Like many others, I’m not sure the latest Trump vs. FOX fight is quite over. (One obvious way to grease a face-saving deal is for Fox to agree to give a few millionin profits to a veterans’ charity.) But here’s my framework for thinking about it.
1. Fox isn’t a “news network” like other news networks. Never has been. The left is right about this. If the Obama White House calls CBS and says it doesn’t like commentator X, CBS will politely tell the White House to f— off. If a Bush White House (or, one suspects, a Rubio White House) calls Roger Ailes and says it doesn’t like pundit X, pundit X is likely to disappear from Fox.**
2. Fox favors immigration amnesty. Not uniformly, of course. But do you think it was an accident when every Fox primetime anchor, including Hannity, came out for amnesty after the 2012 election? See here for more of this argument. Since Trump is in the process of wrecking the GOP elite’s plans for amnesty, you wouldn’t expect Fox to be friendly to him.
3. In the first GOP debate, back in August, Fox appeared to make an executive decision to take Trump out. The tell wasn’t in Megyn Kelly’s questions, which were in-bounds, but the post-debate Fox spin, featuring bizarre repeated predictions that Trump was of course now finished.
4. Trump then picked a fairly nasty fight with Kelly, with Ailes basically backing down, embarrassing her. She has ample reason for animus against Trump. I leave it to viewers of her show to decide if she has given effect to that animus over the past months. Many kausfiles commenters seem to think she has, but others say no.
5. You ordinarily don’t want a candidate to be able to create a conflict of interest simply by attacking a journalist and then claiming the journalist is hostile. But Trump’s not guilty of “bootstrapping” because Fox started it (see point 3).
6. Whether or not Trump’s right to try to bounce Kelly at this late date–and the choice of debate moderators is often the subject of intense negotiations, at least in 2-person races– the statement Fox put out when he threatened to not show up was so juvenile and mocking that it, in itself, is proof of over-the-line bias on Fox’s part.
7. Trump doesn’t have to show up. But — even if he has a legitimate beef — is that prudent? I don’t know. I suppose it partly depends on what his “internals” say about the state of play in Iowa. In his online Twitter query today (about whether he should join the debate) I voted “yes.”
8. Even if a Trump boycott hurts Trump, it’s also likely to hurt Fox, a network that now has a deadening hold on conservative punditry because it is basically the only avenue of upward advancement. If Trump drives a wedge between Murdoch’s network and the GOP base — more accurately, deepens the division he’s already created — it could attract a competitor to try to steal that base away. Remember when the U.S. team didn’t show up at the Moscow Olympics? It drove the point home to ordinary Russians that yes, we were angry and serious about opposing Soviet expansionism. Likewise, if Trump doesn’t show up and wins the election anyway, in the teeth of Fox’s taunts, it will dramatically make the point that Fox isn’t as essential to non-Democrats as it once was. In the long run, that could be more important than whatever effect the debate confrontation has on the Iowa results.
__________
** — Some commenters note that CBS has become a little incestuous. Maybe not the best example! But I stick with the distinction: Even when Obama White House national security aide Ben Rhodes is talking to his brother, CBS News president David Rhodes, about obstreperous reporter Sharyl Attkisson, I bet the conversation is couched in conventional journalistic terms (e.g., hypothetically, ‘She got it wrong’) and not mutual-cause terms (e.g., hypothetically, ‘She’s not helpful’). More here.
Posted inDonald Trump|Comments Off on Trump vs. Fox, Round 7
WASHINGTON — In a German prison camp 71 years ago, Master Sgt. Roddie Edmonds stared down the barrel of his Nazi captor’s pistol and refused to say which of his fellow prisoners of war were Jewish.
“We are all Jews here,” said Sergeant Edmonds, the highest-ranking American noncommissioned officer at Ziegenhein stalag that day, instead ordering more than 1,000 of his fellow prisoners to stand together in front of their barracks. The Geneva Convention required soldiers to provide only their names, ranks and serial numbers, not their religions, Sergeant Edmonds said, warning the German that if he shot them all, he would be tried for war crimes.
That act of defiance in January 1945 spared the lives of as many as 200 Jews, and, on Wednesday, Sergeant Edmonds will receive posthumous recognition by President Obama as the first American service member to be named Righteous Among the Nations, an honor bestowed on non-Jews who risked their lives to save Jews during the Holocaust.
