Archive

Archive for the ‘Bah!’ Category

RIP, BSA

October 15th, 2017 1 comment

Aesop knows Full Convergence when he sees it. And he knows what’s behind it, too.

Surrendering completely to the hopelessly polluted cultural tides, the Boy Scouts of America announced they will start letting girls into the organization next year.

Of course this is an asinine, self-destructive, and completely wrong move for the organization, but it’s just another proof that it needs to crawl under the porch and die.

First is was the atheists pushing back against reverence, then it was the gay Scouts and NAMBLA would-be scoutmasters pounding out any notion of a scout being “morally straight”.

Both of those are a problem for a post-Christian society run by the most toxic iteration of secular humanism, and now we can add feminism to the list of afflictions.

Because a large swath of bitter, ugly, misandrists is perpetually offended at the idea of boys being boys, and growing up to become men. “We can’t be having any of that.” they say with an upturned nose, and a chip the size of Gibraltar on their shoulder. In a way, it was inevitable, as fathers have been relentlessly pushed out of the home by one-sided divorce courts where due process goes to die, aided and abetted by no-fault divorce, and most boys are lucky if they even know their own father, let alone have one around to go to a scout troop meeting or outdoor adventure.

We can’t let boys be boys, and we certainly can’t have them hiking, running, building muscles and healthy bodies, climbing rocks, shooting bows and rifles, and slingshots, learning responsibility, self-reliance, masculine strength, personal and physical courage, whether on a swim across a lake, or learning to save lives at the pool or when someone is injured, or learning how to do 87 different things to such a degree that most Eagle Scouts should probably be given a college associate’s degree on the spot. They’ll get all self-assured, they’ll tussle, they’ll skin their knees, break some bones, get dirt on the carpet, and generally become the men that women of today still long for (in vain, mostly) if the ratings for Mad Men and Daniel Craig’s rebooting of 007 back to Connery levels were any indication. The sisterhood won’t allow that, for it swims upstream against the currents of the depraved culture, and one glimpse of it undoes hour of tedious lectures on diversity and metrosexuality, while making the buckets of Ritalin and Prozac and Paxil heaped into and hurled at normal, healthy school-age boys a total waste of money.

We have a society of harpy man-hating women, and pussified metrosexual males, that go pale at the thought of raising boys who’d climb mountains, sail around the world solo, join the military and kill people and break things, find buried treasure, hunt pirates, or go to the moon. Only women and people of color should do that, because they’re better than the rich white old male patriarchy that carved the greatest nation on earth out of harsh wilderness with two hands, a strong back, a sharp mind, and guts. Oh, and while we’re at it, stop singing the praises of your mother country. It triggers the snowflakes.

Society now wants boys to shut up, check their privilege, wallow in their race guilt, genuflect to defective dystopian savages, and go sit on the couch in their footie pajamas sipping cocoa. Not bring groceries to a widow and her kids, or mow an old woman’s lawn, or – God forbid! – go to church or synagogue and read a Bible.

We can’t have them building things, building strength, building their minds, building their confidence, and learning to Be Prepared. O hell no! They need to learn to depend on government, and its endless soul-sapping bureaucracy, to let it be the same fount of plenty it is for millions of welfare moms married to the government in fatherless homes, once a rarity, but now, the near-universal norm across all races and every level of economic status.

And the same things that have pussified the rest of society will now become the norm in the troops, as they have in the military, and business, and school, and churches, and in short order, only the pussified priggish beta males will be left there, along with the militant recruiting LGBTEIEIO contingent, and in a few short years, everything the girls who wanted into the Boy Scouts to find will have been driven out of it, by the herds of clueless feral shitting and scratching-up-everything hens that they are, like their mothers before them were.

The men will leave, and the boys, forced into a game where they can’t win, will quickly lose interest, and quit in droves. And so, a once-proud and honorable organization, that had raised millions of exceptional scouts into Star, Life, and Eagle Scouts, and millions more boys into simply decent, confident, and competent men, will fade into obscurity and irrelevance. Which, after all, was the whole point of the exercise driving all the pressure on them in the first place. Mission Accomplished, ye shitweasels of cultural decay, you’ve felled another oak, and rotted another pillar of society.

Ah, but all is not lost. After the final Moslem victory over us, the harpies will be subjugated, LGBTTSTVTPXQ39 will be mouldering in mass graves, the Commie Left will be cowed and its media propaganda arm silenced, and the rest of us will be forced to toughen up a great deal if we’re to manage any sort of effective resistance at all. The BSA won’t be a part of that, alas. But I’d bet a good many troopers from the Old Scouts will.

Share

No sale

October 11th, 2017 7 comments

Jerry Jones “stands up” for…what again, now?

The NFL is in deep trouble. The latest Monday Night Football ratings were an all time low. I know that the Yankees were also playing but this is more than competition in the other channel. I think that a lot of fans like me are not watching.

So here comes Jerry Jones, as Jarrett Bell wrote:    

“Too many of the fans of the Dallas Cowboys perceive this as disrespect for the flag. And so I don’t want our team doing it.”

This was a day after the Cowboys owner made his strongest statement yet about the protests in the NFL, declaring that if any Dallas player doesn’t stand for the national anthem they won’t play for his team.

Since his comments went viral, Jones maintained that he’s received “a lot of calls, and not necessarily the kind of calls that were supportive” of his position.

Well, he’s got my support.

Not mine. Before he gets that, somebody is going to need to adequately explain this to me:

Jerry Jones surprised many Monday night by kneeling with Cowboys players and coaches before the playing of the national anthem at the team’s game in Arizona.

After the game, a 28-17 Cowboys victory, Jones told reporters his reasoning for kneeling prior to the anthem.

“We all agreed that our players wanted to make a statement about unity and equality. They were very much aware that that statement when made or when attempted to be made in and a part of in recognition of our flag cannot only lead to criticism but also controversy,” Jones said, per the Dallas Morning News.

Ah, I see. So in sum, Jones is just another NFL shitweasel trying to have his cake and eat it too, by poking out his forked tongue and speaking out of both sides of his mouth. Just to scramble a few metaphors there.

Sorry Jerry, not buying any over here.

Far as I’m concerned, he deserves every bit as much credit for his “bravery” and “integrity” as do all the Hollywood starlets who held their tongues about Weinstein for two or three decades, then “courageously” came out into the open after the dam finally burst (and their career prospects were secured, naturally): none whatsoever.

The NFL badly needs to be taught that if they choose to take a knee in support of a dishonest cause, allowing their entertainment business to be infiltrated and overcome by hard Left politics, they’re gonna find it mighty hard to climb back to their feet again. To repeat: I abandoned ’em a long time ago; I haven’t missed them at all, and I am never coming back.

Share

Let’s ban all the things!

October 11th, 2017 2 comments

Just give ’em time to figure it out. They ARE pretty thick, you know.

After Vegas, the gun control memes and myths come out. It doesn’t matter how wrong they are, they will echo in the mediasphere and then the talking points will leak into everyday conversations. 

“Guns are uniquely lethal.” 

Last year, a Muslim terrorist with a truck killed 86 people and wounded another 458. 

Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel, the Tunisian Muslim killer, had brought along a gun, but it proved largely ineffective. The deadliest weapon of the delivery driver was a truck. Mohammed, who was no genius, used it to kill more people than Stephen Paddock would with all his meticulous planning in Vegas.

Do we need truck control? 

Let’s not be giving the tiresome bags of fascist shit any bright ideas, Daniel. After all, they’re working as hard as they can to eliminate the combustion engine already.

Share

What’s that smell?

October 8th, 2017 4 comments

Still stinking.

Las Vegas police, while saying they’re still stumped on the motive behind Sunday night’s massacre at a country music festival, said today that they haven’t found any evidence to indicate Stephen Paddock had political or “radical ideologies” that motivated the attack.

Yeah, he “just snapped.” Over a one-year period, during which he was meticulously planning, preparing, and setting up his little “event,” learning all about guns and how to shoot them with deadly accuracy over a long distance with a bump-stock, which is…uhhh, pretty much impossible.

McMahill said he was “very confident, very certain that there was not another shooter in the room as he conducted this mass murder rampage.”

Which I haven’t seen asserted yet by anyone. Now the FOURTH FLOOR, mind—well, that’s another matter entirely (see numbers 2 and 3). Which we won’t be addressing right now. Or ever, if we can avoid it.

Asked if Paddock had help planning the attack, the undersheriff said that’s why investigators are “combing over this man’s life from birth to death.”

“It’s hard to believe that one individual planned this attack and executed without anybody else knowing anything about it,” McMahill said.

Or, y’know, helping. But you said a mouthful there, bub. In fact, it ain’t just “hard” to believe; it’s damned near impossible at this point.

Investigators are also trying “to understand, to evaluate whether he had any political, any economic, any social, any radical ideologies that may have led him down a particular path,” he said. ISIS has repeatedly claimed this week that Paddock conducted the attack on their behalf.

“What I can confirm to you today is we have found no evidence of any of that as I’m standing before you today,” the undersheriff added.

And by the time you do, Praetorian Media will have dropped this story like the smoking-hot potato it is. As for his motive, it might just be hiding in plain sight:

The fact pattern in this event is striking for not fitting any known profile. In particular:

The gentleman concerned had no known political or religious affiliations.

Well, except for attending anti-Trump rallies, that is. Anyways.

The level of premeditation is unusual and crystal clear from his mass buying of guns and the cautious systematic smuggling operation to ferry them to his room together with the illegal modifications and the position of the room he chose and occupied for several days beforehand.

This denotes a deeply serious commitment to his act. And one which leaves no doubt that act was conceived to generate the maximum possible publicity.

The question then is: ‘publicity’ for what exactly?

And the answer would appear to be ‘nothing that can be identified’.

There is only one plausible motive for what this man did. And here it is:

This man wished to telegraph to America in graphic form the hard irrefutable evidence that guns and gun ownership and the ease of gun purchase in America are an evil and must be controlled. On that hypothesis everything now makes sense. And it must be said his concept has a certain demented genius.

Because even if the public learns and believes that his motive was all about ‘guns’ the horror of the act itself – an act to protest such acts—is in some ways even worse for being plain evidence that there is no limit to the insanity to which guns can be put.

Seems silly enough to be dismissible out of hand, right? But Steyn doesn’t, quite:

So our London analyst is arguing that this was an act of mass murder to protest the ease with which Americans can commit mass murder. I’m reminded of the entirely idiotic Liam Neeson movie from a year or two back, Non-Stop, in which he battles terrorists who’ve hijacked a plane to protest the ease with which terrorists can hijack a plane. At the key moment in the bad-guy monologue, my kids and I burst out laughing. But presumably Universal Pictures found it credible enough to greenlight the project – and, as I recall, most people in the movie theater seemed to be taking it seriously.

At one level, it’s a ludicrous explanation – and yet it has the ruthless logic of a psychopath, of a man who, like a good screenwriter, subordinates all other considerations to the internal logic of an absurd proposition. It’s also a rare explanation that explains everything: the guns in the hotel, the explosive material in the car, the guns in his house, and in his other house, and doubtless in his other other house. To reprise my reader’s joke: He was smuggling suitcases.

And, as our analyst notes, in the void of any motive, the Democrats and media are now talking about the armory – should we restrict the number of guns? the types of guns? the modifications to guns?

If it seems crazy, but it works, then it ain’t crazy.

The gun-grabbers ultimately have a much bigger problem, though, which is this: we’ve now reached a point in this nation where our formerly high-trust society has become one in which nobody trusts anybody at all. Differences in political opinion have now become unbridgeable chasms; authorities and institutions that once enjoyed near-universal trust and respect have been exposed as dishonest, treacherous, and corrupt. Our shared heroes and role models, from cops to professional athletes, are now either feared, despised, or both. Our national government, once perceived as one “of, by, and for the people,” stands revealed as an aggressive, rapacious, grasping entity imposing its malignant designs on an unwilling population by intimidation, coercion, and raw deceit.

In such a climate, what sane 2A supporter would even dream of surrendering his guns to the people who so obviously lust to seize them? As others have said: when they lecture about “reasonable, common sense gun control,” deny any desire to take anyone’s guns away or interfere with the fictitious 2A emphasis on the right to hunt (hint: they don’t like that either), and then in the next breath cite Australia and Britain as the role models we ought to be emulating…well, that ought to tell you all you really need to know about what it is they really hope to achieve.

Share

The milkman’s kid

October 4th, 2017 3 comments

Annnnnd it’s Muslims liberals both.

I don’t usually post on events like the Vegas atrocity in the early days for the simple reason that almost everything the newsies are talking about in the early going always turns out to be wrong. In this case, now that the media dust is starting to settle a bit, I feel comfortable in asserting a few things. One—what with photo and video proof that he had attended anti-Trump rallies and the like, plus the allegation that Antifa fliers were found on-scene—he was a Leftard whackjob. Two, there is at least some speculation on a link to ISIS.

Three: there is WAY more to this than meets the eye.

So “Mr. Not A Gun Guy” with no prior military service or training, rented two rooms, for three days, at weekend rates during a music festival across the street, from the highest vantage point, covering two different directions, in a hotel where 2/3rds of the rooms could never even see the venue because they face the wrong way, and had 30 weapons in total, including at least 10 recovered in the hotel, and had either illegally modified semi-auto weapons or legally purchased full-auto weapons (with a six- to eight-month wait for the BATFE approval on that) and ammunition sufficient to shoot something approaching 300 people, from mag after mag after mag, and took his time (several minutes) hosing down throngs of unsuspecting random strangers across the street before committing suicide, but he supposedly “just snapped”.

(cough)BULLSHIT!(cough)

This has to be about the most meticulously-planned mass-shooting in US history.

The woman “roommate” LVMPD was looking for was “coincidentally” in Australia when this happened; is a Phillipine immigrant who was formerly (or is currently, it’s unclear) married to a barking leftard moonbat; and the picture she claims was taken of her and Shooter “in L.A.”…

…was one she had previously tagged online as being taken in Dubai.

Show of hands: everyone who’s hooked up with a married émigré from a country with an ongoing Muslim terrorism problem, and who was with her in the world capitol region of Muslim terrorist problems, who’s retired, but blew $15-50K on weapons, ammunition, and a 3-day stay in the ideal sniper roost for a full-auto attack on a crowd of packed targets, coincidentally, with no one being the wiser, and for whom the FBI could rule out any terrorist connection entirely within 60 minutes of the incident, please raise a paw.

Sh’yeah, thought so.

“Just snapped”, my ass.

That’s just the first of a whole slew of posts from Aesop taking note of the distinct cow-pasture odor rising off of this one in waves. Which leads me to another thing I feel completely safe in asserting: Praetorian Media will milk this for any possible gun-control gains they think they can get out of it for another two-three days, then a pillow gets put over its head until it stops kicking, and the corpse gets crammed as deep down into the memory hole as they can stuff it.

Update! Rush handily dispenses with the gun-control angle—not that it will make a tin dime’s worth of difference to the irrational, childish hoplophobes of the Gun Grabbin’ Left and the cynical would-be despots stampeding them:

What law that we do not have that you could enact that would have prevented this guy from getting his arsenal, Senator Schumer? That really is the question. There isn’t a magic law you have out there. We have 59 people dead. We have laws against murder. People still get killed in America. Not even laws against murder stop it from happening. What law could you come up with here that would, quote, “prevent guns, especially the most dangerous guns, from falling into the wrong hands”?

The guy already broke every law on the book getting these guns. What’s another law gonna do? Automatic weapons are essentially illegal. Is the NRA advocating new laws to make them legal? Of course not. The NRA has no involvement whatsoever in trying to make the acquisition of illegal automatic weapons easier. What’s tough about this is this shooter had nothing in his background, at least that’s been reported, that would disqualify him from owning a gun. Not a thing. But even at that, he had to violate every law on the books to accumulate this kind of an arsenal.

What law, Senator Schumer, could you pass that would have prevented these weapons from falling into his hands? What does that even mean? We need a law to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands. What does that even mean, falling into the wrong hands? This guy didn’t have anything fall into his hands. He went out there and got them, and he violated laws to do it.

I have had so many debates in private settings, not public, private settings with typical establishment liberal political types who just utter whatever they say on gun control because it makes them sound like they care. It makes them sound very sophisticated, but they don’t know what they’re saying.

And I’ve asked these leftists that I’ve had these debates with — one of them was at a dinner party on Fifth Avenue right across from Central Park. The guy was a former Treasury official in the Nixon administration. He was a dinosaur. This was in the mid-nineties, and he was a dinosaur then. I don’t even know if he’s still alive. And he’s giving me all the clichés the left has about gun control. And it’s all about gotta get guns out of the society, the murder rate, the guns, there’s no sense in having people have guns. It’s senseless, it’s cruel, it’s stupid. “Why don’t you conservatives join us,” he said.

So I pointed out to Central Park. And I said, “Mr. Dinosaur, if you can assure me that whoever’s over there lurking under the cover of darkness is also not gonna be able to get their hands on a gun, then we might have something to talk about. But, Mr. Dinosaur, the only thing you’re gonna do if you succeed is take guns out of the hands of innocent people who defend themselves with them, and you’re not gonna solve anything.”

You’re gonna make people more at risk, more vulnerable, the danger will increase, and in fact let me repeat this. These are stats from the American Enterprise Institute. From 1994, the percentage change in number of firearms versus gun homicides. The number of firearms since 1994 has increased 56%. That’s pretty substantial. Whatever the number is, it’s substantial. A lot of guns have been purchased since 1994. Fifty-six percent increase over what it was in 1994.

But what about the gun murder rate? Well, guess what? The percentage of murders, the gun homicide rate is down 49% in the same time frame. Now, the left says more guns equals more crime, more guns equal more mayhem, more guns equals more dead people, more guns equals more murder. No, it doesn’t. Fifty-six percent increase gun ownership, 1994, 49% decline in gun homicide rates at the same time. You could say that having more guns has reduced the number of gun homicides.

Yeah, but that’s counterintuitive, and far too complex a concept for minds already crippled by liberalism’s core illogic to grasp.

Share

Soaking the suckers

September 30th, 2017 2 comments

Know what I think probably rankles people the most about this NFL horseshit? The fact that it all amounts to nothing more than witless whining from a bunch of miserable fucking ingrates.

It’s no wonder that so many of the NFL’s millionaire scumbags are eager to join Colin Kaepernick’s protests against the justice system by degrading our anthem.

It’s because they’re criminals.

And it’s no wonder that the NFL stands behind its thugs. If a team can shrug at abusing women, what’s a little anti-American tantrum by a prize property that makes them millions of dollars?

The only question is why are the rest of us subsidizing it?

NFL teams loot millions from taxpayers to fund their stadiums. The Seahawks have a point about injustice. And the injustice is that taxpayers had to spend $390 million on their stadium.

Who will let Washington taxpayers take a knee and opt out of being exploited by the Seahawks?

Ten New Orleans Saints players sat out the anthem. New Orleans Saints coach Sean Payton expressed pride in the players who rejected the United States of America. The Saints not only enjoy a stadium paid for by a billion in taxpayer money in a city with one of the highest poverty rates in the country, but are exempt from sales tax. And receive millions every year in “inducement payments” to stay put.

The NFL is built on government taking money from people and giving it to the industry. Its leftward tilt isn’t an accident. It’s a calculated move. Who are the folks most likely to bail out an industry? They’re on the left. Not the right. If your monopoly is dying, it’s time to go left and hate America.

Anthem bashing is popular with the left. And it’s very popular with the social justice bloggers who increasingly dominate sports journalism, and not just on ESPN. Hating America will score points with the left. It’ll buy the NFL more protectionism from the media and the 2020 Democrats. 

The only question is why do we need the NFL?

We don’t. Daniel also explains the guileful maneuvering that created the NFL monopoly in the first place; nobody should be at all surprised to find that a crooked Democrat was behind it. Given that sordid history, it was probably inevitable that they would descend at last into full-on Leftard style America-bashing and mewling about how horribly they’ve suffered by having to live here.

I went to a Black Lives Matter riot and an NFL game broke out update! Rush makes what to my way of thinking is a pretty lame excuse for the NFL and its team owners:

They have two choices: Side with the employees who are doing what they’re doing and then maybe even look like they support it. Or side with the customers, the fans. If they side with the players as they’re doing, what’s happening? Fans are watching less, attendance is down, the image of the game is taking a huge hit. The owners make a calculation. If they side with the fans then that is going to infuriate the players as a sign of lack of support. They’re gonna say this confirms what we’re saying that we do not have equality and that we’re not treated fairly.

And if the players decide not to show up, then there’s no game. If the fans don’t show up, the game’s still played, and it’s still on TV, but if the players don’t show, and if they keep on not showing. So the owners make this calculation. They’re in, to a certain extent, a no-win situation. I think in most of these owners’ cases, they can’t afford not to express solidarity. That’s why more owners than you’ve ever seen are on the field during the pregame kneeling, linking. I have often believed — no, I should not say this. It’s perfectly totally true, but it’s so distracting, it might get me into trouble.

But let’s put it this way. When 75% of your employees are of a particular race, and that particular race is expressing grievances all over our country with things that are unjust and unfair. If 75% of your employees are joining that way of thinking and you want to keep your team together — and you want the players to think that management has their players’ backs — you have to join them. That’s their thinking. You have to join ’em, whether they agree with it or not.

Now, not all owners did. Not all owners issued a statement. Not all owners reacted to Trump. There’s a whole five or six of ’em who didn’t. And the media jumped right on ’em and asked why and started speculating, “They must be Trump supporters!” They were in the crosshairs. The media tried to do ’em great damage for not joining their players in this display of whatever it is. But the bottom line here is that the league is being harmed, and it is my contention that there are those who seek that very thing.

Yeah, well, you don’t solve that problem and forestall that harm by knuckling under and joining forces with the people harming you. The NFL could have resolved this PDQ by simply enforcing its own rules about the anthem. It ain’t as if they haven’t done it before, after all:

Rich Lowry kind of drops the big one by citing the actual NFL rules on the National Anthem, which specify it must be played before every game, and players must stand for it. So it seems that Trump was… right when he said someone could — and should — fine someone for refusing to stand. (Yeah I know he said “fire,” but you can begin with a fine. And Trump tends to speak bombastically, if no one’s noticed. But they could in fact be fired for repeated violations of the rules.)

We’ve seen the NFL forbid the making of other political statements — Dallas Cowboys players were forbidden from wearing black armbands to commemorate the cops killed by the Black Lives Matter shooter; players were fined for wearing special cleats that honored 9/11. (Those fines were waived — after public controversy about fining a player for honoring 9/11– but the NFL made the point, and we didn’t see those cleats again.)

As always with liberal-fascists, it’s not that they want to ban the making of political statements. They just want to ban the ones they don’t like.

I admit, I don’t think for a second that all these owners lean Left politically, so Rush’s point about them merely making a judgment here about which side their bread is buttered on may be perfectly valid. On the other hand, the owners and the NFL higher-ups could have slapped this silly shit down immediately; it was perfectly within their rights and means to do so—legally, morally, and according to not just their status as employers but the league’s own guidelines.

But there’s also this: the owners are mostly wealthy, older white guys who had been hugely successful businessmen before buying a team (and running to the state and city governments for tax money to subsidize their stadiums). They ain’t stupid; one would think they understand their fan base quite well, and would have to know how much this direct insult to the values fans hold dear by people in their employ and thereby subject to disciplinary action by them would piss those fans off. One would also assume that they’re familiar with the NFL’s published guidelines on the playing of the anthem and the conduct expected of players during it.

They would know the worthless douchebags they have the power to hire and fire were in clear and contemptuous violation of those guidelines; they would also know that this shitshow was going to wind up costing them money, maybe a hell of a lot of it. So one can really only conclude one of two things here: A) that those owners who joined their low-IQ thugs in spitting on the flag and anthem harbor some sympathy for their utterly brain-dead and offensive position, or B) that the owners figured they could placate their overpaid halfwit employees and avert disaster by showing support for this obnoxious nonsense, hoping the fans wouldn’t react by tuning the NFL out. In sum, the owners who joined the protests are either A) garden-variety, perfectly typical America-hating liberal idiots, or B) slimy shitweasels trying to have their cake and eat it too, hoping it will all blow over quickly and be forgiven and forgotten by the very people these fucktards are pissing over.

So how’s that working out for you jackasses, anyway?

Whichever theory is correct, the owners haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory here, anymore than their numbskull employees have. Not having the slightest shred myself of the affection Rush professes for the NFL, I ain’t much inclined to make any excuses for them. The whole sorry lot of them deserve each other, and can collectively go take a flying fuck at a plate glass window any time they feel like it for all me.

Share

#WhiteLives(Don’t)Matter

September 28th, 2017 Comments off

Francis on “white privilege.”

To be born white in the U.S.A. is to inherit a six-digit share of a $20 trillion debt you had no part in borrowing or spending. Your parents, should you be lucky enough to have any, might look upon you as a blessing, but they must also accept the immense burdens and hazards that will accompany your upbringing and maturation: on average, about $1 million for you and each of your siblings until age twenty-one.

From the instant of your birth, you’re a number in a system designed to tax and control you. Government busybodies will use you as an excuse to intrude into your family’s most intimate operations. Neighborhood busybodies supposedly determined to “keep you safe” will help them. “Educators” with little interest in actual education will propagandize you about a wide variety of “issues.” This will be in support of your share of white guilt: your responsibility for crimes committed by others long dead and not even remotely related to you. Yet those “educators” will deny you answers to many of your questions. You’ll have to look elsewhere for honest information about history and economics. That condition will last all the way through college, should you be inclined toward a “higher” education. Dare to mention in class that before the Civil War there were both white and black slaveholders and white and black slaves, or that the institution of slavery is still rampant among nonwhites in Africa and the Middle East, and you’ll be mobbed or worse.

Should you reach your maturity determined to be a decent and productive citizen, you’ll be penalized for the color of your skin. White people aren’t entitled to anything, you see; only blacks are entitled. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission isn’t concerned with whether you can get work, only with whether your black competitor can. In any head to head contest with a black employment applicant, your qualifications will weigh less heavily in your favor than the color of his skin will weigh in his. A company determined to hire you rather than him will need to watch its “employment statistics” closely, lest it give the EEOC an excuse to impose “supervision” on it.

But you’re white, which means no excuses for anything. You’ll find work, and you’ll labor diligently at it. And on paycheck day, the list of deductions from your supposed salary will remind you of just what the State thinks of you: a resource to be mulcted, in large measure for the support of nonwhite idlers and their bastards. Seven out of every ten black babies born today are illegitimate – born out of wedlock. Child support from the father? Not unless the father is an NBA power forward. But to note that fact in public would put you at extreme hazard.

Still, you’ll soldier on. You’re white; it’s expected of you. As the bumper stickers say, millions on welfare depend on you, so you can’t be allowed to slack off. It would be a crime against society and a betrayal of your “white privilege:” the privilege of being blamed for others’ sins while simultaneously having to pay for them.

Read every word of it. If you aren’t damned angry already, I guarantee you will be soon enough. I repeat once more: if fourteen percent of the population really thinks they want some kind of race war…well, they need to be careful what they wish for, that’s all. Damned careful.

On the other hand, here’s something worth remembering too: I saw a local news story here right after the Charlottesville dustup about a fellow with a pressure washing business who had offered to go and clean up defaced Confederate monuments for free. He had already been contacted by officials someplace in Alabama who wished to take advantage of his offer, and was preparing to make the trip and do the job. He was cheerful, personable, and intelligent; he stated in the story, which unfortunately I can’t find a link to now, that if we destroy our past, we won’t properly understand our present, and will likely have no future. He was and is perfectly right about that. He came across as a thoroughly decent and thoughtful fellow, one who wasn’t being stampeded by any hype or hysteria but was capable of making up his own mind about a completely unnecessary controversy manufactured by people with ill intent and a hidden agenda.

He was also black, as I’m sure you guessed already.

I believe I mentioned once before here my friend Travis, who lives in an almost entirely black neighborhood. This is by no means any kind of ghetto; these are decent, hard-working, middle class folks who keep their homes and their yards neat and orderly. It’s quiet and peaceful there; the kids are often out playing in the street of an evening, but not at any 3 AM they ain’t. Not on a school night, particularly.

I had a long conversation one night with his next-door neighbor about Trump and how the Democrat Socialists had almost completely destroyed the black middle class, and how they’d done it on purpose. He was a solid Trump guy, and expressed disgust for the Democrats and what they’ve done to the black family—fostering dependence, treating black people like helpless children on the way to locking them as Democrat voters forever, making them permanent wards of the State (LBJ: “I’ll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years“).

At one point, I told him he must be just about the loneliest guy in town because of those views. He snorted and said, “You’d be surprised, buddy. Everybody in this neighborhood feels the same way I do.” I told him how damned happy it made me to hear that, we shook hands, and I headed on home feeling pretty good about the whole discussion.

The moral of the story, which I swear to you is true: no matter how hard the liberal-fascists try to divide us, there’s still some hope out there. They aren’t having their own way with us entirely—not just yet, they ain’t. The same rules apply that always have, really, and the first one is and always will be this: THEY LIE.

Don’t you believe them.

Share

A confederation of dunces

September 28th, 2017 Comments off

It ain’t really about anthems or flags. It ain’t even about wealthy, pampered morons whining about how tough they supposedly have it in a country in which they ought to be on their knees thanking God to live, instead of the benighted, hellish shithole they’re pleased in their buffoonish ignorance to refer to as their “motherland.” It’s actually about destroying the very concept of “nationhood” itself.

Almost any point on that continuum covers the minimal civic act of standing for a national anthem. If you love your country, your “consciousness of duty” commands you to respect its flag and anthem: you need no statute to direct you to do so. On the other hand, if you feel, as many do, ambivalent about your flag or anthem, “good form appropriate in a given situation” suggests that, out of comity with your neighbors, rising to your feet for a minute or two is the appropriate thing to do. Many republicans and/or atheists (into both of which camps falls Jeremy Corbyn) are not entirely happy about a song enjoining the Almighty to confer long life on the monarch; the current Australian prime minister was a prominent member of the unsuccessful campaign to replace the national flag; I’ve attended events in the presence of Quebec’s Lieutenant-Governor, who enters accompanied by the Vice-Regal Salute, which is the first half of “God Save The Queen” and the last half of “O Canada”, neither of which secessionist Quebeckers care for. But whatever our views we all suffer it “through a sense of what is required by public spirit”.

That presumably is why on Sunday two dozen kneeling Americans decided to rise to their feet for Britain’s national anthem. Because they understood that were they to remain kneeling they would be regarded by their London hosts as boorish graceless ignorant clods – which, in fact, they are, with respect to their own anthem. We stand for the anthems of foreigners not out of allegiance but out of Moulton’s “good form”. Standing for other people’s anthems is the minimal respect required to transact international relations: At, say, US/Soviet summits, Reagan could have taken a knee to protest Moscow’s human rights record, and Chernenko could have taken a knee to protest that Reagan was a running dog of capitalism and imperialism. But both men remained standing – because that’s the minimal requirement for any mutually beneficial relations.

So, when a bunch of pampered poseurs decide to drive a stake through a primal civic ritual, that’s not a small thing. Lord Moulton called it “the domain of manners” because it is literally a land, the public space, a realm. And like any realm it requires a shared anthem and flag. To reduce such things to objects of partisan controversy – whether over racist policing in Democrat cities or transgender bathrooms or anything else – is to shrink the land of manners. Which ought to be disturbing – because, as Lord Moulton put it, “The real greatness of a nation, its true civilization, is measured by the extent of this land.”

By that measure, our greatness is shriveling fast. The land of “good form appropriate in a given situation” has been encroached upon remorselessly, to the point where everything can merely be legal or illegal, and therefore to render any judgment of our own upon the merits of this or that would be presumptuous. Hence all these ridiculous discussions on the “constitutional” right of bazillionaire narcissists and their unlovely employers to shatter one of the small but critical social norms hitherto observed by all: The domain of absolute freedom (they have the right to take a knee!) nibbles away at the domain of manners from one end, and the domain of law answers (the NFL should fire them!) with a response correct in legal terms but which in itself nibbles away at the domain of manners from the other end.

For anyone who wishes to live in a civilized society where the observance of social norms can be safely assumed, this wretched business is a loss – for what remains of social cohesion, for “true civilization” and for “the real greatness of a nation”. A national anthem can be a national anthem or an opportunity for self-expression, but not both. And, if this is yet one more thing that Americans can no longer agree on, if a people lack the minimal social glue to rise reflexively when the band strikes up the first bars of “O-oh, say, can you…”, you have to wonder whether anything remains to bind us together at all.

No need to wonder much about that, actually; it’s becoming clearer by the day that this is a “nation” bound only by geography, and even that rather tenuously. In no other sense—shared values, shared goals, common interests, common dreams—does the word any longer apply at all.

Update! Remember when I said the other day that if the goons of the National Felons League weren’t out on the field making millions playing a kid’s game, they’d be out in the parking lot breaking into cars? Such an inflammatory, unfair statement, you might have thought to yourself; why, in its ugly generalization it smacks of a horrid racism that…that…ummm…

Yeah.

Did you know, that as of this writing, it’s been 24 days since an NFL player was arrested? The odds that we would go that long in between player arrests are 25 to 1! In case you were wondering, there’s an entire website dedicated to tracking all the NFL players who have been arrested.

Oops. I just checked again. It’s now been zero days since an NFL player was arrested. Thanks, Los Angeles Ram Ethan Westbrooks! Westbrooks was arrested this weekend for speeding and being in possession of an unlicensed firearm. This is the second time in bracelets this year for Westbrooks, who was arrested in March on suspicion of domestic violence (the charges were later dropped).

According to NFLArrest.com, the record span between arrests is 65 days. The average span between player arrests is seven days. The site has been tracking player arrests since 2000 and has an interactive breakdown of all the data. You can track arrests by team, date, day of the week (unsurprisingly, Saturday is most popular), player position, or type of crime.

It is important to note, as NFLArrest.com states, that NFL players are arrested at a slightly lower rate than Americans in general. One would hope, however, that the arrest rate would be significantly lower than for the general public. Given the high-profile nature of the job, the greatly heightened socioeconomic class of NFL employees, and league expectations that go along with the privilege of playing a game for a living, it is only natural to think that crime rates would drop precipitously.

And yet.

All in all, I’d say America needs the NFL and its blockheaded brats almost as much as it needs more unvetted and unassimilable Muslim immigrants. Almost, but not quite.

Updated update! David Codrea dispenses with the idea that NFL thugs have some sort of unalienable “right” to insult the people who ultimately pay their grossly-inflated salaries:

Putting on a team uniform and appearing at an event paid for by others means you’re no longer representing yourself, you’re representing those employing you.

When you accept the responsibility of representing a group, your obligation is to represent the goals and the mission of that group. As I noted in “Who Speaks for Oath Keepers?” I have a right to write about any topic I please – just not wherever I want. This is the Oath Keepers site. If I write anything not in the best interests of this organization, Stewart Rhodes and the board have the right to remove it and to boot me out.

Players would not be doing this if the enablers behind them did not find national divisiveness, increased racial agitation and cultural transformation advantageous to their interests. That team owners and the NFL have not shut down players hijacking media attention to promote their own political sentiments – sentiments that are irreconcilable with and deeply offensive to the beliefs of many Americans – speaks to the gutlessness, the lack of principle and/or the insidious motives of those supposedly running the show. If owners and the league had refused to accept such disruption the first time it happened, they would have issued a clear and unequivocal rule that if athletes want to play and keep earning millions of dollars, they’re not going to use the branding they appear under for unauthorized purposes.

All of which serves to reduce this nonexistent “right” to something more akin to an indulgence—a particularly apt term when talking about the childish, self-important antics of spoiled brats.

Via WRSA, who sums it all up nicely: “Irreconcilable differences.” That’s what it all boils down to in the end.

Update to the updated update! Codrea makes a statement above about the “enablers” seeing “national divisiveness, increased racial agitation and cultural transformation” as being “advantageous to their interests.” I submit that, if that’s the case, they’ve badly misidentified their interests, which of right ought to be nothing more than getting as many people as they can to pay attention to their sportsball games. Zman plays around with that a bit:

Of course, the zeal of NFL owners to include the girls is due to the understanding that their sport is never going to be popular with girls or sissies. Like boxing, it takes guts to play football. Anyone who played the game knows the risks, as they saw teammates carted off with broken bones or on backboards. Girls don’t like seeing that and they really don’t want their children doing it. The pinking of sports like football is an effort to distract the girls from the reality of the game so they don’t shut it down.

In a feminine society like ours, it is just a matter of time before masculine things like sports are either made girlish or relegated to the fringe. Boxing, for example, still exists, but only as a fringe sport done by foreigners. UFC has managed to gain an audience, but again, it is as a renegade activity, done underground and on pay-per-view. White mothers will never be taking their sons to UFC camp. They can tolerate martial arts, just as long as it is white boys in bathrobes, safely pretending to be Jackie Chan.

This is why football is so much trouble. Peak professional football was probably a dozen years ago. It was around then that white mothers, especially divorced middle-class mothers, started turning against youth football. They did not want their little baby being run over by black kids. That’s why the concussion hysteria gained traction. It’s a ready made excuse for pulling the white kids out of football, that lets white women pretend it is not racism driving their decision. After all, they loved Will Smith in the concussion movie!

It’s why the NFL’s decision to let their blacks kneel during the anthem is going to be a disaster for them. The owners signed off on it thinking it added drama and would therefore draw in girls, because girls and girly-men like drama. Instead, those kneeling black players are a stark reminder to white women that the sport of football is for violent black men, not nice suburban white boys. Youth participation in football is collapsing and this will only serve to accelerate it. The NFL has now made football anti-white and un-American.

The root cause is not the inherent danger of playing sports like football. The root is the same as it is for everything in the current crisis. The feminization of the West is turning politics into a never ending soap opera for no purpose than the perpetuation of petty gripes among the participants. Nothing gets done, because girls don’t care about deeds. They care about attention.

Hoo boy, the gals ain’t gonna like THAT one little bit.

Share

Goodbye, good luck, good riddance

September 23rd, 2017 5 comments

Let ’em drown in it.

President Donald Trump has ratcheted up the national controversy over black National Football League players who refuse to stand while the U.S. National Anthem is played before games.

During a Friday night political rally in Alabama, Trump called on fans to boycott teams that allow players to engage in that particular form of protest.

The league’s TV ratings have slid since quarterback Colin Kaepernick, then the leader of the San Francisco 49ers, began the trend in September 2016.

‘Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, “Get that son of a b***h off the field right now! He is fired. He’s fired!”‘ Trump boomed.

His crowd applauded and chanted ‘USA! USA!’

All of which was RACIST!™, of course.

The outspoken president also said American football is ‘not the same game anymore’ since referees have clamped down on aggressive tackles, throwing penalty flags whenever they hear the crack of a vicious hit.

‘They are ruining the game, right?’ he asked. ‘They are ruining the game.’

It was ruined a long time ago if you ask me, and I haven’t paid the slightest attention to football in decades now, after having been an avid fan my whole life up until then. Trump’s complaint is certainly part of the reason—they run a play, then spend the next twenty minutes for the damned refs to decide what just happened, and whether it was penalizable or not. When you throw in tantrums from assholes like Kapernick, and the fact that half the players in the league are little more than violent, sub-literate thugs who, if they weren’t on the field getting paid millions to play a kid’s game would likely be out in the parking lot breaking into cars…well, it becomes a pretty tough thing to maintain any sort of interest in, for my money at least. Mike Walsh has seen enough too:

There’s no question that the has-been Kaepernick exacerbated the league’s slide in the ratings, but he alone is not responsible for it. The games have lengthened from three hours to four, while providing the same minuscule amount of “action” — eleven minutes. The players have grown ever more interchangeable; the teams might just as well field squads of tattooed robots. To illustrate just how far off the rails the league has gone, Los Angeles — a city that has no use for pro football and proved it could live without the Rams for years — now has two teams.

But if you ask this former fan, the rot runs deeper. Football, which is practically the state religion in Texas and across the South, used to be closely tied up with patriotism and love of country. The militaristic component of the sport, which was presented as akin to war, appealed especially to red-state dwellers. But sportscasters and sportswriters are overwhelmingly leftist in their outlook, and their eagerness to turn Kaepernick into a civil-rights icon has repelled a sizable section of football’s core audience — and one that, by the current evidence is growing.

He then quotes league commissioner and all-round idiot Roger Goodell:

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell fired back at President Trump on Saturday for encouraging league owners to remove players who take a knee during the national anthem, saying Trump’s “divisive comments” show “an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL.”

“The NFL and our players are at our best when we help create a sense of unity in our country and our culture,” Goodell said in a statement. 

Uh huh. By refusing to show respect for its anthem and flag, and turning a damned game into a chance to make a snotty, ignorant, and ill-considered political statement that obliquely insults the people who ultimately pay their over-inflated salaries. I walked out on them a long time ago, and I haven’t missed ’em for even a moment.

Share

The Afghan Tar Baby

September 16th, 2017 Comments off

Another fine mess.

The focus now should be on the implementation of the new U.S. strategy for Afghanistan and the region. Commentators debate the pros and cons of the approach, but it is now U.S. policy. It requires careful coordination and integration of the tools of American power—military, diplomatic, economic and development—to move toward its objective: a negotiated Afghan political settlement. The policy’s specifics must now be defined and executed.

The rationale for continued U.S. engagement—to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a base for terrorist attacks as it was in 2001—carries much weight given the threats from radical and terrorist groups emanating from Afghanistan, Pakistan and across the region. “Right now (the Taliban) calculates that it can win,” argues a senior U.S. official, and if the United States were to leave precipitously the outcome would be “a state of chaos.” Yet, the tools and actions needed go far beyond “kinetic” actions.

The U.S. approach needs to address: 1) the situation in Afghanistan itself (political, economic, development and military); 2) the role of Pakistan as an enabler of the Taliban and other violent groups and as a possible facilitator of peace; 3) the regional context: other neighbors and key players who can help or hinder a peace process and the India-Pakistan rivalry, which adds a nuclear dimension; 4) the important role of U.S. allies and partners in Afghanistan and in forging a path to peace; and, 5) the objective of achieving a negotiated political settlement which incorporates the Taliban.

Umm, s’cuse me and all, but..”incorporates the Taliban”? Really?

REALLY?

Let’s see, would that be the same Taliban that we’ve been engaged in a fruitless, umpty-leven year slog trying to remove from power? The murderously savage thugs who arm, equip, train, shelter, and fund Muslim terrorists, and have for years? THAT Taliban?

The same Taliban who did this? THAT Taliban? They’re to be our “partners in peace” now?

What the ever-loving blue-eyed Hell ever happened to defeating these vile bastards, pray tell? No, never mind; probably best not to answer that one. It would be too fucking depressing.

Far as I’m concerned, the only “plan” Trump needs to be working on regarding Afghanistan is the airlift schedules for pulling every last bit of American materiel, personnel, and armament right the hell out of there—down to the last bullet, bandage, jerry-can, MRE, and tent stake. Yesterday wouldn’t be too soon. But hey, guess that’s just me.

Sheesh. Who the hell came up with this tripe, anyhow?

Earl Anthony Wayne served in Afghanistan 2009–11. A retired U.S. Career Ambassador, he is a Public Policy Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Center and a Senior Nonresident Advisor at CSIS.

Ah. “Career Ambassador”…and wouldn’t you just know Woodrow Wilson’s black name would pop up again, even in as far-flung a context as this.

Share

Trojan Horse

September 16th, 2017 Comments off

That’s all Obamacare ever was, you know.

The “Medicare for All Act of 2017” would repeal Obamacare, along with most other private and public insurance, and replace it with a government-run, one-size-fits-all, centrally directed system of reimbursement for medical expenses. Sanders, who honeymooned in the Soviet Union, holds the same opinion of health insurance as he does antiperspirants: “You don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different sneakers when children are hungry in this country.”

Senators Harris, Booker, Gillibrand, and Warren, who in addition to cosponsoring the bill may soon be fighting each other, as well as Sanders, for the Democratic nomination, are generals re-enacting the last war. They saw how well Sanders did against Clinton, they have marched in the anti-Trump “resistance” movement, and they want to inoculate themselves from accusations of ideological heresy.

Which is why they embrace the thin-skinned and irritable senator whose wife is under federal investigation. What the copycats forget is the future in politics is never a straight-line projection of the present, much less of the bizarre circumstances surrounding the 2016 Democratic primary. “Medicare for All” might strike Warren & co. today as legislation worthy of support for reasons both moral and self-interested. In time, however, palling around with Bernie Bros may become a liability.

For one thing, the policy is remarkably vague. “Mr. Sanders did not say how he would pay for his bill,” writes Robert Pear of the New York Times. “Aides said he would issue a list of financing options.” The “options” are not included in the bill—but they are enough to raise the hair on the back of one’s neck.

The experiences of Vermont, whose single-payer system collapsed several years ago, and of California and New Jersey, whose true-blue legislatures can’t carry single payer across the finish line, and of Colorado, which voted overwhelmingly against a similar plan last year, suggest the tax increases necessary to sustain expanded coverage frighten even Democrats.

Hey, I thought you morons fixed all that with Obamacare, right? You remember, the “Affordable” Care Act? It was supposed to guarantee universal access to health care—for FREE, no less—and at the same time lower the cost, wasn’t it?

And now here they come again, peddling that same old pig in a poke; they’re even by-God brazen enough to use the exact same damned words. “Universal access.” “Lower costs.” I heard some Democrat-Socialist Congressprick on NPR doing precisely that just yesterday. Even the liberal NPR hack interviewing the lying putz seemed flabbergasted by the sheer twisted illogic of the thing. I would love to have seen video footage of the interview, just to see if the greasy shitweasel managed to keep a straight face.

And once they finally do get total government control over the health care system—and make no mistake, they will—well, that’s it, game over. It will NEVER go away short of an actual violent overthrow of the government. After all, it never has, in any and every other country in which it’s been tried.

Nope, the government-health-care “solution,” like love and diamonds, is forever. Just another of those things we’ll all have to learn to get used to and “absorb,” like the occasional Muslim terrorist atrocity, I guess.

Share

Happy 9/11 Day!

September 11th, 2017 2 comments

The day the world changed. And then, very quickly, changed right back again.

TOM CLANCY WAS RIGHT: (Reposted from earlier today) And we’re living one of his scenarios right now. Not much is known for sure, but it’s obvious that the United States is the target of a major terrorist assault. There’s a lot of bloviation on the cable news channels, most of which will turn out to be wrong or misleading later. Here, for your consideration, are a few points to be taken from past experience:

The Fog of War: Nobody knows much right now. Many things that we think we know are likely to be wrong. 

Overreaction is the Terrorist’s Friend: Even in major cases like this, the terrorist’s real weapon is fear and hysteria. Overreacting will play into their hands.

It’s Not Just Terrorists Who Take Advantage: Someone will propose new “Antiterrorism” legislation. It will be full of things off of bureaucrats’ wish lists. They will be things that wouldn’t have prevented these attacks even if they had been in place yesterday. Many of them will be civil-liberties disasters. Some of them will actually promote the kind of ill-feeling that breeds terrorism. That’s what happened in 1996. Let’s not let it happen again.

Only One Antiterrorism Method Works: That’s punishing those behind it. The actual terrorists are hard to reach. But terrorism of this scale is always backed by governments. If they’re punished severely — and that means severely, not a bombed aspirin-factory but something that puts those behind it in the crosshairs — this kind of thing won’t happen again. That was the lesson of the Libyan bombing.

“Increased Security” Won’t Work. When you try to defend everything, you defend nothing. Airport security is a joke because it’s spread so thin that it can’t possibly stop people who are really serious. You can’t prevent terrorism by defensive measures; at most you can stop a few amateurs who can barely function. Note that the increased measures after TWA 800 (which wasn’t terrorism anyway, we’re told) didn’t prevent what appear to be coordinated hijackings. (Archie Bunker’s plan, in which each passenger is issued a gun on embarking, would have worked better). Deterrence works here, just as everywhere else. But you have to be serious about it.

As Glenn says, these predictions have held up dismayingly well—which has demonstrated just how “serious” we really were, and remain. Now, hopelessly enmired in two bootless attempts at nation-building, trying to establish “democracy” and “freedom” in places where the primordial inhabitants want nothing to do with either, we’re reminded of just how much of the latter we’ve abandoned ourselves, and just how thoroughly we’ve shit on the former.

Now we’ve learned how to “absorb” another Muslim terrorist attack on our own soil every other month or so. We docilely stand in hours-long lines while watching the TSA crotch-grope grandmas from Wyoming or Mississippi at our airports while letting visibly belligerent, thobe-clad, military-age Muslim males pass unmolested; sit idly by while Leftist morons (including women and gays, hilariously enough) trash Christianity while insisting we “respect” Islam as one of the world’s “great religions” in the next breath; have had to endure a Republican President lecture us all on how Islam is a “religion of peace”; have been unctuously instructed that we are NOT to refer to Islamic terrorism as anything more sinister or preventable than “man-caused disasters”; are treated to the ludicrous and sad spectacle of the FBI declaring itself “baffled” after each and every ALLAHU AKHBAR-yodeling terrorist atrocity as to what could POSSIBLY have been his motivation for it; are treated to insulting declarations of concern over Muslims as the real victims after each incident, because of “Islamophobia”; and import them by the millions into the very heart of the West without asking for even the most token or insincere nod towards assimilation or respect for our culture from them.

And the Muslim call to prayer—”the most beautiful sound in the world,” according to our previous President—is heard over more American cities with every passing day, doing what it always does in every part of the world in which it’s been allowed to ring out unattenuated by staunch resistance: drowning out the shrieks of the murdered, muffling the sound of freedom, and giving voice to the barbaric hooting of the victors as they gloat over those they’ve vanquished.

Mission accomplished. Looks like we’re all “America Strong!™” now.

Share

Covers

September 10th, 2017 5 comments

So what IS it with handing a husky-voiced female an acoustic guitar and an old pop song and having her turn the thing into a funereal dirge for a TV commercial, anyway?




I mean, for God’s sake. The charm (pretty limited in the first place, according to my taste anyway) of the original was wrapped up in its lighthearted goofiness, its non-threatening, off-kilter lack of any sort of self-consciousness or, y’know, weight. But this…this is just damned depressing.

And even amidst the dolorous gloom, they manage to load it up with enough saccharine treacle to choke the most jaded, untouchable cynic. Aww, how sweet; the old folks have danced their whole lives through while putting away their damned groceries. Yeah, gag me with a maggot, whydon’tcha.

Just what the hell does this have to do with groceries, anyway? I hasten to add that I had nothing against Publix before I saw this wretched piece of raw manipulation. I’d probably shop there sometimes if I had one anywhere close to me. But if they’re going to start tossing old folks at me, staggering around their kitchens like zombies while listening to hairy-pitted female neo-folkies groaning out a sad abortion of a semi-amusing old pop confection, reminiscing about the golden grocery-shopping trips of yore—well, the Publix PR and advertising departments can count me right the fuck out on that one.

Here’s the original for comparison purposes:




It even has a midget in it, ferchrissakes—a midget. How do you get from midgets cavorting in a grassy field to the kind of three-hankie heartwrencher the Publix folks want us all to open a vein over?

Not that I’m at all opposed to taking a fine old song and folding, spindling, and mutilating it into something pretty far removed from what it was, mind. But as with most things, there’s a right way and a wrong way to go about it. This would be the right way:




I’ve mentioned that one here before, I believe, and it’s still just gorgeous. This, too, works nicely for me:



Kinda strange, kinda odd, kinda bizarre, and probably not at all what Copland had in mind, but still great nonetheless—although if you’re one of those people who don’t like pipe organs, you might feel differently about it, I guess. Even so, I think we can all probably agree that it works a damned sight better than that smoking mess of a Publix ad above does.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go out to the grocery store and see if I can find an old couple tripping the light fantastic down the bread aisle…and tip them over.

Update! Another example of the Right Way, and a fairly, um, extreme one too:




That’s good squishy right there, folks.

Share

Hoodwinked, bamboozled

September 9th, 2017 15 comments

I’m just about ready to call it a Deep State victory and wash my hands of the whole thing at this point.

The Trump administration has no plans to charge former IRS official Lois Lerner over her role in the Tea Party targeting scandal, the Justice Department said Friday in response to calls by Republican lawmakers to revisit the case.

In a letter to the lawmakers, the Justice Department said that “reopening the criminal investigation would not be appropriate based on the available evidence.”

No harm, no foul, no action from the guy we sent there to fix this. It’s time to start thinking about what we’re gonna do next…if anything. Personally, I doubt there’ll be any response other than further online grumbling. There ain’t gonna be any revolution, there ain’t gonna be any meaningful reform, and there ain’t gonna be any civil war, either. Hillary isn’t going to prison; how can anyone still think Trump was serious about that, if the woman who weaponized the IRS as a means to steal an election is to face no repercussions more serious than early retirement with a full pension?

Americans are pussies, all hat and no cattle; the idea of them rising up to put a stop to their own oppression when it might interfere with Monday Night Football at the local microbrewery is ludicrous. As Ace says:

It’s almost as if we changed presidents but the actual government remained completely intact.

I don’t know if this is Trump’s call or Sessions’ call or if it was made by subordinates and there’s some doctrine of non-interference from political appointees that prevents them from doing anything about it — but I’m getting very tired of the One Party Government.

Not even a special counsel to look into this independently? Nothing?

Was it all a lie? And if it was all a lie — then what else can I trust?

Well, you can sure trust this: your vote means nothing. Your freedoms are nonexistent, and your Constitution is a joke. You will do as your government tells you; you will take what it gives you and like it, and bleat for more when told it’s appropriate and allowed. And that is absolutely ALL you will do.

In sum, you are now—officially, irrevocably, and in every way that counts—EUropeans. You may complain about the taste, but you will assuredly eat the shit sandwich, to the very last bite.

Back in the late 60’s, my family MD wrote and self-published a book. Its title: Farewell, America. The man was prescient. In fact, I think I still have a signed copy of it someplace, the one he gave my father. But in any event, the writing was on the wall even then, for those with eyes to see and the heart to face up to it.

Share

Make yourselves useful, for a change

September 3rd, 2017 2 comments

Howie Carr expands on an idea I mentioned here the other day.

Seriously, doesn’t it look like almost all of the heavy lifting in the wake of Harvey is being done by people who belong to what the Southern Poverty Law Center would describe as “hate groups?”

Speaking of which, when does the SPLC’s food drive begin? Are the non-workers of the Socialist Workers Party and the Spartacist League loading any southbound 18-wheelers with relief supplies this weekend?

Maybe everyone in “the Resistance” is worn out from wearing pink hats and black masks and tipping over statues and sucker punching passers-by with bicycle locks in Berkeley and grabbing an old lady’s flag on the Boston Common and burning it — all those wonderful manifestations of how Love Trumps Hate, as they say.

Of course, it’s the last weekend of summer, so you can’t expect the likes of Jeffrey Epstein to be scrambling his private 747 out of the Hamptons to airlift foodstuffs to Galveston and Beaumont. You can’t be asking Brooklyn hipsters or Occupy Wall Street to occupy a relief shelter when the Beautiful People are jetting into Nantucket for brunch at the Chanticleer Inn.

Besides, as assorted adjunct professors at third-rate colleges have been tweeting out all week, those are Trump voters stranded down there in the Lone Star State — bitter clingers and irredeemables.

Then there’s John Kerry — he did sell his second wife’s first husband’s trust fund’s yacht when he moved from Nantucket to the Vineyard, but he could still enlist in the Cajun Navy. America’s Gigolo has other plans this weekend, though. According to The Hill, Liveshot is busy — “Kerry races to save American cycling team.”

Well, first things first.

He has many more examples of our so-“compassionate” betters failing to lift a finger or muss a hair, as well you might expect.

Share

Can’t win

September 1st, 2017 2 comments

Shouldn’t try.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House says President Donald Trump is pledging $1 million in personal funds to Harvey storm relief efforts.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders made the announcement at a briefing Thursday.

And she says he’s calling on reporters to help decide which specific organization he will give to.

Trump has been criticized in the past for giving far less of his income to charitable causes than many other multi-billionaires.

Bold mine, to highlight a disgustingly typical sentiment. No matter what Trump does, he will NEVER be able to please these shitweasels, and they will never give him one iota of credit; they will always pretzel themselves looking for some way to slam him, and expecting any better from them is a mug’s game. Meanwhile, I just gotta ask: how much has Barack Obama kicked in? Or Hillary!™? AntiF(irst)A(mendment)? BLM, the SPLC, the NAACP? Or, for that matter, George Soros?

Or, say, the “journalist” who wrote the above tripe? Or anybody else at AP?

Yeah, thought so.

Share

Paragon of virtue

September 1st, 2017 6 comments

Hey, remember how Comey was a man of unassailable integrity, a truly honest and impartial man untouched by DC sleaze, unafraid to go wherever the evidence led him—respected and trusted by all, the perfect guy to do the tough and dirty job of getting to the bottom of the controversy over Hillary!™’s illegal email server without a whiff of scandal, whitewash, or other untoward behavior?

Yeah. Right.

Two Republican senators say they’ve reviewed evidence that indicates former FBI Director James B. Comey began drafting a statement to announce the closure of the bureau’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server months before key witnesses, including the former Democratic presidential candidate, were interviewed.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley and Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote to FBI Director Chris Wray asking for information related to Mr. Comey’s announcement, saying they’ve reviewed partially redacted interview transcripts that indicate Mr. Comey was drafting a statement on the closure of the case months before the July 5, 2016, announcement.

In a departure from typical federal law enforcement protocol, Mr. Comey announced that no criminal charges would be sought against Mrs. Clinton because — although she had been “extremely careless” in her handling of sensitive national security information — investigators couldn’t prove that it was intentional.

The sleazy, greasy, slimy fuck.

Fix: IN. Right from the start. Unless and until Trump has both Comey and Hillary!™ investigated to within an inch of their very lives, the swamp can never be said to have been truly drained.

Share

Winners

August 31st, 2017 Comments off

And losers.

They’ve lost their reasons for not being able to do anything. Reince Priebus was on this program four days after the election, the first thing out of his mouth before I even asked him a question, “I know what you’re gonna say, and you’re right, we have no more excuses, no more excuses.”

But yet they offered more excuses. You know what the new one is? We don’t have 60 votes in the Senate so we really can’t do anything.

Well, not until they do away with the filibuster. But that’s just another false promise they don’t intend to keep.

Now, folks, after seven or eight years of the Republican Party promising every election to do everything Republican voters expect and promising to do these things, Republicans didn’t not promise, they did. They were gonna get rid of Obamacare, replace it, do something. They were gonna cut taxes, gonna stop this spending, and we were going to get control of the border.

It is an interesting question: What happens when the president of the United States is a Republican and the rest of his party is doing everything it can to undermine him and his agenda? What happens? What’s in the minds of Republican members of the House and Senate? After two years of openly opposing Trump, openly thwarting. After seven years of promises and now the chance to do it all, the Republicans have a chance to do everything they said they were gonna do, they control Washington, electorally.

Folks, they have an opportunity to do everything they have been promising to do, a once-in-a-career opportunity. They’re never going to have this kind of power. And what are they doing? Nothing. In fact, it’s worse than nothing. It appears to outsiders that they are part of the effort to thwart and stop Trump.

Do they think this behavior is gonna be rewarded with reelection? Do they think that the American voters are gonna blame all of this on Trump and reelect Republicans and try to get rid of Trump? And what does Trump do when it comes time to run for reelection? Does he run as a Republican or does he say, “This party isn’t gonna exist! This party is killing itself. This party’s eating itself. This party’s committing suicide. I’m not gonna be a part of it.” There are a lot of questions here, the answers to which are open ended.

This party is a false-flag operation, in clandestine collusion with their Uniparty cohorts for years. But now they’re in one hell of a mess, because we’re onto them at last. They now stand irrefutably exposed as frauds, as phonies, as liars; the Obamacare-repeal charade did that all by itself, let alone all their other betrayals over the years—although I’d argue that the loathsome toad McConnell’s declaration of his intent to destroy the Tea Party ought to have been enough to unmask them.

They will never be part of the solution. They are part of the problem. As Bozell said the other day: they aren’t interested in draining the swamp. They ARE the swamp. They’re in a trap of their own devising, and there is no easy way out for them now. In fact, there may be no way out for them at all.

And they better be paying attention to what’s going on in Arizona. Jeff Flake, who wrote this op-ed basically trashing Trump, has an opponent, Kelli Ward. This is the woman that ran against McCain and came up a little bit short. Jeff Flake has just 21% of support from Arizona Republicans for reelection against Dr. Kelli Ward. She’s coming in at 47%. This is a poll from JMC Analytics. It was a survey of 500 Arizona Republican voters. When you’re down 25 points, this is characterized as being an almost irreparable shape.

So Trump has his rally in Arizona, where, what, 19,000 people, some inside, some outside, and there was a headline out there, “Flake Tries to Make Nice with Trump.” That was in The Politico. And we know why. ‘Cause he’s in dire straits here running up against Dr. Ward. Probably has seen these poll numbers.

And here is a pull quote: “That an incumbent U.S. Senator like Flake could be polling as low as 21 percent in his own primary, while a challenger like Ward has pulled 26 points ahead of him at 47 percent, is almost unthinkable with nearly a full year to go until the August 2018 primary…When asked if Flake should be renominated in 2018, an astounding 66 percent said that someone else should represent the Republican Party on the Senate ticket.”

Flake thought that he was endearing himself. Flake’s one of these guys that believes the media presentation of Trump and his voters. Flake thinks ’cause the media hates Trump that everybody else hates Trump so all he’s gotta do is get on the anti-Trump bandwagon and write that op-ed and he’s gonna be celebrated and hoisted up and applauded, and it’s just the exact opposite. And you know the rest of the Republican Party is watching.

They damned well better be. Because a day of reckoning is coming real soon. It’s gonna be a real come-to-Jesus moment for them, and as I said, I really don’t see a way out…except in the “out on their asses” sense.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of assholes, if you ask me.

Share

Deep State still Deep Stating

August 31st, 2017 3 comments

The last of Trump’s MAGA advisers fires a Parthian shot on his way out the door.

Your presidency will prove to be one of the most significant events in modern American politics. November the 8th was the result of decades during which the political and media elites felt that they knew better than the people who elect them into office. They do not, and the MAGA platform allowed their voices finally to be heard.

Regrettably, outside of yourself, the individuals who most embodied and represented the policies that will “Make America Great Again,” have been internally countered, systematically removed, or undermined in recent months. This was made patently obvious as I read the text of your speech on Afghanistan this week.

The fact that those who drafted and approved the speech removed any mention of “radical Islam” or “radical Islamic terrorism” proves that a crucial element of your presidential campaign has been lost.

Just as worrying, when discussing our future actions in the region, the speech listed operational objectives without ever defining the strategic victory conditions we are fighting for. This omission should seriously disturb any national security professional, and any American who is unsatisfied with the last 16 years of disastrous policy decisions which have led to thousands of Americans killed and trillions of taxpayer dollars spent in ways that have not brought security or victory.

America is an incredibly resilient nation, the greatest on God’s Earth. If it were not so, we could not have survived through the unbelievably divisive years of the Obama Administration, nor witness your message to roundly defeat a candidate who significantly outspent you and had the Fakenews Industrial Complex 100% on her side.

Nevertheless, given recent events, it is clear to me that forces that do not support the MAGA promise are – for now – ascendant within the White House.

Every word of it the sad, sorry truth. The ‘Stache, too, sees the writing on the wall:

President Donald Trump will have to override his advisers if he wants to make good on a campaign promise to abandon the Iran nuclear agreement, according to former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, who published a draft proposal for exiting the accord on Monday.

Bolton alluded to a rift within the administration over whether the United States should scrap the landmark deal, and said he was recently denied a meeting with Trump on the issue after staff changes at the White House.

“It’s a question of who prevails here: the president or his advisers,” Bolton told the Washington Free Beacon on Tuesday.

It surely is. The Iran farce aside, though, Bolton’s most disturbing words would have to be these:

After Bannon’s departure, Bolton said he was compelled to go public with his blueprint since he no longer enjoys regular access to Trump and can’t deliver it to the president himself.

“I made the request and it was turned down to see him most recently,” he said, though he declined to comment further.

Ah well, there’s always Madeleine Halfbright to turn to for advice instead of that icky Bolton, I guess. Or, y’know, Felonia McPaintsuit. And then maybe Trump can exhume Janet Reno to straighten out the FBI after that. Hey, if you ain’t gonna clear out the rat’s nest after all, might as well just hire all the rats and get ’em back on the payroll, right?

Only problem with that is, if Trump ain’t gonna do the job they sent him to do, real Americans might just have to look into some alternative hiring possibilities themselves come 2020.

Share

Off the (guard)rails

August 30th, 2017 5 comments

No doubt Trump is somehow to blame for the Loser Right’s sniveling, cringing embrace of permanent subservience and vassalhood to the Ruling Left, too.

The renowned Dr. Charles Krauthammer, arguing on camera against Laura Ingraham, pronounces the President’s remarks at his press conference on the Charlottesville, Virginia melee a “moral disgrace.”

The specification is Mr. Trump’s insistence that at Charlottesville, there was violence on both sides. To say this was a dastardly abrogation of duty, even though the Doctor himself acknowledges it to be true (“Yes, there was violence on both sides.”). It is true, but “not the point.” It is not the point because all the leaders “in this generation,” all except Trump, recognize the unique importance and evil of white racism in American society. And so, if there was a faction in the streets of Charlottesville that stood for racism, it is immoral to criticize another faction opposing it.

It makes no difference what the other faction did, or what part it played in the mayhem. It makes no difference that the “Unite the Right” demonstrators had a permit, affirmed by a court of law. It is immaterial whether all of those protesting the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue were actually Nazis or Klansmen. It does not matter that the President had denounced the Nazis and the Klan in his second statement, and specifically the one who murdered a woman with his car. Trump must be deemed to have taken all that back when he said there was violence on both sides. And it makes no difference whether the bloody confrontation was, in effect, engineered by calculating politicians, who restrained the police from intervening to prevent violence. All Krauthammer knows is that there were elements harkening back to Jim Crow on the scene, and so it is a moral disgrace to talk about anyone else.

Of course, moral disgrace is one thing, and moral imbecility another.

Read all of it, wherein Krauthammer’s commonality with the moral degeneracy of the Left is spelled out in revolting detail. Good thing he and his pitiful ilk have been left behind by events and rendered entirely irrelevant now, eh?

Share

Bill of particulars

August 29th, 2017 6 comments

If you ain’t pissed off, you ain’t paying attention.

Every Republican candidate’s stock speech sounds the same, the thunderous roar about a government out of control, federal spending out of control (insert charts and graphs and why, if you stack hundred dollar bills, they will reach the edge of the universe), federal taxes out of control (insert comparisons to socialist countries), the federal bureaucracy out of control (insert metaphors about chains, yokes, and the like), the family shattered with federal funding of abortion a crime against humanity (watch for it — there! The heart-wrenching sob), and our military is emasculated.

Two more items were added to the menu, courtesy of Obama. Obamacare Will Be Repealed! and Illegal Immigration Will Not Stand!

In 2009, the Democrats controlled everything, partly due to the Republicans’ cowardice on Capitol Hill, and in part because of some of the most inept candidates and campaigns America has seen in years. The Obama folks could have played it safe but went for socialist gold, using the power of the legislative and the executive branches (and later the judiciary, thank you Justice Roberts) to advance their agenda.

That included federal spending on a level unmatched in human history resulting ultimately in a $19 trillion in debt we simply cannot pay, and with so many tens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities that “infinity” is not far behind. One seventh of the economy was confiscated by the federal government with the passage of Obamacare. Our national borders were declared open and discussions over our national sovereignty closed. And to top it off, the Democrats all but declared themselves above the law.

The GOP harrumphed that this would not stand, by God! If only…if only America would vote them into the majority.

And we all know what THAT got us.

Bozell goes on to recite a litany of betrayal, collusion, and deceit that of right ought to shame even the most brazen professional politician…but, somehow, doesn’t. This would have to be my favorite line of the piece:

There is no difference between Republicans and Democrats. Put them together. They are the swamp.

Which would explain why they’re all so damnably resistant to draining it, of course. As I’ve said so many times: no, we don’t need a third party. What we DO need is a second party, to stand in true opposition to the Government Party, the Beltway Bandit Party, the Business As Usual Party.

(Via WRSA)

Share

Doorbells? DOORBELLS?

August 28th, 2017 1 comment

Seriously? I mean, seriously?

These delicate little neurotics are afraid of fucking doorbells now?

Damned if I’da told it.

Mr. Walia, 19 years old and a computer science major, says he just isn’t comfortable ringing them. He and his friends have become so accustomed to texting one another upon arrival, he says, that the sound of a doorbell feels like an unexpected jolt.

“Doorbells are just so sudden. It’s terrifying,” says Tiffany Zhong, 20, the founder of Zebra Intelligence, which helps companies conduct custom research and gather insights on people born in the past two decades.

Um. “Terrifying”? Really? Good Lord.

There’s no published research about doorbell phobia, but it’s a real thing. In a poll by a Twitter user earlier this month that got more than 11,000 votes, 54% of respondents said “doorbells are scary weird.”

Some millennials and Gen Zers say they won’t even consider answering a ring at the door until they’ve checked the security camera.

The doorbell freak-out reflects the ascendance of mediated communication, which means people interacting through technological devices rather than directly. It’s not so much about screen time versus face time as it is a merger of the two.

Smartphones provide extra information thought by users to be vital to day-to-day interactions. Without smartphones to help, encounters can feel fraught.

“Typically, doorbells are for outsiders,” says Ms. Zhong, whose LinkedIn profile describes her as a “teen whisperer.” “A text signifies it’s a friend.”

God help us if we as a nation ever have to rely on no-ball pisspots like these to, say, storm the beaches at Normandy or something. What might be even worse than publicly admitting something as humiliating as this, though, is that the wilted little hothouse flowers don’t even have sense enough to be ashamed of their tremulous lunacy, and don’t seem to care who knows what gutless little feebs they are.

On the other hand, though, I guess in light of this it’s easy enough to see why they’re all so terribly frightened of Trump. I imagine that, should they ever so much as see a picture of Patton, they’d all just fall over dead from the quivering fantods.

I repeat: good Lord.

Share

“Lots of cant, no solutions”

August 28th, 2017 Comments off

Schlichter uses the Loser Right’s lamentations over the Arpaio pardon as his jumping off point:

What will bring the Rule of Law back? How do we get to the Conserva-Eden we are expected to act like we already reside it? Perhaps another statement of principle? Maybe another post on some unread conservajournal? I know – how about more complaining about how frustrated conservatives are uncouth and should just sit there and take whatever fascist garbage the left dishes out?

I always thought it was conservative to punish wrongdoers. The other side abandoned the Rule of Law, so I would think that they might – maybe – learn a lesson by experiencing the consequences of their bad choice. But apparently punishing wrongdoers is now off the table because some other principle, of which I was unaware during nearly four decades inside conservatism, requires we never ever retaliate. 

So, my finger-wagging True Con friends, what’s your plan? How do we go from liberals abandoning the Rule of Law, and such ancillary and associated components of a society based on liberty like free speech and free enterprise, to a liberty-based society operating under the Rule of Law? “Elect more True Cons!” isn’t a plan; it’s an aspiration, and not much of one. I don’t need another cliché, or another citation to general principles, or some variant of my new favorite, all-purpose get-out-of-having-an-actual-plan-free card, the old “We’re better than this” line.

See, I reject the notion we are ever somehow morally obligated by conservative principles to lose to liberals. If I have to swallow something awful, I’ll take half a loaf any day over an entire loaf of liberal dung like Felonia von Pantsuit. I think the new rules are terrible, and they are antithetical to everything I’ve worked for since before many of my Fredocon critics were a tinge of regret growing in their mommies’ bellies the morning after. But I refuse to sit back and allow libs to be victorious because I won’t dirty my hands fighting fire with fire. If that makes me not conservative enough for some, I can live with that. I can’t live with leftist tyranny.

I think you want to rely on the power of conservative ideas and sort of hope they spontaneously erupt into a conservative paradise via a right wing Big Bang without you actually having to fight for them. After all, fighting is messy and unseemly, and you also have to ally yourselves with…those kind of people, if you know what I mean, and I think you do. It’s so embarrassing having to explain them to your liberal peers. Many of these misbegotten normals are baffled by fancy sandwiches and stuff.

Before you give me more grief for allying with the Republican in the White House – you know, that guy your party elected – I’m going to need your plan. See, we need real solutions, and my solution is fighting back hard and ruthlessly.

Works for me. In fact, I’m coming closer and closer to embracing the “kill ’em all, let God sort ’em out” approach as the only practical and effective way to get them off our necks, and I don’t care even a little bit whether Conservatism Inc is good with that or not. Denying the enemy the head of Sheriff Joe, as Kurt puts it, is but a single step in the right direction along a long, hard road. There are a lot more of them ahead of us, and as we continue putting one foot in front of other, the plaintive bleating of the irrelevant Loser Right will fade to a barely-heard background hum. Which is all to the good if you ask me.

Share

NUTS!

August 23rd, 2017 4 comments

A haircut. They’re now committing attempted murder in broad daylight, in public, over a fucking haircut.

This Colorado man is avowedly not a neo-Nazi.

But he believes his long-on-top, buzzed-on-the-sides haircut got him mistaken for one — and nearly stabbed to death by a confused anti-fascist.

Joshua Witt, 26, escaped his brush with hairdo-doom with a defensive slice to the hand and three stitches.

“Apparently, my haircut is considered a neo-Nazi statement,” he told The Post Saturday, as his account on Facebook garnered 20,000 shares.

Witt says he’d just pulled in to the parking lot of the Steak ’n Shake in Sheridan, Colo., and was opening his car door.

“All I hear is, ‘Are you one of them neo-Nazis?’ as this dude is swinging a knife up over my car door at me,” he said.

“I threw my hands up and once the knife kind of hit, I dived back into my car and shut the door and watched him run off west, behind my car.

“The dude was actually aiming for my head,” he added.

This is how truly insane these people are. Still think you can “reason” with them, “dialogue” with them, debate in good faith with them, make them see the light at last?

If so, you’re every bit as willfully obtuse as they are. And are a complete chump to boot. Heartfelt and appalled denunciation of the murderous lunacy they’ve inspired and promoted from the Democrat Socialist Party and its “mainstream”-media propaganda wing in 3…2…1…never. Stephanie Pagones says:

Even if he were one of the very, very few Nazis in this country: so what?

That doesn’t justify a violent attack, but it’s even worse in this case, because Witt was nothing other than hungry. He had the wrong freaking haircut in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Guess what, media and politicians? This is what happens when you refuse to call out your own side for violence, or pretend it isn’t happening. Trump was 100% correct to call out these monsters along with the white supremacists.

It’s also what happens when our side refuses to fight back and crush them completely—and when our weak-tea so-called “leaders” like Ted Cruz (GOPe-Asshole) try to score cheap political points by attacking a President they loathe for daring to notice that the Goosesteppin’ Left is as much if not more to blame for the mindless violence they instigate than some pitiful handful of Nazis. Y’know, as long as we’re calling people out here and all.

Share

“We’re renting hookers and expecting love”

August 23rd, 2017 1 comment

Okay, I gotta say it: I ain’t digging this much.

In outlining his vision for applying “principled realism” to the war in Afghanistan, President Trump Monday night insisted there will be no precipitous American withdrawal. Though he didn’t specify the number, Trump will be sending additional troops — likely up to 4,000 — to Afghanistan. That would boost our commitment to just above 12,000 men and women in uniform.

And they’ll be expected to accomplish what 140,000 US and allied troops couldn’t achieve at the peak of our engagement, when the Taliban was considerably weaker.

In 2001, we did the right thing by going to Afghanistan to slaughter terrorists. But we were fools to stay. Afghanistan is strategically worthless. Tragically, former President Barack Obama backed the wrong war when his turn came, abandoning the strategic prize of Iraq because of a campaign promise to concentrate on Afghanistan — which he called the right war — to prove his security chops.

Where is the US general with the integrity to ask himself why, after 16 years of American support and self-sacrificing combat, the Afghan central government has been losing province after province to ill-equipped, poorly trained guerrillas who were characterized to me by one of our top generals as tactically inept “idiots”?

We can justify a limited presence in Afghanistan, perhaps 3,000 to 4,000 troops total, for the purpose of killing international terrorists. And we need not stop providing arms to Kabul. But it’s time to stop giving blood.

I hope I’m wrong. I, too, want our casualties to have meaning. But no matter how we reinterpret our mission, there’ll be more American blood. And the only Americans who’ll benefit will be contractors, who love impossible missions that never end.

We cannot save a country that won’t save itself.

We surely can’t. That being so, I say if Afghanis want to live in a primitive Muslim shithole governed by the inhuman, ass-backwards obscenity that is sharia law, let them. Billy Beck had it right long ago: go through the place like shit through a goose, bomb the shit out of them, kill people and break things, then hang up a sign at the border as the last GI leaves: “Don’t make us come back here.”

If our military was really as competent and almighty-powerful as we like to tell ourselves—more importantly, if American leadership had the guts to turn them loose, a clear-eyed concept of what American interests (if any) truly are, and the will to see any conflict through to unquestionable victory—the benighted savages in places like Afghanistan would quake with fear at the prospect of having American boots on their soil. 4000 more targets walking around with empty magazines who aren’t allowed to fire until fired upon ain’t gonna do it.

Afghanistan is a garbage heap with absolutely no value to us at all. It barely even qualifies as a nation, by just about any measure. Our sole interest in the place is to ensure that it’s not used as a safe-haven or training camp for Muslims plotting terrorist attacks against us—and absolutely nothing else. If you truly want to remake the place in the Western image, the handful of troops Trump is proposing to send aren’t near enough. In truth, we probably don’t HAVE enough, and never will. Afghanistan is not worth the blood, the treasure, or the bother, and it never will be. Trump ought to know better.

Update! This. This right here.

The President made his first address in his capacity as commander-in-chief to the nation last night, specifically about the situation in Afghanistan. After eight years of complete cluster-f***ery under Dubya and then a further eight years of having the commader-in-chief aiding and abetting the enemy, frankly I don’t see the point of wasting any more American blood and treasure. The way you win wars is to inflict the most massive amount of pain, death and destruction upon the enemy until he cries uncle. In this case we are not necessarily dealing with a nation-state but an annihilationist ideology. To my way of thinking, you have to kill and kill massively, occupy territory, institute martial law, dismantle the mosques and madrases and “denazify” the country by controlling how Islam is practiced and preached and forcibly introduce Judeo-Christianity over a period of perhaps decades. Obviously that ain’t gonna happen.

While it cannot be denied that Afghanistan is a breeding ground and launch pad for Islamist terrorism, the wave of attacks we have witnessed in the west over the past several years were carried out by citizens and/or recent immigrants to the individual nations themselves. Us included. Still, there needs be some sort of stability in that region. On the plus side, PDT is not going to micromanage the war and will let the generals do the fighting, hopefully with very loose rules of engagement. He also took aim at a huge terrorist enabler; Pakistan. And that has got to also be a shot at the Chi-Coms who are their biggest ally in the region. Still, the fact that very questionable people such as Lindsay Grahamaphrodite are in favor of this and that the plan was cooked up by H.R. McMustard, someone who is perhaps an Obama embed, I’m not exactly jumping for joy here. 

Nation-building is liberal flimflammery. Sure, it worked with Germany and Japan after WW2…but they were civilized nations before the war, and they had been utterly crushed, vanquished, damned near annihilated before any nation-building was attempted. None of those conditions pertains in Afghanistan—not one. Get the hell out of there, with the deadly-serious assurance that should any attack against us ever again originate from there, we will blow as much of the country as we can reach into glowing powder just as quickly as we can build the munitions to do it with.

We shouldn’t have to do that more than once or twice before the lesson is learned, I figure.

Share