#WalkAway from Corruption

I want to talk a bit about the revelations about the Biden family this week, and will under the fold.

But first I’d very much like you to watch this video. This a young woman’s walk away story and she is very impressive. Yes, the video is a bit long, but that also means it’s pretty thorough.

I’ve said many times that my dad, while actually pretty conservative, was a New Dealer, and I cannot fault why he was and was probably right to be. But I was also right to walk away from the Democrats clean back in High School because they just did not make sense in my world. Only in the reign of Obama, however, have I come to believe the Republican Party may well be America’s deliverance once again, but only if we conservatives force them to be.

Here’s the video

See what I mean, this is powerful stuff, I think, for any Democrat who still has a residual ability to think for themself.


OK, on to Biden et. al. The NY Post (one of the very few newspapers who retain any credibility whatsoever) broke a story on Wednesday about the corruption emanating from Joe Biden’s family. It is based on a copy of a computer hard drive found by a Maryland computer repairman and turned over to the FBI last year. One of the very interesting questions raised is just what the FBI has been doing with it for almost a year, or was it just used as a seat cushion. I suspect many of us know the answer to that.

It is seemingly pretty damning about Hunter’s activities in Ukraine and China. To me, it looks like corroboration more than anything we haven’t already suspected. But it is interesting that supposedly Joe required his family to kick back 50% of their ill-gotten gains which makes the Mafia look like pikers. Like I said, very interesting but nothing much all that new. And in fact, Biden’s campaign hasn’t denied it so much as attempted to spin it.

But the real story here is that Twitter suspended the Post and removed the Tweets associated with the story, suspended the Editor of the Post, suspended the official Trump campaign site,  locked White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany’s account, and blocked links to the official US Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans on the matter.

Facebook while somewhat more measured has also restricted access to the material.

Senator Ted Cruz’s questions are appropriate,

1. Who made the decision to prevent users from sharing this story? On what basis did they make that decision?

2. When was the New York Post made aware of Twitter’s decision and what process was afforded to it to contest the censorship?

3. Has Twitter prevented the New York TimesWashington Post, or any other major news outlet from posting its own reporting? If so, when?

4. If Twitter did not prevent Buzzfeed from sharing its reporting on the Steele dossier or the New York Times reporting on President Trump’s tax returns, please explain a politically neutral principle for why the reporting is treated differently?

5. Has Twitter ever restricted a story published by a major news outlet about Donald J. Trump during his four years as President of the United States?

6. Have Twitter or any of its employees involved in the decision to censor this reporting been in contact in any capacity with the Biden-Harris campaign or any of its representatives regarding this reporting or the allegations contained therein?

Meanwhile, Senator Josh Hawley  Tweeted this:

Once again, the coverup is poised to do more damage to the perpetrators than the alleged crime(s).

If we hold the Senate, and/or take the House, which is our part in curbing this corrupt nonsense, then the Article 230 status of big digital media is in play, and they are likely to lose, being held to the standards of publishers, and likely convicted of election interference on a scale that Russia and China have never even dreamed of.

It’s an ill wind …

Time to Change Models

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey testifies before the House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on Twitter’s algorithms and content monitoring on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., September 5, 2018. REUTERS/Chris Wattie – RC1D5C3E3B60

When we talk about our freedoms, the ones enshrined in the Bill of Rights are critical ones that ensure the rest, and they are all interdependent. The second does defend the rest, but so does the first, and the seventh and so on. It’s an integral whole, none of which are subject to negotiation.

That said, they do apply in law only to the government, the prohibit the government from doing certain things. In themselves, they do not prohibit private entities from doing those same things. But they hold up the ideal.

A century or so ago, a system was set up, and yes, Theodore Vail had considerable to do with it, that the US Government wouldn’t interfere with certain monopolistic practices of the Bell Companies, and in return, they would strive to supply affordable, universal service. It worked quite well for bringing central station telephone service to even the remotest part of the nation -with an agreed tweak here and there.

But the other thing about the phone company is that they simply did not care what you said on their lines. You could attempt the overthrow of the president, you could threaten to kill those attempting to overthrow the president whatever, the phone company did not care. It was (is actually) a common carrier, if you had the money for the service, it would carry the message, no questions asked.

Now the government, with due process involving some of those amendments we spoke of above might record and use your statements in a court of law, but the key phrase is due process and government. Nobody ever got disconnected by Northwestern Bell for saying something the CEO didn’t like on the phone.