Mr. Obama will make an unusual appearance at the Israeli Embassy, which is all the more notable because only months ago he clashed openly with Israel over the Iran nuclear deal. He will mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day and the 71st anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp, holding up Sergeant Edmonds and others who showed heroism during World War II as symbols of the values Israel and the United States share.
Mr. Obama will be hosted by Ron Dermer, the Israeli ambassador to the United States who, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spent much of last year working to defeat the president’s highest foreign policy priority. It is the clearest sign to date that both governments are working to heal their relations.
Mr. Obama will be introduced by Steven Spielberg, the Oscar-winning director whose 1993 film “Schindler’s List” recounted the tale of Oskar Schindler, the German industrialist named as Righteous Among the Nations decades ago for saving more than 1,000 Jews who worked in his factories.
The stories of those Mr. Obama will recognize are no less cinematic, although until recently they have been virtually unknown, including to their families.
The award is granted by Yad Vashem, Israel’s official Holocaust remembrance and educational organization, which has bestowed it on more than 25,000 people, only five of them American.
First of all, the Nazis treated western prisoners who were Jews the same as non-Jews, generally speaking. The Nazis observed the Geneva Conventions about prisoners of wars with western nations who had also signed up to live by the rules. Russia didn’t sign up to live by the Geneva Conventions, so the Nazis and Russians were brutal with each other’s prisoners.
The Nazis were not likely to single out the Jewish POWs for death and torture. That rarely happened.
Only about 1% of American POWs died in Nazi camps, and most of them died from the wounds they suffered prior to capture.
Posted inGermany|Comments Off on NYT: Obama to Honor Americans’ Wartime Efforts to Save Jews During Holocaust
Germany’s leaders have nothing of signifcance to say about the worst outbreak of sexual assaults in Germany since the Red Army moved out after World War II. Why won’t they do anything? Answer: for the same reason that the Catholic Church insists that Islam is a religion of peace. The alternative–watching from a distance a civilizational collapse in real time with its attendant horrors–is too terrible for Angela Merkel or Pope Francis I to contemplate. They would rather take casualties than absorb the horror of the situation. The root of the problem is theological. The West is paralyzed by its own notion of the good.
Over at Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer quotes Archbishop Bruno Forte’s claim that “Islam teaches ‘non-violence in the name of God,” adding:
How could an organization that claims to speak for God and to be led by the Holy Spirit be so indefatigably committed to a lie? For it isn’t only Bruno Forte: the Pope has said the same thing, and it’s the official policy of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which winks at dissent on any number of actual Church teachings, but moves ruthlessly to suppress voices that dare to suggest that maybe Islam is not a Religion of Peace. It appears as if protecting the image of Islam is more important to Church leaders today than teaching the contents of their own faith.
I predicted that Germany’s leaders would do nothing about mass sexual abuse by Muslim immigrants in an Oct. 14, 2015 essay at Asia Times. Some extracts:
Germany’s elite knows perfectly well that the migrants bring social pathologies, because they have already seen the world’s worst sex crime epidemic unfold in Scandinavia. Sweden now has the highest incidence of reported rape outside of a few African countries, and nearly ten times the rate of its European peers—and all this has happened in the past ten years. Sweden ranks near the top of the World Economic Forum’s Gender Gap Index, yet it has become the most dangerous country for women outside of Africa, with an incidence of rape ten times that of its European peers. Sweden’s political leaders not only refuse to take action, but have made it a criminal offense to talk about it.
Even in liberated, feminist, gender-neutral Sweden, there is something more horrible than rape, something horrible enough to persuade the political elite to sacrifice the physical and mental health of tens of thousands of Swedish women. That is the horror of social disintegration in the Muslim world.
Horror does not deter Muslims, because Muslims see the world in terms of unconstrained will. Allah’s will governs the spin of every electron and the path of every bullet. It is unfathomable and arbitrary, like nature in the pagan world. Islam can endure horror, but not humiliation. But horror is the Achilles’ heel of the Christian world, whose founding premise is that God offers unselfish love and unmerited grace to mankind, and in a sense stacked the deck in favor of goodness. The perception that the universe is cruel and without purpose is poison to Christianity. That is the great paradox of salvation: If God’s unselfish love and unmerited grace offer salvation to all humankind, what are we to make of those to willfully reject it?
