Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Never NeverTrump

Once a cuck traitor, always a cuck traitor.

For two years, NeverTrump has united with the Left to sabotage Trump’s presidency, smear congressional Republicans who support him, and ridicule Trump voters. Led by Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large-and-getting-larger of the Weekly Standard, this group is as culpable as the news media and Democratic politicians for the smoldering hellscape that now is American politics.

NeverTrump has bolstered the sham special counsel probe into phony claims of election collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin; they have joined the Left on several occasions to demand that the president be removed from office—in late August, Stephens insisted the president’s actions met the “high crimes and misdemeanors” standard for impeachment. They mock Trump supporters with the childish, “But, Gorsuch!” mantra at every presidential misstep, an insult aimed at Americans who voted for Trump singularly out of concern about the future composition of the Supreme Court.

Many NeverTrumpers including National Review’s Goldberg and David French have helped legitimize Michael Avenatti, the creepy porn lawyer also trying to take down Kavanaugh. The president has been compared to Adolf Hitler and Mussolini by this crowd, while they compare themselves to courageous dissidents who fought communism. “Expert” Tom Nichols claimed Trump voters are ruining the country, and the Washington Post’s reprehensible Jennifer Rubin condoned violence against Trump aides, including Sarah Sanders, the first mother to serve as White House press secretary.

On every issue, big and small, NeverTrump worked in lockstep with the media, Hollywood and the Democratic Party to undermine Trump’s presidency and damage anyone aligned with him.

There are still NeverTrump holdouts. Kristol, Nichols, Rubin and Boot are not just opposing Kavanaugh’s nomination but urging people to vote for Democrats this fall, which would empower the very thugs who are leading this assault on our political system and our democracy. Nichols argued that Kavanaugh’s conduct is worse than the Democrats, and accused him of buying into conspiracy theories. So NeverTrumper nutters still abound.

But their numbers are shrinking, and it’s only a matter of time before they turn on each other. That will be a gratifying scene to watch unfold. Sadly, the pile of post-2016 political wreckage lies all around us, with Brett Kavanaugh now in the center of the debris. And NeverTrump, even those now seeking atonement, is as responsible for this as anyone.

I always said I considered Vichy GOPers to be even more reprehensible than the Democrat Socialists. Admittedly, some are worse than others; even Kurt Schlichter, after all, was a NeverTrumper early on. The likes of Rubin, Kristol, Goldberg, and French, and Boot, however, are beyond redemption, and needn’t look for leniency or forgiveness from me. Not that they’d care about such a thing, of course.

Rubin, for one, was never really a conservative anyway; she was one of a handful of liberals terrified by 9/11 who embraced the neocon War On Something Or Other and has slowly slid back into liberal-“moderate” irrelevance since, as the threat to her personally seems to have receded. The others seem to be burdened with a smug, sanctimonious sense of being part of an “elite” which causes them to recoil in horror at Trump’s “obnoxiousness,” his “rudeness” and “coarseness,” his cantankerous eagerness to go to the mattresses in bare-knuckle, down-and-dirty battle with his (our) enemies. Their preference for losing in a genteel fashion rather than risk winning by involving themselves in a vulgar brawl long ago rendered them useless and obsolete. Their obvious disdain for the ill-bred, ignorant hoi polloi who support Trump is no less offensive than the Left’s always has been.

And all that makes them something perhaps even more damaged, crippled, and contemptible than being merely “traitors,” at least in the current intoxicating climate of WINNING: it makes them losers. Sore losers, at that. They can do their sniffing and grumbling from the sidelines now; they’re as far removed from the great struggle to reclaim and restore this country as Julius Caesar’s ghost is, and nothing they say or do matters even slightly to anybody but themselves. They’ve reduced themselves to spectators now, and the pain that surely causes them is no more than their just deserts.

Share

Fake news!

Oh, but this is rich.

CNN’s Jim Acosta posted about the looming confirmation vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, ticking off a laundry list of liberal causes that might be affected by a more conservative court. Acosta was called out for spouting liberal talking points and did not take it well, deleting a tweet that accused his GOP critics of “bullying the press” and whining, “Can’t you guys win gracefully?”

Acosta initially tangled with the account of Don”Stew” Stewart, Deputy Chief of Staff to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). The deleted tweet was a reply to the personal account of Zach Roday, who describes himself as, ” @RepublicanAGscomms director | previously Paul Ryan’s political spox, House flack, Scott Walker ‘14, Romney/Ryan, Senate aide “

Acosta tweeted, “With a single speech, Sen. Collins, announcing her support for Kavanaugh, has paved the way for a much more conservative Supreme Court for the next generation. Abortion rights, gay rights, climate change, and health care reform could well be impacted for decades to come.”

Stewart tweaked him with, “Heads up: I think PFAW hacked your account.” (Note: PFAW is the acronym for the leftist group founded by Norman Lear, People for the American Way.)

The thin-skinned Acosta whined to Stewart about the First Amendment, “More bashing the press by those in power. First Amendment getting you down Stew?” Stewart replied, “Nope, in fact I was exercising my First Amendment rights. You get to express opinions; I get to express opinions. That’s how it works. Thanks for the RT.” Acosta came back, “Awww Stew… I get it. Reporting you don’t like gets labeled “opinion.” Hey buddy.. I’ve been called worse.”

Acosta must really love his King of the Whiney Media Bitches status; he seems awfully determined to maintain it, at any and all cost.

“Bullying the press.” No, Jim, it’s calling you out for the lying propagandists you are. Sorry our President ripped your mask off and left you cowering and cringing, fully exposed to public view and all. But hey, them’s the breaks. If you really think a little gentle ribbing is “bullying,” better brace yourself; by all rights you and yours got a lot more, and a lot worse, coming yet.

Share

What are the rules?

Schlichter takes a stab at enumerating ’em, but there really ain’t but one.

Now, the elite insists that the alleged and disputed actions of Brett Kavanaugh as a drunk teen forever bar him from a seat on the Supreme Court. Okay, but then how does the disqualification rule apply to other situations? Let’s take Tex Kennedy. Beto O’Rourke drove drunk as a 26 year old, got busted after nearly killing some people and tried to ditch the scene. Let’s put aside whether he’s lying to the voters about absconding and focus on the glug glug vroom vroom part.

Does an adult DUI disqualify him from the Senate? If not, why not? Why are his undisputed actions less disqualifying than Kavanaugh’s alleged one? If true, both represent, at best, huge misjudgments. Both subordinated the safety and rights of others to the malefactor’s personal desires. Both involved alcohol, but one involved a minor and the other an adult. Why aren’t both disqualified?

Can someone explain the rule to me that makes both Kavanaugh irredeemable and Beto – pardon the expression – the toast of Texas Democrats?

What’s the rule?

Here’s what I think. I think there actually are no rules anymore. I think the elite is so terrified it is losing its power that it is tossing out the foundations of the society it is supposed to organize and manage, that is, the rules. I think our elite actually does not believe in rules, that their attempts at enforcing the rules are merely a grift designed to jam up Normals and provide a way to keep them in line.

Of course it is. Which brings us around to the One Rule: anything, anything at all, that Democrat Socialists or Leftists do=GOOD. Anything, anything at all, that Repubicans or non-Leftists do—even if it’s THE SAME DAMNED THING THE LEFT JUST DID—is BAD. No more, it’s just that simple.

Share

Easiest whodunit in history

Imagine my surprise.

It Looks Like Maxine Waters’s Staff Doxxed Several Gop Senators During The Kavanaugh Hearing

Of course they did. Not Maxine herself, obviously; she’s far too fucking stupid to even begin to know how to do such a thing. In fact, if you told me Waters even knows what a computer is, much less how to use one, I’d insist on some pretty solid verification before I’d believe it. The curious thing to me, though, is this:



Notice anything there? Somebody blocked out the address and phone numbers. Now I may be wrong, but it seems to me that extending a consideration and security to this mangy, mule-faced shitlib that she actively sought to strip from others with malicious intent is…I dunno, self-defeating, shall we say?

Yeah, I know, I know, mustn’t sink to her level and all that happy horseshit. Well, sorry folks, but screw her, and I do mean hard. Live by the Doxx, die by it, I say; let her suffer the exact same indignity, inconvenience, terror, and risk of physical harm she tried to inflict on others who hadn’t done one damned thing to deserve it, and nothing whatsoever to her personally. I’d wager that after a week or two of death threats, flattened tires, harrassing phone calls around the clock, and flaming bags of dog shit left on her porch in the wee hours, she’d think very damned carefully before committing such an extremely vile and dastardly act again. It’s the only way she’ll learn.

As long as evil cretins like her—and her boss—view abiding by reasonable rules and standards not as a token of civilized behavior but as a weakness to be exploited, they need to have their noses rubbed in their own shit same as you would when housebreaking any other unruly cur. If they prove stubborn or if proper training is beyond them, they should be put outdoors in a secure pen lest they render the house unliveable with their disgusting filth.

Reap what you sow, bitch. You deserve no less. You and your obnoxious ilk are all too fond of yapping sanctimoniously, endlessly, about “justice,” but real justice is the last thing in the world you’d ever want visited on yourselves.

Share

More on Flake the Fake

Started to append this to the post below as an update, but Flake-level duplicity deserves to be considered entirely on its own.

Friday’s agreement to give the FBI a week to supplement its background check by looking into existing misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh guarantees the nightmare will continue, especially for him and his battered family. You don’t have to be a cynic to assume the rabid left will come up with more outlandish accusations in an effort to make up in quantity what it lacks in quality.

The extension is the devil’s bargain Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake struck with his conscience. First he said he would vote to move Kavanaugh out of committee, then was shouted at in an elevator by leftists and cornered by Senate Democrats. Naturally, he caved in to their demands for the extension while supporting Kavanaugh, pending the outcome of the probe.

As popular as a rattlesnake in ­Arizona, Flake is “retiring” from the Senate, yet has outsized leverage because of the GOP’s narrowest possible majority, 51-49. He used it to reward those who debased the Senate he claims to love.

Dems and their media handmaidens were quick to praise Flake for his “bipartisanship,” a term they ­reserve for when a Republican crosses over to pass liberal initiatives.

But the favor is rarely returned, and there is no Democrat equivalent to Flake or Susan Collins of Maine. Even when more centrist Dems vote with Republicans, they never supply the crucial votes, joining only as add-ons to a majority.

Again, there is no modern GOP equivalent to those tactics. As Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) reminded the nation in his fiery denunciation, he voted for both of Barack Obama’s nominees, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Looking at Democrats, Graham angrily declared, “I would never do to them what you’ve done to this guy!”

True, but it had no effect except to remind Republicans that their opponents take no prisoners.

Bold mine, and the most important line in the piece if you ask me, if not for the reason you might at first assume. Truth is, nobody needs to think the Repukes need any such reminders, or that they’re incapable of taking the no-prisoners, scorched-earth approach themselves; when it comes to battling Tea Partiers, real conservatives, or Trump, they’re every bit as willing to go the limits as any Democrat Socialist ever was.

Share

Give ’em an inch

I’m already tired of all the losing.

The senate (via Mitch McConnell), as an outcome of Senators Flake, Collins and Murkowski not supporting the nomination, was no longer going to vote on Judge Brett Kavanaugh without an FBI investigation.

President Trump calls for a limited investigation in scope and duration.

Within minutes of President Trump acquiescing to the well-constructed demands, DNC operatives speaking on behalf of their controlled client, Christine Ford, attorney Debra Katz and Michael Bromwich insist there will be “no limits”, and this is only “one step in their process”.

Perhaps President Trump will eventually win the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh; however, the system will then just move on to the next Machiavellian deployment. In the bigger picture, and again this is likely unpopular, I would prefer to confront the swamp directly – force the vote; if it fails we move to the next nominee and the mid-term election.

Fight us in sunlight. Fight us where everyone can see. Fight us directly….. At some point We The People need to end this fight strategy amid shadows and deceivers which is based on scheme and fraud.

Not everyone may agree on this approach, that’s ok. I understand there are all sorts of opinions on these issues. However, my sense is that We The People are ready to fight, but we also want our opposition to see the purposeful glare in our eyes as we achieve victory and crush them with overwhelming force.

I’m with Bill:

Sundance is right. Trump should have refused and told McConnell to call the vote. Let the chips fall. If Kavanaugh isn’t confirmed because of the treachery (no other word for it, sorry) of the Boobsey Twins, Flake, Manchin, Donnelly, and so on, then so be it.

Such a craven, cowardly defeat should be enough to motivate Republicans to sweep Democrats from power wherever possible. If Kavanaugh goes down, that will only make me more determined to vote for any and every Republican on the ticket here in Indiana.

Don’t try to treat with the demonrats. Kill them. (Politically speaking, of course).

Or, y’know, in whatever way you like, for all me. As for this ridiculous, bullshit “investigation” to “clear Kavanaugh’s name,” there’s a glaringly obvious problem:

Peter Strzok. Lisa Page. Andrew McCabe. James Comey.

Sound familiar?

That’s the FBI — the folks who are being asked to investigate, apparently for one week, the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh. Yes, that group is mercifully gone now, but who is behind them? And what have we not yet learned of the internal conspiracy against President Trump currently being investigated by the inspector general? Who else is involved and who then will be conducting and supervising this investigation? Will it be the same people?

In other words, can we trust the FBI with this when the institution itself is so tainted and deeply in need of reform?

This is the stuff of totalitarian cultures. If things were different, we could applaud an investigation into Judge Kavanaugh’s activities and, I would imagine, so would he. It would clear his name once and for all and he could go on with his life. But no one would suggest an investigation by the NKVD or the Stasi would be fair. What can we say about the FBI, given what we already know?

No doubt Deep State Central will be scrupulously fair in “investigating” a guy nominated by their most hated enemy Trump. And surely the Democrat Socialists will at last be satisfied and won’t further escalate their demands now that this last little one has been met. Senator Cassidy from Louisiana sees things clearly:

What Senate Democrats really want is more time to smear Judge Kavanaugh, regardless of the toll it takes on his wife, his daughters, and our country.

If the FBI turns up nothing significant, they will say what Joe Biden said in 1991, that the FBI does not reach conclusions. They will say the FBI did not have enough time to conduct a thorough investigation.

What they will not do is admit they were wrong to accuse Judge Kavanaugh of being a gang rapist, or a rapist, or a sexual assaulter, or a drunk, or a perjurer, or a hothead unfit for the bench.

If the delay facilitates new allegations from Michael Avenatti or someone else, it will not matter how ludicrous they are. Democrats will instantly call them credible, demand more delays, more FBI resources, and more hearings. They will attack anyone who disagrees.

Delay, delay, delay. That’s all they want, because their goal is to do anything and everything to smear any nominee — anyone — and block Republicans from appointing another justice to the Supreme Court.

Bingo. But let’s not pretend that the treachery is all on the Democrat-Socialist side here:

Few Americans understand the dynamics of fake Republicans in red states, where politically aspiring liberals often put an “R” after their names and run as pretend conservatives, knowing that is their only viable path to high office. Once safely elected, they feel free, like Senator Flake, to actively and sanctimoniously betray their voters.

So it should come as no surprise The Hill newspaper in March reported that Flake has “kept in touch” with former President Obama. Flake told David Axelrod, the former Obama strategist turned CNN host, that Obama called to check on him after the junior senator announced he would not run for reelection.

Flake hates President Trump like poison. He didn’t vote for him. He’s vied with Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) for the title of senator displaying the most open contempt for the president. In his announcement from the Senate floor that he would not be running for re-election, Senator Flake thundered he would “no longer be complicit or silent” in the face of Trump’s supposed “reckless, outrageous, and undignified” behavior—behavior that includes ending the Iran deal, pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord, and bringing North Korea and China to the negotiating table.

On Thursday, Flake’s plan to help destroy Kavanaugh ran into two problems. The first was Kavanaugh’s electrifying self-defense. The second, and perhaps more important, was Senator Lindsey Graham’s message to his Republican colleagues: “If you vote no, you’re legitimizing the most despicable thing I have seen in my time in politics.” The South Carolinian made it impossible for Flake immediately to announce he’d be joining the Democrats against Kavanaugh.

So Flake plotted a mini-coup on Friday morning to snatch away Kavanaugh’s moral victory over the Democrats’ smear campaign. Flake met with Democrats and unrolled a last-minute intervention to delay the Kavanaugh vote and call in the FBI. In short, he legitimized the Democrats FBI talking point, a patent attempt to delay and further besmirch Kavanaugh’s honor.

Kavanaugh does not need any more FBI investigations. He’s already had six. When he served President Bush, he had the highest security clearance in the country, which gave him access to nuclear codes. To get that, the FBI had to comb through his entire life. Kavanaugh’s record is squeaky clean—cleaner, certainly, than that of the post-Obama FBI. His whole life attests to that.

Flake is doing “the most despicable thing” any of us have seen in politics in our lifetimes—using uncorroborated and implausible allegations from 36 years ago to launch scummy attacks against a decent man. No amount of rhetoric about “healing the country” can cover Flake’s perfidious deed.

I have to ask once more: what the hell is going on in Arizona, that they keep sending pustules like Flake and McStain to Washington again and again and again?

Share

“How to successfully debate a Democratic Socialist”

First rule: don’t bother. It wastes your time, and annoys the pig.

Recently I had the opportunity to debate a Bernie Sanders supporter and democratic socialist on the radio. As the democratic socialists become more prominent, both nationally and at our dinner tables and parties, it’s very likely you will find yourself engaging in a similar debate.

Here are a few lessons I learned from my experience that can help you debate a democratic socialist.

Lesson 1. Be Prepared
My opponent came prepared. She knew that I immigrated from Communist China and have written a book on the horrors of socialist communism. Therefore, she quickly pointed out that democratic socialism is not the same thing as what I experienced in China.
She claimed that she didn’t want to get rid of capitalism, private property rights and personal responsibility. She said she hopes democratic socialism, with all the free handouts and government intervention and workers’ power, will make capitalism a better system. She treats capitalism like a puppy: cute but needing adult supervision to ensure it will behave.

Fortunately, I came prepared too. While a foot soldier of democratic socialism like her treats capitalism as a misbehaving puppy, my research reveals the leadership of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) view capitalism as their ultimate foe that ought to be destroyed. DSA’s Vice-Chair Jeff Stein, writing for Vox, declares that DSA believes in abolishing capitalism for an economy run either by “the workers” or the state.

He wrote, “In practice, that means DSA [members advocate] ending private ownership of a wide range of industries whose products are viewed as ‘necessities,’ which they say should not be left to those seeking to turn a profit…DSA also believes that the government should ‘Democraticize’ private businesses — i.e., force owners to give workers control of them — to the greatest extent possible.”

There is a clear disconnect between what socialists like my debate opponent claim about democratic socialism versus what the DSA leadership openly advocates.

And that’s also Lesson 1 in why you shouldn’t bother: they lie. Always, continually, shamelessly, without thought or care. It’s almost a reflex with them. Admittedly, though, I thoroughly enjoyed this one.

Lesson 2. Stress that Democratic Socialism Is Not New or Better
DSA leadership’s stated goals are the same goals declared by murderous communists Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, and many other socialists in the past , which shows democratic socialism is not that much different from what we’ve seen before.

Here is more proof. I read my opponent the following quote:

  • “We demand profit sharing in big business.
  • We demand a broad extension of care for the aged.
  • We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living.
  • In order to make possible to every capable and industrious citizen the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our entire system of public education. We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents.
  • The government must undertake the improvement of public health-by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor, by the greatest possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of youth.”

I asked her if these statements sound similar to what democratic socialists stand for, and she nodded. Then I revealed that they were excerpts from the 1920 declaration of the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, more commonly known as Nazis.

Heh. Good one. So yeah, if you’re debating them not in hopes of convincing or educating them but just to amuse yourself by batting them around like a cat toy for a bit, have at it. Otherwise, meh.

Despite my complete lack of patience for the premise—that seriously debating the smarmy, douchealicious polyps is or can ever possibly be a worthwhile use of anyone’s time—it’s a good, fact-filled article, I must say.

Share

Peace for our time!

The Chamberlain Republicans, maybe?

From the playground to geopolitics, appeasing an aggressor invites only more aggression. This timeless truth of human nature is one that we moderns can’t seem to accept. We reflexively assume that a rational accommodation or concessions will be reciprocated by those proven to be ready to use any means necessary to achieve their aims, no matter how amoral, unfair, or vicious. Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court illustrate that this false assumption leads only to more demands, and ultimately to defeat.

The last-minute accusations from Christine Blasey Ford, a woman who claims that decades ago Kavanaugh groped her at a high school party, and Deborah Ramirez, who accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her at a frat party at Yale, are transparent acts of aggression against the judge and Republicans, one engineered by the Democrats.

The point is to delay confirmation by slandering Kavanaugh and baiting the Republicans into appearing to abuse victims of sexual assault. Why? Facing his likely confirmation, the Dems, egged on by the mainstream media––especially The New Yorker, which published a story too badly sourced even for The New York Times–– are desperately attempting to obstruct and delay the process until after the midterm elections, when they hope they will retake the Senate and thus stop any more Constitutionalist judges from being confirmed to the Court for the rest of Trump’s term.

