The sad rise of #NeverTara

With at least five people now corroborating that Tara Reade told them of her alleged sexual assault by Joe Biden at the time it happened–which includes a chilling testimonial from her late mother, speaking from beyond the grave in a taped phone call to Larry King Live–it’s become increasingly obvious to the Democrat Party that they have a real problem on their hands.  Reade has already presented far more evidence than Christine Blasey Ford ever did when she waged her politically-charged jihad against Brett Kavanaugh, in the process exposing the rank hypocrisy of those who advocated the destruction of a Supreme Court nominee on the flimsiest of pretexts and yet have now just discovered the virtues of due process when their own presumptive nominee for President stands, in their words, credibly accused.  Moreover, Reade’s story isn’t just going away, in spite of the mainstream best efforts to bury it.

That only leaves the Democrats with two unappealing options:  go after Reade hard and fast in an attempt to destroy her credibility, or make it seem as if they’re supportive of her even while they’re trying to drag Biden’s sorry carcass across the finish line.  Luckily for them, Option 1 seems to have been taken up by the #NeverTrump stalwarts over at the Bulwark, who–much like those Japanese soldiers who kept on fighting because they could never accept they had lost the war–have been engaged in rather hamfisted efforts such as this from Charlie Sykes:

Firearms and Ammunition on sale now: $150 off $1,000+ (use code: APRIL150)

Why did Tara Reade delete this?
"Through my lens, President Putin brought a chaotic and failed nation to become a vibrant, creative, economic force within a decade… just admit that his sheer, calculated vision and willful energy brought Russia back.."https://t.co/fOzdeh7hqe

— Charlie Sykes (@SykesCharlie) May 4, 2020

It does, however, remain a bit of a stretch to insinuate that Putin managed to Plant Reade in Biden’s office back in 1993 as some sort of honey trap–even by Bulwark standards.  So that leaves the Democrats with Option 2, if only to cover their bets with the American public.  On that front, they’ve already made their opening gambit–as we see with this op-ed in the New York Times by noted “feminist” Linda Hirshman.

The title pretty much speaks for itself.

I Believe Tara Reade. I’m Voting for Joe Biden Anyway.

I’ll take one for the team. I believe Ms. Reade, and I’ll vote for Mr. Biden this fall.

I won’t say it will be easy. I have been writing on and agitating for women’s equality since “The Feminine Mystique” came out in 1963. I know how supposedly “liberal” men abused the sexual revolution in every imaginable way. I am unimpressed by their lip service to feminism, their Harvard degrees or their donations to feminist causes.

And yet you keep on voting for them.  Might have something to do with why these men don’t take you seriously.  Anyway, moving on…

All major Democratic Party figures have indicated they’re not budging on the presumptive nominee, and the transaction costs of replacing him would be suicidal. Barring some miracle, it’s going to be Mr. Biden.

So what is the greatest good or the greatest harm? Mr. Biden, and the Democrats he may carry with him into government, are likely to do more good for women and the nation than his competition, the worst president in the history of the Republic. Compared with the good Mr. Biden can do, the cost of dismissing Tara Reade — and, worse, weakening the voices of future survivors — is worth it.

Ah, yes.  I remember how liberal feminist support for Ted Kennedy was predicated on the same justification.  Sure, Teddy may have left poor Mary Jo Kopechne to a slow, excruciating asphyxiation death in his car after he drove off that bridge in Chappaquiddick–but think of all he did for abortion while in the Senate!

And what’s a little waitress sandwich compared to keeping Robert Bork off the Supreme Court?

Hirshman concludes:

[P]hilosophy offers an answer to my quest for justice. Philosophers for at least three centuries have known that there can be no call to justice in a situation of extreme scarcity. David Hume, who originated the analysis, suggested that nobody can be expected to behave justly when trying to survive a shipwreck. The great modern philosopher John Rawls called moderate scarcity, or the absence of extreme scarcity, one of the “circumstances of justice.”

It may not be just, but I’m swimming away from Mr. Trump’s sinking ship as hard as I can. If I have to, I’ll vote for Mr. Biden. I hope I’m not going to drown anyway.

I dunno, all the gentleman who sacrificed their own lives so that women and children could escape the Titanic might beg to differ.  Then again, that was a different age when gallantry and principle were more of the norm, rather than cold, calculating self-interest.

That said, I definitely understand what Hirshman is saying here.  The whole reason so many of us voted for Trump back in 2016 was because we had grown sick of voting for all the good losers that the GOP threw at us, and seeing our own party roll over time and again for Democrats and their allies in the media–as if pretending that the status quo was the only civilized course available to us.  Trump, in spite of his character flaws, turned all that on its head, and proved that we could advance a conservative agenda against the Democrats while beating the media at their own game.

There is, however, a huge difference at work here, in that Leftists such as Ms. Hirshman will probably be praised for making a difficult choice for the good of the country, while those of us on the Right will continue to be demonized for doing the exact same thing in regards to Donald Trump and Brett Kavanaugh.  Of course, the Left sees itself as uniquely virtuous, and therefore deserving of this dispensation.  We, on the other had, are the Deplorables, and therefore deserve nothing but contempt for our choices.  At least that’s how the media will portray it.

What people like Ms. Hirshman will never understand, though, is that their side getting a constant pass for their bad behavior only encourages more of it.  Much like those Harvard types she decries for talking the talk on feminist causes while abusing women on the side, Democrat politicians know they’ve already been granted an indulgence for their worst proclivities–and if Joe Biden, who is running for the highest office in the land, gets one, he certainly won’t be the last guy who thinks he can mouth a few platitudes and receive absolution for his transgressions.

Check out the NEW NOQ Report Podcast.

American Conservative Movement

Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. The coronavirus crisis has prompted many, even some conservatives, to promote authoritarianism. It’s understandable to some extent now, but it must not be allowed to embed itself in American life. We currently have 8000+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.

[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]

var wWidgetConf_b1a6d20b69 = {rows: 4,cols: 1,backgroundColor: ‘rgb(240, 240, 240)’,textColor: ‘rgb(0, 0, 0)’,displayContent: ‘0’,contentSort: ‘0’,contentType: ‘0’,showTitle: ‘1’,showThumb: ‘1’,widgetID: ‘wWidget_b1a6d20b69’};

(function() {
var sc = document.createElement(‘script’); sc.type = ‘text/javascript’; sc.async = true;
sc.src = ‘//mixi.media/data/js/92936.js’; sc.charset = ‘utf-8’;
var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(sc, s);
}());