Search the Web

Search the Alt Right

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Conservatives Are Responsible for Liberalism By Ben Peterson

bridge
Fellow contributor Chase Padusniak identified a tension between “conservatism (especially of the Christian variety in the U.S.) and ‘liberalism,'” arguing that it spells “big trouble for American conservatism.”
He’s right about the tension, but it’s not only between conservatism and liberalism. Open society challenges its own internal consistency because it depends on what Popper called “humanitarianism”—respect for human life as intrinsically valuable—and yet it cannot demand this from its citizenry. George Washington famously argued that popular government depends on a virtuous citizenry, which depends on religion—but as Michael Novak explained in The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, compelling any citizen to practice either would violate the conscience, which is the “inviolable” in the open society. Novak quotes Aleksander Solzhenitsyn’s worries that the “boundless freedom” of the open society threatens to erode its own “moral heritage.” Padusniak agrees, arguing that “in an entirely free society…people are…likely to turn away from virtue in a Christian sense. Churches might help, but they cannot save an entire society whose fundamental principle is individual freedom.”
Solzhenitsyn and Padusniak have hit on a paradox: The Judeo-Christian religious tradition provides the indispensable foundation of liberalism, but many free people are inclined to abandon it. So this freedom troubles us because the Biblical command to “love your neighbor as yourself,” is the progenitor of humanitarianism and the element of our moral heritage that we can scarcely afford to lose.
Read More: http://www.intercollegiatereview.com/index.php/2015/03/31/conservatives-responsible-for-liberalism/

A Catholic School Removes Teacher for Defending Faith by ANNE HENDERSHOTT

Patricia-Jannuzzi
Chesterton once wrote that “War is not the best way of settling differences—but it is the only way of preventing them from being settled for you.”  If the Catholic Church is to continue to teach the timeless truths about the dignity of all human persons from conception to natural death, and the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman, the Church needs to begin to seriously engage in the war that has already been declared against her by those who wish to destroy these teachings.
In the past few weeks, there has been an escalation of the attacks against the Church in places like the Archdiocese of San Francisco where Sam Singer, the head of a high priced Public Relations firm, was hired to wage war on Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone because of the archbishop’s strong defense of marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Organizing protests, and enlisting the local media to help him in his battle against the archbishop, Singer has been successful in waging a well-funded media war on the Church and her teachings.
Likewise, in the Diocese of Scranton, Pennsylvania, a battle began last week against a priest who gave permission to show a pro-life film, To Be Born, to a sixth grade CCD class. Described in the local newspaper as holding “rabid anti-abortion views,” the priest—a pastor who is beloved and greatly respected by his faithful parishioners at St. Monica’s Catholic Church—was called a “bully” in a front page story of the Wilkes Barre newspaper. Unfortunately, instead of fighting back with the truth of Catholic teachings on the sanctity of life, the priest has appeared to accept the criticism of showing a pro-life film to “sensitive” sixth graders by admitting that he “showed poor judgment” in allowing the pro-life film to be shown. The CCD teacher who showed the pro-life film has resigned. She was already under attack from parents because she had the temerity to disclose to her students that “not everyone goes to Heaven.”
Read More: http://www.crisismagazine.com/2015/time-war

United Russia

Recently, a delegation from the United Russia ruling party came by my University to give a talk about their platform. Seeing as we are a “liberal arts college” they didn’t get a warm reception. But to those who were willing to listen, one could learn a lot. Lets start from the top.
Is United Russia Conservative?
Most people, if prompted to answer where they believe United Russia fits on the political spectrum would say that the group is conservative. But according to Huntington’s definition of conservatism, United Russia cannot be considered conservative. Huntington’s thesis is that conservatism can only be a purely situational rather than ideational ideology—a defense of any existing institutions against fundamental challenge. In other words, conservatism is a knee-jerk reaction to whatever trend of progressivism is alive and well at the time, without a necessary all-encompassing idea at its core. The United Russia party openly agrees with Huntington’s analysis and instead considers itself traditional as opposed to “conservative”.
However, can it be said that UDR is even traditionalist? According to the party ideology, and the presentation by the representatives, UDR is firmly wedded to many key concepts of modernity and the liberal project. In fact, UDR considers itself the only force that can save classical liberalism from itself, a strange claim for a party that considers itself “traditional.” They claim the title of defenders of real liberal values which they claim are now dead. From a conceptual point of view, this seems to be a either a convenient escape from logic or perhaps a different understanding of the term “traditional.” Perhaps there is a new understanding of traditionalism that is defined by UDR as being “diet liberalism” or “liberalism lite” that makes it more palatable to the Russian public.

