Monday, October 16, 2017

More on Hurricane Harvey

A few more bits and pieces on Harvey Weinstein, the Clinton clan, and democrats in general.

I am shocked- shocked- to find that gambling is going on in here!

Clinton, in an interview with CNN's Fareed Zakaria as part of her ongoing book tour, said she was "sick" and "shocked" when she found out about the sexual assault allegations…

She’s shocked – shocked.  Apparently so shocked that she was in a coma or something for five days after hearing the news:

Clinton's initial silence -- it took her days to release a statement -- was perplexing to some Democrats, with even some longtime advisers privately questioning the decision not to quickly weigh in.

She is ready to do her part now; she will donate an amount equal to what Weinstein has given to her past campaigns – supposedly all of $13,000:

"What other people are saying, what my former colleagues are saying, is they're going to donate it to charity, and of course I will do that," she said. "I give 10% of my income to charity every year, this will be part of that. There's no -- there's no doubt about it."

Wait a minute…she gives 10% every year anyway, and this $13,000 will be part of the 10% this year?  I guess it really is true – government accounting is different than normal accounting (do yourself a favor – take thirty seconds to watch the video).

But the best bit of news is hidden in this little gem:

The two were also personally close: In 2015, the Clintons rented a home next to Weinstein in the Hamptons.

Yes, that’s right.  Bill and Harvey as neighbors; that must have been quite a party.

No Background Check?

Malia Obama, 19, landed an internship at the Weinstein Company right after her dad left office earlier this year…

Now I know that this internship was after Barack left office, but gee…you would think that a former president could still pull a few strings at the FBI, especially since they were still working for him in any case.  But, really, the stories were already pretty well known.

I mean, really – it was just their teenage daughter going to the other side of the country – why worry about it?  After all, Harvey was a good friend – just ask Michelle, who said in 2013: “He is a wonderful human being, a good friend and just a powerhouse…”

Oh…I forgot to mention…it also took Barack and Michelle five days to make a statement on the Weinstein affair.

Hillary, We’ve Tried to Get You to Shut-up for Almost a Year

One might wonder why all of this is coming out now.

I have heard some speculation about the reason that this Weinstein episode has become an issue at this time – and keep in mind, stories about him and others in Hollywood acting the same way have been around for decades.

Many democrats have been trying to get Hillary to go away ever since she lost to Trump; maybe the Clintons will not be able to run away from this connection. 

Keep in mind, the initial story on Weinstein was put forward by the New York Times.  The same New York Times that sat on the same story in 2004.  And outlets like CNN are making sure to tell us that Hillary took five days to make a statement.

There Goes the Neighborhood

Harvey Weinstein -- who more than anyone defined and shaped the sharp-elbowed art of Oscar campaigning -- has been expelled from the group that presents the Academy Awards.

I suspect about half of the members of this group deserve similar treatment.

The Hypocrisy of the Left

Chapter 1,256,723

You don’t get much more left than Hollywood, Clinton, or Obama.  You don’t get much more left than denouncing those who treat women as nothing but playthings.  You don’t get much more left than denouncing Trump for using locker room talk while ignoring people like Bill and Harvey.

Put it all together and you get your typical modern-day liberal.

A Bit on the Non-Aggression Principle

“If you want this job, you have to have sex with me.”

No violation.

“But bionic, all we need is for people to respect the NAP; nothing more is necessary.”

Sure.  You send your daughter out to live in that world.  Are you sure that that’s the world you want?


  1. If the only things keeping my daughters safe from Harvey is a private version of "The Thin Blue Line" and NAP, I think I will vote to secede into a culture of less sexuality.

    Eric Morris

  2. It is very telling that a former senator, secretary of state and presidential candidate, doesn't even bother to pay lip service to the due process that is supposed to occur in her country.

    She could have used it to justify her delayed response. But, that would further diminish the media's ability to convict (or acquit.)

  3. A few points:

    Hillary, go away: I hope Hillary and the big tent of modern liberals never goes away. They're the best way to discourage everything that they preach.

    Hollywood and Entertainment: It's coming down fast. Poor ratings for TV and bad box office sales for the films are the canary in the gold mine. I mean, if you can't sell the Bladerunner sequel that fans have been begging for (for decades), I'm not sure what you can sell.

    This extends to merchandise for entertainment. Whether it's NFL or film/tv/etc collectibles. You can't simultaneously demonize middle class whites (or anyone of "priviledge") while insisting on an MSRP (Manufacturer suggested retail price) of $29.99 per unit. Less so, when you claim these people are more inhuman than you - while you're busy on the casting couch with the vulnerable young lady looking to have a career.

    The markets are responding right now, and there's not much to replace it with. This has smaller merchandise retailers shaking in their boots.

    Entertainment media can adapt or collapse at this point.

  4. Yes! Loved that last bit. Society can not be built on the NAP alone. Culture (and the basis of culture) matters tremendously.

    1. Yep, I loved that part too- especially relevant to me as a father of 4 daughters.

    2. I hated that last bit, as it's idiotic. The first part, that offering something in exchange for sex is no violation of the NAP is correct, but the conclusion is special begging.

      We should dismiss the NAP because my daughter might be willing to suck weiner to get ahead? Lose the NAP because someone else's daughter might be willing to suck my weiner for favors?

      Hell no!

      Keep YOUR moralizing out of MY bedroom, thanks.

    3. Never said the NAP should be thrown out. The NAP only talks about force, but it has nothing to say on all the other things (morals and culture) that are important to a healthy and functioning society... one that would respect the NAP in the first place.

      Sure, I'll keep my moral values out of your bedroom. But please, forgive me if my community doesn't want you as part of our voluntary association.

    4. Mr. Softy, you are new around here so I will go easy on you...just once.

      Sherlock has said it, I will repeat: show me one place where I have written my desire to throw out the NAP. Just one. I will save you a lot of trouble - you will not find one.

      As to the remainder of your go live in that world; make sure your daughters know that it is the world you desire.

      Maybe you can teach them how to get ahead in such a world? You know, firsthand demonstrations? After all, it really isn't clear that this would be a violation of the NAP.

    5. Hey BS, how the heck did your bedroom wind up in Bionic Mosquito's blog?

  5. "You send your daughter out to live in that world."

    In a society without a State to stop me, I would kill the fat bastard for even talking dirty to my daughter. We need more men to talk the law into their own hands.

  6. I saw this somewhere, that that Hillary was asked whether Harvey was like Bill she answered "close but no ciguar. "

  7. I'm wondering what's actually going on with all this recent cultural uproar, instigated by the sudden saintly attitudes of NYTimes, CNN et al. The Left (Hollywood pedophilia and debauchery) and the Right (NFL-Military joint maneuvers) both grinding their teeth as their foundations crumble. But why now?
    It's nothing new. This crap has been going on for decades. The art and science of keeping it all covered up has been fine-tuned to near perfection. So why the sudden sacrificial offerings to the gods of the Left and Right?
    Perhaps an historian, such as Bionic, can provide some strategic insight?

    1. It's the kids and the internet, man. Thank God. Long may they wave.

  8. I agree. Technically there is no NAP violation but this has nothing to do with the NAP. This is about culture. A people with a culture of a strong moral foundation would not only find this behaviour reprehensible, but would go out of their way to socially ostracize and reprimand. Perhaps even exclusion and expulsion from the industry itself. However, in our current depraved culture, this behaviour is commonplace. Not just in Hollywood either.
    While we are only hearing stories of survivors or those who refused, I am sure there are far more women who happily capitulated. Fame and fortune are more important to them than their personal dignity and values. I have heard first-hand and seen what ambitious women with Harvey Weinstein's moral compass do. They will throw themselves at men (married or single) in an attempt to exchange the physical "commodity" they are offering for career opportunities. Weinstein would not have been pursuing this strategy for so long if it was not working.
    This is not to say that this behaviour would simply disappear if there was a return to the "Old Culture" (for lack of a better term). Sex, power and beauty are intricately bound together. However, the more debauched manifestations of this dynamic would be minimized.

  9. Another aspect of this to me is tied to the market. From an economic perspective, there are far more actors than there are creative roles available (and creative people like writers and directors who are part of the creative process). The balance of power then shifts to those who can supply meaty creative roles. A man with the morals and tremendous urges of Harvey Weinstein with that power in his hands and here we are.

    Ironically, Hollywood's anti-capitalist stance (and with the assistance of the administrative state) has made this situation worse. Mandatory state-enforced guilds for writers and actors leads to concentrations of power and creates barriers of entry to newcomers. Those who don't want to play by the rules established are effectively shut out. I haven't even touched on the distribution business and cinema's dated restrictive business model. Perfect industry for a creep like Weinstein to thrive.

    However, technological innovations and the associated software and businesses that have arisen to provide competing content (Youtube, Netflix, Amazon) are an absolute boon. Without capitalism or at least a somewhat functioning market, things would be a whole lot worse (especially considering the moral rot that constitutes culture today).

    As an aside, when will modern women get some basic economic and philosophical knowledge? Men seem to be driving the marginalization of Hollywood by providing other alternatives for content creation and distribution. This debacle highlights how awful feminism and its associated entitlement complex has become. If you want the climate of sex for roles to change, don't just whine and complain. Useless hash tagging and twitter memes won't change things either. And even worse is bringing in the heavy hand of the state. Women in the industry need to get into the creative side of the business and be market savvy. Established actresses need to put their money where their mouth is. Instead of that home in Beverly Hills, fund a production company or seek out and align creative talent you can elevate with your brand and visibility. Get a competitive advantage by horizontally integrating yourself along the value chain so you have a bit more power than the thousands of me-too actors and actresses who need to suck up and beg for creative roles (enter Harvey Weinstein).

    Unless you have the exceptional talent of a Hepburn or Taylor, specialization in a low barrier profession like acting is not the way to go. Unfortunately the current solution seems to be this: "Men stop behaving badly and give us the great roles and scripts we need. Meanwhile most of us will continue to make no attempt whatsoever to develop our creative capabilities and broaden our horizons so that we are not as dependent on others (male or female). In a market where actors are a dime a dozen!"