You Don't Say? No, I Mean You Don't Say (LIke Shut Up)

 

 Make sure nobody tells Glenn, or Ann, or Michelle Malkin and whatnot:

A new study indicates that people who engage in text messaging tend to be more racist and shallow than their less technologically savvy counterparts. 

“Ultra-brief social media like texting and Twitter encourages rapid, relatively shallow thought and consequently very frequent daily use of such media should be associated with cognitive and moral shallowness.”

I've wondered how Tweets have come to be a force in our media discussions - especially regarding the news - considering how slight they are (140 characters? Huh?) But seeing it this way - as the insecure and shallow feeding off the insecure and shallow(er?) - then it starts to make some sense. 

Wait - Skitter, I'm too slick even for myself - I take that back: 

 Nothing these amoebas do makes sense anymore,...

 

Who Will Watch The Watchmen? Nobody, That's Who,...

Peggy Noonan has another funny, head-spinningly-whacked, and completely oblivious column for us today, on "How Far Obama Has Fallen":

Why did the president make such mistakes? Why did he make decisions that seemed so unknowing, and not only in retrospect? Because he had so much confidence, he thought whatever he did would work. He thought he had "a gift," as he is said to have told Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. He thought he had a special ability to sway the American people, or so he suggested to House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor. 

But whenever he went over the heads of the media and Congress and went to the people, in prime-time addresses, it didn't really work. He did not have a magical ability to sway. And—oddly—he didn't seem to notice. 

It is one thing to think you're Lebron. It's another thing to keep missing the basket and losing games and still think you're Lebron. 

And that really was the problem: He had the confidence without the full capability. And he gathered around him friends and associates who adored him, who were themselves talented but maybe not quite big enough for the game they were in. They understood the Democratic Party, its facts and assumptions. But they weren't America-sized. They didn't get the country so well. 

It is a mystery why the president didn't second-guess himself more, doubt himself. Instead he kept going forward as if it were working.

Some "mystery". I've got a picture of the reason right here:

Except for the line "he gathered around him friends and associates who adored him, who were themselves talented but maybe not quite big enough for the game they were in," Peggy Noonan offers not a single acknowledgement she had anything to do with what's happened. Nope - it's all this Peggy's fault:
 

Michelle Malkin labeled Joseph "Peggy The Moocher" - showing a nicely-honed lack of civility that pissed no one off, BTW - which raises the question:

Why has Obama "fallen" but the nation's Peggy Noonan's - whose endorsement helped put Obama over the top - can carry on as though they're still credible? As though they can "keep missing the basket and losing games and still think you're Lebron"? Why do they pay no penalty?

This is going on all around us, still, and will continue until we're doomed by their decisions - and finally, pushed by reason, compelled to kick them out - because it'll then be obvious they won't/don't/can't adMitt when they're wrong and just leave the stage. Instead, we're stuck listening to more of their insane rattling, except now it's going from one sap's assessment of the crease in someone's pant leg to another's "less than inspiring endorsement for a less than inspiring man."

Which is one way to spin him, I guess,…

 

Let's Be Clear, Ladies: I'm The Only One Who Does The Crazy Ranting Around Here (Insuring No Jews Get Hurt)

Let's start with a quote from crazy Camille Paglia, and assess the accuracy of what Ann Althouse says is "a fine rant":

I was very excited about [Obama]. I thought he was a moderate. I thought that his election would promote racial healing in the country.

“My good blog friend The Crack Emcee at The Macho Response rants 

but that's his style and he's good at it."

 --Panda Bear, M.D.

Humpf! With an M.D. after his name or no M.D., nobody ever assumed I'd promote "healing" of any kind - I ain't the "healing" type. (Paglia's currently selling the idea that George Lucas and Madonna are The Greatest Artists Of Our Time - Whoo Boy, Howdy! There is no life left in us! Medic! We are GONE!) Anyway, Althouse is next, commenting on Paglia's supposedly "fine rant":

This is how I felt, when I voted for Obama in 2008. Except I wouldn't say I was "very excited." I wasn't caught up in the ecstasy. I thought it was the better bet,,...