So why this history lesson? Some lessons have seemingly been lost. Ashe Schow in The Daily Wire tells us:

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey said in an interview last week that the company could no longer “afford to take a neutral stance anymore.”

He made this statement after being asked by podcaster Sam Harris why Twitter’s bans and suspensions always seem to “reliably land[s] on one side of the political divide.”

He pointed out that progressive feminist Megan Murphy – who is no friend to conservatives – was banned for tweeting that “Men are not women” and asking, “How are transwomen not men? What is the difference between men and transwomen?” yet unapologetic anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan is still allowed on the platform.

“I don’t believe that we can afford to take a neutral stance anymore. I don’t believe that we should optimize for neutrality,” Dorsey said immediately.

Later in the podcast, Dorsey mentioned the Murphy ban again, saying, “The case you brought up. I’m not sure what was behind that, but I certainly don’t believe it was that one tweet.” He added that most people who are punished by the platform were repeat offenders.

Dorsey, according to NewsBusters, also dodged a question about the First Amendment. Harris had asked him why Twitter couldn’t just ban actual violent speech, but allow all other forms of speech, even those many vehemently disagree with. Dorsey said Twitter’s policies follow “the spirit of” the First Amendment.

Read the rest but you get the gist of it. Twitter itself is taking sides.

US law has assumed that Twitter Facebook, Google, all the others, are like the phone company, simple carriers of information, common carriers that if you pay the fare, will carry the message. It’s a good proven model, but it is inaccurate. Dorsey just denied again that his company is a common carrier, and he’s right, it is selectively choosing messages it is willing to carry from chosen clients. That’s OK too, but it is a different model.

It’s the model of the editorial page of any newspaper, they can print what they want, supporting their opinion. It’s also the model we use here, I’m not required to be fair or balanced, this blog is basically my opinion, what news is here I try to make accurate, but no guarantees.

But there’s another factor here, Bell Tel as a common carrier has no responsibility for the messages they carry. The New York Times is responsible for every word printed on its editorial page.

And so it is time for the lawfare to begin. Doxxing people? – Twitter’s at fault, Threatening public figures? Twitter dunnit. On and on. Time to break these self-righteous protectors of snowflakes, soy boys, and other so-called people that oppose American freedom.

And you know, I suspect the world will be a better place when we have destroyed them, and their owners.

Get Woke, Go Broke.

The title is stolen from a commenter at Ace’s because it is the perfect summary of the story. From Hot Air.

At what price does Twitter fame come? Corporate brands that offered virtue signaling to online mobs might discover that it’s more expensive than they thought. A new Morning Consult survey shows that every major brand that disaffiliated themselves from the NRA has suffered overall damage to their standing with consumers:

After the Parkland, Fla., high school shooting, several prominent companies ended their businesses relationships with the National Rifle Association — and some are facing backlash in public opinion, according to a new poll.

Morning Consult survey of 2,201 U.S. adults conducted Feb. 23-25 found increases in negative views of businesses that severed ties with the NRA after consumers learned of them. The poll’s margin of error is plus or minus 2 percentage points.

MetLife Inc., the insurance giant that ended a discount for NRA members last week, had a 45 percent favorable rating, compared to a 12 percent unfavorable rating, before survey participants were informed of that move. After learning of it, respondents with an unfavorable view of the company doubled to 24 percent, while its favorability rating was unchanged.

The chart’s left column shows the overall impact

All of these companies did get a boost from Democrats, but it turns out that it’s not enough to offset the overall damage to their reputations for tossing the NRA under the bus. That’s even more remarkable considering that only 14% of the sample had NRA members in their households. There is a distinct partisan split on this question, with that number rising to 23% among Republican respondents and only 8% for Democrats. Still, the relatively low numbers of NRA membership fall far below the backlash shown overall to these corporate moves.

On the other hand, 42% of all households in the survey own a firearm, including 28% of Democrats and 42% of independents; over half of all Republicans surveyed have a firearm in the house (55%). Twenty-one percent of all Democrats surveyed had more than three firearms in the house (38% of Republicans), showing that gun ownership is not partisan nor is enthusiasm for firearm ownership. A bigger differentiator is geography; only 15% of all urban respondents own more than three firearms, while 41% of all rural respondents do.

What about the millennials that these companies tried to woo this week with their virtue-signaling? Well, 43% of respondents below 30 years of age report having firearms in their households, roughly the same percentage as the other age demos, and 24% report having more than three of them. Twenty-one percent report that their household includes at least one member of the NRA, a higher percentage than any other age demo. They are more likely to want corporations to take public stances on social issues, but only slightly so when combining “very important” to “somewhat important,” and they’re slightly lessinterested corporate takes on political issues.

