They deserved it.
Exuberance:
Bolsonaro wins in Brazil
Remember the so-called “Brazilian Trump,” Jair Bolsonaro? I’ve written about him several times previously.
Today was the run-off election between Bolsonaro and a leftist opponent, and the the results are in:
Far-right lawmaker Jair Bolsonaro won Brazil’s presidential election on Sunday, riding a wave of frustration over corruption and crime that brought a dramatic swing to the right in the world’s fourth-largest democracy.
With 94 percent of ballots counted, Bolsonaro had 56 percent of the votes in the run-off election against left-wing hopeful Fernando Haddad of the Workers Party (PT), who had 44 percent, according to the electoral authority TSE.
“We cannot continue flirting with communism … We are going to change the destiny of Brazil,” Bolsonaro said in an acceptance address in which he vowed to carry out his campaign promises to stamp out corruption after years of leftist rule.
The former army captain’s rise has been propelled by rejection of the leftist PT that ran Brazil for 13 of the last 15 years and was ousted two years ago in the midst of a deep recession and political graft scandal.
Thousands of Bolsonaro supporters cheered and set off fireworks outside his home in Rio de Janeiro’s Barra de Tijuca beachfront neighborhood as his victory was announced. In Brazil’s commercial capital of Sao Paulo, Bolsonaro’s win was greeted with fireworks and the honking of car horns.
“Brazil is partying. Brazil’s good people are celebrating,” said Carmen Flores, local president of Bolsonaro’s PSL party.
I wish them luck. Bolsonaro, who was severely wounded early September in an assassination attempt, is a controversial figure, to say the least.
Brazilians were more than willing to roll the dice, however. They’ve had enough of leftists being in charge.
One of the very greatest dancers you’ve probably never heard about
I’m puzzled by the near-obscurity into which Fernando Bujones has fallen.
Barishnikov and Nureyev are household words, even for a lot of people who know nothing else about ballet. Likewise, Nijinsky, who danced a hundred years ago.
But Bujones, one of the greatest male dancers of all time, and probably the greatest American male dancer ever? Crickets, relatively speaking.
I saw Bujones dance in person many many times. Bujones had the misfortune to die young, at the age of 50 in 2005, but that was after he had had a full dance career. So his relative obscurity is somewhat puzzling.
There are surprisingly few films/videos of Bujones, although he danced during the 70s through the 90s. His career (which began in his teen years; he was a prodigy who was offered a job at the age of 14 by Balanchine) also coincided with that of Barishnikov, who defected to the West around the same time Bujones won the Gold Medal at Varna in 1974. Barishnikov caught the attention of the public while Bujones never really did.
Bujones was born in Cuba but came to this country at a very young age. He had many sterling qualities as a dancer, but I think the most important was his tremendous ballon, the definition of which is an effect that makes it “seem as though a dancer effortlessly becomes airborne, floats in the air, and lands softly.” Neat trick, eh? And try doing it over and over, while maintaining a perfect line, pointed feet, and not seeming to be making a whole lot of effort or to breathe all that heavily?
Sadly, many of the videos of Bujones are blurry. But I offer you a few that show just a glimpse of the gifts I’m talking about. Here he is as James, the hero (or perhaps anti-hero) of one of the oldest ballets in existence, “La Sylphide.” He has the challenge here of dancing in a kilt (in this case, you may be relieved to hear, with underwear). I think this short clip is a great example of the extraordinary quality of Bujones’ ballon:
I said that dancers have to look as though they’re not exhausted. But in this next clip from the finale of “Giselle,” Bujones has to achieve the next trick of seeming both energetic and exhausted, sequentially and even simultaneously. The plot involves the eponymous heroine Giselle’s betrayal in the first act by Prince Albrecht, played here by Bujones. This is the second act, in which he goes to her grave (she has died of a broken heart at the end of Act I) and he is set upon by Wilis, spirits of women who are determined to dance him to his death. But Giselle herself has a love that transcends the grave and the betrayal, and she is set on saving him from his fate.
In this excerpt Albrecht has already been under the spell of the Wilis and is forced to dance, against his will, and is both spellbound and exhausted. At the very beginning of the segment I’ve cued up, there is a series of entrechats (the step where he jumps vertically, with beats) that is absolutely phenomenal. A sequence like that has the effect of turning one’s legs and feet into the equivalent of lead weights. (By the way, looking at videos of Barishnikov doing the same ballet, he does a different type of step that’s not quite as exhausting, although I can’t remember which is the original choreography, Bujones’ version or Barishnikov’s). Giselle appears at around 1:20; before that we just see the Wilis, commanding him to dance till he dies:
Here’s my question: why hadn’t pipe-bomb suspect Cesar Sayoc served any prison time?
Sayoc now faces up to 58 years in prison for the pipe bomb (or pipe bomb hoaxes) recently sent to various political figures on the left.
But my question is: why was a guy with a rap sheet a mile long not only at large until yesterday, but with a history of never having served any time in prison?:
Sayoc has been arrested multiple times previously, according to the FDLE, including for a “threat to bomb” in 2002. Sayoc pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a year of probation. Subsequent arrests were related to fraud, possession of a controlled substance, battery and grand theft in the third degree, and more. Based on FDLE records, Soyac appears not to have served any jail time in Florida, but was placed on probation in three separate instances.
I wrote about this yesterday as well, quoting an article that listed the following:
Sayoc has been arrested several times in Broward County, Florida, dating back to 1991, court records show. His most recent arrest in Broward was in 2014. In 2002, he was charged with making a bomb threat in Dade County, Florida. He was sentenced to one year of probation. Prosecutors agreed to withhold adjudication of the felony charge, meaning it was dismissed after he completed the probation in 2003.
In 1991, Sayoc was charged with third-degree grand theft, a felony. He pleaded guilty that same year and was sentenced to two years of probation. In 1994, his mother sought a domestic violence injunction against Sayoc, court records show.
Sayoc was arrested on drug charges in 2004. He was accused of possession and sale of steroids, along with possession of a controlled substance without a prescription, tampering with evidence, filing fraudulent tax returns, criminal use of personal ID info and possession or unlawful issue of a driver’s license. He pleaded guilty that same year and was sentenced to 18 months of probation.
In 2013, Sayoc was charged with battery and third-degree grand theft, a felony. He pleaded guilty in 2014 and was sentenced to probation. In 2009, Sayoc was charged with operating without a valid license, not having insurance and not having a tag light and was fined after pleading guilty to the misdemeanor charges. In 2014, Sayoc was arrested on a petit theft charge and violation of probation. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail.
He apparently never served even that 30-day sentence.
I’m neither a police officer nor a judge, and I don’t have enough information to say how usual or unusual this would be, but I certainly hope it’s unusual for someone that dangerous to be walking around, free as the proverbial bird.
Theories abound. One is that it has to do with lenient sentencing in the Florida court system involved. He also has been reported in various outlets as having a history of mental illness (apparently untreated) and/or diminished intellectual capacity, but I’m not at all sure that those reports are reliable. Certainly, if he intended his bombs to be functional, the way he actually built them was a testament to a certain amount of diminished intellectual capacity.
My question remains unanswered as yet, so far as I know.
8 reported dead in shooting at Pittsburgh synagogue
A breaking story, and very bad news:
At least eight people were killed and multiple others injured in a shooting Saturday morning at a synagogue in a Pittsburgh neighborhood known for its Jewish population, CBS Pittsburgh/KDKA reports.
The suspected shooter was identified as Robert Bowers, 48, law enforcement sources told CBS News and KDKA. Bowers surrendered and was taken into custody.
Bowers burst into the Tree of Life synagogue and indiscriminately fired in the building while shouting, “All Jews must die,” police sources told KDKA. Three officers were shot during the incident, officials said. The extent of their injuries are unclear.
Reports are that the synagogue was full of people.
The shooter? The thing about anti-Semitism is that there are so many candidates: extremist Muslims, leftists of various kinds, Farrakahnners, neo-Nazis, and probably a few I haven’t thought to list—such as, I suppose, the garden-variety non-political lunatic.
I assume the MSM will find a way to pin it on Trump, if only for the fact that there are some bad people with guns in the United States.
One thing I don’t understand, however, is why at least one person in this large congregation wasn’t armed, and/or why there wasn’t a guard of some sort. If it has been a smaller group I might understand, but this was apparently a flourishing congregation. Maybe there was such a person, and it just hasn’t been reported. Or maybe the person didn’t get the opportunity to fire; being armed doesn’t mean you have an opportunity to take a gunman out. Even four of the police who came to the scene were apparently injured by the shooter’s fire.
And yes, I would imagine that a population of Jews in Pittsburgh would be a bit less likely than the average group to be packing heat. But it’s not as though there aren’t Jews who are very interested in self-defense and in preserving the Second Amendment.
It was the longest game in World Series history last night…
…by far.
And it felt even longer.
Eighteen innings. Seven hours and twenty minutes. And strange:
Maybe the best way to sum up the bizarre night at Dodger Stadium: Of the 50 players on both rosters, only four didn’t get into the game: Chris Sale and Drew Pomeranz for the Red Sox and Rich Hill and Hyun-Jin Ryu for the Dodgers. The 46 players used on both teams was a record for any postseason game. The Red Sox burned through a record-tying nine pitchers, including Eovaldi, the projected Game 4 starter who pitched the final six-plus innings — leaving the Red Sox without a starter for Game 4 until manager Alex Cora announces one Saturday afternoon.
It felt more like a demolition derby than a baseball game.
And oh yeah, the Dodgers won.
What hath #MeToo wrought?
During the recent accusations by Christine Blasey Ford against Kavanaugh, we heard a lot—even from the right—about how “we have to hear her story” whether there is evidence to back it up or not.
But you know what? I don’t want to “hear her story” (or his, if it’s a male accuser) except in one or all of these forums: a therapist’s office, a work of fiction without the use of real names, and/or a courtroom. Those are the only forums in which it would be appropriate to hear them, and most such accusations would never get to the latter forum—the courtroom—because of the lack of evidence other than the accuser’s unadorned say-so.
However, feminism and the #MeToo movement has enshrined the idea of listening to women and believing them all. That’s garbage, because that is not the way to determine whether a story is true and to protect the accused. But #MeToo cares not about the accused.
It occurs to me—and certainly not for the first time—that the Weinstein hit that originally got the #MeToo ball really rolling was a calculated move to get to Trump. It hasn’t worked in that particular regard (at least so far), but it did weaponize (purposely) the use of sexual allegations as a political tool. That had already been done many times, particularly against the right (as Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain could tell you), but #MeToo has gone even further in the direction of automatic belief in an accuser showing the right combination of pain and/or anger.
What is needed is belief on the part of the public and our elected officials that the unsupported word of a person is not enough to convince us of its truth. That must be a deeply-held conviction on the part of the vast majority of people in this country and elected officials and judges of both parties. Emotions must not rule in these cases, and not just in the courtroom. A person’s reputation should not be able to be destroyed by an unsupported story. Period.
But we as a society have lost that conviction. It didn’t just start with #MeToo, by any means. It’s been going on for a long time. The foundations of this country depend on it, but they also depend on a very aware public, educated in the background of why those protections were put in place. We have lost that, too, as a result of many years of leftist control of education and media. It is not an accident. And it is not just the loss of religion, although that factors into it as well.
Any accuser’s affect, while of interest, is mostly irrelevant to whether she or he is telling the truth. All affect can tell you is whether the person is good at acting or whether the person deeply believes that he or she is telling the truth. It can be either one, and a person can therefore be emotionally convincing without actually being a truthteller.
That’s the problem with this entire charade. In a courtroom, a witness’s affect (be it accuser, defender, or witness in another role) is part of the way to evaluate truth or falsehood. But in a trial it’s a much smaller part than in a situation such as the Kavanaugh hearing or the accusations against other public personalities and/or politicians, because of the need for corroborating evidence and the availability of cross-examination and all the rest of the process and rules of a trial.
People often mock that process or distrust it or point out that it can be unfair, and trials certainly don’t always end up with the right verdict IMHO. But the process involved is the best we can figure out, and it is a thousand times better than a trial in the court of public opinion and the MSM.
Overactive spam filter?
Lately my spam filter seems to have occasionally been classifying perfectly normal comments from regular commenters as spam, for no apparent reason. It doesn’t happen often, but it’s been happening slightly more than usual. I try to catch it, but I don’t always succeed.
So if you have a comment that doesn’t appear after you post it, please let me know so I can rescue it.
Reports on the pipe bomb suspect so far
I said in the previous post that we don’t know much yet about the pipe bomber or his motives, although we may learn more in a press conference that’s supposed to happen later today. But till then, we have this information, which may or may not be true, or may be partly true (note, by the way, the Trump-tie-in headline that characterizes all the targets of the bombs as “Trump critics”):
The suspect in the bombs sent to opponents of President Trump was identified as Cesar Sayoc Jr., 56, of Aventura…
A registered Republican, Sayoc has been arrested at least 10 times according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, once in 2002 for making a bomb threat and most recently in 2015 for a probation violation.
That registration was current as of Sept. 30, 2018, according to state voter files.
State corporation filings show him as an owner or manager of two businesses, Native American Catering and Vending and Ver Tech AG.
So if this information is correct we have a very typical “petty criminal person who’s been unbalanced and making trouble for a long long time”—way before Trump’s presidency, by the way, and in ways that have little to do with Trump. Also, Sayoc’s many previous run-ins with the law include a bomb threat as early as 2002.
Sayoc’s name indicates some sort of possible foreign origins, and here it says that Sayoc has claimed that “his grandfather, Col. Baltazar Zook Sayoc, was a martial arts practitioner who developed his own style of fighting, Sayoc Kali. Sayoc says that style was used to fight the Communist Party of the Philippines.”
So we learn that apparently Sayoc’s origins are in the Philipines. The site also says that he claims to have gone to college in the US, but there is no information there about whether he was born in the US—or, if not, at what point he arrived here and under what program.
More about that 2002 threat and other assorted offenses:
Sayoc has been arrested several times in Broward County, Florida, dating back to 1991, court records show. His most recent arrest in Broward was in 2014. In 2002, he was charged with making a bomb threat in Dade County, Florida. He was sentenced to one year of probation. Prosecutors agreed to withhold adjudication of the felony charge, meaning it was dismissed after he completed the probation in 2003.
In 1991, Sayoc was charged with third-degree grand theft, a felony. He pleaded guilty that same year and was sentenced to two years of probation. In 1994, his mother sought a domestic violence injunction against Sayoc, court records show.
Sayoc was arrested on drug charges in 2004. He was accused of possession and sale of steroids, along with possession of a controlled substance without a prescription, tampering with evidence, filing fraudulent tax returns, criminal use of personal ID info and possession or unlawful issue of a driver’s license. He pleaded guilty that same year and was sentenced to 18 months of probation.
In 2013, Sayoc was charged with battery and third-degree grand theft, a felony. He pleaded guilty in 2014 and was sentenced to probation. In 2009, Sayoc was charged with operating without a valid license, not having insurance and not having a tag light and was fined after pleading guilty to the misdemeanor charges. In 2014, Sayoc was arrested on a petit theft charge and violation of probation. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail.
Sayoc filed for bankruptcy in 2012 and was not married at the time. He was working as a store manager at a supermarket in Hollywood, Florida, at the time. He was also arrested on theft charges in Dade and Palm Beach counties in 1992 and 2015.
That’s quite a history. This guy seems to have been trouble in so many ways that it’s hard to count them. And yet note that, until now, Sayoc has only spent 30 days in jail—at least, that’s what his sentence was in 2014; we can’t be sure he actually served it.
“Known wolf” indeed.
And yet mark my words: if all of this pans out as being true, Sayoc will be held up by the left as the quintessential and typical Trump supporter, as well as being a person who was “triggered” into violent action by Trump.
Maybe Trump was even the cause of Sayoc’s bomb threat in 2002—after all, Trump’s been in the public eye for a long time.
Why would anyone send fake bombs to political targets?
In about two hours, there apparently will be a press conference to discuss the Florida man who has been apprehended in connection with the pipe “bomb” mail case, in which fake bombs were sent to various political targets on the Democratic side.
No doubt we’ll know more in a few hours. But that doesn’t mean we’ll know all that much. We may learn something about his politics, although if recent cases of political perps are an example, much of what we learn may not be true and will later need to be corrected. We may learn more about his mental state and motives, with that same caveat.
Whatever we learn, I think it’s safe to bet that the MSM and the left will blame Donald Trump.
But before that press conference occurs (and I may be away from my computer by the time it does), I’d like to advance a few reasons why a person might send fake bombs through the mail at political targets.
(1) The person is politically opposed to the recipients of the packages, but is so incompetent that he doesn’t even know the rudiments of bomb-building and unable to look them up and execute them. He constructs a cartoon bomb that conforms to his idea of a bomb, and assumes it will explode.
(2) The person is politically opposed to the recipients of the packages, but is merely trying to scare them and not to hurt them.
(3) The person is trying to test the system to see whether packages with what look like bombs can get through to their supposed targets. The goal might be to point out flaws in the system.
(4) The person is mentally unbalanced and wants notoriety.
(5) The person is politically allied with his targets and wants to create a situation in which there is no actual danger to them but there is the appearance and danger that will be blamed on the opposition and will hurt them politically. This is the “false flag” scenario.
(6) The person is merely trying to wreak havoc and confusion (for example, this was the supposed motive for the actions of Russia during out 2016 election).
These five possibilities are not mutually exclusive. Number 4, for example, can coexist with any of them. And although I’ve used the singular “person” and the male “he,” it’s possible that it could be “people” and that a woman or women could be involved. And perhaps I’ve left out some possibilities without realizing it.
In a little while we might learn more.
[NOTE: See also this, based on preliminary information about the Florida suspect.]
Boehner: evolving on grass
From John Boehner [emphasis mine]:
Boehner predicted that national cannabis legalization is going to happen in less than five years.
“That sound bite about being ‘unalterably opposed’ to cannabis is almost a decade old. Back then, like a lot of folks, I was getting faulty information,” Boehner said of his 2011 remark during today’s American Cannabis Summit online seminar organized by the National Institute for Cannabis Investors.
“I realized I was wrong and, let me tell you, I’ve been having more and more meetings with my friends and colleagues on the Hill about this – some of the most conservative politicians around and their views are evolving on cannabis, too, just like the American people,” he added.
I have a theory. It’s a little bit tongue-in-cheek but also somewhat serious. You know how incompetent and strange so many things have gotten? Whether it be rude customer service, or obscure and confusing instructions on a gadget you buy, or things that immediately break down, or those 2/3 of Americans who can’t name the three branches of the US federal government, it often seems like “Idiocracy” wasn’t just a movie. My theory is that most of America has now smoked grass at one point or another, and a surprising number of people smoke it regularly, including old Boomers (there are no young Boomers anymore, are there?) like Boehner.
Makes them mellow. Ultimately, though, it fries a lot of brains, particularly developing ones, but brains of all ages.
Grammar’s a funny thing. I assume that, when Boehner said that conservatives’ and the American people’s “views are evolving on cannabis,” he actually meant that their views on cannabis are evolving. But that’s not what he said.
Grammar’s another thing that’s fallen by the wayside. Pity.
And just for fun, here’s the trailer from the most un-PC—and one of the funniest—movies in the world:
It’s become more dangerous for gay people in Western Europe
As soon as I saw the headline—“Violence Against Gays on the Rise in Europe”—I figured I could guess why that might be occurring.
What group is also “on the rise” in Europe, that has a problem with gay people? Yes, it’s Muslims, who are apparently responsible for most of these attacks on gay people in Western Europe, although the media there doesn’t like to say so:
I looked at several news stories (in several languages) about these incidents – and about that October 22 rally. None of them included the words Muslim or Islam, even though the Religion of Peace is, to put it mildly, a major part of the problem – not just in Paris, of course, but all over Western Europe. Everybody knows this, even though virtually nobody feels comfortable talking about it. In most media reports of such incidents, indeed, the Islamic factor can only be discerned through exceedingly careful reading.
Western Europe is proud of its accepting attitude towards gay people, and until this point most of its leaders have been proud of their welcome to Muslims from all over the world. But the two values cannot co-exist very well at all. The author of the linked piece writes about his own experience:
Even as the growing Muslim population in Dutch cities has driven gays into the provinces and reduced Amsterdam’s gay scene to a shadow of its former self, Dutch gay activists have backed off entirely from truth-telling about this topic, not only insisting that Muslims pose no threat to gays but anathematizing the likes of Geert Wilders for daring to suggest otherwise.
…[L]iving in the Netherlands and Norway for the past twenty years, my partner and I, between the two of us, have experienced five encounters with Muslims that I think it’s fair to call assaults. (Two involved knives; two involved attempted beatings; I don’t include nasty sidewalk shoving, spitting, and name-calling.) I’ve lost track of the number of friends and acquaintances in Western Europe who’ve been gay-bashed by Muslims; the number of gay people I know who have been killed by Muslims in Western Europe stands, so far, at one. (That murder, a knifing, occurred in the victim’s office in the center of Oslo.)
Gay people and Jews are the canaries in the European mine. Both groups have seen their safety (and their liberty to act as they wish while in public) decline as the Muslim immigrant population has increased there. To a certain extent, the same is true for women, whose Western freedoms of mobility and dress face the increased risk of violence (especially sexual violence) as well, also mostly at the hands of the Muslims of Western Europe (particularly the recent arrivals [see *NOTE below]).
It is difficult to acknowledge these truths without sounding bigoted. And it is definitely true that the vast majority of European Muslims are not beating gay people up or raping women. But it also must be acknowledged that the vast majority of people who are doing just that are Muslim immigrants, and that so far Western Europe has seemed powerless and/or unwilling to do much about it.
[*NOTE: I tried to find some statistics on whether it’s just the recent arrivals from Muslim countries who participate in the violence, or whether their European-born and/or raised offspring are heavily involved as well. I had difficulty finding any information on that in the short time I had to research this post, but the linked article points out that Bulgaria has a lot of Muslims who’ve been living there for generations, and the rates of sexual violence in Bulgaria are low. I would guess that rates may also have something to do with which Muslim countries furnish the immigrants, because there may be differences between Muslim countries on that score.]