The racism of modern feminism

We noted, three weeks ago, on both The First Street Journal and RedState, that über-feminist Amanda Marcotte, long a documenter of the what she believes is a “rape epidemic” due to Teh Evil White Cisheteronormative Patriarchy™, has somehow failed to pay the slightest bit of attention to the sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve in Cologne, Germany. Miss Marcotte has always, always! been insistent on women’s rights, a frequent writer — and jumper-to-conclusion — concerning sexual assault, and a proponent of the so-called “slut walks,” in which women demonstrate concerning their right to wear whatever they wish or act as they please and not be looked down upon or seen as “asking for” rape.

Thus, when I noticed this article in Miss Marcotte’s hometown newspaper, The New York Times, I had to revisit her Salon author page, to once again see if she had (finally) noted the assaults in Cologne, or Mayor Henriette Reker’s statement that the Western women of her fair city ought to be more circumspect in dealing with the immigrant men.

The Fight to Free the Nipple

By Deborah Acosta | January 26, 2016

On a warm fall day, members of a literary group gathered in Prospect Park to soak in the sun and snack on chocolate pretzels. Most book clubs in a park in Brooklyn wouldn’t cause much of a stir, but as the mostly female group read, men gawked and children stared. Police officers were called to the scene. The members of the Outdoor Co-ed Topless Pulp Fiction Appreciation Society are used to such attention. They are part of a larger movement called Free the Nipple, and see themselves as proponents of gender equality.

Yes, in 2016 women can vote and wear pants. Many large corporations have finally loosened their pantyhose restrictions. But in some states, women still have to hide their nipples in public while men don’t.

O.K. You might be thinking, There’s a gender pay gap. Who cares about nipple censorship?

There’s a lot more at the original, but I was far less concerned with the ‘free the nipple’ movement and the fourteen women nationwide who are interested in it than I was interested in whether Miss Marcotte had commented on this story from her hometown borough of Brooklyn.  After all, this would tie right in to her support for the ‘slut walk’ campaigns and belief that how women dress, drink and behave has absolutely no impact on rape. There was certainly nothing about it on her Salon page.

But I did find that yes, she had once again addressed the topic of rape and sexual assault, in an interview that she did with Jon Krakauer, author of Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town. If you choose to read the reviews of the book at the link, you’ll see that the author’s intent was not just to report, but to “incite” (Chris Schluep) and “(sets) the story firmly in the context of social history” (The Boston Globe). Miss Marcotte quoted Mr Krakauer from her interview with him:

You know, I get really pissed off at this argument, “Oh, this is too serious a crime. Universities shouldn’t even adjudicate rape, they should turn it over to the police.” Well, the criminal justice system, with its high burden of proof, will never address the problem adequately. And universities, by Title IX, are required to do something about it.

This has been the goal of the feminists: since rape accusations, at least against acquaintances, have proved to be difficult to prosecute precisely due to the “high burden of proof,” MrKrakauer and Miss Marcotte want the universities to “adjudicate” rape claims, precisely because they do not have a high burden of proof. Mr Krakauer and Miss Marcotte would like to see some punishment meted out to a student accused of rape or sexual assault or sexual misconduct, simply based on the accusation, actual proof be damned.

And now we have this from Robert Stacey Stacy McCain:

‘Rape Culture’ Feminists Won’t Mention

Posted on January 29, 2016

Darian Lee Winfield was arrested Jan. 8 as a suspect in “a series of sexual assaults and home invasions” in Detroit:

Darian Winfield, 19, was charged with first-degree home invasion, assault with intent to murder and assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct, according to a news release from the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office. He was arraigned in 34th District Court and bond was set at $1-million cash, according to Maria Miller, spokeswoman for Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy.

Winfield is charged with breaking into a house in the 5800 block of Radnor on Dec. 30 and stabbing a 39-year-old Detroit woman with a knife in the chest with the intent of sexually assaulting her, according to the Prosecutor’s Office.

