↓
 

The New Neo

A blog about political change, among other things

  • Home
  • Bio
  • Email
Home » Page 808 << 1 2 … 806 807 808 809 810 … 1,884 1,885 >>

Post navigation

← Previous Post
Next Post→

The world’s most positive voice teacher

The New Neo Posted on September 15, 2018 by neoSeptember 15, 2018

I love this guy. Love, love, love.

I once took about eight voice lessons before I quit in despair, and maybe if he’d been my voice teacher I would have improved rather than gotten worse over the course of my study.

Talk about accentuating the positive! This guy doesn’t seem phony about it at all, either. And his message isn’t just empty “everyone should get a medal” feel-good praise. It’s that just about anyone can learn to sing with the right instruction, and that insults don’t help.

Here’s my favorite segment of the video:

My ex-husband was a terrible singer for much of his life, and had been told as much as a small boy. He was often off-key, for example, and he knew it. He only would sing when totally fooling around, and not in his real voice. But a few years ago I caught him singing for real, just a few notes, and I noticed something I’d never noticed before: his singing voice had quite a beautiful tone and timbre. Really really pleasant, strong and resonant.

I was stunned. It occurred to me that the only thing he needed was a little training to help him stay on key—and apparently, practicing singing would have helped with that, because one of the reasons he ordinarily didn’t sing was that he could hear that he wasn’t on key and he would stop before he got far at all. It turns out that that meant he wasn’t the least bit tone-deaf, and all he needed was to keep singing with a helpful teacher.

In fact, as I reflected on it, my ex had always been a fabulous whistler, and completely on key when he whistled. So it made sense that he’d be able to learn to sing on key once he practiced enough with his real voice. But despite my encouragement, he backed off from trying to learn.

Anyway, I’d love to meet some teacher like the guy in the video and give it a go myself.

Posted in Me, myself, and I, Music | 20 Replies

Will John Kerry ever find himself in trouble for his foreign meddling?

The New Neo Posted on September 15, 2018 by neoSeptember 15, 2018

I doubt it, actually.

Here’s Michael Rubin at the Washington Examiner on the subject:

Kerry is personally invested in the Iran nuclear deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA), from which President Trump walked away. The wisdom of Trump’s action is open to debate, but what is not is this: Trump won the 2016 election. He made clear during his campaign that he opposed the JCPOA, just like Obama made clear during his campaign that he supported outreach to Iran. There was no deception on either man’s part. And Trump’s decision to walk away from the JCPOA is not illegal. Julie Frifield, assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs under Kerry, acknowledged the JCPOA was unsigned and “neither a treaty nor an executive agreement.” In other words, it had the same status as the Bush-era agreements with the Czech Republic and Poland for anti-missile defenses which Obama voided when he came to office.

There has been a temptation among polemicists on both the Right and Left to criminalize the policy debate, and this is unfortunate. But that does not mean anyone should get a free pass for what appears to be criminal activity. If Kerry wants to criticize Trump for walking away from the JCPOA, he is free to do so. And if he wants to plot and plan with Zarif, he can register as a foreign agent on behalf of Iran. But he should not remain above the law. To allow him to do so sets a horrible precedent for any future administration, for American democracy, and for coherence of U.S. policy. It is time both Kerry and the Justice Department understood that.

Michael Rubin was born in 1971. So perhaps he can be forgiven for not mentioning that this action of Kerry’s doesn’t set any precedent. Kerry set the precedent already, back in 1970 and 1971.

One of the many things that fuels Kerry’s arrogance is the idea that he can do this sort of thing and (at least in his own mind) be regarded as a hero.

I must say that John Kerry is one of the people in the Democratic Party I detested back when I was a Democrat. I have never seen a single reason to change that opinion of Kerry in all the years he’s been in public life.

ADDENDUM: Kerry seems to think the whole thing is good for some yuks, plus a book plug.

Mr. President, you should be more worried about Paul Manafort meeting with Robert Mueller than me meeting with Iran's FM. But if you want to learn something about the nuclear agreement that made the world safer, buy my new book, Every Day Is Extra: https://t.co/DKjc33Kvvu https://t.co/cesltkt0zW

— John Kerry (@JohnKerry) September 14, 2018

Posted in People of interest, War and Peace | 18 Replies

The new trend: socialism with a pretty face

The New Neo Posted on September 15, 2018 by neoSeptember 15, 2018

Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez was the first, but not the last: a very young, female, attractive socialist ousting an incumbent Democrat in the primaries. And these nominations are more than nominations, because in the particular deep-blue districts in which these women are running, winning the nomination in the Democratic Party is tantamount to winning the election. Therefore, Ocasio-Cortez is almost certain to be headed for the US Congress.

