My letter to Ralph Northam

3 February 2019

Governor Northam:

As your constituent, I want to offer you my moral support in this tough time you are going through.

When you gave your press conference and explained why you had made the admission that you later had to retract or clarify, I understood what had happened. You had been trying to do the right thing by apologizing, but then realized you had made a mistake and admitted to something you didn’t do. So the next day, you sought to explain more fully and set the record straight.

This happens all the time. Most of the legislators who are giving you a hard time right now are lawyers, and therefore should be familiar with this type of scenario. Suspects, under pressure from a detective to confess to a crime, will often admit to an act they didn’t commit. Then later they have to try to recant and explain that they falsely confessed. People who have not been under that kind of stress don’t understand what it’s like, or how one could make that kind of error, but we know it happens often.

Some of the same Democrats who are attacking you now would say that a black defendant who committed a drug felony 35 years ago should be forgiven by society, and have his civil rights restored so that he can participate in the political process. Yet they would also say that you should step down and leave politics because you darkened your skin in a talent show, which is not even a criminal offense. These critics are not being consistent in their thinking.

Then they want to say that you should resign because you mishandled the public relations aspects of the situation. But every politician makes gaffes. At least you tried to be as honest about it as you could, rather than giving a false explanation that might appease people more. Even if it’s not good politics, it’s the right thing to do.

The problem is that we’re in an era where Democrats want to base their strategy for winning the coming elections on accusing Republicans of being white supremacist, and Republicans want to argue, “Democrats are the real racists.” You simply got caught in the middle of that, and now both parties feel the need to compete to show that they’re the less racist. The way they’re doing that is by competing to see which one can attack you the most fiercely.

There are good reasons, though, why you might not want to resign. Your staying would help uphold a principle that politicians should not be attacked for what they said or did 35 years ago. We just got done with the Kavanaugh hearings, which were another scenario where a man’s future was being decided based on a long-ago alleged incident of youthful horseplay (not even alleged to have been sexual in nature) from when he was 17. Shouldn’t there be any statute of limitations on how far back we’ll go in judging a man’s character based on what he did, or may have done, many years ago?

Part of the problem with going back so far in digging up these old incidents is that people’s memories will have faded. 35 years is a long time, so no wonder you had trouble remembering exactly what happened or didn’t happen. Yet they expected you to have perfect recall when put on the spot and suddenly confronted with these emotionally charged accusations. They’re behaving unreasonably and uncharitably toward you.

If you resign, then the will of the people, as expressed in the primary where they chose you among the field of Democrats, and the general election, where they chose you over your Republican opponent, will have been thwarted. Both the governor and lieutenant governor positions will be filled by people who were not elected to those positions. For example, the lieutenant gubernatorial role, currently held by Democrat Justin Fairfax, will be taken by Steve Newman, the Republican pro tempore of the senate.

We don’t actually know that Justin Fairfax would make a better governor than you, or that Steve Newman wold make a better lieutenant governor than Justin Fairfax. All we know is that the voters did not choose them for those roles. You were the one they chose to be governor, and Fairfax was the one they chose to be lieutenant governor.

Your position is not like that of a legislator, who could be removed from his committees and shunned by his colleagues for saying or doing something they don’t like. As leader of the executive branch, you still have the necessary authority to do your job effectively. You are still in command of your cabinet and the other public servants in your administration.

The Constitution of Virginia makes the executive branch separate from the legislative so that you can be independent, and not have to bow to the wishes of your fellow Democratic politicians if you don’t want to. The Constitution also gives you a four-year term, and says that you don’t have to resign unless it’s your choice. You have committed no impeachable offense. So why should you be compelled to quit? The governor is the leader of his state party; the other Democratic politicians are supposed to follow your lead, and not the other way around.

Democrats didn’t like the fact that you voted for George W. Bush twice, but for some reason they consider stuff you did much longer ago than that less forgivable. But in both cases, you say that you’ve had a change of heart since then. The voters were willing to accept that you’d changed your politics since the 2000 and 2004 elections, so who’s to say that if the question were put to them, they wouldn’t also accept that you’d changed your views on race since the talent show 35 years ago? We have no way of knowing.