Monday, March 30, 2015

Obama Was Hand-Picked & NOT a Natural Born Citizen - Congress Knew It & Protected Him

The further I travel down this rabbit hole, the more I feel divorced from the good conservative people that I choose to call my own. I hold some stories back from our readers. My thought is that people have a hard enough time embracing the basic fact that our government is corrupt on both sides of the aisle. If you knew how corrupt I thought these people really were, I feel like you'd rush to the phone and soon bad men would show up to haul me off in a straitjacket.
Do they still do that?
Regardless, today I want to show you something that might leave you questioning everything around you.
Welcome to my world.
In 1975 a representative named Joe Bingham introduced an amendment to remove the "natural born citizen" constitutional requirement to become President.
Why is that important?
Because it was not until almost 30 years later that the issue would be addressed again. And it was not addressed only once, but multiple times. This is all part of congressional record.
Remarkably, it just so happened to coincide with the meteoric rise of a man named Barack Obama who currently sits in the People's House.

Read More: http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/03/obama-was-hand-picked-not-a-natural-born-citizen-congress-knew-it-protected-him/

Biting the Bullet Andrei Navrozov

Navrozov_Review
The flyleaf of this book sports a quote (“One finally gets the musical whole of Dostoevsky’s original”) from an enthusiastic notice in the New York Times Book Review of a new translation of The Brothers Karamazov, which the Pevear-Volokh onsky tandem unleashed upon the English-speaking world a quarter of a century ago.  As the author of that enthusiastic review, and hence a person in some small part responsible for the tandem’s continued success, I may be entitled to a private reminiscence.
Some months back, as I was scrolling idly through mentions, for the most part hostile, of my own person on Google, I came across the foreword to a book written by a certain Professor Morris of the University of Hong Kong.  The professor recalled the impression made on him in his youth by Hemingway, who, in his own turn, had been influenced by Dostoyevsky:
He read many of his important books, including The Brothers Karamazov, as translated into English by Constance Garnett (1861-1946).  She was the first English translator to render Dostoyevsky into English, and her translations were the only ones available to Hemingway.  The publication of Dostoyevsky in English caused a sensation—they were something “new,” something that “surprised the world.”  I was especially taken by this statement in A Moveable Feast: “In Dostoyevsky there were things believable and not to be believed, but some so true they changed you as you read them. . . . ”  That idea in that sentence changed my life—even as I read it.  Ideas and writing so great they changed you even as you read them!
The italics are the professor’s, but even without them it would have been clear to me by now that this is somebody who takes his reading seriously.  A melancholy sigh, after scrolling a few paragraphs down, did not quite cover up the embarrassment I was beginning to feel:
I had my students read Garnett and Hemingway, and together we read that sentence in A Moveable Feast.  Then one day late in 1990, I read a review of a new translation of Dostoyevsky’s book.  The book review, written by Andrei Navrozov, praised the new translation and was highly critical of Constance Garnett and her translations of Dostoyevsky—the translations Hemingway had read and said they “changed you as you read them.”  The new translators were Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky.  Garnett’s translations, Navrozov said, were lies, emendations, rewritings, camouflage—all without the music of the original.  This new information devastated me: Hemingway had based his great statement—the one that changed my life—on a falsehood.  Therefore, what I had believed and taught my students was based on a falsehood, or a series of falsehoods—both Garnett’s and Hemingway’s—Garnett’s intentional, Hemingway’s unknowing because he did not read Russian and had to rely on a translation.  A whole chain of communication, thought, and analysis in my life and profession over a period of several decades was suddenly without a basis in truth.
Read More: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2015/April/39/4/magazine/article/10827055/

Private Emails Reveal Ex-Clinton Aide’s Secret Spy Network by Jeff Gerth



Emails disclosed by a hacker show a close family friend was funneling intelligence about the crisis in Libya directly to the Secretary of State’s private account starting before the Benghazi attack.

Update, March 27, 6:48 p.m.: This story has been updated to include responses from the FBI and the State Department.
Starting weeks before Islamic militants attacked the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, longtime Clinton family confidante Sidney Blumenthal supplied intelligence to then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gathered by  a secret network that included a former CIA clandestine service officer, according to hacked emails from Blumenthal’s account.
The emails, which were posted on the internet in 2013, also show that Blumenthal and another close Clinton associate discussed contracting with a retired Army special operations commander to put operatives on the ground near the Libya-Tunisia border while Libya’s civil war raged in 2011.
Blumenthal’s emails to Clinton, which were directed to her private email account, include at least a dozen detailed reports on events on the deteriorating political and security climate in Libya as well as events in other nations. They came to light after a hacker broke into Blumenthal’s account and have taken on new significance in light of the disclosure that she conducted State Department and personal business exclusively over an email server that she controlled and kept secret from State Department officials and which only recently was discovered by congressional investigators.
The contents of that account are now being sought by a congressional inquiry into the Benghazi attacks. Clinton has handed over more than 30,000 pages of her emails to the State Department, after unilaterally deciding which ones involved government business; the State Department has so far handed almost 900 pages of those over to the committee. A Clinton spokesman told Gawker and ProPublica (which are collaborating on this story) that she has turned over all the emails Blumenthal sent to Clinton.

