Sunday, February 9, 2020

More Hollywood Hypocrisy Set Against Unfavorable View Of Democrats.




++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
amgreatness.com/2020/02/06/the-unimpeachable-soul-of-america/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not a favorable view of Democrats. (See  1 and 1a below.)

And:

Billionaire B spent $1 million per voter i Iowa. Seems he could stand on the corner and have recipients of his largess sign vote pledges for a lot less. Perhaps he does not care how much it costs to buy an election. The optics of what he is doing is not a favorable one in my humble opinion.

As for Bernie and the other socialists who want to make everything free, I suspect what is free is generally not worth having.  That is the basic difference between socialism and capitalism.  The latter suggests sweat is required.  Whereas, the former benefit from the sweat of others.

Capitalists become the slaves of socialists and eventually everyone becomes enslaved by those in power Read: "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Road To Serfdom."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Get ready for more Hollywood hypocrisy. (See 2 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) The Democrats: A Corrupt, Insane Posse Masquerading as a Political Party
By Clarice Feldman

Eleven years ago, the writer Michael Walsh wrote (under his penname David Kahane) “Think of the Democratic Party as it really is: a criminal organization masquerading as a political party.”
After the Democrats’ Russia, Kavanaugh, Mueller, and Ukraine fiascos, the Iowa caucus debacle, and Friday’s bizarre Democratic debate, I think we need to update it: It’s a Criminal, Insane Posse masquerading as a political party.
The week began with an outstanding, uplifting, and inspiring State of the Union address by the President before a joint Congress. Among the House delegates were a gaggle of Democratic congresswomen dressed in white who insist they are strong, independent, capable, and worthy to lead. They stood, clapped, or sat in unison at signals from Speaker Pelosi who sat behind the President, mouthing words to some imaginary friend and moving her mouth reminiscent of someone on psychotropic drugs. (Message: I am woman -- hear me meow chasing the laser red dot.) At the conclusion of the speech she stood and ripped up her copy of the SOTU address in small packets either because she lacked strength to rip it all in one batch or for dramatic effect. To say the Democrats’ behavior was disconsonant with any message of sober adult solons is to understate it.
The following day, the Senate voted down the House’s absurd impeachment effort, after which the President gave a heartfelt address to all those in the House and Senate who had helped him in exposing the fact-free, corrupt House effort to overturn the 2016 election by ousting him from office. If you missed it, here’s a video of it. He was gracious and thankful to all those who stood by him, something Republicans are not known to do as soon as Democrats hurl charges, no matter how patently flimsy and partisan those charges are. For once, Republicans didn’t flee the forum for fear of spotting their white togas when the jackals appeared. (I suppose when much of the media described the address the address as “dark,” they meant the pushover Republican days were over for them and their party of choice.)

And then there was the Iowa Caucus, the results of which are unclear -- did Sanders or Buttigieg win? Will  the DNC chair who is about to leave that slot with a big bonus persuade Iowa to recanvas or will they give him the back of their hand? Only the Shadow apparently knows… Although it is clear that Warren and Biden lost. 


Over at the Wall Street Journal, James Freeman explains the genesis of the App that failed.  “Veterans of Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 presidential campaign” who for some reason were considered “gurus at this sort of thing“ created the app. (Professor Kevin Gutzman reminds us: ”Robbie Mook, the Hillary staffer who laughed at Bill Clinton when he said Hillary needed to go to Michigan and Wisconsin in the 2016 campaign’s final days, is the fellow responsible for the app that didn’t work in Iowa.”)
Their outfit, Shadow, in turn was supported by a firm called Acronym, Acronym is a “non-profit” run by Tara McGowan, continues Freeman. Certainly not by coincidence, McGowan “oversaw the $42 million digital program in 2016 for Priorities USA, the primary super PAC for Hillary Clinton.” Among the hotshot coders Shadow engaged “was a prep cook for Starbucks.”
Why was Shadow hired to do this? Connections. 
David Burge, Iowahawk, tweeted the contract chain:
Keep in mind whenever you donate to a political party or movement, this is where your money goes -- to make sure Senator McDreamy’s nephew’s roommate gets his piece of the take
I know there are Bernians who see the app as a Machiavellian technoplot to fix the vote, but the truth is much more likely a bunch of Hillary campaign wunderkinds decided to cosplay as a Silicon Valley startup, and everybody was afraid to say they were in way over their heads
Where you come from, the software salesman isn’t your boss who says you better damn well buy it if you know what’s good for you.
Vice, like Iowahawk seems to think that the coders were working off an App Coding for Dummies book
It’s not clear that this simple and likely explanation for the app that failed will persuade Sanders’ followers. After all, he was cheated in 2016 and the people whose app seem to have cheated him out of a clear victory in Iowa and momentum going on to New Hampshire were intimately connected to Hillary Clinton.
Of course, you can ignore the app’s factual genesis and look elsewhere for blame. Sheila Jackson Lee, B.A. Yale JD U Va, whose gerrymandered district looks like a gaping shark’s mouth, suggested that Russia was responsible for the crashing App in Iowa. 
Rachel Maddow blamed the weird message board 4 Chan
As for me -- I’m sticking with graft and incompetence, the usual Democratic Party’s operational mode.
Burning Bernie
Professor Charles Lipson explains why the Sanders supporters have reason to doubt the fairness of their opposition in the Democratic establishment:
The Democrats’ nominating process increases the likelihood of a contested convention -- and a nasty fight with Bernie and his supporters. The party discarded the traditional, Anglo-American system, where each state’s winner receives all its delegates. Instead, they chose a European-style system in which each candidate wins a fraction of the delegates proportional to his share of the vote. The Anglo-American system produces clear winners and losers. The European system doesn’t. It includes all factions in Parliament, where the leading party tries to assemble a governing coalition.
Democrats’ problem is that they are not trying to form an inclusive, coalition government. They are trying to pick a nominee, but they are doing it with a system that was never designed to produce a single, decisive winner. Oops.
If the convention is contested, elected delegates will be joined by “super delegates,” starting on the first or second ballot, depending on the convention rules. Who are these super delegates? They are quintessential insiders, mostly state and local elected officials. There is absolutely no way they will jeopardize their own fiefdoms by choosing Bernie or any other socialist.
Their refusal will produce a bitter clash if Bernie arrives in Milwaukee with millions of votes and millions of donors. If he actually holds a plurality of elected delegates and is passed over anyway, the fight will degenerate into trench warfare. Remember, Bernie knows this is his last rodeo, and he has zero loyalty to the party. Remember, too, that his default speaking style is “really angry,” interspersed with “damned mad.” If that’s how Bernie and his supporters leave the convention, it’s hard to see a Democratic path to victory.
The party’s best outcome would be for Bernie to lose decisively in both the primary vote and delegate count -- so decisively that his followers believe the process was fair and the nominee legitimate. A bad outcome would be an inconclusive primary contest, where Bernie did well but lost at the convention.
Worst of all would be one where Bernie arrived with the most votes and delegates but fell short of a majority and came away empty-handed. He would blame party leaders and their back-room deals to benefit billionaires, corporations, and corrupt politicians. If that happens, the party will be in real trouble. Bernie will scream, Trump will exploit the divisions, and left-wing voters will spend November 3 in a purple haze, eating Ben and Jerry’s. What they won’t do is trudge to the polls and vote Democratic.
The Democratic “Debate”
I confess, by week’s end I lacked enough patience to watch the Democrats’ debate on Friday night, and contented myself with reading about it from trusted observers. The actor James Woods is back from a year-long jailing by Twitter, and bounced back having lost none of his acid wit:
“The #Democrats have cheated elections for so long, they can’t even elect themselves... #IowaCaucusDisaster 
-- James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) February 7, 2020
Pete Buttigieg seems to have mastered the art of glibly speaking meaningless word salads (an Obama mode). So much that Sundance cleverly satirized him:
Sample Mayor Pete quote:
"The consequential moments that we face are moments of great consequence we must face; and when facing those moments we must think of the great consequence behind these faces or we will fail to be great..."
sarcastically: Yup. The consequential moments that we face are moments of great consequence we must face; and when facing those moments we must think of the great consequence behind these faces or we will fail to be great...

:::crowd cheers::: 

Stage crew looks around: "Huh, what the?.." 
-- TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) February 8, 2020
“If you take a step back and really think about what they’re saying in this debate it’s fricking bonkers stuff. Like really beyond crazy.’
Josh Holmes:
"It used to be over-the-top parody to say that Democrats want free healthcare for illegal immigrants and felons to be voting from their cells it’s now a consensus position among their leading Presidential candidates."
Greg Price:
“Elizabeth Warren says we need "race-conscious laws." Think about that. Isn't that what we spent so long trying to make sure we didn't have?  ‪#DemDebate
Tom Maguire tweets:
“Physicists have theorized on the manner in which some stars collapse inward and then go super-nova. The Dem party may give us a lab experiment in 2020.”
Maybe so. Some viewing the weak field of Democratic contenders are placing their bets on another old White Male Hope -- the latecomer, billionaire Michael Bloomberg. He spent $20 million in Iowa to garner 20 votes. If he seriously campaigns from now to the election, and maintains that spending pattern, I think he’d still lose but it would be a bigger boon for  the economy, especially Democrat coders, consultants, pilots of private planes, and ad agencies, than any other stimulus package I can imagine. The press will love that, as well. Trump has proven that clever use of social media makes it unnecessary for a candidate with a saleable message to keep them alive by paying them a fortune for ads no one watches. But if Bloomberg thinks $1 million per vote is a great campaign plan, who would complain?


1a) Pelosi and Rumpelstiltskin

Watching Nancy Pelosi and her gang of insolent quislings, it was hard not to think of the Grimm Brothers' fairy tale "Rumpelstiltskin."  Power, greed, deal-making, sacrifice of children, and petulant rage are a few of the themes of this fairy tale that aptly describe the current Democrat party.
The fairy tale relates that a young woman must spin straw into gold thread because her father, a miller, foolishly boasted to the greedy king that she can.  Clearly, this is an impossible task until a "strange little man" saves the day — but at what cost?  Constantly trying to keep up with the demands of the avaricious king, the miller's daughter accepts a bargain that entails giving up her newborn baby son if she cannot identify the "little man's" name.  Through happenstance, she is able to counter the odious demand, and the now identified Rumpelstiltskin flies into a fit of rage.  In fact, in "his anger he stamped with his right foot so hard that it went into the ground above his knee; then he seized his left foot with both his hands in such a fury that he split in two, and there was an end of him."
So what does an ancient fairy tale have to do with Nancy Pelosi?
For far too long, the Democrats have wheedled their way into American's lives with sly promises and sleight-of-hand maneuvers.  Oh, a bone or two will be flung, but the depressed Baltimores, Detroits, and Clevelands never improve.  A recreational center may be built, but illegals bearing deadly intentions and drugs will not be stopped as they destroy neighborhoods.
Democrats with smug Cheshire cat smiles claim that all of G-d's children really matter but somehow are quite comfortable with schools that do not teach and present-day teacher unions concerned only with the acquisition of power, not the education of children.  As Dennis Prager notes:

The most obvious — and, therefore, the one more and more Americans can resonate with — is the near destruction of most American universities as places of learning. In the words of Harvard professor Steven Pinker — an atheist and a liberal — outside of the natural sciences and a few other disciplines (such as mathematics and business), 'universities are becoming laughing stocks of intolerance.'
If you send your children to a university, you are endangering both their mind and their character. There is a real chance they will be more intolerant and more foolish after college than they were when they entered college.
When you attend an American university, you are taught to have contempt for America and its founders, to prefer socialism to capitalism, to divide human beings by race and ethnicity. You are taught to shut down those who differ with you, not to debate them. And you are taught to place feelings over reason — which is a guaranteed route to eventual evil.
The Democrats are only too willing for Americans to surrender their children's souls to the miseducation and propaganda that describe far too many schools as Leftist indoctrination prevails.
And, for the ladies in white, late-term abortion is truly caring for the lives of little ones!  Recall that the Democrats sat on their hands as Trump introduced the miracle of a very premature baby who survived with the help of modern medicine.
For generations, people have accepted the facile words of the Democrat Party that in order to get ahead, albeit meagerly, they must make a deal with the "strange little man" who allegedly cared, the consequences be damned.  Hence, little by little, Americans gave up their liberties under the delusion that they would receive something of equal value in return. 
But alas, the stakes are even higher as the Democrat Party shreds the Bill of Rights and constitutional safeguards.  Moreover, the introduction of the "New Way Forward" act is a horrifying revelation of the contempt and loathing the Democrat Party has for American sovereignty and safety of her citizens.  H.R. 5383 seeks to deliberately flout American immigration law that is supposed to protect American life and property.  It is stunning in its malevolence and acceptance of lawlessness.  But it is only the latest manifestation because in 2013 in an interview with Telemundo, Pelosi said, "Our view of the law is that ... if somebody is here without sufficient documentation, that is not reason for deportation."  Pelosi has always wished to pass a new law legalizing illegal aliens altogether.  Enter the New Way Forward.  Knowing that anti-American anti-Semites Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and Ocasio-Cortez are in favor of this act should give all Americans deep pause.
In February 2018, Pelosi and House Democrats "introduced a bill to immediately restore voting rights to felons, and mandate automatic voter registration."  Clearly, the Democrats would ignore the words of Bill McCollum, who in 2007 asserted:
The campaign to automatically restore civil rights to nearly all felons upon release from prison, with no waiting period and no hearing to determine if those felons will go right back to a life of crime, is reckless and irresponsible.  States have enacted laws to take away certain rights of those who commit crimes, reasoning that a person who breaks the law should not make the law.
But it should be recalled that Pelosi has long had ties to communists and socialists whose sole aim is the subversion of America.  Pelosi, one of the wealthiest members of  Congress, continually operates by "demonizing and destroying" those who oppose her.  She lied about Obamacare; she is comfortable with Islamic leaders who exhort anti-American beliefs; she "discounts the ideas of those who disagree with her regarding global warming"; she has "likened conservatives to Nazis"; and she has used her political influence to manipulate taxpayer money and enrich herself. 
I am actually grateful that Pelosi showed her genuine colors when she tore up President Trump's State of the Union address.  First, it is an illegal act according to 18 U.S. Code 2071, but given that the Democrats cast the law aside when they see fit, this should surprise no one.  But it should enlighten many who, heretofore, were not paying close attention.
That she could shred the accomplishments of the Americans who were invited to the SOTU event is a continuing display of the contempt Democrats have for the people. 
I would say that in her wrath, Pelosi has shown America that she does not represent the people and that her party has nothing but disdain for American values and American lives.  Ultimately, their overweening hubris and fury will consume them, much as it did Rumpelstiltskin of the past.  It will be a fitting end as the Democratic Party immolates itself, taking its bossy termagant leader with it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) The tiresome, hypocritical politics of the Oscars
The year the Oscars had its highest viewership, Titanic won best picture. That was 1998, when the broadcast drew in 55.25 million viewers. “A billion people tuning in to see,” Billy Crystal sang in his opening monologue. A small fraction of a billion, perhaps, but the claim wasn’t as ludicrous then as it would be now.
The Oscars had its worst year ever in 2018, with a measly viewership of 26.5 million. The following year’s host-less Oscars saw a slight bump to 29.6 million — though it’s still a far cry from years past. Host-less again, the Oscars might expect to see a similar bump in numbers this year. But the Academy Awards still hasn’t figured out its real problem.
The circumstances surrounding the decision to go without a host were not intentional — the Oscars disinvited Kevin Hart after he refused to apologize again for old jokes he’d made about gay people — but it appears to have worked out in the award ceremony's favor. At the very least, that was one less person to lecture viewers about politics.
Having an awards show host isn’t always just wokeness and identity politics, though. Ricky Gervais’s excoriation of Hollywood during the Golden Globes this year made for some pretty good TV. He, however, will not be back in 2021.
Hollywood doesn’t seem to know what viewers want. For those who actually pay attention to awards shows, they want to see their favorite actors strutting around in expensive suits and designer dresses, accepting awards for films viewers saw and enjoyed. They don’t want to be lectured.
Nevertheless, here’s a rundown of what to expect this year: more criticism that all of the best director nominees are men, more criticism that the majority of the best picture nominees are “bro movies,” more criticism that most of the best actor and actress nominees are white, and more hand-wringing over what Joker’s success means about America.
This isn’t to say that many of the criticisms lodged against the academy aren’t legitimate. But when Phoenix steps on stage to deliver another lecture on climate change, excuse us for dozing off.
To make the incessant pandering to woke causes even worse, Hollywood’s hypocrisy has become even more obvious since the allegations broke against Harvey Weinstein. How many of the attendees and winners can say they didn't know about his predations? All celebrities feel as though they need to atone for it, but at the very least those who were complicit then could just hush up and stop lecturing everybody now. Hollywood stars aren’t anyone’s moral superiors, and they should stop trying to pretend they are.
At the Oscars this year, viewers and participants will all find a reason to be upset, whether it’s the lack of action on sexual assault in Hollywood, the lack of diversity on screen, or a certain prejudice against films created by streaming services such as Netflix.
As movie lovers have started to do over the past two decades, however, the majority of America will just tune out.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No comments: