Believe Women? Only If They Are “Progressive”

By | November 16, 2018 | 2 Comments

It is a cliché to say that if “progressives” didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all. But the reason statements become clichés is that they are often repeated because they are true. Still, if clichés aren’t your thing, try hypocrisy: claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform.

Double standards, hypocrisy, call it what you will. The fact remains that so-called “progressives” believe women and stand up for them only if the women share their leftist beliefs. That is, they stand up for women only if it advances their leftist agenda. If not, the women are thrown under the bus ‒ ignored completely, or actually blamed for causing their own problems.

Dana Loesch.

Recently this spokesperson for the NRA had her home address published on the Internet. She received credible death threats for herself and her young children. She had to rush to pack her belongings in garbage bags, gather her family, and flee to an undisclosed location. That is, it is undisclosed until anti-gun activists disclose it.

Of course, this terrorist threat to a woman and her children evoked no sympathy, or even much notice, from MeToo activists, PussyHat wearers, or leftist feminists in general ‒ thus revealing that they are leftists first, and feminists second, if at all. Sympathy for a spokesperson advocating for the Second Amendment? You must be joking.

One might hope that her NRA associates provided security. But not everyone has armed friends to provide security. They must depend on police, who are often busy elsewhere. Even worse, a Supreme Court decision holds that police have a duty to protect the public in general, but no duty to protect anyone in particular ‒ even if that person has obtained a court order of protection from a violent individual.

Think about that when you hear mobs threaten violence against those who hold differing opinions. This epitomizes the leftist viewpoint: We have a right to threaten you and your family because of your political views, but the police have no duty to protect you, and we want to disarm you so you cannot protect yourself. Have a nice day.

Tucker Carlson’s wife.

I am not using her given name in the hope that this will offer some shred of privacy and protection, though I know that this hope is pointless. The Carlson family is already being subjected not merely to threats, but to actual physical violence.

The Carlsons’ home address was publicized on the Internet, despite Tucker’s efforts to keep it confidential. A mob of leftist activists gathered outside the house. Tucker was in the studio preparing for his TV show, and ‒ providentially ‒ their four children were elsewhere. Mrs. Carlson was alone. The mob chanted insults and threats, including, “We know where you sleep tonight,” plus exhortations to get out of town, references to a “pipe-bomb,” as well as spray-painting racist graffiti on the driveway.

Meanwhile, at least one man pushed on the front door, hard enough to damage it. Mrs. Carlson was terrified of a home invasion, which in fact this threatened to become. She barricaded herself in the pantry and called 911. Police eventually arrived and the mob dispersed. Reports are unclear, but apparently no one was arrested.

Tucker declared that he refuses to be intimidated, but of course, what is actually being done is not reported. Will the family have to relocate hastily, as did the Loesch family? Will they remain, with Fox News providing bodyguards? Will Mrs. Carlson practice with a 12-gauge shotgun? Is this what American politics has descended to? How long must all this go on? Who knows?

Perhaps even worse, the mob posted on the Internet the home addresses of Tucker’s brother and college roommate, neither of whom has anything to do with Tucker’s show. Leftists call their opponents Nazis. But they themselves are using Nazi tactics. The Nazis called it Sippenhaft, punishing the relatives of those who opposed them.

Tucker Carlson’s daughter.

Sometime earlier, in an incident Tucker hoped not to publicize, he was having dinner at a country club with his son and 19-year-old daughter. A man came up to their table and loudly asked the daughter if she was Carlson’s “whore,” calling her a “f**king c*nt.” Carlson’s son then threw wine in the man’s face, while Tucker yelled protests. Here we see another example of Sippenhaft. What does Tucker’s 19-year-old daughter have to do with anything?

But sadly, this is not a new low for leftist politics. “Saturday Night Live” once did a skit claiming that Sarah Palin’s husband was “doing” his daughters, presumably including the seven-year-old. Recall that this was on network TV, not cable, and thus subject to FCC rules. Bill Maher gestured that Ivanka Trump was masturbating her father. Calling this “gutter humor” would be an insult to gutters. And don’t forget that Michelle Malkin was called a “Manila whore,” Laura Ingraham a “slut,” and Ann Coulter a “female impersonator.” No, nothing is out of bounds when insulting a conservative woman.

The man who insulted Tucker’s daughter was later expelled from the country club. But he is suing the Carlsons and hired that paragon of the legal profession, Michael Avenatti, who also represents stripper Stormy Daniels. This is yet another illustration of the fact that we have a legal system, not a justice system.

Irony 1: The man who insulted Tucker’s daughter is a board member of a women’s mental-health group. Apparently yelling vile insults is his notion of supporting a woman’s mental health. Irony 2: Stormy Daniels threatens to fire Avenatti if his arrest for domestic violence results in a conviction. She wants to be believed, but she doesn’t believe Avenatti’s accuser.

White House intern.

After hogging the microphone and taking other reporters’ time arguing with President Trump at a news conference, CNN’s Jim Acosta physically assaulted a much smaller, female intern who was attempting to take the microphone back from him. He rudely shoved her arm down. This was amply documented on video. It may be a federal offense, and surely is a gross violation of journalistic ethics ‒ assuming such a thing exists anymore.

But instead of standing up for the intern, much of the mainstream media stood up for Acosta, some going so far as to accuse the intern of assaulting him for daring to try to take back the microphone that belonged to the federal government, not to Acosta. If any doubt remains, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo7ORobbXPw

The bottom line.

Where are the MeToo activists? Where are the PussyHat wearers? Where are the opponents of Justice Kavanaugh who waved placards saying, “We believe her,” and “We believe women”? Where indeed?

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford had an inconsistent memory of something that she says happened 35 or 36 years ago. The two people she says were there do not recall the event. This uncorroborated memory evoked a torrent of “We believe her” and “We believe women.” But the White House intern was physically bullied just a few days ago ‒ on clear video. Mrs. Carlson and Dana Loesch were terrorized in their homes just a few days ago ‒ on partial video. These events evoke nothing at all. What clearer evidence could there be that what passes for feminism is often merely leftist political posturing?

These so-called feminists maintain a stony silence in the face of these attacks on women ‒ because the women are conservatives themselves, or at least relatives or employees of conservatives. Are such women undeserving of the concern, much less the protection, of these phony feminists?

Many self-anointed feminists are committed leftists who occasionally have some spare time, which they use for feminist rhetoric. But real feminists? People who stand up for women when they are attacked by men? No, not really.

Contact: dstol@prodigy.net. You are welcome to publish or post these articles, provided that you cite the author and website.

www.stolinsky.com

2 Comments

  • David Stolinsky says:

    On a TV show Thursday night, the host implied she did not believe Avenatti’s accuser and charged that he was “set up,” at which the audience applauded. Note that the accuser was said to have a swollen, bruised face, and Avenatti was quoted as saying, “She hit me first,” before denying he hit her at all. Believe women? Don’t make me laugh.

    Meanwhile, AP carried as a news report the lie that the White House had “doctored” the video of Acosta accosting the intern. Yes, it is a lie. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo7ORobbXPw

    Even if you’re a committed leftist, answer this question: Suppose you had a 22-year-old daughter or sister, looking for her first job out of college. Assuming they were in the same occupation, for whom would you prefer her to work: (1) Michael Avenatti, (2) Jim Acosta, or (3) Brett Kavanaugh? I thought so.

  • David Stolinsky says:

    Suggestions to improve White House press conferences:
    1. Remove microphone and have correspondents shout questions as they did in the past. This is self-policing – Acosta would be shouted down.
    2. Have someone at sound system switch. Turn it off if anyone goes over two questions.
    3. (My favorite) Replace petite intern with very large man, who is a federal agent. Bullies are cowards – microphone would be handed back promptly.

    Question: Why does lower-court judge have power to tell President how to run White House, any more than President has power to tell judge how to run his courtroom? The Judicial Branch is co-equal with the Executive and Legislative Branches, not superior to them. We have a Supreme Court, not a Supreme Leadership Council. We call them justices, not ayatollahs.

    I don’t agree with every point in this column, but read it – it’s important:
    https://www.wnd.com/2018/11/why-founding-fathers-were-concerned-about-judiciary/?cat_orig=education

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Social Widgets powered by AB-WebLog.com.