The impulse to open Germany to Muslim refugees is irresistable for Germany’s elite, prominently so in the case of Chancellor Angela Merkel. To understand her motives one must consider that she is not only a German, but also a Christian. “Belief in God and closeness to the church have molded me and occupied me since my childhood,” she wrote in an essay entitled “Why I am a Christian” just before her election victory. A pastor’s daughter, she grew up in atheist East Germany and maintained her belief despite the hostility of the state and her peers. “Since my youth I knew that I followed an inner compass through my commitment to God and his Church, one that was rejected by the [East German] state and the majority of the population. It was not always easy to stand by Christ. In contrast to most young people I went to Christian instruction and confirmation classes, rather than to the [state] ceremonies for youth.”
All the promises of heavenly bliss are not worth the torment of a single child, said Ivan Karamazov. The image of one drowned boy overwhelmed Europe. Only a few hundred thousand people have died in Iraq and Syria during the past fifteen years, but zeros could appear to the right of the death toll before long. Whether the migrant tidal wave arose spontaneously, or whether it was channeled by Turkey, is a secondary question. The Christian mind cannot absorb the horror of human suffering on an apocalyptic scale, and what we see now is tiny compared to what is likely to come next.
Judaism is more resilient in the face of horror, I think, because it assigns to humankind a higher degree of freedom, that is, the radical freedom to enter into partnership with the creator of the world and transform nature itself. The God that Judaism encounters in the world in which we find ourselves–this God, and not a God that satisfies the sensibilities of philosophers or theologians–left Creation intentionally incomplete so that man might have the freedom to become a partner in the work of creation. Chaos in the natural world and human wickedness are a divine challenge to humankind to rise to the status of co-creator. The possibility of radical freedom, of course, also implies the possibility of radical evil.
The Christian is reborn into the Church and enters its community as an individual. The Jew already was present in the congregation at Mount Sinai, where all Israel, including all future generations, heard the voice of God from the fiery mountain. The Christian ponders why bad things happen to good people; the Jew prays each morning in good times and bad, “How fortunate are we. How good is our portion, how pleasant our lot, how beautiful our heritage.” The deliverance at the Sea of Reeds is not a past event and Israel’s ultimate redemption is not a mere future: Judaism is simply the construction of a present in which all generations rejoice in Israel’s inheritance, and provide a context against which an individual’s suffering is measured. One might ask with Ivan Karamazov whether all this is worth the suffering of a single child. In the Jewish perception, it is worth it to God–not an abstract God, not a designer God to whom we attribute our own sensibilities, but YHWH with whom Abraham and Moses spoke.
The jihadists know just how to manipulate Western sensibilities. Catastrophic casualty levels are part of the program, at least in a number of theaters. Hamas in Gaza was the first combatant in history to deliberately maximize the number of casualties among its own civilians (by firing thousands of missiles at Israel during the summer of 2014 from densely-populated civilian areas). The Israel-Palestine conflict, though, is a sideshow in the Middle East; the disintegration of Libya, Syria, Iraq, Somalia, South Sudan and Yemen and the latent instability of Pakistan and other Muslim countries.
Only a few hundred thousand people have died in Iraq and Syria during the past fifteen years, but zeros could appear to the right of the death toll before long. Whether the migrant tidal wave arose spontaneously, or whether it was channeled by Turkey, is a secondary question. The Germans–the best Germans, like Chancellor Merkel–cannot absorb the horror of human suffering on the present scale, and what we see now is tiny compared to what is likely to come next.
“Imagine if Hitler had liked Jews,” I told an Israeli politician recently who asked me to characterize the Republican frontrunner. The comparison seems more apt every day. The title of this note refers to Bertolt Brecht’s 1941 satire, “The Resistible Rise of Alfonso Ui,” portraying Hitler as gangster in the mode of Al Capone.
Donald Trump has tapped an ugly mood in America’s middle class, whose prospects have dimmed noticeably since the 2008 financial crisis. For the first time since the Great Depression Americans are losing ground that they cannot regain. Median household income fell by nearly 10% from 1999 through 2011 and remains far below previous peaks. Home ownership is down from 69% in 2008 to just 64%. The rate of participation in the labor force has fallen from 66.5% before the crisis to just 62%, the lowest since the 1970s. A generation of young people has graduated from college with mediocre earnings prospects and mountains of student debt…
There is a touch of Weimar in the air. The Germans of the 1920s didn’t understand why they were impoverished and humiliated. Germany was Europe’s fastest-growing economy before World War I, its center of innovation, its greatest military power. How could it have lost the war, swallowed painful reparations payments, and given up huge swaths of its territory? The Germans were in a mean mood and they wanted the nastiest attack dog in politics. Hitler accommodated them. Even worse, the German Establishment, led by Franz von Papen, thought it could use Hitler, and invited him to form a government in January 1933.
