Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

The Tyranny Party

Tell me again all about how Trump’s the “authoritarian,” libtards.

One of the nice things about a core curriculum—sadly disappearing from most of higher education—is that it forces you to read books you would otherwise have skipped. Although this can be painful in the moment, it often pays off in unexpected ways.

Sigmund Freud is not a writer I would have picked up had he not been assigned. But I’m glad he was. The older I get, and the more of the Left I see, the more useful becomes Freud’s concept of “projection,” an unconscious defense mechanism that protects the ego from guilt or anxiety. It has amazing explanatory power and can help one make sense of a trove of recent books by left-wing writers, and one disgruntled former conservative, that blame Donald Trump for “authoritarianism” in American politics.

What, according to the authors reviewed here, is authoritarianism? They all attempt definitions, which are more or less similar. We may therefore take one as representative. The authoritarian, say Harvard government professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in How Democracies Die,

1) Rejects, in words or action, the democratic rules of the game,
2) denies the legitimacy of opponents,
3) tolerates or encourages violence, or
4) indicates a willingness to curtail the civil liberties of opponents, including the media.

Gee, none of THAT sounds familiar at all, does it? Final analysis:

The most certain way a once-stable republic gives way to tyranny is when the republican spirit of its people is eliminated or undermined. All such regimes decisively depend for their success and longevity on a foundation of virtue in the people. How’s that going in our time? None of these books has anything at all to say about the family, the bedrock of representative republicanism. Only Mounk treats religion at any length, and then mainly to lambaste figures and societies to his right for being insufficiently deferential to Islam. Nor do these writers even mention the government-driven erosion of Alexis de Tocqueville’s “mediating institutions,” another bedrock of American democracy. All of these goods—and more—have been under persistent left-wing attack for at least two generations. The health of democracy seems not to have improved during that period. The connection seems obvious enough but these authors glide right past.

In any event, it’s rich to read the Left fret about the end of “democracy” when they have spent so much conscious effort undermining its necessary preconditions. They have done so, I think, for two reasons. First, they long ago came to equate liberty with license. Philosophically, once nature was discarded as the standard by which to guide and judge human life, the satisfaction of appetites became the only conceivable end. Hence in matters of personal morality, the contemporary Left is a curious combination of libertine and censor. Any physical—especially sexual or pharmaceutical—act that does not draw blood or pick a pocket is permitted. There are no mores that are simply necessary to society or to personal well-being. If you’re not directly harming someone else, then no one has any business even passing judgment on what you do. But you deserve to be crushed for thinking or saying the wrong thing—especially for passing judgment! Witness the recent massive freak-out over Penn Law professor Amy Wax’s praise of the once-commonplace concept of “bourgeois norms.” How dare she!

The second is that the Left has internalized, mostly without realizing it, the classical case that the only truly legitimate regime is the rule of the wise. For them, it comes dressed up in its modern guise as Hegelian historicism, but either way, it’s ironic that in today’s cisgender Euro-bashing fiesta, their whole political philosophy rests on two quintessentially dead white male arguments. But, hey—they believe they are the wise. Not those dumb rednecks. When the pieces start to fit together in your mind, you begin to realize why the modern Left wants to make America more like those South American countries with a pale upper class, a darker lower class—and no middle of any shade. Because they get to be in charge. Uppity low-income, middling-I.Q. whites are troublemakers. They think they deserve a say. Trump gives those nettlesome, red-hat-wearing proles a voice. What else do you need to know to grasp that Trump is bad?

The greatest factor in hastening the end of American-style democracy over the past 125 years (at least) has been increasing government centralization and administrative rule. To answer the question posed by Harvard Law professor Cass Sunstein’s edited volume: it already did happen here! The project all along has been, and still is, to end politics. That is, to foreclose as illegitimate public debate and disagreement on issues allegedly settled by science and administered via expertise. As our personal freedom to abuse our bodies, sate our appetites, and neglect our duties ever expands, our actual freedom to govern ourselves and determine our collective future radically contracts. The people writing these ostensible democratic laments are all in the intellectual lineage of those who brought us to this point. Their aim is to complete the project. Trump’s aim—however inchoate or implicit—is to reverse it. Who’s the real anti-democrat?

It’s Michael Anton, so there’s plenty more between my excerpt blocks, all of which you’ll want to read.

Share

News you can REALLY use

Or I can, at least.

It’s official — Patrick Stewart is returning to the Star Trek franchise. The acclaimed Shakespearean actor is set to headline a new Star Trek series for CBS All Access, reprising his iconic Next Generation character, Captain Jean-Luc Picard. The project, which has been rumored since the June announcement of a Star Trek universe expansion with new series, was just unveiled by Stewart himself in a surprise appearance at the Las Vegas Star Trek Convention.

The new series, which is not a Star Trek: Next Generation reboot, will tell the story of the next chapter of Picard’s life.

Hm. I’m guessing I can’t get CBS All Access with digital rabbit ears for free, so maybe it’s news I can’t use after all. Makes me happy just the same, though. For my money, TNG remains far and away the best of all the Trek spinoffs; speaking strictly for myself, I prefer it even to the original, which I do still love. Should the new thang be anything like as successful as TNG was, it’ll show up somewhere in the free-TV universe soon enough.

Share

“Sick, twisted racism”

They’re not even bothering to try to hide their hate anymore.

On Wednesday, the New York Times hired Sarah Jeong to join their editorial board. Shortly thereafter, Jeong’s old racist tweets emerged.

The tweets aren’t exactly ancient history. In 2014 and 2015, Jeong — senior writer at the Verge — unleashed a few Twitter tirades against people with a lighter complexion. She seems to have deleted them now, but screenshots showing the tweets (and her new Twitter bio as “soon to be editorial board @nytimes”) have surfaced on the Internet.

“Dumba** f**king white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs p**sing on fire hydrants,” Jeong tweeted in November 2014. Ouch! Not only a profanity-laced tirade, but a tirade comparing people to dogs because of the color of their skin!

“Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins,” she wondered in December 2014. Make no mistake, she suggested a whole race of people were unfit for above ground habitation due to the color of their skin.

