The Insane Rationalizations, Bigotry And Out Right Hypocrisy Of The Left

[Mobius]

Classy, gutsy move:

https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/09/grassley-supreme-court-nomination-2020/?utm_medium=email

Grassley Promises Not To Consider A Trump Nominee In An Election Year

Now, can RBG hold on one more year? And to what lengths will the Dems go to keep her there??

He means a presidential election year. And he said as long as he is chairman. So may be a way around.

[Paul G.]

 

 

Never worked in the field of sexual assault investigations? You know what a SAPR is? Also as a Brigade XO I oversee commander's inquires. Apparently Soros provides talking points to the SECDEF sexual assault prevention and response program.

 

So when you lost a commander's inquiry, did you make it a point to go around and harass the defendants who were found to have done nothing wrong? Harass their wives and kids too? Did you ALWAYS consider that the accused was guilty and just leave it at that?

How do you lose a comander's inquiry? Its a fact finding investigation.

 

I have also sat as president of many an AGR hiring board and irrespective of Ford's testimony, if Kavenenaugh had presented for a position with the issues of integrity, judgement and decorum he displayed during the hearing, he would not have a job in any self respecting agency.

 

Quoting Steve Schmidt..

 

Heres the deal, said Schmidt. [Kavanaugh] was serially dishonest in his testimony on big issues and on small issues. If dishonesty gets you kicked out of West Point as an 18-year-old, we might want to apply that standard to the highest court in the land.

Edited October 10, 2018 by Paul G.

[shep854]

 

Classy, gutsy move:

https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/09/grassley-supreme-court-nomination-2020/?utm_medium=email

Grassley Promises Not To Consider A Trump Nominee In An Election Year

Now, can RBG hold on one more year? And to what lengths will the Dems go to keep her there??

He means a presidential election year. And he said as long as he is chairman. So may be a way around.

 

Exactly. So if Ginsberg can hold on until 1/20 (admittedly a bit over a year), her seat's safe for the Dems, unless the R's keep the Presidency.

Of course a new committee chairman might not feel bound by Grassley's statement--more drama.

All this assumes the R's keep the Senate.

Edited October 10, 2018 by shep854

[urbanoid]

Cuck

 

[Paul G.]

Cuck

 

Just how would you know his wife sleeps with other men?

[urbanoid]

I hear voices, no shit.

[Michael Eastes]

Hello Michael,

 

How wonderful to see you posting! Hope you are well.

 

--

Soren

It’s nice to be back, and be greeted by old friends! I’m well, and finally able to get back on with a newer iPhone. The screen is tiny and the page isn’t particularly iPhone friendly, but it’s worth a shot after being away so long.

 

Paul G., you say that Murph is hobbled by “simplistic” thought processes; I’ve met him, and I can assure you that you’re off target. Indeed, I have to wonder about anyone who thinks that the recent dung flinging fest in the Senate was in any way justified.

[Panzermann]

 

Hello Michael,

 

How wonderful to see you posting! Hope you are well.

 

--

Soren

It’s nice to be back, and be greeted by old friends! I’m well, and finally able to get back on with a newer iPhone. The screen is tiny and the page isn’t particularly iPhone friendly, but it’s worth a shot after being away so long.

 

Paul G., you say that Murph is hobbled by “simplistic” thought processes; I’ve met him, and I can assure you that you’re off target. Indeed, I have to wonder about anyone who thinks that the recent dung flinging fest in the Senate was in any way justified.

 

 

The literal shitshow that went on there made me think of a bad show put up to detract from other things.

 

 

 

[Mr King]

Cuck

 

 

It is only a matter of time till they are burning people at the stake.

[Jeff]

Classy, gutsy move:

https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/09/grassley-supreme-court-nomination-2020/?utm_medium=email

Grassley Promises Not To Consider A Trump Nominee In An Election Year

Now, can RBG hold on one more year? And to what lengths will the Dems go to keep her there??

 

Sorry, I gave up on being nice. If the president's party controls the Senate then fill the seat. If the Dems take over the Senate in November and a seat opens up in 2020, then they can sit on it. If the Republicans keep control then there's no reason not to move forward. "Classy" gets you jack shit with the Left and that's just what we should give them.

[Mr King]

Classy, gutsy move:

https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/09/grassley-supreme-court-nomination-2020/?utm_medium=email

Grassley Promises Not To Consider A Trump Nominee In An Election Year

Now, can RBG hold on one more year? And to what lengths will the Dems go to keep her there??

 

[Jeff]

By all means, let's be classy.

 

Truck set on fire because of pro-Trump stickers

By Benjamin Brown | Fox News

 

A truck adorned with several stickers supporting President Trump was reportedly set ablaze and vandalized with spray paint outside a bar in Washington state, in what the owner believes was a targeted attack.

 

"If you say anything that someone doesn't like, you are ultimately a target," Johnny MacKay told KOIN-TV of Portland, Ore. "You're automatically the enemy and they have to hurt you."

 

After having a few drinks at the bar in Vancouver, Wash., MacKay told the station he decided to take an Uber home and leave his truck overnight in the parking lot. He said he left his vehicle under a light in hopes that it would discourage anyone from trying to break in.

 

The truck had two stickers on the bumper in support of President Trump, one of which read: “TRUMP 2020.”

 

"I literally just put them on this weekend," MacKay, who did not vote for Trump but supports the Oval Office, told the station. "If I would've known somebody would've taken politics this far -- I saw them, I thought they were funny and apparently somebody didn't get the joke."

 

Randy Sanchagrin, who lives across the street from the bar, told the station he ran outside after hearing an explosion to see the truck engulfed in flames.

"All of a sudden I hear a loud bomb and the windows shake," Sanchagrin said. He had his sister call police.

 

A video posted to Twitter showed flames spouting from the truck, and the charred aftermath.

 

MacKay was shocked the next morning to find his truck destroyed, as he said the “tires were melted, the windows were shattered.”

 

The word “Trump” appeared to be spray-painted in large white letters across the body of the vehicle.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/us/truck-set-on-fire-because-of-pro-trump-stickers-owner-says

 

 

[Jeff]

And while we're being classy, they are looking to pack the court.

 

Pack the Supreme Court? Why we may be getting closer.

By Aaron Blake

Senior political reporter, writing for The Fix
October 9

 

Plenty of ink has been spilled about whether Brett M. Kavanaugh’s confirmation will politicize the Supreme Court in new ways. But the biggest question may not be what the court does now, but instead what Congress’s next step is. And given the trajectory, there’s a high likelihood this process will further devolve into partisan politics and gamesmanship. The stakes are too high, the emotion is too raw, and the sense of grievance is too real on both sides.

 

It’s not unreasonable to think the destination here is packing the court.

 

Court-packing has come up occasionally throughout the years as a workaround for one side or the other to wage something of a hostile takeover of the court. Rather than waiting for the right justices to retire or die when the right president is in office, the theory goes, a party can just expand the court enough to install the requisite justices and tip the scales to its side. Enacting term limits for justices would require a constitutional amendment and take years to pan out; packing the court is quicker and requires only a regular old act of Congress.

 

For obvious reasons, the idea has gained some new currency with liberals, for whom it could help in taking a 5-4 conservative court and flipping it to a 6-5 liberal one. Michael Avenatti has said it should be a litmus-test issue for any 2020 Democratic presidential candidate.

 

The below is more true today than ever before. The Court must be expanded to 11 seats and it can be done under the law. Any Dem that does not commit to expanding the Court has no business running for the nomination. There is far too much at stake. #Basta pic.twitter.com/NTQ2ssE5cb

— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) October 6, 2018

The idea hasn’t yet caught on with Democratic leaders. But there are reasons to believe they might one day entertain it.

 

Court-packing hasn’t been seriously attempted since 1937, when Franklin D. Roosevelt pushed to expand the anti-New Deal court by as many as six justices to turn it into a pro-New Deal court. The effort went nowhere, but scholars generally say it had the beneficial effect of pushing the existing court in a more pro-New Deal direction. Before that, there were seven instances of adding or subtracting justices in the 1800s, according to a 1968 Baylor Law Review article by J.R. Saylor — all for reasons of political expediency for the party in power.

 

Which brings us to today. We’re arguably in an environment in which this rather drastic and little-used step could be construed as viable or even necessary. The only things standing in the way of such an effort are basic math and a fear of unintended consequences. And the barriers on both counts are crumbling.

 

On the first count, Democrats would not only have to regain both chambers of Congress and the presidency, but they would also need to get 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster. That same filibuster, though, has been severely scaled back in recent years (for reasons we’ll get to) and could simply be eliminated.

 

The bigger hurdle would seem to be the consequences. Included under this umbrella are the arguments that this could lead to some kind of unraveling of U.S. government (by turning the judiciary into effectively another political branch) or even just backfire politically (by setting a precedent that the other side later exploits). On that count, it’s possible that the politics of Supreme Court vacancies have devolved so significantly that Democrats — or even Republicans — might decide it’s worth a shot.

 

A quick recap: A Republican blockade of President Barack Obama’s judicial nominees in the early 2010s led the Democratic-controlled Senate in 2013 to invoke the “nuclear option,” getting rid of the filibuster for non-Supreme Court nominees. By 2016, Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, and Republicans wouldn’t even hold a hearing — reasoning that it should wait for the election of a new president. By 2017, a Democratic Party that was perhaps legitimately aggrieved by the Garland situation and Donald Trump’s popular-vote-losing win in the presidential election funneled that frustration into a doomed filibuster of Trump’s nomination of Neil M. Gorsuch. They did this despite pretty much everyone knowing that Republicans would just go nuclear for Supreme Court nominees like Democrats had for other nominees, and they did. Then came the events of the past few weeks, culminating in Kavanaugh’s rather ugly 50-vote ascension to the Supreme Court — in which even he admitted fault for his conduct.

 

The Kavanaugh hearings laid bare what this process has really come to be about, and it decidedly is not sober, nonpartisan review of the law. The new justice got to the court by savaging an entire political party for allegedly waging an elaborate conspiracy against him. From there, it’s up to both sides to tone it down in the next battle, but neither is going to do so voluntarily. Any detente will be fragile, at best.

 

Then we layer on top of that the dire straits Democrats face on the Supreme Court. Not only do they face what’s probably the clearest-cut conservative majority on the Supreme Court since the Great Depression, but they also have no clear path back. The oldest justices come from the court’s liberal wing, meaning those are most likely to be the next vacancies. It could be a very long time before we have a Democratic president with a Democratic Senate who is able to nominate a justice who could tilt the court toward the liberals. (They also face difficult math in winning back the Senate, which could tempt them to try to pack the court whenever they get the chance.)

 

That’s a near-perfect storm of motivation, desperation and sense of righteousness. What’s missing thus far is the means to actually try to pack the court.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/09/pack-supreme-court-why-we-may-be-getting-closer/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.828ecfa661b2

 

 

[Mr King]

Americans Strongly Dislike PC Culture

Youth isn’t a good proxy for support of political correctness, and race isn’t either.

On social media, the country seems to divide into two neat camps: Call them the woke and the resentful. Team Resentment is manned—pun very much intended—by people who are predominantly old and almost exclusively white. Team Woke is young, likely to be female, and predominantly black, brown, or Asian (though white “allies” do their dutiful part). These teams are roughly equal in number, and they disagree most vehemently, as well as most routinely, about the catchall known as political correctness.

Reality is nothing like this. As scholars Stephen Hawkins, Daniel Yudkin, Miriam Juan-Torres, and Tim Dixon argue in a report published Wednesday, “Hidden Tribes: A Study of America’s Polarized Landscape,” most Americans don’t fit into either of these camps. They also share more common ground than the daily fights on social media might suggest—including a general aversion to PC culture.

