Leftists Targets Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s Home In D.C. Poster Campaign

Leftists Targets Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s Home In D.C. Poster Campaign. By Ian Miles Cheong.

AntiFa activists in Washington D.C. have put up posters with the home address of Tucker Carlson’s family….

The posters feature Carlson’s face blocked out by the AntiFa three-arrow symbol, his home address, the words “Block the Alt-Right,” and a description of Carlson as an “Influencer,” which reads: “Racist with a huge following and platform, uses it to promote racist dogwhistles.” …

In November 2018, a mob of AntiFa activists associated with Smash Racism DC, rallied outside his D.C. residence. They chanted the words “Tucker Carlson, we will fight. We know where you sleep at night!” Much like All Out DC, the organization posted his address on Twitter, and ordered him to leave town.

The left clearly views non-left media figures as political figures. So left media figures are too. In Australia, I’d nominate Tony Jones as a major left influencer.

A rape epidemic — by women?

A rape epidemic — by women? By Cathy Young, from 2014, reporting on a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on sexual and intimate violence in the United States.

If the CDC figures are to be taken at face value, then we must also conclude that, far from being a product of patriarchal violence against women, “rape culture” is a two-way street, with plenty of female perpetrators and male victims.

How could that be? After all, very few men in the CDC study were classified as victims of rape: 1.7 percent in their lifetime, and too few for a reliable estimate in the past year. But these numbers refer only to men who have been forced into anal sex or made to perform oral sex on another male.

Nearly 7 percent of men, however, reported that at some point in their lives, they were “made to penetrate” another person — usually in reference to vaginal intercourse, receiving oral sex, or performing oral sex on a woman. This was not classified as rape, but as “other sexual violence.”

And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being “made to penetrate” — either by physical force or due to intoxication — virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1 percent in 2010, and 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in 2011).

In other words, if being made to penetrate someone was counted as rape — and why shouldn’t it be? — then the headlines could have focused on a truly sensational CDC finding: that women rape men as often as men rape women.

Glenn Reynolds:

This shouldn’t be so surprising. Back in the old days, when talk of “rape” or “sexual assault” generally meant forcible penetration at the hands of a stranger, rape was unsurprisingly pretty much a male-committed crime.

But feminists pushed for a broader definition of rape, going beyond what Susan Estrich, in a very influential book, derisively called Real Rape, to encompass other forms of sexual coercion and intimidation. …

Unsurprisingly, when the definition of rape — or, as it’s often now called in order to provide less clarity, “sexual assault” — expands to include a lot more than behavior distinguished by superior physical strength, the incidence of rape goes up, and behavior engaged in by women is more likely to be included in the definition. (At juvenile detention centers nine out of 10 reporters of sexual assault are males victimized by female staffers.) …

With rape rates actually falling sharply, the current moral panic over campus rape seems more like political agitprop and mass hysteria than anything else. Like all such, this, too, will pass. But it will also do damage along the way.

Biden and Hillary: The eerie similarities between Joe’s 2020 bid and Clinton’s failed campaign

Biden and Hillary: The eerie similarities between Joe’s 2020 bid and Clinton’s failed campaign – Colin Reed (Fox News)

Image: Mark Stewart – US Dept. of State

With the far left’s — quite frankly insane policies of most of the US Presidential hopefuls — former V.P. Biden would seem the only candidate with a real chance of upending President Trump.

Colin Reed notes:

….the undeniable comparisons between Biden’s bid and the last failed Democratic candidate, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Reed continues:

The 1990s era culture of triangulation and a pro-business Democratic Party that Biden and Clinton thrived in have been replaced by a 2019 edition more focused on ideological purity and identity politics.

Biden bemoaning the good old days when people who disagreed could nonetheless work together is not what his voters want to hear right now. Anger and grievance populism are in, compromise is out.

Reed points out that much of Clinton’s demise as a candidate was her inability to hide clear corruption. Trump came in to “drain the swamp”.