In July 2014, Jeong admitted to taking a sick pleasure from being cruel to people based on the color of their skin. “It’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men,” she confided. This confession did not specify what Jeong did to men based on their age and the color of their skin, but she did admit taking pleasure in cruelty.

Yeah, well, in the unlikely event she ever tries something “cruel” on THIS old white man, what she’ll wind up getting isn’t going to give her any pleasure at all.

The NYT, naturally, issued a quite lame defense of their brand-spanking new hire which, who cares.

Anybody out there still feeling good about our chances of being able to live peaceably cheek-by-jowl with “people” like this? If so, could you maybe explain to me just how you figger it?

I swiped my title from a Schlichter tweet posted by Insty:



I dunno, Kurt. Trump should mention it, sure. In fact, he should wave it like a bloody flag in LibMedia’s face every time they go all ragged and weepy about A) their self-asserted integrity and lack of “bias”; B) the environment of “danger” welling up in response to their open contempt for us; C) the very idea that the “news” they present might be of the “fake” variety. But honestly, I don’t see anybody being able to make them defend anything at all; at this point, they quite obviously no longer care who sees how overflowing with insane hatred they are.

Share

Games of chance

Don’t know why, but this story just grabbed me.

On August 3, 2001, a McDonald’s film crew arrived in the bustling beach town of Westerly, Rhode Island. They carried their cameras and a giant cashier’s check to a row of townhouses, and knocked on the door of Michael Hoover. The 56-year-old bachelor had called a McDonald’s hotline to say he’d won their Monopoly competition. Since 1987, McDonald’s customers had feverishly collected Monopoly game pieces attached to drink cups, french fry packets and advertising inserts in magazines. By completing groups of properties like Baltic and Mediterranean Avenues, players won cash or a Sega Game Gear, while “Instant Win” game pieces scored a free Filet-O-Fish or a Jamaican vacation. But Hoover, a casino pit boss who had recently filed for bankruptcy, claimed he’d won the grand prize–$1 million dollars.

Like winning the Powerball, the odds of Hoover’s win were 1 in 250 million. There were two ways to win the Monopoly grand prize: find the “Instant Win” game piece like Hoover, or match Park Place with the elusive Boardwalk to choose between a heavily-taxed lump sum or $50,000 checks every year for 20 years. Just like the Monopoly board game, which was invented as a warning about the destructive nature of greed, players traded game pieces to win, or outbid each other on eBay. Armed robbers even held up restaurants demanding Monopoly tickets. “Don’t go to jail! Go to McDonald’s and play Monopoly for real!” cried Rich Uncle Pennybags, the game’s mustachioed mascot, on TV commercials that sent customers flocking to buy more food. Monopoly quickly became the company’s most lucrative marketing device since the Happy Meal.

Inside Hoover’s home, Amy Murray, a loyal McDonald’s spokesperson, encouraged him to tell the camera about the luckiest moment of his life. Nervously clutching his massive check, Hoover said he’d fallen asleep on the beach. When he bent over to wash off the sand, his People magazine fell into the sea. He bought another copy from a grocery store, he said, and inside was an advertising insert with the “Instant Win” game piece. The camera crew listened patiently to his rambling story, silently recognizing the inconsequential details found in stories told by liars. They suspected that Hoover was not a lucky winner, but part of a major criminal conspiracy to defraud the fast food chain of millions of dollars. The two men behind the camera were not from McDonald’s. They were undercover agents from the FBI.

This was a McSting.

It’s a hell of a fascinating tale, all about the rigging of the McDonald’s Monopoly game—a scam very nearly pulled off by an ex-cop working for the Georgia company that printed the game pieces, along with US postage stamps and state lottery tickets. But don’t go thinking that this greedy, crooked ex-cop was all bad:

During that 1995 prize draw, something happened that would change the game. According to Jacobson, when the computerized prize draw selected a factory location in Canada, Simon Marketing executives re-ran the program until it chose an area in the USA. Jacobson claimed he was ordered to ensure that no high-level prizes ever reached the Great White North. “I knew what we were doing in Canada was wrong,” Jacobson recalled. “Sooner or later somebody was going to be asking questions about why there were no winners in Canada.” Believing the game was rigged, he decided to cash in too.

Not long afterward, Jacobson opened a package sent to him by mistake from a supplier in Hong Kong. Inside he found a set of the anti-tamper seals for the game piece envelopes—the only thing he needed to steal game pieces en route to the factory. “I would go into the men’s room of the airport,” he later admitted, the only place the female auditor couldn’t follow him. “I would go into a stall. I would take the seal off.” Then he’d pour the winning game pieces into his hand, replace them with “commons,” and re-seal the envelope. First, he stole a $1 million “Instant Win” game piece and locked it in a safety deposit box. Then he stole documents that he claimed proved the Canada conspiracy. “I thought I would need that to protect myself,” Jacobson recalled. If his employer ever fired him, he had a “get out of jail free” card. But when he stole another $1 million game piece, Jacobson did something awesome.

On November 12, 1995, a donations clerk at the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Tennessee ripped open the morning’s mail, and discovered a brightly colored card. At first, Tammie Murphy assumed it was junk mail, until she noticed the tiny Monopoly game piece inside. McDonald’s officials descended on the hospital and examined the game piece under a jeweler’s eyepiece. Ronald McDonald himself attended a press conference, where the hospital was announced the $1 million winner. Despite an investigation, the New York Times could not uncover the identity of the generous donor.

I remember seeing that part of the story on the news back then myself, actually. Like I said, this is a truly fascinating story, and—freighted as it is with avarice, corruption, betrayal, blind chance, and redemption—a quite human one.

(Via VP)

Share

Black BART

Still waiting for that “national conversation on race” we were supposed to be having.

In 2015, the crime on BART trains was so bad that BART created an app where riders could document any chaos or violence or lawlessness, then automatically send it to BART.

After a year, the geniuses at the East Bay Express ascertained that black ridership on BART was about 11 percent, but complaints against black people made up about 70 percent of the info from the app. It did not take long to figure out that the app was racist, and it was soon never heard from again.