We’re a long way from Germany in the late 1920s, to be sure, but the parallels are disturbing.
Posted inDonald Trump|Comments Off on Imagine If Hitler Had Liked Jews
It is such a pleasure to listen to Rush channel Pat Buchanan more and more everyday. [Nationalism Trumps Conservatism Says Limbaugh, WND, January 20, 2016] He has been on fire lately. Only a couple of years ago he talked about cigars and football half of the time. I can remember weeks going by without a single reference to immigration. In 2013, I actually believed Rush had gone to the other side as he would mention we should keep the illegals—just not give them the vote. Now, since about the time Eric Cantor got torpedoed by Dave Brat, Rush has been talking about immigration more and more every day. I think he reads you and the other writers on VDARE every day. I know I do.
Posted inAmerica|Comments Off on Rush Limbaugh Channels VDARE
Published on Jan 26, 2016: A Professor has interrupted German Chancellor Angela Merkel during the opening ceremony of a new Fraunhofer Institute for Microsystems and now fears for his teaching position. He said he is scared about the future of his 2, 4 and 9 year old children and that Merkel is conducting an experiment whose outcome nobody can predict. He urged her to be responsible and reasonable as she is a physicist herself.
Merkel shrugged him off and said she is already doing the best she can for the future of Germany. This may be because she has no personal investment in the future, no children, no relatives and has recently been spotted in South America hunting for real estate where she can spend her retirement.
Merkel is facing heavy critique for letting in millions of young Muslim men of whom only a fraction are genuine refugees. Despite the majority in her own party disagreeing with her “no upper limit”-policy, she insists on putting absolutely no boundaries on immigration. Her newest programs include advertising for immigrants in Africa and making “social experiments of assimilation” in rural areas where locals are highly outnumbered. She does not recognize the existence of a German people and in her latest New Year’s speech she claimed that anybody around the world can claim he is a true German, even if he has never been to Germany before. Germans who claim “being German” for themselves are hateful, so she says.
In January immigration has increased 20-fold compared to last year as the men who arrived are now calling their friends and telling them how easy it was to enter Germany.
At current immigration levels, German men between the age of 20 and 35 will be a minority within 5 years. And it’s precisely for this reason that the professor is rightfully scared about the future.
Posted inGermany|Comments Off on Professor interrupts Merkel: “I’m scared about the future of my children”, faces legal consequences
Ellison Lodge writes: Goldberg’s self-congratulatory conclusion: “My job—our job—is to write and say the truth as I see it.”
But while National Review portrays itself as bravely taking unpopular positions out of its devotion to timeless principles, the plain fact is that it has repeatedly abandoned “timeless” principles when they became unpopular with the elites.
Nowhere is this more true than on the issues of race and immigration. And when confronted on these shifts in principle, National Review often resorts to arguments about practicality rather than principles.
One need not believe that one’s own ethnic group, or any ethnic group, is superior to others…in order to wish one’s country to continue to be made up of the same ethnic strains in the same proportions as before. And, conversely, the wish not to see one’s country overrun by groups one regards as alien need not be based on feelings of superiority or “racism”…the wish to preserve one’s identity and the identity of one’s nation requires no justification…any more than the wish to have one’s own children, and to continue one’s family through them need be justified or rationalized by a belief that they are superior to the children of others.”
Jared Taylor asked William F. Buckley his thoughts on the column, and after many evasions, Buckley tersely responded that “It seems to me that the idea traditionally defended of endeavoring to maintain existing ethnic balances simply doesn`t work any more.”
In 2007, Ramesh Ponnuru argued that immigration patriots should not oppose birthright citizenship because this “crusade is about as politically counterproductive as they come. It will pit restrictionists against children. And even in the unlikely event it succeeded, it would be (wrongly, in my view) struck down by the courts.” [Getting Immigration Right: A headache and a half for the GOP, October 8, 2007 (not available online)]
This is not the first time Ponnuru argued that immigration patriots should weaken their positions out of expedience.
