Skip to content

Month: September 2018

More on the Government/Media Complex

In his article on the Trump insurrection, Bill Sardi writes this about book publishers Simon and Schuckster:

Simon & Schuster is the publisher of both Omarosa’s book UNHINGED, and reporter Bob Woodward’s FEAR.

S & S is also the publisher of HARD CHOICES, a memoir of former United States Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, published by in 2014.

Simon & Schuster is a subsidiary of CBS Corporation, part of the anti-Trump news media campaign. The question is, are these books fiction or non-fiction. Is CBS fomenting this political theatre for financial gain? It sells books!

Also relevant, especially given the recent New York Times op-ed that was supposedly written by a senior Trump White House official (but that I believe was written by a Times writer in cahoots with the “intelligence” [sic] community, and it’s all made up), are some other articles about the media/government complex:

Watergate revelations: the coup against Nixon, Part 2 of 3 by Russ Baker (a lot of info, including on Bob Woodward’s role in helping to take down Nixon on behalf of the “intelligence” (sic) community, and Parts 1-3 also detail George H.W. Bush’s involvement in the Nixon coup and JFK as well.)

The CIA and the Media by Carl Bernstein

Correspondence and collusion between the New York Times and the CIA by Glenn Greenwald.

NYT prints government-funded propaganda about government-funded propaganda by Adam Johnson.

Zero Dark Thirty: CIA hagiography, pernicious propaganda by Glenn Greenwald.

And this post by me.

The New York Times’ Anonymous Op-Ed on Trump

The New York Times now has an op-ed from an anonymous source from within the White House who is admitting to sabotaging Donald Trump’s agenda, namely Trump’s attempting to strengthen relations between the U.S. and Russia. The Times begins by saying they are publishing the piece anonymously to protect the “whistleblower” from losing his/her job.

The Times writes: “The Times today is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers.”

Publishing it anonymously is the “only way”? Are they that dumb to think that? His/her job “would be jeopardized”? That’s nuts. The individual whoever s/he is can leave the White House and get a job with MSNBC immediately, or with a military contractor and make millions. That is what former Washington parasites do.

The NYT op-ed writer tries to say that s/he is from the “resistance” within the White House, but, as Brendan O’Neill of Spiked points out regarding the anti-Trump resistance at the John McCain funeral, such “resistance” is really the “Establishment.”

Now, if this NYT editorial isn’t all made up, which is very possible given the Times‘ recent history, then the person should just come forward and leave the White House. And no, it isn’t treason. But dumb Donald is learning more that the Establishment life-long government parasites he has brought into the White House are not on his side, and they are not on the side of the American people, either. They are clearly interfering with the “Will of the People” in their obstructions.

The permanent, unelected government in Washington (sometimes known as the “deep state,” or the “national security state”) thrives on Cold War with Russia, they thrive on the conflicts in the Middle East that George H.W. Bush played a major role in intensifying after the First Cold War ended in 1990 or so. They thrive on their close financial ties to the military and security contractors, a.k.a. “military industrial complex” and their close ties to their treasured propagandists of the government media, including the warmongers of the New York Times.

But, while the writer mentions “whispers within the cabinet” of making use of the 25th Amendment to oust Trump, at least this is better than assassinating Trump, which they did to JFK.

And this is probably being timed to coincide with Bob Woodward’s new book, which claims that top White House officials have been doing things like censoring and preventing certain items of information from being seen by Trump, information that the saintly do-gooder aides determine could cause Trump to make a “bad” decision.

And so we have yet another item made up by government media, as well as the probably made-up stuff in Woodward’s book. After all, Woodward helped to take down Nixon, who really was a bad guy and a war criminal, but Woodward was doing so on behalf of the permanent, national security state who didn’t like Nixon’s détente with Russia and China. The national security state thrives on Cold War tensions and hostility, as I just noted above.

And it’s not the “liberal media,” folks. It’s the “government media.”

And I first understood that the New York Times was just another rag when its reporter, Maureen Dowd, decided to go further than just “biased reporting,” and actively colluded with Dukakis for President campaign chairman John Sasso to splice together part of Joe Biden’s speech and a similar speech by British politician Neil Kinnock, to expose plagiarism on the part of Biden.

My conclusion is that, unless the anonymous White House writer is outed or comes forward, the real writers are the Goebbels of the New York Times (a.k.a. “New York Slimes“), which I believe they have a right to do, as protected by the First Amendment. And so does Bob Woodward have a right to fabricate claims on Trump. (Not so, says The Donald, and many other people.)

What Trump needs to do is fire ALL of his top staff and cabinet officials, and bring on libertarian-minded people such as Judge Andrew Napolitano who actually would follow the U.S. Constitution, and those who are not life-long government parasites or militarists. But sadly, Trump is himself a confused and ignorant nationalist who loves all things military and Big Government, and central planning. Oh, well.