Flash forward to less than a year ago: 50-70 black people rampaged through a BART station, beating and robbing a few white passengers – just the latest in a series of black mob violence at BART trains and stations. Some fatal. Most ignored. All treated as a symptom of white racism.

All with videotape that BART executives refused to share for the craziest of reasons: BART executives said doing so would be “embarrassing to minorities.” And no, I do not expect you to believe that unless you see it for yourself. So here’s an excerpt from a recent video I did. Just click here: BART refuses to release videos.

If that is not enough, try this on for size: an article I wrote about it at the time for American Thinker with lots of links. Just click here.

Just a few weeks ago, BART was back in the news when it was revealed that 66% of the people banned from BART for criminal behavior are black. More racism, of course, said the people who were loath to consider, even for a second, that black people on BART create holy Hell six times more than their ridership should.

It ain’t just Oakland, it ain’t just the Bay Area, it ain’t just BART. And as long as so many of us are too squeamish to start demanding truth and accountability in place of coverups and PC misdirection, it ain’t going to change.

Share

And now you know the rest of the story

But…but…but…it’s UNPOSSIBLE.

My great-grandfather was given the nickname Nwaubani, which means “from the Bonny port region,” because he had the bright skin and healthy appearance associated at the time with people who lived near the coast and had access to rich foreign foods. (This became our family name.) In the late nineteenth century, he carried a slave-trading license from the Royal Niger Company, an English corporation that ruled southern Nigeria. His agents captured slaves across the region and passed them to middlemen, who brought them to the ports of Bonny and Calabar and sold them to white merchants. Slavery had already been abolished in the United States and the United Kingdom, but his slaves were legally shipped to Cuba and Brazil. To win his favor, local leaders gave him their daughters in marriage. (By his death, he had dozens of wives.) His influence drew the attention of colonial officials, who appointed him chief of Umujieze and several other towns. He presided over court cases and set up churches and schools. He built a guesthouse on the land where my parents’ home now stands, and hosted British dignitaries. To inform him of their impending arrival and verify their identities, guests sent him envelopes containing locks of their Caucasian hair.

Last year, I travelled from Abuja, where I live, to Umujieze for my parents’ forty-sixth wedding anniversary. My father is the oldest man in his generation and the head of our extended family. One morning, a man arrived at our gate from a distant Anglican church that was celebrating its centenary. Its records showed that Nwaubani Ogogo had given an armed escort to the first missionaries in the region—a trio known as the Cookey brothers—to insure their safety. The man invited my father to receive an award for Nwaubani Ogogo’s work spreading the gospel. After the man left, my father sat in his favorite armchair, among a group of his grandchildren, and told stories about Nwaubani Ogogo.

“Are you not ashamed of what he did?” I asked.

“I can never be ashamed of him,” he said, irritated. “Why should I be? His business was legitimate at the time. He was respected by everyone around.” My father is a lawyer and a human-rights activist who has spent much of his life challenging government abuses in southeast Nigeria. He sometimes had to flee our home to avoid being arrested. But his pride in his family was unwavering. “Not everyone could summon the courage to be a slave trader,” he said. “You had to have some boldness in you.”

My father succeeded in transmitting to me not just Nwaubani Ogogo’s stories but also pride in his life. During my school days, if a friend asked the meaning of my surname, I gave her a narrative instead of a translation. But, in the past decade, I’ve felt a growing sense of unease. African intellectuals tend to blame the West for the slave trade, but I knew that white traders couldn’t have loaded their ships without help from Africans like my great-grandfather. I read arguments for paying reparations to the descendants of American slaves and wondered whether someone might soon expect my family to contribute. Other members of my generation felt similarly unsettled. My cousin Chidi, who grew up in England, was twelve years old when he visited Nigeria and asked our uncle the meaning of our surname. He was shocked to learn our family’s history, and has been reluctant to share it with his British friends. My cousin Chioma, a doctor in Lagos, told me that she feels anguished when she watches movies about slavery. “I cry and cry and ask God to forgive our ancestors,” she said.

Huh. And all this time I’ve been led to believe slavery existed exclusively in the states of the old Confederacy here in America—an evil unique to my ancestors alone, a blot which will and should stain all Southerners unto eternity. Why, next you’ll be telling me that the slave ships coming here were mainly run by Brits and New Englanders, or that slavery still exists in the Muslim world without exciting the slightest murmur of condemnation from Westerners who will nonetheless sneer most heartily at anyone with a Southern accent they may meet.

The part I bolded above highlights a key truth as regards A) both the condescension and moral smugness Southerners still face from “damn Yankees” even now, and B) the author’s anguish over his family history. Namely: it’s foolish and unjust to condemn the people of bygone eras by the standards of our own. My sarcasm above aside, it’s a fascinating article in a pretty improbable spot.

Share

Johnny Rotten gets it

Punk as fuck.

“What I dislike is the left-wing media in America are trying to smear the bloke as a racist, and that’s completely not true,” the 61-year-old said. “There’s many, many problems with him as a human being, but he’s not that, and there just might be a chance something good will come out of that situation, because he terrifies politicians.”

Mr. Lydon said Mr. Trump is like a “political Sex Pistol” whose purpose is to rattle the status quo. After co-host Piers Morgan described Mr. Trump as “the archetypal anti-establishment character,” Mr. Lydon added: “Dare I say, a possible friend.”

The former lead singer also declared his support for Brexit, saying he stands with Britain’s “working class” who voted to exit the European Union in June.

“Where do I stand on Brexit? Well, here it goes: The working class have spoke, and I’m one of them, and I’m with them,” Mr. Lydon said, raising his fist. “And there it is.”

And there it is indeed. Good on ya, John.

Share

“A nation of immigrants”?

Nope.

The “nation of immigrants” trope is relatively new in American history, appearing not until the late 19th century. Its first appearance in print was most likely The Daily State Journal of Alexandria, Virginia, in 1874. In praising a state bill that encouraged European immigration, the editors wrote: “We are a nation of immigrants and immigrants’ children.” In 1938, Franklin Delano Roosevelt said to the Daughters of the American Revolution: “Remember, remember always, that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants and revolutionists.” John F. Kennedy would later use the term as the title of a book, written as part of an Anti-Defamation League series, so it is undoubtedly objective, quality scholarship.