Read More: http://www.propublica.org/article/private-emails-reveal-ex-clinton-aides-secret-spy-network

Sunday, March 29, 2015

Twilight of the Right. When conservatism became a movement, it lost its soul. By ALAN PELL CRAWFORD


It is the night of August 15, 1973. I’m at Washington’s Sheraton-Park Hotel, now the Marriott-Wardman. The occasion is the annual convention of Young Americans for Freedom (YAF), formed 12 years earlier by, among others, William F. Buckley Jr. While nearly 1,000 YAFers are elsewhere in the building, I, by special invitation, am at a reception hosted by R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. Tyrrell—who had been kind enough to help me land an internship that summer at the right-wing weekly Human Events—was then the dashing editor of The Alternative, a magazine for undergraduates with Tory sensibilities.
The Alternative in time  was renamed The American Spectator, and as Tyrrell became more enmeshed in conservative-movement politics, it would move uptown to the Washington, D.C. suburbs. But back then, The Alternative was edited in a farmhouse outside Bloomington, Indiana, home to Indiana University. It was at Indiana, as an undergraduate who had consumed a heady concoction of two parts Mencken and one part Edmund Burke, that I became an occasional contributor toThe Alternative. Its publisher, the man we called “Baron” Von Kannon, is now a vice president at the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank established that same year.
Deciding it was important for The Alternative to “make a strong showing” at the YAF convention, Tyrrell had taken it upon himself to pay my YAF dues. Then he dunned me for reimbursement. At the time, I considered this a gross imposition, but I was soon glad he did it. By attending I get my first glimpse of the great Buckley himself, and for a kid from a 50-acre farm in southern Illinois, this is some thrill.
There is free beer in Tyrrell’s “hospitality suite,” and the required atmosphere of Menckenesque bonhomie. There is also, amid the boozy geniality, a sense that we are watching the newsreel of history flicker before us. Richard Nixon, up to his beady eyeballs in Watergate, is to deliver his second televised address on the subject. Tyrrell turns on the TV, and we watch as our president squirms through another futile defense. No matter how much movement conservatives disapproved of Nixon on other grounds—China, wage and price controls, revenue sharing, the Family Assistance Plan, etc.—Watergate was one thing they liked. M. Stanton Evans, a long-time advisor to YAF and a mainstay at their conventions, put it this way: “If I’d known he’d been up to all that stuff, I’d have been for Nixon all along.”
Read More: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/twilight-of-the-right/

8 Things Vietnam War Movies Leave Out (By an Enemy Soldier) By Evan V. Symon & Nguyen Hoa Giai

Even if your knowledge of the Vietnam War comes exclusively from Hollywood films and Texan textbooks that only refer to it as "that one the good guys lost," you've probably heard about the Viet Cong. They were a bunch of jungle-fighting guerrilla warriors who killed American boys via night-time ambushes and terrifying traps. Well, that's one side of the story. Here's another: They were a bunch of scared (mostly) young kids fighting in a massive conflict for very personal reasons. We sent a writer out to Vietnam to speak with Nguyen Hoa Giai. He fought as a Viet Cong from the late 1950s to the end of the war in the mid-'70s. Here's what he told us.

#8. We Weren't All Communists; We Just Wanted Independence, or Revenge

I became a Viet Cong guerrilla in the late 1950s, when I was 15. It wasn't because I was a Communist, or because I ran away to join the circus and just got wildly sidetracked. My uncle actually fought on Ho Chi Minh's side of things during WWII when the resistance against Japanese occupation was actually funded by the Americans and Brits. Here he is palling around with Allied soldiers:
I was just mad at how the South was pushing all of its excess money into the major cities like Saigon. The South Vietnamese government seemed to ignore small towns and villages, like mine. Ngo Dinh Diem (the leader of South Vietnam at the time) even took away our farms and put them under the control of a single rich guy who'd supported the French in World War II. This happened all over South Vietnam and was called "land reform," rather than the far more accurate "serious, deep, and exploratory boning."