In 2001, Ponnuru frankly acknowledged the magazine was shifting course from hardcore immigration patriotism to a “restrictionism that can succeed.” [Minding the `Golden Door`, April 23, 2001]
Ponnuru chided immigration patriots for supporting an immigration moratorium because it “made it seem as though they opposed all immigration.” He also dismissed efforts aimed at denying welfare to illegals because “nothing could have been calculated to alienate Hispanics more than the perceived suggestion that they were welfare chiselers.” Most of all, he rejected Peter Brimelow’s argument that immigration policy should not alter “the country`s racial composition.” Ponnuru objected that Brimelow “opened the debate on terms that almost guaranteed the restrictionists` failure” because it gave the Left “ammunition” to call them racists.
In both these cases, Buckley and Ponnuru largely avoided challenging immigration patriots’ positions on the grounds of “truth” or “principles.” Indeed, in some cases (like birthright citizenship), they explicitly acknowledged the immigration patriots were correct. Instead, they rejected these positions because the arguments wouldn’t be well received. Ponnuru accused immigration patriots of indulging in “the fantasy that they could make immigration the central, realigning issue of American politics.” (In 2016, he seems to have forgotten this: see Why Immigration Is a Big Deal to Conservatives, Bloomberg, January 20, 2016)
Well, Donald Trump has indeed made “immigration the central, realigning issue of American politics.” He accomplished this feat by using tactics and rhetoric that National Review claimed would lead to failure. And now, suddenly, National Review wants to go down with the ship in order to stop him.
Yet while National Review is hysterical over Trump, the editors are not quite suicidal. After all, when Buckley said arguments against “maintain existing ethnic balances simply doesn`t work anymore,” he didn’t identify exactly whom it “doesn’t work” with.
The answer is obvious: American elites. Buckley’s famous quote that “I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University” notwithstanding, particularly in his later years he was much more concerned with elite opinion than popular opinion.
And that explains the magazine’s actions. National Review acknowledges its attack on Trump is unpopular with the grassroots Right—but the move ingratiates the editors with the elites, especially the Main Stream Media elite. After all, that’s who their careers as Professional Token Conservatives depend on.
* I can think of somewhere it is more true: gay marriage.
All the more so because even this publication is glossing over it.
* NR should be called Donor Review.
It’s just a shill for the oligarchs.
Also, Conservatism Inc. suffers from moral deficit.
Because it has signed onto the cult of MLK and Holocaustianity, the Dems have moral advantage because it is more the party of Jews and blacks.
So, the GOP, with its moral deficit, tries to gain some credit by going whole hog on appeasing Neocon Zionists. But Jews are smart and know what the GOP is up to. Besides, Neocons are already in the GOP manipulating the cuckywucks.
And the GOP doesn’t offer Jews anything they can’t get from the Dems. Democrats are fully behind Israel, and Jews control much of American Liberalism and use it to direct most anger and fury at ‘white privilege’, Russia, and China.
GOP would like to persuade people that Israel is a poor beleaguered nation thrown under the bus by Democrats, and stupid Evangelical Christian Zionists might fall for this, but no Jew among the Democrats are buying this, even as they occasionally lob a complaint at Obama, the puppet of Jews.
The fact is Israel isn’t in any kind of danger. And Jews have it so good in the US. The idea that Jews need GOP support for protection is laughable to Jews.
But GOP carries on with this fiction cuz Neocons keep whispering into its ear that if GOP tries a bit harder in singing hosannas to Jews and Israel, Jews will finally come over to the GOP camp. A joke.
American whites need to reject the MLK cult and Holocaust Cult.
American whites must go fully HBD on race and explain that the main reason for black problems is racial differences, not history. Whites also need to highlight all the foul things done by blacks to liberate themselves from ‘white guilt’. Also, whites need to point out that blacks had slavery for 10,000 yrs, and slavery was ended in the US and in Africa by whites.
As for the Holocaust, white Americans need to demand that Jews thank them. After all, if UK and US had decided to side with Germany, Jews would have been finished. But US and UK sided with Jews against Germany and saved Jews. And many white gentiles died defeating Nazi Germany. Also, US provided help to Soviet Jews even though Soviet Jews had played a key role in the communization of Russia and mass repression and killing.
So, white American gentiles owe the Jews NOTHING. If anything, white American gentiles should demand that Jews thank them for all time for having saved them in WWII and defeated Nazi Germany.