But in 1874, as in 1938, and even in 1958 when JFK’s book was written, America was not a nation of immigrants. The women Roosevelt was addressing were not the daughters of immigrants but rather the descendants of settlers—those Americans who founded the society that immigrants in 1874 came to be a part of.

Concerning immigration patterns, from 1820 through 1924, 34 million new arrivals entered the United States, mostly from Europe. Throughout this period, intermittent waves of immigration were punctuated by pauses and lulls. These respites provided immigrants time to Americanize. By contrast, from 1965 through 2000, 24 million new arrivals entered the United States, mostly from Latin America and Asia, and with few if any pauses between waves. In just 35 years, America experienced nearly as much immigration as it did over a century. Nevertheless, from 1820 through 2000, the foreign-born averaged just over 10 percent of the total American population.

To claim that America is a “nation of immigrants” is to stretch a truth—that America historically has experienced intermittent waves of immigration—into a total falsehood, that America is a nation of immigrants. For the truth of the first thing to equal the truth of the other, every nation that experiences immigration may just as well be considered a “nation of immigrants.” Germans have lived along the Rhine since before Christ, yet Germany has also been swarmed by foreigners from the Middle East and North Africa. Is Germany, therefore, a nation of immigrants? A resounding nein is the answer we are hearing from Germans.

Before America was a nation, it had to be settled and founded. As Michael Anton reiterated in response to New York Times columnist Bret Stephens: America is a nation of settlers, not a nation of immigrants. In that, Anton is echoing Samuel Huntington, who showed that America is a society of settlers. Those settlers in the 17th and 18th centuries—more than anyone else after—had the most profound and lasting impact on American culture, institutions, historical development, and identity. American began in the 1600s—not 1874—and what followed in the 1770s and 1780s was rooted in the founded society of those settlers.

Settlers, Anton explains, travel from an existing society into the wilderness to build a society ex nihilo. Settlers travel in groups that either implicitly or explicitly agree to a social compact. Settlers, unlike immigrants, go abroad with the intention of creating a new community away from the mother country. Immigrants, on the other hand, travel from one existing society to another, either as individuals or as families, and are motivated by different reasons; and not always good ones. Immigrants come later to be part of the society already built by settlers, who, as Higham wrote, establish the polity, language, customs, and habits of the society immigrants seek to join and in joining must embrace and adopt.

Justice Louis Brandeis would later echo Jay, declaring that the immigrant is Americanized when he “adopts the clothes, the manners, and the customs generally prevailing here…substitutes for his mother tongue the English language,” ensures that “his interests and affections have become deeply rooted here,” and comes “into complete harmony with our ideals and aspirations.” Only when the immigrant has done this will he have “the national consciousness of an American.”

Remember, Brandeis was a Progressive leading light back then. In light of the above statement, the raving madmen of our present-day Loonie Left wouldn’t for a moment consider him an acceptable SC nominee now. But then, if Trump nominated Che Guevara to the Court the NYT, WaPo, and all the rest would doubtless denounce even him as a “right-wing extremist,” too.

That’s progress, see.

Share

Shoot the moon

I guess the ship has sailed on nuking it, then.

Forty-nine years ago today, and just a few hours from now, is the exact anniversary of when 50,000 steely-eyed missile men, crew-cutted geeks with pocket protectors, test pilots, fighter pilots, and hundreds of metric tons of raw testosterone kicked the rest of the world’s ass right to the bottom of the heap, going back to the dawn of time, from the moment that Eagle landed, to when this guy’s foot stepped off the LEM ladder.

Neil Armstrong, ace X-15 test pilot, and mission commander of Apollo XI, became the first man from earth to ever set foot on the Moon, and if and until we ever get people to Mars, he put every explorer in history, and even every guy to follow, below him on what Tom Wolfe correctly called “the top of the pyramid.”

He was there because his sidekick, lunar module pilot, and outside-the-box revolutionary thinker Buzz Aldrin

had managed to land the lunar module, off course, and with mere seconds remaining for landing before a crash-tastrophe, because you don’t fly 250,000 miles to puss out at the last 12 seconds, just for such piddling concerns as running out of fuel.

Meanwhile, as command module pilot Michael Collins was searching the Moon’s surface from lunar orbit to spot whereinhell (or rather, the Sea Of Tranquility) Eagle had actually landed, Armstrong and Aldrin were running through checklists and getting ready for the culmination of the combined effort of tens of thousands of people at NASA (back when they had a purpose, and a clue) and hundreds of thousands of contractors and subcontractors, accomplished to make the trip possible, less than a decade from Kennedy’s speech promising we’d do it.

Because that’s what Americans do.

Well, it WAS, at least. One of Aesop’s commenters explains why that’s no longer the case:

I like to compare and contrast Apollo 11 to the big event that happened not far from where I was. Woodstock. 

The first was a tribute to hard working men and women: engineers, technicians, assemblers, and tens of thousands of hard working people who undertook a task that many viewed as impossible. “To land a man on the moon and return him safely to earth by the end of this decade”. It was hard work, it was risky work. Men died: outstanding men you’d be proud to have known or worked with. It was a triumph of intellect, done with slide rules and calculators that your Smart Phone out powers by a factor of thousands. Even today, it is thought of as being so hard to do that about 5% of the US population thinks we never did it. 

The second was a bunch of kids having sex in the mud while drugged out of their minds, listening to singers and musicians drugged out of their minds.

The first group was dedicated to doing things others can barely only imagine – bending the universe to their will through sheer intellect and power. They are “can do” people. 

The second group was dedicated to rubbing body parts against each other with no effort of will and no character. Their entire focus in life is their genitals. 

The second group is now in charge of the country.

The time of the first moon shot was pretty much the final glory of America That Was; it was also the end of the era in which the last of the sane, patriotic Democrats—however beguiled they might have already been by the Great Darkness of hard Leftism—still roamed the Earth. Must be a coincidence, right?

On the “bright” side though, since Trump is a bought and paid for vassal of Putin, we ought to have no trouble continuing to hitch rides into space on rickety Russian rockets. So we got that going for us, right?

All kidding around aside, the moon landing was little short of a miraculous achievement, a truly stunning effort requiring brilliance, absolute commitment, sacrifice, and incredible courage. That succeeding generations have fallen so dismally short in all those areas and more diminishes the accomplishment not a whit. In hindsight, it’s almost as if the effort involved simply exhausted us, rendering us incapable of doing much than sitting back and gasping for breath. Nothing against their scientists, engineers, and astronauts, mind, but for some of us it will be quite a bittersweet day when some other nation—China, India, whoever it might be—takes up the reins, blasts off for the Final Frontier and leaves America in its Earthbound dust for good.

Share

Bar raised

Bakeries. Why is it always bakeries, for Pete’s sake?

Portland bakery fires employees for denying black woman service after closing
PORTLAND, Ore. — Two employees of a bakery in Northeast Portland were fired earlier this month for denying a black woman service because the business had closed.

“Back To Eden Bakery” released several public apologies and statements following the incident, before letting the employees go. In one Facebook post, the bakery’s co-owner wrote, “We are doing business in a gentrified neighborhood in a racist city within a racist state of a racist country.”

Annnd here we go.

In one statement, “Back To Eden Bakery” says that according to its own surveillance video, a black woman named “Lillian”, who is well known in the area as a “professional equity activist”,

Of course she is.

entered at 9:06 p.m., after the bakery’s closing time. Employees had also turned off the “Open” sign, but several customers (all white) who had already ordered were still inside. Two other white women who went to the bakery two minutes before “Lillian”, and were also informed that the business was closed for the night.

The bakery says “Lillian” left the store briefly and began recording video.

In other words, as with the Memories Pizza incident, the whole thing was a put-up job from the git-go. Some inflamed carbuncle visited the bakery purely with the intention of raising a stink, nothing more. The pestilential oxygen-thief was way more interested in ginning up controversy than she ever was in cupcakes or eclairs.

The bakery’s statement says that even though it does not consider the employees to be racist and that they were following the business’s protocol of closing at 9 p.m., they were fired because “sometimes impact outweighs intent.”

So these kids basically got fired for doing their fucking jobs properly, then. Mark it on your calendar, gang: now, right now, is the moment when we finally reached Peak Progtard Idiocy. Next headline from Libloonyville: Apoplectic Negress agitator has shitfit, sues Woolworth’s after being refused service at store that had been closed for decades!

In the statement “Back To Eden” says the employees were fired because the woman and the “clamoring public” demanded they be fired.

Fine by me; let the public clamor as much as it likes. Also let it do without baked goods in the future, and the Starbucks coffee to go with it, as “woke” businesses run by shitlibs in Progtard hellholes are driven out of business one after another. Then they can all sit back and have themselves a good cry over “food deserts,” “redlining,” and the unavailability of damned near everything as the fruits of their obstinate jackassery fully ripen at last, leaving them with nothing but the stinking, rotten peel.

Via Glenn and Hinderaker, who says:

Utterly sickening. Sure, you can say it happened in Portland. (“It’s Chinatown, Jake.”) But this kind of insanity has taken root all across the country. We are in a fight for our lives.

Yep.

Share

Rule One

SJWs must be excluded, shunned, and generally avoided like the plague they truly are.

John Schnatter—the founder and public face of pizza chain Papa John’s—used the N-word on a conference call in May. Schnatter confirmed the incident in an emailed statement to Forbes on Wednesday. He resigned as chairman of Papa John’s on Wednesday evening.

The call was arranged between Papa John’s executives and marketing agency Laundry Service. It was designed as a role-playing exercise for Schnatter in an effort to prevent future public-relations snafus. Schnatter caused an uproar in November 2017 when he waded into the debate over national anthem protests in the NFL and partly blamed the league for slowing sales at Papa John’s. 

On the May call, Schnatter was asked how he would distance himself from racist groups online. He responded by downplaying the significance of his NFL statement. “Colonel Sanders called blacks n—–s,” Schnatter said, before complaining that Sanders never faced public backlash.

Schnatter also reflected on his early life in Indiana, where, he said, people used to drag African-Americans from trucks until they died. He apparently intended for the remarks to convey his antipathy to racism, but multiple individuals on the call found them to be offensive, a source familiar with the matter said. After learning about the incident, Laundry Service owner Casey Wasserman moved to terminate the company’s contract with Papa John’s.

In an emailed statement on Wednesday afternoon, Schnatter confirmed the allegations. “News reports attributing the use of inappropriate and hurtful language to me during a media training session regarding race are true,” he said. “Regardless of the context, I apologize. Simply stated, racism has no place in our society.”

Ace draws the correct lesson from this teachable moment.

Even though he was not using the word from his own lips, but rather saying what Colonel Sanders had done (without pushback), a Social Justice Warrior got offended and leaked a recording of the conversation, and now he’s out as chairman of his own company.

Never, never hire a Social Justice Warrior. They are hate machines who will destroy any venture because they get off on that. They’re never in the business of whatever business is stupid enough to pay them to “work;” they’re only in the business of hyperpoliticization, sowing division, and destroying the work of others.

Don’t hire them; if you own a business and have employed them by mistake or in ignorance of what they are, use any reasonable (meaning not legally-actionable) pretense you can come up with to remove them. Don’t mix with them in even the most casual social settings; if an SJW snowflake is present at any gathering you might happen to be attending, no matter how innocuous or apolitical its nature, leave immediately and, if possible, inform your hosts of the reason why in no uncertain terms. Any possible association with them by sane, sensible people is an invitation to disaster; unpleasant as they are, it’s not worth the risk.

Social Justice Warriors are the terminal symptoms of an always-fatal disease. Like a tumor, they’ll have to be surgically removed to the last, tiniest trace if Western culture is to survive.

Share

Losing it

Of course, she didn’t have much of it in the first place.

Democratic House minority leader Nancy Pelosi appeared to mess up a chant that she started at an event Wednesday.

