News of the Week for Nov. 2nd, 2020
News of the Week for Nov. 2nd, 2020
Here is the silent classic, “The Cat And The Canary” from 1927.
One would expect a professional guild to expect their members to adhere to professional guidelines as they exercise their profession, and to assure that their members are living up to those professional standard while exercising their profession. The National Association of Realtors also believes in members adhering to professional guidelines as they exercise their profession if by “adhering to professional guidelines as they exercise their profession” they mean punishing people for anything from “unwillful discrimination” to “disparate impact” in any and all aspects of their private lives.

A few highlights of just how insidious this is (bold sections highlighted by your humble author):
- Speech deemed hateful when made by realtors on their social media (or anywhere else in their lives) “should not be allowed to continue” and “must be stopped” because all realtors are guilty by association with a “hateful few.” Who determines “hateful speech” now, though?
- Everything a realtor does in their lives will be held up to the “anti-discrimination” standard operating in their professional code of ethics.
- It bears repeating that this overreach into every aspect of realtors’ lives will apply not just to willful discrimination but all discrimination. “Willful” is intentionally struck out. Would this include microaggressions? Impact not intent? Honest mistakes? Misinterpretations?
- To highlight the impact of this proposed change, if found in violation of their harassing or hate speech policies anywhere in their lives, realtors will be handed over to their state licensing authorities as acts of discrimination relevant to the profession.
- The provision will apply to “harassing speech, hate speech, epithets, or slurs,” that lead to “overt discrimination or disparate impact.” The latter of these two is worryingly subjective, as we’ve seen very clearly all year. The rationale is very “impact not intent.”
- These proposed changes have been approved in special emergency meetings that go outside of protocol by a special advisory board that circumvents the usual processes.
- What’s the impact? Realtors in violation could lose their licenses and labeled bigots by their professional guild. These violations are to be considered “particularly egregious.” The context is chilling and rather Orwellian, since it applies to realtors’ whole lives.
- What’s the overarching context? The usual. George Floyd died, so they need diversity. They need to look internally. They need to police speech of all of their members at all times. Why? Disparate impacts
- Enforcement can be used to “raise consciousness” and serve as “an effective educational tool.” The Code’s duties should be “enforced, and enforced with vigor and determination.”
- As a new type of egregious example of misconduct, a realtor was deemed to have been discriminatory and used hate speech on social media (example not disclosed), was fined $5000 and assigned *implicit bias training*. First offense. $5000.
- Hearing Panels can look back as far into one’s (social media) history as necessary to apply discipline when the problem is “a violation of public trust,” as these amendments would turn any act of “hate speech” into.
- Whatever “fair housing” refers to, it includes unconscious bias training and profiling “leaders who exemplify the best fair housing practices and workplace diversity,” which probably means giving awards and status to Woke realtors.
- This is about realty, but it’s not about realty. This could be any professional entity with ties to professional licensure at the state level, and you could be judged on very subjective standards and fined and removed from your ability to do your job over them.
An archive of their webpage discussing this can be found here and here.
The “racial equity” indoctrination is more widespread than many people realize. Not even an Executive Order from the President can stop it at state/local government or private companies. Case in point: The total take over of Seattle and Kings County, Washington by the ideology of “racial equity” and the Critical Race Theory that underlies it.
Racial segregation, systemic inequality, and open discrimination and harassment the official policy of many of the government organs in and around Seattle. Christopher Rufo has yet again done yeoman’s work uncovering leaked documents that prove the “wokeness” that has metathesized throughout the Seattle area.
“At the King County Library System, a private consulting firm called Racial Equity Consultants recently held racially-segregated ‘listening sessions’ as part of the library’s ongoing racial justice programs. The consultants ‘begin with an anti-oppression framework’ and use segregated sessions in order to root out ‘institutional privileges and systemic inequities embedded in the current socio-political conditions that influence and affect our institutions.’ The consultants discovered widespread ‘institutional racism’ in the library system—and dismissed employees who reported ‘not experiencing or witnessing racism while working at KCLS’ as likely suffering from the false consciousness of ‘internalized racism.’ When reached by e-mail, Racial Equity Consultants said it was not authorized to comment.
“At the Veterans Administration Puget Sound facility, the local leadership has launched a series of racially-segregated ‘caucuses’ for ‘individuals who identify as white,’ ‘individuals who identity as African American or Black,’ and ‘individuals who identity as people of color.’ According to whistleblower emails, the organizer of the sessions, Dr. Jesse Markman, initially ‘felt uncomfortable suggesting, as a white person, what [he] perceived, at the time, to be segregation.’ However, after consultation with outside diversity trainers, Markman decided to move forward with the racially-segregated sessions, calling them ‘an environment for sharing and discussion, which is not afforded by mixed groups.’ When contacted by e-mail, Dr. Markman referred the inquiry to the VA’s Public Affairs Office, which did not provide comment.
“Finally, at the King County Prosecutor’s Office, Prosecutor Dan Satterberg and senior staff have recently required employees to sign a ‘equity and social justice’ pledge and assigned ‘continued training for white employees,’ who must ‘do the work’ to ‘learn the true history of racism in our country.’ As part of the new initiative, white employees are encouraged to participate in racially-designated ‘white antiracist action groups,’ as well as agency-wide ‘cultural competency’ training that teaches them to how to ‘accept responsibility for their own racism, sexism, [and] hetereosexism.’ According to leaked emails, Satterberg recently wrote a letter to staff declaring that the ‘privileged white male cohort’ in his office should ‘shut up and listen to the truths of those impacted by racism,’ then commit to the program of ‘antiracism.’ The prosecutor’s office confirmed the authenticity of the equity pledge and staff-wide memo, but Prosecutor Satterberg did not offer comment.”
Yet again we see paid consultants who get paid crudloads of money to peddle their bigotry. But this insanity has become embedded within organizations who use innocuous or even positive sounding words (e.g. “equity”) while peddling inequality and collective racial shaming in what is known as a “Motte & Bailey” fallacy.
In response, the King County Library System offered a non-apology apology.

Notice how they use words like “diversity” while peddling ideological uniformity, words like “equity” but avoid words like “equality”, and “inclusion” while they push segregation. It’s Orwellian.

An outfit calling itself “Freedom House” has decided that the U.S. is free… but not free enough. Why is the U.S. not free enough? President Trump.
- The administration of President Donald Trump continued to introduce restrictive new policies to limit immigration and reduce the number of refugees and asylum seekers reaching US soil, prompting court challenges and some pushback from Congress. In March and October, the president vetoed congressional resolutions that sought to overturn his February declaration of a national emergency, which he used to reassign appropriated funds to advance construction of a wall along the border with Mexico.
- In August, a gunman apparently motivated by racist and xenophobic ideology carried out the year’s deadliest mass shooting, killing 22 people at a store in Texas that was frequented by Mexican and Mexican American customers.
- In December, the opposition-controlled House of Representatives approved articles of impeachment against President Trump, accusing him of abusing his office by attempting to extort a personal political favor from the Ukrainian government, and of obstructing Congress by ordering the executive branch not to cooperate with the House’s impeachment inquiry. A trial in the Senate was pending at year’s end.
Let us address the those score deficiencies.
“Was the current head of government or other chief national authority elected through free and fair elections?
“¾”
And how is the United States deficient? The use of the Electoral College, Russia interference, not making Russia interference a major issue, and being impeached.

How is the Electoral College not part and parcel of a “free and fair” election? Is it because the winner of the Electoral College might not win a plurality of the vote? That speaks to an intentional anti-majoritarian element, not to whether the process is “free” or “fair”.
The rest of it is linked to the Russia conspiracy, including the impeachment. To be fair, the Freedom House ranking was only through 2019 and didn’t include Trump’s acquittal in the Senate. But even they admit that “The Trump administration took some steps to prevent a repetition of the 2016 interference in 2020, but the White House resisted making the issue a major priority”. So not going full in on what he perceived as a political and personal attacks makes his election “unfree” or “unfair”? This “ranking” made no legitimate qualms about the 2016 Presidential election.
“Are the electoral laws and framework fair, and are they implemented impartially by the relevant election management bodies?
“¾”
And what are their complaints here? Single member districts drawn by legislatures with gerrymandering, voter ID laws, election officials who are elected (e.g. Secretaries of state, county registrars of voters, &c.), the Electoral College (again), the Senate, and vacancies on the Federal Election Commission.
“Antifa” we are told, just means that they are “against fascism”, and after all who wouldn’t be against fascism other than some fascist Nazi? So, when Antifa and friends actually “bash the fash” they obviously target… Jews?
People in New York throw projectiles at driving participants of the #JewsforTrump caravan below. pic.twitter.com/5QBYiX29Tv
— Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) October 25, 2020
Are they trying to break the windows on the property of the Jews? Now, where have we seen that before…
The first of full week of early voting has finished up, with one more to go. In past elections your humble author would compare early vote numbers with past elections to get an idea of how this election was shaping up. However, due to mail ballots being shotgunned out to all active voters, the dynamic is completely different. In past elections, the Democrats did well with early voting while Republicans did well in absentee ballots, with early votes being about ten times more numerous than absentee ballots; the total of all early votes and absentees being about ⅔ of the total vote.

In 2016 by the first week, 384,096 people had voted with Democrats having a voter lead of 27,150, or a lead of 7.1%. In 2020, after the first week 649,555 votes have been submitted, with 56.2% of that being mail vote and 43.8% being early vote. The Democrats had a voter lead of 54,927, or 8.4%. A majority of ballots have likely already been cast. The good news for the GOP, the first day of early voting had the Democrats ahead by over 20%, and 44,603 votes. The bad news for the GOP is that there are ⅔ more votes already cast at this point than in 2016.

Total number of Nevada voters who have cast ballots at the end of the first week of early voting.
The Democrats’ mail ballot advantage has increased from ca 40 thousand to nearly 100,000, with on average about 10,000 net additional Democratic voters after the first weekend. The Republicans have usually do the worst when it comes to in-person early voting on the weekends and the final Friday. The Republicans after the first week of in-person early voting have a net voter advantage of over 40,000 voters. The Democrats lead overall has increased from ca 44,000 to ca 56,000, despite the percent difference falling from ca 20% to about 8%.

Total number of mail ballots returned in Nevada by party.

Democrat lead in voters who have cast ballots at the end of the first week of early voting.
The Democratic lead in mail ballots has increased by about 52,000 with 189,000 additional total mail ballots having been received since the first day of early vote reporting.
In Clark County (where Las Vegas is and ca 70% of the state’s population), the Democrats had nearly 39,000 lead in voters out of about 260,000 cast, or about 15%. In comparison, they have about a 67,000 voter lead with about 429,000 ballots case in 2020, or just under 16%, which is comparable to 2016 by percentage.
In Washoe County (where Reno and ca 20% of the state’s population), the Democrats had a lead of only about 2500 voters out of about 71,000 votes cast, or about 3.5%. In contrast, in 2020, Democrats have a lead of nearly 8000 voters out of nearly 138,000 votes cast, or about 5.5%. Considering that Republicans have a slight registration lead in Washoe County, this is not a good sign.
So far, the Democrats have banked tens of thousands more early voters than Republicans, and even increased their numerical lead slightly. Considering that Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by less than 30,000 votes, every vote will county. For the Republicans to have any hope of winning statewide they need a combination of:
The independent vote, however, has been less and less favorable for Republicans in each subsequent election. It remains to be seen just how the independent and 3rd party vote will react to Donald Trump as an incumbent.
A decade ago, I was talking with a scientist who had immigrated from Bulgaria, had lived under Communism, and had become an American citizen. The words she spoke to me still gives me a chill of terror:

News of the Week for Oct. 25th, 2020

Back when homosexuality was illegal and considered a mental illness, advocates of legalization argued that it was merely a “lifestyle choice” and a “preference”, rather than something that they could not control. After it was accepted as legal, and even a right, it became an “orientation” that was inherent and that people couldn’t control their sexual attraction. Even then, however, “sexual preference” and “sexual orientation” was generally used to be interchangeable and basically denoted one’s sexual attraction.
Even as recently as this year, Logo TV (a LGBTQ&c. focused channel), The Advocate (a LGBTQ&c. magazine), and Slate all used the term “sexual preference” or similar language declaring the impermanence of this “orientation”.
Yet all it took was an expression of lack of prejudice or hatred against LGBTQ&c. by Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett to literally rewrite the dictionary to make it doubleplusungood and her statement an expression of throughtcrime.
Today Mazie Hirono said the term "sexual preference" is offensive. @SteveKrak showed as of September 28 Merriam-Webster didn't say it was offensive, but today it does say that.
So I checked when the entry was last changed according to merriam webster and *THEY CHANGED IT TODAY* pic.twitter.com/sb9gK69M0R— Wokal DistΔnce (@wokal_distance) October 14, 2020
Check it out! Merriam Webster covering for Dems on the fly! pic.twitter.com/5Gm5LHAhqE
— Thor Svensonn (@thorsvensonn) October 14, 2020
This isn’t the first time Mirriam-Webbster has caved to the wokeness and made itself the vanguard of newspeak.