Read: An Optimist’s Guide to Political Correctness

The study was written by More in Common, an organization founded in memory of Jo Cox, the British MP who was murdered in the run-up to the Brexit referendum. It is based on a nationally representative poll with 8,000 respondents, 30 one-hour interviews, and six focus groups conducted from December 2017 to September 2018.

MORE BY YASCHA MOUNK

Americans Strongly Dislike PC Culture

YASCHA MOUNK

James A. Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian, the scholars behind the hoax

What an Audacious Hoax Reveals About Academia

YASCHA MOUNK

America Is Not a Democracy

YASCHA MOUNK

If you look at what Americans have to say on issues such as immigration, the extent of white privilege, and the prevalence of sexual harassment, the authors argue, seven distinct clusters emerge: progressive activists, traditional liberals, passive liberals, the politically disengaged, moderates, traditional conservatives, and devoted conservatives.

According to the report, 25 percent of Americans are traditional or devoted conservatives, and their views are far outside the American mainstream. Some 8 percent of Americans are progressive activists, and their views are even less typical. By contrast, the two-thirds of Americans who don’t belong to either extreme constitute an “exhausted majority.” Their members “share a sense of fatigue with our polarized national conversation, a willingness to be flexible in their political viewpoints, and a lack of voice in the national conversation.”

Most members of the “exhausted majority,” and then some, dislike political correctness. Among the general population, a full 80 percent believe that “political correctness is a problem in our country.” Even young people are uncomfortable with it, including 74 percent ages 24 to 29, and 79 percent under age 24. On this particular issue, the woke are in a clear minority across all ages.

Youth isn’t a good proxy for support of political correctness—and it turns out race isn’t, either.

Whites are ever so slightly less likely than average to believe that political correctness is a problem in the country: 79 percent of them share this sentiment. Instead, it is Asians (82 percent), Hispanics (87percent), and American Indians (88 percent) who are most likely to oppose political correctness. As one 40-year-old American Indian in Oklahoma said in his focus group, according to the report:

It seems like everyday you wake up something has changed … Do you say Jew? Or Jewish? Is it a black guy? African-American? … You are on your toes because you never know what to say. So political correctness in that sense is scary.

The one part of the standard narrative that the data partially affirm is that African Americans are most likely to support political correctness. But the difference between them and other groups is much smaller than generally supposed: Three quarters of African Americans oppose political correctness. This means that they are only four percentage points less likely than whites, and only five percentage points less likely than the average, to believe that political correctness is a problem.

If age and race do not predict support for political correctness, what does? Income and education.

While 83 percent of respondents who make less than $50,000 dislike political correctness, just 70 percent of those who make more than $100,000 are skeptical about it. And while 87 percent who have never attended college think that political correctness has grown to be a problem, only 66 percent of those with a postgraduate degree share that sentiment.

Political tribe—as defined by the authors—is an even better predictor of views on political correctness. Among devoted conservatives, 97 percent believe that political correctness is a problem. Among traditional liberals, 61 percent do. Progressive activists are the only group that strongly backs political correctness: Only 30 percent see it as a problem.

Read: The Threat of Tribalism

So what does this group look like? Compared with the rest of the (nationally representative) polling sample, progressive activists are much more likely to be rich, highly educated—and white. They are nearly twice as likely as the average to make more than $100,000 a year. They are nearly three times as likely to have a postgraduate degree. And while 12 percent of the overall sample in the study is African American, only 3 percent of progressive activists are. With the exception of the small tribe of devoted conservatives, progressive activists are the most racially homogeneous group in the country.

One obvious question is what people mean by “political correctness.” In the extended interviews and focus groups, participants made clear that they were concerned about their day-to-day ability to express themselves: They worry that a lack of familiarity with a topic, or an unthinking word choice, could lead to serious social sanctions for them. But since the survey question did not define political correctness for respondents, we cannot be sure what, exactly, the 80 percent of Americans who regard it as a problem have in mind.

There is, however, plenty of additional support for the idea that the social views of most Americans are not nearly as neatly divided by age or race as is commonly believed. According to the Pew Research Center, for example, only 26 percent of black Americans consider themselves liberal. And in the More in Common study, nearly half of Latinos argued that “many people nowadays are too sensitive to how Muslims are treated,” while two in five African Americans agreed that “immigration nowadays is bad for America.”

In the days before “Hidden Tribes” was published, I ran a little experiment on Twitter, asking my followers to guess what percentage of Americans believe that political correctness is a problem in this country. The results were striking: Nearly all of my followers underestimated the extent to which most Americans reject political correctness. Only 6 percent gave the right answer. (When I asked them how people of color regard political correctness, their guesses were, unsurprisingly, even more wildly off.)

Obviously, my followers on Twitter are not a representative sample of America. But as their largely supportive feelings about political correctness indicate, they are probably a decent approximation for a particular intellectual milieu to which I also belong: politically engaged, highly educated, left-leaning Americans—the kinds of people, in other words, who are in charge of universities, edit the nation’s most important newspapers and magazines, and advise Democratic political candidates on their campaigns.

So the fact that we are so widely off the mark in our perception of how most people feel about political correctness should probably also make us rethink some of our other basic assumptions about the country.

It is obvious that certain elements on the right mock instances in which political correctness goes awry in order to win the license to spew outright racial hatred. And it is understandable that, in the eyes of some progressives, this makes anybody who dares to criticize political correctness a witting tool of—or a useful idiot for—the right. But that’s not fair to the Americans who feel deeply alienated by woke culture. Indeed, while 80 percent of Americans believe that political correctness has become a problem in the country, even more, 82 percent, believe that hate speech is also a problem.

It turns out that while progressive activists tend to think that only hate speech is a problem, and devoted conservatives tend to think that only political correctness is a problem, a clear majority of all Americans holds a more nuanced point of view: They abhor racism. But they don’t think that the way we now practice political correctness represents a promising way to overcome racial injustice.

The study should also make progressives more self-critical about the way in which speech norms serve as a marker of social distinction. I don’t doubt the sincerity of the affluent and highly educated people who call others out if they use “problematic” terms or perpetrate an act of “cultural appropriation.” But what the vast majority of Americans seem to see—at least according to the research conducted for “Hidden Tribes”—is not so much genuine concern for social justice as the preening display of cultural superiority.

David Frum: Every Culture Appropriates

For the millions upon millions of Americans of all ages and all races who do not follow politics with rapt attention, and who are much more worried about paying their rent than about debating the prom dress worn by a teenager in Utah, contemporary callout culture merely looks like an excuse to mock the values or ignorance of others. As one 57- year-old woman in Mississippi fretted:

The way you have to term everything just right. And if you don’t term it right you discriminate them. It’s like everybody is going to be in the know of what people call themselves now and some of us just don’t know. But if you don’t know then there is something seriously wrong with you.

The gap between the progressive perception and the reality of public views on this issue could do damage to the institutions that the woke elite collectively run. A publication whose editors think they represent the views of a majority of Americans when they actually speak to a small minority of the country may eventually see its influence wane and its readership decline. And a political candidate who believes she is speaking for half of the population when she is actually voicing the opinions of one-fifth is likely to lose the next election.

In a democracy, it is difficult to win fellow citizens over to your own side, or to build public support to remedy injustices that remain all too real, when you fundamentally misunderstand how they see the world.

​

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/large-majorities-dislike-political-correctness/572581/

[Paul G.]

 

Hello Michael,

 

How wonderful to see you posting! Hope you are well.

 

--

Soren

Its nice to be back, and be greeted by old friends! Im well, and finally able to get back on with a newer iPhone. The screen is tiny and the page isnt particularly iPhone friendly, but its worth a shot after being away so long.

 

Paul G., you say that Murph is hobbled by simplistic thought processes; Ive met him, and I can assure you that youre off target. Indeed, I have to wonder about anyone who thinks that the recent dung flinging fest in the Senate was in any way justified.

I did not say Murph had simplistic thought processes. I said he had simplistic views, as in the hearing was "good vs evil" you can't get much more simplistic than that. Also that I espouse "Soros talking points" because we disagree. Again case in point simplistic. So forgive me if i don't see Murphy's complex side, ever.

