Murray mentioned being pro-immigration and anti-school choice—“in which the élite has not borne any of the costs.”

Of how HRC has gotten herself held hostage by her genuflection to the Coalition of the Fringes, and what the fallout of this might entail in further alienating the WWC:

If racial injustice is considered to be monolithic and unchanging—omitting the context of individual actions, white and black—the political response tends to be equally rigid: genuflection or rejection. Clinton’s constituency surely includes many voters who would welcome a nuanced discussion of race—one that addresses, for example, both drug-sentencing reform and urban crime. But identity politics breaks down the distinction between an idea and the person articulating it, so that before speaking up one has to ask: Does my identity give me the right to say this? Could my identity be the focus of a Twitter backlash? This atmosphere makes honest conversation very hard, and gives a demagogue like Trump the aura of being a truthteller. The “authenticity” that his followers so admire is factually wrong and morally repulsive. But when people of good will are afraid to air legitimate arguments the illegitimate kind gains power.

I recently spoke with the social scientist Glenn Loury, who teaches at Brown University. As he sees it, if race becomes an irreducible category in politics, rather than being incorporated into universal claims of justice, it’s a weapon that can be picked up and used by anyone. “Better watch out,” he said. “I don’t know how you live by the identity-politics sword and don’t die by it.” Its logic lumps everyone—including soon-to-be-minority whites—into an interest group. One person’s nationalism intensifies tribal feelings in others, in what feels like a zero-sum game. “I really don’t know how you ask white people not to be white in the world we’re creating,” Loury said. “How are there not white interests in a world where there are these other interests?”

Of the Burnhamesque eclipsing of a Left/Right schema towards an Up/Down schema:

In this way, red states and blue states—the color-coding scheme enshrined by the networks on the night of the 2000 Presidential election—continued to define the country’s polarization into mutually hateful camps.

The inadequacy of this picture became clear to me in Obama’s first term. During the Great Recession, I visited many hard-hit small towns, exurbs, rural areas, and old industrial cities, and kept meeting Americans who didn’t match the red-blue scheme. They might be white Southern country people, but they hated corporations and big-box stores as well as the federal government. They might have a law practice, but that didn’t stop them from entertaining apocalyptic visions of armed citizens turning to political violence. They followed the Tea Party, but, in their hostility toward big banks, they sounded a little like Occupy Wall Street, or vice versa. They were loose molecules unattached to party hierarchies—more individualistic than the Democrats, more antibusiness than the Republicans. What united them was a distrust of distant leaders and institutions. They believed that the game was rigged for the powerful and the connected, and that they and their children were screwed.

The left-versus-right division wasn’t entirely mistaken, but one could draw a new chart that explained things differently and perhaps more accurately: up versus down. Looked at this way, the élites on each side of the partisan divide have more in common with one another than they do with voters down below.

Of the Trump Train as part-and-parcel of what his happening across Europe:

The Trump phenomenon, which has onlookers in Europe and elsewhere agog at the latest American folly, isn’t really exceptional at all. American politics in 2016 has taken a big step toward politics in the rest of the world. The ebbing tide of the white working and middle classes in America joins its counterpart in Great Britain, the Brexit vote; Marine Le Pen’s Front National, in France; and the Alternative für Deutschland party, which has begun to threaten Angela Merkel’s centrist coalition in Germany. To Russians, Trump sounds like his role model, President Vladimir Putin; to Indians, Trump echoes the Hindu nationalism of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Even the radical nostalgia of Islamists around the Muslim world bears more than a passing resemblance to the longing of Trump supporters for an America purified and restored to an imagined glory. One way or another, they all represent a reaction against modernity, with its ceaseless anxiety and churn.