I'm so surprised. Let's look at that "better bet" rationally, shall we? 

 War hero, long-serving United States Senator, etc., who leans on his own Republican Party's excesses

Vs. 

Nobody

Yeah, we lost that bet - but neither of these female professors has taken any blame for the further ruination of the country. That would be too direct, too blunt, too real. (You ever tried hitting on one of those types of women?) Reality ain't the problem, it's their need for self-delusion.

When NewAgers are dissatisfied with themselves, they escape whoever shows how dumb they are, not to learn but basically to do more damage.

It's the essence of NewAge. Especially for feminists. Everything's expendable, and self-criticism is utterly worthless. Crazy is empowering. Reality can't hold a candle to the political strategy of seeing what you want to believe and acting on it.

I have mentioned feminism is NewAge, haven't I? Or does anyone think all this "Gaia" and "Goddess" talk just popped out of nowhere? Please. These are female dreams of "ancient teachings":

In their minds, this is a woman-ruled planet, lorded over by "Mother Nature," and men are their lowly pawns, to be moved around at will, replacing one "better bet" for another. Men are not actual people, or the people who actually built this place, but stepping-stones to female success, lucky to carry their weight.

And since this balkanized bitch-fest has taken hold in the West, things have slid downhill. But not to worry - it's her hill. No "real" men allowed - just their boyfriends.

And before I forget, let's note Ann Althouse "wasn't caught up in the ecstasy" of 2008 (nor, presumably, was Camille) or that it wasn't "ecstasy" but cultish political hysteria, or that - whatever you want to call it - women didn't let such odd behavior deter them from voting like those "caught up" in it. Because that's critical thinking for you:

You see the madness, right in front of your eyes, but you go along with it anyway - all the while claiming you've made a "rational choice."

At least that's the way it's playing out nowadays. Here's the title of another recent post that finds Ann mocking the obvious:

"The Emptiest Candidate in Presidential Election History: Mitt Romney truly believes in nothing."

On this one Ann begins with the words "They've got nothing on him." A personal assessment no doubt, written because she's never heard the term "Flip-Flopper," or would ever print anything "they" do have on him. Take Romney biographer Ronald B. Scott:

"As president of the Boston stake, Romney owed church leaders a consultation before doing anything that might cause them trouble. In October or November 1993, he went to Salt Lake City to meet with them and explain the abortion position he was going to take. He told them he would say that he opposed abortion personally but that such private beliefs shouldn't be imposed on others. If he didn't frame his position as pro-choice, he'd lose. Many of the church leaders were unhappy with Romney's formulation. But if they wanted him in the Senate, this was the best they were going to get."

Romney's a bought-and-sold member of a spiritual cult of political shape-shifters, but not a word from Ann concerning their ambitions ("they wanted him in the Senate"). Instead, now that so many want Romney in the White House - just like in 2008 - we're back to pretending "They've got nothing" on someone else. They're all clean, until they get elected, it seems.

Here's another of Glenn Reynolds' glorious fellow nut jobs, Michelle Malkin, this time mocking a member of Glenn Reynolds' "Four Horsemen" configuration:

"Mormon-basher Andrew Sullivan: ‘Romney belonged to white supremacist church’"

Is this even in question? Or that the LDS was a "white supremacist church" while Romney was an adult? Was Sullivan Mormon-bashing or stating fact? It's as much of the former as Malkin's claim that "real reporter" Juan Williams used "misogynist rhetoric," when saying Ann Romney's story of youthful poverty was "phony." A claim that was since been borne out.

 They're so cute when they're angry.

What I noticed, in both cases, is there's never been a statement of wrong-doing by Malkin, nor any retraction of her slanderous claims, nor even so much as a word of apology. Not only has one not been offered, but it doesn't have to be made in a society (if I must call this unethical collective a society) where none is expected. This is the world they've created - but expect to be loved for.

