And Now It’s Time For The Backlash

Nearly a year ago, I wrote that “Sexual harassment has been weaponized. There can be no doubt about it, no discussion required. Anyone, at anytime, can be accused, and the accusers’ testimony must be believed, even if it is questionable.” But I don’t come before you today to pat myself on the back for my Nostradamus-like prediction. Rather, I wonder if the Democrats and the Soros machine played their hand too soon, or perhaps with the wrong cards.

Before I continue, I want to be crystal clear on a few subjects. Rape is abhorrent and wrong. Sexual assault is abhorrent and wrong. There are no exceptions to this. No justifications. If Justice Kavanaugh had been an actual rapist or assailant, there would have been no voice louder than mine in demanding his immediate withdrawal from candidacy for the court. Of course, it turns out that he wasn’t.

Had Christine Blasey Ford been a more credible witness before the Senate—if any of the vast, vast number of inconsistencies with her story hadn’t been so blatantly obvious—I think it’s quite possible that Kavanaugh’s nomination could have been derailed. If there had been one corroborating witness, for example, or if she’d been able to remember where the house was, how she got there, how she got home, how many people were at the party, etc., Ol’ Kav might have been kicked back the the district court, regardless of his guilt or innocence. Hell, even after Ford’s testimony (but before Kavanaugh’s), some conservatives, like Ben Shapiro, were still convinced that Kavanaugh should have removed himself from consideration. Thankfully, both Justice Kavanaugh and President Trump conducted themselves as they should have—Kavanaugh replying with furious, seething anger at being falsely accused, and Trump allowing an FBI investigation to take place.

But now that the sexual harassment/rape card has been played, Democrats will find it difficult to play it again with any degree of success.

Without question, the tactic backfired spectacularly in this case. Republicans, who were greatly divided in their support of both Mr. Trump as POTUS and of “RINOs” like Susan Collins and Jeff Flake, have now come together in the face of the vile tactics used by Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer in their attempts to keep Kavanaugh off the court. And the admission that, yes, many of the protesters in Washington D.C. over the weekend were, in fact, paid by organizations to “steer participants” into “creating viral moments” only galvanizes the Right even more.

Republicans, or even right of center Independents, have come to the realization that failing to support Republican candidates—even if they aren’t the perfect “conservative”—could lead to the loss of the Senate and of the House. That wouldn’t have seemed incredibly important before Kavanaugh. But Kavanaugh exposed the Democratic Party for what it has become over the last two years—a radical, far-left organization that employs the tactics of Alinsky, and even Stalin, to wage nothing short of war against the basic, foundational principles of our society. The vast majority of Americans don’t want anything to do with the pink-haired, shrieking protesters who were stupid enough to bang on the door of the Supreme Court (who were 100 percent white, by the way). That doesn’t play in Peoria.

All of these events appear to have combined to push public opinion further in the direction of Mr. Trump. Rasmussen shows his support at 51% among likely voters, which is 4% better than Mr. Obama on the same day of his presidency. The electorate appears to be saying that they were repulsed by the smear tactics of Hirono, Booker, and Schumer.

I’ve seen friends of mine on the Left call the confirmation of Kavanaugh a “pyrrhic victory.” I think it will prove to be anything but. America has seen the bald face of the Democratic Party throughout this process, and it doesn’t like what it sees. And not only will it cost the Democrats seats in November, it also cost them one of their most valuable tactics. The next time somebody accuses a Republican of rape or sexual assault, whether it’s a judge or a congressional candidate, the standard of proof will be held much, much higher. Ms. Ford’s accusations did not even meet the standard for a preponderance of evidence, and it wasn’t even close to being clear or convincing. Forget beyond reasonable doubt. Once Kavanaugh was confirmed, Ford immediately announced that she had no plans to pursue the case further. Keep in mind, there is no statute of limitations on sexual assault. Ford could have pressed for criminal charges to be brought. She didn’t. The only goal of her testimony was to keep Kavanaugh off the bench. You can draw whatever conclusions you’d like from that.

And if you really want to #believewomen, if you really want all victims of sexual abuse to be heard, you should be mad as hell right now at the perpetrators of this fraud. I am furious to think that someday, my daughter might be sexually assaulted by a classmate or a co-worker, and the veracity of her claim might be doubted because of the Democrats’ rush to assassinate the character of Justice Kavanaugh. The real pain and trauma experienced by actual victims of sexual assault has been marginalized and minimized by this fraudulent accusation. We should all be mad about that.

That’s why I believe that, come November, many Americans may decide that they don’t like what they’ve seen from Trump so far, but they will decide that they like what they’ve seen from Democrats even less. Good luck to Heidi Heitkamp, Claire McCaskill, and Bill Nelson—Democrat senators who voted against Kavanaugh and are running in states that Trump won in 2016. I think they’ll need it.

 

53 Replies to “And Now It’s Time For The Backlash”

  1. Rtr

    I hope you are right. I cannot believe that the USA has slunk so low. Problem is academia and the media are for the most part owned by the left – and not the moderate left. Mind you we’re not a lot better off up here in Canada. We elected a lefty snowboard instructor as the leader of our country. On the other hand it looks like we’ll correct that mistake in a year. Justin Trudeau is essentially a white Obama and our country has suffered as the US did under the Obama administration.

    Reply
    • DougD

      Dunno about that, I didn’t vote for JT’s party but I’d say he is doing a reasonable job. If only Stephen Harper hadn’t gotten all paranoid he’d still be in the seat.

      Polarization is the best thing ever to happen to the media and establishment, regardless of what side you’re on. Like the demotivator says, “If you can’t be part of the solution then there’s good money to be made prolonging the problem.”

      Reply
    • dumas

      I have to support you, Rtr- the current Liberal government has done a lot of harm to my region of the country in an obvious way. They’ve done a lot of harm to the rest of the country in less obvious ways that will only become apparent in the long term.

      Reply
  2. Josh Howard

    For the first time in my lifetime, I’m throwing off my Independant/Libertarian label… just this once… and voting straight party.

    I don’t care who is running. I don’t care how terrible they are. I want to hurt the Democrat organ as much as possible for as long as possible because of the past decade of garbage that I’ve had to deal with not being tied to one side or another. Screw them and the ship they sailed in on. I’m ready to sink it and bring about something new.

    Reply
    • JustPassinThru

      It’s gotten to that, hasn’t it. It’s not about party or the (often, nominal) differences; it’s not about the ones who claim one set of values but legislate another way.

      At this point, it’s about STOPPING these DERANGED MOBS. That’s a poor way to have to vote; but that’s what it comes down to. Simply withholding a vote can work to give the Party of Chaos a majority, to let them unleash with baseless, hysterical Impeachments.

      What that does to Donald Trump, I care little. Donald Trump is rich enough to take care of himself and has little enough time left in life, anyway. I fear for what that will do to the NATION, when OPPOSITION to this demented witch’s brew of Marxism, racial-caste institutionalization, deviant sexuality and hysteria…becomes criminalized.

      When only ONE opinion is allowed, and if you are not loud enough in cheering it, you are punished – in your Internet presence, in your credit score, in employers’ searches of your background. In the Digital Age, dissenters can, and probably will, become non-persons.

      It will probably happen, and soon. But every day we can hold it off, is a day that personal liberty is given a stay.

      Reply
    • gtem

      I’m the same way. I’ve been ambivalent about Repubs (of the McCain/Romney/Pence flavor) in the past , and even leading into these midterms Braun in Indiana seemed like a Trump coattail rider who beneath that veneer is just standard Republican talking points (“bolster our military to counter dictatorships like North Korea and Russia” per his campaign site). I wasn’t going to bother to vote for either him or Donnelly. But seeing how increasingly unhinged the Dems are becoming, it doesn’t look like there’s much of a choice left. How quaint it is to think that so little as 2 years ago, Vietnam vet and all around likable guy Jim Webb ran in the Dem primaries on a pro-union/moderate-on-social issues platform and said ‘All lives matter” at the debates.

      Reply
  3. safe as milk

    the left is supposed to stand for
    1) workers
    2) free speech
    3) peace
    the democratic party supports none of the above.
    they are nothing but corporate war mongers wrapped in virtue signalling.

    Reply
    • stingray65

      The left (Democrats) now stand for:
      1) abortion without restriction
      2) open borders without restriction – i.e. US Constitutional Rights for illegals.
      3) welfare, affirmative action, and quotas for “victim” classes.
      4) war against anyone who disapproves the first 3.

      Reply
  4. Spud Boy

    I’m pretty much a single issue voter, and that issue is affirmative action. The Democrats have doubled down on identity politics in recent years, trying to turn every issue into the next civil rights struggle. It’s all very ironic considering that more Democrats than Republicans opposed minority civil rights in the 1960s.

    Reply
  5. F. Lee

    I found this episode disgusting. I’ve had several very heated arguments with loved ones (women) over this, and have concluded that I’m better off not discussing it with them. Somehow saying that I think a decades-old allegation without any corroboration should not be considered becomes “I always side with men.”. WTF. OK, whatevs I guess. We’ll just talk about Mason Crosby’s 5 missed FGs instead. There may be other reasons Kavanaugh is not fit for SCOTUS; I don’t have any opinion on that. And like JB if there were corroboration for these allegations I’d be all for pursuing them.

    That said, the democrats have the unfortunate luck only that their hypocrisy is the most recent. The RINOs (a group which includes Trump and all his congressional brown-nosing lackeys) have more than their fair share in the last two years. The most recent, is USMCA which is a slightly warmed over NAFTA, which Trump has famously labeled the worst deal in history (though he calls everything that…). Most economists agree that USMCA is, if anything, worse than NAFTA. No doubt the RINOs will call this further hindrance on free trade a victory, while the rest of us pay the price for their cynical political dealings.

    Reply
  6. Shrug

    Well thank God the guy who probably committed perjury and has a fascinatingly shadowy financial history got on to the Supreme Court.

    Thank god it’s the guy who would probably overturn Roe v. Wade (remember gang, it’s not about abortions but rather it’s about what the government can tell you to do with your body), is now on the Supreme Court.

    Thank the lord there’s a guy like Kavanaugh, who has some decidedly extreme opinions on executive power and privilege (he’s in favor of the executive becoming stronger and more protected, for those that don’t know), on the court at a time when the executive branch has, since 9/11, already faaaaaar overstepped its bounds in terms of historical precedent.

    I, for one, am grateful to have a guy like Brett K on board. With his known, on record, acceptance of government spying programs, how else could we protect our own citizens? Luckily the Bill of Rights is already in tatters, but thankfully Brett is on board to make sure it stays that way. Thanks, Brett!

    I don’t know if he did or did not sexually assault Ms. Ford. I don’t know if, as you imply, the Big Scary Democratic Machine drummed up Ford from thin air simply to do Dastardly Things.

    What I do know is that I find his big government politics abhorrent. What I do know is, that since 9/11, this country has been headed towards some type of authoritarianism and that I don’t think he’ll do anything whatsoever to stop it.

    Reply
    • NoID

      I agree with you 100%. I didn’t particularly like Kavanaugh before the hearings, following them I’m definitely not happy he’s on the court, and it has 0% to do with Ford’s accusations. There were far better choices on the list.

      Reply
    • jz78817

      ” What I do know is, that since 9/11, this country has been headed towards some type of authoritarianism and that I don’t think he’ll do anything whatsoever to stop it.”

      it’s become crystal clear to me that people are more than happy to accept an authoritarian regime so long as the despot(s) in charge look and sound like them.

      everybody loves freedom as long as they get to tell other people what to do.

      Reply
    • MrGreenMan

      He received a the highest rating from the ABA, that highly-rated left-wing woman who disagrees with his politics endorsed him back in July, and Kennedy – who was considered middle-of-the-road – hand-selected him. He was not Trump’s man. Trump’s man was Amy Barret Coney.

      Before this Ford business, Kavanaugh was considered a squishy-Bushy middle-of-the-road choice.

      His opinions aren’t extreme; they may be frightening, but that’s the Washington establishment position.

      Reply
    • CJinSD

      “I, for one, am grateful to have a guy like Brett K on board. With his known, on record, acceptance of government spying programs, how else could we protect our own citizens? Luckily the Bill of Rights is already in tatters, but thankfully Brett is on board to make sure it stays that way. Thanks, Brett!”

      I suppose the party that has been fomenting protest of the very existence of the Bill of Rights had little choice but to make up allegations to stop Kavanaugh. It would confuse the Democrats’ base had they said he would fail to defend our rights, seeing as how they’ve been weaponized to dismantle limitations on state power for the past decade. The first amendment has a fork in it, unless one is Muslim. The second amendment is dead as soon as another batch of public school zombies start to vote. We’ll be quartering soldiers in our homes next time the Democrats win anything. It certainly would have been nice to have someone who is more Trump and less Bush-Biden in his taste for big government, but the opposition couldn’t risk showing middle America where their priorities really lie by making an argument of substance against Kavanaugh. Instead they had to lie, like the conspirators that they are.

      Reply
  7. arbuckle

    There are 8 other judges on the SC. Kav can’t do anything unilaterally and this court isn’t going to outlaw “women’s rights”. Loosen the grip on your pearls.

    Reply
    • stingray65

      Just you wait – women will soon be forced to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. Birth control and abortion will be outlawed, and everyone whose family can’t be traced to the Mayflower will be deported, while those that remain will be forced to own a gun. Unions will be banned, slavery will be legalized, and all congressional authority will be given to the President – and he will now be called King and the Trump’s eldest is next in line of succession.

      Reply
      • Carmine

        It sounds funny, but back in 2012 I actually had a loony liberal lady I know swear to me that Mitt Romney was going to bring back segregation…..I heard it with my own ears……..

        Reply
  8. rambo furum

    Find the common thread between Feinstein, Schumer, Shapiro, Katz, Soros, Alinsky, Swetnick, Blumenthal, Bromwich, down to Ratajkowski. People are still failing to identify the real source of the problem.

    Reply
      • Random

        So, essentially “making him/her a non-person” for purposes of this forum, because he hinted at something that you may not agree with (irrespective of whether true or false)?

        The threat above and your article don’t quite go with each other. Pick one!

        Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          I think what Bark is saying — and what I am absolutely saying — is that we are not going to let this site be smeared out of existence by giving people a legitimate reason to call us a bunch of anti-Semites. The fact of the matter is that it’s too easy to recast some legitimate concern about how certain power groups seem to be driving culture in a negative direction as OMFG NAZI NAZIS.

          My son is a quarter Jewish. One of this site’s most eminent contributors, Ronnie Schreiber, is Jewish. If someone has a beef with what the very small club of Jews in Hollywood or Wall Street is, they’re going to have to phrase it in such a way that we don’t get put on an ADL hate-site list. I’m also not interested in stoking hatred that will eventually rebound on my own kid.

          Rambo is fine to stick around as long as he doesn’t go 100% Mein Kampf on us.

          Reply
          • Trollistan

            As always, you put forth a much more measured and thought out response than your brother does.

          • Bark M Post author

            Sick burn bro

            Why did you create yet another login for this site? Was the “Random” one you used earlier not enough?

          • random(1);

            Bark, I picked whatever “name” (not enough to call it a login) popped in my head at the moment. This was probably the third time that I found myself posting a reply on your blog.

            Here’s what’s unfortunate: given the instinctive/visceral nature of your earlier response, I said to myself as I was typing in this random “name”: I wonder if he will be petty enough to look up my IP address and browser signature. Sure enough, you did not disappoint.

            Listen, neither myself nor, I bet, this rambo poster are here to attack you or anyone else for being jewish or something else. A lot fewer people care about such things than you probably think. Somebody makes an observation which has some apparent merit and instead of ignoring or otherwise deflecting it (humor works well for this purpose), you jumped right in it and gave yourself both victim and punisher status, in 100% contradiction to the ideas espoused by your article. That’s quite disappointing!

            All those societal ills you speak of (and I agree with you on most if not all of those) come from a society unwilling to analyze and debate things but rather set on shutting up any opponent, without debate. I come to this blog because of your brother’s writing and, among other things, his willingness to touch topics that are tabu in the PC world out there. It’s refreshing, it’s very much needed and, as he very well explained in his reply above, it’s not without danger. If you care to follow the advice of a random reader on the Internet, stop being so thin skinned and stop engaging readers directly in a negative tone. Work toward building this blog up. I read about your brother’s attempt to purchase TTAC; screw that, leave them alone and build this one into the next TTAC or something better. One sure way to make sure that’s not going to happen is to engage in petty bickering and blog dictatorship.

            Anyway, chill and good luck with what you’re doing here!

        • Panzer

          Saying the Jews are the problem is not a legit position.
          To me this is one of the worst things about the post 2008 era. The left has weaponized and thus debased accusations of prejudice. The words ‘Racism’ and ‘Sexism’ don’t mean anything anymore because they’ve been so overused. So when we come up against actual examples of racism and other prejudice, we can’t do anything about it because we don’t have the words anymore for them.
          Fuck the left for creating space for the actual nutters and shitlords.

          Reply
    • Ronnie Schreiber

      You haven’t accomplished a thing in your life (prove me wrong by citing something worthwhile that you’ve done), so you blame your inadequacy on some outside force, in this case Jews. Blacks who blame all of their misfortunes on racism have crippled themselves. You’re doing likewise, not that society is missing whatever paltry contributions you could make, but it’s sad to see a man acting so much like a child.

      Jew haters are so lame. They see boogeymen even when they’re not there. Senator Feinstein is married to a Jew but is not Jewish. George Soros explicitly denies any Jewish affiliation at all. With the exception of Ben Shapiro (I assume that’s the Shapiro you reference since Mark mentioned him), none of those people have anything to do with traditional Judaism or traditional Jewish beliefs and practices and Ben certainly doesn’t agree with the rest of list on any substantive policy issue. Ah, but he’s a Jew so he must be part of the conspiracy.

      You’re quite welcome to stop using all of the things that Jews have had a hand in developing, from the chips in your computer/phone, to the polio vaccine that you give your kids (well, that is, if you’ve been able to find a woman with low enough standards to let you breed), to the electricity that powers your home, but you’re a coward who is weak, unable to even live up to your own convictions.

      Reply
      • rambo furum

        Nobody thought it was Russian or Eastern bloc ancestry? Oh, those Russians! I guess the lawyer angle in unspectacular in that room.
        Ipray for Mr. Scheiber to have his narcissistic injury eased. May Christ bring him humility and love.

        Reply
        • Ronnie Schreiber

          You’re not nearly as clever as you think you are. Dunning-Kruger in the flesh. You were wrong about Sen. Feinstein being Jewish and you’re wrong about surnames. Shapiro and Katz are not Russian or Eastern European. Shapiro is from the Hebrew word for saphire and Katz is an acronym for Kohen Tzedek, righteous priest. Bromwich is British.

          As for your postscript, to paraphrase Patti Smith, Jesus died for somebody’s sins (likely his own), but not mine.

          Reply
      • everybodyhatesscott

        I have zero problems with the average jew but if you want to say I cant get a polio vaccine in exchange that you will move to your promised land tomorrow, let’s start the paperwork. If you say you hate whites, the NYT will promote you, if you suggest a 2% population is seriously over represented in the editorial.staff, you will have your life ruined.

        Shapiro is a snake and a bad ‘conservative’ Soros is evil. I’m not.going to blame your entire religion for that but pointing out their misdeeds does not make a jew hater. You are a good writer and seem like a decent person.

        I’m not going to stop reading cause jack and bark are both great writers but the fact that deadweight can personally insult them non stop and call them horrible names is fair game and not worthy of ever mentioning the banhammer but this topic is verboten is somewhat upsetting.

        Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          Actually I’ve sent more than 20 DW posts into the trash can lately, because he is becoming outright insane. But no amount of DW stupidity will get both me and Bark fired from our real jobs the way that being branded as Jew-haters will. We might as well start reprinting pages from The Bell Curve.

          Reply
          • Everybodyhatesscott

            Jack, that’s sort of my point. I’ll drop this cause I’m not a huge jq guy but “we will ruin your life” makes me uncomfortable.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            It’s not just that. We arent going to cover any third rail topic here in a way that will make it tough for me to feed my kid. I’m not Heartiste or Vox Day; I have to make a living in the real world. I don’t like it but after seeing a NASCAR driver lose his gig for something his DAD said 30 YEARS AGO I have to think about consequences for my family as well.

          • gtem

            More than any Jewish conspiracy, I always found it disturbing how no one in Congress, on any side of the isle, seriously questions our billions in money and arms sent to Israel. They are truly that untouchable and unquestioned, because the few times anyone does (like Buchanan or Jim Traficant in the 90s), you will be branded an anti-semite so quick it will make your head spin.

            ““Foreign aid to Israel is sacred, we know that. That is sacred,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said when discussing budget cuts.”

            I consider that entirely crazy. Or how Netanyahu came over here to speak to a joint session of Congress without official invitation from Obama. Talk about election interference (AIPAC’s sway in general).

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            Given how many American Jews absolutely despise Israel, I wonder how much of it is Illuminati shit and how much of it is the fact that Israel, like Cuba for the USSR, is geographically convenient.

          • gtem

            Jack the geopolitical angle is probably the biggest one to be honest, I’d say the same exact thing about the Saudis and other Gulf States who keep our dollar relevant, but occasionally do pesky things like sponsor Wahhabi terrorists. But the difference in my mind is that people can and will sometimes come out and ask “why the heck are we friends with the Saudis?” To ask the same about our relationship with Israel is political suicide in the US, and that doesn’t sit well with me.

            Coincidentally I saw a bumper sticker laden old Camry in the trendy Highland Park neighborhood of Pittsburgh last weekend, in addition to the “She persisted” sticker and a litany of other causes and support for repressed groups, there was a “I love the US but Israel is my home” sticker. I honestly didn’t expect that one. I didn’t care for it much either, as an immigrant myself.

          • Dirty Dingus McGee

            Perhaps if DW comes up with a semi lucid diatribe, you will post it.

            Everyone needs a good laugh now and then.

          • Ronnie Schreiber

            Jack, that’s sort of my point. I’ll drop this cause I’m not a huge jq guy but “we will ruin your life” makes me uncomfortable.

            Who, here, has said anything about ruining someone’s life?

            My point about the polio vaccine is that if Jews are really the boogeymen that Jew haters think they are, well then Jew haters should logically and morally refrain from using anything that Jews created or developed. They want to benefit from Jews’ contribution to civilization while denying Jews a place in the family of mankind.

            If you want to have an informed discussion about why Jews are overrepresented in industries that in many ways were created by Jews, or industries that dovetail well with Jewish culture we can have that discussion. Interestingly, I never see the folks who think Jewish overrepresentation in the entertainment and media industries say anything about the fact that most junkmen, scrap dealers, in the U.S. are Jewish. I suppose that’s like feminists who avoid mentioning that over 90% of on the job fatalities are men.

          • Ronnie Schreiber

            Or how Netanyahu came over here to speak to a joint session of Congress without official invitation from Obama. Talk about election interference (AIPAC’s sway in general).

            Where in the U.S. Constitution does it say that Congress needs the permission of the President to invite speakers and witnesses?

            As for AIPAC, they have less sway in American politics than the NRA.

            As for election interference, it’s well documented that Obama’s State Dept. funnelled U.S. taxpayers’ dollars to Netanyahu’s opposition in the last Israeli election.

            For the matter, Netanyahu has called for an end to U.S. economic aid to Israel. Israel has a first world economy and doesn’t need economic aid. Military aid is a different question. I think the U.S. gets good value out of its military aid to Israel. The majority of U.S. military aid to Israel is used to buy American military hardware or to fund joint research ventures that ultimately benefit the U.S. American planes use Israeli avionics and the U.S. Army is going to be using the Trophy tank defense system.

          • gtem

            “Where in the U.S. Constitution does it say that Congress needs the permission of the President to invite speakers and witnesses?”

            I’d say it’s not a matter of whether it is constitutional or not, but it is a pretty blatant affront to US leadership to have another leader side-step them to speak to a whole branch of US government. To hear that the State Dept used funds to influence Israeli elections is not surprising at all I suppose, much like we dumped 20 billion to shape/promote Ukrainian democracy as we saw fit, so I guess that sort of thing just goes back and forth.

            To compare to the NRA analogy. The NRA draws most of its funds from the millions of regular citizen members who pay their membership dues. And plenty of anti-gun politicians and most of the media establishment use any opportunity then can get to vilify and drag the NRA through the mud. Do we hear anyone in prominent positions of power raise the concern about AIPAC having an outsized influence on America’s foreign and domestic policy? No, that’d get you called a horrible anti-semite. That’s where I take issue: outsized influence of our politics, and don’t you dare talk about it.

            I think the US should assess what the net balance of pros/cons is to supporting Israel to the extent that we do, and the sort of consequences that carries. A reliable customer of US military tech, a military ally in a tough neighborhood (which in-turn keeps us on every muslim fanatic’s hit list), who in turn actively tries to sway internal US politics. I’m not convinced of the utility of the relationship to be honest.

        • Bark M Post author

          Insulting me is one thing. You can mostly do that all you like (with the exception of DW’s batshit crazy rants). Allowing anti-Semitic comments on my own blog is akin to endorsement in the eyes of many.

          Reply
          • Panzer

            “much like we dumped 20 billion to shape/promote Ukrainian democracy as we saw fit, so I guess that sort of thing just goes back and forth.”

            Sorry tovarisch, I guess we all forgot that the Ukrainian people require Moscow’s permission to choose their own government, or in the case of 2014, overthrow a wannabe dictator and elect someone else to take his place.

            As for the 20 billion (I think it’s less than that) that figure includes ALL aid to Ukraine since 1991, and pails in comparison to the ‘package’ (let’s just call it what it is – a bribe) Putin offered to Yanukovich to turn down the EU association agreement which entailed approx. 17 billion a year worth of preferential access to Russian markets for Ukraine plus a ‘soft loan’ of about 20 billion on top of that.

        • benjohnson

          >>2% population is seriously over represented

          The sooner you figure out why this happens the better off your life will be. It has more to do with hard-work, family, stability, raising children well, intellectual rigor, education, and thrift than it does with DNA.

          For example – I used to lament that some of my Jewish friends were smarter than me – but once I copied their practice of reading difficult books I found myself their equal.

          Reply
  9. Jeff Zekas

    As a former Democrat/ Liberal/ Green Party/ Socialist, may I comment? The supreme court is supposed to INTERPRET laws, not MAKE laws, at least, that’s what I learned in school. So, unless you want a liberal activist court, then Kavanaugh is no threat to civil liberties. As for Kav committing “perjury”: evidence does not exist for such a claim. Innocent until proven guilty, applies to everyone, whether an “old white man” or a black dude in prison for murder. Thirdly, the Dems want to allow ILLEGAL ALIENS the right to vote, all 22 million of them, which is strange, since every other country requires citizenship to vote. Lastly, I was a union member for 30 years, and BOTH parties stabbed us in the back, with NAFTA and the China policy. End of sermon.

    Reply
    • safe as milk

      for the most part, i agree. the one thing that goves me pause is kavanaigh’s support of the patriot act. it was an obvious violation of the constitution and the worst law of the last 20 years.

      Reply
  10. Orenwolf

    What in the holy hell happened to this comment thread?

    Why are bigoted and misogynistic commenters always jumping in with these “conservative” posts like this?

    It’s like somewhere along the line, conservative social or economic values became inseparable from oppressive views on everything else.

    What’s ultimately going to undermine the credibility of any argument here isn’t going to be anything that Bark had to say, it’s that every time he does, it gets +1’d by the people who would really be a lot happier if the USA were less brown and more architecturally based on crosses, and anything that furthers that goal is fair game.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.