The Democrats have stooped so low with these smears because they know the stakes. The courts and especially the Supreme Court have been critical to the progressives’ program since Woodrow Wilson. The biggest obstacle to the progressive dream of government controlled and managed by a technocratic oligarchy has been the Constitution. Its divided and balanced powers were designed precisely to rein in overreaching ambition and concentrations of power. Hence the Constitutional order must be subverted by the Supreme Court and its unaccountable justices enjoying lifelong tenure.

But if Kavanaugh is confirmed, there will be five reliably Constitutionalist justices on the bench, who are unlikely to tolerate judicial usurpation of Congress’s law-making powers. That’s why this current nomination is a hill the Dems are willing to beclown themselves on.

The Dems know that most Republicans come to this conflict with the huge disadvantage that results from accepting your opponent’s dubious ideology and dishonest narrative. The progressive party can dare the Republicans to ignore the endless specious demands, stop the show-trial, and proceed to a vote on Kavanaugh, because they know the Republicans, fearful of the “optics,” will cave. They know that the eleven male Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee dread the #MeToo movement casting them as knuckle-dragging Neanderthal sexists who want to “silence” the accuser with their “cavalier treatment of a sexual assault survivor,” as one Ford lawyer has said. Republicans still don’t get that no amount of appeasement will stop the left from demonizing them anyway. Just ask Boy Scout Mitt Romney, who was savaged for his innocuous “binders full of women.”

Is there a long-term solution? Of course there is, unlikely as it is to ever be implemented:

What can we do to end these confirmation circuses? Just stop holding them. There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the Senate’s power to give “advice and consent” to the president regarding his nominee must entail days of televised hearings replete with caterwauling protestors and grandstanding Senators who’ve already made-up their minds. Invite written questions from the Senate, then schedule one day for the nominee to respond. Don’t put it on television, but make public a written transcript. Remove the television cameras, and attention-craving, politically ambitious Senators will be gone like a cool breeze.

For now, Grassley needs to end this farce if Ford doesn’t show up on Thursday or continues to negotiate for more delays and concessions. No more concessions. No more delays. No more ceding control of the process to Democrat Party lawyers. Don’t give Ramirez the time of day. Hold the vote no later than Thursday, or Friday if Ford does show up. Make Senators go on the record with their votes, and hold them to account in November. Put to the test the Dems’ claims that a critical mass of women, many of them with sons they don’t want falsely accused, believes the fundamentalist feminist narrative and will vote accordingly. To borrow Churchill’s definition of appeasement, stop feeding the alligator in the hopes that you will be eaten last.

I still say there ain’t gonna be no vote. I’d be tickled to death to be proved wrong, naturally. I’d also be surprised as hell. On the other hand, Kavanaugh’s judicious letter hit all the right notes and was a smart move which may give him a much-needed boost in some meaningful places. But the Demonrats are all in on this one, and the assist for their madhouse tantrum from disingenuous turncoats like Murkowski, Flake et al will probably be enough to forestall any vote. We’ll find out soon enough.

Share

Compare, contrast

Us:

September 24, 2018
The Honorable Charles Grassley The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
Chairman Ranking Member
Committee on the Judiciary Committee on the Judiciary
United States Senate United States Senate
135 Hart Senate Office Building 331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510 Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein:

When I testified in front of the Senate three weeks ago, I explained my belief that fair process is foundational to justice and to our democracy.

At that time, I sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee for more than 31 hours and answered questions under oath. I then answered more questions at a confidential session. The following week, I responded to more than 1,200 written questions, more than have been submitted to all previous Supreme Court nominees combined.

Only after that exhaustive process was complete did I learn, through the news media, about a 36-year-old allegation from high school that had been asserted months earlier and withheld from me throughout the hearing process. First it was an anonymous allegation that I categorically and unequivocally denied. Soon after the accuser was identified, I repeated my denial on the record and made clear that I wished to appear before the Committee. I then repeated my denial to Committee investigators—under criminal penalties for false statements. All of the witnesses identified by Dr. Ford as being present at the party she describes are on the record to the Committee saying they have no recollection of any such party happening. I asked to testify before the Committee again under oath as soon as possible, so that both Dr. Ford and I could both be heard. I thank Chairman Grassley for scheduling that hearing for Thursday.

Last night, another false and uncorroborated accusation from 35 years ago was published. Once again, those alleged to have been witnesses to the event deny it ever happened. There is now a frenzy to come up with something—anything—that will block this process and a vote on my confirmation from occurring.

These are smears, pure and simple. And they debase our public discourse. But they are also a threat to any man or woman who wishes to serve our country. Such grotesque and obvious character assassination—if allowed to succeed—will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from service.

As I told the Committee during my hearing, a federal judge must be independent, not swayed by public or political pressure. That is the kind of judge I will always be. I will not be intimidated into withdrawing from this process. The coordinated effort to destroy my good name will not drive me out. The vile threats of violence against my family will not drive me out. The last-minute character assassination will not succeed.

I have devoted my career to serving the public and the cause of justice, and particularly to promoting the equality and dignity of women. Women from every phase of my life have come forward to attest to my character. I am grateful to them. I owe it to them, and to my family, to defend my integrity and my name. I look forward to answering questions from the Senate on Thursday.

Sincerely,
Brett M. Kavanaugh

Them:

Citing an unnamed, high-ranking Trump official, the Wall Street Journal and CNN reportat least four vulgar messages were sent to Ashely Kavanaugh’s work email address. In one instance, Mrs. Kavanaugh was sent an email which reads, “May you, your husband and your kids burn in hell.” Another message states “Hi, Ashley,” you should tell her husband to “put a bullet in his … skull.”

“My condolences to you for being married to a rapist. Although you probably deserve it,” another email read.

On Wednesday, Mrs. Kavanaugh is said to have received a note with the following subject line: “F*** YOU AND YOUR RAPIST HUSBAND.”

In addition to Mrs. Kavanaugh, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) has received multiple threats in a bid to intimidate her into voting against the Trump Supreme Court pick.

“My office has received some pretty ugly voice mail threats, terrible things said to my staff, so this has been a very ugly process and I think that’s very unfortunate,” Collins told radio station WVOM on Wednesday. Last week, Collins’s chief of staff, Steve Abbot, told a Maine television station, “We’ve had some very abusive callers” regarding Kavanaugh’s nomination. “We’ve had some very vulgar calls and sort of harassing the staff.”

Now, Ballsey-Fraud claims to be getting death threats and such too, which frankly I don’t give a tinker’s damn about; one of these things is NOT like the other, and a sleazy, slimy political operative peddling lies in order to undermine the presumption of innocence and due process has damned well earned every bit of discomfort she suffers as far as I’m concerned. Ultimately, it all comes down to this:

The stakes of the current battle over Kavanaugh are far bigger than a single Supreme Court seat, and Republican voters understand this, even if their elected lawmakers don’t. It’s bigger than Roe v. Wade, Obamacare, or Second Amendment rights. Democrats are trying to turn the rule of law on its head, to destroy the presumption of innocence — not for themselves, mind you, but for anyone who dares to oppose their totalitarian political agenda.

The Democrats have one goal: to prevent the nation’s elected Republican government from doing what it was elected to do. That’s the whole purpose of the Robert Mueller probe, which to date has not produced a shred of evidence that Trump treasonously conspired with the Russian government to steal an election from Hillary Clinton. It’s the reason for the lawless and anti-democratic “resistance” within federal agencies, which gleefully uses its power and total lack of accountability to the electorate to wreak havoc on our nation’s institutions.

Democrats refuse to accept that they lost the election fair and square, and they refuse to accept that Trump and Republican lawmakers have the right under the U.S. Constitution to nominate and confirm Supreme Court justices. The last week has proven that Democrats will do anything, whether it’s spinning up federal investigations on false premises, sabotaging legal processes within federal agencies, or cooking up vile smear campaigns to prevent the confirmation of the next Supreme Court justice, all the way to 2020 and perhaps even beyond, if necessary.

Republican voters know exactly what’s happening right now, and they’re out for blood. The only question left is who they’re going to punish. If Senate Republican leaders don’t immediately end this entire charade and schedule a floor vote for Kavanaugh, their heads will be on the chopping block.

People keep on complaining about the Vichy GOPe Congresscritters using terms like “spineless,” “feckless,” “cowards,” “clueless,” and the like. I ain’t buying any of that for a minute; nobody ever clawed their way to the top of the DC shitpile by being anything less than a cunning, relentless, bold, and devious operator, not once. Look at how Yertle McTurtle destroyed the Tea Party movement, brazenly gloating about it before, during, and after. He even sneakily spent big bucks to make sure Roy Moore was defeated by his Democrat-Socialist opponent.

No, the Vichy GOPe wing of the Status Quo Uniparty is perfectly capable of fighting viciously and effectively against their opponents right enough. It’s just that too many of us are still laboring under a misperception as to who those opponents really are.

Hats off to poor Kavanaugh; he’s clearly a class act, and his determined refusal to sit passively back and go down without a fight is indeed admirable. It’s plain, too, that his understanding of the Constitution and the proper role of the Court would make him a fine Justice. But this fight is bigger than just his nomination now. Like the man who nominated him, he’s beset on all sides—locked in an existential three-way war in which those who are supposed to be his allies and supporters are simply no such thing.

Update! Steyn’s take:

So, as Leah the Boss Tweets, the left’s position is that, if you’re in a middle-school girls’ bathroom and li’l Jimmy is transitioning in there and you happen to be exposed to her penis, what’s the big deal? Everyone knows penises are nothing to do with blokes anymore and, if you suggest otherwise, you’ll be kicked out of every position you hold. But, if you graduate middle school and make it to Yale and you’re exposed to Brett Kavanaugh’s penis, or a doppelgänger for Brett Kavanaugh’s penis…whoa! That particular penis or doppelpenis will traumatize you for the next thirty years.

They’re sickos: twisted, depraved, dysfunctional people who should be vigorously shunned at the very least.

Democrats are already using the second accuser to argue that it’s totally unreasonable to expect the first accuser to testify this Thursday, if ever. This Kavanaugh guy spent the Eighties stalking Democrat women like a one-man Rotherham gang-rape posse. He’s the Jimmy Savile of the DC Court of Appeals.

The Aussies and various of their Commonwealth cousins have the blunt expression “soft cock” for a weak-willed and indecisive man: There is a lot of that in the Judiciary Committee and throughout the “Republican Congress”. So it requires a perverse kind of genius for a party of soft cocks to be damned as insatiable priapic beasts violating the maidenhood of the nation. One day in the very near future a Republican who has taken the precaution of never having any sexual contact with anyone ever will nevertheless find that’s no obstacle to being America’s most notorious serial rapist.

