Forward: ‘Holocaust-Denying Academic Organized List of Trump Endorsers’

There are only two honorable forms of argument — to challenge facts or logic. Name-calling is not an honorable form of argument.

Not to mention that this article presents no evidence for its claim that Boyd Cathey denies the Holocaust.

Does Boyd Cathey deny that any Jews were murdered in WWII? Of course not. He denies that the murder of Jews in WWII was the most significant event in human history. Was does the slaughter of Jews in WWII get the special name “Holocaust” or “Shoah”? Don’t gentiles get special names too for their mass deaths?

The Forward writes:

In an effort to counter claims that his list of supporter is short on intellectuals, Donald Trump, scholars supporting his run for presidency are collecting signatures on a statement endorsing the Republican candidate.

According to a Daily Caller report from Friday, more than 50 scholars have joined the statement, saying that, “supporters of the Trump agenda are by no means limited to the badly educated and ill-informed.”

But among the organizers of the scholars list is one name that stands out: Dr. Boyd Cathey, who, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center was “involved in several extremist movements, including ‘radical traditionalist Catholicism,’ Holocaust denial and the neo-Confederate movement.”

Cathey, a North Carolina archivist, is associated with the anti-Semitic group known as the “Institute for Historical Review.” He sat on the advisory committee of the institute’s Journal for Historical Review, which is described by SPLC as “the world’s leading Holocaust denial organization.”
Cathey’s main focus is net-confederate revisionism, but has made anti-Semitic statements throughout the years. He argued that anything he might say “dealing with Wagner, Judaism and Germany, whether reasonable or not, would probably get me exiled even deeper into the realms of the prejudiced unwashed,” before recommending reading the anti-Semitic writings of Kevin MacDonald.
A spokesperson for the Trump campaign did not respond to question regarding Cathey’s endorsement.

The scholars behind the letter are seem cognizant of their unique position in their professional circles, which have, by and large, rejected Trump. “We are fully aware that signing this statement will not bring the signatory the same professional rewards as speaking at a conference on why Trump is a ‘fascist’ or on why he reminds one of the late German Fuhrer,” wrote Cathey, and fellow organizers Dr. Paul Gottfried and Dr. Walter Block. “Expressing support for the Republican presidential candidate undoubtedly requires more courage, particularly for someone in the academic profession.”

Paul Gottfried is Jewish and certainly no Holocaust-denier.

Posted in Anti-Semitism | Comments Off on Forward: ‘Holocaust-Denying Academic Organized List of Trump Endorsers’

BOOM! Dem Pollster Says Election Could be Like 1980 a 40 State Trump Landslide

REPORT: According to former Jimmy Carter pollster Pat Caddell, Hillary Clinton is hemorrhaging support as a result of the FBI announcement and we could see a repeat of the 1980 election when anti-establishment candidate Ronald Reagan won in a landslide.

Caddell drew comparisons to the 1980 presidential race, which was close right up until the final days before the electorate abandoned Carter and rallied around the anti-establishment candidate, leading to Reagan taking victory in a landslide.

Caddell noted that Carter’s entire campaign had been built around portraying Reagan as unqualified and “dangerous,” in a similar vein to how Clinton has demonized Trump. Caddell explained that the polling between Reagan and Carter was close up until the final weekend when “the dam broke” and Reagan shot ahead by ten points.

Stating that he had been looking at the data regarding unfavorability ratings for both Clinton and Trump, Caddell noted that since Friday, large numbers of voters had been structurally “moving against the status quo – the incumbent who is essentially Hillary Clinton.”

Posted in America | Comments Off on BOOM! Dem Pollster Says Election Could be Like 1980 a 40 State Trump Landslide

The Rise Of The Alt-Right

Scott McConnell writes for The American Conservative:

Twenty-one years ago I was assigned by Commentary to write about Jared Taylor—today known as one of the eminences of the “alt-right.” Taylor had written a grim book on American race relations, Paved With Good Intentions, which had been published by a mainstream house and was widely, if critically, reviewed. Though unusually skeptical about the prospect of blacks and whites living together harmoniously in the United States, it stopped well short of any systematically racist argument. The book had several fans among New Yorkers I knew prominent in journalism and city politics.

When I referred to it in passing in a New York Post column, we quickly received a fax from Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League stating that Taylor was far more extremist than I had let on. Curious to explore further, I queried Commentary—where I then did most of my non-newspaper writing—and they were interested.

I interviewed Taylor, read back issues of his monthly newsletter, American Renaissance (AR), and drafted a piece. AR was devoted primarily to demonstrating that in American history racism was as accepted as apple pie and that this was by no means a bad thing. It contained large doses of the evolutionary and biological racial thought fairly commonplace amongst American elites in the ’20s and ’30s. A central contention was that the United States could not thrive as an increasingly multiracial and multicultural country and that American whites were facing a kind of cultural dispossession.