Also, if Jews bring up slavery, whites need to mention that Jews were also involved in the slave trade. Jews also had slaves in the South. Jews also worked with whites in South Africa. And Israel was founded on ethnic cleansing. And communist Jews carried out all sorts of horrors in the USSR. They killed more people in a single decade than white Americans killed blacks in 300 yrs.
Unless the Narrative of Guilt is changed, whites will continue to be moral cucks of Jews and Negroes.
As long as American Conservatism accepts moral disadvantage vis-a-vis American Liberalism of Jews and Negroes, it will lack confidence and pride. It will always act in the manner of appeasement and pleading for mercy.
The Israelis don’t want to disturb a hornet’s nest in taking on the Islamic State. Is a similarly measured option available to the United States? Most Israeli officials say no. They argue that the United States is a superpower, and that if it wants to maintain leadership in the region, it must lead the fight to roll back the Islamic State.
The United States has no vital strategic interests here.
Posted inAmerica, Israel|Comments Off on Israel Not Messing With Islamic State
A St. George woman who gained attention when she was legally allowed to wear a colander on her head for her Utah driver’s license photo dropped her request for a trial on a drunken driving charge Thursday and entered a plea in the case.
Jessica “Asia” Steinhauser, 42, had been scheduled for trial Friday morning in 5th District Court on the misdemeanor charge after she was allegedly found passed out on a couch at the Washington County School District’s offices, where she had taken her daughter for testing.
Defense attorney Douglas Terry said Steinhauser pleaded no contest to the charge and will serve house arrest, but she will receive no jail time.
Deputy County Attorney Rachelle Shumway said the DUI charge reflected the fact Steinhauser had a passenger younger than 16 in the vehicle.
Steinhauser is a former porn star who went by the name Asia Carrera and is now also known as Asia Lemmon, but Steinhauser is the name that appears on her license and in court records.
At the time she obtained her driver’s license in 2014, she wore a pasta strainer for the photo and asserted her religious right to do so when she initially met opposition from Division of Motor Vehicle employees.
Steinhauser told The Spectrum & Daily News at the time that she is an atheist who belongs to the satirical religious movement called Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Its members identify themselves as “Pastafarians” and Steinhauser is reportedly the only one in Utah who has obtained a colander-wearing license photo.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster website identifies a handful of other people around the world who have obtained similar licenses.
Steinhauser’s movie credits include 263 videos as a porn actress between 1994 and 2007, but she also appeared in an uncredited role as porn actress Sherry in the 1998 mainstream movie “The Big Lebowski.”
She moved to St. George in 2005 and has since retired from the film industry, but she appeared in the 2010 documentary “After Porn Ends,” which is about life after being a porn actor, and was ranked No. 5 among a magazine’s “The Top 50 Hottest Asian Porn Stars of All Time” list in 2011, according to her Wikipedia page.
She is also a member of Mensa, an international high-IQ society.
Steinhauser was arrested March 5 after a police officer responding to the situation at the school district’s office reported Steinhauser showed him the vehicle she had driven, that her “eyes appeared glassy” and had exhibited some involuntary twitching, and that she attempted to drive away.
The officer reported Steinhauser also had difficulty following his instructions as he tested her ability to balance and walk through sobriety tests outside the office building.
Steinhauser had a reported blood alcohol content of .254 percent – more than three times Utah’s .08 legal limit.
She was not wearing a pasta strainer when she left the courthouse Thursday.
She married nutritionist and author Don Lemmon on December 19, 2003.[2] The couple moved to St. George, Utah, where Carrera gave birth to her first child, daughter Catalina, on March 4, 2005.[2][28] Lemmon was killed in a car accident near Las Vegas on June 10, 2006. At the time, Carrera was almost eight months pregnant with their second child, son Devin.[29] Concerned about her livelihood and worries of not being able to support her two children on her own, Carrera began to solicit donations on her personal web site.[30][31] Eventually, Carrera got a message from an insurance company that a life insurance policy she had forgotten about did exist for her husband, and she was granted it after mandatory investigation.[31]
On May 13, 2007, she announced on her website that she had filed a request to legally change her son’s name from Donald Edward Lemmon III to Devin D’Artagnan Lemmon, in honor of Devin DeVasquez, the woman who had introduced Carrera to Lemmon. “Devin D’Artagnan Lemmon” had been what Carrera and Lemmon had originally planned to name their son, but after Lemmon’s death, Carrera named the boy after his father, a decision she regretted soon after. She explained that “He’s not Don, he never will be Don, and it made me want to start crying every time a random stranger would say, ‘Oh he’s so cute, what’s his name?'” The state made an error in changing the boy’s name, however, and he is legally named “Devin D’Artagnan Lemmon III.”[32]
On April 14, 2010, Carrera confessed on her blog that she became an alcoholic after Lemmon’s death, that she had joined Alcoholics Anonymous, and was in her third week of sobriety. She emphasized that she still did not believe in God, and that it is “actually not mandatory for joining AA.”[33] Carrera later gave birth to a boy she named Niko. On September 21, 2012, she wrote on her Facebook page that she gave him up for adoption.[34] On March 5, 2015, Carrera was charged with “driving under the influence with a child,” since her daughter was in the car with her, lodged at the Purgatory Correctional Facility and released on bail.[35][36][37]
She identified investor Warren Buffett as her hero on her website,[38] which Buffett was pleased to learn.
In 2006, Carrera was asked for commentary by The Spectrum, a St. George, Utah-area newspaper, on the local case of Susan Russell, who was charged with 15 counts of third-degree felony distribution of pornographic material. Russell allegedly sold pornographic materials and sex toys from a back room in her Earrings and More store, potentially violating the “community standards” of the Mormon-dominated town per the Supreme Court case Miller v. California. Carrera opined:
“I deliberately moved to St. George with my husband so we could raise our kids in a conservative atmosphere, in a low-crime, family-friendly state. I do appreciate that the laws are there, and will make it harder for my kids to get into trouble when they get older.”
However, she also said,
“Do I have a problem with porn being sold here? No, not per se. I have no problem with porn at all. Trust me, they don’t exploit women, and watching porn has never been scientifically shown to lead to any increase in crime rates, be it rape, pedophilia, or any other sexual crimes.”
Nevertheless, she reiterated that the community’s conservatism was the reason she moved there, and that she had no plans to challenge it.
The most heartbreaking scene in the documentary After Porn Ends, about the post-porn lives of 12 adult stars, may be when Asia Carrera talks about her membership in the high-IQ society Mensa. She explains that Mensa links to all its members’ websites, but that they wouldn’t link to hers because… well, because it was a porn site. Eventually, though, the society did feature her in an issue of its magazine devoted to Mensa celebrities—a big moment for her, she says.
Which, to me, just seems incredibly sad. This after all, is Asia Carrera, a woman who ran away from home at 17 and pulled herself together to become a successful businesswoman and a world-famous name and face. Yet, despite all of that, what she wants is validation from some random group of self-declared smart people. For someone like her to need the approval of someone like them is an apocalyptic admission of neediness that’s depressing to think about.
The natural conclusion to leap to, of course, is that the neediness and the porn career are inextricably intertwined: that Carrera entered porn because she needed to be loved, and/or is so unsure of herself because she’s ashamed of her porn career.
There’s certainly a fair bit of evidence in After Porn Ends, available on iTunes now and on DVD later this month, to support such suspicions. A number of the former performers link their entry into the industry to child sexual abuse and/or to drug addiction. And nearly all of them talk about the bitter stigma of being in the adult industry. Houston lost her job selling real estate when a client recognized her. Randy West—who otherwise seems fairly happy with his career—talks bitterly about the fact that most charities won’t allow adult stars to donate to them. Even more poignantly, he suggests that his career in the adult industry made it hard for him to form normal relationships, and thus may be responsible for the fact that he never married and has no children.
One expert talking head argues overdramatically that being an adult star cuts you off from all personal ties. Given the way many of the ex-stars talk about their families and spouses and kids, he’s obviously making a gross generalization. But at the same time, it’s clear that if you’re a former adult performer a lot of people are going to judge you—and you can see how, living with that, having Mensa declare you worthy might pack a certain punch.
Posted inPornography|Comments Off on Colander-wearing atheist enters plea in DUI case
All over Europe, women are suffering the consequences of the Muslim invasion disguised as a refugee crisis, and one reporter’s encounter was captured on video. A group of Muslim migrants thought she was too attractive, then showed her what happens as a result.
The video is at the link above. There’s nothing NSFW in the video; it’s just the usual enriching perspectives we’re instructed to appreciate from our colorful third world Diversity.
A reader gives his interpretation of this vibrantly multicultural scene, and issues a warning to the White Men of the West.
Here is the reality.
These guys have monumental, stone cold asshole game.
