Progressives Are The Modern Puritans

Progressives Are The Modern Puritans, by Maureen Dowd.

After I interviewed Nancy Pelosi a few weeks ago, The HuffPost huffed that we were Dreaded Elites because we were eating chocolates and — horror of horrors — the speaker had on some good pumps.

Maureen Dowd, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer at Dowd’s party in Washington

Then this week, lefty Twitter erected a digital guillotine because I had a book party for my friend Carl Hulse, The Times’s authority on Capitol Hill for decades, attended by family, journalists, Hill denizens and a smattering of lawmakers, including Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Susan Collins.

I, the daughter of a D.C. cop, and Carl, the son of an Illinois plumber, were hilariously painted as decadent aristocrats reveling like Marie Antoinette when we should have been knitting like Madame Defarge.

Yo, proletariat: If the Democratic Party is going to be against chocolate, high heels, parties and fun, you’ve lost me. And I’ve got some bad news for you about 2020.

The progressives are the modern Puritans. The Massachusetts Bay Colony is alive and well on the Potomac and Twitter.


There are some good things and some bad things about this article. First, I don’t agree with Maureen that Trump did anything that would merit impeachment. Even Mueller testified that the investigation was not impeded. Mueller was given a lot of documents by Trump and even allowed his WH lawyer to testify. …

Second, the only person who colluded with the Russians was Hillary. The dossier that she bought and paid for came from Russian sources through Christopher Steele.

It is now time to investigate the investigators. We may find that this whole thing was dangerous and illegal. Obama authorized our own government to spy on a political opponent. This whole thing was an attempted coup. Let’s also not forget the gross increase in unmaskings that happened under Obama. This is the socialist way of doing things. American citizens have to deal with an all-powerful police state.

On the plus side, Maureen has a theme here about the nutcase progressives and what they are doing to their own party that has become too radical to be acceptable. Puritans, indeed.

hat-tip Charles

Baltimore Ambush: Trump forces Democrats to defend the indefensible, again

Baltimore Ambush: Trump forces Democrats to defend the indefensible, again, by Monica Showalter.

President Trump has done it again.

What’s he doing? Forcing a new narrative as election time kicks in, making Democrats have to address the reality that they have been in power for decades in one-party blue districts and cities, and they have left those districts smoking ruins, rat-infested hellholes, “places no human being would want to live,” complete with live-action shots. The video of the Baltimore resident decrying the Democratic area’s neglect is absolutely deadly. …

What it shows is Trump not only means to ‘win’ against his opponents, he intends to annihilate them. His election game is on and he’s not playing beanbag. He using the same powerful tactics he was able use on Pelosi and her bickering ‘squad’ which had the effect of forcing Pelosi to defend the indefensible and making Rep. Ilhan Omar the face of the Democratic Party. Now he’s making urban decay the second face of the Democratic Party. His poll numbers went up after the first one. Count on them going up again after this.

The Left’s Broad, Bigoted Politics of Vilification

The Left’s Broad, Bigoted Politics of Vilification, by Steve Cortes.

I appeared on CNN Monday night to discuss the firestorm over the president’s caustic tweets last weekend criticizing the four most progressive members of the House of Representatives. I deemed the tweets illogical and shrill, and said so on Twitter and on Anderson Cooper’s show. I also pointed out that the overreaction from Democratic politicians and their media allies revealed a hysterical attempt to castigate the president as prejudiced. I cited the incredibly incendiary accusation of my CNN colleague Wajahat Ali who retweeted an article and its headline: “Trump is a racist. If you still support him, so are you.”

Such an immense and broad condemnation of tens of millions of Americans represents, itself, an intensely bigoted tactic. After all, utterly dismissing wide swaths of our society just because they do not share prescribed political preferences represents a wholesale effort to delegitimize and dehumanize; it’s a classic tactic to “otherize,” to borrow a term from the left. Paradoxically, liberals like Ali unveil their own inherent and systemic bigotry by belittling their fellow citizens, merely on the grounds of policy differences. Rather than engage and debate and persuade, the intolerant left chooses the politics of vilification. Their rash judgment deems the “unwashed rabble” of our America First movement as deplorables and racists, simpletons unworthy of real consideration.

