America’s elites are waging class war on workers and small biz

 

In America, class warfare is often disguised as culture war, and culture war is often cloaked by talk of race. But underneath it all, the class warfare is still there. Whether accidentally or intentionally, America’s upper classes seem to wind up harming the working class and small businesses, always in the name of some high-minded cause.

On immigration, for example, the go-to move is to call people who object to open borders racists and nativists. But what’s behind it? As Biden economic adviser Jared Bernstein commented: “A tight job market pressures employers to boost wage offers . . . One equally surefire way to short-circuit this useful dynamic is to turn on the immigrant spigot every time some group’s wages go up.” Immigration as a way of keeping working-class wages down.

Likewise, efforts to defund police or de-police neighborhoods are treated as anti-racism, but their actual, predictable effect is to make poor and working-class neighborhoods much less safe, in order to make wealthy woke activists feel good about themselves. Similarly, Anthony Lukas’ classic book, “Common Ground,” told the story of how wealthy white activists placed most of the burden of desegregating Boston’s public schools on poor black and white families, while those behind the policies retreated to leafy suburbs, far from the problems they had created, or made worse.

Now a report in The New York Times captures a microcosm of the class war that race-talk obscures. A black student at Smith College reported being abused because she was black, saying she was treated as if she didn’t belong on campus by a white janitor and campus police officer. Her complaints produced a speedy apology from Smith (“We always try to show compassion for everyone involved,” said Smith President Kathleen McCartney) and mandatory sensitivity training for staff, as well as — ironically — the creation of all-black and minority dormitories. As part of the anti-bias training, the school’s blue-collar employees, the Times reports, “found themselves being asked by consultants hired by Smith about their childhood and family assumptions about race, which many viewed as psychologically intrusive.” 

Then an outside investigation determined that, basically, it never happened. The campus police officer, the janitor and a cafeteria worker had been falsely tarred as racists, but they were not the beneficiaries of apologies, “compassion for everyone involved” or anything else. 

“Check your privilege” is a common term around higher education, but the notion that white janitors, cafeteria workers and campus police are “privileged” in that environment is not simply absurd, but monstrous. As Smith janitor Mark Patenaude told the Times, “We used to joke, don’t let a rich student report you, because if you do, you’re gone.”

Universities, and especially the woke parts of universities, speak of race more than class. And as the Smith incident illustrates, they seldom extend the exquisite sensitivities displayed on matters of race to questions of class discrimination. They barely admit such questions exist.Privilege is the ability to get an employee of many years punished simply by making a complaint, even a false one.  

And yet class war rages, even if people don’t want to talk about it. It’s not the Soviet-style class war, with “capitalists” on one side and “workers and peasants” on the other, but rather the educated “gentry class” (as demographer Joel Kotkin calls it) making life tough for the working class.

The gentry class is in firm control of most of the institutions in America, from big corporations, to media organizations, to, most especially, colleges and universities. The Democrats are the gentry class’ party, as the GOP increasingly becomes a diverse coalition of working-class and small-business people. And the gentry class is letting the working class have it.

Barack Obama boasted about driving coal mines into bankruptcy; Joe Biden tells miners they need to learn how to code. There’s talk of forgiving student-loan debt, which would effectively transfer wealth from high-school educated truck drivers to social workers with graduate degrees. Biden’s open-borders immigration policy will once again open the “immigrant spigot” to push working-class wages down. Piling ruin upon ruin.

And just as at Smith, they don’t care who’s hurt, so long as they can strike a pose. Is all this accidental? Or is it the product of hostility toward what Hillary Clinton called the “deplorables?” On the receiving end, does it really matter?

FreedomCovid LoopholesUK "High-value business travelers" are exempt from UK Covid quarantine rules. In case you were wondering, no, you are not a high-value business traveler.

In the United States, the powerful and connected only pretend to feel badly when they are caught sneaking around doing things the little people are not permitted to do.

In the UK, they have the common decency to just say it out loud.

Some people are just more important than you.

Who is exempt?

"Individuals undertaking specific business activity which would deliver a significant benefit to the UK economy – including activity that creates or preserves 50+ UK jobs – will no longer need to self-isolate when travelling or returning from non-exempt countries."

"Creates or preserves" 50+ UK jobs"

I could see this being handy.

Border Agent: I'm afraid you'll have to quarantine.

CFO: If I have to quarantine I'll fire 50 people.

Border Agent: In that case you're exempt.

There are other exceptions as well that should not at all make you furious.