Conservatives Will Be Proud of Their New SJW Supreme Court Justice

Now that U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has made his speech before the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday, we now know that he is as much an SJW (“social justice warrior”) as he is a swamp creature. After mentioning his daughters’ school basketball teams and his coaching, Kavanaugh stated, “Title IX helped make girls’ and women’s sports equal. And I see that law’s legacy every night when I walk into my house, as my daughters are getting back from lacrosse or basketball or hockey practice.”


I have a feeling he is totally unaware of how Title IX has been abused in these later years to remove due process rights of those accused of sexual assault, and allowing false accusers to get away with their false accusations with impunity. Or he might be aware of it but doesn’t think it’s that big a deal. That would be because he is an SJW.

Another reason to believe that Kavanaugh is a “social justice warrior” is that he also felt it important to point out: “My law clerks come from diverse backgrounds and points of view. A majority of my 48 law clerks have been women. More than a quarter of my law clerks have been minorities. And I’ve had far more African-American law clerks than the percentage of African-American students in U.S. law schools.” Yeah, we get it, we get it. Jeepers.

In her review of R. Shep Melnick’s book, The Transformation of Title IX: Regulating Gender Equality in Education, Christina Hoff Sommers wrote,

In April 2011, the head of OCR, Assistant Secretary of Education Russlynn Ali, sent out another now-famous Dear Colleague letter to colleges across the nation, outlining the radical steps colleges should take to curb an alleged epidemic of sexual mayhem on campus. Ali’s letter effectively mandated campus sex-crime tribunals. She advised schools to determine guilt by a very low standard—a “preponderance of evidence.” Mediation between accuser and accused was ruled out of order. The letter specified a new definition of sexual harassment: “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature.” This definition includes casual comments—even jokes.

Ali’s goal, as Melnick explains, was to introduce a “new paradigm” into Title IX regulation. The old paradigm (that is, American law) attributes acts of sexual harassment to misbehaving individual­s; the new paradigm (developed by radical legal theorists such as Catharine MacKinnon, professor at Michigan Law), blames systemic misogyny. For MacKinnon, an act of sexual harassment is part of a vast system of subordination—one of the many ways society “perpetuates the interlocked structures by which women have been kept sexually in thrall to men.” What did MacKinnonism entail for schools? To meet the new OCR standards, it was no longer enough for them to identify and punish serious perpetrators—the entire culture of the school had to change.

And in her book, Rape Culture Hysteria: Fixing the Damage Done to Men and Women, Wendy McElroy called for the outright repeal of Title IX. The courts’ expansion of Title IX has eroded the due process rights of the accused to the point that such rights no longer exist.

And I actually think that Kavanaugh really believes in “social justice warrior” activism, because the entire criminal justice (sic) system and education system are swarming with SJWs now. While the U.S. Supreme Court did rule on the side of the Christian baker who refused to bake a cake for a same-sex couple, the Justices’ opinion was loaded with SJW language throughout, and it was incoherent. Not a mention of private property rights or freedom of association, which are really the main principles involved in that kind of case. But the “conservatives” on the High Court are afraid to stand up for such principles. Kavanaugh will be one of them, and the Supreme Bureaucrats will continue with the incoherent rulings out of fear of offending this or that “social justice” group.

And Kavanaugh has good swamp creature cred as well. “Drain the swamp,” Donald? As a judge, Kavanaugh already is a rubber-stamp for the surveillance state, the police state and warmongering, and the CIA. He is an “apparatchik,” for sure.

I hope Rand Paul, who has already said he will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh, changes his mind, as well as that others come to their senses. But I am not holding my breath.

Today’s Nattering Nabobs of Negativism

H.L. Mencken Club president Paul Gottfried has an article on clarifying a National Review article by Ben Shapiro, in which Shapiro claims that conservative organizations or publications oust bigoted conservatives while those on the left merely scold their bigots but they don’t oust them. Gottfried says that the ones who are mainly ousted by conservatives are those who dissent from interventionist foreign policy and libertarians. Gottfried cites William F. Buckley, Jr. and National Review’s ousting of the Birch Society not for the stated reasons of white supremacy or anti-Semitism but because of the Birchers’ opposition to U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.

I really enjoy it when conservatives go after each other like this, or when progressives go after each other. One example of progressives in-fighting has been Glenn Greenwald being attacked by his fellows on the left for his actually insisting on facts and evidence when it comes to the “Russia-collusions” investigation, same thing with Alan Dershowitz. Although it’s not as enjoyable as seeing the bureaucrats of one government agency going against the bureaucrats of another government agency. We want to see bureaucrats at each other’s throats. They’re scum.

And Charles Burris has linked to a column by a Lionel Shriver on what Burris calls Cultural Maoism. That’s not Lionel from the radio, or a relative of Maria Shriver, it’s a columnist at the U.K. Spectator. In her column Shriver asserts that the snowflakes who show being intensely offended by every little thing are not really offended and are not really emotionally triggered by microaggressions. They are merely either feigning such emotions and hurt, or are brainwashed to believe they are but mainly are motivated by a need or a compulsion to target and hunt down others to victimize and torment.

Shriver cites the way the youngins shout down and physically attack not only those on campuses who say the wrong things or the un-PC things, but attack others who defend such intruders. We can see from Antifa how they have physically assaulted innocent, peaceful people who might happen to be carrying an American flag or who might happen to wear a “MAGA” hat. All these people seem to be millennials who suffer from utter lack of control over their own lives, who have a need to control and dominate over others, and who were probably raised by the most insecure of parents.

One contributor to their inner turmoil is the fact that many of them now were raised in the post-9/11 era, by parents who already were raised to believe in and worship the State and its apparatchiks but whose State mysticism was reinforced by post-9/11 government-inflicted hysteria and fear-mongering that was then repeated over and over by the sheeple of the mainstream media, i.e. government media. We now have a generation of utter neurotics and pathologically irrational control freaks not only by an hysterical upbringing but also who are poisoned by terrible prescription drugs, vaccines and processed foods.

The authoritarians on the right like those of National Review are just as bad. They also have an immature need to dominate over and assume control over others, but in a more passive-aggressive way. That is why they love government interventionism, especially foreign interventionism. When Ron Paul suggested closing down the foreign military bases that are unjustly all over the world where they don’t belong, and bringing all the U.S. troops back to the U.S., recall how Dr. Paul was smeared as this or that bad person, especially by conservative talk radio personalities and the punditry on the right. He was especially smeared by the SJW-ish Reason magazine and the moron Michael Medved on talk radio.

One problem with the conservatives is this nationalism stuff, this American Exceptionalism stuff. But many of them have issues of narcissism and delusions of grandiosity just as the young millennials and the left do. The U.S. government in Washington is a “City on a Hill” and has a God-given right or entitlement to invade and occupy other territories with impunity. To hell with moral principles.

And The Donald with his idiotic trade crapola. Trump seems to think that trade is “America trades with other countries,” when no, individual Americans and businesses trade with other individuals and businesses, domestically and internationally, and it doesn’t involve “The Country.” It doesn’t involve the government in Washington. As Laurence Vance wrote in his column today, “Free trade is just commercial freedom from government interference.”

So the nationalists and conservatives want the government to interfere with foreign countries’ peoples and governments, in addition to interfering with their own fellow Americans’ business, and the youngin millennials want the government to interfere with everything from people’s health care matters to what people are allowed or forbidden to say, think, write, or believe.

I say, how about just live and let live, and leave others alone. Ya think?

Some Articles for Labor Day

Robert Wenzel has this excellent perspective on Labor Day

(And I had this piece on the value of labor a long time ago.)

Charles Burris discusses the truth about the national sickness of American statolatry.

Sheldon Richman has this column on the invidious conflation of anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism.

And Donald Miller, MD has a lengthy essay on U.S. military supremacy. It seems that he did a lot of research. Although, I’m not comfortable with the conclusions regarding “nuclear war survival skills” and “disaster preparedness for nuclear war.” Hmmm.

Barf: A Week of McCain Worship

I was listening to the Sunday talk shows on Bloomberg Radio yesterday. The drooling John McCain worship continues for over a long, torturous week. On the talk shows, including ABC’s This Week with George Snuffleupagus (Martha Radish this time), when discussing John McCain they ask, “Did he hate Trump?” and the answer being, “Yup” so therefore they will all be doing a foaming-at-the-mouth tribute to McCain. (If McCain were a Trump crony, there would have been a passing mention of McCain’s death, and on to other issues.)

Not one person on with Chris Wallace’s Fake News Sunday seemed to point out what a war criminal John McCain was, dropping bombs on and killing innocent civilians in Vietnam. And then there was Chuck Todd on Meet the Fake Press, with more McCain worship. This whole week reminded me of when Richard Nixon died — another war criminal — and on TV there were the scenes of the Nixon funeral and/or memorial service, even Baba Wawa was among the voice-overs along with fellow news fossils, competing with each other to see who can say even nicer things about Tricky Dick. What sick people.

Discussing McCain ad nauseam, Margaret Brennan on CBS News Fake the Nation had a panel of several media personalities. Did any one of the Establishment stenographers on the panel mention how McCain promised throughout his last reelection campaign to vote to repeal ObamaCare, and when he had a chance to do just that, he voted against repeal, and solely because he hated Donald Trump? What a schmuck.

No wonder many people now don’t take these “news” fakers seriously. Over the past year with the Trump hate-fest, the “Russia collusions” propaganda and the continued government worship with certain issues including gun control and their refusal to acknowledge that the Trump tax cuts positively affected the economy. No reason to take seriously these propagandists for statism on the government media.