 

You can wonder all you like, I never claimed to justify anything. The process was flawed, and both sides were partisan opportunists. But that doesn't negate the core issue...kavanaugh's serious issues regarding integrity, temperament and objectivity. I have to wonder about anyone who thinks that is irrelevant to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

[Paul G.]

 

Americans Strongly Dislike PC Culture

Youth isnt a good proxy for support of political correctness, and race isnt either.

 

 

 

On social media, the country seems to divide into two neat camps: Call them the woke and the resentful. Team Resentment is mannedpun very much intendedby people who are predominantly old and almost exclusively white. Team Woke is young, likely to be female, and predominantly black, brown, or Asian (though white allies do their dutiful part). These teams are roughly equal in number, and they disagree most vehemently, as well as most routinely, about the catchall known as political correctness.

 

Reality is nothing like this. As scholars Stephen Hawkins, Daniel Yudkin, Miriam Juan-Torres, and Tim Dixon argue in a report published Wednesday, Hidden Tribes: A Study of Americas Polarized Landscape, most Americans dont fit into either of these camps. They also share more common ground than the daily fights on social media might suggestincluding a general aversion to PC culture.

 

Read: An Optimists Guide to Political Correctness

 

The study was written by More in Common, an organization founded in memory of Jo Cox, the British MP who was murdered in the run-up to the Brexit referendum. It is based on a nationally representative poll with 8,000 respondents, 30 one-hour interviews, and six focus groups conducted from December 2017 to September 2018.

 

MORE BY YASCHA MOUNK

 

Americans Strongly Dislike PC Culture

YASCHA MOUNK

James A. Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian, the scholars behind the hoax

What an Audacious Hoax Reveals About Academia

YASCHA MOUNK

 

America Is Not a Democracy

YASCHA MOUNK

If you look at what Americans have to say on issues such as immigration, the extent of white privilege, and the prevalence of sexual harassment, the authors argue, seven distinct clusters emerge: progressive activists, traditional liberals, passive liberals, the politically disengaged, moderates, traditional conservatives, and devoted conservatives.

 

According to the report, 25 percent of Americans are traditional or devoted conservatives, and their views are far outside the American mainstream. Some 8 percent of Americans are progressive activists, and their views are even less typical. By contrast, the two-thirds of Americans who dont belong to either extreme constitute an exhausted majority. Their members share a sense of fatigue with our polarized national conversation, a willingness to be flexible in their political viewpoints, and a lack of voice in the national conversation.

 

Most members of the exhausted majority, and then some, dislike political correctness. Among the general population, a full 80 percent believe that political correctness is a problem in our country. Even young people are uncomfortable with it, including 74 percent ages 24 to 29, and 79 percent under age 24. On this particular issue, the woke are in a clear minority across all ages.

 

Youth isnt a good proxy for support of political correctnessand it turns out race isnt, either.

 

Whites are ever so slightly less likely than average to believe that political correctness is a problem in the country: 79 percent of them share this sentiment. Instead, it is Asians (82 percent), Hispanics (87percent), and American Indians (88 percent) who are most likely to oppose political correctness. As one 40-year-old American Indian in Oklahoma said in his focus group, according to the report:

 

It seems like everyday you wake up something has changed Do you say Jew? Or Jewish? Is it a black guy? African-American? You are on your toes because you never know what to say. So political correctness in that sense is scary.

 

The one part of the standard narrative that the data partially affirm is that African Americans are most likely to support political correctness. But the difference between them and other groups is much smaller than generally supposed: Three quarters of African Americans oppose political correctness. This means that they are only four percentage points less likely than whites, and only five percentage points less likely than the average, to believe that political correctness is a problem.

 

If age and race do not predict support for political correctness, what does? Income and education.

 

While 83 percent of respondents who make less than $50,000 dislike political correctness, just 70 percent of those who make more than $100,000 are skeptical about it. And while 87 percent who have never attended college think that political correctness has grown to be a problem, only 66 percent of those with a postgraduate degree share that sentiment.