Pelosi attempts to rally an audience to chant “Clean air! Clean water! Clean government!” Just moments later, she messes up the chant herself in a video first reported on by NTK Network.

Her strange public behavior and occasional difficulty speaking have garnered attention online, as many notice a pattern of such flubs.

In a recent appearance, she repeatedly slurred her words, saying “soy boyn” instead of “soy bean” and “repoot” instead of “repeat.”

The minority leader has also said, “The Constitution does not say that a person can shout … yell ‘wolf’ in a crowded theater. If you are endangering people, then you don’t have a constitutional right to do that.”

Of course, the actual saying is that you can’t shout “fire” in a crowded theater, not “wolf.”

Who says senility can’t be funny? Via Ace,who says: “Because that’s what people with healthy brains do.” Quite true—for Democrat Socialist values of the word “healthy.”

Share

Missed opportunities, abandoned ambitions

The American Dream is more of a nightmare these days, thanks entirely to Big Government.

Kaitlyn (not her real name) just moved here from Georgia. Her husband is an auto mechanic. “He can fix anything with four wheels! Well, except my car – it runs like crap!” She went on at some length about how good he was at fixing things. His plan was to start his own shop once they moved here. They moved into a double-wide trailer that had a nice pole barn out back, which he planned to outfit with electric and a high-end air compressor, maybe even a grease pit, and start his own business.

He spent almost a year working on permits, licenses, inspections, and so on. He spoke to people from the county, city, state, feds, and the EPA. He talked to attorneys, accountants, and consultants to help wade through all the red tape. After about a year, he realized that the start-up costs were more than he was willing to gamble on the eventual success of a business that did not yet exist, so he got a job with the city, maintaining their trucks and mowing equipment. It doesn’t pay very well, but it has good benefits. It’s not a bad job, she says. Nothing to complain about. Everything is ok.

Kaitlyn did a great job on my hair, was very pleasant and personable, and is clearly very intelligent. She said that a few miles from their house, a barber recently retired. She considered buying his shop. She’s always dreamed of owning her own business. She said that’s the whole reason she went to cosmetology school. I said that sounded great – the shop is already set up, it has a large group of established customers, and she could expand from there.

She said that she spent several months looking into it, but she would need permits, licenses, inspections, and so on. I pointed out that it has been a barber’s shop for years, so the inspections, permits, and so on would already be done. She said that it would be a new business, and she would have to pay for all that to be done over again. She spoke with attorneys, accountants, and consultants to help wade through all the red tape – some of the same individuals that her husband had just consulted. She soon realized that the start-up costs were more than she was willing to gamble, so she got a job with a chain. The pay is not very good, and the benefits are lousy. One reason her husband took a government job was for the health insurance for their family. But she doesn’t mind working for Sport Clips – it’s a decent job, she says. Nothing to complain about. Everything is ok.

So how does this story end?

Well, in my view, it’s already ended. This young couple from a modest background has all the potential in the world. They’re both ambitious, intelligent, and very good at a valuable skill. They’re devoted to their family, their dreams, and each other. They dream of better things and are willing to gamble, willing to work hard today for a better tomorrow, and willing to take on the additional responsibilities that come with owning a business. They’re savvy enough with modern government to hire attorneys and consultants to help with the red tape.

And even they can’t open a new business, to do something they already know how to do.

Progressives may think they’re utopians who dream of a better tomorrow. But, in reality, they are the robotic defenders of the status quo. Everything stays the same because nothing happens. And when things don’t happen, those things don’t make the evening news. They didn’t happen at all, so there’s nothing to complain about. Everything is basically ok. And that’s the way it will stay.

Until it doesn’t.

And then, all of a sudden-like, EVERYTHING happens—all at once, and violently.

Anybody trying to start a small business in America these days is either a masochist, or just plain nuts. The most fundamental ideal of what was once the American Dream has now been placed out of reach of the people—snatched away from them by the depraved minions of a greedy, grasping, arrogant Superstate. It’s not something we should be tsk-tsk-ing and shaking our heads over, then shrugging and getting on with our day. It’s something that ought to make us absolutely furious—cold, shaking, killing mad. Because that kind of rage is what will be required to take it back. Like it or not, nothing less is going to do it.

(Via Gail Heriot)

Share

The Old Grey Whore

How “journalism” is done: on their backs, legs spread wide.

Just when you thought contemporary journalism couldn’t sink any lower, along comes Ali Watkins, now 26, a reporter for the New York Times whose rapid rise through reporting’s corrupt and partisan ranks includes stints at the Huffington Post, BuzzFeed, and Politico. Back in February, Ms. Watkins suddenly became the object of official attention when the feds seized her email and phone records as part of an investigation into a prominent Senate staffer, James Wolfe — the former security director for the Senate Intelligence Committee and a Democrat, of course. Then, in June, Wolfe was arrested and charged with lying to the FBI, which was investigating leaks from the committee to select reporters…among whom was Ali Watkins.

It turns out that Watkins had been involved in a sexual relationship with Wolfe for three years, although at the time of Wolfe’s arrest she had moved on to greener pastures, including other staffers on the committee…

A responsible journalistic organization would never have hired this little scamp, but at the Times, which is hell-bent on turning its formerly white male newsroom into a model of “diversity,” being female trumped all other considerations, and the newspaper is clearly grooming Watkins for bigger things. But now that the truth is out about how this particular reporter got her scoops, a responsible journalistic organization would have fired her.

The Times, alas, is not that journalistic organization.

“Scamp”? That’s putting it WAY too mildly. Anybody who still kids himself that people like this can be treated with honorably and honestly needs to think very carefully about how completely the little whore was willing to degrade herself to advance the shitlib agenda. For instance:

The indictment said Wolfe, 58, began dating Watkins — who is in her 20’s — in 2013 when she was an undergraduate student working as a news intern. The indictment said the pair ended the relationship in December 2017.

In an April 2013 tweet, Watkins also tweeted about the fictional Netflix television show “House of Cards,” where a young reporter has an affair with an older member of Congress.

“I wanted to be Zoe Barnes…until episode 4,” she tweeted. “Sleeping with your source- especially a vindictive congressman? #badlifechoice #HouseofCards”

In another tweet, Watkins asked: “So on a scale of 1 to ethical, how does everyone feel about pulling a @RealZoeBarnes for story ideas? #TOTALLYKIDDING @HouseofCards.”

The “House of Cards” tweets were posted months before prosecutors said her relationship with Wolfe began.

So after smirking about it being a “#badlifechoice,” our roundheels decided with full awareness to prostitute herself with a guy old enough to be her grandfather in order to get Trump.

She’s not just a whore, she’s a stupid whore. Better get out of the world’s oldest profession now, honey, before you get hurt. Any streetwalker stupid enough to let the NYT pimp her out just ain’t cut out for The Life.

Share

Epic!

Still the best July 4th story of all time.

On this day in 1826, 50 years after the Declaration of Independence was adopted in Philadelphia, John Adams died at home in Braintree. One of the great men of the Revolutionary generation and the second president of the United States, Adams was 91 years old. Shortly before he breathed his last, John Adams whispered, “Thomas Jefferson survives.”

But he was wrong.

In fact, 560 miles away at Monticello, Thomas Jefferson had died only a few hours earlier. The fact that these two founding fathers died on the same day and that it was, of all days, the Fourth of July was not viewed as a coincidence. In his two-hour eulogy at Fanueil Hall, Daniel Webster cited it as “proof” of how much God cared for the country.

Of course, there’s more to the Jefferson/Adams saga than just that.

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were the last surviving members of the original American revolutionaries who had stood up to the British empire and forged a new political system in the former colonies. However, while they both believed in democracy and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, their opinions on how to achieve these ideals diverged over time.

Adams preceded Jefferson as president (1797-1800); it was during this time that their ideas about policy-making became as distinct as their personalities. The irascible and hot-tempered Adams was a firm believer in a strong centralized government, while the erudite and gentile Jefferson believed federal government should take a more hands-off approach and defer to individual states’ rights. As Adams’ vice president, Jefferson was so horrified by what he considered to be Adams’ abuse of the presidency–particularly his passage of the restrictive Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798–that he abandoned Adams and Washington for his estate at Monticello. There, he plotted how to bring his Republican faction back into power in the presidential election of 1800. After an exceptionally bitter campaign, in which both parties engaged in slanderous attacks on each other in print, Jefferson emerged victorious. It appeared the former friends would be eternal enemies.

After serving two presidential terms (1801-1809), Jefferson and Adams each expressed to third parties their respect the other and their desire to renew their friendship. Adams was the first to break the silence; he sent Jefferson a letter dated January 1, 1812, in which he wished Jefferson many happy new years to come. Jefferson responded with a note in which he fondly recalled when they were fellow laborers in the same cause. The former revolutionaries went on to resume their friendship over 14 years of correspondence during their golden years.

If you have any interest in history and haven’t read David McCullough’s John Adams yet, you really ought to. It’s a good ‘un.

Share

You may not be interested in trucking

But trucking is interested in you.

Miller, 30, is a long-haul trucker, the co-owner of an Arizona-based business that runs three trucks through Werner Enterprises Inc. He says he hauls “anything that will fit in the back of a dry van.” His cargoes range from motors to toiletries to, in one case, a single envelope. He got into trucking five years ago for the classic reasons: “It’s a decent-paying job that allows you a lot of freedom to see the country.”

But the work definitely has its downsides. Miller sees his wife and two young children only three or four days a month — something he hopes will change as the business grows so he can hire other people to do the driving. If, that is, he can find and keep them.

Recently a driver Miller had trained as a student and then hired full time quit after working just a couple of months. The guy took a local pickup-and-delivery job with a company that used to require three to five years of experience before even considering a new driver. Nowadays they can’t be so picky.

The U.S. trucking industry is short about 50,000 drivers, estimates Bob Costello, chief economist for the American Trucking Associations. The driver shortage ranked first among industry concerns in the American Transportation Research Institute’s annual survey, released last October.

Virginia Postrel does a much more thorough job of diving into the weeds to dig up the reasons behind the shortage than the last piece on the topic I excerpted here did. The bottom line is this: when truckers start to get really scarce, pretty much everything you buy won’t be far behind…and the price you pay for pretty much everything will be going up, too. Read all of it.

Share

Gipper redux, only more so

There you go again.

For the first time since the election of 1984, the Left is on the run and they don’t like it one bit. Back then, they had been stunned when the ignorant, trigger-happy cowboy Ronald Reagan upset Jimmy Carter in 1980; a man they were absolutely sure had almost no chance to win the presidency instead beat the incumbent rather handily. But they were devastated when Reagan crushed Walter Mondale in 1984 in one of the mightiest popular and electoral landslides in American political history. It just could…not…be…that Reagan won 525 electoral votes to Mondale’s 13, 49 states to Mondale’s one, and 54 million popular votes to Mondale’s 37 million.

Of course, it remains to be seen whether Trump follows the same trajectory as Reagan. But he’s off to a much faster start: unemployment down, the Dow up, the economy apparently booming, productivity and growth soaring, help wanted signs everywhere. It took Reagan a couple of years to wring the stench of Carterism out of the economy; Obama’s eight years of deliberate stasis, by contrast, have disappeared practically overnight.

Hence the scalded-snakes reaction to everything Trump does. For all the activity, it’s not so much what Trump is doing, it’s that he’s doing it. This brings to mind Dr. Johnson’s famous observation when told of a female preacher among the Quakers: “Sir, a woman’s preaching is like a dog’s walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all.” For far too long, Republicans have preached a good game of governmental reform but utterly failed to deliver; even Reagan never got rid of the Department of Education, nor reclaimed the Panama Canal. So not only was it not done well, it wasn’t done at all.

Those days are now gone. Hardly systematically, but with the great energy in the executive that Alexander Hamilton so admired, Trump has targeted and then taken down a host of Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party edifices. Regarding the former sacred cow of the EPA, he installed environmentalist bête-noire Scott Pruitt to rein it back in. Scornful of Elizabeth Warren’s unconstitutional Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, he sent Mick Mulvaney to oversee its dismantling. International trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership and NAFTA are getting their turn in the stocks as well. And as for the fantasy of “climate change,” Trump is making coal and oil great again.