Four years ago, using the levers of government to enrich the family foundation proved to be the scandal Hillary Clinton couldn’t shake. The stench of corruption was too much for voters to stomach,

The scandals revolving around Biden’s strong arming of the President of the Ukraine to fire his chief prosecutor — who apparently had clear evidence that Hunter Biden (Joe Biden’s son) was involved in a pay for play scheme similar to Bill and Hillary using high office for sale — will alone potentially be Biden’s undoing.

Hunter Biden, Joe’s son, was recently kicked out of the US Naval Academy for cocaine use. Even the MSM is catching on. The next scandal —  Hunter Biden hops on AirForce 2, flies to Beijing and returns with a 1.5 BILLION dollar deal from the Chinese government in an area he has NO expertise in whatsoever — is beyond suspect. Joe Biden presumably thinks he’ll survive this was purely based on a compliant media and Left wing press. As they are now turning on him for ideological reasons, his candidacy is in big trouble — right before the first US Democrat Party Presidential debates next week.

Now, Biden faces a similar predicament. You can bet his fellow Democrats are strategizing about the best way to weaponize the attack. Biden will not be able to dismiss the allegations as a figment of the right-wing attack machine. Even progressive watchdog groups –- and fierce critics of President Trump -– told ABC that Hunter Biden’s work represented a “huge appearance of conflict.”

Next week should be fascinating in US politics. Pop up the pop corn and watch the accusations and fur fly.

If Biden falls, only “Pocahontas” Warren would have an outside chance at “The Donald”.

I doubt Trump could win a second term landslide as Ronald Reagan did, but as long as the US economy chugs along and Trump doesn’t go to war with Iran, his chances of re-election are looking better all the time.

Enjoy the upcoming show!

John Lennon’s Son Slams “Pathetic” Political Correctness

John Lennon’s Son Slams “Pathetic” Political Correctness, by Paul Joseph Watson.

Sean Ono Lennon slammed political correctness as “pathetic,” pointing out how many people are “offended by comedy and science.”

“When I was young the most interesting people were left wing intellectuals. Believe it or not,” Lennon tweeted.

Writer and director Paul Duane responded by claiming, “We still are the most interesting.”

“No we’ve become the church lady as person below says. It’s embarrassing. We’re offended by comedy and science. It’s pathetic,” responded Lennon.

Imagine that.

John Lennon was a closet Reagan Republican claims former assistant, by the LA Times in 2011.

Fred Seaman, who was Lennon’s personal assistant from 1979 until the singer’s assassination in 1980, claims the former Beatle and anti-war activist favored Ronald Reagan over Jimmy Carter and would have voted for the Gipper if he could have.

“John, basically, made it very clear that if he were an American he would vote for Reagan because he was really sour on Jimmy Carter,” Seaman told Seth Swirsky, who is making a film about the Fab Four.

Sounds like Lennon would be a conservative today.

Denmark Begs Men to Have Sex with its Feminists

Denmark Begs Men to Have Sex with its Feminists, by John Davis.

Feminism has given women in Denmark an immunity from civility, and, license to openly hate and ridicule men. For example, it is not uncommon for girls to be sitting on a bus, in a group, and have them openly point to a man and discuss how unattractive he is. The Danish legal system is set up so that once a woman has “been impregnated” by a man, the man is completely disposable in divorce, and, the man’s role as a sperm donor is further degraded by requiring him to pay for the child for the rest of his life so that the impregnated woman may enjoy her fulfillment as a modern feminist.

Denmark still imposes all of the obligations of men that have survived medieval chivalry, yet, virtually sees men as nothing but completely disposable sperm donors (who are occasionally allowed to work in the Danish socialist job market).

How’s that working out? Is there a glimpse into the future for the rest of the west?

The result is that only about 20% of Danish men are actively in the dating pool.

Danish women are constantly complaining about not having enough men to satisfy their desires for sexual and social intercourse.