The French, who had controlled Vietnam since the 1800s, always saw the locals as "lower," and we never forgave them for refusing to give us independence. Ho Chi Minh was snubbed twice, and after the second time he reacted. My uncle also wanted independence and would do anything, including support Communism, to get it.
Read More: http://www.cracked.com/article_22206_8-facts-about-vietnam-war-i-learned-as-viet-cong.html

Fun facts & fascism by Sarah Ruden

Here’s a small homage to a category G. K. Chesterton and George Orwell popularized: the good bad book—basically, hokey but appealing. I propose classing certain other books as good good. They are both viscerally enjoyable and deeply serious, like an old-fashioned Sunday dinner with a roast and succotash and homemade wild blackberry pie and theological discussion, preliminary to a long, fierce, wily game of kick-the-can.
Alas, there don’t seem to be many books from recent decades that qualify, but I’ve made a few discoveries in recent years. One that my husband, Tom, cherishes in honor of his late father, a Navy officer in both World War II and the Korean War, is Rick Atkinson’s Pulitzer Prize–winning An Army at Dawn (Picador, 2002), about the Allied North Africa campaign in 1942 and 1943, beginning with the invasion named Operation Torch.
Atkinson’s is a truly winning account. He has a rare lust for the bare-naked truth with all of her cellulite, and he doesn’t care how much archival labor it takes to court her; most astonishingly, the courtship maintains an unbroken lyricism. The distinctly green hue of the American troops (some of them naively open poltroons, some with a gee-whiz enthusiasm for combat); our generals’ earnest bumbling in some cases and egomaniacal eccentricity in others; the patient contempt of British confederates, and our leadership’s slowness in accepting their good advice to invade Europe from the south first, through Italy, after the subjection of North Africa; the gratuitous, bloody resistance of the Vichy French; and everywhere the farce of new technology helpless under the boot of outdated logistics and tactics—whatever he’s writing about, Atkinson always picks the perfect politically incorrect fact (such as the V.D. infection rates according to American ethnic group) or the perfect tenacious image (such as troops bouncing to shore “like kangaroos” during a mechanically botched landing).
Read More: http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/Fun-facts---fascism-8108

Saturday, March 28, 2015

An Online Gallery of Over 900,000 Breathtaking Photos of Historic New York City

Grand Central

What is any major American city if not an industrial gallery bustling with people and machines? Sometimes the images are bleak, as with the photo essays that often circulate of Detroit’s beautiful ruin; sometimes they are defiantly hopeful, as with those of the rising of New Orleans; and sometimes they are almost unfathomably monumental, as with the images here of New York City, circa the 20th century—or a great good bit of it, anyway.

You can survey almost a hundred years of New York’s indomitable grandeur by perusing over 900,000 images from the New York City Municipal Archives Online Gallery. Photos like the astonishing tableaux in a sunlight-flooded Grand Central Terminal at the top (taken sometime between 1935 and 41) and like the breathtaking scale on display in the 1910 exposure of the Queensboro Bridge, above.

The online gallery features large-format photos of the human, like the sea of bathers above; of the human-made, like the vaulted, cavernous City Hall subway station below; and of the melding of the two, like the painters posing on the cables of the Brooklyn Bridge, further down.

Read More: http://www.openculture.com/2015/03/an-online-gallery-of-over-900000-breathtaking-photos-of-historic-new-york-city.html

Hilton Kramer, 1928-2012 by Roger Kimball

hilton_kramer_mobile_3-25-15-1
Today, March 25, is the birthday of my friend and colleague Hilton Kramer.  Hilton died on March 27, 2012, at 84. Today, I suspect, Hilton is remembered chiefly as the founding editor of The New Criterion, the magazine I now edit, which he and the pianist and music critic Samuel Lipman started in 1982.  But in the years before, Hilton was the awesome voice of The New York Times’s arts and culture pages. The phrase “arts and culture” is key because Hilton, though perhaps best known as an art critic—he was for many year’s the chief art critic of our former paper of record—was so much more than an art critic. He wrote regularly about literature and other aspects of culture for the paper’s book review and for other sections of the paper. In comparison with the politically correct Lilliputians now teeming in the culture pages of the Times he was a giant indeed. 
Hilton’s was always a lonely voice on the cultural landscape. For one thing, he was absolutely incorruptible. There was never any hint of positive reviews for favors given or go-with-the-flow acquiescence in the latest art world trends. Hilton always called things the way he saw them. And since he was so well informed and could draw upon an unusually wide range of cultural and intellectual reference, his judgments were respected even where they were feared or resented.
I have been lucky to have had many attentive and engaging teachers over the years, but no one was more of a mentor to my work as a critic than Hilton Kramer. In May 2012, just a couple of months after his death, I published “Hilton Kramer and the Critical Temper,” part recollection, part homage, to this remarkable man. On the sad occasion of what would have been his 87th birthday, I thought my readers might be interested in revisiting what I had to say then:
No one, if he could help it, would tolerate the presence of untruth in the most vital part of his nature concerning the most vital matters. There is nothing he would fear so much as to harbor falsehood in that quarter.—Plato, The Republic, Book II
Prose. Many of the recollections that followed Hilton Kramer’s death, age 84, on March 27, dilated on the nature of his prose. “Clarity” usually came towards the top of the list. George Orwell somewhere likened good prose to a transparent window pane. It revealed what it was about without calling attention to itself. It disappeared in rendering the thing it described. Hilton’s prose displayed that Orwellian clarity. Not only did you always know where you stood reading an essay by Hilton Kramer, you knew exactly where he stood, too. And you knew precisely what he thought about the subject under discussion.

Ann Coulter On ABC’s David Muir: Hey, Pretty Boy: Do You Actually Know What’s In The News? By Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter
When “NBC Nightly News” anchor Brian Williams crashed and burned over all the tall tales he had told, there must have been mirth in the hallways at ABC.
In the highly competitive world of TV news, finding the right anchor is crucial to a network’s brand. After running through a few pretenders, ABC had finally filled the iconic Peter Jennings’ seat on “World News Tonight” just months earlier with David Muir. ABC was perfectly poised to snatch the top spot from NBC.
During his first six months as “World News” anchor, the newly minted Muir had beaten Williams only a half-dozen times. But after Williams’ fall from grace, ABC sailed to the most-watched evening news program.
ABC executives could go for long lunches and look forward to cashing their bonus checks. Muir is young, dashing—one of People magazine’s 2014 “Sexiest Men Alive”!—and the proud recipient of the Walter Cronkite journalism award.
The vanquished Brian Williams had told most of his fictions off air. The only thing ABC execs had to worry about with Muir was that the new guy would tell fairy tales ON AIR, which is so much less important.
Last week, Muir began the news with a story about the retraining of New York City police officers under Commissioner Bill Bratton. To fulfill the new policy of not inconveniencing criminals, cops are being taught to subdue violent suspects without harming them, requiring the officers to learn a series of Bolshoi ballet moves.
Read More: http://www.vdare.com/articles/ann-coulter-on-abcs-david-muir-hey-pretty-boy-do-you-actually-know-whats-in-the-news?stf=Muir%20led%20off

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Ted Cruz: First President of the North American Union?

New York: Conspicuous Construction by Martin Filler

filler_1-040215.jpg


Sky High and the Logic of Luxury

an exhibition at the Skyscraper Museum, New York City, October 9, 2013–June 15, 2014

From the pre-Revolutionary period until World War II, tenants in New York City were uniformly given three months’ notice of annual rent increases on February 1 (known as Rent Day). Many then sought cheaper deals, and when all leases expired on May 1 (called Moving Day) as many as a million residents changed houses in what amounted to a single mass migration. Lately there’s been another, more specialized real estate frenzy afoot in America’s largest city. Its most visible manifestations concern the world’s very richest people.
Last December a long-anticipated threshold was crossed when a duplex penthouse atop the French architect Christian de Portzamparc’s new One57 condominium, on Manhattan’s West 57th Street between Sixth and Seventh Avenues, sold for an unprecedented $100,471,452.77. In 2014 seven more apartments at that address, built by the Extell Development Company, changed hands for between $32 million and $56 million each, which together accounted for more than a third of the year’s two dozen biggest New York residential transactions. This January, another duplex there fetched $90 million.
Portzamparc’s tower of monetary power stands two blocks south of Central Park, at the epicenter of Manhattan’s densest concentration of top-of-the-line apartment construction since Fifth and Park Avenues were built up between the two world wars. The block directly west of One57 awaits another Extell venture, Nordstrom Tower, designed by Adrian Smith (architect of the world’s tallest structure, the Burj Khalifa of 2003–2010 in Dubai) and Gordon Gill. Comprising a branch of the Nordstrom’s fashion retailer at street level, a hotel above the store, and condos on the uppermost stories—unobstructed park views commence at 225 feet high, hence this sequence—it will rise next to and over Henry Hardenbergh’s Art Students League of 1891–1892 and become the city’s tallest residential building at 1,775 feet.
Nordstrom’s piggybacking was made possible by the developer’s purchase of the art school’s air rights—that is, the titular transfer of empty vertical space above nearby buildings never used to the full extent permissible by zoning laws. Such stratagems are an essential part of the complex legal and economic equation (what the skyscraper historian Carol Willis has termed “invisible Monopoly,” after the real estate board game) that has allowed these super-tall, super-thin towers to multiply in Midtown North, as planners and police call the neighborhood.
Read More: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2015/apr/02/new-york-conspicuous-construction/

4 Ways the Suburban Dream Is About to Die By M. Asher Cantrell

Wouldn't it be great if there was a place you could live when you wanted to be in the city but also wanted a lot more space? Sort of like a mini-city, away from the bustling urban area itself. Like a sub ... urb.
But it's starting to look more and more like the idea of the suburb was just an artifact of the 20th century, because they're fading fast, and it's all because ...

#4. Their Prime Businesses Are Going Away

For years, one of the biggest draws to the suburbs, besides all the readily available heroin, was the specialty retail shops. Clothing stores are the biggest, but pretty much any place that sells just one type of product (or subset thereof) is what we're talking about. Video games, toys, cards, books, whatever. They're all going out of business at an alarming rate.
WendellandCarolyn/iStock/Getty Images
But people making "Business Closed" signs are rolling in dough.
In the last year alone, close to a dozen major clothing chains, located primarily in suburbs, have either announced mass closings or outright gone out of business. Delia'sDebWet SealAeropostale,American EagleCoach, and several more have all said that they're shuttering stores that used to be hugely profitable.
The American mall has been suffering for years. But now their close relatives, department stores, are also shutting down in droves. SearsKmartMacy'sJ.C. Penney, and even Target are starting to scale way, way down. Barnes & Noble and Toys "R" Us have announced major store closings, too, as have Office Depot/OfficeMax and Staples. RadioShack is also closing nearly 2,000 stores, but is still hanging in there, eagerly awaiting the frazzled dad looking for a certain type of battery five minutes before closing so he can get his kid's birthday present to work.
Joe Raedle/Getty Images News/Getty Images
Those dads were tenacious as fuck.
In fact, the only retail businesses that are doing reasonably well are chain pharmacies (which are more like big, less sketchy convenience stores now) and dollar stores. Places that tend not to specialize in anything are the only places people want to shop anymore.
You don't need to travel to your local suburb for a less-crowded shopping experience (or any shopping experience at all, if you live in a rural area). You can just hop on Amazon while fully nude and wearing a rubber horse mask and get a backup rubber horse mask shipped to you in two days or less, which more and more people seem to be doing, since Amazon's Prime membership numbers are skyrocketing. Getting Amazon Prime, that is. Not buying rubber horse masks.
Tomwang112/iStock/Getty Images
"Let's see security do something about it now."

But it's not just that. It seems that what really killed the specialty retail beast was stretching itself too thin. Huge numbers of stores that were run with minuscule margins means that the more they got squeezed, the faster they folded. And finally, after 20 years of recessions, a disappearing middle-class, and big-box stores and online shopping stealing their lunch, the camel's back seems to have finally broke, and no amount of celebrity clothing lines targeted at suburban moms have been able to fix it.
Read More: http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-ways-suburban-dream-about-to-die/

Brian Williams’ Job Christopher Sandford

Apr_2015_pic_2
You know within a few moments of meeting him whether a “celebrity” is going to be a regular guy.  It’s not just the winning smile, or his willingness to pose for endless selfies; it is whether or not he’s matured around a recognizable value system, the presence or otherwise of a due sense of modesty about his achievements, the way he holds himself away from the public spotlight.
Thirty years ago, in London, it fell upon me to arrange for a suitably illustrious guest to speak at a dinner for housebuilding-industry executives and their wives.  I remember approaching one or two now-defunct stars of British stage and screen, as well as Carol Thatcher (the prime minister’s daughter), and various others whom I recall with something closer to nostalgia than real fondness.  Most were already engaged on the night in question, and the few who weren’t balked at the modest fee I was able to offer them.  At the last moment, a colleague suggested that I try the anchor (or reader, as they were then called) of the nightly BBC Television news bulletin, Richard Whitmore.
Whitmore himself answered the number I dialed, and listened briefly to my pitch.  He not only said that he would come to the dinner, but told me he would be delighted.
When the night arrived, Whitmore appeared for our rendezvous a minute or two late and apologized profusely for his lapse.  He had taken public transport in from his suburban home, and the train had broken down in a tunnel en route.  Trim and neatly dressed, bespectacled, of around middle age, he seemed like a thoroughly unexceptional and pleasant Englishman of a sort perhaps less notable then than it is now.  When first alighting at the station, he had extended his hand and—as though his name might not be immediately familiar—warmly introduced himself.  We walked together to the hotel where the dinner was held, and along the way I observed examples large and small of Whitmore’s unfeigned charm and modesty.  Considering this was a man seen by some eight million viewers each weeknight, he seemed touchingly surprised when an occasional passerby stopped to greet him.  When I asked him if he minded the attention, he smiled and shook his head.  “Honestly, though, you sometimes wonder what all the fuss is about . . . For some reason or other, just because you can read off an autocue, people assume you’re a great sage.”
Read More: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2015/April/39/4/magazine/article/10827061/

Wednesday, March 25, 2015

Bargaining with Zionists by Steve Sailer


The hubbub over last week’s election in Israel is another reminder of why the Democrats have pinned all their 2016 hopes on Hillary Clinton. The Democrats are planning a coronation rather than a competitive donnybrook (like the one the Republicans seem to be ginning up) because a genuine battle in the primaries would expose the intraparty acrimony inherent in the Democrats being the Coalition of the Fringes. In particular, getting most Democrats to assume upfront that Hillary is inarguably the rightful heir to the throne in 2016 should paper over for four or, ideally, eight years the looming Democratic crack-up over Israel and Jews.
While not very significant as a voting bloc anymore, Jews have long furnished the Democrats with much of the Party’s campaign funds and media muscle. But a massive long-run problem for Democrats is that American Jews tend to be liberal about America but conservative about Israel.
Moreover, the appalling anti-Semitic Muslim terrorism in Europe is finally persuading some American Jews to question their schmaltzy complacency that mass immigration into predominantly gentile countries is always “good for the Jews.” These developments make American Jews increasingly uncomfortable with the Democrats’ People of Color coalition of the resentful.
Read More: http://takimag.com/article/bargaining_with_zionists_steve_sailer/print#axzz3V7ftTUlc

“How Jews Think”

BROTHER NATHANAEL, a Jewish convert to “Orthodox” Christianity, writes about the interior world of Jews in a three-part series called “How Jews Think.” Obviously, these are generalizations, and generalizations are what they are, they don’t apply to everyone:
HAVING GROWN UP AS A JEW and having gone to an upper middle class synagogue throughout my childhood up through my young adult years, I am uniquely qualified to do an expose on the inner workings of the Jewish mind. Now that I am an Orthodox Christian, having converted in 1971 to Christianity, I can see very clearly how the Jew thinks:
1. The Jew is a perpetual outsider. The Jew is a ceaseless “observer” and consequent “actor” & “reactor” upon the world’s stage. The Jew seeks to impose his will upon the Gentile whom he looks down upon as being inferior in intelligence and activism to him.
2. The Jew is always on a “mission.” The Jew always has a “cause” he must fight for. The mission and the cause of the Jew is hostile to the mission and cause of Jesus Christ and Christianity.
3. The Jew wishes to remain aloof and separate from the nations. That is why Winston Churchill initially used the term, “The International Jew.”

Read More: http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/2015/03/how-jews-think/

Rolling Stone Fails a Police Fact Check By Megan McArdle

<p>Grades are coming due.</p>
 Photo by Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for Rolling Stone
When Rolling Stone ran a story about a horrific rape that allegedly occurred at a UVA fraternity, I was sickened. After reading Richard Bradley's probing questions about that story's veracity, however, I said this: 
I read Bradley's article and thought, “well, if there are problems with Erdely's story, it will probably come out eventually, because there’s enough detail that can be checked.” But there’s a corollary to that: If the Rolling Stone article's allegations are true, there’s also enough detail to put at least a couple of people in jail, and possibly the whole group, even if Jackie (the victim) is reluctant to assist the investigation.
I called for the Charlottesville Police Department to investigate the case forthwith.
Well, they did. And today, at a press conference, they shared the results of that information. To summarize: "Jackie," the alleged victim, refused to cooperate with police. The fraternity, however, did, and extensive attempts to corroborate her story failed.  
There wasn't much new here for people who have followed this case closely, and know about the various problems with Jackie's story. They already knew that the guy she told friends raped her, with whom her friends had actually exchanged text messages with prior to their date that night, was a character named "Haven Monahan" who supposedly worked with her at the University's Aquatic Center. Earlier reporting indicated that this is not the name of a UVA student, and the number they were texting belonged to a web-based service that allows people to send texts. Fraternity records do not show an event that night.
Read More: http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-23/rolling-stone-fails-a-police-fact-check

Tuesday, March 24, 2015

A TRAGIC LACK OF RACIST POLICING by Colin Liddell



This recent video of a mentally disturbed Black man being shot and killed by police on his own doorstep in Dallas is the latest SJW snuff movie to be doing the rounds. This kind of video is becoming increasingly common, not just because wherever you go people can instantly film stuff like this on their smart phones, but also because police are increasingly being required to wear body cameras. This trend towards greater surveillance is driven by the belief, widespread among Blacks and Leftists, that America’s police are acting in a “racist” way, and by the desire of police and Conservatives to show that they are “not.” 

But the idea that a little surveillance and disclosure will clear things up is at best touchingly naive. No matter how White police act when arresting Blacks, Leftists and most Blacks are never going to be satisfied that there is a lack of “racism.” Racism is too nebulous and elastic a concept to ever be vanquished, even by the prospect of police officers arresting people nicely and respectfully, while smiling into the camera.

On the contrary, such videos will only increase Black people’s sense of victimization and alienation, as the only ones that will be watched are those in which there is clear evidence of racism and/or where things go tragically wrong, as in the case in Dallas. These videos will inevitably feature White police officers shooting/tasering/choking Black suspects. The raw visual semantics will transcend any notion of right or wrong, and eclipse the finer points of correct policing. 

Read More: http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2015/03/a-tragic-lack-of-racist-policing.html#more

Mentors Are The Secret Weapons Of Successful Startups by Rhett Morris

Editor’s note: Rhett Morris is the director of Endeavor Insight, the research arm of Endeavor, a nonprofit that supports high-impact entrepreneurs across the world.
“I’ve probably revised this investor pitch deck 200 times,” a founder told me recently. She’d met with more than 50 potential investors before closing a seed round last month. This might sound excessive to some, but her experience is not unusual.
Entrepreneurs often spend hundreds of hours raising funds from angel and venture capital investors. While these activities are clearly important, analysis of new data on startups suggests that founders should also dedicate significant time to something that many people overlook: recruiting great mentors. This simple strategy can increase a company’s odds of success more than almost anything else.

Discovering the secrets of the best founders

Our team studied thousands of tech businesses last year. We looked specifically at companies in New York City’s tech sector, which was the fastest-growing tech sector from 2003-2013 and is now the second largest tech hub in the world. The goal of this research was to investigate how local tech firms had become so successful.
Our analysts combined data from CrunchBase, AngelList and LinkedIn, and interviewed nearly 700 founders. (In total, New York tech founders dedicated more than a month of time to this project.) These sources enabled us to create the world’s largest database of a single entrepreneurship community.
We found that a number of characteristics that are often highlighted as predictors of success for startups – such as starting a company while in college – don’t actually make much of a difference. While these conclusions on traditional startup myths were interesting, we uncovered several other intriguing findings by examining the habits of the best firms and founders.
Read More: http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/22/mentors-are-the-secret-weapons-of-successful-startups/?ncid=rss

Singapore After Lee Kuan Yew: Future Is Uncertain For The Utilitarian Paradise He Created By Joel Kotkin

In this age of political Lilliputians, we must acknowledge the passing of giants. Although he ran only a small city-state, Lee Kuan Yew, along with late Chinese Premier Deng Xiaoping, ranks among Asia’s most pivotal figures of the past 50 years.
These two men — a tall, aristocratic scion of a Hakka trading family and the diminutive Chinese revolutionary — came from very different perspectives, but shared a pragmatic streak, and ultimately strategies that came to be widely copied. You can see their legacy today across the continent, in rapid urbanization and growing economic power.
But it was Lee who first formulated the essentials of the new Asian economic approach, blending capitalistic modernity with a state-directed economy and authoritarianism. Although repression of dissidents in both countries rightfully offends Westerners, particularly journalists, it has not deterred foreign capital, technology and capital from seeking to cash in on Asia’s growth.
American and British capital may have fueled global capitalism’s 20th century triumph, but Lee and Deng shaped its expansion in the 21st.
Lee’s Achievement
This is not merely a testament to Lee’s tenure as prime minister from 1959 to 1990, the longest of any in world history, but the singularity and durability of his accomplishment. From Singapore’s independence to the present day, Lee helped fashion what is arguably the most successful and best run city in the world.
In 1965, after Singapore’s acrimonious exit from Malaysia, its outlook was far from promising. Unemployment was high and the fledgling city-state was wracked by internal dissension between its ethnic mix of Chinese, Indians and Malays, and between conservatives and communists, who seemed in political ascendancy as elsewhere in Southeast Asia. The then rough-edged Asian metropolis, an important trading center, boasted a per capita GDP of$2,667 in 1990 dollars, more than double the average for East Asian countries and trailing only Japan in the region, but well behind European countries and North America.
Faced with imminent disaster, Lee’s response was to create a new political system that blended a mildly socialist program with a development strategy aimed at attracting foreign capital and building up the manufacturing sector. Lee and his People’s Action Party (PAP) focused on developing a modern infrastructure — from the port and roads to education — that is second to none.
Read More: http://www.joelkotkin.com/content/001059-singapore-after-lee-kuan-yew-future-uncertain-utilitarian-paradise-he-created?utm