“Sexual contact,” hell. The key—at least for all sane males at least from middle-school age if not sooner—is to never, ever have anything whatsoever to do with a certain type of American female, purely as a matter of self-defense.

KAVANAUGH INVADES POLAND update! Your one-stop shop for boo-koos of hilarious Kavanaugh meme-age is right where you’d expect it to be.

Share

Annnd that’s a wrap

Stick a fork in him; he’s all done. Remember, you heard it here first.

As Senate Republicans press for a swift vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats are investigating a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh. The claim dates to the 1983-84 academic school year, when Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale University. The offices of at least four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation, and at least two have begun investigating it. Senior Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week and, in conversations with The New Yorker, expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote. The Democratic Senate offices reviewing the allegations believe that they merit further investigation. “This is another serious, credible, and disturbing allegation against Brett Kavanaugh. It should be fully investigated,” Senator Mazie Hirono, of Hawaii, said. An aide in one of the other Senate offices added, “These allegations seem credible, and we’re taking them very seriously. If established, they’re clearly disqualifying.”

Executive summary: another liberal Democrat-Socialist bint has been coaxed out of the woodwork to claim that, at a drunken dorm-room party, after someone wagged a dildo at her Kavanaugh whipped out his winky and waved it in her face as others among the heavily-soused crew laughed and teased her with shouts of “Kiss it! Kiss it!” She admits her recollection of this heinous crime against humanity—an atrocity surpassing any Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot ever committed—is “foggy” and has “significant gaps,” which, of course it does. She also claims that, having been raised a “devout Catholic,” she “wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” which makes ME want to laugh.

No matter; Kavanaugh’s nomination will be withdrawn before the end of the week. If this new “revelation” doesn’t take him down, they’ll make more until they find the one that does. All because of a stupid, tasteless stunt he allegedly pulled as a kid four decades ago? No. Because of this:

The entire Kavanaugh episode demonstrates what modern elite women are willing to do in order to preserve the “right” to murder their unborn children on the altar of narcissism and self. May God hold them accountable.

SOMEBODY damned sure needs to.

Update! Of COURSE the “new allegations” are bullshit. So was the old one. The next one will be, too.

The unnamed former friend said of Ramirez, “This is a woman I was best friends with. We shared intimate details of our lives. And I was never told this story by her, or by anyone else. It never came up. I didn’t see it; I never heard of it happening.” Ramirez and the unnamed friend were close all through their years at Yale, and said that Kavanaugh remained part of their “larger social circle.” According to the story, this friend of Ramirez initially suggested “that Ramirez may have been politically motivated” in coming forward with the allegation.

So, we have an incident lots of people allegedly witnessed and talked about, but her best friend at the time says she was never told or heard about it, and suggested possible political motivation.

And again: doesn’t matter. Why? Here’s a hint:

Democrats will stop at nothing to stop Kavanaugh. They will destroy an innocent man if they have to. This is yet another dirty trick that should signal to the Senate GOP that the longer they wait, the more bogus accusations will be made to postpone Kavanaugh’s confirmation until after the midterm elections.

So all that really needs to happen for this whole shitshow to be short-circuited, then, is for Senate Republicans to stand firm, staunchly defy the malevolent plotters behind all this, and show some backbone in support of…uhh…ummm…uhhhh…

Yeah. He’s done.

Share

Me-too Republicans

Some things never change.

Eighty years ago, “Me Too” described Republicans eager to publicly second the policies of Franklin Roosevelt, a feeling so pervasive that the party nominated for president in 1940 a man who a few months earlier registered as a Democrat. “Me-Too Republican” generally conjured up not opportunists but an oversocialized character longing for approval from his Democratic neighbors and colleagues but clinging, perhaps out of family tradition or some other cause that also spoke to his desire to fit in, to the GOP label.

The phrase now refers to something different. But the conformity and reflexive support that characterized that Me Too endures in this #MeToo. Me Toos “me too,” too, after all.

Prominent Democratic politicians insist that decent people must believe the allegations against Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford, a woman who refuses invitations to testify under oath, whose story conflicts with that of the man she names as an eyewitness and the notes taken by her therapist, who cannot pinpoint the approximate date or precise location of the alleged assault, and whose history of supporting ActBlue and other left-wing causes indicates a possible motive to take down the president’s pick.

Her story seems suspect. But if you express something short of belief, many see you as suspect.

Okay, look, here’s the damned deal: let’s stipulate the lying liberal whore’s every assertion. There’s no compelling reason to, and certainly no evidence to back it up, but let’s go ahead and do it. So what do we have, then? A few teenagers got drunk at a party, and she ended up with one of them grabbing her tit and pawing clumsily at her clothes for a few seconds. And then…

That’s it. By her own account, NOTHING ELSE HAPPENED. He grabbed her by the tit momentarily, and that is the ABSOLUTE WORST of it.

And now she all of a sudden claims to have been traumatized by it for almost four fucking decades. Although, oddly enough, she never once mentioned it to a living soul, not until Kavanaugh’s name turned up on Romney’s list of prospective SC nominees in 2012. Kavanaugh has been vetted by the FBI six times already, and never ONCE was this non-event mentioned. Not one time.

There’s a right way and a wrong way to handle this dirty, transparent, manipulative attempt to do away with due process and the right to confront one’s accuser in open court. This would be the wrong way:

In Judge’s Defense, Republicans Shouldn’t Descend to Dems’ Level

Oh, Jesus tapdancin’ Christ. Right out of the gate, you know what’s coming. Ain’t like we haven’t seen it a blue million times already, after all.

Weaponizing a vague and unverifiable claim of sexual assault from Kavanaugh’s teenage years is a fitting capstone to what has been a truly grueling and repugnant confirmation process. The question now becomes, will Republicans respond in kind? Fearing for their grip on the Supreme Court if Kavanaugh is defeated and Democrats take control of the Senate, will they overreact and lash out at Ford? Will they attempt to discredit Ford by questioning her motives, her veracity, or even her sanity? My view is that this would be a serious error, as well unfair to Ford herself.

Fuck Ford, and fuck what might or might not be “fair” to her or any other such low-down, scurvy sewer rat as she. She eagerly lent herself to the sleaziest of smear campaigns for purely partisan purposes, and is manipulating the process even now with her ducking and dodging and cutesy-coy maneuvering. She’s gotten “death threats,” has she? Boo fucking hoo; so has the decent man she slimed, and his whole family too. This sort of thing is a tried-and-true Democrat Socialist tactic, and it’s more than past time it splashed back on them. If she has to spend the rest of her worthless life in hiding, I solemnly promise you I will not give a single shit.

This isn’t some noble, civilized debate we’re having here, with honorable opponents who respect the rules and can be counted on to conduct themselves with integrity and decorum. This is a war to the knife against craven guttersnipes who will stick at nothing at all to win. If you can’t get your head around that, you’re better off staying indoors with the women and children.

On the other hand, Republicans face real danger. If they were to treat Professor Ford with, the same savagery and contempt that has been inflicted on Brett Kavanaugh, there is a possibility that public sympathy for the Judge would evaporate, and the whole affair could turn into an ugly mess.

No, Republicans must be the adults in the room. They must treat Judge Kavanaugh, and his accuser, with the sort of fairness, circumspection, and respect that has eluded their Democratic colleagues throughout the process. Republican Senators thus far have shown every indication that they intend to do exactly that: they will act responsibly and judiciously, and they will show sensitivity to Professor Ford and allow her to keep her dignity. Americans will thus be left in no doubt about which party is acting in good faith.

The entire bare-knuckles campaign to defeat the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh can be likened to a leftist tantrum, characterized by vitriol as well as futility. The numbers in the Senate, after all, are with Republicans, and thus the truth has always been that, as long as Republicans keep their cool and close ranks to support a solid conservative nominee, nothing and no one can prevent them from confirming a good man like Brett Kavanaugh.

Wanna bet? For my money, they’ve already done it. It’s for sure and certain that FeinSwine has already gotten everything she wanted out of this and then some.

The timing of Feinstein’s release of information regarding the initially anonymous woman accusing Kavanaugh of sexual assault was simply impeccable. Democrats knew they had no reasonable chance of stopping his confirmation, but Feinstein, a savvy and old-school politician, found a way to turn lemons into lemonade. Feinstein may have wrought a political masterpiece.

It is very likely that Feinstein knew in July, when her constituent sent the allegation to her, that it was so lacking in any kind of detail and backup that it could not derail Kavanaugh. But that didn’t mean that the allegations from Christine Blasey Ford could not be politically useful.

By releasing the information at the last hour, Feinstein put Republicans on the judiciary committee and the White House in a catch-22. They could either vociferously defend Kavanaugh and look like they were once again defending an abuser of women, or throw him under the bus and have to scramble to nominate and confirm a new nominee.

If, as increasingly appears to be the case, the GOP stands behind Kavanaugh in the face of this allegation, Feinstein has created a Me Too moment that Democrats can campaign on in their attempt to take back Congress, just as she did in 1992. It is, in a word, brilliant. One can almost see Mitch McConnell smiling and fist-bumping her, saying, “Well played, Di.”

This guy too, strangely enough, argues for the GOPe to “take the high road,” as if that had ever worked before. I certainly agree that it would be nice if our opposition was honest, trustworthy, dignified, and reasonable—if our disagreement was over Constitutional nuance, a debate about how best to maintain the integrity and relevance of the Constitution and its insistence on limited government and individual liberty.

Too bad that none of that is true, not one word of it. In truth, this isn’t a “debate” at all, not in any meaningful sense. It is an existential struggle, a semi-cold war against a dishonest, dishonorable opponent who NEVER argues in good faith, but is always jockeying for a position from which he can slide the shiv into freedom’s back. The Kavanaugh Kerfuffle is in no way unique, extraordinary, or atypical. It is merely the latest chapter in a very old playbook.

And there’s a reason for that: it’s worked for them every time up till now. That’s thanks to the collusion of the GOPe, combined with the above-the-fray prissyiness of those of us who misguidedly insist on this “high road” nonsense and recoil in horror from the thought of getting their hands dirty and their raiment soiled in an unseemly gutter brawl. It’s an essentially passive, defensive strategy, which is the wrong tack to take when what is required is a proactive, offensive, vigorous, and unrestrained effort.

What we’ve been seeing all these years is Mike Tyson pitted against the Marquess of Queensberry—or Little Lord Fauntleroy, more like—yielding its perfectly predictable result. And if you think the Kavanaugh fight has been ugly, just wait till Ruth Bader-Ginsberg either croaks or is carted bodily off to the glue factory. We ain’t seen nothing yet, folks, and we’d all damned well better be ready and willing to get as down and dirty with the scuzzbuckets of the Left as necessary if we want to keep from losing what little of our country is still left to us.

The “high road” is every bit as useless and irrelevant now as the effete feebs who smarmily scold us about its importance are. Until we’ve well and truly clobbered the Marxist moonbats, by any means we can contrive, we need to keep Miss Manners on the sidelines, and Emily Post’s Blue Book Of Social Usage firmly tucked away in our back pockets. Well, unless we intend to clout a shitlib over the head with it, that is.

Share

So shut ’em down already

Heartiste spells out what’s up:

We’ve gone from:

THESE ARE THE FACTS

to

I WANT TO BELIEVE

to

I WANT YOU TO BELIEVE

to

YOU MUST BELIEVE

Next stop:

NON-BELIEVERS IN THE NEVER-WRONGNESS AND SAINTLINESS OF WOMEN WILL BE SHOT AT DAWN

Well, not precisely. They don’t seem too much interested in believing Paula Jones, Juanita Brodderick, or Karen Monahan, just to name a very few.

Update! Gotta include this:



Methinks it’s about time the Vichy GOPers stopped saying OK and got on with things, but I ain’t holding my breath. In fact, after seeing Grassley’s “deadline” (much akin to Obama’s “red line” fan-dance) prove to be about as firm as an overcooked noodle, I now predict that Kavanaugh will NOT be seated on the Court—certainly not in time for the next session, and very likely not at all. Meanwhile, speaking of Karen Monahan (from the link above):

U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison pushed back Friday against allegations of domestic abuse, saying his accuser fabricated the story about him.

The Minnesota Democrat also dismissed a medical record that named him as the abuser, but said he can’t be sure more people won’t “cook up” allegations against him.

Yeah, I just bet. But he’s a Muslim, so thumping on his women is a-okay with you shitlibs, right? Right.

Share

The monkey speaks his mind (again)

Hitting on something that has been bugging the hell out of me.

If Kavanaugh isn’t confirmed I think we are lost. Governance-by-riot will be firmly in place, and I see no way out of it. The flashes of backbone that we are seeing in the Republican leadership is gratifying, but until it is confirmed by a timely vote it will just be more of their typical obfuscation in service of the corporatist wing of the party. What makes me sick is that these very same Republicans take off the gloves when they are in tough primary races, but can’t seem to retain that killer instinct when it matters.

And another thing…why aren’t Republican operatives asking Feinstein to recuse herself from the confirmation process because they have credible evidence that the letter was actually a plant by the Chinese spy who was until lately in her employ? Yeah…it’s called tit-for-tat. And the Republicans need to be doing more of it.

Figured out what it is that annoys me about this yet? Walsh’s latest, which I’ll be excerpting more of in a separate post, provides another strong hint (my emphasis throughout):

(Kavanaugh) does indeed shift the balance of ideology on the court away from Anthony Kennedy’s whimsy toward a grounded, conservative respect for the law. And when the next liberal justice shuffles off, and Trump appoints yet another originalist justice, their slim hopes of goose-stuffing social change down the throats of the American people via judicial fiat will be gone for a very long time. And so will their self-image of being on the “right side of history.”

This week will be crucial to putting the Democrats back in their boxes. Let’s see if the GOP will take it.

We all hope they will, but if they do it will be because of the new-breed, Trump-supporting types rather than the same-old-same-old Establishment hacks. Which brings us ’round to the annoying thing: how many times have we all read the dire warnings from our side’s pundits—the best and brightest among ’em too, like Reynolds and Schlichter—about how the Democrat Socialists aren’t gonna like it much when the GOPe gets back into power and uses Dem-Soc tactics and MO’s against them? Schlichter calls it “the New Rules,” as in the Left is gonna hate ’em. People on our side talk about this in the most rapturous terms, as if the threat alone might somehow get results.

And it never, ever happens. It took everything short of hooking his flappy man-boobs up to a super-duty car battery to get Yertle McTurtle to finally use Harry Reid’s nuclear option against them, and even then it was unexpected to the point of shocking when he did it. And that is the first, last, and only example I can think of of Republicans at last turning the tables and ramming some of the Democrat-Socialists’ own shit down their throats, despite who even knows how many opportunities when it was fully justified and might have truly made a difference.

Instead, it’s always been an empty threat, and the Left has always known it. It’s the reason they’re so unhinged over Trump: he talks a tough game…and then he follows up by going out and playing hardball against them.

And he’s kicking their scrawny asses up between their shoulder blades by it too, and solidifying his already damned firm support in the bargain. Any bets on whether the Vichy GOPe will take the hint, learn the lesson, and finally start moving the ball instead of the goalposts?

Share

Damn the torpedos!

Full steam ahead.

MAD. Mutually Assured Destruction.

Fight nukes with nukes.

Put the confirmation vote back on the docket for Thursday of next week.

Have Dr. Ford testify under oath in full view up the public.

If she provides no more evidence or the Democrats make a scene and turn it into a circus.

Confirm Kavanaugh.

To let the Democrats delay this one day is a win. To let them take out Kavanaugh as a casualty in their war on Trump is a huge win. It would make Trump a lame duck with more than two years left in his first term.

If they get away with this, no Republican could ever run ever again. All the Democrats would need to do is find some former high school classmate willing to accuse a candidate of sexual misconduct half a century ago.

If that happens, we might as well start the shooting now, because we are headed for a Hitlarian or Stalinist purge, but instead of accusations of treason and execution, it is accusations of sexual misconduct and the total destruction of a person’s income and livelihood on national TV.

Ask yourself is that any worse? To one day find everything you built yourself up to be, torn down, so you end up jobless and unemployable, shamed in front of your family.

That cannot be the tactic that is allowed to win.

This cannot be the ideology that is allowed to win. They’ve gotten away with way too much already. Now it’s too late to stop them with anything less than bullets to their empty heads. That’s on us, I guess, for being too complacent and indulgent and not nearly vigilant enough, as in “the price of freedom is…”

That said, I support the above proposal unreservedly. And if Yertle McTurtle feels otherwise, he needs to get his useless ass the hell out of the way and let somebody who isn’t a backstabbing fraud take charge. This bit of mushmouth blah-blah ain’t helping:

Speaking on the Senate floor on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) lambasted his Democratic colleagues for seeing “a political advantage” in withholding the sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh until the 11th hour of his confirmation process.

True, sure. But the only way they can gain the benefit of that advantage is IF YOU HELP THEM—by sitting on your hands flapping your jaws without ever actually doing anything.

“That this process has played out with so little order and so little sensitivity lies solely at the feet of Senate Democrats, who saw a political advantage in leaking this to the press instead of vetting it through proper channels,” McConnell added.

“But this is where we are.”

So move us forward then, Vichy GOPers: schedule the vote for fucking five minutes from now, hold it come hell or high water, and support your party’s elected President by sticking together and ratifying the goddamned nomination. Let the sneakthief shitlib plotters weep and wail and bluster and threaten; they’re going to do that anyway, no matter what you do. There is absolutely NO reason to treat with them honorably, in hopes of holding some “higher ground” that means nothing, and which The Main Enemy has no interest in or regard for anyway.

The lying liberal whore’s allegations are unsupported, unverifiable, and without demonstrable merit. Gossamer-thin as they are, they’re more than adequately refuted by credible testimony from many who know the man well as to Kavanaugh’s character, which is without blemish and unimpeachable. The spurious charges are purest bullshit, a sick fairy tale cobbled together for malign purposes; they deserve to be laughed out of all debate, and should NOT be taken seriously by anyone not assisting with such a heinous plot.

To Hell with her, and to Hell too with every last Republican who still insists on play-acting as if this despicable smear campaign is anything other than what every sensible, sane person knows it to be: a desperate attempt to hang onto undeserved, illegitimate power. Period fucking dot. No such sensible and sane person should be even mildly interested in harkening to one more word out of her filthy, lying yap, nor be willing to grant her a forum in which to utter it. To do so would be folly, worse than a waste of time.

Confirm the man now, or surrender and be damned. That’s it. There’s nothing more to say.

Share

The essential truth

Steyn hits the most important point of L’Affaire Kavanaugh:

It is immensely depressing to think that in a few days’ time the upper chamber of the national legislature of the most powerful nation on earth will conduct hearings into which teenager groped what at a drunken high-school party thirty-six years ago. Or possibly thirty-eight. Or thirty-five. Or thirty-seven. But it’s somewhere in that ball park, notwithstanding that Professor Ford cannot reliably place the date, or even the year.

Which is the main reason why this event should not be occurring. On the present set of facts (and, given previous form, Dianne Feinstein may have more two-month-old info yet to disclose), there is nothing that can be proved. By her own account, Ms Ford cannot identify the house where the party occurred, or explain how she came to be in that house, and how she got home that night. She admits to being very drunk – too drunk to recall certain basic facts, but not to recall telling details. She was not a friend of Brett Kavanaugh, and never saw him again after the party. You could not take that to the county attorney, but you can take it to the United States Senate, thirty-six years later. There is a reason for rules of evidence and statutes of limitation – not because justice has a sell-by date, but because the determination of it does.

Nevertheless, I expect she will be “credible”. She has had four decades – or at any rate the six years since she first mentioned the incident at “couples therapy” in 2012 – to fix the summer of ’82-ish in her mind. In real courts, the best testimony is as near to contemporaneous as you can get – the statement you give immediately after the mugging or the car theft, before time and telling lead you to believe you saw him in the glow of the street lamp outside the Thai restaurant…when there is no street lamp on Maple Avenue, and the Thai restaurant closed three months before the incident took place. But we are now licensing a select group of crimes where the the normal rules of evidence do not apply.

And so what matters is that she will tell a narrative which (like Jeffrey Wright’s seersucker and docksiders) fits half the country’s preconceptions of the evils of the other half.

If Republicans fold on this, they might as well forget about getting anybody through a Senate confirmation ever again.

Annnnd BINGO, there it is. It is simply inconceivable that even Vichy GOPers don’t realize this—an obvious truth from which one can only conclude that they just don’t care, as long as they can get their precious Uniparty/Deep State business-as-usual back.

This isn’t about what Kavanaugh may or may not have done as a teenager. It isn’t really even about Kavanaugh himself. This is about who really runs things in Washington. It’s about power. It’s about setting an example—a demonstration of what happens to anyone uppity enough to attempt real, substantive change to Mordor On The Potomac’s status quo, pour encourager les autres. Above all, it’s about forcefully adjusting the expectations of the MAGA Deplorables—about putting us in our place; about establishing the distinction once and for all between rulers and ruled; about making it clear what bucking the Ruling Class too hard will get us in the end: nothing.

