The lewder, more pornographic, and less talented at their craft pop icons become, the louder the Left lauds their artistically dodgy output. Miley Cyrus was mocked before she began twerking tush, gyrating crotch and twirling tongue. Only then had she arrived as an artist in the eyes of “critics” on the Left. Ditto Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian. The last launched a career with a sex tape and cultivated ass elephantiasis; and viola!
Cyrus, Beyoncé, Gaga, Madonna, Lena Dunham, et al.: There’s zero artistic range there. The power of the average pop artist and her products lies in the pornography that is her “art,” in her hackneyed political posturing, and in the fantastic technology that is Auto-Tune.
In a culture dominated by the left, vulgar and vacuousness is conflated with quality and edginess. So why is everyone apoplectic over a few naughty references and allusions in the presidential debates (begun by goody-goody Marco Rubio)?
Left and Right: everyone is distraught over the political strutting ongoing on the Republican stage.
Give me a break!
I bet you that if Bernie Sanders got a little frisky the Left would think him adorable.
With Amy Lindsay, Ted Cruz, standing for president, had an opportunity to support a charming, gracious and smart lady, who had acted in one of his campaign ads (below), later to be pulled by the senator’s campaign because Ms. Lindsay had also starred in a naughty film or two.
The libertarian-leaning Ms. Lindsay is, by her own admission, extremely conservative fiscally, likes Ted Cruz—so she was doing his ad because it comported with her beliefs—and intends to vote Republican.
Here was Cruz’s opportunity to show his support for our kind of woman: doesn’t nag, doesn’t rely on welfare, doesn’t think she has the right to dictate to anyone how they use their resources and thus supports Cruz’s right to pull her ad. Can you image the fuss Sandra Fluke would make in her place?
Politically, here was Cruz’s chance to show Democrats what it means to dignify a woman’s right to make a living as she sees fit.
He blew it.
Donald Trump should employ Amy in his next ad against the three establishment Amigos: Jeb, Marco, John K.
I can see why women—biologically programmed to like powerful men who can take care of them—would find Muslim men more attractive than the West’s soft, repulsive, liberal men. Indeed, from this Jerusalem-based imam comes excellent locution and logic to describe an emasculated, feminized West, primed for a muscular, masculine Muslim takeover. His “Europe has become old and decrepit” is three minutes and 11 seconds into the supremely reasoned sermon.
So where are the West’s manly leaders? “I have a blond wife, a blue-eyed child and a … shotgun,” said one European, residing near a refugee encampment, to InfoWars’ correspondent. But he (and his hearsay) is but one (and if he defended his fair flock; he and European males like him would be jailed). Most men just hand their women over. Yuk.
And by the way, the Imam strikes a better pose than, say, Father Michael Pfleger and the prototypical white, liberal, male preacher. Be honest: Who looks better? The ascetic-looking Muslim in his white flowing robes, speaking in that deep manly voice, or this emasculated thing (which is what the West’s religious leaders generally look and sound like):
The Western, radical liberal preacher:
The Muslim Manly Preacher:
To follow on the report of Paul Joseph Watson, InfoWars’ young correspondent (some four minutes into the broadcast): Indeed, if you accept and want the growing “superstate bureaucracy,” you accept and want its imported populations. I’ve debunked the demographic argument, which is an extension of the argument from statism:
… Exemplified by Mark Steyn, Wilders’ worthy supporters in the US make sure he knows they love him for standing tall for speech, women, and individual rights—no-brainers all. Like Steyn, they generally steer clear of addressing the perils for their own country of mass, third-world immigration (legal and illegal).
I am told that I don’t understand Mr. Steyn of the dooms-day demographics. So I listened to his “End of Europe” lectures, in which he vividly describes the multitudes of Muslims going forth to North America and Western Europe to be fruitful and multiply and push for Islam. Their Pan-Islamist identity trumps their new assumed identity. Because of numbers, Mark asserts, History is on the march in the Muslim direction. By 2030 much of what we think of as the developed world will be part of the Muslim world.
Here Steyn hits a brick wall. Other than making babies at home and total war abroad, Steyn used to propose nothing much at all. Oh yes, if you’re not already fighting (futilely, in my opinion) in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can show your marbles by publishing offensive cartoons, making rightwing movies, and writing right-wing text.
The “One-Man Global Content Provider” is wrong. Demographics need not be destiny. The waning West became what it is not by out-breeding the undeveloped world. We were once great not because of huge numbers, but due to human capital — people of superior ideas and abilities, capable of innovation, exploration, science, philosophy.
Declining birth rates—and their antidote; the mass immigration imperative—are the excuses statists make for persevering with immigration policies that are guaranteed to destroy western civil society and shore up the State.
It would be productive if Steyn were to also demand, asap, as this writer has, the implementation of an immediate, defensive, libertarian, negative-rights, leave-me-alone strategy: don’t let the homie Jiahdis who hold western passports back in. Government-issued papers do not a natural right confer. Citizenship is no natural right; staying alive is.
Feminists pushed for an all-out war on men as a class of oppressors. Be they innocent boys—hundred of thousands of them—or seasoned sex offenders; men have been swept up in this dragon’s dragnet. Now the dragons realize, belatedly, that these kids who have sex with other kids are their sons and grandsons; just hormonal, normal teens whose lives they’d helped wreck with ideologies that rape reality. CNN’s Kyra Phillips investigates how a nerdy teenage boy landed on the sex offender registry:
Zach Anderson is 19 and a typical teenager. He’s into computers and wants to build a career around his love for electronics.
But those plans and any semblance of a normal life are for now out the window. Under court order, he can’t access the Internet, go to a mall or linger near a school or playground. His parents say because he has a 15-year-old brother, he can’t even live at home any longer.
Why? He’s been placed on the sex offender registry after a dating app hookup.
It began, Zach and his family say, when he went on a racy dating app called “Hot Or Not.”
He was at his home in Elkhart, Indiana, when he met the girl, who lived across the state line in nearby southern Michigan.
The girl told Zach she was 17, but she lied. She was only 14, and by having sex with her, Zach was committing a crime. He was arrested and convicted.
He was given a 90-day jail sentence, five years probation and placed on both Indiana and Michigan’s sex offender registry for the next 25 years. …
My guess is that this feminist, one among many rabid reporters at CNN, may have some regrets, now that she has a son of her own. More.