Lifestyles of the benefactors of the poor

The other McCain has an interesting tale to tell:

Recently the World Bank, led by the leading socialist candidate for the french presidency, in its endless efforts to help the poor, helped the poor backward illegal immigrant Muslim majority of the Ivory Coast take over from the slightly less poor and slightly more advanced native Christian minority of the Ivory Coast.

But how do these people live when not tirelessly serving the poor?

The managing director of the International Monetary Fund, former French Foreign Minister, and until now leading socialist candidate for the French presidency, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, was recently busted for raping a hotel maid in his three thousand dollars a night hotel suite

I find the psychology of it interesting. He was in a foreign country, she was in her own country, still the most powerful country in the world despite our recent decline, she was an employee in her place of employment, he was a guest, which puts her in the strongest possible position get retribution for rape, and him in the weakest possible position to weasel out of it, in the position where one is most likely to get busted. These people think they own the whole world – and usually they are right.

Why did the USG kill Bin Laden out of hand? And why did almost all Americans approve of killing him out of hand, rather than charging him and trying him, or questioning him under torture and then charging him and trying him?

Because no one, not even the US president, trusts US courts to convict against foreign pressure, or acquit against foreign pressure.

It will be interesting to see what happens with these charges. It will also be interesting to see what happens to the career of whoever is in charge of the Midtown South New York police precinct.

I suspect that after he is released on bail, these charges will go nowhere fast, much like the careers of the police who busted him. His behavior suggests that that is what he believes, and the reaction to the killing of Bin Laden suggests that this belief is widely shared.

10 Responses to “Lifestyles of the benefactors of the poor”

  1. A Man's Man says:

    U 2 Riv: Whether it be true or false that the earth needs saving from mankind, high technology is manly, and saving the earth from mankind is unmanly. What is more manly? Cutting down trees with a chain saw, or chaining yourself to a tree to save it?

    Me 2 U: What’s more manly -sitting on your ass typing blah, blah, blah, on a blog or getting out in NATURE, hiking, climbing mountains and climbing trees?????

    • jim says:

      forty five minutes ago I came home from a walk along the beach and over a hill, during which I climbed a tree, and now I read your comment.

      But my point is not that physical exercise is manly, but that the progressive viewpoint is unmanly, since progressives are required to be ashamed to be affluent, ashamed to be white, ashamed to be male, ashamed to be human.

      Progressivism, like Christianity, demands guilt, while the manly attitude is to never apologize, never explain, to do what pleases oneself. Progressivism is, however, worse than Christianity, since at least Christians get forgiveness and love, while progressives suffer from original sin that can never be expunged, so they supposedly deserve to be hated by everyone and are required to hate themselves.

      • A Man's Man says:

        Disagree. I don’t know what you mean by “progressive” – I’m assuming its some form of groupthink. The conservation of nature, the respect for all forms of life, not just human, and the molding of one’s own personal lifestyle around these concepts to whatever extent is practically do-able, is neither “manly” or “un-manly” – it’s just humane and intelligent.

        Like everyone else in the “manosphere” you want to put lables on people – progressive, unprogressive, right, left, this, that, whatever.

        Did it ever occur to you that some people have convictions that develop from within with very little if any input from political or media trends?

        And trying to tell another man what convictions to have (your’s) in an effort to get him to give up his frame for your’s – is indeed “unmanly” if he were to do it.

        • jim says:

          The conservation of nature, the respect for all forms of life, not just human, and the molding of one’s own personal lifestyle around these concepts to whatever extent is practically do-able, is neither “manly” or “un-manly” – it’s just humane and intelligent.

          If Rivelino thinks the earth needs saving, he thinks he is sinful and should be guilty. If you feel yourself sinful and guilty, you lose your balls.

          Pioneers, lumberjacks, bulldozer drivers, and hunters are pretty much concentrated essence of manliness. See some rednecks catching fish with their bare hands.

          That man oppresses the earth, and that this is sinful, is much the same concept as that man oppresses women, and that this is sinful. Feminist women do not in fact sleep with sensitive feminist males, and caring about the earth is almost as sensitive as caring about male oppression of women.

          Another thing that hits progressives males trying to get into progressive women’s pants is that progressives have no friends to the right, no enemies to the left. In the progressive pantheon, girls have higher status than males. So you cannot accept the progressive pantheon, since this makes you theoretically her equal, and in reality her inferior. Girls don’t sleep with their equals, still less with their inferiors.

    • jim says:

      forty five minutes ago I came home from a walk along the beach and over a hill, during which I climbed a tree, and now I read your comment.

      But my point is not that physical exercise is manly , but that the progressive viewpoint is unmanly, since progressives are required to be ashamed to be affluent, ashamed to be white, ashamed to be male, ashamed to be human.

      Progressivism, like Christianity, demands guilt, while the manly attitude is to never apologize, never explain, to do what pleases oneself. Progressivism is, however, worse than Christianity, since at least Christians get forgiveness and love, while progressives suffer from original sin that can never be expunged, so they supposedly deserve to be hated by everyone and are required to hate themselves.

  2. I think the primary reason for killing Osama Bin Laden was to lesson instances of hostage-taking (and beheading) of Americans, in the period of time leading up to the trial and execution.

    • jim says:

      Possibly, but so far Al Quaeda has not taken hostages. They just kill people. Hamas takes hostages to swap. Maybe Al Quaeda might get into that business, but we have a pile of Al Quaeda prisoners, and they have never asked for a hostage exchange. They were doing the best they could to hurt us before we killed Osama, and I expect they would continue doing the best they can to harm us, regardless of whether we had killed him, taken him prisoner and interrogated him under torture, or merely locked him up

  3. Occupant says:

    Don’t know if you monitor old posts, but the case against DSK appears to be unraveling. Do you still think he is guilty?

    Thing is this most recent episode will effectively immunize him from any future accusation of prior sexual misconduct or wrongdoing, throwing reasonable doubt on his (apparently numerous) accusers, giving his run for the leadership of France a shot in the arm.

    • jim says:

      There is physical evidence (semen) that he had sex with her, and evidence of physical violence between them (bruising, scratching), but under the circumstances, that is no longer persuasive evidence of rape. I would now have to go with the verdict “Not proven”

Leave a Reply