They assume one hell of a lot about how much shit we’re willing to eat without taking to the streets in open, violent rebellion against them, don’t they? But just because they’ve been right this long doesn’t mean they’re always going to be. “Too early to start shooting the bastards”? Claire Wolfe’s famous assertion looks less defensible with every successive Deep State outrage against the very concept of self-rule and “the consent of the governed.”

Share

STAMPEDE!

Hard to believe, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by any of this:

Sen. Jeff Flake wants to postpone vote on Brett Kavanaugh; Update: Statement from Sen. Collins.

Bob Corker, too, is on board with this shameless nonsense. This guy has the right of it:

Screen-Shot-2018-09-16-at-20.27.32-573x600.png

If True Conservative Principle™ Quislings like Flake and co. want to ensure that no Republican SC nominee will ever again make it past the Democrat-Socialists to a seat on the Court, let them go ahead and “delay” the Kavanaugh vote because of some made-up, irrelevant, thirty-year-old horseshit spoon-fed to ’em by their master Feinstein.

Let ’em see what happens to their corrupt sham of a political party afterwards. And then let ’em burn in the fire they will have ignited via their own despicable, sleazy machinations, the slimewads. To a fucking crisp.

Outbreak of sanity update! The plain truth.

Sen. John Kennedy called the confirmation hearings for Judge Brett Kavanaugh “an intergalactic freak show” and said he was embarrassed for Congress by the accusations of sexual misconduct leveled at the Supreme Court nominee.

“So far, it’s pretty much been an intergalactic freak show,” Kennedy, R-La., told Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday.” “Most Americans are looking at this – most mainstream Americans – and they’re thinking that Congress has hit rock bottom and started to dig.”

Kennedy added: “I have been embarrassed by the whole process and, frankly, I’m – no disrespect to Senator Feinstein or to Stanford Law School – but I’m a little bit offended. I sit on Judiciary Committee. They’ve had this stuff for three months. If they were serious about it, they should’ve told us about it.”

Oh, they’re not serious about investigating the allegation. They’re not serious about getting the truth out, nor about seeing “justice” done, nor about providing succor or closure to the “victim.” They’re serious about hogtying Trump—about securing him to the Deep State leash at last. And with the aid of baglapping Uniparty-GOPe scum like Flake, they might possibly even win this one.

Share

No harm, no foul

Steve Scalise said…wait, what now?!?

Color me shocked: Number Two (how apropos) Congressional shitweasel with a nominal (R) after his name tries to blame political violence on both sides. Even after taking a rifle bullet through his literal ass from a deranged Democrat leftard moonbat:

(MORDOR ON THE POTOMAC) “Unless more leaders speak out against this violence, it will only continue. Instead of calling for harassment, we need more leaders in both parties to condemn this rhetoric and the violent actions of their supporters.

We cannot afford to sit on the sidelines of this issue. I am calling on everyone, whether Republican or Democrat, to call out violent actions and violent rhetoric. If you have to resort to violence, you’re probably losing the argument.
Let’s return to civility, for the sake of our democracy.”

Best of luck with the white flag “both sides are equivalent” horseshit, Congressturd Scalise.

Now, given that elsewhere in his statement Scalise mention several specific incidents, all of which involved Democrat-Socialist partisans (in the WW2/Italian sense) attacking Republicans, an argument could be made that he wasn’t proposing any kind of moral equivalence here, I dunno. But either way Aesop is all over it:

This kind of sophomoric false equivalency virtue-signaling is why people voted President (Not My Guy) Trump in, passing up thirteen of your pussilanimous pussy cronies and fellow namby-pamby Pollyanna douchecanoes to get to him, and have turned their back on business-as-usual Marquess-of-Queensbury-Rules-waving backstabbers like you, and your whole RINO “Dying With Dignity, and Losing With Pride” faux-conservativism of the last 30 years.
Strong message follows.

So get this straight, Congressman Assbag:

I’m not “promoting” violence, I’m promising it.

There will be no unilateral disarmament.
And there will be no unilateral “return to civility”.
It’s a binary value: either everybody does it, or nobody does it.
Trying that any other way is suicidal.

Rep. Scalise is hypocritically mouthing PC pablum from the shadow of his wheelchair, if he forgets so soon the two guys who used violence on his behalf, by plugging the lone gunman that put an AK bullet through his hips and left him bleeding and crippled on the softball field, waiting for the coup de grace shot. Pity they hadn’t taken the “no-violence” pledge a year earlier, huh?

So he’s either a moron, or a hypocrite.
Given his job, it’s impossible to select from two such likely choices.
And, let’s be honest, nothing says he cannot be both.

There’s only one side screaming to go out and start violence. For nearly two years now, non-stop, and ever more boldly by the day.

The other side is simply vowing to finish it.

In a better world, Scalise’s call for everybody to condemn political violence committed by anybody might be a position worth taking. America in 2018 is not that place. Instead, it’s a place where the Democrat-Socialist Party openly encourages violence against their opponents, simply and exclusively because they lost an election they expected to win. They have weaponized the government itself and used it in a brazen attempt to overturn a legitimate election and seize power via palace coup. They have launched meritless “investigations” and applied pressure up to and including prison in hopes of turning someone, anyone, into useful accomplices against Trump.

The Vichy GOPe, rather than condemning this skullduggery and sedition in the strongest terms, has sat quietly by as usual, playing their habitual part as shambolic, muttonhead losers forever turning the other cheek as the Democrat-Socialists slap them stupid; being Deep State termites themselves, they hope only to get back to business as usual and have no interest whatever in defending a President who has done far more to advance principles they greasily claim to revere than the whole lot of them together ever managed.

This craptastic kakistocratic kabuki is being watched by millions of Americans who elected Trump to do exactly what he’s doing: to disrupt this shitshow, to bust up the status quo of corruption, futility, and failure; to reverse or at least stem the dismal tide of depravity and destruction the Left has deluged Heritage America under; in short, to RESIST, to FIGHT, to take the offensive against the Degenerate Left at long, long last.

Like Aesop, I can’t quite see those people just sitting back and letting this happen. They’re fed up; they told the PTB so in no uncertain terms when they defiantly elected Trump. The PTB’s response was to double down on their decades-long assault against the Normals, do away with the idea of the people having a say in their own governance via our system of elections, and really let those freak flags fly. We’ll see what that gets ’em.

Share

Will no one rid me of this meddlesome blatherskite?

Wherein we ponder yet again one of the burning questions of our age: is this egomaniacal jackass NEVER going to do the decent thing and just go away?

Guess not.

Capping off a week where Senate Democrats embarrassed themselves at what should have been the semi-serious vetting of a Supreme Court justice, along comes our foot-stomping former president to remind Americans of who, ultimately, is responsible for infantilizing national politics.

Friday’s speech was yet another reminder of why Donald Trump won in 2016: Voters rejected Barack Obama as much as they rejected Hillary Clinton. After a decade of binging on this skilled politician’s oratory cocktail of empty platitudes, self-puffery, and finger-wagging scoldings, we were burned out. Americans started to notice that the soaring rhetoric did not match the accomplishments. There was a creeping sense the same man who once promised his vision was “not red states or blue states, just the United States” had done more damage to the body politic than any other president in recent memory.

And he wasn’t even a good tactician for his own side. In fact, while this political mastermind was in the Oval Office, his party lost more than 1,000 seats to Republicans across the country.

Far from the speech being the “greatest, most timely, and most important in the history of this country” as oneDemocratic activist described it, Obama’s speech sounded like an updated version of every speech he’s given in the past few years. It was filled with whiny platitudes about moments in time and stark choices and inequality and demagogues. He veered between warnings about fake patriotism while insisting it’s our civic duty to vote the way he wants. He pouted about not getting credit for the country’s booming economy. Both sides are culpable for the current political divide, Obama admitted, but Republicans are much more to blame. (Perhaps he missed this week’s spectacle at the Kavanaugh hearings.)

He trotted out the same well-worn complaints about voting rights and climate change. Solutions always come with a price, such as a carbon tax and higher minimum wage. After eight years of trying, he still can’t come up with a convincing sell on how to fix the nation’s failing immigration system: “Democrats talk about reforming our immigration system so, yes, it is orderly and it is fair and it is legal but it continues to welcome strivers and dreamers from all around the world.” Huh?

There were more nuggets of nothingness: A vacuum in democracy. The politics of fear. Stand up to bullies not follow them. We need more women in charge. The best way to protest is to vote. Walls don’t keep out threats like terrorism or disease.

Pretty boring stuff from a guy who is widely considered by the media as one of the greatest presidential orators of all time. It’s doubtful that Chris Matthews felt a thrill up his leg as he listened to this snoozer.

Like hell. You know good and well the loathsome toad was sporting a tiny chubby throughout the whole ordeal.

Best part of it all? Oshitstain, after floundering haplessly for eight years and wreaking nothing but spiralling economic misery, attempting to steal the credit for Trump’s economy—an economy which took off only after Obama’s clumsy thumbprints were removed entirely from it.

Share

Clueless

Can he really be this stupid, this insular, this out of touch with obvious reality? Really?

Seriously?!?

NBC News’s Chuck Todd wrote an op-ed in The Atlantic titled “It’s Time for the Press to Stop Complaining – and to Start Fighting Back.” Much of it wasn’t about the urgency for journalists to defend their work, as the headline suggests; it was mostly focused on how Roger Ailes and Fox News are to blame for growing American animosity towards the news media.

Todd starts by explaining there’s a “new kind of campaign,” a campaign meant to destroy the legitimacy of the American news media.” He quickly pivots to prominent figures in conservative media, accusing Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, and Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Tucker Carlson of attaining wealth and power by “exploiting the fears of older white people.”

However, he admits that President Donald Trump “didn’t start this fire” of people hating the mainstream media. That honor, according to Todd, belongs to Fox News founder Ailes. The “Meet The Press” host gave Ailes the title of “the godfather of the Trump presidency.”

“Take the word balanced. It sounded harmless enough. But how does one balance facts?” Todd asks.

Seems easy enough to me, Chuckles: you report ’em, and keep your opinions about ’em to yourself. But hey, I’m not a trained, professional “journalist.”

“A reporting-driven news organization might promise to be accurate, or honest, or comprehensive, or to report stories for an underserved community. But Ailes wasn’t building a reporting-driven news organization. The promise to be ‘balanced’ was a coded pledge to offer alternative explanations, putting commentary ahead of reporting; it was an attack on the integrity of the rest of the media. Fox intended to build its brand the same way Ailes had built the brands of political candidates: by making the public hate the other choice more.”