When I pointed out this clear chasm between their professed tolerance and real-world bigotry, Mr. Ali admonished me, stating that white Trump supporters “will never love you … no matter how hard you try to be the Latin face of Trump, they will never love you.” This CNN commentator and New York Times writer shamelessly employed an old racist trope, essentially calling me an “Uncle Tom” for daring to be brown and pro-America First. His demeaning comment attempted to remove me of my agency and castigate me as some supplicant intent on pleasing my white betters. …

Many minorities like me gravitate to President Trump not because he speaks delicately or because he never offends us (or others), but rather because he has become the political warrior we need. He fights the status quo at home and abroad and demands that the interests of working-class Americans – many of whom are black and brown – take priority. Thus, he works for secure borders to protect minority citizens from illegal alien crime and unfair workforce competition, and restructures trade deals that had decimated manufacturing in America. He has also unleashed the power of small business through tax and regulatory relief, a particularly powerful propellant for our highly entrepreneurial Hispanic communities. This growth explains why Hispanic wage growth now vastly exceeds the national average, a stark contrast to the slow-growth Obama era. Such real-world, tangible improvements easily eclipse the false promises and lofty rhetoric the Democrats have directed toward minorities for decades.

Trump tells black lawmaker to clean up ‘disgusting, rat and rodent infested’ district

Trump tells black lawmaker to clean up ‘disgusting, rat and rodent infested’ district. By Reuters.

President Donald Trump hit out at a prominent African-American critic on Saturday, calling him a “brutal bully” who should concentrate on cleaning up his “disgusting, rat and rodent infested” Baltimore district rather than criticizing the work of U.S. immigration officers on the Mexican border.

Trump’s target in a series of early morning tweets was U.S. Representative Elijah Cummings, Democratic chairman of the House of Representatives Oversight Committee, who has called Trump a racist and sharply criticized his immigration policies.

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded to Trump by calling Cummings a champion for civil rights and economic justice and added in a tweet: “We all reject racist attacks against him and support his steadfast leadership.”

On Thursday, the committee voted 23-16 along party lines to allow Cummings to issue subpoenas to White House officials, including Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner, deepening a probe into potential violations of government record-keeping law.

It’s escalating. Yes, Baltimore is a rat-infested failure of a once-great city, and Trump didn’t mention race. But Baltimore is largely black now, so the dog-whistling is fairly audible.

Naturally the left are screaming that Trump is a racist for saying this.

Ahem. What about all the anti-white dog whistling we’ve seen from the left over the last two decades? For example, the left/media say that “Black Lives Matter” is wonderful and good, but that “All Lives Matter” and “White Lives Matter” are racist and evil. Quotas, diversity, special economic privileges for non-whites, incessant criticism of white civilization, white religion, white history, white anything — all came from the left.

The left started this, with their electoral strategy of grabbing all the non-white votes. This inevitably led to anti-white racism, as they pandered to non-whites by race. (Feminism was the prototype.)

This point we are reaching was always inevitable, once the left started us down that fateful path. It seems that the non-left — led by ex-leftie Donald Trump of all people in the US, various nationalists in Europe, and by ex-leftie Mark Latham in Australia — is going to stand up to it at last. Now that whites are faced with not-so-distant demographic gloom, as the left throws open all white countries to everyone.


Say it, Republicans! Or just give it up: open borders is treason, the left is anti-white!

Say it, Republicans! Or just give it up: open borders is treason, the left is anti-white! By James Kirkpatrick.

Republicans still don’t know how to talk about race, identity and nation. Which is a problem, because, as an article in Axios recently bragged, “The single biggest threat to Republicans’ long-term viability is demographics.”