Yet, Danish women will viciously guard their feminism, hatred of men, life plans to treat men as disposable, and the concept that men are irrelevant except to give the woman sperm, and, the child some semblance of legitimacy. …

Nothing some government propaganda won’t try to fix:

Note how the advertisement features a prominent man-hating feminist in the narrative in order to appease the fascist feminist lobby that controls the country’s social laws and norms.

Note how the advertisement relegates the man to a mere decoration and accessory and sperm donor.

Note how the key solution, in the minds of the feminist State, is for women to seduce (and rape (she employs force at the end of the video which would be a serioius crime if a man did it)) the man, as opposed to an honest interaction between two adults seeking mutual love, respect and compassion for each other.

It didn’t work.

Ocasio-Cortez Gets Head Stuck In Bucket, Journalists Rush To Explain Why It Was Actually A Genius Move

Ocasio-Cortez Gets Head Stuck In Bucket, Journalists Rush To Explain Why It Was Actually A Genius Move, by the Babylon Bee.

On Wednesday, New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez somehow got her head stuck inside a bucket. She was heard yelling, “Who turned out the lights?” while repeatedly running full speed into walls. …

Many journalists … leaped to Ocasio-Cortez’s defense, saying her getting her head firmly wedged inside of a plastic bucket was further proof of her being an intelligent and dynamic politician.

“Most people don’t have her scientific curiosity and intelligence,” said MSNBC pundit Chris Hayes. “Someone incurious like Trump would never look at a bucket and ask ‘Could my head fit inside that?’ But Ocasio-Cortez dives into such questions head first.” …

As for Ocasio-Cortez, she is doubling down and refusing to apologize, even though the incident caused a huge delay for the Capitol janitorial staff.

Satire, but doesn’t it nail the relationship between the green-left and the media?

Recently AOC called holding areas for illegal immigrants to the US “concentration camps” and invoked the Nazis. She would not back down when the substantial differences were pointed out.

Transgender Colorado STEM Shooter Motivated by Revenge Over Pronouns, Bullying

Transgender Colorado STEM Shooter Motivated by Revenge Over Pronouns, Bullying, by Tyler O’Neil.

On May 7, two teens opened fire in the STEM School in Highlands Ranch, Colo., injuring eight students and claiming the life of 18-year-old Kendrick Castillo, who heroically sacrificed himself to stop the shooting.

Early rumors suggested one of the shooters was transgender, and court documents released Thursday confirm that one of the suspects was motivated to carry out the shooting due to other students rejecting her gender identity.

During a police interview, 18-year-old Devon Erickson said 16-year-old biological female Maya McKinney — who identifies as male and goes by the name Alec — warned him not to go to school the night before the shooting.

According to the Snapchat message, McKinney told Erickson she wanted to get revenge “on a lot of people.” She told police that classmates called her “disgusting,” made fun of her, and referred to her “as a she,” despite her transgender identity, the Associated Press reported. …

Erickson, a registered Democrat, expressed hatred for Christians who uphold the biblical position on traditional sexuality. He also attacked Donald Trump and praised Barack Obama on social media. …

Kendrick Castillo, the one casualty, was a member of the Knights of Columbus, a Roman Catholic charity that has been demonized by Democrats due to its opposition to LGBT pride. …

This shooting does not prove or even suggest that transgender people in general are a threat, but the grievances promoted by a pro-transgender culture can become explosive. Americans should be able to disagree on these issues while still being civil to one another, and this shooting tragically shows that civility is breaking down.

You didn’t hear about that in the media. In their narrative, transgender is next to  godliness and shooters can only be non-left deplorables or radical Muslims.

Political correctness has become an immediate danger — people are getting shot over it.

The Media’s Narrative on Climate Change

The Media’s Narrative on Climate Change, by Kip Hansen.

Those of you who closely watch the media — newspapers, broadcast & streaming news, national magazines, national public radio — may have noticed that all the news about climate change is beginning to sound the same — regardless of outlet (there are a few sensible exceptions). This is no accident. In fact, it is an organized movement among American journalists. …

Not just American. It is international.

The story starts earlier in the year with a conference planned and held at the behest of  Columbia Journalism Reviewand The Nation(“along with partners such as The Guardian”).  You can watch the conference online (YouTube).  The outcome of that conference is a growing cabal of journalists and their editors. In their own words:

How does the media cover—or not cover—the biggest story of our time? Last fall, UN climate scientists announced that the world has 12 years to transform energy, agriculture, and other key industries if civilization is to avoid a catastrophe. We believe the news business must also transform.”

“The Columbia Journalism Review and The Nation assembled some of the world’s top journalists, scientists, and climate experts to devise a new playbook for journalism that’s compatible with the 1.5-degree future that scientists say must be achieved. We also held a town hall meeting on the coverage of climate change and the launch of an unprecedented, coordinated effort to change the media conversation.”  

Journalists around the world are being contacted by email by CJR  with a message that includes this appeal :

“Our ask of you  is simple: commit to a week of focused climate coverage this September. We are organizing news outlets across the US and abroad—online and print, TV and audio, large and small—to run seven days of climate stories from September 16 through the climate summit UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres hosts in New York September 23. The stories you run are up to you, though we can offer ideas and background information and connect outlets looking for content with content providers looking for outlets.

We’d be happy to schedule a phone call to discuss this further.  


Mark Hertsgaard and Kyle Pope

In other words, when it comes to climate, the news media are mainly about propaganda, not news. Which goes nicely with the new education system — mainly indoctrination, not education.

Which I’m sure surprises no readers here, but it’s nice to see an admission.

Admission from the New York Times that it presents “news” to support the PC “narrative”

Admission from the New York Times that it presents “news” to support the PC “narrative”, by Michael Cieply in 2016, who was an editor at the New York Times from 2004 to 2016. The NYT is the ground zero for political correctness in the US, and hence the world.

It was a shock on arriving at the New York Times in 2004, as the paper’s movie editor, to realize that its editorial dynamic was essentially the reverse. By and large, talented reporters scrambled to match stories with what internally was often called “the narrative.” We were occasionally asked to map a narrative for our various beats a year in advance, square the plan with editors, then generate stories that fit the pre-designated line.

Reality usually had a way of intervening. But I knew one senior reporter who would play solitaire on his computer in the mornings, waiting for his editors to come through with marching orders. Once, in the Los Angeles bureau, I listened to a visiting National staff reporter tell a contact, more or less: “My editor needs someone to say such-and-such, could you say that?”

The bigger shock came on being told, at least twice, by Times editors who were describing the paper’s daily Page One meeting: “We set the agenda for the country in that room.”

It’s hardly surprising, because most of us figured out what that’s the way the mainstream media rolls these days. But it’s nice to see an admission.

PC terminology distorts the truth

PC terminology distorts the truth, by Angela Shanahan.

Take violence against women. Lately the union boss John Setka got himself into a lot of trouble about this issue. Why? Not just because he himself has been charged with harassing a woman through phone and text messages, nor because he has publicly threatened Australian Building and Construction Commission inspectors, claiming their children will be made to feel “ashamed” of them, nor because he is the boss of a union that has used systematic bullying at building sites for years.

No, this is not why Setka has been threatened with expulsion from the ALP and his job. It is because he was perceived to criticise Rosie Batty, whose campaign against gender-based domestic violence has turned her into an untouchable icon of the virtuous right-thinking elite.

Domestic violence policy is a means to an end, for some:

[The domestic violence issue] has been hijacked as an ideological campaign by ambitious feminists, harnessing the mantra of gender inequality, to attack something that does not originate in gender inequality.

Rather, domestic violence has its origins in the twin social evils of alcohol and drug abuse, combined with poverty, large-scale family breakdown, and of course inadequate policing. Hence domestic violence is most acute in Australia in Aboriginal communities. However, that fact does not play to the anti-racism ideology. So while the professional feminists are using domestic violence as a vehicle to promote yet more talkfests and paid lectures, Aboriginal women and children are being continually subjected to the most degrading physical and sexual violence.

Meanwhile, in the alternative universe in which we white educated types live, the men are not allowed to question any of this. Instead, they are encouraged to pay homage to the phony gender rubric that frames any discussion about domestic violence by flinging off the scourge of their maleness and sporting white ribbons.

Women are too hamstrung by the platitudes of feminists to query this agenda. So we are all obliged to treat domestic violence not as a practical problem of the drug culture and of policing, but as a seriously vague “gender issue” about which men have to beat their breasts and women take the high ground as victims and then demand that governments should do something, even though government can do very little.

See Rate of Domestic Violence Highest in Lesbian Relationships, a perennial favorite at the Wentworth Report.

Conservative injection should be easy as learning ABC

Conservative injection should be easy as learning ABC, by Gerard Henderson.

For eons, the ABC board, senior management and high-profile staff have denied the public broadcaster has a problem with bias or political diversity. …

Some ABC defenders have claimed there are many conservatives within the organisation — without naming one such person. Others have asserted this is a non-issue since there is no relationship between how journalists do their jobs and their political views. …

Ita Buttrose was appointed ABC chairwoman by the Coalition government in late February this year. … “Sometimes I think we might be biased. I think sometimes we could do more with diversity of views. I haven’t got a problem with anyone’s view but I think we can make sure ours is as diverse as we can make it to be.” Following further questioning, she raised the issue of unconscious bias.

Then on June 10, ABC Radio National Breakfast presenter Fran Kelly queried the ABC chair about what she meant by saying that ABC people sometimes reveal a bias without really knowing it. Buttrose doubled down on her earlier view, stating “we’re all biased in one way or another”. She then reflected that media types did not respond well to criticism. …

It is a matter of record that many an ABC panel takes place where everyone (the presenter included) agrees with everyone else in a left-of-centre kind of way. Such panels lack political diversity. That also makes them boring.

Unions remind Albanese who’s boss over Setka

Unions remind Albanese who’s boss over Setka, by Katrina Grace Kelly.

Because of the attempted hit on Setka — which has been akin to stabbing a sleeping bear in the face with a toothpick — every Labor politician in the country is now at risk of being drawn into a dangerous maelstrom, which Albanese has singlehandedly created.

Troy Gray, Setka’s ally, stated the obvious when he declared: “John Setka is not going anywhere.”

Gray also announced that the union he leads, the Victorian Electrical Trades Union, intends to trawl through the personal lives of state and federal ALP politicians in a search for dirt to use against them: “If sending a text message is the standard for resignation then there definitely will be some nervous politicians out there because we will audit them.” …

Who owns whom:

Despite the fact that the unions effectively sacked Kevin Rudd as prime minister, most commentators either just don’t understand this basic fact, or refuse to admit it; the unions own Labor, Labor doesn’t own the unions.

A football player can never bring down their team’s owner, an employee can never have the owner of the business they work for sacked, and Labor politicians cannot sack union officials.

All Labor politicians remain in their jobs by the good grace of the people that run the unions, and although it suits Labor, the unions, and Labor-aligned commentators to pretend otherwise to the general public, it remains a simple fact that unions can get rid of Labor politicians, whenever they feel like it. …

Rough trades and white breads:

When it comes to people in the labour movement, there is a vast chasm between “rough trades” — those who rose up to leadership from the shop floor, with dirty hands and hardened resolve — and “white breads”, those who developed their left-wing politics at university.

Rough trades tend to hold white breads in contempt, perhaps because of the way white breads idolise and romanticise the working-class existence but nevertheless fail to understand it. …

Hold them to the same standards:

Admittedly, in terms of pure entertainment value there is not enough popcorn in the whole world to cater for the debacle we see unfolding before us. It is delicious, too, that Labor politicians are finally being given the same treatment that employers are routinely subjected to.

The fun and games are underlined by a serious issue, however. The people who run unions and employer groups do need to be held to the same standards as other office-bearers in the community. The entities should also pay tax, just like corporations do.

It is well past time that our legislative framework stopped treating registered industrial organisations as special cases.