Weekly Roundup: My Phone’s In There Edition

Some time ago, I read an excellent article, possibly in Foreign Policy, about how the Chinese government handled criticism at the higher levels. (How do they handle it at the lower levels? With a tank, of course.) Recognizing that China could not improve and progress if it didn’t continually address mistakes made by its leaders, but also understanding that it could be fatal to question or criticize the man in charge at any given time, the Chinese came up with an ingenious solution. Let’s say, for example, that Hu Jintao, the previous Dude Who Runs China, had introduced some ineffective or dangerous policy during his term. Some senior person would notice this problem and would address the leadership like so:

“Gentlemen, it has come to my attention that a dangerous policy introduced by Jiang Zemin is threatening this country.” He would then outline the policy as if it had been created and/or implemented by Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao’s predecessor. Everyone, including Hu Jintao, would listen politely. And if the senior official’s argument and/or facts proved to be persuasive, Hu Jintao would announce that he was addressing errors made by the previous administration, the bad policy would be removed, and everyone would continue to go about their business.

Our natural response as Westerners to this is to recoil from the hypocrisy! of this tactic, but in fact it is the only way to deal with the unfettered power of a uniparty state. By freeing the current powers that be from the admission of fault, you allow them to treat the problem as a problem to be solved rather than as a challenge to be defeated. This tactic is no more “hypocritical” than declining to wrestle a grizzly bear.

In any event, I think it would be irresponsible to suggest any correlation between this highly effective practice from overseas and the recent spate of “AAPI March Against White Supremacy” events that have, entirely correctly of course, placed the blame for the spate of attacks on AAPI individuals by non-whites on the root cause of white supremacy. We do not have a Uniparty in this country and the idea that a group of people who are suffering a remarkable string of violent attacks would use “white supremacy” as a means to have a discussion about countermeasures without upsetting the jealous power of that Uniparty is, of course, the most ridiculous of conspiracy theories.

Let’s move on.

This video is from a recent event in Washington DC where two girls, aged 13 and 15, carjack and murder a immigrant rideshare driver. (Do not confuse this with the other recent event in DC where two boys, aged 13 and 14, carjacked but only injured an immigrant rideshare driver.) For those of you who are tuning in after the video gets censored, or after it disappears from the high-resolution host at Worldstar, here’s what happens:

* The video starts with the two girls, one in the front seat and one in the rear, physically assaulting the 66-year-old man, identified as Mohammed Anwar. One of them starts using a taser on Anwar as he tries to get out of the car. Anwar, meanwhile, is repeating “This is my car!” in broken fashion during the assualt.

* The girl in the front seat puts the car in Drive while trying to steer the car, presumably to throw Anwar out. He is in the process of falling out of the car as it accelerates towards and strikes a bicycle rack with the open driver’s door.

* The Accord continues to accelerate in the wrong lane towards a T-juncture, with Anwar’s dying foot on the accelerator. At this point, the girls probably realize that they have no way to actually stop the car. This was a bad plan. The one in front settles for jerking the wheel to the right.

* Whoever was filming this starts running down the street. When he reaches the end of the street we see that the Accord has rolled onto the driver’s door and struck a parked car. We cannot see Anwar at this point.

* A group of Praetorian National Guardsmen is helping the girls out through the Accord’s passenger doors. The person who is filming starts yelling, “They stole the car!” At this point we see the limp, twisted body of Mohammed Anwar on the sidewalk. Nobody is looking at Anwar or making any effort to assist him.

* The Guardsmen are still focusing on the girls, whom they are walking to a door of the nearest building. The person taking the video reiterates that “Those girls stole the car.” Someone, possibly a Guardsman, confronts him from the side with an angry “What’s up?” (It might also be “Who Else?” as in, “Who else is in the car?”)

And now we come to the part that will probably ensure that this video, or at least the sort of samizdat descriptions of it that you are reading now, will come to live in the post-American consciousness. The girl who had been sitting up front, the one who tazed Anwar and then took the actions that directly caused his mutilated death, has already effortlessly and naturally transformed herself into the role of victim. She realizes that something is very wrong.

No, it’s not the crumpled body next to her.

It’s the fact that she left her phone in the car.

* “Please, my phone is in here!” she cries, nimbly stepping around Anwar’s body as she attempts to return to the Accord. A Guardsman grabs her hand but we can hear her making some difficult-to-understand pleas to the Guardsman. “My phone!”

* A Guardsman and (possibly) a Capitol cop are standing apart from the rest of the Guardsmen and the car. One of them says, “sigh I saw what happened.”

That’s the end of it. The first thing that strikes me about this situation was that the carjackers almost got away with it. Let’s say their joyride had been a few hundred feet longer, or that fewer people had been around to see what happened. It would have been no trick to slip past the Guardsmen and disappear back into the streets. The Capitol Police would have lazily reconstructed it as “immigrant driver loses control of 170-horsepower Honda.” And who would have been able to gainsay that?

The second thing is, of course, the absolute and total self-righteousness of the girl in the red hoodie. She is willing to step around the body of her murder victim to retrieve her phone. It occurs to me that most of my readers grew up like me — in a culture that never failed to emphasize the likelihood that whatever had just happened was, indeed, our fault. That sense of immediate guilt, welded in during childhood, has never left me. A few years ago I was in the middle of an SCCA race and the sixty-something bat-blind idiot next to me just turned his car into me for no reason. My immediate thought was: OH GOD WHAT HAVE I DONE?

By contrast, the girl in the red hoodie has been raised by a society, and a media, that has been at pains to inform her of her impeccable innocence in any and all things; indeed, that she could never be at fault. The primary response that expresses itself as crippling guilt in me has been upgraded to victimhood in her. She can murder a man in cold blood, step over his body like it was a lump of dogshit, then sob over her phone.

It doesn’t make her an “animal”, as many people on Twitter and elsewhere have suggested. Rather, she is entirely human in the sense that she has totally and completely learned all the lessons taught to her. We told her that everybody is trying to hurt her, that she can’t trust anybody who doesn’t look exactly like her. She listened, and heard, and acted.

Her defense attorney will have a tough row to hoe here. The DC justice system wants to — is designed to — slap her on the wrist for even felony murder charges. The goal here is to make sure she is back on the street before her 18th birthday, because incarceration is expensive. But she will need to show a minimum of remorse in order to lend a facade of righteousness to the proceedings. This will not make any sense to her. Isn’t she the victim? Hasn’t she been told that for her entire life? Her so-called “victim”, on the other hand — why, he had a car! A family! Probably a house! All the things she doesn’t expect to have! Haven’t we told her that those things have all been stolen from her by a profoundly broken society? Well, who can blame her for trying to steal them back?