Ocasio-Cortez’s ignorance of certain basic things economic has been rather thoroughly covered in the news (see this to take just one example). But Julia Salazar—who won a nomination for NY state senate—may represent an even more curious case than Ocasio-Cortez. Simply put, Salazar isn’t just an attractive young socialist, but she appears to have misrepresented much of her personal history, and the voters knew that before they gave her the primary victory. They must have liked her narrative anyway:

Salazar described herself as an “immigrant from Colombia” in interviews…and in campaign speeches and literature…[then] she explained that she was born in Miami at a time when her parents were living part of the time in Colombia, and made clear that she was an American citizen.

Salazar has described herself as Jewish, and said her father was a Colombian Sephardic Jew descended from the medieval community that was expelled from Spain, and that she started to explore Judaism in college. Rosen said these claims could not be verified, and [Salazar’s] brother said their father “never mentioned” any Sephardic heritage to him; Salazar’s mother said that, although the family was Catholic on both sides, Julia’s father’s family had a Sephardic background, saying “that’s where her interest stems from. This is not something that was invented for the purposes of this campaign.” Salazar said Rosen was engaging in “race science” and said he had “threatened to publish her mother’s personal information if she didn’t cooperate.” In college, she studied Jewish texts and observed kosher food rules, and was involved with the Jewish organization Hillel.

Salazar has also described her family and upbringing as “poor” and “working class”. Her brother said their family was “upper-middle class” while Salazar’s mother said the family was “a little bit of both worlds”; Salazar had a trust fund of approximately $685,000 in her name, left by her father.

But that’s not all. There’s also a convoluted story of accusation and counter-accusation involving ballplayer Keith Hernandez. Too complicated to go into here, but this is the NY Times’ take on the subject, and this is the NY Post’s, which makes a pretty convincing case that Salazar was guilty of attempted identity theft, although the evidence wasn’t strong enough for a trial and it remains unclear.

Salazar will be running unopposed by any Republican; that’s how deep blue the district is. Here’s a photo of Salazar compared to a photo of her 68-year-old opponent, who’s been in office as the representative of his Brooklyn district for about 15 years:

Would either Ocasio-Cortez or Salazar have won their respective primary races had they not been beautiful young women? I have no way of knowing, but I think it sure didn’t hurt. Then again, Bernie Sanders—not young, not beautiful, not even a woman—did pretty darn well. So perhaps it’s just that socialist magic.

Posted in People of interest, Politics | 16 Replies

Why everyone should be angry at what Feinstein did re Kavanaugh, and why everyone is not

The New Neo Posted on September 15, 2018 by neoSeptember 16, 2018

There are many things wrong with the accusation against Brett Kavanaugh that Diane Feinstein publicized recently. The vagueness of the charges, their antiquity, and the suspect timing, to name a few.

But the one I want to focus on now is the anonymity of the accuser,

There is a reason why one of the pillars of our legal system is that the accused—in a court of law—is given the right to face his or her accuser. This is true not just in sexual crimes but in others as well, and it’s even true when a child is the purported victim, although sometimes there are special ways in which children are protected from having to face their alleged perpetrators.

Anyone who bears legal witness against someone is identified and subject to cross-examination and the other tools in the lawyers’ kit. The purpose is not to be mean to victims, although the process can indeed be very stressful. The purpose is to protect the rights of the accused, which is considered (or used to be considered) one of the most important principles of American law.

I’m old enough to remember when even rape victims in cases that went to trial had their names published in the newspapers, which is a different but related issue. Then, in the 1970s, the movement to pass rape shield laws came to fruition with the passage of a host of such laws by the 1980s. These laws protected alleged rape victims in trials from having their own sexual history dragged out and used against them except in limited circumstances.

However, when these laws tried to make it a violation for newspapers to publish the names of victims, they ran afoul of the courts who mostly considered such laws unconstitutional. However, to this day, newspapers are reluctant to publish such information, as a courtesy, although they sometimes do. Of course, the scandal sheets and internet sites are not so reluctant, if they can manage to find out the information.

But all of that is about legal proceedings and rapes or sexual assaults that meet the criteria for court proceedings. The accusations against Kavanaugh very clearly do not. So why is Feinstein protecting the accuser’s identity?

Because PC practice now dictates it, as a mark of great sensitivity. That’s pernicious, because it elevates anonymous gossip to the status of news. Not only is the accused unable to confront the accuser, but the public is unable to evaluate a single thing connected with the incident. That leaves the space wide open for people to project whatever they wish onto the story, and for politics to rush in to fill the gap.

That’s Feinstein’s intent, of course. And everyone—right or left, man or woman, Democrat or Republican—should be calling her out for it. But of course they are not.

But this isn’t just a case of someone publicizing this story. This is the case of a United States senator of great seniority (in every sense of the word) using anonymous gossip as character assassination for political purposes.

Or trying to use it; we’ll see if it has any effect. So far it doesn’t seem to have derailed anything. But as I wrote yesterday, that’s probably not her intent. Her intent was to delay the hearings if possible (that doesn’t seem to be happening), or at the very least to taint Kavanaugh’s reputation forever and to rally Democrats to even greater fury for the 2018 elections.

But there’s even more behind it. It’s a warning to any future appointee of Trump’s, just as the Manafort and Cohen and Flynn prosecutions are warnings to anyone who might associate with him in business or government: beware!! It’s scorched earth, and we will use every method we can think of to destroy you.

Posted in Law, Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex, Politics | 41 Replies

This one speaks for itself

The New Neo Posted on September 14, 2018 by neoSeptember 14, 2018

Why does it take for a NY teacher to lose her teaching license?

Not this, apparently:

In August, Dori Myers, 30, who was arrested in January 2018, pleaded guilty to a criminal sex act for performing oral sex on the [14-year-old male] student in November 2017 at the New School for Leadership and the Arts in Kingsbridge where she taught social studies…

The school then fired her.

On Wednesday, the court labeled her a Level 1 sex offender, but the plea agreement that was struck jettisoned prosecutors’ request for a minimum of two years in prison.

As part of her plea agreement, Myers also got to keep her teaching certificate. Lucian Chalfen, a spokesman for the state Office of Court Administration, stated, “Each case is decided on its own merits. Whatever the negotiated plea entailed, all parties agreed to it.”

This was the argument used to ask that she keep her license:

Defense lawyer Andrew Stoll said Myers will be fired by the city Department of Education “and won’t be working for them anymore,” but asked the judge not to make her give up her license, according to a court transcript obtained by The Post.

“There is a possibility that she could teach adults now or in the future and we want to preserve that possibility,” Stoll said. “She still is a talented teacher and has those skills, and I don’t see any reason to destroy her ability to make a living and to contribute to society in a positive way.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that a license is a license is a license. I don’t think that New York issues “adults only” teaching licenses, nor is it alleged that Myers has one.

And there are ways other than teaching for her to earn a living and “contribute to society in a positive way.” As far as I’m concerned, she’s clearly forfeited her right to teach.

Posted in Law, Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex | 21 Replies

Allan Dershowitz continues being fair

The New Neo Posted on September 14, 2018 by neoSeptember 14, 2018

Fairness is so unusual these days, especially among Democrats (which Dershowitz still is), that it is worthy of special note. I’ve become more and more respectful of Dershowitz in recent years for his devotion to principles over party, as in his latest efforts at correcting falsehoods:

Before this claim [that Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator with Cohen, a claim that has been stated by many Democrats] is repeated so often that people assume it is true, let me state categorically that Trump is not an unindicted co-conspirator and that it is wrong to characterize him as such. An unindicted co-conspirator is someone against whom a grand jury has found probable cause, on the basis of evidence, that he or she is guilty of being a co-conspirator in a crime. But as far as we know there has been no grand jury indictment in this case, because Cohen waived the grand jury and pleaded guilty to “an information” prepared by a prosecutor, not a grand jury…

Unlike President Richard Nixon, who had been named an unindicted co-conspirator in an indictment handed down by a grand jury, Trump has not been accused by a grand jury indictment of anything thus far. Cohen’s guilty plea and allocution cannot turn the president into an unindicted co-conspirator. Only a grand jury can.

The following in particular is one of the reasons I admire Dershowitz—his consistency:

When President Nixon was named “unindicted co-conspirator” in 1974, I yelled foul, even though I voted against Nixon and was critical of most of his policies. I thought it was unfair to designate the president as an unindicted co-conspirator since a person in that status has no right to defend himself, because he is never brought to trial. I urged the ACLU, on whose board I then served, to challenge this misuse of the grand jury and to protect our political enemy’s civil liberties.

So Dershowitz isn’t some recent convert to defending the rights of accused presidents, he’s been doing this for at least 44 years. It’s somewhat of a mystery why Dershowitz is still a Democrat, but I believe it has something to do with what Zell Miller once likened to a birthmark—an identity that for some people is so deep that it would take something truly cataclysmic to change it.

Dershowitz adds:

In the rush to weaponize the law against a president they despise, too many Democrats and liberals are becoming incautious about improperly throwing around the loaded accusation of unindicted coconspirator against Trump. Unless and until Trump is named or identified in a grand jury indictment as an unindicted coconspirator, he should not be so characterized.

Are becoming incautious? That’s where Dershowitz needs to take a good long look at his own party and recognize that they’re not just becoming anything; they’ve been this way for a long time.

And “incautious” is way too mild a word for it. The “unindicted co-conspirator” accusation is a premeditated misstatement with malice aforethought. Some ignorant people may indeed play along with it, but many of those who perpetrate it know full well what they’re doing.

Dershowitz is foolish if he thinks they will listen to him. He’s a pariah at this point for stating the truth and defending people they consider the enemy.

Posted in Law, Liberals and conservatives; left and right, People of interest, Trump | 14 Replies

Dianne Feinstein accuses Brett Kavanaugh of having f***ed a pig in high school

The New Neo Posted on September 14, 2018 by neoSeptember 14, 2018

[See UPDATE below]

Did you know that somebody told somebody who told Dianne Feinstein something about something really bad or at least sort of bad that happened to somebody somewhere at the hands of Brett Kavanaugh sometime a long time ago?:

“I have received information from an individual concerning the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court,” Feinstein said in her surprise statement. “That individual strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further, and I have honored that decision. I have, however, referred the matter to federal investigative authorities.”…

According to a report by The Intercept, the letter was relayed to lawmakers by an individual affiliated with Stanford University and concerns an incident involving the 53-year-old Kavanaugh and a woman while they were in high school. According to two officials who spoke anonymously with the New York Times, the incident involved possible sexual misconduct between Kavanaugh and the woman…

Two sources familiar with the matter tell Fox News that Feinstein has had possession of the letter regarding Kavanaugh since July. Feinstein met privately with Kavanaugh on August 20 and also questioned him repeatedly in open and closed session during the Judiciary Committee hearings on his nomination last week. There is no indication that the matter came up in either the private meeting or the closed committee session.

The FBI has declined to investigate.

Feinstein’s move is the old LBJ rumor ploy (a perhaps apocryphal story about LBJ), minus the specificity:

Every hack in the business has used it in times of trouble, and it has even been elevated to the level of political mythology in a story about one of Lyndon Johnson’s early campaigns in Texas. The race was close and Johnson was getting worried. Finally he told his campaign manager to start a massive rumor campaign about his opponent’s life-long habit of enjoying carnal knowledge of his own barnyard sows.

“Christ, we can’t get away with calling him a pig-fucker,” the campaign manager protested. “Nobody’s going to believe a thing like that.

“I know,” Johnson replied. “But let’s make the sonofabitch deny it.”

By the way, for those who think Trump is coarse, they should study LBJ. He was protected by the press for the most part, though. We didn’t learn about most of his salty sayings till much much later.

I don’t know whether this one really happened, but if so it’s a doozy:

President Lyndon B. Johnson was rather blunt when confronted by the Greek ambassador, who opposed a plan to split the small island of Cyprus between Greece and Turkey.

“Fuck your parliament and fuck your constitution,” said the 36th president of the United States. “Cyprus is a flea. Greece is a flea. If these two fellow continue itching the elephant, they just might get whacked by the elephant’s trunk.”

If Feinstein’s allegation isn’t LBJesque, it’s certainly Kafkaesque.

At least when the late Senator Ted Kennedy was borking Bork, he made some actual accusations (although absurd ones) in a public speech.

UPDATE 12:07 PM:

I just noticed that Ronan Farrow claims to have some of the details of the allegation:

The allegation dates back to the early nineteen-eighties, when Kavanaugh was a high-school student at Georgetown Preparatory School, in Bethesda, Maryland, and the woman attended a nearby high school. In the letter, the woman alleged that, during an encounter at a party, Kavanaugh held her down, and that he attempted to force himself on her.

She claimed in the letter that Kavanaugh and a classmate of his, both of whom had been drinking, turned up music that was playing in the room to conceal the sound of her protests, and that Kavanaugh covered her mouth with his hand. She was able to free herself. Although the alleged incident took place decades ago and the three individuals involved were minors, the woman said that the memory had been a source of ongoing distress for her, and that she had sought psychological treatment as a result.

No man is safe from this kind of garbage. Of course, entering public life as a Republican puts a person more at risk.

And no one should be surprised at this sort of thing, because in the past such accusations have worked—not necessarily to block nominations (although it certainly worked to defeat Roy Moore, for example, as well as others), but to taint the person nominated (Clarence Thomas, for example) and offer opportunities for future accusations that the party supporting that person is defending woman-abusers.

I have been consistent in saying that, whoever is the accused, these ancient accusations that are completely unprovable, but also completely impossible to defend oneself against (“make the sonofabitch deny it”) are pernicious and should be ignored and/or condemned. But unfortunately they will continue to occur as long as they are rewarded—and human nature being what it is, they will almost certainly continue to be rewarded.

[NOTE: It occurs to me that someone, somewhere, may read the title of this post and get the idea that I’m calling Kavanaugh’s nameless accuser a pig. No, I’m not. The reference is to the LBJ story, and the commonality between the two is a charge involving sex that cannot be proved or disproved, but is unsavory.]

Posted in Politics | 30 Replies

The power of Google

The New Neo Posted on September 13, 2018 by neoSeptember 13, 2018

A video has emerged that tells us what we already knew—that the heads of Google follow the ethos of the left:

Someone leaked to Breitbart an hour-long video of an “all hands” Google meeting that was held just after the 2016 election. The video features Google’s co-founder, Sergei Brin, its CEO, Sundar Pichai, and numerous other high-ranking “Googlers” speaking in turn about the election’s tragic outcome. It is stunning.

All of the speakers express grief over Donald Trump’s election. All of the speakers assume that every Google employee is a Democrat and is stunned and horrified that Hillary Clinton–the worst and most corrupt presidential candidate in modern history–lost. There is much discussion about what Google can do to reverse the benighted world-wide tide exemplified by Brexit and Trump’s election.

Well, there was at least one Google employee who didn’t get with the program: the leaker. But you can bet that person was a huge exception.

More here

Private monopolies can do whatever they want. I mean, sure it’s illegal to use a dominant market position as leverage to advance another business product — Microsoft was sued for using its dominance in operating systems to try to give its Netscape browser an advantage over competitors — but our well-paid-off “conservative” shills will tell us it’s no problem for an outright monopoly to scheme to use its power to squelch some businesses and competitors and an entire political movement.

The question has never been what political persuasion the Google majority hold, or their willingness to use their clout to act on it. The question is whether Google is a monopoly and whether antitrust legislation can be used to change that. The question is discussed here, here, and here, just to cite a few of the many articles on the subject.

But it’s not just about conventional antitrust laws. It’s about whether Google (and Facebook, and Twitter) can be considered ordinary companies, or whether they are neutral platforms for speech:

So far, in the courts, Google has successfully argued that its decisions about what to rank, the ordering of its rankings, what ads to run, what videos to allow on YouTube and who will see them are all analogous to a newspaper editor’s decisions about what op-eds to run. And since a newspaper editor’s decisions are protected speech under the first amendment, so, Google argues, are its search engine decisions.

That Google compares itself in these cases to a newspaper editor might come as a surprise, given that Google, Facebook, Twitter and others often make the contrary claim to users and governments that they are neutral platforms, mere conduits for information.

Mark Zuckerberg made that claim explicitly when Facebook was under fire from critics who were accusing the platform of suppressing conservative content in its “Trending Topics” news feed. Google still makes that claim on its support page under “search using autocomplete”, disclaiming: “Search predictions aren’t the answers to your search. They’re also not statements by other people or Google about your search terms.”

But disingenuity aside, are these companies’ practices of privileging certain information really analogous to what newspaper editors do, and therefore similarly protected by the first amendment? The answer is no.

Making decisions about what and how information is conveyed does not automatically make one an editor entitled to first amendment protection. That is what the supreme court decided, for example, in Rumsfeld v Forum of Academic and Institutional Rights (Fair), when a group of law schools argued that it could bar military recruiters from recruitment fairs for its students…

…the court [in Packingham v North Carolina] called cyberspace and social media “the modern public square”. If the court means what it says and sticks with the modern-square analogy, then it’s these companies that become vulnerable to first amendment challenges by users.

There are also other analogies to draw with what Google is doing (eg providing users information) that would not entitle it first amendment protection.

Much more at the link.

We also have the release of a movie entitled “The Creepy Line.” It’s about Google:

I found that trailer on YouTube, by the way—which is owned by Google.

Posted in Finance and economics, Law, Liberals and conservatives; left and right, Liberty | 33 Replies

Nazis and socialism: straight from the horses’ mouths

The New Neo Posted on September 13, 2018 by neoSeptember 13, 2018

There’s a long-running argument, online and elsewhere, about how socialist the National Socialists (otherwise known as Nazis, whose full name was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party [*see NOTE below]) were.

The Nazis certainly weren’t conventional socialists, if there can be said to be such a thing. But they were indeed some sort of socialist—as briefly described in this previous post.

Now we have this article at the Federalist, which tackles the question once again and answers that the Nazis were indeed socialists, and certainly on the left side of the political spectrum. Here are some excerpts:

From the moment they enter the political fray, young right-wingers are told, “You own the Nazis.” At best, the left concedes it owns communism. This comforts a little, because even if far higher in body count, communism supposedly rebukes the scourge of racism. But it’s all a lie…

… The right consists of free-market capitalists, who think the individual is the primary political unit, believes in property rights, and are generally distrustful of government by unaccountable agencies and government solutions to social problems. They view family and civil institutions, such as church, as needed checks on state power…

The left believes the opposite. They distrust the excesses and inequality capitalism produces. They give primacy to group rights and identity. They believe factors like race, ethnicity, and sex compose the primary political unit. They don’t believe in strong property rights.

They believe it is the government’s responsibility to solve social problems. They call for public intervention to “equalize” disparities and render our social fabric more inclusive (as they define it). They believe the free market has failed to solve issues like campaign finance, income inequality, minimum wage, access to health care, and righting past injustices. These people talk about “democracy”—the method of collective decisions.

By these definitions, the Nazis were firmly on the left. National Socialism was a collectivist authoritarian movement run by “social justice warriors.”…

As Hayek stated in 1933, the year the Nazis took power: “[I]t is more than probable that the real meaning of the German revolution is that the long dreaded expansion of communism into the heart of Europe has taken place but is not recognized because the fundamental similarity of methods and ideas is hidden by the difference in phraseology and the privileged groups.”

Nazism and socialism competed with the Enlightenment-based individualism of John Locke, Adam Smith, Montesquieu, and others who profoundly influenced the American founding and define the modern American right at its best…

Much much more at the link.

It is true, however, that Communists were among the most fervent anti-Nazis, both in Germany and elsewhere. But—as the Federalist article points out—this does not change the fact that both were primarily on the left. They were definitely different (as could be seen, for example, by the distinction between Nazi Germany and Stalin’s USSR). But it was in part a turf war. Both were devoted to statism vs. individualism, and both believed in government control of business as well:

The Nazi charter published a year later and coauthored by Hitler is socialist in almost every aspect. It calls for “equality of rights for the German people”; the subjugation of the individual to the state; breaking of “rent slavery”; “confiscation of war profits”; the nationalization of industry; profit-sharing in heavy industry; large-scale social security; the “communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low costs to small firms”; the “free expropriation of land for the purpose of public utility”; the abolition of “materialistic” Roman Law; nationalizing education; nationalizing the army; state regulation of the press; and strong central power in the Reich…

In “Mein Kampf,” he states that without his racial insights National Socialism “would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground.” Nor did Hitler eschew this sentiment once reaching power. As late as 1941, with the war in bloom, he stated “basically National Socialism and Marxism are the same” in a speech published by the Royal Institute of International Affairs.

Nazi propaganda minister and resident intellectual Joseph Goebbels wrote in his diary that the Nazis would install “real socialism” after Russia’s defeat in the East.

Very few people in this country are aware of these facts. The left’s propaganda machine has been teaching that Hitler was a man of the right for a long, long time, and for the most part that propaganda has been successful.

[ * NOTE: To get the exact name for the Nazi Party—I knew it was more than “National Socialists,” but I wasn’t 100% sure what it was—I went to Wiki, as evidenced by the link I offered in the text of my post. However, as though to demonstrate the point in the last paragraph of my piece, this is the way the Wiki entry begins [emphasis mine]:

National Socialism (German: Nationalsozialismus), more commonly known as Nazism…is the ideology and practices associated with the Nazi Party – officially the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP) – in Nazi Germany, and of other far-right groups with similar aims.

Far-right groups? The article goes on to describe the socialist roots and socialist aims of Nazism, without seeing the irony there.

By the way, there is a Wiki talk page that discusses the Nazi right/left issue, although “discusses” is really not the right word. Here’s what it says under FAQs:

Why does this article say that the Nazis were right wing?

Because that is the consensus of reliable sources, in this case historians and political scientists.

But the word “socialist” is right in their name!

The word “socialism” has different meanings in different contexts. The phrase “national socialist” as used by the Nazis referred to a nationalistic view that the German people should prosper at the expense of others, or more specifically, that the interests of the German people were the paramount concern of the party. The meaning of “socialist” was not “communal ownership of property” as it is generally used to mean today, but “of or pertaining to a society” in the more general sense.

There’s much much more in which the Wiki folks firmly reject the “Nazis are leftist” arguments. I don’t have time to read all the links, but if any of you feels like tackling it, I encourage you to do so. My guess is that they reject all sources (including one contemporary to the Nazis, such as Hayek, or the writings of Goebbels—hey, what did Goebbels know about Nazism?), and pay attention to historians and social scientists many of whom are invested in leftism and have their own motives for disowning the Nazis.

Wiki does add this:

But what if I find a large number of very reliable sources all claiming that Nazism is left wing?

Then you will be more than welcome to show them to us, so that we can see that they are very reliable and that they assert that Nazism is a left wing ideology. If they are, then we will change the article.

Get it? They have to be very reliable, and anyone on the right is probably considered to be inherently unreliable. But I would suggest that anyone who wants to put in a little bit of work should research those Wiki links that point to previous discussions of the issue, and see how Wiki has handled it in the past, and try again to introduce this information.

One thing that is actually less relevant is what the Nazis called themselves. The “Socialist” in the name is far less important than what the Nazis did.]

Posted in History, Liberals and conservatives; left and right | 35 Replies

John Kerry, diplomat…

The New Neo Posted on September 13, 2018 by neoSeptember 13, 2018

…up to his old tricks:

Kerry, in an interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt to promote his new book, said that he has met with Iranian Former Minister Javad Zarif—the former secretary’s onetime negotiating partner—three or four times in recent months behind the Trump administration’s back.

“I think I’ve seen him three or four times,” Kerry said, adding that he has been conducting sensitive diplomacy without the current administration’s authorization. Kerry said he has criticized the current administration in these discussions, chiding it for not pursuing negotiations from Iran, despite the country’s fevered rhetoric about the U.S. president.

This sort of thing is an old story with Kerry:

Kerry met with representatives from “both delegations” of the Vietnamese in Paris in 1970, according to Kerry’s own testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971. But Kerry’s meetings with the Vietnamese delegations were in direct violation of laws forbidding private citizens from negotiating with foreign powers, according to researcher and author Jerry Corsi, who began studying the anti-war movement in the early 1970s.

According to Corsi, Kerry violated U.S. code 18 U.S.C. 953. “A U.S. citizen cannot go abroad and negotiate with a foreign power,” Corsi told CNSNews.com.

By Kerry’s own admission, he met in 1970 with delegations from the North Vietnamese communist government and discussed how the Vietnam Warshould be stopped.

Almost fifty years ago.

Kerry: old dog, old tricks.

Posted in People of interest | 20 Replies

Serena the un-serene

The New Neo Posted on September 12, 2018 by neoSeptember 12, 2018

Although I don’t follow tennis as closely as I used to, I certainly heard and read about the big brouhaha at the US Open involving Serena’s being penalized by an umpire, and ultimately losing in the finals to relative newcomer Naomi Osaka:

Williams was handed the third game penalty for verbal abuse, after calling the umpire Ramos a ‘thief’ and demanding that he issue an apology.

The interaction came after he issued a warning for a code violation relating to receiving coaching, which is prohibited in Grand Slam matches.

Williams insists she did not know her coach was giving her instructions, saying she had “never cheated in her life”.

“I don’t cheat to win. I’d rather lose. I’m just letting you know,” she said in protest to Ramos’ decision.

In frustration during the changeover, Williams smashed her racquet, earning another code violation and a one-point deduction.

“You’re attacking my character. Yes you are. You owe me an apology,” she said.

“You will never, ever, ever be on another court of mine as long as you live. You are the liar.

“When are you going to give me my apology. You owe me an apology. Say it. Say you’re sorry. … And you stole a point from me. You’re a thief, too!”

Williams claimed the discretion [in penalizing her a game at that point, which is when she was already down in the second set] used by umpire Ramos was sexist…

“There’s a lot of men out here that have said a lot of things, but because they’re men that (punishment) doesn’t happen to them … Because I’m a woman, you’re going to take this away from me? That is not right.”

After the game, Williams said Ramos had never deducted a game from a male tennis player for calling him a thief…

“I’m here fighting for women’s rights and for women’s equality and for all kinds of stuff,” she said.

“For me it blows my mind…This is outrageous.”

All kinds of stuff—like the right to be abusive and infantile when things don’t go her way. Continue reading →

Posted in Baseball and sports, Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex, People of interest | 56 Replies

Kavanaugh, Kamala Harris, and Hillary Clinton: A lie gets halfway round the world…

The New Neo Posted on September 12, 2018 by neoSeptember 12, 2018

…especially if it’s told by Kamala Harris and then retweeted by Hillary Clinton:

California Senator and likely presidential candidate Kamala Harris spread a misleadingly edited video of Brett Kavanaugh’s hearing testimony, falsely claiming Kavanaugh views birth control as the equivalent of abortion. From that, the argument goes, if Kavanaugh voted against Roe v. Wade, birth control would be banned…

Harris’ perpetrated this fraud by editing out the first part of Kavanaugh’s statement, which made clear that he was quoting what litigants in a case had claimed…

Harris’ falsehood was widely shared on social media, so much so that both Politifact and WaPo felt the need to fact check it. Both ruled it false…

Enter one Hillary Clinton today on Twitter, after all the evidence was in that Harris’ claim was false, including the Politifact and WaPo fact checks.

Hillary repeated Harris’ false accusation in a Twitter thread. This clearly was a planned out series of tweets by Hillary, not just a retweet…

Not only is it a lie, they know it’s a lie, too. Harris doubled down on the “dog whistle” remark after she was informed of the context of Kavanaugh’s words. And Clinton certainly should have known, after the WaPo gave Harris’ original lie four Pinocchios and Politifact rated it false.

Why do Harris and Clinton do this? They do this for a simple reason, and that reason is embodied in the title of this post, which is a shortened version of an old saying about falsehood vs. truth. The saying has several forms and has been attributed to a variety of people:

Metaphorical maxims about the speedy dissemination of lies and the much slower propagation of corrective truths have a very long history. The major literary figure Jonathan Swift wrote on this topic in “The Examiner” in 1710 although he did not mention shoes or boots…

[Swift wrote] as the vilest Writer has his Readers, so the greatest Liar has his Believers; and it often happens, that if a Lie be believ’d only for an Hour, it has done its Work, and there is no farther occasion for it. Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect…

Let me just pause here and say boy, they really used to know how to write.

More from the same link:

The phrasing and figurative language used in these sayings have been evolving for more than three hundred years. In 1787 “falsehood” was reaching “every corner of the earth”. In 1820 a colorful version was circulating with lies flying from “Maine to Georgia” while truth was “pulling her boots on”. By 1834 “error” was running “half over the world” while truth was “putting on his boots”. In 1924 a lie was circling the globe while a truth was “lacing its shoes on”.

From a 1787 sermon by Thomas Francklin:

Falsehood will fly, as it were, on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps, though sure, are slow and solemn, and she has neither vigour nor activity enough to pursue and overtake her enemy…

Much much much more at the link.

The point, of course, is that lies work. They are juicy, they often are uncritically accepted because of motivated reasoning, and in this day and age they spread even faster than in the past.

Of course, the same methods of speedy dissemination can help spread the truth. But somehow, truth often lags behind, as in days of yore, and therefore Harris and Clinton can rest secure in the knowledge that their lies will almost certainly have the desired effect.

Of course, where Kavanaugh is concerned, what Harris and Clinton say will not stop him from being confirmed. But that’s not their goal right now. Their goal is to fire up the troops to think his confirmation is a huge outrage and that he will abolish abortion, all the more reason to go out and vote Democratic in 2018 and beyond.

Posted in Politics | 25 Replies

Post navigation

← Previous Post
Next Post→

Your support is appreciated through a one-time or monthly Paypal donation

Please click the link recommended books and search bar for Amazon purchases through neo. I receive a commission from all such purchases.

Archives

Recent Comments

  • Richard Aubrey on Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?
  • sdferr on Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?
  • Mike Plaiss on Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?
  • huxley on Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?
  • Skip on Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?

Recent Posts

  • Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?
  • Roundup
  • Open thread 5/18/2026
  • Stone Age dentists
  • Israel’s defamation lawsuit against the NY Times for publishing the Kristof piece

Categories

  • A mind is a difficult thing to change: my change story (17)
  • Academia (319)
  • Afghanistan (97)
  • Amazon orders (6)
  • Arts (8)
  • Baseball and sports (162)
  • Best of neo-neocon (90)
  • Biden (536)
  • Blogging and bloggers (583)
  • Dance (287)
  • Disaster (239)
  • Education (320)
  • Election 2012 (360)
  • Election 2016 (565)
  • Election 2018 (32)
  • Election 2020 (511)
  • Election 2022 (114)
  • Election 2024 (403)
  • Election 2026 (32)
  • Election 2028 (7)
  • Evil (129)
  • Fashion and beauty (323)
  • Finance and economics (1,021)
  • Food (316)
  • Friendship (47)
  • Gardening (18)
  • General information about neo (4)
  • Getting philosophical: life, love, the universe (729)
  • Health (1,140)
  • Health care reform (545)
  • Hillary Clinton (184)
  • Historical figures (331)
  • History (702)
  • Immigration (433)
  • Iran (441)
  • Iraq (224)
  • IRS scandal (71)
  • Israel/Palestine (804)
  • Jews (426)
  • Language and grammar (361)
  • Latin America (203)
  • Law (2,921)
  • Leaving the circle: political apostasy (124)
  • Liberals and conservatives; left and right (1,288)
  • Liberty (1,102)
  • Literary leftists (14)
  • Literature and writing (389)
  • Me, myself, and I (1,478)
  • Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex (914)
  • Middle East (381)
  • Military (318)
  • Movies (347)
  • Music (526)
  • Nature (255)
  • Neocons (32)
  • New England (177)
  • Obama (1,737)
  • Pacifism (16)
  • Painting, sculpture, photography (128)
  • Palin (93)
  • Paris and France2 trial (25)
  • People of interest (1,024)
  • Poetry (255)
  • Political changers (176)
  • Politics (2,778)
  • Pop culture (394)
  • Press (1,623)
  • Race and racism (861)
  • Religion (419)
  • Romney (164)
  • Ryan (16)
  • Science (626)
  • Terrorism and terrorists (967)
  • Theater and TV (264)
  • Therapy (69)
  • Trump (1,604)
  • Uncategorized (4,406)
  • Vietnam (109)
  • Violence (1,414)
  • War and Peace (995)

Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
DanielInVenezuela (liberty)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (shrink archives)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor’s Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
Maggie’sFarm (togetherness)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
MichelleObama’sMirror (reflect)
NoPasaran! (bluntFrench)
NormanGeras (archives)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob)
Pamela Geller (Atlas Shrugs)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (exodus)
Powerline (foursight)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RedState (conservative)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
©2026 - The New Neo - Weaver Xtreme Theme Email
Web Analytics
↑