And when it comes to gun control, they turn out to be less interested than other age demos, too:

More at the link, but it seems to me there is a very old saying that applies here. “Shoemaker, stick to your last.”

The point of a corporation is to make money for the shareholders, anything that intentionally detracts from that is malfeasance by the management of the firm, and the employees bear the brunt of the cost. That is one reason why I tend to be slow with boycotts, but I’ve reached my limit, and these companies that intentionally insult my beliefs, and my fights, will have to do without my trade. For most of them, that’s an easy decision, I have no reason to deal with them in the foreseeable future. But they are no longer on my list of acceptable vendors.

From what I read, I’m not the only one, either. I wouldn’t be all that much happier if they were coming out in support of the NRA, by the way. If it’s in their interest to support the organization, fine, like say, Colt, for example, but if it’s just a generic corporation, well, why are you doing this? Yes, it is different for a company wholly owned by an individual (or family), it is quite appropriate for their organization to reflect their beliefs. While a corporation is (and has to be) a person for legal purposes, it is a limited thing. General Electric is not a citizen with a right to vote.

Best we keep it that way.

Trumping the Media

Joe Katzman recently wrote an article for The Daily Caller and it is outstanding. Did you ever wonder why our knowledge and logical arguments never win against the left? Well here is your answer, as well as the answer to why Twitter is essential to the President winning for us. Enjoy!

Try this on for size:

People often take public positions in an attempt to increase their social status.

If you’ve been in a corporate setting, or settings with certain friends, I don’t need to offer further examples of this idea. You’ve seen it happen, and you also know that you need to be “reading the room” at all times before you speak and act. Failure costs status. People notice this dynamic, and act accordingly.

I didn’t say it was an ideal state of affairs. But a truly rational person must notice reality. My friend and his wife are picking up on a “we’re higher status than you” signal, and it’s part of the reason they’re so upset.

Macro examples also abound:

Do you really think it’s a coincidence that leftism and its “Diversity Pokemon Points” amount to a full caste system?

Do you have any doubt about The left’s hatred for those who will not stay in their assigned status?

Yes, it is as juvenile as mean girls in junior high, but you know we all play this game some if we want to get ahead in life.

Maybe that’s because American public education is now a 20-year Milgram Experiment. Where the meta-message inside political correctness is to override your own judgement, in favor of deliberately-shifting judgements from people with higher status.

These aren’t accidents. They’re clues.

Leftism isn’t a policy machine or an economic machine. Its economic results would tell you that much in a hurry. But the machine keeps running. Which means it must work for something. The correct question is: in what way does it work?

Analysis: Leftism is a status machine. A very, very successful status machine. Conservatives have lost status battle after status battle, often because they fought it as a policy battle. It rarely is.

That’s conservatism’s most consistent and most damaging mistake.

President Trump’s systematic thrashing of the leftist media is the example that illustrates the theory.

Conservatives complained about the media for a long time. Aristotle’s dialectic approach, against people uninterested in truth. Net effect? Very low. Sad!

So let’s apply what we’ve learned.

Why do the media have power? Because they have social status with ordinary people. […]

And in truth, that is all they have. I was in my early twenties (that’s a while ago) when I learned that if I knew anything about anything the media wrote about, the media would be wrong, it has gotten much worse since.

Trump also acts in ways that cause journalists to fulfill his pre-suasion labeling. He makes “outrageous” statements, which many people outside the Beltway Bubble agree with. Those statements receive over-the-top media attacks, which make his enemies look ridiculous. Then events swiftly show that Trump had a point. Trump rubs it in, using the media’s own “Fake News” term against them and pouncing on every sloppy and dishonest mistake. As a final topper, Trump makes the dishonest media a focus during every massive rally. Which strengthens his out-grouping effect among participants and viewers.

He uses ridicule and lèse majesté, not bended knee and appeals — note that subordinating word — to logical argument.

The result?

American belief in the credibility of their news media is now at about 32 percent. That’s the lowest ever polled, and an 8 percent drop from the lowest point of the 2008-2015 period. The media has lost audience, and a lot of power. When Vogue tried to damage Melania by ripping her wardrobe, activists promptly made memes from a photo of the weird-looking critic. The attack instantly lost its power.

