Earlier: It’s Official: Even Hard Science Entering New Dark Age

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through VDARE.com]

Recently I had things to say about wokeness at the fine old magazine Scientific American. Their September issue had run a long article, headlined Reckoning With Our Mistakes, in which the editors groveled, rent their garments, heaped ashes on their heads, and flagellated themselves with guilt over shamefully un-Woke things the magazine had published back in the 19th century.

All that was bad enough—distressing enough, I should say, for an old science geek like myself who, in his youth, looked to Scientific American for instruction and amusement on science and math topics, delivered in a spirit of objective enquiry.

Now here came the October issue. For the first time ever in the magazine's 175-year history the editors [Editor in Chief Laura Helmuth—Tweet her]have endorsed a Presidential candidate. [Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden | We’ve never backed a presidential candidate in our 175-year history—until now, October, 2020]

Can you guess which one? Of course you can! Quote:

The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people—because he rejects evidence and science.

There follow several hundred words about how ineptly the Administration has coped with the COVID-19 pandemic, with some supplementary remarks on healthcare in general and environmental issues. Then this concluding paragraph:

Although Trump and his allies have tried to create obstacles that prevent people from casting ballots safely in November, either by mail or in person, it is crucial that we surmount them and vote. It's time to move Trump out and elect Biden, who has a record of following the data and being guided by science.

What exactly are those obstacles to voting that Trump has tried to create? The online version of this Scientific American editorial has a link to a Chicago Tribune story headlined Cook County GOP Sues to Block State's Enhanced Vote-by-Mail Efforts ,by Rick Pearson, August 10, 2020. Back in June, you see, the Governor of Illinois signed a law to expand mail-in voting. Of course, this meant expanding opportunities to corrupt November's election [Confessions of a voter fraud: I was a master at fixing mail-in ballots, by Jon Levine, NY Post, August 29, 2020]. A conservative legal group, the Liberty Justice Center,  has tried to block the law.

The Scientific American editorial is, in short, just cut'n'pasted from Biden campaign talking points.

With characteristic class, Washington D.C. swamp-dwellers booed President Donald J. Trump while he and the First Lady viewed Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s coffin at the U.S. Supreme Court today [Trump booed as he pays respects to Ginsburg at court, by Kevin Liptak, CNN, September 24, 2020]. Since her death, Ginsburg appears to have become a national saint, at least among the Woke fanatics who currently control the Ruling Class, and her obsequies may achieve McCain-level excess—she is only the second Supreme Court justice to lie in state: the other was William Howard Taft, who had been BOTH Chief Justice AND U.S. President [Public viewing at Supreme Court to honor Ginsburg before justice lies in state at US Capitol, by Jack Moore, WTOP News, September 21, 2020]. This is particularly odd because Ginsburg quite clearly displayed the unpleasant traits of Narcistic Personality Disorder—and (as some Leftists quietly acknowledge) her narcissism has now seriously undercut the causes she claimed to champion.

Ginsburg was a “tireless and resolute champion of justice” according to Chief Justice John Roberts. (He would, wouldn’t he?—Roberts is a Dubya-appointed cuck whose main interest seems to be shielding SCOTUS from Leftist wrath and clinging to the myth of judicial impartiality). She “believed that equal justice under law only had meaning if it applied to every single American” according to President Obama. For President Carter, she was simply “a truly great woman” [Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Supreme Court Justice and Pioneer of Gender Equality, Dead at 87, by Tim Dickinson and Tessa Stuart, Rolling Stone, September 18, 2020]. But I say she was a truly great Narcissist.

This shouldn’t be surprising. I recently reported on technical literature showing that people who virtue-signal are high in Narcissistic traits, because they desire status and adoration and they realize that they can achieve these by manipulating people into thinking that they are virtuous. Ginsburg spent her professional life signaling her support for “equality” and individual rights, while, clearly, living an extremely luxurious lifestyle.

Above, Ginsburg on a trip to India with fellow Justice Antonin Scalia

It is common for corporate journalists and even celebrity medics to accuse President Trump of narcissism (e.g. The Mind of Donald Trump, by Dan P. McAdams, The Atlantic, June 2016). But I’ve documented that Hillary Clinton’s peculiar behavior evinces far more evidence of classic Narcissistic disorder—and this was even before she called on Joe Biden not to accept defeat “under any circumstances” [Hillary Clinton says Biden should not concede the election 'under any circumstances',  NBC, August 26, 2020]

Earlier by Patrick J. Buchanan: Last Best Chance to Capture Supreme Court

"As everyone knows, I made it clear that my first choice for the Supreme Court will make history as the first African American woman justice."

So Joe Biden promised. Since the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, however, Biden has refused to produce a list of Black female judges and scholars whom he would consider for the now-vacant seat.

What is his problem?

Donald Trump had no such reluctance. In 2016, he listed a slew of candidates from among whom he promised to pick his justices. True to his word, Trump elevated federal appellate court judges Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

Since the Kavanaugh confirmation, Judge Amy Coney Barrett has been openly discussed as a potential Trump choice to succeed liberal icon Ginsburg. Why is Biden so reluctant to reveal some highly qualified Black female judges? His refusal suggests that the kind of high court judges that America wants is not the liberals' issue. It is Trump's issue.

The president will announce his choice Saturday, after the mourning period for Ginsburg is over. Mitch McConnell's Senate is expected to confirm the new justice in late October.

With the court's ideological balance at stake, the battle from now to Nov. 3 is thus for all the marbles: control of the House, the Senate, the presidency and the U.S. Supreme Court.

During a BLM “peaceful protest” in Omaha, Nebraska, on May 30 (over George Floyd’s dying of a heart attack while in police custody in Minneapolis), James Scurlock was peacefully protesting by breaking into an architecture firm—hoisting an office chair and hurling it into two computer monitors, then ripping a phone from a desk and throwing it against the wall, as his friend shattered another monitor—all of which was captured on video.

Nearby, Jake Gardner, an Iraq War veteran and Trump supporter, was keeping watch over the two bars he owned, The Hive and The Gatsby, aided by his 68-year-old father and a security guard. The peaceful protesters soon made their way to Jake’s bar, where they hurled a street sign through The Hive’s plate-glass window. He and his father rushed outside to prevent the peaceful protesters from storming his bar.

Scurlock’s friend, catching his wind after smashing computer monitors, knocked Gardner’s father to the ground. (It’s on tape.) Or as CNN’s Madeline Holcombe put it: “An unidentified man can be seen pushing Gardner’s father.” Gardner rushed to help his father, then backed away toward the bar, lifting his shirt to show the protesters he was armed, and telling them to move along. Again, it’s all on tape. Murmurings can be heard from the crowd: “That (expletive) got a gun” and “It’s not worth it (expletive) you stu–,”

At that point, peaceful protester Alayna Melendez leapt on Gardner from behind (not subscribers to the Marquess of Queensberry rules, these peaceful protesters), knocking him down and into the street, whereupon yet another peaceful protester jumped on top of Gardner, who fired two warning shots in the air, scattering his first two assailants. Again: all on tape.

Three seconds later, as Gardner was trying to get up, Scurlock jumped on him from behind and put him in a chokehold—which I believe is considered definitive proof of intentional murder when performed by a police officer. In videos, Gardner can be heard yelling, “Get off me! Get off me!”

With his right arm pinned, and Scurlock choking him, Gardner moved the gun to his left hand and shot over his shoulder, hitting Scurlock in the collarbone, killing him.

See also: Trump Still In Statistical Dead Heat With Biden, But His White Share Weakens 

The Main Stream Media has finally discovered that President Donald J. Trump's real weakness is with whites [‘It’s a big, big swing’: Trump loses ground with white voters, By David Siders, Politico, September 21, 2020]. Of course at VDARE.com we’ve been calling attention to this for months, and blaming Jared Kushner’s strategy of pandering to minorities. What’s really disturbing: even Rasmussen Reports, which recently showed Trump with his first-ever lead over Joe Biden (47%-46%) and therefore got no MSM publicity, shows this weakness with whites. The good news: Trump has upside potential. The bad news: it’s awfully late.

Donald Trump won in 2016 because he adopted (blundered into?) what VDARE.com calls the Sailer Strategy and focused on whites, especially in the Rust Belt, rather than Karl Rove-type pandering to minorities.

It’s easy to miss how extraordinary Trump’s triumph was among whites in 2016. He got about 58% of the white vote, which is roughly about what Romney got. But there’s a paradox that masks Trump’s true impact.

You have to consider the effect of Third Parties. Quite often you hear people say that Reagan got 59% of the white vote in 1980 and he won in a landslide and Romney got 59% of the white vote and was defeated, and that this is a measure to the extent to which the country has changed.

Well, that’s not exactly true—because there was a Third Party candidate in 1980, John Anderson, who got 6.6% of the vote, essentially all of it white. So the Democrats were more damaged by John Anderson and by Reagan in terms of the white vote.