"Exemptions will also come into force at the same time for domestic and international performing arts professionals, TV production staff, journalists and recently signed elite sportspersons, ensuring that industries which require specific, high-talent individuals who rely on international connections can continue to complete their work."

These all make perfect sense, of course. Performing arts professionals and TV production are absolutely essential to the maintenance of life itself.

 

Liberalism isn’t even hypocrisy. It’s just one giant lie wrapped in a scam and dipped in unadulterated bullSchiff.

Remember, we have to believe all women…except when it’s a liberal like Bad Touch Biden who is doing the grabbing, in which case she’s either a lying tramp who wanted it or she simply doesn’t exist. You know, all these differing rules about how we are supposed to react to #MeToo stuff seems really complex and difficult, since they change based on the ideology of the alleged pervert, but it’s really simple if you just understand one simple thing.

The liberal outrage is all a lie and a scam.

They don’t give a damn about women getting treated like garbage. Not even a little. They just want to leverage bogus claims of #MeToo accusations against conservatives like Brett Kavanaugh for cheap political advantage. That’s why when a Democrat does it – and they know he’s doing it – all you hear is the sound of silence and complicity.

Being a Democrat means free passes for making passes, or worse. Everyone knew Bill Clinton was a scumbag – even now his wrinkly carcass is probably soaking in a hot tub with a couple of exotic dancers on loan from The Gilded Pastie. Not even Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit cares. She’s got her Chardonnay and her Twitter account where she can chuckle about the pandemic and imagine that if she had remembered Wisconsin and was president, she would have ordered a million new ventilators back in August because she’s smart.

And everyone knew that sauced harpy’s donor and pal Harvey – hell, he was every liberal’s donor and pal – was leaving no starlet unturned out. Weinstein fell not because liberals were outraged but because he was on the losing side of an internal power struggle against the old guard elite within liberalism. Suddenly, overnight, Harvey’s wink-wink nudge-nudge quirks turned from awards show joke fodder into something sinister. But his behavior never changed.

And the same goes for Jeffrey Epstein, who didn’t kill himself.

Liberals don’t care until they are forced to care. And even then they only pretend to care.

Kurt Schlichter: Dating Tips For Prominent Democrats

We’ve learned so much about what women face in the last few weeks, and you liberal men should take this as an opportunity to change – specifically, out of your flapping bathrobes and into some Dockers. Groping, flashing, molesting shrubs – believe it or not, some women consider these things to be wrong. Crazy? Sure, but for now it’s no more monkey business as usual. As a noted Democrat, you need to maintain your political viability, and you can exploit the respect and concern for women you’ve always pretended to have to help you dodge responsibility for whatever you’ve already done!

Hey, nobody gets into liberal politics because they actually believe this stuff! Being a Democrat leader has always been a traditional path to making special new friends for guys who can’t cut it on looks and personality. Face it – no one ever said, “You know who’s hot? Al Franken. I bet he can bench his body weight.” If Harvey Weinstein had managed a Safeway, America’s starlets and ferns would be substantially less traumatized.

Having needs is nothing to be ashamed of. You’ve taken on an awesome responsibility being a Democrat leader – you’re constantly struggling to hold up the burden imposed upon you by the support and acclaim of the D.C. establishment and the media. You have a right to extracurricular activities; why, liberal women will tell you themselves that the mere fact that you are quite willing to kill babies by the millions entitles you to all sorts of fringe benefits!

But hey, there are a lot of uptight people out there whose bourgeois notions of “right” and “wrong” really don’t account for the unique pressures and special requirements you face as a liberal icon lookin’ for some lovin’. So, you need to take precautions to ensure that people don’t get the right idea about what you are doing.

Wrong idea. I mean, wrong idea.

First, you’ll want to exclusively seek out liberal women. Don’t make Bill Clinton’s mistake and target women who aren’t reliable progressives. Pinko gals generally know how to play ball and won’t start some sort of fuss that will end up derailing your really important work towards the Democrat Party’s ultimate goal of turning America into Venezuela II: The Starvening.

And be considerate! Don’t just tell her, “You’d better put some ice on that.” Show her you care. Go and get her some ice yourself – see, it’s the little things that make the difference between silent suffering and embarrassing revelations.

Now, there may to be some ungrateful ladies who make some allegations about you for whatever reason, most likely their participation in the vast right wing conspiracy. This puts you in a tough place because you have to balance the liberal principle of believing the victim with the liberal principle of liberals not being held accountable for the terrible things they do.

Just take a deep breath – it’s going to be okay, because you’re a Democrat. The media and Hollywood are going nuts, but if you’re a Democrat in Congress, you’re good. Hell, Teddy Kennedy drowned a chick and they pretty much gave him a medal. You didn’t drown a chick, did you? If you did, maybe you should talk to a lawyer about pleading self-defense.

I don't want to live in a world where Harvey Weinstein is God

Mark Steyn is the best wordsmith in America (even if he is Canadian).

Contradictions and Condescension

Not so long ago, picking up a Golden Globe for her turn as Mrs Thatcher, Meryl was happy to salute Harvey Weinstein as God, notwithstanding that the previous occupant of that position was famously antipathetic to the sin of Onan, with or without attendant shrubbery....

Why do Mitt's binders full of women outrage liberal sensibilities but not Harvey's pot plants full of semen?

Well, in the old days, the bourgeoisie expected bourgeois values throughout society. The wealthy and powerful disdained them, but discreetly. Now they disdain them openly. Indeed, they wage war on them, relentlessly. Instead, they enforce "progressive" values. Institutions fundamental to the nation-state, such as citizenship, have to be rendered meaningless - so that what matters in any immigration debate is not the citizens but the invaders, to the point where Nancy Pelosi thanks the parents of "Dreamers" for breaking American law and bringing them here, as a precious gift to a nation crying out for even more low-skilled immigrants. As for institutions that pre-date the nation-state - institutions almost as old as humanity - they're as easy to redefine, so that marriage can no longer be confined to those of opposite sexes. Speaking of the sexes, human biology can be vaporized, so that two sexes become 57 genders, and grade-school boys more interested in Barbie than GI Joe get to be pumped full of puberty blockers and directed to the girls' bathroom. And after all that, religion has to be put on the back foot, so that any recalcitrant mom'n'pop bakery for whom two men atop a wedding cake is an abomination, must be hunted down, dragged into court and financially ruined pour encourager les autres. And in a revolutionary present it is necessary ultimately to throttle the past - eliminating Robert E Lee, Christopher Columbus, Dr Seuss, Stephen Foster, the national anthem, to dam up the stream of history, the flow of past to present to future, and thus sever the citizenry from their entire inheritance, so that we are mere flotsam and jetsam on the frothing surface of the moment - a world where, in a certain sense, Harvey Weinstein is God....

Amid the condescension, there are contradictions. So a century-old statue of someone dead a hundred and fifty years who does not conform to the identity-group pieties of 2017 must be torn down - whereas an actual flesh-and-blood human being who does not conform to the identity-group pieties of 2017 can stagger around Hollywood and New York and London and Rome treating women like garbage.

Read the whole thing.

Of Anointed and Laymen

Have you noticed how many things we have been told about what we should and should not eat are wrong?  A generation of people who were told by "science" how to eat are now FAT. 

In the book Tales of New America, there is a scene which stuck with me. In it, an intelligent, educated man of some stature is attempting to sneak in to the “red state” half of a Balkanized America. The man is wealthy, powerful, and possesses the self-confidence of such folks.

He is outsmarted by a lowly, unattractive border guard. The border guard explains that he was not a good-looking man, nor was he privileged to attend great universities. But that didn’t mean he was stupid. The assumption that a man employed in a lowly, backwater job is dumb is a mistake. In this story, it caught the interloper by surprise, and cost him his life.

And that is one reason Donald Trump is President.

For all their vaunted education and intellectual credentials, the intelligentsia was outsmarted by a boorish real estate developer. Note also the difference in payroll expenditure. The way things work in the anointed world, and I’ve seen it first hand, is everything is accounted in terms of the size of your demesne. The more people you have, the more powerful you appear. Their first instinct is always more. More money, more people, more media exposure.

Even a regular old construction worker can tell you that at a certain point, more people and more money won’t buy you a damn thing. In fact, in many cases, adding more people just means there are more folks getting in the way. Most laymen have an instinctive distrust of committees, and for good reason.

So what is the difference between the layman and the anointed, anyway?

It isn’t precisely college education, though that is related in some fashion. There are laymen who hold advanced degrees and do excellent work. And there are laymen who hold no degree, and nonetheless do great work, also. The primary difference may be the focus.

Laymen are job-focused. You have to build a building, or fix a car, or write software to do something. The anointed are power-focused. Whether or not anything gets built is of no concern. Indeed, it may even be the opposite, in that if an organization they control ever achieves its primary goal (like, say, eradicating breast cancer), then their power would be diminished. So often times, their goal is to prevent the work from being completed. This is heresy to the layman.

Sometimes it gets ridiculous.

The anointed are hyper sensitive to perceived political shifts. This has, in recent years, been used to embarrass them with planted political issues, like 4chan’s push of free bleeding, which led women around the world to bleed in their pants to protest the patriarchy.

And this shows the absurdity of it all. These people propose to rule the laymen, and yet no layman would have been fooled by such an obvious political ruse. He’d have said something like “well, if you want to bleed in your pants, that’s your own business, I guess. But seems kinda stupid and gross to me.” Even a construction worker with an IQ of 95 wouldn’t be quite that gullible.

This, of course, has led to colossal flip-flopping on political issues as the anointed try to gauge how best to play the power game at that particular moment.

So an anointed can believe, simultaneously, in an extreme example of doublethink, that evolution must be true, and evangelical Christians are stupid for believing in Creationism (and thus must be accounted as science deniers), while trying to tell us that biological gender doesn’t even exist. The fact that kindergartners can tell the difference, but Yale grads can’t, is telling. So much for the Party of Science, eh?

And the bottom line is ... power.

And, as O’Brien [1984] explained, it was all about power, nothing more. Truth was irrelevant and could be manipulated anyway. Accomplishment was meaningless. Everything served the feeling of power. There was no other reason to exist. This is how our anointed elites feel. Their entire lives are an endless pursuit of power over their fellow man, and the emotional high this provides.

Whether they really are more intelligent in some way or not may be irrelevant, because in the end it doesn’t matter if the person asserting that 2+ 2 = 5 is smarter than you. He is still wrong, and is trying to deceive you (and often himself, too). Sometimes greater intelligence only provides a man with a greater capacity for deception.

The Ruling Class will not give up its power without a fight to the death.

Fox News Radio correspondent confronts Gateway Pundit reporter in White House briefing room

Politico

As reporters were getting settled ahead of Friday’s briefing, the Fox correspondent Jon Decker pointed out that a reporter from Gateway Pundit, Lucian Wintrich, was in the room and that they “hate blacks, Jews, Hispanics,” according to BuzzFeed White House correspondent Adrian Carrasquillo, who tweeted about the incident.

Decker also sent an email to the entire White House reporter email listserv, noting that the White House "has admitted Gateway Pundit into today's White House Press Briefing."

While some in the White House briefing room say the White House should be open to any and all outlets, others have expressed concern with certain outlets being legitimized via their White House credentials.

Fox News confirmed Decker was reacting to previous tweets Wintrich had posted. According to a White House Correspondent in the room, several reporters shook Decker’s hands as he walked back to the Fox News radio booth.

When the entire media - news and infotainment - is guilty of false "reporting," selective editing, spiking stories because they don't advance the narrative, alternative media spring up. 

The establishment fights back, not by getting better, but by demonizing the interlopers. 

The attempt to monopolize the views that the American people get has failed. The old media has lost its power to create the national mood. That's why Hillary lost despite the backing of the establishment press. Her entire campaign was based on demonizing Trump and the press was her megaphone. They failed. 

Using muscle in the White House Press Room isn’t going to fix the problem. It’s the modern version of book burning. As the well-known hero of Progressives, Chairman Mao, once said “let a thousand flowers bloom.” 

Gateway Pundit has a long way to go before it has printed as many lies as the NY Times. They still haven’t returned the Pulitzer Prize for Walter Durante’s whitewashing Stalin’s. And don’t get me started on the rest of the legacy media.

Here's a link to Gateway Pundit.

The Bill Clinton Effect: Why Liberals Treat Women Worse

Because "Liberal Women" will stand by Liberal sexual perverts.

It’s a phenomenon I call “the Bill Clinton effect.” President Clinton isn’t just another example of a prominent pol who habitually cheated on his wife with many women, including those on his staff. Clinton showcased how those who normally police behavior and work to penalize men for mistreating women will excuse men aligned with them politically. In other words, Clinton revealed that liberals can expect to get away with a lot more in terms of abusing women than conservatives.

Young progressives may only know a whitewashed version of the Clinton scandals, in which rabid conservatives tried to make a mountain out of a consensual-affair molehill. Yet the undisputed facts of the Lewinsky affair reveal a clear and classic example of a powerful man abusing women under his power and creating a hostile work environment: Clinton was a powerful executive having sexual relations with a 22-year-old intern working in his office, whom he rewarded with a taxpayer-financed job and other special treatment. None of the interns working alongside Monica got cushy job offers post-internship. That alone is supposed to be a giant red flag for those concerned about equal treatment and a harassment-free workplace.

But, of course, that was just the tip of the iceberg; Clinton was having his affair with Monica in the midst of an ongoing investigation into his alleged sexual harassment of a state employee (Paula Jones) during his time as Governor of Arkansas. Other women also came forward with allegations of harassment and even assault. Clinton lied about his affair with Lewinsky, at first suggesting she was delusional, both to the public and then when testifying under oath as a part of that sexual harassment suit.

Liberal women’s groups are supposed to frown on men who smear women and undermine the legal process of sexual harassment suits, and take accusations of sexual assault seriously. Yet President Clinton—a good Democrat who supported abortion rights and other feminist sacraments—was largely given a pass. Sure, some feminists murmured their disappointment with Clinton’s behavior and mouthed platitudes about Paula Jones deserving her day in court. But their criticisms were perfunctory at best. Mostly, they stood by Clinton’s side, defending him and remaining silent as he lied and slandered the women who accused him.

Compare this to the treatment of Justice Clarence Thomas. Even if one assumes that every accusation made by Anita Hill is true, Justice Thomas would at most be crass and a little boorish, but very minor-league in terms of sexual harassment compared to Clinton. Yet women’s groups and the liberal media pounded Thomas, almost derailing his Supreme Court nomination, and to this day ensure that his name is synonymous with sexual harassment.

Given these examples, it would make sense that liberals would feel freer to abuse women than their conservative counterparts. Conservatives have to assume that the press and the establishment women’s movement will exact as mighty a punishment as possible for any misdeed, while liberals can expect far less blowback. Moreover, conservatives, who are consistently bashed as part of a “war on women,” are terrified of anything that might legitimize that charge. Thus they are motivated to deal harshly with fellow conservatives who threaten to further entrench that reputation with the public. In contrast, liberals enjoy a comfortable advantage with women and reputation for caring about women’s issues, so are likely to be less vigilant about policing their own ranks.

Given this history, it’s no big surprise that, as the liberal online website Vox.com put it, progressive have a sexual harassment problem.

Democrats and Dinner with a pedophile

You get to know a lot about people by those they hang out with.  

On the evening of December 2nd, 2010, a handful of America's media and entertainment elite—including TV anchors Katie Couric and George Stephanopoulos, comedienne Chelsea Handler, and director Woody Allen—convened around the dinner table of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. It wasn't just any dining room, but part of a sprawling nine-story townhouse that once housed an entire preparatory school. And it wasn't just any sex offender, but an enigmatic billionaire who had once flown the likes of former President Bill Clinton and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak around the world on his own Boeing 727. Last spring, Epstein completed a 13-month sentence for soliciting prostitution from a minor in Palm Beach. Now he was hosting a party for his close friend, Britain's Prince Andrew, fourth in line to the throne.

Keep this in mind when you recall that Obama hung around with racist preachers, Leftist bombers, crooked politicians and slum lords.

Bob McDonnell just got two years for accepting a Rolex watch.  He made the mistake of being a Republican.

What does Teresa Sullivan and the bigots who railroaded the Scottsboro Boys have in common? Pretty much everything.

The Scottsboro Boys were nine black teenagers accused of raping two white women in Alabama in 1931. The case had everything: race, sex, lies about sex, hysterical women, a rush to judgment and the assumption of guilt. It was a landmark case because it tried to use prejudice and mob rule as a substitute for a fair trial. And when the “victims” turned out not to be a victims, the bigots who rushed to judgment were not satisfied. They “knew” that black men always wanted to rape innocent white women whenever they could.  

The similarity is startling. The ante-bellum South was obsessed with the belief in oversexed black men. Fast forward to today where feminists of all sexes are obsessed over what they claim is “rape culture.” The fact that violent crime, including rape has dropped dramatically in the last two decades is irrelevant. Men are beasts and women are victims and truth is a irrelevant. It’s bad everywhere, but especially bad in college where men are believed to be mass raping women. It’s so bad that coeds are holding vigils to “take back the night.” No less an authority figure than President Obama insists that “one in five” college women are raped before graduation. Others say it’s even worse: that the real number is“one in four.” If that’s true, it makes a college campus more dangerous than Mogadishu.

Enter Rolling Stone magazine with a rape fantasy even more graphic that Fifty Shades of Gray. And just as true. An innocent young coed … brutally raped, on broken glass, for three hours, by seven white, rich, Southern, privileged men and one beer bottle. All this on the campus founded by a slave-owner and run by an administration that didn’t care what happened to innocent womanhood.

Eric Owens: Erdely hoped her wildly implausible 9,000-word, agenda-driven excuse for journalism would emphasize “the larger theme of a university culture and social scene indifferent even to the most brutalized victims of rape.”

With all the right buttons pushed, UVA’s administration headed by Teresa Sullivan swung into action. The first thing was to ban all fraternity activity. The story was so plausible to the feminist culture on campus that there were no questions about the plausibility of the story. Like the residents of Alabama in 1931, the people in charge were ready to believe. Like night follows day there were protests, vigils, candles, demonstrations, vandalism and an academic lynch mob. And Teresa Sullivan, who survived being fired by the university’s board just a few years ago, decided that her position was to be the leader of the mob. She knew that the way to remain in her cushy position was to feed to prejudices of the feminists. She knew her audience, because no matter what the press may say, UVA is in every way representative of American academic bigotry and bias. Those mobs, those demonstrators, the people trashing the frat house didn’t have to be created. They were already there, like the racists of 1931 Alabama, hoods and nooses at the ready, to take down the despoilers of innocent maidenhood. And even as the story was falling apart, the truth didn’t matter. Because there’s a large truth, the fable of a campus rape epidemic where every untoward glace, awkward fumble, every drunken hook-up is evidence of the heteronormative patriarchy holding the womyn down.

Sullivan told The Washington Post that the suspension of fraternity and sorority activities would remain in place until Jan. 9, as the university pursues a wide-ranging discussion on sexual assault and campus culture. 

Law Professor Glenn Reynolds: “So the story’s a hoax, but the punishment remains because conversation. Sullivan’s response has been disgraceful.”

We sent an e-mail to Sullivan’s office asking for a statement from her. We have yet to hear back.

Why do so many people not know that Bill Clinton raped women?

Reading a story recently about the Bill Cosby rape allegations.  I enjoy reading the comments at the end of many stories (one of the benefits of the internet).  Someone brought up the subject of Cosby being treated differently from other alleged rapists like Bill Clinton.

A woman responded that cheating on your wife was different than rape.  It was obvious that the only woman sexually associated with Bill Clinton today in the minds of most people is Monica Lewinski.

The women that Clinton was accused of raping, like Juanita Broaddrick are not remembered of dismissed as unbelievable trailer trash.

Meanwhile, accused white liberal rapist and former president Bill Clinton has no such problems. He still dominates Democratic politics, commanding an average $195,000 per speech imparting his wisdom and insights. Past allegations of rape and groping and using his power and charm to seduce women are ignored – or secretly admired.

The Clinton Foundation hauls in millions, supporting Bill; his wife, stand-by-your-man former New York State senator, former secretary of state, and potential presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton; daughter Chelsea; and hundreds of hangers on in style. Women of all backgrounds, especially feminists, flock to his speeches as he tells them what they want to hear.

Clinton's alleged victims haven't fared so well. Paula Jones was dismissed as "trailer trash" by Clinton, defending himself against her claims of rape, which he later settled for $850,000. Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broaddrrick were scorned and mocked by Clintonistas after going public with their claims. Gennifer Flowers, charmed by Clinton in exchange for sex and talk of marriage, was mocked as silly – someone who couldn't even spell her first name correctly. Mention Monica Lewinsky, the 22-year-old starry-eyed intern in the Clinton White House and Clinton charmee, and (sometimes nervous) laughter erupts. Except from the victim herself. No complaints from liberal women about the degrading treatment of their "sisters."

It's Liberal Privilege.

Leonardo DiCaprio borrows the FIFTH largest superyacht in the world to party in Brazil

Hollywood superstar Leonardo DiCaprio has taken over one of the world's largest superyachts in order to watch the World Cup in style.

DiCaprio and more than 20 friends are said to have taken over the 482-foot Topaz, worth £400million, while staying in Brazil for the football tournament.

The yacht is owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emitates and owner of Manchester City FC.

I would say that Di Caprio's taxes are not high enough.

15 Examples Of "Liberal Privilege"

3) You can be a Communist or a radical Islamist, you can hate America or even engage in acts of terrorism and still get a job as a college professor. In fact, it probably makes it more likely you'll be hired.

10) If you're a liberal minority politician, you can be crooked, ignore your constituents, and do nothing of consequence to make their lives better while you get elected over and over again.

Read the whole thing.