The repeating pattern: a Republican 1) says something 2) is accused of racial insensitivity 3) immediately grovels and offers concessions. The mostly white Republican base gets demoralized, the Cultural Marxist Left is emboldened, and the Overton Window shifts in the wrong direction. …

The solution is simple. But it requires a modicum of courage—one person with influence explicitly defending the right of Americans as Americans to defend their interests. For years, American leaders, including supposed “conservatives,” have been saying that anyone who believes in certain “ideas” is an American. Not surprisingly, current American political leaders are taking this to its logical conclusion and saying that America belongs to everyone in the world — not its citizens. As Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently declared, the country “belongs to everyone.”

But it doesn’t. It belongs to American citizens. And if American citizens can’t stake an exclusive claim to their own country, then they must admit they simply don’t have one anymore. And if that is the case, whites, like every other group, should collectively organize for their interests in this continental shopping mall masquerading as a nation-state. …

The excellent blogger The Z Man has accurately noted that whites are forever searching for an “external standard against which they can measure their preference.” “Only then can they declare that desire valid,” he wrote, “because it matches that standard. Whites no longer feel as if what they want is valid because they want it.”

Thus, conservative beliefs can only be defended if they are said by a black person, a Jewish person, a Hispanic person, etc. Many non-whites within the Conservative Movement have used this to their economic advantage and have lucrative careers preaching to white audiences at conservative gatherings. …

The solution is for Americans to speak as Americans explicitly in defense of American interests.

What is America? America is a majority-white nation created by Anglo settlers, built upon English legal customs and institutions, and speaking the English language. If it ceases to be these things, it ceases to be America.


Looks like the era of MLK has ended, and tribalism has returned.

One of the great achievements of white (aka European) civilization was that it manged to reduce tribalism to a whisper, to the enjoyment and prosperity of (nearly) all. This worked while whites were a clear majority in their own countries, and they welcomed modest numbers of talented members of other tribes into their midst. Sadly, the left launched a strategy of monopolizing non-white votes to gain power, which led to a creeping tide of anti-white racism. It is now being called, and it’s not clear which way this is going to go.

The Lessons of the Versailles Treaty

The Lessons of the Versailles Treaty, by Victor Davis Hanson.

In comparison to other treaties of the times, the Versailles accord was actually mild—especially by past German standards.

After the 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian war, a newly unified and victorious Germany occupied France, forced the French to pay reparations and annexed the rich Alsace-Lorraine borderlands.

Berlin’s harsh 1914 plans for Western Europe at the onset of World War I—the so-called Septemberprogramm—called for the annexation of the northern French coast. The Germans planned to absorb all of Belgium and demand payment of billions of marks to pay off the entire German war debt.

In 1918, just months before the end of the war, Germany imposed on a defeated Russia a draconian settlement. The Germans seized 50 times more Russian territory and 10 times greater the population than it would later lose at Versailles.

So, under the terms of the Versailles Treaty, the winning democracies were far more lenient with Germany than Germany itself had been with most of its defeated enemies.

No one denied that Germany had started the war by invading Belgium and France. Germany never met the Versailles requirements of paying fully for its damage in France and Belgium. It either defaulted or inflated its currency to pay reparations in increasingly worthless currency.

Versailles certainly failed to keep the peace. Yet the problem was not because the treaty was too harsh, but because it was flawed from the start and never adequately enforced. …


After the Treaty of Versailles, the victorious Allies of 1945 did not repeat the mistakes of 1919. They demanded an unconditional surrender from the defeated Nazi regime.

The Western Allies then occupied, divided and imposed democracy upon Germany. Troops stayed, helped to rebuild the country and then made it an ally.

In terms of harshness, the Yalta and Potsdam accords of 1945 were far tougher on the Germans than Versailles—and far more successful in keeping the peace.

Republican advertisment attacks the Squad

Republican advertisment attacks the Squad. Notice that it implicitly calls them out for racism and identity politics.

It’s going to be all about race. For two decades the left has built an electoral strategy around a coalition of the fringes and anti-white racism. Quotas! Special treatment! Diversity! Black Lives Matter! White civilization is racist, sexist, etc! White religion is bad!