They treat this woman like absolute shit, and she is fascinated by it, she keeps calling them back for more. She lets the guy take the microphone out of her hand.
In the pussified world of Western European girly-men, these guys stand out as masculine, hard men who say what they want, take what they want. They walk down the street like they own it. They don’t smile. They double down when challenged. They give sub-zero fucks.
CH readers will see where this is going … .
The dried up miserable vaginas of Europe’s women will be engorged and dripping at the sight, and they will be blushing and squirming in their chairs and playing with their hair even as they say, oh, how awful … . Then they will do everything they can to get more of these unapologetic bastards into their country, and look for the opportunity to be called a slut, have their hair pulled, their clothes grabbed and pulled off, be slapped, be violated, be dominated, be owned. As more of these videos circulate, the man-starved women of Europe will become increasingly desperate to spread their legs for a vicious and hateful pummeling by these invaders.
They will forget their own so-called men ever existed.
And to get all “meta”, feminism was a civilization-wide shit test, and the men of Western Europe and the USA failed. They have been reduced to sniveling beta status ever since. The poon of the West is desperate for a stern and iron Alpha ramming by anyone, and the first guys who showed up are these Muslim dirtbags.
Looks like it’s their lucky day.
Note that the foregoing is clearly correct for the Germanic countries. The Muslims will own the place in a generation. This is not true in Eastern Europe, only the west. The Poles, Hungarians, Serbs, will absolutely without blinking shoot, hang, stab, run over with trucks, set on fire with gasoline, or club to death every Muslims they can get their hands on before they will turn over their women.
Hyperbolic, but he’s onto something. After watching the video, I wouldn’t go so far to say the female reporter is sexually aroused (she could just be chirpily stringing the rapefugees along to make sure she gets entertaining quotes), but the wider theme explored by the reader is by and large true: when stronger* men invade your public space, your women will eventually, and often in contradiction to their own stated wishes, gravitate into an orbit with the dominant invader male valence and assume the submissive position.
*Stronger in a sexual market context means less appeasing, bolder, and firmer of frame. IOW, an asshole.
The lesson is that when an existential crisis threatens the nation, its women simply can’t be trusted to correct course. Men must steer the ship. And if that means dismissing their women’s opinions while they get to the hard job of making their country great again, then so be it. The dismissiveness will probably reignite their women’s desire for them.
The conclusion one must draw is the utter incompatibility of the White K-selected races with the less-than-White r-selected races. Multiculturalism is a failure. Worse, it’s a deliberate failure; an attack by the ruling classes against their own people.
The saracens are a different breed, possessing a natural ZFG attitude and patriarchal insolence towards women that may not buy them much poon in their homelands but acts like a tingle generating explosive reaction in secular, betatized, domesticated, and effeminated European societies. The shy, shoe-gazing, polite White European beta male – representative of his tribe – is rendered impotent when contrasted against the brutish brown man’s street theater, and the White man’s women notice the contrast, and their hindbrains, despite the best intentions that some may have, map out sexual market hierarchies accordingly.
PS Refreshingly, there are some young women who know the score.
If there is hope among White women, it lies with the virginal cuties. But, as reader Diversity Heretic averred, the White man’s chivalry comes with a necessary cost.
Okay, you want male protection. Male protection comes at the price of female deference. If you want to compete with (and displace) men in the job and education marketplaces, if you want women to be defense ministers, if you want to pursue a career at the expense of being a wife and mother, if you want income and status equality with men, if you want to ride the alpha cock carousel until your early thirties, then expect to find a beta male provider who’ll buy with a ring what you gave away free when you were younger and hotter,
THEN CHICKY BABE, YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN! GUTEN GLUCK UND GUTEN ABEND!
I’m not convinced the majority of White women support the invasion because they long for a mud breach in their vaginal canals. It’s state sponsored, socially approved moral posturing no different in spirit than an Oprah inspired kaffeeklatsch.
I reply: But women lead the moral posturing to open the borders. They are lapping men in their eagerness for more diversity enrichment. There is a deeper psychological compulsion that animates women’s politics, and I contend it begins at the source of female sexuality: their innate desire for strength and dominance in men. Right now, that female desire has been redirected to outsider males, because their own men are hamstrung from reacting in the proper masculine manner to the alien threat (and too many are donning miniskirts as feeble signs of protest).
Posted inImmigration|Comments Off on Rape Refugees
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