 

Political tribeas defined by the authorsis an even better predictor of views on political correctness. Among devoted conservatives, 97 percent believe that political correctness is a problem. Among traditional liberals, 61 percent do. Progressive activists are the only group that strongly backs political correctness: Only 30 percent see it as a problem.

 

Read: The Threat of Tribalism

 

So what does this group look like? Compared with the rest of the (nationally representative) polling sample, progressive activists are much more likely to be rich, highly educatedand white. They are nearly twice as likely as the average to make more than $100,000 a year. They are nearly three times as likely to have a postgraduate degree. And while 12 percent of the overall sample in the study is African American, only 3 percent of progressive activists are. With the exception of the small tribe of devoted conservatives, progressive activists are the most racially homogeneous group in the country.

 

One obvious question is what people mean by political correctness. In the extended interviews and focus groups, participants made clear that they were concerned about their day-to-day ability to express themselves: They worry that a lack of familiarity with a topic, or an unthinking word choice, could lead to serious social sanctions for them. But since the survey question did not define political correctness for respondents, we cannot be sure what, exactly, the 80 percent of Americans who regard it as a problem have in mind.

 

There is, however, plenty of additional support for the idea that the social views of most Americans are not nearly as neatly divided by age or race as is commonly believed. According to the Pew Research Center, for example, only 26 percent of black Americans consider themselves liberal. And in the More in Common study, nearly half of Latinos argued that many people nowadays are too sensitive to how Muslims are treated, while two in five African Americans agreed that immigration nowadays is bad for America.

 

In the days before Hidden Tribes was published, I ran a little experiment on Twitter, asking my followers to guess what percentage of Americans believe that political correctness is a problem in this country. The results were striking: Nearly all of my followers underestimated the extent to which most Americans reject political correctness. Only 6 percent gave the right answer. (When I asked them how people of color regard political correctness, their guesses were, unsurprisingly, even more wildly off.)

 

Obviously, my followers on Twitter are not a representative sample of America. But as their largely supportive feelings about political correctness indicate, they are probably a decent approximation for a particular intellectual milieu to which I also belong: politically engaged, highly educated, left-leaning Americansthe kinds of people, in other words, who are in charge of universities, edit the nations most important newspapers and magazines, and advise Democratic political candidates on their campaigns.

 

So the fact that we are so widely off the mark in our perception of how most people feel about political correctness should probably also make us rethink some of our other basic assumptions about the country.

 

It is obvious that certain elements on the right mock instances in which political correctness goes awry in order to win the license to spew outright racial hatred. And it is understandable that, in the eyes of some progressives, this makes anybody who dares to criticize political correctness a witting tool ofor a useful idiot forthe right. But thats not fair to the Americans who feel deeply alienated by woke culture. Indeed, while 80 percent of Americans believe that political correctness has become a problem in the country, even more, 82 percent, believe that hate speech is also a problem.

 

It turns out that while progressive activists tend to think that only hate speech is a problem, and devoted conservatives tend to think that only political correctness is a problem, a clear majority of all Americans holds a more nuanced point of view: They abhor racism. But they dont think that the way we now practice political correctness represents a promising way to overcome racial injustice.

 

The study should also make progressives more self-critical about the way in which speech norms serve as a marker of social distinction. I dont doubt the sincerity of the affluent and highly educated people who call others out if they use problematic terms or perpetrate an act of cultural appropriation. But what the vast majority of Americans seem to seeat least according to the research conducted for Hidden Tribesis not so much genuine concern for social justice as the preening display of cultural superiority.

 

David Frum: Every Culture Appropriates

 

For the millions upon millions of Americans of all ages and all races who do not follow politics with rapt attention, and who are much more worried about paying their rent than about debating the prom dress worn by a teenager in Utah, contemporary callout culture merely looks like an excuse to mock the values or ignorance of others. As one 57- year-old woman in Mississippi fretted:

 

The way you have to term everything just right. And if you dont term it right you discriminate them. Its like everybody is going to be in the know of what people call themselves now and some of us just dont know. But if you dont know then there is something seriously wrong with you.

 

The gap between the progressive perception and the reality of public views on this issue could do damage to the institutions that the woke elite collectively run. A publication whose editors think they represent the views of a majority of Americans when they actually speak to a small minority of the country may eventually see its influence wane and its readership decline. And a political candidate who believes she is speaking for half of the population when she is actually voicing the opinions of one-fifth is likely to lose the next election.

 

In a democracy, it is difficult to win fellow citizens over to your own side, or to build public support to remedy injustices that remain all too real, when you fundamentally misunderstand how they see the world.

â

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/large-majorities-dislike-political-correctness/572581/

Who sets Political Correctness Culture if not the party in power?

 

Liberal Academia? Really? Do they hold real power to establish what's politically acceptable in a society? Political correctness just put Kavanaugh on the Bench. PC culture is defined by who has the power to define it.

[FlyingCanOpener]

So what does this group look like? Compared with the rest of the (nationally representative) polling sample, progressive activists are much more likely to be rich, highly educated—and white. They are nearly twice as likely as the average to make more than $100,000 a year. They are nearly three times as likely to have a postgraduate degree. And while 12 percent of the overall sample in the study is African American, only 3 percent of progressive activists are. With the exception of the small tribe of devoted conservatives, progressive activists are the most racially homogeneous group in the country.

You don't say? A look at any protest these days will prove that to you. It's a decade old, but Stuff White People Like still rings true.

[DKTanker]

[DKTanker]

Classy, gutsy move:

https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/09/grassley-supreme-court-nomination-2020/?utm_medium=email

Grassley Promises Not To Consider A Trump Nominee In An Election Year

Now, can RBG hold on one more year? And to what lengths will the Dems go to keep her there??

Noble of him to keep a pledge he made in 2016, but given the new reality that the left is openly embracing incivility and even violence as a means to extort the nation to put them back in power, would Grassley have made the same pledge today? If his answer is no and RBG does leave the court in 2020, Grassley has but one option, to resign his position.

[shep854]

 

Classy, gutsy move:

https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/09/grassley-supreme-court-nomination-2020/?utm_medium=email

Grassley Promises Not To Consider A Trump Nominee In An Election Year

Now, can RBG hold on one more year? And to what lengths will the Dems go to keep her there??

 

 

My thinking.

----

When I used the term 'classy', I did NOT mean 'weak' or 'stupid'.

[CT96]

[Murph]

Thank you Mike. Again welcome back

 

 

 

 

Hello Michael,

 

How wonderful to see you posting! Hope you are well.

 

--

Soren

It’s nice to be back, and be greeted by old friends! I’m well, and finally able to get back on with a newer iPhone. The screen is tiny and the page isn’t particularly iPhone friendly, but it’s worth a shot after being away so long.

Paul G., you say that Murph is hobbled by “simplistic” thought processes; I’ve met him, and I can assure you that you’re off target. Indeed, I have to wonder about anyone who thinks that the recent dung flinging fest in the Senate was in any way justified.

[shep854]

Nailed it! 😆

[Murph]

It's ok Michael, I have no issues, I have put enough sexual predators in jail/prison to not have to justify myself to him. BTW, I just went to trial on my "LAST" (*YAY!!) sex crimes case, and the guy got 27 years. Now I can concentrate on old murders (and Internal Affairs cases).

 

Hello Michael,

How wonderful to see you posting! Hope you are well.

--
Soren

It’s nice to be back, and be greeted by old friends! I’m well, and finally able to get back on with a newer iPhone. The screen is tiny and the page isn’t particularly iPhone friendly, but it’s worth a shot after being away so long.

Paul G., you say that Murph is hobbled by “simplistic” thought processes; I’ve met him, and I can assure you that you’re off target. Indeed, I have to wonder about anyone who thinks that the recent dung flinging fest in the Senate was in any way justified.

 

[Jeff]

It's becoming a clear choice between a democratic representative republic and a mobocracy. People are finding the reality of a mobocracy is not very nice.