Nobody needs to worry about any outside campaigns to “destroy the legitimacy of the American news media”; the American news media, to include one Chuck Todd, did that all by themselves, thanks. Sexton takes Todd’s self-serving drivel apart:

Meanwhile, you have one of the allegedly down-the-middle reporters at CNN comparing Antifa, a group the U.S. government has warned is a domestic terror threat, to soldiers landing at Normandy and telling us “all punches are not equal.” But hey, no need to concern ourselves with a lack of balance at any network besides Fox News. In fact, my even bringing this up as an example of media bias is probably just more whataboutism that Chuck Todd would prefer everyone ignore.

Here’s the truth. The people who make up the media lean overwhelmingly to the left and are spectacularly bad at recognizing their own biases. That’s why conservatives are forever forced into the position of trying to point out that the media’s laser focus on the bad behavior of one set of partisans (those on the right) is not the complete story. There is another side to the story which often gets less attention because it doesn’t grab people like Chuck Todd as equally significant or important.

That’s why, just as an aside, you so often see the “GOP seizes on…” headlines. That’s a signal that people on the right are worked up about something which the media doesn’t think is a problem and therefore can only cover at all if they make it a story about the GOP’s odd (or perhaps dishonest) behavior.

The examples, statistics, and patterns confirming not just “some” but overwhelming liberal bias—damned near universal liberal bias—in the “mainstream” media are simply too voluminous to bother listing in this post; plenty of them have been discussed here over the years, but nowhere near all. To hear no less a libmedia leading light than Chuck Todd attempting to pooh-pooh it goes well beyond straining credulity; you almost have to feel sorry for the man. Almost. Back to Wulfsohn for our closer.

At least MSNBC doesn’t attempt to portray itself as fair and objective, unlike CNN. All you have to do is ask Todd what pro-Trump pundits are on NBC’s payroll. The answer: there aren’t any. You’ll find plenty of Never Trumpers, but you won’t find any Republican who will defend this president. To CNN’s credit, they actually do have pro-Trump commentators, albeit ones often greatly outnumbered by Trump haters.

On a side note, Todd has a lot of gall to question the journalistic standards of Fox News right as his own network is being accused of killing the Harvey Weinstein sexual assault story. In fact, on the night Todd’s piece was published, Ronan Farrow accused his former employer of blocking him from further reporting. So while he craps on a competing network, his own network’s credibility is being burned to the ground.

What Todd resents the most about Fox News is the fact they’re the first to highlight media bias and profit from it. They’ve dominated in ratings for almost 20 years. A huge audience is sick and tired of being informed about current events with a liberal slant. Fox News became the anecdote (uhh, antidote, maybe—M), the counterweight to the rest of the mainstream media, who shield Democrats and demonize Republicans.

Todd is either clueless or lying, I’m not sure which. Either way, he’s preposterous…and pathetic.

Share

Reality bites

Weasel, weaseling.

In a segment on NPR’s “On Point” Friday, a fellow guest compared me to an Adolf Hitler supporter because I said something positive about President Trump’s tenure in office. Yes, seriously.

After I said some of Trump’s norm-breaking actions are good — namely his call for civil service reform and attempts to curtail some agencies’ powers and regulations — Norman Eisen, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and, ironically, co-founder of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said my support of Trump reminded him of the people who have supported authoritarian, mass-murdering regimes.

Our conversation begins around the 31-minute mark, here,where you can listen to what I said about President Trump that prompted this characterization from Eisen:

When Bre was speaking…I couldn’t help but think of those who greeted, don’t take offense, please, Bre, but those who greeted the other tyrants of the past 100 years. Whether they were of the left, like Lenin and Stalin, or the right, like Hitler — not saying Trump is Hitler, making those same claims about the evil that needed to be swept away and the change that needed to happen.

My favorite part of this is that he told me not to be offended right before he compared me to enthusiastic Nazis or Joseph Stalin supporters. He also says he’s “not saying Trump is Hitler,” then proceeds to make precisely that comparison. While Eisen is saying this, you can hear the host, David Folkenflik, try but fail to stop him. It’s like watching — or in this case, listening to — a car crash in slow motion.

I am writing this to draw attention to the tone from some of Trump’s critics. To them, everything merits a comparison to Hitler, and to make the “mistake” of saying a positive thing about President Trump — even when that positive thing is sandwiched between skeptical comments about him — is labeled as tantamount to helping the Nazis construct concentration camps. That’s so detached from reality and people who cannot see that should have no credibility.

So what is and what is not allowed to be said in public about the president without being called a Nazi? I said I wish Trump could tweet less and focus his lib-owning powers on regulatory rollbacks and taking down the administrative state. To Eisen, for some reason, that sounded like support for Nazis. One of us needs a reality check, and it’s not me.

Wouldn’t help any. Again: their argument isn’t with us. It’s with reality. They more of it they get, the harder they run from it, fingers stuffed deeply in ears every step of the way.

What amuses me here is Eisen’s gutless, cowardly attempt at having his cake and eating it too. By trying to forestall or at least deflect any righteous, wholly justified anger at these outrageous slanders (“Don’t take offense,” I’m not saying Trump’s a Nazi,” immediately before doing precisely that), Eisen establishes himself as King Of The Fucking Pussies.

Wear the crown proudly, Poindexter. It all leads me to ask yet again: how in the ever-lovin’ blue-eyed world did we ever allow such mincing nincompoops to steal our country from us?

Share

Antisemitic Jews

A few of the other distasteful groups some on the alt-right choose to align themselves with: Joo-hatin’ libtards, self-hating Jewish libtards, and…guess who.

Anti-Israel activist Peter Beinart had spent years arguing that Hamas was a potentially moderate organization. Then when he was questioned at Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport, he played victim. 

But as Caroline Glick notes, there was every reason for Israeli authorities to question Beinart’s visit, because the anti-Israel BDS activist had participated in anti-Israel protests in Israel. Beinart was not, despite his claims, detained. He was asked about his participation in that protest by the Center for Jewish Nonviolence. The Center, despite its name, is used by Jewish Voice for Peace members, a BDS hate group, which also, despite its name, advocates for and supports terrorists who attack Israel. 

JVP members are on the banned list. Beinart had participated in a protest organized by a group that it used as a vehicle. So it’s completely normal that he was asked about it just as visitors to this country are asked about their membership in prohibited organizations such as the Nazi, Communist and other totalitarian parties. The BDS blacklist that bigots like Beinart rave about is no different than the United States blacklist on anyone who “has used a position of prominence to endorse terrorism.” 

That’s the BDS movement. 

JVP declared that it was proud to host Rasmea Odeh. Odeh had been convicted of a supermarket bombing in Israel that killed Edward Joffe and Leon Kanner: two Hebrew University students. It called the terrorist an “inspiration” and used the hashtag, #HonorRasmea. That’s using “a position of prominence to endorse terrorism” which gets you banned from both the United States and Israel. 

Beinart writes for The Forward, a paper notorious for attacks on Israel and Jews that veer into the anti-Semitic. Typically anti-Semitic Forward headlines include, “3 Jewish Moguls Among Eight Who Own as Much as Half the Human Race” and “Why We Should Applaud The Politician Who Said Jews Control The Weather.” 

Did I neglect to mention yet another of those distasteful groups above: the absolutely batshit insane? Consider the oversight hereby corrected, then. But wait, there’s more…and worse.

Jewish power, Karl Marx, whose bearded visage still sneers from The Forward’s old building, claimed, is self-interest. That self-interest has corrupted Jews. And Jewish self-interest has corrupted the world. Only socialism, enlightened global altruism, can redeem the world from the corruption of the Jews. 

Behind the special pleading, the foaming outrage, the laughable invocations of Jewish tradition and morality, Beinart, Eisner, The Forward and Jewish Voice for Peace are working off the same Marxist critique of Jews. Israel’s crime and that of its Jewish supporters, they contend, is that its self-interest has corrupted Jewish morality. The only way to redeem the Jews is to destroy Jewish self-interest. 

To destroy Israel. 

Only by abandoning their self-interest, their power, even their survival, can they atone for what Marxist anti-Semites, from their great bearded master on down, see as the ‘original sin’ of the Jews.

Peter Beinart, The Forward and JVP aren’t putting forward bold new ideas. Their Jewish sources are not, as they claim, the prophets of Israel or the Kotzker Rebbe, but the original prototype of the anti-Jewish Jew. Their prophet is the pathological anti-Semite who raved, “What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.” 

Over a century and a half later, Marxist criticism of the Jews has made few innovations, replacing Judaism with Israel, and to a lesser degree, money with power. Leftist anti-Zionism is so hard to distinguish from anti-Semitism because its roots are still in the same anti-Semitic Marxist sewer. 

The Anti-Jewish Jews preach the salvific powers of the left to redeem the selfishness of the Jews. Only the left can save Jews from Jewish power. Only the left can redeem Jews from clinging to their guns, bible, and land by destroying Israel.

Boy, the irony is strong with these ones, ain’t it?

Yeah, I ain’t gonna be joining the chorus of “JOOZ DID IT!” conspiracy theorists, Right, Left, or Confutated, thanks. I don’t care how vociferously they preach their frothy gospel, here at this websty or anyplace else. Try peddling it someplace else, guys; there’s no market for it here.

Share

Stolen glory

They stepped in it. They splattered it all over themselves. Now they’re frantically trying to clean up the mess.

Legendary Apollo 11 astronaut Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin took a swipe at the upcoming movie “First Man” late Sunday for its director’s decision not to show the planting of the American flag on the moon during the historic 1969 mission.

Aldrin, 88, who was the second man to step on the moon, behind crewmate Neil Armstrong, posted historical photos of the flag-planting and added the hashtag “Proud to be an American.”

In previous posts Saturday, Aldrin shared photos of himself wearing a T-shirt with the tagline “Buzz Aldrin, Future Martian” that shows an astronaut planting the American flag on the Red Planet.

Chazelle himself also released a statement, insisting the omitting of the planting of the US flag had nothing to do with politics.

“The flag being physically planted into the surface is one of several moments of the Apollo 11 lunar EVA [extravehicular activity] that I chose not to focus upon,” he said on Friday.

“To address the question of whether this was a political statement, the answer is no. My goal with this movie was to share with audiences the unseen, unknown aspects of America’s mission to the moon — particularly Neil Armstrong’s personal saga and what he may have been thinking and feeling during those famous few hours,” the director added.

When he was, y’know, planting the American flag on the fucking moon. In celebration of a wholly American achievement. The Soviets got to low orbit before petering out. Nobody else has managed to do even that much. Hell, even we can’t manage it anymore. It might be a past glory, now long behind us. But it’s still OUR glory, no matter how much that indisputable fact disrupts the feel-goods of globalist shitlibs.