Tolerant whites have looked on but said little. But now that political power and their future is being taken away by mass non-white  immigration in the US, the uncouth Trump is speaking up. Likewise Europe is finding nationalist leaders who are standing up to the racist tide.

The left trashed the politics of Martin Luther King and went tribal. They started this.

The catch-22, of course, is that to stand up to this sort of racism you look racist yourself. Recognizing white identity and celebrating or defending things white — just like blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Cubans, Somalis, Arab, and every other ethnic group — is indeed mildly racist. Need the media to keep on suppressing that impulse for whites:

Identity Politics and Labor in Australia

Identity Politics and Labor in Australia, by Mark Latham.

In political history, 2019 will be remembered as the year Labor lost the unlosable election due to wrong-headed tax policies. …

The clearest example of this process is in the Labor/Green embrace of identity politics, judging people by race, gender and sexuality. Poor people with the wrong skin colour (white), gender (male) and sexuality (straight) are automatically excluded from social justice consideration.

One only needs to visit a public housing estate in Western Sydney to know that straight white men are a big part of Australia’s underclass. Restructured out of manufacturing work and forced into welfare dependency, identity politics has no solution for their poverty. Even worse, it sneers at them as an example of ‘white male privilege’, creating enormous resentment among one of the most disadvantaged groups in society. Social justice never works well as a zero-sum game, when one disadvantaged group can only prosper at the expense of another.

Labor has lost the support of a generation of straight white men (perhaps a quarter of the electorate) who see their needs being wiped by the emergence of employment quotas, workplace discrimination and accusatory domestic violence propaganda aimed at them. That’s a massive constituency shedding, driving the ALP primary vote into the low 30s. …

The rise of identity politics has divided Australia into competing identity groups, making people less inclined to trust in the collective role of government and fair allocation of public resources. It’s been a social justice disaster that Labor should abandon immediately, returning the party to the principles of meritocracy.

The new Boris machine owes very little to Westminster

The new Boris machine owes very little to Westminster, by Fraser Nelson.

Until now, new Prime Ministers have always arrived in 10 Downing Street accompanied by the team they built around them in Parliament. But Boris Johnson is different. He is the creature of two Blair-era inventions: devolution and referendums. The team he is building around him in No. 10 is from City Hall and Vote Leave, where he was able to pioneer a new style of politics and government. …

He rejected the clannishness that infects Westminster, where loyalists are promoted (epitomised by David Cameron’s notorious chumocracy). Boris chose on talent alone: hence figures as diverse as Lynton Crosby, Munira Mirza and Kit Malthouse joined him in City Hall. He is doing the same in No. 10 and his various advisers will report to Sir Eddie Lister, his chief of staff. This might infuriate MPs, especially those who thought they’d follow their hastily-chosen chieftain into No. 10, but the clannish model has just been broken. …

The result of this will be to reject the old rules: that you govern, then at some stage switch to campaign mode. The Boris project is starting in campaign mode, and I doubt it will ever stop. This is one of Donald Trump’s innovations: never stop campaigning. To apply pressure to the insiders, appeal to the outside. …

And will it work? The odds against it are still huge: May wasted three years on a deal that Parliament would not and was never going to pass. To do a better job in a few weeks with an EU that prides itself on intransigence will be, to put it mildly, a challenge.

Supreme Court Gives Trump Go-Ahead to Fund the Wall

Supreme Court Gives Trump Go-Ahead to Fund the Wall, by Tyler O’Neil.

On Friday, the Supreme Court struck down a lower court order, allowing President Donald Trump to redirect military funds to build his wall on the southern border. In a 5-4 decision, the Court allowed Trump to redirect $2.5 billion in military construction funds for wall projects in California, Arizona, and New Mexico. …

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch ruled that Trump could proceed with redirecting the funds while litigation over the issue continues.

That’s less than 10% of the funds required.