The suspect’s family denies his guilt:

Darian Lee Winfield’s relatives vehemently deny the accusations, saying the teen was apprehended while en route to a police precinct to clear his name after media reports that police were looking for him.
“He’s a model student, he works, he goes to school,” his mother, Anita Pace, told The Detroit News on Friday night. “It’s not him. They have the wrong person.” . . .
Winfield, considered armed and dangerous, was growing increasingly violent, Police Chief James Craig said at a news conference Friday. . . .

Further down:

So, is Winfield an angel — a “model student” who “volunteers at a soup kitchen” — or a serial predator? We don’t know, but he is presumed innocent unless he is convicted in a court of law. However, we know that someone is terrorizing women in Detroit. Someone stabbed that woman in the chest, and there are other victims in Detroit:

GeNaye Washington was asleep when a man climbed through her bedroom window, beat her and sexually assaulted her while her mother and siblings were just a few steps away in the home.

Washington, 17, died of her injuries [Jan. 12], according to her family, who identified her Wednesday to the Free Press as one of four victims who were raped in a string of sexual assaults and home invasions on Detroit’s east side that began last December.

“We hope that justice is served, but it still won’t bring her back,” said Shaquetta Washington, GeNaye’s older sister. . . .

According to Washington’s family, she was struck in the head multiple times and raped. A Detroit man, Darian Winfield, has been named a person of interest in the homicide, according to Detroit Police. Winfield was charged Sunday in another sexual assault and home invasion case and more charges could be forthcoming in a separate December Grosse Pointe Park attack.

Shaquetta Washington said she doesn’t know Winfield, but said her brother played basketball with him during the summer at a nearby basketball court.
Washington was attacked about 7:30 a.m. Jan. 7 near the 5500 block of Radnor. Her home was broken into and the assailant used some kind of blunt weapon, police said.

What I want to know is, where are the feminists? For the past couple of years, feminists have been claiming that American colleges and universities are in the grip of a “rape epidemic.” More than 100 lawsuits have been filed by male students who say they were falsely accused and denied due process in the campus kangaroo courts imposed in response to this hysterical fear-mongering. Yet the feminists who whipped up this irrational frenzy — Jaclyn Friedman, Jessica Valenti, Jill Filipovic, Alexandra Brodsky, et al. — can never be bothered to pay any attention to victims like GeNaye Washington or suspects like Darian Winfield in places like Detroit. There is a certain narrative — rich college girls on elite campuses allegedly being raped by “privileged” male students — which serves the political agenda of feminists, and they ignore any crime that doesn’t fit the narrative. If GeNaye Washington had been a student at Oberlin College or if Darian Winfield were a fraternity member at the University of Virginia, maybe Amanda Marcotte would care.

But ordinary women raped and murdered by an ordinary criminal? The story of those crimes doesn’t advance the feminist narrative, and so feminists never notice the victims of these crimes.

There’s more at Mr McCain’s original, but the more I read, the more I am persuaded that the feminist left is thoroughly consumed with racism.

Why? I did not include Mr Winfield’s photo here — it is available on Mr McCain’s website — because RedState is very concerned with not infringing on photo copyrights, but the accused is a black American. The rape victim named in the article is also black. While rape accusations in which the accused are white certainly catch the attention of the current crop of feminist writers — part of Miss Marcotte’s claim to fame was her jumping on the bandwagon concerning the three white college students accused of raping a black stripper, and her bitter retraction when it was proved that no, the accuser was not raped — when the accused rapists are not white, we hear nothing but crickets from the feminists. As nearly as I can see, today’s feminists are either so consumed by a racial version of “social justice” that they believe any accusations against non-white assailants somehow undermines the goals of diversity and multiculturalism, and/or — more probably ‘and’ rather than ‘or’ — they have simply fallen into the trap that so many journalists on the left have, (perhaps) unconsciously accepting the notion that blacks are just more criminal and more violent than whites, cannot be expected to really obey the law, and that such crimes simply are not news.

After all, we have all seen how black-on-black shootings and murders are not news, at least not to today’s journalists, while a white-on-black killing, especially by a police officer, is a national story; why ought we to be surprised that black-on-black rape cases attract no attention from the left?
Cross-posted on RedState.

Accounts Receivable Factoring

Understanding How Factoring Can Help Your Business

There are times when your company needs money quickly, but banks are unwilling to help. Your credit may have reached its maximum limit, or the bank may decide that your company is a bad credit risk. Many business owners would panic if they needed funds but could not find them, but there are more progressive business owners who understand the benefits of accounts receivable factoring.

What Is Factoring?

A factoring company provides funding to your organization based on your open invoices, and not your company’s credit. Since a factoring company is not a bank, it does not have to follow the strict guidelines that banks have which can slow down the lending process. Factoring companies lend money based on the face value of your open invoices, and then you pay that money back when the invoices are paid. The process is simple, and your company does not need great credit to utilize this service.

Pulling Your Company Out Of Bankruptcy

One of the areas where factoring can be a great help is with a company that is trying to emerge from bankruptcy and get back to being profitable. In most cases, a bank will not extend credit or offer a loan to a company that is just coming out of bankruptcy. But a factoring company can offer funding because it uses the client’s receivables as the basis for offering credit, and not the client’s past financial performance.

You Get Your Money Now

If your company has bills to pay right now, then waiting 30 days for a client to pay their invoice can be damaging to your credit. Instead of waiting, you can use those invoices to bring cash in now and pay your vendors off.

Fast And Easy

Most factoring companies do not have a long and involved application process like you would see with a bank. In most cases, you can apply for an account with a factoring company and be approved the same day. As long as your factoring account is current and active, you can keep submitting invoices to enhance your cash flow.

New companies that cannot get credit or companies that have bad credit ratings need to look into factoring as a form of cash flow funding. A factoring company uses your own invoiced sales to create a cash flow that you can use to pay vendors, and make sure your payroll stays up to date as well.

In liberal Sweden? How can this be?

The source is al Jazeera; make of that what you will.

Sweden to expel up to 80,000 refugees

Al Jazeera | Thursday, January 28, 2016

Sweden intends to expel as many as 80,000 refugees and migrants who arrived in 2015 and whose applications for asylum have been rejected.

“We are talking about 60,000 people, but the number could climb to 80,000,” Interior Minister Anders Ygeman was quoted as saying by Swedish media.

He added on Wednesday the government has asked police and authorities in charge of refugees to organise their expulsion.

Sweden, which is home to 9.8 million people, is one of the European Union countries that has taken in the largest number of refugees in relation to its population. Sweden accepted more than 160,000 asylum seekers last year.

But the number of refugee arrivals has dropped dramatically since Sweden enacted systematic photo ID checks on travellers on January 4.

The mass expulsion was announced as Europe struggles to deal with a crisis that has seen tens-of-thousands of refugees arrive on Greek beaches with the passengers – mostly fleeing conflict in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan – undeterred by cold, wintry conditions and deadly seas.

There’s more at the original.

Remember, Donald Trump is not the Prime Minister of Sweden, and Carl XVI Gustaf is the King, not Ted Cruz. Sweden is one of the more left-wing nations in the already-further-left-than-the-US European Union, and has openly welcomed immigrants and refugees for decades.

And that has left Sweden to become somewhat less Swedish. The population is now 16% foreign-born, higher than in the United States or the United Kingdom or Germany, and the Swedes, the most heavily-taxed people in the world, can no longer afford to pay the generous welfare benefits for the burgeoning immigrant population. Add to that the soaring crime rate be driven by the immigrants, and it’s no wonder that the Swedish people are saying that enough is enough. Rapes have soared 1472%, and while the left try to explain away the huge increase as not really having anything to do with the immigrants, those explanations probably don’t mean a whole lot to the women who have been raped.

It has been said that a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged. It looks like the oh-so-liberal Swedes have been mugged by the truth. One may have a lot of sympathy for the displaced refugees and their plight, but any normal person has a lot more concern for the safety of his family and loved ones.
Cross-posted on RedState.

If the left are really concerned about global warming climate change . . . . . . maybe they ought to behave like they are

From MarketWatch:

Monster storm makes life difficult for Fed

Fed says some officials may participate by videoconference

By Greg Robb | Published: Jan 25, 2016 10:44 a.m. ET

The Great Blizzard of 2016 couldn’t have come at a worse time for the Federal Reserve.

The blockbuster snowstorm that dumped 18 inches of snow on the nation’s capital will certainly make life difficult for the dozen far-flung presidents of the Fed’s regional banks, who are set to trek to Washington and hole up across the city for their two-day policy meeting in the two-story chandeliered board room.

A Fed spokesman on Monday said the Fed’s policy-setting committee would meet as scheduled on Tuesday and Wednesday.

But not everyone may make it.

“Participants unable to attend in person will be able to participate by videoconference,” the Fed said.

Virtually all schools and the Federal government are closed Monday in the nation’s capital.

There’s more at the original.

If the Federal Reserve’s Open Market Committee can meet with some participants attending, and voting, by videoconference, the obvious question is: why can’t a lot of other government business be done by videoconference? President Obama attended the signing ceremony of the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Le Bourget, a suburb of Paris, telling us all how we must change our infrastructure and our lifestyles to save the planet from climate change, but in traveling to France he set in motion a transportation beast which involves two Boeing 747s, a C-17 Globemaster III, a chartered White House press corps plane, back-up vehicles, and a huge military and security staff. It cost millions of dollars for the President to attend the final meeting in person, and spewed tons and tons of the very greenhouse gasses COP21 proposed to limit. The conference itself was one which had thousands of delegates and staffers, transported to Paris from all over the world, every last one of them by some carbon dioxide belching conveyance.

Shouldn’t the people who are meeting to try to find ways that the countries of the world can agree on reducing carbon emissions be the first ones to try to limit their own carbon emissions?

The technology exists: businesses have been using videoconferencing since the last century,1 so the concept is both well-established and well-known. Were the nations involved actually serious about climate change, they could have suggested that COP21 be organized by videoconference; were the political leaders, including our President, who celebrated the Paris Agreement truly serious about climate change, they could have made their speeches remotely.

But, of course, doing things that way would mean no government-paid working vacations in Paris, wouldn’t it? Perhaps if the UN scheduled the next COP meeting in Port au Prince or Ulaanbaatar, maybe the warmists would be a bit more attracted to videoconferencing!
Cross-posted on RedState.

  1. Admittedly, very late in the last century, but still . . . .

Rule 5 Blogging: Playing in the snow!

It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacey Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as posting photos of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Gwyneth Paltrow in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude.

This week, in honor(?) of Winter Storm Jonas, we feature soldiers working in the snow!

Army Ranger School. Click to enlarge.

Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: Playing in the snow!’ »

From Around the Blogroll Donald Trump insults his supporters

From CNN:

Trump: I could ‘shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters’

By Jeremy Diamond, CNN | Updated 7:08 PM ET, Sat January 23, 2016

Sioux Center, Iowa (CNN)Donald Trump boasted Saturday that support for his presidential campaign would not decline even if he shot someone in the middle of a crowded street.

“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” Trump said at a campaign rally here.

After the event, Trump declined to answer when asked by CNN to clarify his comments.

The GOP front-runner has repeatedly pointed to the loyalty of his supporters, many of whom tell reporters and pollsters that almost nothing could make them change their mind about voting for Trump in the presidential race.

Sadly, he’s probably right. Edwin Edwards, then running for Governor of Louisiana, once said, “The only way I can lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy,” but the arrogant Mr Trump went even further than that, telling us that his “voters” are so fornicating stupid that they’d support him even if he murdered someone.

In some ways, I understand Mr Trump’s appeal: he is saying what so many people think and believe about what is happening in our country, and what has been so wrong with politicians, and he pulls no punches. That makes him a great candidate, but wouldn’t make him a good President. Perhaps Barack Hussein Obama has shown him the way, combining in himself the ability to be one of the best presidential candidates we have ever seen, along with being the worst President in my lifetime . . . and my lifetime includes Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter.

I have said before: if Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination, I will vote for him in the general election, unless it is so obvious that the Democratic candidate will carry Pennsylvania that my vote won’t matter; in that case, I will vote third party.

And now, on to the blogroll!

  • Donald Douglas on American Power: National Review’s Unwise Excommunication of Donald Trump
  • William Jacobson on Le*gal In*sur*rec*tion: Great News – Reparations demand causing Dem fissure
  • Karen on the Lonely Conservative: Gun Grabbing Nanny Bloomberg Wants To Run For President
  • Patterico on Patterico’s Pontifications: Trump the Democrat Donald Trump isn’t a Democrat and he isn’t a Republican; he’s only an arrogant self-promoter, but he does that very well. His actual political positions, taken over time, are closer to the left than they are to the right.
  • The Editor using a horrible, fossil-fueled snowblower during winter storm Jonas (Click to enlarge)

    The Editor using a horrible, fossil-fueled snowblower during winter storm Jonas (Click to enlarge)

    William Teach on The Pirate’s Cove: Remember When Snow Was Going To Be A Thing Of The Past?
  • Robert Stacey Stacy McCain on The Other McCain: The Pump-and-Dump Feminist
  • Lisa Carr on The Victory Girls: The 2016 Election and The Anger Surrounding Trump: Why Situational Awareness Is Important
  • Hube on The Colossus of Rhodey: Maybe he should relinquish some roles — Give ’em to minorities Hollywood and the ‘Academy’ are filled with leftists, and yet, when the voting members of the Academy returned their ballots, these oh-so-diverse-multiculturalists wound up nominating exclusively white actors for the acting categories. Knowing that leftists just can’t be racists — after all, they’ll tell you that themselves — then they must have based their votes on, heaven forfend! what they saw as actual merit, on actual performances. I suppose that, for the left, when actual performance does not yield the desired racist balance, it’s just wrong.

    If you are stupid enough to travel to North Korea, it should be at your own risk

    From The Wall Street Journal:

    North Korea Detains U.S. Student

    Otto Frederick Warmbier allegedly committed a ‘hostile act’

    By Alastair Gale | Updated Jan. 22, 2016 4:59 a.m. ET

    North Korea said Friday it was holding a U.S. student for committing an unspecified “hostile act,” the latest in a series of detained American tourists and missionaries that Pyongyang has at times used to try to win diplomatic leverage with Washington.

    Otto Frederick Warmbier, an undergraduate student at the University of Virginia, was accused of being manipulated by the U.S. government, according to a brief report from the Korean Central News Agency. The report provided no details of Mr. Warmbier’s actions other than to allege that he entered the country “for the purpose of bringing down the foundation of its single-minded unity.”

    Mr. Warmbier was detained in Pyongyang on Jan. 2, according to Troy Collins of Young Pioneer Tours, the tour company that took him to North Korea. Mr. Collins declined to provide further details but said Mr. Warmbier’s family had been informed of his detention. . . .

    Mr. Warmbier’s detention comes as the U.S. seeks new sanctions at the United Nations on North Korea following its latest nuclear test on Jan. 6. Pyongyang has called its bomb test a necessary measure for self-defense and repeated its desire for the U.S. to offer a peace treaty to formally end the Korean War.

    The U.S. says North Korea should first abide by its previous commitments to denuclearize.

    Pyongyang has in the past used detainees to try to initiate diplomatic exchanges with Washington. In 2014, North Korea called for a high-level U.S. delegation to come and discuss the release of two Americans then under detention.

    There’s more at the original.

    At some point, the State department has to say to Americans, if you choose to travel to Iran or Syria or Iraq or North Korea, you are on your own. President Obama recently secured he release of four Americans being held in Iran by trading Iranians held in the United States on legitimate criminal charges. The Journal article details another incident, in which Americans detained in North Korea were fetched out after diplomatic wrangling. Even President Reagan’s misguided attempts to trade arms for hostages in the 1980s resulted in simply other hostages being seized. The United States needs to make it clear that to Americans traveling to these countries that the government will not allow kidnapper countries to hold American policy hostage by grabbing Americans, and the only way to do that is to state, clearly and unambiguously that if an American chooses to risk travel to those countries, it is at his own risk, and nobody else’s.

    Further, we need to point out that Americans who do travel to pirate countries and get themselves seized, under whatever pretexts, are placing other American travelers in jeopardy if the United States does expend efforts to try to secure their releases, by increasing the value of other hostages; that was the result of President Reagan’s policies, and Iran has just demonstrated that the rules haven’t changed.

    The article noted that “the State Department strongly recommends all U.S. citizens avoid travel to North Korea,” and that’s true enough, but it isn’t firm enough. The State Department needs to make it known that traveling to North Korea is not only placing yourself in danger, but is separating yourself from all diplomatic help. That’s cold and that’s harsh, but it is what needs to be done.

    I have sympathy for Mr Warmbier and his plight, but his plight should not give North Korea some advantage; he should be on his own.
    Cross-posted on RedState.

    Well, Bob Dole does know something about catastrophic losses!

    From The New York Times:

    Bob Dole Warns of ‘Cataclysmic’ Losses With Ted Cruz, and Says Donald Trump Would Do Better

    By Maggie Haberman | Wednesday, January 20, 2016

    Bob Dole, the former Kansas senator and 1996 Republican presidential nominee, has never been fond of Senator Ted Cruz of Texas. But in an interview Wednesday, Mr. Dole said that the party would suffer “cataclysmic” and “wholesale losses” if Mr. Cruz was the nominee, and that Donald J. Trump would fare better.

    “I question his allegiance to the party,” Mr. Dole said of Mr. Cruz. “I don’t know how often you’ve heard him say the word ‘Republican’ — not very often.” Instead, Mr. Cruz uses the word “conservative,” Mr. Dole said, before offering up a different word for Mr. Cruz: “extremist.”

    “I don’t know how he’s going to deal with Congress,” he said. “Nobody likes him.”

    Well, it’s certainly true that some of the Republican leadership in Washington doesn’t like him, but given that Senator Cruz is either first or second in the opinion polls in Iowa, I’d say that somebody must like him.

    But Mr. Dole said he thought Mr. Trump could “probably work with Congress, because he’s, you know, he’s got the right personality and he’s kind of a deal-maker.”

    The remarks by Mr. Dole reflect wider unease with Mr. Cruz among members of the Republican establishment, but few leading members of the party have been as candid and cutting.

    “If he’s the nominee, we’re going to have wholesale losses in Congress and state offices and governors and legislatures,” said Mr. Dole, who served in the House and Senate for 35 years and won the Iowa caucuses twice. He described Mr. Cruz as having falsely “convinced the Iowa voters that he’s kind of a mainstream conservative.”

    Apparently the word “conservative” means something different in Washington than it does outside the Beltway. Perhaps the “mainstream” of conservatism is something different from what former Senator Dole believe it is, or ought to be. If there is anybody in Iowa who doesn’t know and understand Senator Cruz’s positions, it is because that person is willfully ignorant. Not only has Senator Cruz been running on his positions, not only does he have a campaign website which details his positions, pointing out the positive, but his opponents have been right there, telling the prospective caucus-goers what they say Mr Cruz believes, doing their best to accentuate the negative.

    Now, I will be clear here: Senator Cruz is not my preferred candidate, and I have previously expressed reservations about how effective a President Cruz would be at getting things done. But I also remember Senator Dole, one of the well-liked go-along-to-get-along Republicans, who was the 1996 Republican Presidential nominee, who got nothing done that the Democrats couldn’t accept. Oh, they might have sniped along the edges, but good, collegial Senator Dole was well-liked and well-respected by everybody, nobody had a bad thing to say about him, and he led absolutely nobody to conservative positions or accomplishments. Newt Gingrich once referred to Mr Dole as the “tax collector for the welfare state,” and, as if to prove that the Democrats respected Mr Dole, Tim Noah of the now-dying New Republic characterized it thus:

    In 1985, shortly after Sen. Bob Dole, R.-Kan., became majority leader of the upper body, a little creep called Newt Gingrich publicly branded him “the tax collector for the welfare state.”

    Well, it wasn’t Senator Dole who led the Republicans to the congressional majorities in the 1994 elections; it was that “little creep” who crafted the “Contract With America” and the coordinated campaigns which led to that result.

    Mr Noah’s article was from January of 2012, telling the reader that Mr Gingrich, then running for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, “truly would be a catastrophically bad nominee for the GOP to choose.” I have some trouble accepting advice from the Democrats concerning who would be a good or bad Republican nominee as being unbiased or genuine. And Mr Noah confirmed his respect for Mr Dole by concluding his article, “Oh, Bob. We miss you so.”

    Well, of course they do! And if the Democrats, Mr Noah at the very least, think so highly of former Senator Dole, then I would be inclined to give rather less respect for the Kansan’s opinion.
    Cross-posted on RedState.

    Remember ‘Peak Oil?’

    Remember these stories from yesteryear, from our friends on the left?

    Peak Oil is on schedule.

    Monday, December 10th, 2007 @ 2:31 am | Energy, Peak Oil |By Jeromy Brown

    As entirely expected here at Iowa Liberal, documented further by the New York Times:

    The economies of many big oil-exporting countries are growing so fast that their need for energy within their borders is crimping how much they can sell abroad, adding new strains to the global oil market.

    Experts say the sharp growth, if it continues, means several of the world’s most important suppliers may need to start importing oil within a decade to power all the new cars, houses and businesses they are buying and creating with their oil wealth.

    Indonesia has already made this flip. By some projections, the same thing could happen within five years to Mexico, the No. 2 source of foreign oil for the United States, and soon after that to Iran, the world’s fourth-largest exporter. In some cases, the governments of these countries subsidize gasoline heavily for their citizens, selling it for as little as 7 cents a gallon, a practice that industry experts say fosters wasteful habits.

    What I find unexpected is that 7 cent gas didn’t turn these countries into economic superpowers. When all is said and done, the potential of oil countries will have been mostly wasted. The wealth has gone everywhere but to the people that live there, and now that their economies are just barely getting afloat, sure signs of oil’s scarcity continue to pile up. As exporters turn into importers, the energy vacuum will start tearing eyeballs out of sockets Total Recall style.

    Or this one?

    Peak Oil Watch

    Thursday, May 29th, 2008 @ 5:09 pm | Peak Oil |By Jeromy Brown

    The WSJ:

    Oil Exporters Are Unable To Keep Up With Demand
    Domestic Needs, Sluggish Investment Crimp Shipments

    The world’s top oil producers are proving unable to put more barrels on thirsty world markets despite sky-high prices, a shift that defies traditional market logic and looks set to continue.

    Fresh data from the U.S. Department of Energy show the amount of petroleum products shipped by the world’s top oil exporters fell 2.5% last year, despite a 57% increase in prices, a trend that appears to be holding true this year as well.

    There are several reasons behind the net-export decline. Soaring profits from high-price crude have fueled a boom in oil demand in Saudi Arabia and across the Middle East, leaving less oil for export. At the same time, aging fields and sluggish investments have caused exports to drop significantly in Mexico, Norway and, most recently, Russia. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries also cut production early last year and didn’t move to boost supplies again until last fall.

    One prediction of Peak Oil theory is that oil-exporting nations will realize it is in their greater self-interest to keep and use their oil. Another is that output will plateau, and then decline.

    This is our time to prepare


    Shrill Shrieking Unspeakably Wealthy Moonbats

    Sunday, January 27th, 2008 @ 11:02 am | Energy |By Thomas Tallis

    Yet another granola-crunching moonbat yammering on about ‘peak oil’ and other liberal lies.

    This particular science-disbelieving moonbat happens to be the CEO of Shell Oil.

    Seven years, folks! I know there are some people who have this quasi-mystical idea that we can’t mess things up completely – that God will step in right at the moment of impending disaster, or that ingenuity will come into play just when things look darkest. Some people might call these thoughts “Hollywood fantasies,” and that’s one way of putting it, but the itch reaches back further than that. It’s the age-old need for a clean narrative that doesn’t end in one’s own demise. I have news for all y’all’s inner children.

    Just because your need for a clean narrative is soul-deep doesn’t mean you’re going to get what you want. If there’s anybody who hears the CEO of Shell say “we’re gonna hit peak oil” and wants to go about debunking and offering alternate theories, let that person ask himself: if I know so goddamn much about oil, why am I not infinitely wealthy, like the CEO of Shell?

    Or this one, from the least moonbatty of the Iowa Liberals:

    Attention conservatives!

    Wednesday, April 11th, 2007 @ 9:08 pm | Energy, Middle East, National Security, Peak Oil |By Mike Ganzeveld>

    Your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to find a way to blame the following on liberals:

    Finally, the future decline of Saudi production implies that peak total liquids is forecast to occur in mid 2009. This means that coordinated conservation plans need to start now.

    Further evidence supporting Saudi Arabia’s production decline continues to emerge. The evidence is not only technical and economic, but also behavioural. The analysis of the further evidence, described below, shows that Saudi Arabia is highly unlikely to produce over 8.5 million barrels/day of crude oil and lease condensate, on an annualised basis.

    Saudi Arabia is in decline now. This means that the world’s production is in decline now. Future supply will be unable to meet forecast demands. Governments, corporations and individuals need to start making coordinated plans to prepare for the decline in world production.

    I think we all know who’s to blame for Peak Oil. Yeah, that’s right….Bill Clinton!

    From CNNMoney, today:

    IEA says world ‘drowning’ in oil, prices could go lower

    by Ivana Kottasova | January 19, 2016: 6:03 AM ET

    Can oil really go lower?

    The answer from the International Energy Agency is an “emphatic yes.”

    The world is “drowning” in oil, and weak demand has failed to match relentless pumping by the world’s biggest oil producers, the group said. With Iran planning to boost its production by as much as 1.5 million barrels a day by the end of 2016, the global oil glut will get even worse.

    “The oil market faces the prospect of a third successive year when supply will exceed demand by 1 million barrels a day and there will be enormous strain on the ability of the oil system to absorb it efficiently,” the IEA said in the monthly oil market report.

    There’s more at the original.

    Now, “peak oil” should have been a very measurable thing; barring new discoveries, we should have been able to calculate when we’d just plain run down on oil supplies. But yet, all of those learned scientists, all of those oh-so-brilliant economists and statisticians and experts got it wrong.

    And now we are supposed to trust yet another group of learned scientists and experts who are telling us that we are doomed, doomed! from global warming climate change, using calculations on forces which are not finite, like the oil supply is, and which are a lot more complicated, with many, many times more variables than the rate of petroleum consumption, and base our policies — and the impoverishment of the working class in the industrialized nations — on those projections.

    I suppose that I could have looked up almost any liberal website from a decade ago, and found similar stories telling us how we just had to get off evil petroleum, because we were running out of the stuff.  Now that no, we aren’t running out of oil — though eventually we will, but that’s a long time down the road — they have had to find another reason to try to eliminate the very fuel of capitalism. 

    Because, that, in the end, is the goal of the left.  Capitalism, despite being the only economic system we have ever known which has lifted more than a tiny minority above the subsistence level, is just plain evil, because any system which allows some people to become winners allows other people to be losers, and somehow, that just isn’t fair.

    There are no “participation” awards in the economy: you either succeed, or you fail.

    It makes perfect sense to clean up after ourselves, and we would all love to see some sort of Star Trek future, where energy is unlimited and clean and there is no pollution anywhere, but that future hasn’t arrived yet. It makes no sense, no sense at all, to impoverish poorer Americans — the very people the left claim to want to help! — to push forward with policies which cannot be justified, based on technologies which do not yet exist.