Why Does Everyone Hate Women?

--Megan McArdle

Post-feminism? Really? Come on. You're kidding me, right?

Let's move to Peggy Noonan - she's got another whopper in the hopper. This time it's "When Americans Saw the Real Obama." I would've thought, since Noonan was an enthusiastic Obama supporter four years ago (like Althouse and Paglia) she'd wonder aloud about why and/or how she missed what's been right under her nose the whole time. No such luck. There's not a single "Come To Jesus" moment in her entire piece. Nope, she's still Brilliantly Observant Peggy, who just happened to let this "strangely clueless" man run an elaborate ruse past her - by being exactly the same person he's always been.

Sound familiar?

Even after reading Obama's book, saying he lets people see what they want in him, self-delusion isn't a part of Noonan's (or Althouse's or Paglia's or Malkin's) formulation of what's been happening with them. Few seem capable of considering it. This level of rationalization's a real skill. I've seen it before - displayed by many others who've all appreciated a good scream, mixed with a dose of mass insanity, now and then. NewAge marches on, but it never changes.

Guy Liddell diaries: Hitler's rant on how he was deceived by 'everyone' during his last days in Berlin bunker.

Ha! I shouldn't be too hard on poor Peggy - everyone's scared - and, as we've seen, far from alone. 

What's the only "Final Solution" now?

 To keep making as much fucking sense as everybody else,...

These Are Headlines (Form A Line And Give Me Head,...)

Oh wow - a member of The "Bigotry" Brigade got called out as crazy:

For a conservative commentator, David Brooks gets plenty of flak from the right. And he doesn’t much care. 

“If it’s from a loon, I don’t mind it,” the New York Times columnist tells me in a video interview. “I get a kick out of it. If it’s from Michelle Malkin attacking, I don’t mind it."

I know, it's David Brooks, but still - nobody EVER tells these people they're nutty. 

It's just not like that where I come from.

GOD IS GOOD:

Pastor charged with first wife's murder after 'staging car crash to kill second wife'

OH, COME ON - IF SHE WAS MITT ROMNEY THEY'D BE CALLING IT "CHARITY":

 Madonna Gives Another $750K to Kabbalah, But Little to Anyone Else

LET ME SEE IT - STRICTLY FOR "RESEARCH" - AND I'LL BE THE JUDGE:

Jailed Texas group-sex teacher Brittni Colleps says, ‘I was victimized in that video’

IT'S WEIRD - MY FRIENDS AND I JUST GET TOGETHER FOR COFFEE:

Inside Tom Cruise and Scientology Chairman David Miscavige's Complex Relationship:

"There’s a point of no return, and I think Tom has crossed it," says Hall, who worked closely with Miscavige and knew Cruise slightly. "The time for him to leave was a long time ago. The lines between him and Miscavige are so blurred now." 

The consensus from interviews conducted during the past two months with dozens of former Scientology members who freely divulge church secrets was that Cruise’s relationship with Miscavige was symbiotic. Rinder says Cruise was a "really nice guy" when he first joined the church but, over time, took on more and more of Miscavige’s personality traits. "In Scientology, it’s called being in someone’s valence," says Rinder. "Cruise has assumed a lot of Miscavige’s qualities." 

Church literature defines the concept of valence in part as "another’s identity assumed by a person unknowingly; a valence is a substitute self taken on after the fact of lost confidence in self or a failed valence or as a solution to a problem." 

Karen De La Carriere, who says she was one of Scientology’s most well-known and respected auditors until she left in 2010, notes that Cruise was "practically channeling" Miscavige during his infamous interview with Matt Lauer on Today in 2010. 

"The way he lit into Matt Lauer, calling him glib and attacking him -- that was exactly how David Miscavige deals with people," says De La Carriere. "That was the purest example of how Tom is in Miscavige’s valence. It’s a scary thing to watch."

AND, FINALLY, I THINK "CONGRATULATIONS" ARE IN ORDER:

Ke$ha Says She Had Sex With A Ghost 

It's Still True: They DO Have Ways Of Making Me Talk,...

The Atlantic Monthly's Conor Friedersdorf recently said, "the civil war the right needs is one waged against the hucksters, whether they're in the marketplace of ideas or the marketplace itself." I guess - considering TMR's mandate is to fight hucksterism - that means I have to fire the first shot.

Here goes nothing. 

It has long been said that life was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Congratulations - through the wonders of modern technology - they've made it longer. From Glenn Reynolds' Instapundit:

MICKEY KAUS: Will MSM Guilt Start Working for Mitt? “‘Like Ali, Obama Floats Like a Butterfly’–that’s the headline Real Clear Politics gave Howard Fineman’s latest post. But even though Fineman is Editorial Director for leftish Huffington Post (and appears regularly on MSNBC) his piece isn’t what you’d expect. It’s basically a plea to the MSM to start covering Obama they way they’d cover a normal candidate. . . . An MSM veteran, Fineman, in essence, is agreeing with conservative critics of his profession: they’ve been cutting the President way too much slack, failing to take him to task in areas (the Woodward portrayal, Libya, the jobs numbers ) where they would have hammered another candidate.”

Notice there's no concern from these champions of justice that the MSM - or the conservative blogosphere - have been cutting Romney "way too much slack, failing to take him to task in areas where they would have hammered another candidate"? That it's all a one-way street with these guys who've positioned themselves as the trustworthy alternative to the biased media? Mitt Romney spouts complete nonsense? His cult punishes those who reveal their "secrets" or is practicing voter fraud? That they're behaving like delusional Pat Robertson supporters in order to win? You'll never hear it from Glenn Reynolds, Mickey Kaus, Michelle Malkin, Robert Stacey McCain, Ann Althouse, the folks at Hot Air, Ace of Spades, - or even the reporters for The Washington Examiner - but can expect to, probably, be punished by a collective cry of "bigotry" (from them and the Romney campaign) for saying so instead.

I hold to a pretty hard ethical line (which I've defined as "not goody-goody, but just good") and it gets me in a world of trouble, online, that - if I didn't know I now live in a NewAge-obsessed-and-influenced society - I wouldn't understand at all.

But I do understand the times I live in, so (despite my occasional shock at the behavior of those under NewAge's spell) the cowardly treatment I get for, both, wanting to be correct in my assessments - while also wanting to be moral - have, unfortunately, become known to me as par for the course:

I can be right, and few will champion it. 

I can be slandered, and few will come to my defense. 

 I can be ridiculously outnumbered, and I will be forced to fight alone.

In this NewAge society, these virtues - including the willingness to fight on despite overwhelming obstacles - are not appreciated. Instead, to NewAgers, they are signs of madness.

Isn't this how it was in the NewAge's Third Reich?

Don't I understand that being right doesn't matter? The law professor, NewAger - and my friend - Ann Althouse, once said that my desire to be seen as correct "all the time" was ugly - and, to prove it, she continues to promote the idea that "inaccuracies and distortions" are "what is beautiful and wonderful about human life." Really?

She and her blog partner, Glenn Reynolds, have long engaged in the practice of "punishing with traffic starvation" those they deem unworthy, while appearing to encourage the free flow of ideas and letting water find it's own level. Why? Because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, nothing more. Their sycophants (and that's what they are) will say nothing, which - just as we saw with Adolf Hitler - allows Althouse and Reynolds not to dare reflect on their behavior. Who cares if they're distorting the flow of information? After all, "inaccuracies and distortions" are "what is beautiful and wonderful about human life," right?

Joeseph Goebbels would be proud.

Isn't it bizarre that The Wall Street Journal's blogger, James Taranto - who was once a seemingly-fair and intelligent man - will now criticize Madonna and Obama but it's left to the supposedly biased FOX News to say "Mitt Romney's Gaffes Are Needlessly Weakening Him"?

Has even an editor for The Wall Street Journal forgotten what being an American stands for?

Like Conor Friedersdorf, I Refuse to Vote for Barack Obama. But I also refuse to stand with those who lie, distort, and mistreat anyone who demands there's a role for truth - not just in our politics but in our lives. For the last four years, we - those of us who make up the right side of the blogosphere - are supposed to have been the citizens of these United States, taking back our nation, by re-affirming the values that made this country great. Well I, for one, see no evidence of that having happened. Instead (since the death of Andrew Breitbart, really) there has been an ugly switch from understanding and utilizing the Left's tactics to - and, the Mormon cult follower, Mitt Romney's nomination can be no better example of this - becoming what they've always hated.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The Stupid Party. The Hypocrite Party. The Magic Party. The Secret's Party. 

I know something about these things.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is TMR, and I am The Crack Emcee.

And I want it to be known, here and now:

This is what I've hated. I've hated it all along. I'll always hate it. And I hate it now more than ever.

All of it.

No matter who's promoting it. 

 

I Am "The Master" Of My Domain (The Cult Of One,...)

How much would you like to bet Glenn Reynolds and Ann Althouse (along with their respective "conservative" colleagues and readerships) were making phone calls shouting "bigotry"?

Unnamed Scientologists applied "lots of pressure" to stop The Master being made and have it changed once filming began, studio head Harvey Weinstein said. 

The film's director Paul Thomas Anderson has stated that The Master was partly based on L Ron Hubbard, who founded Scientology in the 1950s. 

The Church of Scientology has denied trying to block the film. 

Weinstein told BBC News: "We've had pressure and we've resisted pressure. Originally people said to me 'don't make it'. Lots of pressure. 

"And then, as we were making it, we had pressure to change it. Paul's not doing that and I didn't think he chose me [to work with] because I was going to acquiesce either." 

The movie tells the story of a cult leader known as The Master, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, and a troubled World War II veteran, played by Joaquin Phoenix, who is drawn into his world. 

It won awards for acting and directing after its premiere at the Venice Film Festival and is seen as an early contender for The Oscars. 

Asked about the reaction from Scientologists in Hollywood, Weinstein said: "I'm not going to get into names, but they feel strongly that they think it's a religion and as such they think the subject matter shouldn't be explored.

Wow - imagine that:

The same reaction Romney supporters have to anyone looking into Mormonism - isn't that weird?

To have two different "religions," with one openly labeled a "cult" while the other (conveniently) isn't - though they have almost everything in common - including the reactions of their respective supporters?

Could it be because the Mormon cult is seen as conservative and Scientology isn't?

I mean, as I've pointed out repeatedly, I've heard no cries of "bigotry" from Glenn Reynolds, Ann Althouse, Stacey McCain (who should know better) and Michelle Malkin when it comes to explorations into L. Ron Hubbard's malarky - only Joseph Smith's - and only now.

And, when it comes to fighting Islam, Reynolds even decided to change-up his long-standing "bigotry" dance enough to post this yesterday:

Why Defending Free Speech Is More Important than Criticizing Bigotry. The Obama crowd doesn’t care about free speech. Never has, never will.

Notice - after MONTHS of Reynolds & Co. crying whenever someone mentioned Romney's cockamamy "beliefs" - with Reynolds clearly leading the pack to his millions of readers - now it's the Obama crowd who "doesn’t care about free speech. Never has, never will."

And this is from supposedly a conservative, someone supposedly on "my side," though - I must admit - I understand Reynolds currently serves a much higher calling than any mere adherence to truth, logic, reality, or even the protection of our country:

HE'S TRYING TO MOVE VOTES!

Yeah - politics - just like the Democrats. Blatant lies, corruption, and hypocrisy, Be Thy Name,…