Your intent in darkening your face to perform as Michael Jackson was to pay tribute to a performer you admired. Michael Jackson himself lightened his skin; yet this was not decried by whites as a racist or disrespectful act, nor did it end his musical career, the way some people want your political career ended. In fact, in many cultures, such as Filipino culture, skin-lightening is a common practice. On the other hand, whites will often (temporarily) change their skin tone too by going to tanning salons. Changing one’s skin color is not really that big of a deal; these are just aesthetic choices. It is part of our freedom of expression which we cherish as Americans.

Organizations like the NAACP, having achieved most of their civil rights goals, probably feel like they’re having trouble staying relevant. They have to make you seem like a villain so that they can seem like heroes for attacking you. This helps them attract publicity, donations, etc.

It’s unfortunate that you got caught in the middle of that, and that they’ve made their problem your problem. But until someone stands up against this kind of bullying, there will be more incidents like this, where people act outraged over a minor mistake in judgment, and form a howling mob to call for his head on a platter. You should stay firm in your position that you did nothing to deserve being forced to resign.

It’s tempting, when a man is betrayed by his friends, for him to become weak and say, “I’ll just quit, if that’s what they want me to do.” But the young people of our Commonwealth need the example of a man who will stand strong in his convictions. If your fellow Democratic politicians say that you can’t lead effectively, what is really happening is that they are the ones who are refusing to let you lead effectively, and therefore if anything, they should be the ones to step down.

If I were going to be cynical, I might also say that perhaps what’s going on is that some people prefer Justin Fairfax’s politics to yours, and that’s why they want to pretend to be outraged, so they can pressure you to quit so he can take your place. But again, Fairfax wasn’t chosen by the people to be governor; you were. You were the one who ran for that office and won; he wasn’t.

You probably have a lot of people who quietly support you but don’t want to say anything lest people accuse them of being racist. But, people called Donald Trump racist too, and he got elected anyway. It’s too bad that, after he got treated that way, he’s now attacking you as well. If you were a Republican, he’d probably be siding with you.

The worst case scenario is, if you choose to stay in office, you have to deal with these people giving you a hard time for the next two-and-a-half years, and then you can leave politics if you want. That’s not too bad. If you quit, though, it’s almost like you’re acknowledging you did something very wrong; yet you just got done correcting your mistake in making a false admission of having been in that yearbook photo. So to resign would be to compound your earlier mistake.

So, I say, you should stay. Let the snarling, barking, yelping dogs of the media and leftist establishment make all the noise they want, while you focus on your own work, under the protection of the constitutionally guaranteed separation of powers and four-year term which you have every right to complete.


Nathan Larson

Why was I not entitled to two years with Meshelle before she went away?

BuiQuang writes:

You both used each other and you lost. Too bad, so sad for you. Obviously, you the victim. You did not plan to hold green card over her head to gain control. You the good guy.

What’s wrong with holding the green card over her head, as a defensive measure to deter her from, e.g., making false rape accusations against me? Why should she not be punished for making false rape accusations?

Also, what’s wrong with having her serve as an indentured servant for two years? A lot of white guys had to serve years as indentured servants before they were allowed to live as free men in this country. Two years is not all that long of an indenture.

And I didn’t even really expect anything of her other than that she put out, which she didn’t mind doing anyway, usually.

Bail bonding is actually a pretty good system

I was reading in WaPo:

Virginia Attorney General Mark R. Herring on Sunday called for reforms to the state’s cash bond system, saying too many nonviolent, low-risk defendants are languishing behind bars while awaiting trial because they can’t afford to post hundreds or thousands of dollars.

How do we know they’re low-risk, given that nobody wants to post bond for them? Maybe the reason no one wants to post bond is that they know them personally and are aware they’re not a good risk. They might have information that the judge doesn’t have.

What if they end up on the street? If no one will help them get out of jail, there’s a good chance that no one will give them a place to stay either. Why aren’t the same charities that provide homeless shelters also posting bail for people they consider aren’t too much of a risk?

What will end up happening is that instead of keeping people locked up for lack of bail money, they’ll keep them locked up for being too much of a risk. That’s what happened to me.

Do you ever wish you were more narcissistic?

I.e. that you had a bigger ego, a greater sense of self-importance, a stronger desire for respect and recognition, etc.? Would you prefer to think more highly of yourself than you really deserve, so that you would go out into the world to try to prove that your inflated perceptions of your own value are justified; and in so doing, make the prophecy of your success self-fulfilling?

Ayn Rand wrote, “Man’s ego is the fountainhead of human progress.” When you start out in life, you have no power; you’re just being trained in what other people already know. You may live much of your life in fantasy, because the reality of your situation is so boring and limiting. During that time, people can easily laugh at your dreams and your confident predictions of what you can accomplish, belittling you and calling into question whether you’ll ever amount to anything. Adults judge your performance by whether you do well in school, stay out of trouble, etc. but to peers, those are all just signs of nerdiness.

So, from the beginning, you have something to prove. Of course, once you start to be successful, then you attract haters. However, being hated is different than being belittled, which is the default if you seem insignificant in the big scheme of things. At least if you’re a villain, it means that you’re powerful enough to inflict pain and destruction on those who wrong you; that seems better than being a villain.

Part of the pain of inceldom is from not being recognized by femoids as worthy of sex and love. Some men blame themselves for the rejections they receive. A narcissist like Elliot Rodger, on the other hand, feels he’s more worthy than the men who get to bang femoids and enjoy their companionship. This causes him to rage at the injustice.

Some might argue that the narcissist, deep down, feels insecure about his own worth. That may be true; in fact, a lot of narcissists are also suicidally depressed at times. (Even ER eventually shot himself.) Another possible reason for this, though, is that while they still recognize their own worth, they despair in getting others to recognize it; and so to preserve their own dignity, they refuse to subject themselves anymore to this kind of treatment.

Yes, the narcissist rages when people give him less respect than he feels he deserves; and he becomes determined to right this great wrong by producing indisputable proof of his greatness. For ER, this meant producing videos and then shooting a bunch of people. But others can channel their narcissism into other endeavors.

Anything is theoretically attainable in this world. With advanced enough technology, we could create designer femoids who are attracted to incels. The human mind is capable of such accomplishments. Some might say, “The politics of our time won’t allow it,” but a skillful politician might be able to sway the masses in a different direction.

Who has the drive and ambition to accomplish such things? It requires a certain ego strength to not get discouraged and defeatist. If you want to accomplish something truly great, i.e. above what the average man can accomplish, then you have to consider yourself of above-average ability. The narcissist has that confidence.

Some sites, like Wikipedia, are just designed to induce narcissistic injury (and therefore, narcissistic rage) because your credentials mean nothing there.

It’s not looking good for Comstock

The Dems point out that she usually votes with Trump, but on the other hand, she was a NeverTrumper (and for a bad reason — the Access Hollywood tapes), which is why she attracted basically two primary challengers. (Both Shak Hill and I served essentially in that capacity, attacking her from the left.) It’s never a good sign when you get primaried; Lingamfelter got primaried too last year, and he also lost.

She hasn’t taken a stance in support for Brett Kavanaugh. Instead, she got on what may turn out to be the wrong side of history, by supporting the #MeToo movement.

On the other hand, Wexton doesn’t seem to have any major drawbacks. Even though her commercials have rhetoric saying she’s in favor of a bunch of anti-man stuff (e.g. collecting child support, getting tough on sex offenders, and keeping guns away from “domestic abusers”), she hasn’t really been a feminist SJW. Her legislation isn’t really all that extreme (it seems like mostly housekeeping rather than anything substantive), and most of the cuckservatives probably would’ve voted for the same bills. Heck, the Republicans even say that she voted against helping victims of domestic abuse (HB 1, HB 484), although that too seems trumped up.

And she’s apparently been willing to plea bargain with sex offenders, even pedophiles, supposedly, also that’s pretty run-of-the-mill. All prosecutors in northern Virginia tend to plea bargain. When it comes right down to it, there’s not much difference between her and Comstock.

What’s a bad sign for Comstock, though, is that she turned down the League of Women Voters debate. I don’t necessarily like having a league of women voters (men wouldn’t be able to set up such an organization for themselves), but to not do the debate seems like cowardice and maybe even acquiescence to defeat.