Facebook has tried to fight these trend lines by flagging items as “fake news.” Recently, the social media giant decided to stop. Too many people sought out flagged articles. Or, put another way: In many circles, the mainstream media’s status has become negative.

If you thought those memes, like the ones we rung most weekends, are just for fun, now you know why that while they are fun, bigly, they have a real purpose. I’m a logical thinking guy, I couldn’t do what the President does on Twitter, or those memes, for that matter, but I can laugh at them and say Yep, it is so.

And so, now is the time for us to in the words of the famous quote:

To crush your enemies. See them driven before you.

And to hear the lamentations of their women.

Even, maybe especially, the male ones.

 

Land of the Formerly Free

British police stand guard at the entrance to the US Air Force base at RAF Mildenhall, Suffolk, Britain December 18, 2017. REUTERS/Chris Radburn

A sad one today, that I hope will anger our European readers, it surely would in America. From The Daily Caller via The Daley Gator.

Northumbria Police in Britain warned online users that anyone who posts “offensive” and “potentially criminal” comments about grooming gangs will be tracked down and prosecuted.

The police force launched an investigation on Facebook comments posted to its Facebook page in response to stories about the Operation Shelter scandal. During the scandal, white British girls were groomed and sexually abused by gangs made up of mostly Muslim Pakistani men in Newcastle. 18 men were convicted over the sex crimes.

So that tells us plainly that if you are in Britain and you call a Muslim a Muslim and/or you refer to the government especially the police not doing their jobs and covering up that fact, you will be prosecuted. Not the kind of thing a free country does.

According to Chronicle Live and Breitbart, police reviewed every comment on the page after a member of the public complained that the posts made references to the convicted criminals’ race and religion—two of which were then recorded as racially aggravated public order offenses.

The police decided that there were eight comments that required action and have since tracked down six people responsible for posts “deemed to be offensive and potentially criminal.”

The story goes on to state that they all are remorseful. Well, I suppose I would be as well, if I had a police constable standing on my doorstep. Not that this is new, back in 2013 I wrote about a Baptist preacher in Norwich who dared to hand out Christian tracts at Norwich’s gay pride parade. He too was threatened very seriously with prosecution. You can read about it here, including documents.

While many of the groomers’ sex crimes against young girls were, by their own admissions, racially-motivated, Judge Penny Moreland allowed the convicts to receive lesser sentences because she believed the victims were targeted “not because of their race, but because they were young, impressionable, naïve and vulnerable.

So, even if the judge was correct, and these crimes were not racially motivated, which she is not by the perpetrators own words, because you are young, impressionable, naïve, and vulnerable, not to mention a working-class white, you are no longer equal under the law. Well, that seems to me to be what she explicitly said.

By the way, the grooming in Rotheringham, and elsewhere is still going on, in the very sight of the British police and government. Quite a few elsewheres, in fact, if what I read is true.

Note that I am referring to the government here, which is so corrupt that it is afraid to do its basic job, providing for the common defense, for fear that someone will call it racist. Well, you know what, the way it is selectively enforcing the law is, you got it, racist.

There was an article published yesterday, that said that without the Constitution, the United States would become “a sh*thole”. The author has much right in that assertion, and the proof is Britain.

Things are, of course, even worse in Germany, but that is not any great surprise, is it?

What was it that that old white Brit, Thomas Jefferson wrote one hot and muggy day in Philadelphia? Oh yeah, this.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Too bad that Her Majesty’s Government has forgotten their heritage, for those words stirred, in Britain, no less than in what would become America, fully a third of the population, including Burke, William Pitt the Elder, and Charles James Fox to support the colonies in Parliament. May they once again stir the hearts of freedom-loving Britons.

If I’m honest, if they don’t I foresee a time when Britain will be just another slave state, or in the current cant, a sh*thole, because that is the direction they are going.

The Week in Pictures, and a Tweet too!

Welp, this happened. From AoSHQ

Then this did.

Scott Dworkin’s Twitter bio reads:

Co-Founder @TheDemCoalition. #AMJoy on MSNBC Contributor. I help lead #TheResistance. Obama Alum.

About the normal of level of intelligence in the blue checkmark mafia. To be fair though, he wasn’t the only one fooled. We’ve gotten to the point that anything is credible if it supports your own views. Well, I haven’t, but the demonrats and never-Trumpers (BIRM) have.

I’ve got a feeling that Wolff’s book is just about as credible.

USS Al Gore

As usual, mostly PowerLine and Bookworm. Have a good day and a happy New Year. And yes, a Good Epiphany.

%d bloggers like this: