Hrmph, most yes.

Stephen Ippolito Says:
November 21st, 2017 at 9:06 pm

The film you mention is surely a masterwork of the Left’s propaganda, on par with Leni Riefenstahl.

In doing so, McCarthy was doing nothing he had not done hundreds of times before but the film captured his malicious demeanour and broadcast into homes for the first time his wanton cruelty in the service of punishing Welch for his opposition by destroying a young man who wasn’t even taking part in the hearing and whom no-one seriously considered to be a communist or to have committed any crime.

McCarthy was shown on the film to be exactly what he was — and what his spiritual descendants are today — supremely arrogant bullies so confident and cruel in their power that they believe that simply naming their enemies ought to be enough by itself to permanently destroy them.

School of Darkness by Bella Dodd already mentioned how Marxism had in the 1930s infiltrated American institutions and brought about Stalin show trials to keep the faithful in line. These were the same forces accusing McCarthy of the things the Marxists were doing. Why? Because of ALinsky’s rules, or rather the prototype.

It’s a good example of how the Leftists manipulated humans that fell for their propaganda movie con. Americans have been falling for the Left’s cons since long before this century started.

A moment of epiphany for the average person in the US, Welch’s words caught and expressed the mood of the decent majority of sensible people who recognise fair play, the presumption of innocence and the right of an accused to speak his own truth and to demand that evidence be brought to ground a charge against him which he can challenge and test before he can be condemned and cast out of society.

How sad that it was once the left that stood up to the finger-pointers and paid the price for the principles that mere denunciation is not proof of guilt and that one may even dissent from public policy and yet not be disloyal to one’s people.

That is the lie and deception, yes. The presumption of innocence isn’t given to M, Bush II, McCarthy, or other targets of the Hussein Regime, the Leftist alliance, or the Deep State.

Why would they? This is a war, and you all are casualties of it: some without even realizing it.

Male Cosmetic Surgical Procedures: 0.2 million (2016)
Female Cosmetic Surgical Procedures: 1.4 million

Male Minimally Invasive Procedures: 1.1 million
Female Minimally Invasive Procedures: 12.8 million

https://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/plastic-surgery-statistics/

So women are roughly ten times as likely to pay real money to improve their appearance?

I can’t find the comparison figures for cosmetic purchases, but would bet that the trend is roughly the same.

Perhaps so, but in a society, or at least the Left sub-culture, that has rejected the notion of sexual mores, how do Harvey and Charley know there’s a difference?

There is a difference between display and exhibitionism. The latter is a disorder. The former is a cultural custom. True exhibitionism (the former) is almost exclusively a male domain.

As for display—in the cultural sense—I gave you a few cultural examples of male human display. They are by no means the only ones. I do not think it is necessarily correct that females are generally the ones who display, as far as the human race as a whole goes. In terms of other cultures and other times, there have been plenty of cultures that feature human male displays, and I have never read a discussion of whether, over time and geography and culture, it is much more generally a human female cultural activity as opposed to a human male one. There is plenty of each.

But neither constitutes extra-cultural male exhibitionism in the clinical sense.

On exhibitionism, if women practice exhibitionism, why shouldn’t men? I thought we were supposed to believe in gender equality?http://www.livingly.com/The+Most+Daring+Red+Carpet+Gowns+of+2017

The problem with bringing up the “Red Scare” of the ’50s is that there were Communists in the State Department. As there were in Hollywood. A few years ago, the Writer’s Guild magazine had a tribute to the Hollywood 10. Almost all (or all, I forget which) admitted to being Communists, some underground Communists, and some had joined the Party well into the ’50s, long after the Ukranian famine, the purges, the Gulag, the Doctor’s Plot, the Night of the Murdered Poets, and other of Stalin’s atrocities were known.

It is indeed tough on us males to have our genitalia more prominent, more anterior than you women, whom I have occasionally heard referred to as “split-tails”.

I recall a story by Robert Ruark, the great writer on African safaris and big-game hunting whom no one reads anymore, about an African safari porter whose genitalia were ripped from him by a hyena as he slept (a most rude awakening!)

The new Jacobite Swamp is the story now. Why are there suddenly so many denunciations that Citizen Robespierre is smiling? We all sense that there is something terribly wrong with the civil conversation. The job of the commentariat is to make sense of what terrible departure from the constitution is causing it?

Accusation should beget investigation and legal action, not execution.

Why is the legal system being completely circumvented if not ignored? What mad terrorist conspiracy causes the working press to destroy lives at the behest of the legal community, who actively recruit aggrieved accusers? The blogging community is dropping the ball, focused on the wrong issues as intended by the authors of said fascist denunciation? Surely, there are real offenses out there to be punished. But the medium is the message and you are what you eat?