I’m not being sarcastic here. If we tell a whole group of Americans that they have been the victims of an institutional crime, don’t we also to some degree encourage them to seek their own justice, however rude and random, for that crime? Your humble author identifies as German-American. Let’s say I’d grown up hearing how other ethnic groups had stolen my birthright, taken the wealth of my people, used us as disposable automatons. Imagine that I was told “The police love to murder unarmed German-Americans.” Imagine that I saw other immigrant groups — Austrian-Americans? Swiss-Americans? — come to this country and become fantastically wealthy. Then imagine that I was told that the discrepancy between my outcome and theirs was due to the efforts of a third party — let’s say the Dutch-Americans.

If you pump me full of that propaganda for decades, what will happen? I mean, we already know, because it kinda-sorta happened in 1937. If you tell a group of people for long enough that they are victims, and you are sufficiently convincing, some of them will eventually decide to balance the scale on that count.

For that reason, I will not join the chorus of people seeking the death penalty for this girl. She is still fundamentally a child. She is a product of her environment and her education. My eleven-year-old son has been slightly mispronouncing the word “interesting” for a few years now; he says “intern-sting”. Should he face the death penalty for behavior that I have not been willing to correct?

No, what’s required here is that we punish, or at least ameliorate, the corrupt system of education and discipline that has produced a seemingly endless number of teenage robbery-homicide experts in the District of Columbia and elsewhere. By doing so, we would both be addressing the root cause of the existing horrors while preventing any new horrors from occurring. There’s just one little problem: The system that created our young carjackers is, in fact, imbued with fantastic and tremendous power. It is beyond confrontation. Let’s say, as a basis for argument, that a Republican administration would solve the problems in Washington, D.C. (Try not to laugh.) Is there any chance whatsoever that a Republican administration could ever be elected there?

Of course not. There is literally zero alternative to the existing power structure. Therefore, we have to petition the existing power structure to change, one painful bit at a time, knowing that there will be many a murderous 13-year-old created between now and the time that such things no longer happen. We also know that we cannot present even the appearance of a threat to the existing power structure, or we will suffer a fate ranging from the permanent defeat of our ideas to a complete unpersoning.

The best thing to do is to lay the blame at the feet of the powers that existed in DC before — but the last Republican Mayor of DC ended his term in… uh… 1910. So that won’t work. It’s too absurd. What we need instead is an artificial enemy, someone to play Emmanuel Goldstein to Muriel Bowser’s benevolent and lovable Big Brother. We need something that doesn’t quite exist in reality but is very present in the popular imagination, like Emmanuel Goldstein. Then we can work together with the power structure to rectify the errors that were caused by this Goldstein-like force.

I got it! We’ll have a march to protest wh…

THIS EPISODE OF “WEEKLY ROUNDUP” HAS BEEN TERMINATED, THANK YOU FOR READING

* * *

For Hagerty, I wrote about the modern Eldorado convertible.

79 Replies to “Weekly Roundup: My Phone’s In There Edition”

    • CJinSD

      “The body camera footage later shows officers sitting down with the mother separately explaining that her child allegedly had broken a $1,000 computer, threw an eraser at the teacher and used a clipboard to hit other students before walking off the property that day.”

      At some point I care more about people who aren’t being raised badly.

      Reply
  1. stingray65

    “Let’s say I’d grown up hearing how other ethnic groups had stolen my birthright, taken the wealth of my people, used us as disposable automatons. Imagine that I was told “The police love to murder unarmed German-Americans.” Imagine that I saw other immigrant groups — Austrian-Americans? Swiss-Americans? — come to this country and become fantastically wealthy. Then imagine that I was told that the discrepancy between my outcome and theirs was due to the efforts of a third party — let’s say the Dutch-Americans. If you pump me full of that propaganda for decades, what will happen?”

    What will happen? If you have an IQ of less than 85 you will immediately buy into your victimhood. If your IQ is between 85 and 115 you won’t necessarily believe, but you will be afraid to say anything that might get you branded an oppressor, racist, Uncle Tom or some other epitaph that puts you on no-fly lists, no-hire lists, gets your fired, and ruins your prospects. If your IQ is over 115 you believe it is a ridiculous claim but you play along because you get some serious money and power playing this racism game that is a whole lot more than some chintzy reparations or welfare check. Chances are the 13 and 15 year old “victims” fall into the first category.

    Reply
      • stingray65

        I suspect that most of the people you think are gullible smart people are actually not as smart/gullible as you think. I don’t believe anyone with reasonable intelligence can believe this victim crap, but I do believe a lot are terrified of saying so, which isn’t gullible but cowardice. Thus I think it would be more accurate to say there are a lot of smart cowards.

        Reply
        • CJinSD

          There are some people fighting awfully hard to make sure CRT is programmed in Virginia Beach public schools when mere cowardice would permit them to just keep their mouths shut. They are people whose kids will certainly be vilified in classrooms due to their efforts. Why would cowards fight for that?

          Reply
          • stingray65

            There are people fighting hard for CRT because they can make money from it. Private schools that don’t teach that crap will get students of parents that actually want their kids educated in something useful, race hustlers will find angles to grift, education consultants can make money running CRT sessions for teachers and administrators, book publishers/authors who want to sell school systems CRT textbooks, school officials and PTA members who see big grants from Leftist charities and Biden Dept of Education officials for implementing CRT into the curriculum. So many ways to make money if you have some intelligence to work the system.

          • CJinSD

            I’m specifically talking about parents who aren’t in on the scam, but are insisting that anyone opposed to CRT is embarrassing the school district by making Virginia Beach look “divided” and “backwards.” They want their little white children to be ridiculed in classroom struggle sessions. Not every evil idiot Democrat needs to be directly compensated for the harm that they do.

          • Newbie Jeff

            “Is religion still a thing? That’s the high water mark for gullibility in today’s world”

            Disagree.

            The New Amerikan religion is the same as other religions in that its adherents pray for deliverance, but instead of God the faithful pray to government. I give people far more credit for praying to an infallible deity somewhere in the heavens than praying to a “god” with a demonstrated precedent of failure here on earth. It is New Amerika’s “democratic socialists” who demonstrate the undiscovered depths of gullibility.

      • Ronnie Schreiber

        “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.” – Eric Blair (aka George Orwell)

        Withour running afoul of Godwin, in 1933, it could be argued that Germany was the most technologically advanced country on earth. When I was in college in the 1970s, chemistry majors were still urged to learn German because Germans did much of the foundational work in organic chemistry.

        At least a third of concentration, labor, and death camp commandants had PhD or M.D. degrees.

        As I taught my kids, “Good is good and smart is smart and they’re not the same thing. We want you to be good and smart.”

        Reply
  2. Disinterested-Observer

    The trouble with the Blackwing, as I believe Jack has stated before, is that a true Cadillac cares not for ‘ring times. The premise is absurd. As befitting a company that once was able to sell a car that cost more than a Rolls, power should be “adequate” whatever the ‘Murican equivalent of that number is. It should accommodate however many people, ahem, that Master P needs to transport. It should fucking look good.

    Reply
  3. KoR

    In regards to the article, I do wish I was privileged enough to afford one of the new dinosaur Cadillacs. I’ve always had a soft spot for middle fingers, rebellion, and light stupidity which they seem to represent. My next car, whatever and whenever that will be, I’d very much like to buy something in that vein before I’m not allowed to buy one anymore.

    Unfortunately, short of the Camaro/Mustang/Challenger triumvirate of which I’ve had my fill of over the past few years, nothing in my tax bracket really fills that role. My current Golf R is an exceptional do-everything car, but lacks the theater, the whimsy, that the Blackwings probably do, or my last Mustang did.

    I’m one of approximately seven people who would both buy AND could (sorta) afford a modern equivalent of the Chevy SS. Which I guess is one reason why that was the last of its kind too. The wealthy (or at least wealthier than I) can afford to splurge on something loud and silly, where many around my age and income lack the space, time, and money to have a car that can’t be everything.

    So it goes.

    Just as a bit of humble brag in terms of the depths of my love of bastard cars, I once owned a base, 3.0 CTS with a stick shift. It was very dumb, and mostly terrible, but god was it cool. Miss that car dearly. Nothing new really fills that incredibly tiny niche in the market.

    Reply
  4. -Nate

    I call bullshit .

    These two women are in fact animals, they _chose_ to be so, no one forced them .

    I could be a coward too and claim my wretched childhood, blahblahblah means I can act like an animal but it’d be bullshit, plain and simple as I’m responsible for what I do and say .

    I chose to work hard and be honest even when it costs me $ , my reward is peace of mind at all levels and a nice little life where I have not only what I need but many things I simply want .

    Stealing is wrong, no way around it .

    Maybe these two children don’t deserve the death penalty / life behind bars but they do deserve punishment and maybe forcing them to learn how to not act like animals would be a good start .

    -Nate

    Reply
    • Eric H

      Everything those kids dis is wrong, and they were raised to not give a shit by both their parents and institutions.

      I used to live in the DC area back when Barry got his ass thrown in jail for smoking crack. I was still there when they re-elected his addict ass back into government. Nothing of substance has changed since then.

      They get the government and institutions they deserve with the citizens you would expect.

      Reply
  5. John C.

    Do you have a sense of how long the lifespan will be for the CT5? The Camaro platform seems secure. However the unique offering Chevy SS from a few years ago didn’t save Australian car production and I doubt this will save a Cadillac car.

    Reply
    • LynnG

      John C,
      It was not the Chevy SS that did Holden in. It was the fact that Holden was going to produce all the Pontiac offerings. But Obamas’ Car Czar (who ever he was and is most like back in the shadows of the West Wing) killed Pontaic which inturn was the final nail for Holden. Some where in my files I have the final edition of the Pontiac monthly magazine and on the cover was the upcoming models and they were all Holdens. I have a number of friends down under and they really like their Holdens and could not understand why GM wanted to kill it off.

      Reply
      • John C.

        Moving the G6 and the G8 to overseas platforms seems boneheaded not just for jingoistic considerations. The G6 had to move in Grand Am like numbers to keep the dealers afloat and gosh knows how much incentives that would have required. The G8, replacing the Grand Prix and the Bonneville, had to make the money. The volume necessary seems far off. Perhaps if they had a 3800 version to bring in the traveling salesman that used to take so many Grand Prix?.

        My understanding is that the police cars were to keep the factory running during the second go around with the SS being the profit center. The police shifting to the Volvo Explorer without all the flipping or bad transmissions I would have expected was the end of that hope. I was in New Zealand in 2018 and Australia in 2019 and was surprised how few Holdens or Falcons I saw. Plenty of Camrys, guess they are feminizing pretty fast.

        I don’t know how many upper end traveling salesmen are left, I don’t do it anymore, but 37k for the CT5 with the efficient 2.0 T doesn’t sound too bad.

        Reply
  6. Dan

    On Uniparty ECC. Another one of those Jack analogies that I hadn’t thought of that became blindingly obvious as soon as I read it here.

    On today’s episode of Chocolate City. You give far too much credit here. These people are, mentally speaking, 10 years old forever. Cause and effect are two ships in the night. Future time doesn’t exist. Their never ending monkeyshines isn’t front brain response to environmental propaganda, they don’t have the frontbrain for that. It’s back brain response to a turned back. They were doing that long before we began to provide them pre-emptive excuses and still will, should the Chinese also be dumb enough to permit them to do so, long after we’re dead.

    On Asians making the correct supplication. I don’t get this one. I do get this one in the work within the existing power structure, but endorsing fewer merit admissions and more get out of jail frees for the people assaulting you seems even more suicidal for them than it does for white people. There’s got to be a big IOU attached.

    On Cadillac doing the LS thing. Would that even work anymore? As top loaded as the market is now 125K doesn’t seem like much of a barrier to the people they want momentum with. Inviting working stiffs in would break the Veblen angle and without that you’re just the Corvette they already have.

    Reply
  7. Newbie Jeff

    “Our natural response as Westerners to this is to recoil from the hypocrisy! of this tactic, but in fact it is the only way to deal with the unfettered power of a uniparty state. By freeing the current powers that be from the admission of fault, you allow them to treat the problem as a problem to be solved rather than as a challenge to be defeated”

    Is this not precisely how the current situation at the border could be described? Democrats assailed the Trump administration with “children in cages!” and now that Biden (Harris) is putting children in cages, the predominant narrative is that it’s still Trump’s fault. I don’t think Biden (Harris), congressional Democrats, or their voters feel the slightest pressure of blame… and I don’t see actual solutions forthcoming.

    …if anything, it’s the exact opposite. Because the blame for the visible failure of the current administration’s can be so easily transferred to the previous one – and most Americans are fucking stupid enough to buy it – the current regime has absolutely no incentive to pursue real solutions. Which, in the case of an immigration system so spectacularly and catastrophically failed as the United States’ is, would be to simply build a big ass wall along the border… Biden (Harris) and Democrats could then blame the Trump administration for not completing this wall, and as I have said, most Americans are fucking stupid enough to buy that, too.

    But that’s not happening, is it? I don’t see anyone in power even laying the groundwork for a pathway to potential solutions, much less actually working on viable solutions. Sorry to return to my predictable cynicism, but at what point does a rational citizen come to terms with what a complete lack of viable solutions means for the country and his own future? Does anyone really think this all ends up okay?

    Reply
    • Eric H

      The Sino-shuffle only works when the people’s belief in the government outweighs their own conscience, when there is no freedom of the press to question the official line, and when history is mutable.

      The US has other issues.

      The spirit of working together to improve the country is dead.
      It was killed by the Republican party when Gingrich came to prominence within it. The “not only do we have to win, you have to lose” attitude coupled with the basest hypocrisy his vision instilled is simply repugnant and antithetical to cooperation.

      We have editorial outlets with news in their titles spewing nothing buy hyperbolic fearmongering 24-7. All of this bullshit is then used as “sources” by other similarly biased outlets to back up their version of the truth. Since there is no limit freedom of expression of opinion, this is the path used to reforge history.

      No one believes anything the government says unless it agrees with their particular editorial bias. It doesn’t matter what is said, once the editorial cycle spins up there are many versions of the truth – one of which will be tailored to your particular world view. The whole “big lie” approach of the Trump administration was the rotten cherry on top of the shit sundae that describes the entirety of political discourse in the “news”.

      That this is done to lay the groundwork to facilitate an Americanized version of the Sino-shuffle is obvious.

      The worst part is people eat this shit up, then ask for seconds.

      Reply
        • John C.

          Sobro, do your part in the Chinese tradition and admit Newt was bad, if just for shilling for Fannie May. Then the world opens up to reform apparently.

          Reply
        • Eric H

          Are you aware that Gingrich still holds significant power and influence in the Republican party? That’s not “blaming Hu Jintao”.

          Reply
          • Newbie Jeff

            “Are you aware that Gingrich still holds significant power and influence in the Republican party? That’s not ‘blaming Hu Jintao'”

            Weighing your comments on American media – which I agree with – I was going to respond cautiously… but, as they say, you’ve now removed all doubt.

            That you think Newt Gingrich still holds significant sway in the Republican Party harms your credibility here… I’m not sure what’s up with your fixation on Gingrich, but you can rest easy knowing that Gingrich has about as much influence as any other Republican waiting outside Trump’s office at Mar-a-lago. For better or for worse, Trump is the Republican Party… period.

            By “big lie” approach, do you mean the biggest lie of the Trump administration – manufactured by Democrats and broadcast incessantly by their sycophantic media – that Trump “colluded” with Russia to “steal” the 2016 election? The “Big Lie” set the stage for the destruction of confidence in our elections, it undermined the credibility of the office regardless of who occupied it, and disrupted a duly-elected president’s ability to govern. Now Democrats have gotten so much mileage out of the “Big Lie”, most of the party’s somnambulant prog-zombies probably still believe it despite “facts” and “science”.

            The point is, no one should have been the least bit surprised when those that now demand the unconditional acceptance of the election they like are the same idiots that screamed “Russia collusion” after the election they didn’t like. There is the Democratic Party’s “Sino-shuffle”, as you say, in its mature form. If you actually think it was Newt Gingrich that got us here, while simultaneously trying to lecture the commentariat on gullibility, you are Orwell’s “doublethink” come to life.

          • Ronnie Schreiber

            I believe Sobro was saying that you illustrate exactly what Jack described. You blame Gingrich just as today’s Politburo blames their predecessors.

          • Eric H

            Ronnie:
            I understood what Sobro was saying, it’s just wrong. Blaming Strom Thurmond or John McCain would fit the bill.

            Newbie:
            Where did I say they the Democrats aren’t using the media in the exact same way? I mentioned nothing partisan about the way the media is whoring themselves out.
            Newt was the final nail in the coffin of even pretending to be civil in US politics. Was congress a cesspool of bought legislators and special interests before? Of course, but they at least tried to keep the discourse somewhat civil with at least a token public facade of bipartisanship.

            The big lies to which I referred are virtually every utterance by Trump, his sycophantic supporters in the party, and the official Whitehouse press conferences. Policies aside, simply verifying facts shows the level of deceit.
            The big lies pertaining to the 2016 election is all on the Republican side.
            Trump in his 2016 campaign said the only way he would lose is via election fraud. He ran that out many times to energize his faithful. After he won the election denying the “collusion” was the next step especially when a bunch of people went to jail trying to hide it. If it was merely morally reprehensible as opposed to outright illegal the Trump administration would have owned it land would have shouted it from the rooftops like everything else. No one on the Democrat side claimed Russia messed with the votes, that’s a lie to deflect the conversation away from the actual illegal things (working with a foreign government to influence the election) that occurred. Did Russia try to influence the election? Without a doubt. Did they do anything meaningful? Who knows, but it’s worth investigating.

          • Newbie Jeff

            “The big lies pertaining to the 2016 election is all on the Republican side”

            “Did Russia try to influence the election? Without a doubt. Did they do anything meaningful? Who knows, but it’s worth investigating”

            You actually wrote this on a public forum.

            Normally, I wouldn’t waste time engaging with someone who lives inside such a paralyzing delusion. I suppose I could just attack the poor grammar and say, “google mueller investigation” and expend no further effort.

            But there’s a point to make here. This person most likely believes everything they are saying… they believe this because the cultural affliction of entitlement in America isn’t just limited to participation trophies and “free” college… people like this feel entitled to their own version of reality. As such, Mueller could have spent 20 years… 200 years… looking for “collusion”, coming up empty again and again, and this person would still believe in the “Russia collusion” narrative simply because that’s the reality they want to believe. They will block out every segment of reality, every inconvenient fact, every counterpoint that doesn’t build the reality they want, and they will do this without the slightest cognitive dissonance. They won’t think an inch outside their comfort zone, and will accuse you of “gullibility” at the same time…

            …nevermind that Adam Schiff’s tweets alleging “evidence!” of collusion are still available… nevermind that Manafort went to jail for campaign finance crimes, not Russian collusion… or that Michael Flynn was entrapped by the FBI… nevermind that the Steele dossier was a political document, or that the a lawyer doctored emails to justify continued government surveillance of the Trump campaign… nevermind that Trump’s enemies spent years looking for evidence of collusion and found nothing – literally nothing – that proves the “Russia collusion” lie.

            The Eric H’s of American society will simply ignore it all… just like Bowser won’t mention the carjacking, or NPR won’t write the name of the Boulder shooter, or Biden won’t say “crisis” … if they don’t like it, it doesn’t exist. It’s as simple as that… So the question becomes, how do we coexist within the same borders with people who are fundamentally detached from reality? How does our society function? The answer is already here for us to see: it doesn’t.

          • Eric H

            Newbie:
            Denying that the meeting between various Trump campaign people and Veselnitskaya happened is delusional. Simply having that meeting violated campaign law. People went to jail for attempting to cover up that the meeting took place and then for lying about what the meeting was about. Collusion happened. From what I have read, nothing was gained from it but being incompetent doesn’t mean doesn’t mean you didn’t do it.

            These are facts. Saying it didn’t happen is a lie.

            Saying the Mueller report didn’t find anything is a lie. Ten people went to jail as a result of the investigation, seven of them for lying to congress or obstruction of justice.

            Mueller chased down all the leads, interviewed everyone relavant that obeyed subpoenas, verified everything he could, and wrote his report. When his team finished it was submitted to Barr who promptly threw it in the garbage after writing a memo that lied about the report’s contents. My opinion of Barr is that he is the most dangerous kind of toady, he believes that the executive branch is above the law.

            No one should be above the law and politicians should be held to the highest of standards. Any misuse of power should be met with the harshest of punishments, but we all know that ain’t gonna happen. Politicians of all stripes are too corrupt to let the graft train get derailed.

            Mueller isn’t stupid, he knew exactly what was going to happen when he finished. With the Justice Department doctrine that the sitting President is not indictable (which is bullshit) he didn’t recommend indicting Trump for obstruction of justice for ordering Whitehouse staff to not cooperate with the investigation.

            Where are the factual errors here? All of this is in the public record.

          • Daniel J

            @Eric H

            There have been plenty of Republicans and Democrats willing to work across the aisle after Newt was even relevant. The issue is that there is a very small vocal minority on twitter who are forcing the narrative. Just look at AOC and Ted Cruz. They agreed on something yet the narrative by AOC and and her “twitter-ati” is that Ted Cruz somehow led the capital riots, when in fact he was doing something many have done well before him in the certification of the election.

            So obvious, it’s not about results, its about optics. If democrats were truly interested in coming together about something that most could get behind, they would. And of course, we have the NeoCons still in office who are do nothing or “NO” republicans that are useless too, no doubt.

            Newt has nothing, zero, zilch about what is going on in current federal politics.

            I’ve read many articles about the russian lawyer meeting with Jr and other staff. It seems all over the place if anyone can agree on whether it was illegal or not. From what I can tell over the years, campaign staff meet with people all the time to get “dirt” on whoever is running for office. In regards to the “narrative”, I trust reporters like Matt Taibbi, and he pretty much believes that the narrative was incorrect.

            Lets say, hypothetically, that what Trump did was illegal. Fine, but then why isn’t the media and the DOJ going after ALL of these politicians, both D’s and R’s, for their misconduct? Why does the media not run with Clinton or Biden scandals?

            So who perpetuates the hate and divisiveness again? It ain’t Newt. Hell, the Democratic party railroaded Tulsi, the one person who would work with R’s, and many R’s were willing to work with her.

          • Eric H

            Daniel:
            Yes, there’s still bipartisanship on issues that both sides agree on.

            About the meeting, having a meeting trying to get dirt on people is fine so long as it’s not a foreign national. The FEC is pretty specific: https://www.fec.gov/updates/foreign-nationals/
            The question would be if they received anything of value.

          • Newbie Jeff

            “Collusion happened. From what I have read, nothing was gained from it but being incompetent doesn’t mean doesn’t mean you didn’t do it.”

            “These are facts. Saying it didn’t happen is a lie”

            You didn’t read anything factual, because such “facts” don’t exist. It’s not a lie just because you type it in a comment. I get that you want so badly for your preferred narrative to be true. I get that you have been brainwashed by a partisan, agenda-driven media that tells you it’s true… but there’s a pretty significant reason it’s not true. Despite everything the media tells you, despite how badly you want to believe it, the reality is that the “Russia collusion” lie lacks something critical:

            Evidence.

            Evidence is what convicts people of collusion and not campaign finance violation or lying to the FBI because they are trying to entrap you. Reasonable doubt is the standard for innocent verdicts, because only evidence proves something beyond reasonable doubt… conspiracy theories, hunches, and just really really wanting something to be true doesn’t get people convicted. Evidence does.

            There is no evidence of collusion. The Mueller witch hunt looked for years and could not find it. It is so definitively true that no evidence exists, the Mueller team issued a rare public refutation of a certain Buzzfeed article when that article claimed that – after so many desperate years of waiting – evidence of collusion was finally found! It wasn’t. It doesn’t exist, which is why a bunch of anti-Trump lawyers scouring the earth for evidence had to publicly renounce such an article.

            When you, or Democrats, or the media actually produce evidence – that would be an email, a video, an audio recording, a letter, a post-it note, anything – that proves the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, then I’ll concede. Until then, just know that you are the intended result of duplicitous, traitorous partisans who operate on the confident assumption of your total gullibility and abject stupidity as a known quantity.

          • CJinSD

            gul•li•ble gŭl′ə-bəl►
            adj. Easily deceived or duped.
            Easily gulled or cheated.
            adj. Easily gulled; that may be duped.
            See also: believers in Russian Collusion

          • Ronnie Schreiber


            I understood what Sobro was saying, it’s just wrong. Blaming Strom Thurmond or John McCain would fit the bill.

            Ah, I see. It’s different when you do it.

            Tell us again how sharp *President Biden’s cognitive abilities beautiful the emperor’s new clothes are.

          • Eric H

            Ronnie:
            You’re missing the critical bit about the Hu Jintao bit.

            Hu Jintao is dead. He no longer has any face to save, no longer has friends in high places, and is not around to defend his name.

            If the current Republican party tried to pin something on Gingrich that he felt defamed his legacy you can be damned sure he’d make a big stink about it. This is the only reason it is different.

            Newbie:
            Do you understand words have specific meanings? The Trump campaign had (at the time) a secret meting (which they didn’t admit to until it became public) with a Russian foreign national to discuss what they hoped was dirt on the Democratic opposition, which by the federal election laws was illegal. This is the exact dictionary definition of collusion.

            How does your brain work on this?
            Do you deny the meeting took place?
            Do you deny what the Trump campaign wanted to get out of that meeting?
            Do you deny that trying to gt something of value from a foreign national for a federal election is illegal?
            Do you deny the dictionary definition of collusion?

            Please enlighten me on your though process here.

          • Newbie Jeff

            “The Trump campaign had (at the time) a secret meting (which they didn’t admit to until it became public) with a Russian foreign national to discuss what they hoped was dirt on the Democratic opposition, which by the federal election laws was illegal”

            How do you know what was discussed? Is there a transcript? A recording? Audio? Video? Did money change hands? You literally said in another post, “From what I have read, nothing was gained from it…” This directly contradicts the lies Adam Schiff told the American people, that irrefutable evidence exists to prove the Trump campaign colluded with Russians to throw the 2016 election. Evidence of this does not exist, because Mueller’s team spent over 2 years looking for it. Do you really think a first-time, insurgent grassroots presidential campaign colluded with a foreign government and was also able to somehow hide every shred of evidence that it had done so?

            This would be that whole thing about evidence I said earlier. Maybe they showed shared pictures of their kids… maybe they traded recipes… maybe they hacked into the DNC… maybe a bunch of hookers peed on them. But Democrats don’t know, the media doesn’t know, and you certainly don’t know.. but it didn’t stop Democrats from inventing a narrative about “collusion” and selling it to the idiotic herds of their constituency (hint, that’s you).

            The “dictionary definition” of collusion literally defines the daily routines for politicians like the Clintons, Biden, Kamala Harris, Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, etc etc… did it ever occur to you that those camps never get investigated? Do you ever wonder why those campaigns don’t get infiltrated, wiretapped, and torn apart? In the “dictionary definition” of collusion, Eric Swalwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy – there is irrefutable evidence of this – and he still serves on the House Intelligence Committee. Doesn’t that seem a little strange to you?

            Somewhere, inside your one-dimensional spectrum of intellect, there has to be at least the tiniest notion that maybe the entire “Russia collusion” narrative was just a political narrative intended to inflict political damage on a political enemy in scorched-earth political warfare. So in the interest of trying to achieve something productive, let me explain it to you like I would explain it to a child: Democrats really don’t like Trump. They thought Trump would lose, but when he won they were really embarrassed and mad. Democrats made up a story to make Trump seem like a bad man. They used that story as an excuse to harass and spy on Trump and his friends. This is called a witch hunt. When Trump didn’t want to cooperate with the Democrats’ witch hunt, they said he was guilty of obstruction. This is called a Catch-22. Democrats were able to do this because lots of people don’t like Trump, and these people don’t really care if something is true or not, or if the politicians they voted for are guilty of the same things they were accusing Trump of doing… This is called Doublethink.

          • Eric H

            Newbie:
            Unpacking your tirade you deny what the Trump campaign people went in to that meeting to accomplish. You claim there is no proof of what went on in that meeting or why it was arranged.

            Lots of emails have been made public about this meeting and its setup.
            In an email from Goldsone to Trump Jr on June 3rd:
            Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.

            The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.

            This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump – helped along by Aras and Emin.

            Jr. responded with:
            Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?

            And thus the meeting was setup with the specific goal of getting help from a foreign national to help with the campaign.

            Before the emails were released but after the meeting was made public, the campaign people claimed the meeting was about adoption of Russian children and not about campaign issues. Later they claimed it mostly about adoption with some stuff on Clinton. Even later Jr. said in an interview “he had been expecting information about Clinton.”

            The participants directly admitted what the meeting was about and what they wanted from it. The “dirt” they got was that an American company (Ziff Brothers Investments) had cheated Russian taxes and illegally donated to the Clinton campaign.

            Do you want to educate yourself or do you wish to remain willfully ignorant of these events?
            Will you continue to deny what actually happened?

          • Newbie Jeff

            “Unpacking your tirade you deny what the Trump campaign people went in to that meeting to accomplish”

            …and then what happened? Were Russian agents hired to meddle in the election? Did the Trump campaign hire Russian hackers to hack the DNC? Did they pay Russians to run FB ads to sway voters? Is “Russia collusion” real? Your capacity for thinking around any possible conclusion other than “Russia collusion”, your ability to completely ignore any fact you find inconvenient, or any context that alters your preferred narrative, is fascinating.

            You like quotes? Try these:

            “…one of the judgements in the Intelligence Community assessment was that we didn’t see any evidence of actual manipulation of voter tallies”

            “WeIl, no, it’s not. I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election”

            “…we didn’t have any evidence of collusion certainly that met the evidentiary threshold that would make its way into the Intelligence Community assessment. There was nothing in the assessment, [redacted] alluding to collusion”

            -James Clapper, former Dir. of National Intelligence. Closed-door testimony to House Intelligence Committee members, 17 Jul 2017.

            These are Clapper’s verbatim responses to direct questioning from House Representatives like Adam Schiff (and others) regarding “Russia collusion”. DIRECT QUOTES, moron. US government officials, under oath, questioned about “Russia collusion”.

            But Adam Schiff went on TV and lied to you anyway, didn’t he? As you accuse others of denying reality, you may have to face the fact that you were duped by left-wing partisan lies and Democratic Party disinformation, cycled through the CNN ticker, with the intention of misleading low-information voters.

            Your move, dude.

          • Eric H

            Newbie:
            Quit changing the subject. No one claims “the Russians” affected the actual vote tallying. It’s a bullshit misdirection Trump defenders bring up when they run out of excuses for the behavior of Trump and his campaign staff.

            The Trump campaign meeting with a Russian national to try to get something of value was a violation or FEC law. You’ve stopped denying it but refused to admit you were wrong.

            It’s interesting how you cannot separate “The Trump campaign tried to get something of value from a foreign national who happened to be Russian” from “the entire Russian government worked behind the scenes with Trump to hack the election.” You seem to think I’m claiming the latter, but in fact I have been very specific in claiming the former. To me, it appears that your anger at anyone questioning Trump affiliated actions has diminished your reading comprehension. You seem to think I’m angry at all this, nothing could be further from the truth. I’m simply tying to find out how someone could have lived through this, seen the reports, (hopefully) read a variety or sources, read what the actual participants said, and still have an internal frame of reference that diverges wildly from reality.

          • Newbie Jeff

            “Quit changing the subject”

            For someone who accuses me of lacking reading comprehension, you seem to be unable to comprehend the exchange which is written right in front of you. Let’s recap:

            You: “The big lies of 2016 is all on the Republican side. After Trump won he denied collusion”

            Me: “The biggest lie of 2016 was Democrats telling the American people that Trump colluded with Russia”

            You: “Collusion happened [that’s a DIRECT quote from you, BTW]”

            Me: “There’s no evidence of this. Lots of people looked for it”

            You: “…but but ‘dictionary definition’ of collusion!”

            Me: “literally everyone in DC is guilty of the ‘dictionary definition’ of collusion. Using it as an excuse to spy on a campaign proves the entire narrative was politically motivated”

            You: [completely ignoring those facts] “here’s a quote from a Trump Jr meeting, see collusion!”

            Me: “Here are quotes from anti-Trump intelligence officials testifying under oath to anti-Trump politicians that there is zero evidence of collusion”

            You: “you’re changing the subject! You can’t read!” [but noteworthy, you have stopped using the term “collusion” which you had so confidently repeated above… which, again, is not my failure of reading comprehension because you alleging “collusion” is still written right there where everyone can read it… ruh roh!]

            Me: the juicy irony of you accusing me of living in a “divergent reality” is that you’ve now backed yourself into a logic trap: on one hand, you’ll have to continue to assert the Trump campaign was guilty of “collusion” – or the “dictionary definition of collusion” – when the Mueller investigation found zero evidence of it, no one in the Trump campaign was convicted of it, every official who testified under oath denied it, and miraculously Trump Jr is out there running free… (and I’m pretty sure everyone in the witch hunt was considering the “dictionary definition” of collusion). Which means you still believe in the “collusion” narrative when literally no one else who was originally pushing the narrative still does…

            OR…

            …you admit the Trump campaign was NOT guilty of collusion, which was my initial and consistent point, it refutes what you wrote and argued in your previous comments, and it proves that Democrats told the biggest lie of 2016 and thus I was correct from my very first comment.

            So let’s go for the grand finale with a very simple question: “Earth to Eric H, was Trump guilty of collusion or not guilty of collusion?”

          • Eric H

            Newbie:
            Yes, the Trump campaign is guilty of colluding with a foreign national to improve their chances of winning the election. They admitted it openly. Only the corrupt leader of the justice department kept them from being prosecuted for it.

            Be as deluded as you want. The quotes from intelligence officials are in relation to RUSSIAN STATE LEVEL collusion, which I am not and have not accused the Trump campaign of. Your continued attempts at misdirection reveal the zealot you are and are good for a chuckle.

            Have a nice day.

          • Newbie Jeff

            “Yes, the Trump campaign is guilty of colluding with a foreign national to improve their chances of winning the election”

            Except no one was convicted of this, despite the campaign’s political enemies desperately trying for years… if talking to foreign nationals to get “dirt” was “collusion” then every politician in DC is guilty of this. That Democrats only looked at the Trump administration proves their motivations were purely politically motivated.

            “The quotes from intelligence officials are in relation to RUSSIAN STATE LEVEL collusion, which I am not and have not accused the Trump campaign of”

            Thank you for this. As I said at the very beginning, Democrats lied about this to undermine the legitimacy of Trump’s election. John Lewis, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer, and many others are on public record accusing the Trump campaign of collusion with Russia that affected the outcome of the 2016 election. This set off years of investigation that further undermined the Trump’s ability to govern as the witch hunt coerced and threatened members of his administration. It was the biggest lie of the 2016 election, and it has contributed to a catastrophic loss of Americans’ trust in the election process, which we will most likely never recover from as a republic and as a society.

            No, sir, YOU have a nice day!

  8. JMcG

    I’m really starting to feel like Tommy Lee Jones’ character in No Country for Old Men. I just feel outmatched by the relentless flood of evil.

    Reply
    • Jim

      Actually, in response to the Sheriff explaining why he is retiring, his dad stated “What you got ain’t nothin’ new. This country’s hard on people. You can’t stop what’s coming. It ain’t all waiting on you. That’s vanity.”

      Reply
  9. hank chinaski

    All the links will likely push this into moderation, but it’s been a busy weekend for white supremacy:
    https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2021/03/woman-charged-with-murder-in-alleged-street-racing-crash-posts-video-blaming-grandmother-killed-in-wreck.html

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14482526/lucia-bremer-dies-shot-teen-boy-charged/

    https://vidmax.com/video/203248-total-savage-brutally-assaults-and-chokes-out-asian-man-on-the-nyc-subway-steals-his-apple-bag

    And they haven’t even exonerated Derek Chauvin yet.
    .
    .
    .
    The memes related to the Suez clusterfuck are gold. I haven’t seen an explanation yet for the dick pick it drew in the sea before entering the canal. Epic level troll.

    The Donald is their Goldstein now and forever.

    Reply
  10. Daniel J

    I saw some of the social media responses. Many were saying that why didn’t the driver just let the girls take the car, since shouldn’t his life be worth more than the car. Others suggest that these girls are the victims. And then of course, Mayor Bowser puts out a vanilla PSA about car jackings, without any other comment to this car jacking or the other 90+ car jackings since the first of the year.

    It’s all disgusting. We can no longer defend our life or our property anymore without the criminal somehow being the victim.

    We had the “In Defense of Looting” book come out a while back. I’m now waiting for the “In Defense of Car Jacking”.

    Reply
  11. jwinks6500

    The “guard” appear unconcerned that there is a dead man on the sidewalk (maybe programmed only to respond to MAGA hats). No sense of urgency. No one (bystanders, the guy with the camera) goes to see about him??? Sick.

    Reply
  12. stingray65

    Of course the Leftist establishment starting with the Mayor is already making excuses for the girls, and I have little doubt that they will get no more than a mild slap on the wrist for their armed robbery and murder crimes because of course they are juveniles who are suffering from a legacy of slavery, and they should not have their bright futures in helping to overcome the racist USA snuffed out for a simple youthful indiscretion. But perhaps those of us who have our doubts about the relaxed criminal justice system should consider that these girls might be future Nobel prize winners, or Grammy winners, or might invent the vaccine for the next pandemic, or perhaps the first female person-of-color captains of giant ships passing through the Suez Canal, and even if they never achieve fame or high achievement they will almost certainly become taxpaying citizens and loving parents because of the experience and learning that comes from seeing the error of their ways and putting themselves on the straight and narrow after a brief brush with criminality and a corrective rebuke by the criminal justice system.

    Reply
  13. Eric L.

    I mean, this is a very insightful article, but you all missed the genuine hilarity of the juxtaposition of “my phone’s in there!!” with the image of the Ever-stuck Suez ship. 🤣

    Reply
    • -Nate

      Ronnie ;

      It’s pretty much the same in any American Ghetto or Barrio….

      Daily shootings for no real reason .

      -Nate

      Reply
  14. MD Streeter

    Heartiste was fond of saying “diversity+proximity=war” and I never wanted to believe him. I married a Japanese girl and we lived for years in Japan (where I experienced more real racism than she has here in Michigan) and we spend our evenings watching old Star Trek and its wonderful vision for us. But with everything that’s happening now (and has been happening since before the Michael Brown thing) it’s hard to refute his words. I hope but I’m not optimistic.

    Reply
  15. baconator

    Well, as the owner of a ‘76 Eldorado and also someone on the waiting list for that alphabet soup manual-transmission Blackwing, I agree with you about the cars. The Blackwing is way too goddamn expensive, but it may be the last daily driver I ever buy, and there’s nothing else remotely like it available new. So, I will go into (cheap) debt, and hope I can earn my way out of it.

    I can only assume that this ridiculous forced march to unwanted and premature electrification will shift even more buyers toward full-size trucks. Those (and maybe V-12 Lambos?) will be the last ICE vehicles sold, and they will be nearly depreciation proof.

    In the meantime, the container ships that enable globalization will continue to burn bunker fuel, each ship responsible for the CO2 output of a million cars.

    Reply
    • LynnG

      Baconator,
      Also as an owner of a 76 Eldorado with an EFI 500 and the famous ECU that routed the power for the two fuel pumps thought the ECU which leads to ECU failure as the fuel pumps age, and about 30 other Cadallics over the last 40 years. Congrats on ordering the 2021 Blackwing, however a little hard earned advice. First, Extended Warranty, I know they are usually a waste of money but in the case of a limited production motor with a short outlook for future producton (remember Mary said Cadillac would be all electric) Extended Warranty is a must have. Second, once these cars are on real world roads, keep a look out for posting on owner sites as to what elecrtonic components have a short life span. Then stock up with a couple of extras, you will need them. Remember the XLR, well some brilliant designer designed the left and right tail light as an unservicable units. Guess what, 8-10 years after production stopped, all the NOS replacements are gone, and on the used market, a single tail light can go for up to $2,500 depending on supply. The manufacturers have cut back stock of NOS parts to the bare minimum and for those of us that keep our cars a while its a real Catch-22. Again, congrats on ordering your new Blackwing, wish I could have afforded one of the 500 CT6 Blackwings but not in my budget….

      Reply
      • baconator

        Thanks for the advice – I’ll be doing as you say. I’m not expecting the Blackwing to be a fully-baked piece of engineering. I’m hoping that Cadillac makes enough of the base models so that all the screens and other gubbins in the interior can be replaced with junkyard parts. As for the engine and transmission, they’re also largely parts-bin items. Worst-case, I can do some mix-and-match with other LT-engine parts from the Summit or Jegs catalog, so I think that will give me a fighting shot at keeping it running. I’m pretty sure it’s a better bet than, say, the new Audi RS6 that the car mags are showering with praise.

        Reply
  16. David Sanborn

    Cliff’s Notes version: fundamentally what you’re trying to establish with far too much exposition is this: Democrat controlled cities like DC produce teen murderers, nay even encourage their existence. Republican cities are in contrast a utopian paradise of law & order. See how easy that was?

    What you miss: the vast majority of large cities are, by default Democrat enclaves. The 12 most populous cities in America have Dem or Independent mayors.
    https://ballotpedia.org/Party_affiliation_of_the_mayors_of_the_100_largest_cities
    You have to look waaay down that list to find a Republican mayor, and that’s San Antonio. Here’s some data on their crime: “With a crime rate of 51 per one thousand residents, San Antonio has one of the highest crime rates in America compared to all communities of all sizes – from the smallest towns to the very largest cities. One’s chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime here is one in 20.”
    https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2020/08/06/report-san-antonio-ranks-4th-among-us-cities-with-biggest-increase-in-homicide-rates-in-2020/

    What you’re clutching your pearls over isn’t a political matter, it’s economic and cultural. Big cities have areas of astonishing poverty, places I’ve worked in for FEMA for many years. As American wealth transfers to a burgeoning billionaire class the middle class is mutating into the broke class. Minimum wage has been stagnant for more than three decades.
    https://cepr.net/this-is-what-minimum-wage-would-be-if-it-kept-pace-with-productivity/
    People are getting desperate, parents work multiple jobs and don’t have time to raise good progeny. Public schools in economically depressed areas don’t have sufficient tax revenue to fund even a subpar education or retain good teachers. Teen pop culture has essentially no worthwhile figureheads, no paragons of virtue. It’s a sea of MMA fights on tv, trap and rap music like Moneybagg Yo with no Gil Scott Heron values to be found. Rinse, repeat.

    This is a nuanced problem that demands more than just being Republican, which I infer to mean ‘hiring more cops and equipping them with more lethal weapons’ – but you’d rather lay the blame on Democrats. Whatever man. Simple solutions for simple people.

    Reply
    • snorlax

      Interesting self-own; San Antonio’s mayor is a liberal independent. It has not had a Republican mayor since 2001.

      “Public schools in economically depressed areas don’t have sufficient tax revenue to fund even a subpar education or retain good teachers.”

      Major cities spend enormous amounts of money on public schools. For example, in my home state of Massachusetts, the (severely underperforming) Boston school district spends $23,000 per pupil. For comparison, the ultra-wealthy suburb of Wellesley, where houses start in the seven figures, spends $21,000 per pupil.[1] Washington, D.C., the subject of this piece, spends $30,000(!) per pupil.[2] More broadly, the US spends more money on public schools than almost any other country.[3] Japan, which is famous for its excellent public schools, spends only $10,000 per pupil.

      [1] https://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/ppx.aspx
      [2] https://townhall.com/columnists/terryjeffrey/2020/09/16/washington-dc-public-schools-spend-30k-per-student-23-of-8th-graders-proficient-in-reading-n2576265
      [3] https://www.insider.com/how-much-countries-around-the-world-spend-on-education-2019-8

      Reply
      • David Sanborn

        I’ll issue a mea culpa on San Antonio and its *Independent* mayor in a *republican state*. That said, Nirenberg is hardly liberal. My fundamental point stands: you can’t hang crime on political affiliation as Jack so stridently wishes to.

        Your examples of schools that are seemingly well funded are exceptions to the rule: schools in poor districts that depend on property taxes for their funding struggle to retain talented staff and do worse in testing. I’m sorry that’s over your head. There’s absolutely correlation between poorly funded schools and poor performing students. Would you move your kids to a neighborhood with crumbling schools and underpaid teachers? I don’t think so.
        https://www.npr.org/2016/04/18/474256366/why-americas-schools-have-a-money-problem

        Jack’s attempt to hang the actions of two murderous youths on the Democratic party is absurd, unconscionable. The problems we face in America today are far more nuanced and complex than his political scapegoating. But that’s his brand: partisan gas lighting at every opportunity. He probably blames the Murano convertible on Democrats too.

        Reply
        • snorlax

          Nirenberg defeated a Democrat incumbent by running to her left. If he is not a liberal, then nobody is.

          Here is a good resource[1] that lists spending per pupil in the 1,000 largest school districts in America in the year 2014. Every district was funded adequately, most were funded lavishly and many were funded extremely lavishly, given that Japan’s top-ranked public education system spends $10,000 per pupil, and the average parochial school tuition in 2019 was $7,350 per pupil.[2]

          The highest spending was in Newark, at $30,742 per pupil ($34,400 inflation-adjusted), and the lowest was in Boise, at $5,673 per pupil ($6,400 inflation-adjusted). To answer your question, I would much sooner send my children to public school in Boise than Newark. For the most part, the more the school district is listed as spending the less I would want to send my children there.

          Since you are blaming the actions of the two girls on inadequate spending on public education, I’m curious what amount of spending would have been adequate such that they would not have murdered the immigrant cab driver. Since $30,000 per pupil was apparently not enough, should it have been $35,000? $50,000? $100,000?

          [1] https://ballotpedia.org/Analysis_of_spending_in_America%27s_largest_school_districts
          [2] Link in reply so this one doesn’t go into moderation.

          Reply
    • Newbie Jeff

      “Reality has a well known liberal bias my friend as nothing I wrote, other than San Antonio’s mayor being an I instead of a R is inaccurate”

      Translation: “I got the basic facts completely wrong which ended up destroying the entire argument I was trying to make… but somehow, I’m still right. I know this because I use social media, which is literally designed to target me with manipulated, confirmation-biased content to keep me plugged into it, and it works great!”

      Reply
    • David Sanborn

      Hey thx for asking nicely. I explained myself thoroughly: Jack’s claim the horrible crime committed by the two teen girls should be laid at the feet of Dem lawmakers goes beyond gaslighting, it’s entirely asinine.

      For example: I live in Florida, a very Republican state with shining examples of highly ethical Republicans like Matt Gaetz and also Marco Rubio, Rick Scott, Ron Desantis, etc. If Jack’s contention is correct, we’d be at the bottom of the list of crimes per capita. Somehow we’re the 21st worst state. The worst state? Republican Alaska.

      You want to lower crime? Raise the standard of living. Give parents enough of a wage to have time with their kids. Fund all schools adequately. Have societal role models. Maybe go to church. But don’t insult my intelligence by saying it’s the fault of Democrats.

      I’ve exceeded the comment thread depth and can’t reply directly to CJinSD, so I’ll append it here:

      Dear CJinSD: calling me “every villain since the dawn of time” is the saddest use of hyperbole I’ve ever encountered. But since you brought it up, I’d love to be the guy in Highlander whose head is held on with safety pins. He’s quite villainous.

      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.