I summarized this, quoting liberally, and concluded that the endgame vision of the AR crowd was potentially horrific, leading to national dissolution or civil war, while adding that continued mass immigration really would put the common culture of America under grave stress. If immigration rates went down, Taylor and AR would remain fringe players. If they rose, white racial anxieties would bubble to the surface, and Taylor might one day have his moment.

The piece was never published: Neal Kozodoy, Commentary’s editor, told me I had indulged Taylor too much and asked for a shorter, tighter rewrite. By then my brief summer vacation had ended, other tasks intervened, and I eventually lost interest.

Jared Taylor’s moment has not arrived, but clearly he has edged into the national conversation. He has been pictured and quoted in an anti-Trump attack ad produced by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, he has been a guest on Diane Rehm’s show on NPR, and his core ideas have been broadcast—and excoriated—in magazines and websites great and small. He is now touted as one of the intellectual leaders of the alt-right, a diffuse movement of uncertain significance, but one deemed sufficiently important by the Clinton campaign for Hillary to devote a large portion of an August campaign speech to it. Donald Trump—who has almost surely never read a single article by an alt-right figure—is claimed by Clinton and other liberals to be under its influence and propagating its doctrines.

The truth is quite different: parts of the alt-right have raised their own visibility by attaching themselves to Trump. At the same time, Trump and his unanticipated success in winning the Republican nomination are symptoms of the same political and civilizational crisis that makes alt-rightish themes—at least in a more or less bowdlerized and soft-core form—compelling to a growing number of people.

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on The Rise Of The Alt-Right

Sam Glaser Down Under: Fourteen Days Performing in Australia in Fourteen Minutes

Published on Oct 31, 2016: Sam’s recent artist-in-residence program in Sydney Australia reached tens of thousands of fans in a very busy few weeks. He worked with several day schools, led two Shabbatons, visited retreat centers, taught and performed at Limmud and was a featured conductor at the annual Australia Jewish Choral Festival. Thankfully a talented two-camera crew was on hand to document the events and the footage was expertly edited by Reuven Fauman, founder of Truly Moving Stories. Yes, Sam would LOVE to come to your community and do the same thing! Operators are standing by at samglaser.com.

Posted in Sam Glaser | Comments Off on Sam Glaser Down Under: Fourteen Days Performing in Australia in Fourteen Minutes

Men in Massachusetts should simply not show up to defend restraining orders, divorces, and other family law matters?

Comments: * Google “Phil Greenspun divorce” for some amusing stories about the economics rewards of divorce. Basically marrying and divorcing an investment banker or a surgeon is a lot better life than becoming a banker or surgeon.

* Greenspun is obsessed with the idea that all a woman needs to do is sleep with 2 or 3 rich orthodontists and she will make more money than if she had gotten the degree herself.

Philip Greenspun writes:

One intriguing idea that I learned at the hearing was that in some cases men might be better off not showing up to court when a case is being decided under the family law and domestic violence system. U.S. Census data from March 2014 show that, when there is enough income for a child to yield a cashflow, men in Massachusetts lose custody lawsuits roughly 97 percent of the time. Typically the man is therefore spending $100,000 to $1 million in legal fees in order to have a shot at being one of the 3 percent. But is the guy actually digging his own grave by showing up?

[In theory the law, unlike in some European and Islamic jurisdictions, is gender-neutral. And, as discussed below, the citizens who came to the hearing included a woman who lost custody of her children due to her higher-income, harder-working status. In practice, however, attorneys say that men cannot prevail on a domestic violence complaint against a woman.]

“I was advised by my lawyer not to show up to defend against a restraining order,” said one father, “because if the man doesn’t show up he can be restrained for only 7 days but if he does show up the order can last for a year.” One take-away from the hearing was that when when the children were potentially profitable, motivated female plaintiffs would eagerly seek, and typically win, restraining orders to keep children from seeing their fathers.

[“The Domestic Violence Parallel Track” explains why this is typically a powerful tool for plaintiffs nationwide, but in Massachusetts a restraining order has a specific cash value. Given a $250,000-per-year defendant, for example, obtaining ordinary “winner parent” status and 2/3 time with the child yields $40,000 per year in tax-free cash via the child support guidelines plus, typically, an order that the defendant pay 100% of the child’s actual expenses (e.g., day care, uninsured medical/dental). If a plaintiff can get the defendant entirely excluded from the child’s life, judges are explicitly encouraged to award additional child support (due to the fact that father is not providing free babysitting 1/3 time). Having 100% “custody” may simply mean dumping the child into commercial care, such as day care or with nannies, and the loser parent will pay for those on top of the enhanced child support.]

[Of course, this advice would not be good in a state that offers fathers a realistic chance at obtaining 50/50 parenting time schedule, e.g., Alaska, Arizona, Delaware, Maine, Pennsylvania ]

Posted in Divorce | Comments Off on Men in Massachusetts should simply not show up to defend restraining orders, divorces, and other family law matters?