Of the risks elitist contempt towards the WWC brings:

At the same time, it isn’t possible to wait around for demography to turn millions of disenchanted Americans into relics and expect to live in a decent country. This election has told us that many Americans feel their way of life is disappearing. Perhaps their lament is futile—the world is inexorably becoming Thomas Friedman’s. Perhaps their nostalgia is misguided—multicultural America is more free and equal than the republic of Hamilton and Jefferson. Perhaps their feeling is immoral, implying ugly biases. But it shouldn’t be dismissed. If nearly half of your compatriots feel deeply at odds with the drift of things, it’s a matter of self-interest to try to understand why. Nationalism is a force that élites always underestimate—that’s been a lesson of the year’s seismic political events, here and in Europe. It can be turned to good or ill, but it never completely goes away. It’s as real and abiding as an attachment to family or to home. “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo,” Trump declared in his convention speech. In his hands, nationalism is a loaded gun, aimed not just at foreigners but also at Americans who don’t make the cut. But people are not wrong to want to live in cohesive communities, to ask new arrivals to become part of the melting pot, and to crave a degree of stability in a moral order based on values other than just diversity and efficiency. A world of heirloom tomatoes and self-driving cars isn’t the true and only Heaven.

From the piece’s concluding paragraph:

As [Hillary Clinton] ended our conversation in the hotel basement—she had to get to the evening’s fund-raiser—I asked how she could hope to prevail as President. She talked about reminding voters of “results,” and of repeating a “consistent story.” Then, as if she found her own words inadequate, she leaned forward and her voice grew intense. “If we don’t get this right, what we’re seeing with Trump now will just be the beginning,” she said. “Because when people feel that their government has failed them and the economy isn’t working for them, they are ripe for the kind of populist nationalist appeals that we’re hearing from Trump.”

Posted in Culture, Democrat Party, Identity Politics, Politics, Republican Party | Leave a comment

After November: Codevilla

Angelo Codevilla, whose 2010 book The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It is a contemporary update to ideas proposed Sam Francis as well as Alt-Right pioneer James Burnham, has a new, must-read column titled “After the Republic”. (Kmac has more here.)

From the bipartisan ruling class increasingly concentrating its power in D.C. comes an imperialism of sorts, one which defends itself vis-à-vis a rhetoric of ‘fake constitutionalism’:

Because Republicans largely agree with Democrats that they need not take seriously the founders’ Constitution, today’s American regime is now what Max Weber had called the Tsarist regime on the eve of the Revolution: “fake constitutionalism.” Because such fakery is self-discrediting and removes anyone’s obligation to restrain his passions, it is a harbinger of revolution and of imperial power.

Codevilla provides a litany of major cultural and political shifts since the 1960s which have led to our current existential crisis. Among them:

[B]ecause the ruling class blurs the distinction between public and private business, connection to that class has become the principal way of getting rich in America. Not so long ago, the way to make it here was to start a business that satisfied customers’ needs better than before. Nowadays, more businesses die each year than are started. In this century, all net additions in employment have come from the country’s 1,500 largest corporations. Rent-seeking through influence on regulations is the path to wealth…

Moreover, since the Kennedy reform of 1965, and with greater speed since 2009, the ruling class’s immigration policy has changed the regime by introducing some 60 million people—roughly a fifth of our population—from countries and traditions different from, if not hostile, to ours. Whereas earlier immigrants earned their way to prosperity, a disproportionate percentage of post-1965 arrivals have been encouraged to become dependents of the state. Equally important, the ruling class chose to reverse America’s historic practice of assimilating immigrants, emphasizing instead what divides them from other Americans. Whereas Lincoln spoke of binding immigrants by “the electric cord” of the founders’ principles, our ruling class treats these principles as hypocrisy. All this without votes or law; just power.

In terms of how the counterculture of the ‘60s is now the mainstream culture:

In short, precisely as the classics defined regime change, people and practices that had been at society’s margins have been brought to its center, while people and ideas that had been central have been marginalized.

With respect to domestic politics, Codevilla characterizes the greater of the Two Evils:

The consequences of empowering today’s Democratic Party are crystal clear. The Democratic Party—regardless of its standard bearer—would use its victory to drive the transformations that it has already wrought on America to quantitative and qualitative levels that not even its members can imagine. We can be sure of that because what it has done and is doing is rooted in a logic that has animated the ruling class for a century, and because that logic has shaped the minds and hearts of millions of this class’s members, supporters, and wannabes.

Consolidation of power is being cinched by debate-stifling, Orwellian tactics:

Under our ruling class, “truth” has morphed from the reflection of objective reality to whatever has “normative pull”—i.e., to what furthers the ruling class’s agenda, whatever that might be at any given time. That is the meaning of the term “political correctness,” as opposed to factual correctness.

The cumulative effect (among large blocs of whites – Ed.) is nothing short of a civics crisis:

Never before has such a large percentage of Americans expressed alienation from their leaders, resentment, even fear. Some two-thirds of Americans believe that elected and appointed officials—plus the courts, the justice system, business leaders, educators—are leading the country in the wrong direction: that they are corrupt, do more harm than good, make us poorer, get us into wars and lose them…

Codevilla’s jaw-dropping conclusion is quite ominous:

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.

Posted in Death of the West, Politics | Leave a comment

RIP: Kevin Meaney

This greatly underrated standup comedien has died at the age of 60.

Meaney’s career spanned 30 years. The father and native New Yorker had a small role as an executive in the 1988 film comedy “Big,” starring Tom Hanks, and helmed the CBS version of “Uncle Buck,” which ran just one season, from 1990 to 1991.

It was his first HBO special, in 1986, that launched his comedy career after he toiled doing standup in San Francisco and Boston. In 1987, he took his first turn on “The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson.” He also appeared as a guest on “Saturday Night Live” and on shows including those hosted by David Letterman, Oprah Winfrey and Conan O’Brien.


Posted in Culture | Leave a comment

Beck on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown

From BNN:

The Blaze founder Glenn Beck took to his Facebook page last Saturday to urge his followers to abandon support of Republican nominee Donald Trump, declaring that if such an action results in the election of Hillary Clinton, “so be it” because “[a]t least it is a moral, ethical choice.”

Beck’s latest missive was in response to the release of an 11-year-old hot-mic tape of Trump saying lewd things about women.

“If the consequence of standing against Trump and for principles is indeed the election of Hillary Clinton, so be it. At least it is a moral, ethical choice,” Beck wrote.

Posted in Politics | Leave a comment

Clinton News Network – Pt. 35,182

This is great. CNN always seems to have a skewed-left audience of ‘undecided voters’ in their focus groups. Is this the CNN hack simply transcribing back to the group what they cannot see and hear for themselves (?) in the room… or is the CNN hack coaching the group?

Posted in MSM, Politics | Leave a comment

Nationalist Sentiments Around the Globe

From a piece in Foreign Policy titled “The Developing World Thinks Hitler Is Underrated”:

In the West, Hitler is known above all as a practitioner of race-based genocide, the architect of the Holocaust. He is also remembered as the hypernationalist who, in the hope of expanding German power across all of Europe, and later the entire globe, plunged the world into the most destructive war in the history of mankind.

Yet in much of the developing world, where ignorance regarding the Holocaust and Hitler’s fantasies of world domination is rife, he is perceived less as a mass murderer and ideologue of global conquest than as a stern disciplinarian who addressed social ills in a briskly efficient manner. His is a legacy of “law and order,” not of horrific chaos and collapsed cities. Additionally, and crucially, in the non-Western world the name Hitler can connote “anti-imperialist rebel” due to the German leader’s nationalistic struggle against “Anglo-French-American-Zionist domination.”…

In Hitler’s own home ground, the West, rejecting this child of the Occident and his poisonous legacy goes hand in hand with a respect for human rights, racial diversity, and due process (which does not mean that these ideals are without their native detractors and potential saboteurs). Across much of the globe, though, openly expressed admiration for the Hitler legacy can be seen as just one more indication of the tenuousness of these social and political values in our modern world.

Posted in Alt-Right | Leave a comment

Hurricane Matthew vs. Slayer

One commenter notes: “I show this video to my foreign friends when they ask me what America is like.”

Posted in Humor | Leave a comment

Broaddrick’s Hell

Hearing the account directly from Juanita Broaddrick herself is so much more shocking.

The part where she describes running into HRC a few weeks later… is absolutely chilling.

Posted in Democrat Party | Leave a comment

Jones, Willey, & Broaddrick

Were there a media worth a dime, they would have assembled these 3 women for a collective interview years ago.

Posted in Democrat Party | Leave a comment