The article quotes Armstrong’s kids as saying they actually agree with the shitlibs on its being a “human” achievement, but who gives a stinking damn what they think? None of them have been to the moon yet either. Anytime they want to go plant themselves a UN flag up there, they’re welcome to try. Maybe Once-Great Britain, Turkmenistan, Sierra Leone, and Burkina Faso can help out.

Share

Peer pressure

Looks like another victory for the Left in their struggle to destroy normality.

“Rapid-onset gender dysphoria” among teens and young adults may be a social contagion linked with having friends who identify as LGBT, an identity politics peer culture, and an increase in internet use, finds a study out this month from a Brown University professor. The study was quickly yanked from Brown’s news releases after a transgender activist feeding frenzy, and the journal it was published in is reconsidering the publication. There is a parent and researcher-driven petition to stand behind the publication of the first study to look in detail at rapid-onset gender dysphoria.

The petition includes the following graph about gender referrals in the United Kingdom. Anecdotal and news reports, as well as the rapid recent growth in transgender treatment centers, indicates a similar phenomenon inside the United States.

“[T]he parental reports in this study offer important and much-needed preliminary information about a cohort of adolescents, mostly girls, who with no prior history of dysphoria, are requesting irreversible medical interventions, including the potential to impair fertility and future sexual function,” says the petition. “In any other group of children, these grave consequences would be seen as human rights violations unless there was significant and overwhelming evidence these procedures would be beneficial long-term.”

Actually, there’s “significant and overwhelming evidence” of the opposite, starting with the incredibly high suicide rates for the tiny handful of poor mentally-ill people who truly are gender dysphoric.

“The spirit of free inquiry and scholarly debate is central to academic excellence,” said the statement from Bess Marcus, the dean of Brown’s School of Public Health. “At the same time, we believe firmly that it is also incumbent on public health researchers to listen to multiple perspectives and to recognize and articulate the limitations of their work.”

Except on topics like climate change, on which “the science is settled” and therefore must never again be debated.

The reason trans activists went nuts is that the study reinforces what plenty of parents, public health experts, and doctors have been saying: Transgenderism looks a lot like a dangerous fad. It’s telling that their response was to demand suppressing the results. It’s also telling that Brown chose to prioritize the unreasonable demands of a tiny minority above the potential well-being of children and the process of scientific inquiry.

Because the potential well-being of children and the process of scientific inquiry aren’t useful in advancing the liberal agenda. Read the rest; as Pullman says, it’s telling, to say the very least. Which is why the Leftists at Brown are suppressing it, natch.

Share

Where’s MY white privilege, dammit?

Self-loathing is an essential—perhaps THE essential—component driving the modern liberal psyche.

The concept of ‘white privilege’ was popularized by Peggy McIntosh in a 1989 paper written at Harvard University and titled, “White Privilege: Unpacking The Invisible Knapsack.” It was written as a personal, experiential essay, and it details 26 ways in which McIntosh’s skin color has been decisive in determining her life outcomes. This hugely influential paper has been responsible for the subsequent proliferation of a rigidly enforced theory of privilege throughout social movements and university classrooms. So central has this doctrine become to progressive politics, pedagogy, and activism, that to even question its validity is to invite the inquisitorial wrath of ‘social justice’ radicals. But it is for this very reason that it is important to subject McIntosh’s ideas to scrutiny. So let us return to the source and to first principles and unpack Peggy McIntosh’s knapsack…

Follows, a close examination of the tremendously large silver spoon ensconced in the gormless nitwit’s mouth from birth, a matter far more of wealth, social position, and access to a network of lofty connections than of race. She doesn’t seem interested in groveling apologetically for those things, oddly enough.

In other words, Peggy McIntosh was born into the very cream of America’s aristocratic elite, and has remained ensconced there ever since. Her ‘experiential’ list enumerating the ways in which she benefits from being born with white skin simply confuses racial privilege with the financial advantages she has always been fortunate enough to enjoy. Many of her points are demonstrably economic. One is left to wonder why, given her stated conviction that she has unfairly benefited from her skin color, there seems to be no record of her involvement in any charity or civil rights work. If she did take to the streets in support of some cause or other, she left no trace that I can see. Nor, as far as I can tell, has she spent any time teaching the underprivileged or working directly to better anyone’s condition but her own. Instead, she has contented herself with a generous six figure salary, and has not shown any particular eagerness to hand her position over to a more deserving person of color.

Very few of the people reading this article—whatever the color of their skin—will have even the vaguest idea of the comfort and privilege in which Peggy McIntosh grew up and to which she has since become accustomed. Nor will we have access to the world of opportunities that she has been fortunate enough to enjoy. But even though the lifetime of privilege McIntosh has experienced is almost certainly due to her wealth and not the colour of her skin, she nevertheless found a way to share this irksome burden with the illiterate children of Kentucky coal miners, the hopeless peasants of the Appalachians, poor single mothers struggling to make ends meet on welfare, and the vast majority of whites in the United States and throughout the world who never had the chance to attend Radcliffe or Harvard. She simply reclassified her manifest economic advantage as racial privilege and then dumped this newly discovered original sin onto every person who happens to share her skin color. Without, of course, actually redistributing any of the wealth that, by her own account, she had done nothing to deserve.

All of which means that pretty much anything you read about ‘white privilege’ is traceable to an ‘experiential’ essay written by a woman who benefitted from massive wealth, a panoply of aristocratic connections, and absolutely no self-awareness whatsoever. This alone calls into question the seriousness and scholarly validity of the derivative works, since they are all the fruit of a poisonous tree. But McIntosh’s hypothesis was eagerly embraced nonetheless, because it served a particular purpose—it helped to mainstream a bitter zero-sum politics of guilt and identity. This dark epistemology has quietly percolated through the universities and the wider culture for two decades now. It has had the effect of draining attention from a massive and growing wealth gap and it has pitted the poor against one another in public spectacles of acrimony and even violence. Even so, it was readily embraced by progressively-minded professors who might otherwise have had trouble squaring their thirst for social justice with their high six figure salaries. In the last decade, this dogma has come screaming out of the nation’s august halls of learning and into mainstream civil discourse (although to call most of what passes for discourse today ‘civil’ somewhat labours the definition). And, still, we are endlessly and forcefully reminded that to question this concept in any way is, in and of itself, racist.

That’s probably enough excerpting; it’s a deep, well-conceived and crafted piece which goes into some unexpected places and is deserving of a read in full. Good comments, too.

McIntosh’s unwelcome gift of the burden of her own misguided guilt, neurosis, and self-flagellation is one the world could have done without. Whatever happened to the notion of a becoming sense of gratitude, responsibility, and noblesse oblige as an accompaniment to the good fortune of being born into a life of wealth and privilege, anyway?

If we’re all going to have to shoulder the load of stupid PC-Progtard angst, though, I’m gonna have to insist that they lay off their damned appropriation of my culture: “The Language Police Want Y’all to Adopt the Gender-Neutral, Non-Sexist ‘Y’all’.” Help, help, I’ve been microaggressed!

Seriously, though, the idea of sensible people “uniting” with such useless skinbags for any purpose at all seems fanciful beyond even the wildest science-fiction these days. Not even something as cataclysmic as the events in John Ringo’s Posleen War series could do it, seems to me. I know that whenever a gaggle of ’em goes out to attempt a “dialogue” with the Posleen in hopes of finding a “peaceful resolution of our differences,” “compromise,” and “reconciliation” with them—and you know damned well they would—I won’t be making any attempts to talk ’em out of it.

(Via KT)

Share

Laid to rest

Steyn on McStain:

What differentiated McCain from your cookie-cutter RINO squish was the sheer brio of his viciousness. I mean that as a genuine compliment: without it, he’d have been Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe. In fact, he was pretty much reduced to that by the generally bland weekend obits: In their determination to show respect to a war hero who’d battled cruel illness, they generally dropped all mention of the stuff that made him fun and human. On air he bantered with a showbiz professionalism: When he and I appeared together on “The Dennis Miller Show”, he said he had a real respect for me because that ridiculous accent was a lot harder to keep up for three hours than you’d think. Off-air it was more cutting, snide, vindictive, and extraordinarily petty. As I wrote during the 2000 campaign:

It turns out that, in an ideologically-riven Congress, John McCain is a truly bipartisan figure: both sides loathe him. There’s a persistent rumour that the only reason his fellow Republican senator, Utah’s Orrin Hatch, decided to get into the race for president last summer is that he can’t stand McCain. Senator McCain concedes that he called another Republican, Iowa’s Charles Grassley, a ‘f**kin’ jerk’, but says that he and Chuck are now ‘friends’ (‘friends’ in the context of the US Senate means they have the warm, close, personal relationship of, say, Suha Arafat and the Israeli government). When he was a humble Congressman, the Atlantic Monthly reported McCain’s altercation in the aisle of the House with Democrat Marty Russo: ‘Seven-letter profanities escalated to 12- letter ones and then to pushes and shoves.’ It takes a while to decipher this code but, reconstructing the incident, ‘seven-letter’ is a reference to ‘a**hole’ and ’12-letter’ to ‘motherf**ker’. One mayor back in his home state says that he’s not happy with the idea of McCain having his finger on the nuclear button.

So on Sunday the senator released 1,500 pages of medical records proving conclusively that he is not clinically insane – though for my own part I’d like to see what’s in the handful of pages that were held back ‘for personal reasons’. But, for the moment, we must accept the word of his doctors that John McCain is not, to use the medical term, stark staring nuts.

Nonetheless, in private many senators agree with that Arizona mayor… So, throughout New Hampshire, at one campaign stop after another, someone stands up and asks about the rumours that he’s explosive and out of control. ‘Boy,’ says McCain with mock solemnity, ‘that really makes me mad.’ The crowd laughs. ‘I was just exploding about that earlier this morning.’ More laughs. ‘Look, my friends, I get angry sometimes. I get angry when I see Congress wasting billions on weapons systems even the Pentagon doesn’t want. I get angry when I see 12,000 of our brave fighting men and women living on food stamps. I get angry when I see the lobbyists and special interests in Washington corrupting our democracy. I get angry when I see gross injustices perpetrated…. ‘ Etc.

Actually, there’s no evidence that John McCain has ever got angry over any ‘gross injustice’ or matter of public policy. Every incident recounted by Senate colleagues revolves around some piffling perceived slight; mention weapons systems and McCain is perfectly calm, but use the last piece of Senate toilet paper and he calls you a motherf**ker.

The real John McCain was far more interesting than the vapid obituarists would have.

To repeat: McCain was the pluperfect example of absolutely everything wrong with our government and the people in charge of it—the living, breathing representation of the wrong turn we’ve taken, where it’s left us, and how extremely arduous a journey it will be getting back, assuming we ever do. We’re well rid of him.

Share

Categories

Archives

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix