Tag: trainwreck

Is Romney criticizing Trump or campaigning for him?

I don’t know about you, but I suspect Trump’s numbers are going to go up in reaction to Romney’s much-ballyhooed attack on him:

“Here’s what I know: Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud,” Romney said. “His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He’s playing members of the American public for suckers: He gets a free ride to the White House, and all we get is a lousy hat.”
 
Romney lambasted Trump on foreign policy, casting him as “very, very not-smart” in his comments about allowing ISIS to take out Syria’s leadership and for proposing the slaughter of the families of terrorists.

“Mr. Trump is directing our anger for less-than-noble purposes. He creates scapegoats in Muslims and Mexican immigrants. He calls for the use of torture. He calls for the killing of innocent children and family members of terrorists.”

This strikes me as more than a little akin to throwing Brer Rabbit into the briar patch. What’s he going to do next, accuse Trump of liking apple pie, marrying hot women, and wanting to keep America too American?

Mike Cernovich will no doubt note that by saying Trump “gets a free ride to the White House”, Romney has made the mistake of assuming the sale.

Meanwhile the Mexicans are campaigning for Trump too, it seems:

In a televised interview late on Wednesday, Finance Minister Luis Videgaray categorically rejected the proposal.

“Under no circumstance will Mexico pay for the wall that Mr. Trump is proposing,” he said. “Building a wall between Mexico and the United States is a terrible idea. It is an idea based on ignorance and has no foundation in the reality of North American integration.”

Yes, I’m sure that will convince many Americans not to vote for Trump. If they keep this up, Trump is going to win in a landslide after promising to nuke Mexico City and deport all of the contributors to National Review. What are they going to do next, roll out George W. Bush to attack him?

Happy Super Trumpsday

Happy Super Trumpsday, everyone!

Today we bathe in the tears of the GOP establishment. The salt must flow!

#SuperTrumpsday

A good performance today will confirm Donald Trump as the Republican candidate thanks to the GOPe’s desire to stack the deck and force “electable” moderates on the party’s conservatives.

Memo to Republican leaders: Be careful what you wish for.

Hoping to avoid a repeat of the messy fight for the Republican nomination in 2012, the party drew up a calendar and delegate-selection rules intended to allow a front-runner to wrap things up quickly.

Now, with Republicans voting in 11 states on Tuesday, the worst fears of the party’s establishment are coming true: Donald J. Trump could all but seal his path to the nomination in a case of unintended consequences for the party leadership, which vehemently opposes him.

“Trump has significant advantages, and that’s the way the system is designed,” said Joshua T. Putnam, a political science lecturer at the University of Georgia with an expertise in delegate selection. “It’s right in line with what the folks designing these rules wanted. It’s just not the candidate they preferred.”

No wonder the GOP has been losing the political and cultural wars for 30 years. Their elite leadership is strategically incompetent.

Yeah, it’s not Latin at all

It’s always amusing how the midwits at File 770 are locked into the position that everything I do must, by definition, be stupid, evil, and wrong. A couple of them are still striking poses about the title of Opera Vita Aeterna:

No, that’s not how medieval Latin worked. It still had grammar!

That title is crap Latin whether it is supposed to be Classical or Medieval Latin.

You can’t just write out strings of straight dictionary words of Latin and hope they mean what you want them to.

The change from Classical Latin to Medieval Latin was a little more like taking this:

    To be, or not to be–that is the question:

And making this:

    It’s a question of being or not being.

That Beale title is more the equivalent of

    Is! Is! Negate! Is! Yonder! Query!

Actually, it’s not Latin at all. I don’t speak Latin. I speak Italian. And it’s not actually proper Italian either, which would be Un’opera della vita eterna, but in the hallowed tradition of my fallen intellectual hero, Umberto Eco, I abbreviated it, then added an extra A to give it a Latinate flavor. I not only didn’t “just write out strings of straight dictionary words”, I didn’t use a dictionary at all.

Now, if the File 770ers were genuinely familiar with my writing, or were doing anything more than posturing and virtue-signaling, they would have criticized my bad Latin in Summa Elvetica, where I did actually write in what is actually supposed to be Latin.

Praeterea, homo in Die Sexto creatus sunt. In ordine naturae qui in narratione Creationis descriptus, perfectius praestat. Ergo homo est perfectior quam aelvi. Tum, perfectissima res animae estseparatio ab corpore, quod in illa re similior Dei angelorumque, et purior, quod separatur ab ulla aliena substantia. Quandoquidem non aeque perfecti atque homines, aelvi ulterius quam homines ab perfectissima re animae. Ergo aelvi habent animae naturaliter sibi unita.

I would, of course, welcome any grammatical corrections they might suggest and will be happy to add them to the novel should they be able to provide any.

You can always tell a midwit, because he’s always in a hurry to show everyone how smart he isn’t.

A world-class tantrum

Matt Walsh is exceedingly butthurt by the fact that Donald Trump just took his third state in a row:

Dear Donald Trump Fan,

I’m going to tell you the truth, friend.

You say you want the truth. You say you want someone who speaks boldly and brashly and bluntly and “tells it like it is” and so on. According to exit polls in South Carolina, voters who want a president who “tells it like it is” are an essential demographic for Trump, just as they’re an essential demographic for Judge Judy and Dr. Phil. You say you want abrupt and matter-of-fact honesty, and you want it so much, you’ll make a man president for it regardless of whether he defies every principle and value you claim to hold.

Personally, I think you’re lying, and I’m going to test my theory. In fact, I believe I’ve already proven my theory because you’re now offended that I called you a liar. But Trump has called half of the Earth’s population a liar at some point over the past seven months, and you loved every second of it. You said you loved it not out of cruelty or spite, but out of admiration for a man who’s willing to call people liars — even if he’s lying when he does it.

Yet here I am employing the same tactic — accurately, I might add — and you recoil indignantly. Over the course of this campaign season I’ve said many harsh words about you and your leader, all of which I stand by, but you’ve never respected my harsh words, or the harsh words of any Trump critic. Indeed, you insist that our tough criticism of you only vindicates your support of Trump, while Trump’s vulgar and dishonest criticism of everyone else also vindicates your support of Trump. You’re tired of people being critical, but you love Trump because he’s critical. You say you like Trump for his style, but you hate his style when it’s directed at him or you.

It’s epic. You really have to read the whole thing to believe it, let alone appreciate it. But wait, there’s more! I happened to tweet about it.

Supreme Dark Lord @voxday
The butthurt. The salt. The tears. The meltdown of @MattWalshBlog is simply delicious. Deal with it, cucky.

Matt Walsh ‏@MattWalshBlog
Thanks for sharing my stuff

Supreme Dark Lord @voxday
Are you kidding? I made certain to archive it before you come to your senses and delete it. That was a self-evisceration!

Now, I don’t know much about Matt Walsh, but I do know where he stands socio-sexually now, because like every other Gamma bitterly licking his wounds, he didn’t hesitate to leap in and take a shot when he thought he saw the opportunity.

Supreme Dark Lord @voxday
Even as the political elite sneer at them, Trump tells the poorly-educated that he loves them. And they will love him back. #Trump2016

Matt Walsh ‏@MattWalshBlog
So you need politicians to tell you they love you? Are you an actual toddler or are you just pretending?

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
No, Matt, the difference is that they know you hate them and think you are better than them. That’s why you’re irrelevant.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
Also, you’re projecting, Matt. That was a world-class tantrum you threw. That’s why so many people are laughing at you.

Klejdys ‏@klejdys
What @voxday is doing to @mattwalshblog now is illegal in 38 states.

That little exchange explains something I didn’t understand when I first read the article/tantrum, which is why Matt Walsh doesn’t merely oppose Donald Trump politically, but harbors genuine hatred for him. As a Gamma, he’s a Secret King, which is why he is simultaneously contemptuous of Trump and envious of Trump’s success.

Anyhow, enjoy the salt. I certainly did.

Words are magic

A minor dialogue on Twitter cracked me up today. To put it in context, some scientists and science fetishists on Twitter were in an uproar over my assertion that SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEW was not only unreliable, but was nothing more than glorified proofreading. They argued that SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEW was all about replicating experiments and testing conclusions, not merely reading over the material in order to make sure the author wasn’t smoking crack.

One guy even demanded to know if I knew what “peer” meant. Because, you know, that totally changes the process.

Finally, I asked a scientist how many peer reviews he had done. Between 10 and 30 was the answer. Fair enough. Then I asked him how many experiments he had replicated as part of those SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEWS.

None. Or to put in scientific mathematical terms, zero. Also known as “the null set”.

And what did he actually do in scientifically peer-reviewing these papers? Well, he read them and occasionally made some suggestions for improving them.

[INSERT FACE PALM OF YOUR CHOICE HERE]

That is why I am strongly considering changing my title from Lead Editor of Castalia House to Lead Scientific Peer Reviewer. Because then, you see, we won’t merely be publishing fiction, we’ll be publishing PEER REVIEWED SCIENCE.

UPDATE: This was Real Live Scientist with More than TEN Proofreads Peer Reviews David Whitcombe’s response to finding out that scientists with considerably more experience agreed with me.

David Whitcombe ‏@hauxton
Ooh
You wrote a blog.
Still misunderstanding peer review.
Over your head in guess
 
David Whitcombe ‏@hauxton
Laughable Dunning Kruger

Thereby supporting my hypothesis that SJWs always double down.

Confessions of a sociopath

Either John Scalzi gets a little forgetful when he’s virtue-signaling or he is even more openly sociopathic than his stone cold “give no fucks” mentality would indicate:

John Scalzi Verified account ‏@scalzi 4 February 2016
Related, writing something that shows you’re a horrible person and then proclaiming “it’s satire!” neither makes it satire or excuses you.

Apparently this is neither satire nor excusable:

“I’m a rapist. I’m one of those men who likes to force myself on women without their consent or desire and then batter them sexually. The details of how I do this are not particularly important at the moment — although I love when you try to make distinctions about “forcible rape” or “legitimate rape” because that gives me all sorts of wiggle room — but I will tell you one of the details about why I do it: I like to control women and, also and independently, I like to remind them how little control they have.” – John Scalzi, 25 October 2012 

So, which is it, Johnny? Are you a rapist? Or is it satire?

“The embodiment of white nerd privilege”

Wil Wheaton has been called out for going against the SJW Narrative. It was inevitable, of course. After all, we have been reliably informed that as a white man, he is playing on the Easiest Difficulty Level:

Like many of you, I’ve been aware of Wil Wheaton’s outspoken position as a Bro-Feminist for quite some time. Occasionally, he’ll retweet or even say something that might seem profound. But I’m also not alone in suspecting that, beneath his “yay, feminism!” facade, lies deep-rooted misogyny. Recently, he proved my suspicions correct when he attempted to brand Clinton supporters a rather disgusting sexist slur that I will not repeat.

Make no mistake. Wheaton is the embodiment of white male nerd privilege. This “actor” had one role back in the 1980s that people actually remember, and somehow he’s more famous than the trailblazing women who had more prominent roles than him in the same fucking series. He’s parlayed his “I’m just like you!” nerd celebrity status into a recurring role as himself on a hit sitcom. He doesn’t even have to act, he literally just shows up and gets paid just for being him. How much more privileged can a creepy white dude get?

No wonder he’s loved so much by nerds. He’s the epitome of what all nerds want to be – rewarded by everyone just for being their precious, nerdy selves. He even got a “hit” YouTube series where he gets to hang out and play board games with people who have actual accomplishments. He even drags his wife on the show every now and then, as if to prove to all his little nerdling fans that hot girls really do like him.

Speaking of which, how creepy is it that his YouTube show seems to be an excuse for him to spend time with women who wouldn’t give him the time of day otherwise?

Anyway, back to my point. Wheaton has shown his true colours with his recent sexist campaign against Hillary Clinton…. Frankly, the man reminds me of the rapist Jian Ghomeshi. His espousing
of progressive values is nothing more than a mask. And we’ve just seen
his mask slip, giving a peek at the sexist evil hidden beneath.

Wait, hold on… okay, never mind. Wil Wheaton apologized. And as we all know, an apology always suffices to make the SJWs go away.

A predictable outcome

The Oregon Militia situation finally turned lethal:

“I want the world to know how my father was murdered today. His hands were in the air and he was shot in the face by the American authorities. Ammon Bundy reported there are 6 witnesses to this evil.”
Posted by Thara Tenney on Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Her testimony was echoed by another eyewitness, Victoria Sharp, who was in the car with Finicum when the group were pulled over by cops and federal agents. Sharp claims that Finicum put his hands out of the car window and asked the police to allow the women to leave the car.

“They shot at him, but they missed him,” said Sharp, adding that the group then attempted to drive away in the car but were shot at again by police.

“When we crashed and stopped for a second, he got out of the car, he had his hands in the air, he’s like ‘just shoot me then’….and they did, they shot him dead,” said Sharp.

“He was just walking, with his hands in the air, I swear to God, and they shot him dead and after he was down on the ground, shot him three more times,” said Sharp, adding that the vehicle was again “bombarded with bullets” as well as tear gas rounds.

Sharp says that the group tried to “find something white” so they could display it as a sign of surrender. She challenges news reports that only six shots were fired, asserting, “they shot at least 120 shots altogether.”

Sharp also claims that none of the individuals in the car pulled out a gun at any point and that the incident was an “ambush” with “FBI snipers in the trees” surrounding the vehicle.

Whatever. I have no idea what these people were thinking they were going to accomplish by occupying a wildlife refuge center, but I can testify, from my father’s experience, that no one is going to “wake up” and no one is going to be inspired to do anything as a result of it. They’re just going to be vilified, jailed, and forgotten.

It’s like a tragic parody. And notice that the moment the government took action, they tried to surrender. Never play or posture at violence. And never threaten violence unless you are fully prepared for your enemy to resort to it.

UK debates Trump ban

And even Piers Morgan, who is far from the brightest bulb in Albion, is appalled at the stupidity on display in the UK:

Why I’m so embarrassed today for Britain. The same parliament that hasn’t banned a single UK citizen from returning after fighting for ISIS is seriously debating banning Trump from its shores

As I write this column, members of the UK Parliament are debating whether or not to ban Donald Trump from entering Britain. They’ve allocated three hours of time to do this.

Time that could have been spent debating terrorism, famine, nuclear weapons, the Middle East refugee crisis or the Syrian War.

But no, instead British law-makers have concluded their own time is best served seriously considering a proposal to ban a man who may end up being the next President of the United States.

The reason they’re doing it is, of course, is because Trump recently called for a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the U.S. in the wake of an horrific mass shooting by two Islamic terrorists. Like many, I didn’t agree with what Trump said and indeed, I wrote him an open letter at the time saying it was ‘dangerously wrong and bigoted’.

But to ban a foreign politician for expressing an opinion is utterly absurd. Particularly a foreign politician who stands an increasingly good chance of becoming leader of the world’s biggest superpower and Britain’s supposedly closest, most powerful ally.

Can you imagine a situation where President Trump, if he is elected, is actually banned? It would make Britain the laughing stock of the world, and confirm to Americans that we’re just as pathetically petty and small pond in our thinking as you’ve always suspected.

What they should do is put it to a referendum. Let the people of Britain – the actual British people, not the millions of invaders – decide if they would rather ban a) Donald Trump or b) Muslims from the UK. I suspect the Donald might not do so poorly.

But regardless, it would be hilarious if Parliament banned Trump prior to his winning the Republican nomination, and then the election. Nothing would make it more obvious that the rest of the world no longer gives a damn about what is now nothing more than a powerless, petty province of the EU.

If the UK wants to matter again, it has to get out of the EU. #Brexit.