To make matters even worse for them—which means better for normal Americans—their chosen executioners Mueller and Pals have succeeded only in shooting themselves in the foot repeatedly, exposing the sinister Deep State beyond dispute and snaring Hillary and Obama both in a tangled web of treasonous deceit. Combine that with the Left’s very public collapse into batshit lunacy; Democrat Socialist advocacy for a zombie economy, higher taxes, higher gas prices, and foreign-policy humiliation; and a constant drumbeat of hatred and contempt for the ordinary people without whose indulgence they would surely starve, and Walsh’s closing question becomes both apt and hilarious.

Share

Badass history

I stumbled across this in the course of doing a little research on Charles Martel, and it sure is fun stuff.

At the Battle of Beresteczko in 1651, Jan Sobieski led the Hussars in an attack that smashed the light cavalry formations of the Ukrainian Cossacks. In 1664 he battled Swedish invaders at the gates of Warsaw.  In 1667 he led warriors against the Mongol Tatars, raising 8,000 men with his own money and successfully defending the city of Podhajce against 20,000 steppe horsemen with the sheer force of his own impenetrable fucking steel ballsack. At Chocim he destroyed 20,000 Turkish front-line warriors and captured over 100 pieces of artillery, an heroic asskicking that made him such a national hero that he was elected King of Poland a year later based on his own popularity alone. Known as “The Unvanquished Northern Lion”, by a Turkish army that had the good sense and honor to appreciate a righteously-hardcore badass even when he wasn’t fighting under the same flag, Jan Sobieski had fought his way to the Crown on military awesomeness alone, then went home at the end of every day to share a bed with a fucking hot French countess he’d brought in straight from the court of Louis XIV.

And, more importantly even than his track record kicking ass in the name of Poland, Jan Sobieski was a man of honor. So when the Pope sent him a letter desperately requesting he send aid to the battered defenders of Vienna, Sobieski assembled every single goddamn warrior he had – at the expense even of garrisoning his own cities against attack – and personally rode to the rescue at the head of a force that was 20,000 men strong.

…Then, on the morning of September 12th, 1683, almost a week after he should have stormed the walls, Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa turned to his right flank and noticed something he wasn’t really expecting.

King Jan Sobieski of Poland. And 76,000 Polish, German, Saxon, Bavarian, and Imperial troops riding hard behind him.

The Turks fought like heroes, adjusting to their flank attack and resisting with everything they had, but once again Kara Mustafa fucked them. Rather than redirect all 200,000 guys to repel the attack, he kept half his guys in the trenches facing the city and somehow thought he could hold back the largest cavalry charge in human history with only half his force.

It didn’t work. Racing down from the hills as hard as he could, Jan Sobieski led an epic attack of heavy European cavalry through the Wienerwald Forest (hahahahaha) and straight into the flank of the Turkish formation. The Turks battled bravely. They didn’t break right away. For several hours the infantry of the Turks, known for their hard fighting, battled like the kind of warriors who conquer kingdoms. But in the end, the mighty Poles were too much.  Sobieski raced ahead, Hussar wings fluttering behind him, on a final charge that smashed through them, cut off their flank, sacked their baggage train and forced the Turks to flee. They withdrew in good order – their defeat had been decisive and total, but hadn’t inflicted an insane number of casualties.

Still, Sobieski rode into the gates of Vienna a hero. The Savior of Christendom. Because he totally was.

The guy has a whole long list of these articles, including one I can’t say I’m entirely down with myself; see if you can spot which it is. There are some that are sort of, um, unexpected, shall we say—like the Komodo Dragon, North Sentinel Island, and…Spock?!? All in all, though, it’s another deep well of entertaining and informative reading that I’ll spend a long time wading through as and when I can.

Share

The gang that couldn’t shoot straight

Better sit down for this one, folks. As difficult to believe as it is, it would seem that Barry Hussein Oshitstain told a lie once.

IG Report Shows Obama Lied When He Said He Knew Nothing About Hillary’s Secret E-mail Scheme
‘The policy of my administration is to encourage transparency,’ Obama told CBS News during the same interview in which he lied.

I can’t believe it. I WON’T believe it. Uncle Peter, my smelling salts!

In 2015, President Obama told America he only learned that his secretary of state Hillary Clinton was illegally using a private email server to conduct public business after The New York Times published a story saying so. Today’s release of a Department of Justice inspector general report shows that was a lie.

“FBI analysts and Prosecutor 2 told us that former President Barack Obama was one of the 13 individuals with whom Clinton had direct contact using her clintonemail.com account,” the report says in a footnote on page 89. “Obama, like other high level government officials, used a pseudonym for his username on his official government email account.”

Boy, their whole world pretty much unravelled once Gin-Soaked Hillary!™ got sent to the royal showers, didn’t it?

The report also says Obama Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey knew that Obama had lied.

Sigh. Of course he did.

It was in 2015 that Obama had disclaimed knowledge that Clinton used a private, rather than government, email address. In 2016, while drafting a public statement explaining why the FBI wouldn’t prosecute Clinton during her run for the presidency, Comey changed the statement’s wording to hide that Obama had communicated with Clinton through her private email address, the report says.

“A paragraph [in Comey’s statement] summarizing the factors that led the FBI to assess that it was possible that hostile actors accessed Clinton’s server was added, and at one point referenced Clinton’s use of her private email for an exchange with then President Obama while in the territory of a foreign adversary,” the IG report says. “This reference later was changed to ‘another senior government official,’ and ultimately was omitted.”

Clowns. They’re all fucking clowns, for God’s sake. If you’re going to lie for a living, you need to be one hell of a lot better at it than these droolcases. A Tweet from Sean Davis is appended:


We should all wish for enemies as stupid and inept as Trump’s. A commenter on Davis’s Tweet has himself a good laugh over Barky’s shopworn perennial excuse:

You realize what this means? It means Obama didn’t even know he sent those e-mails until he read it in the IG report.

Thus proving the truth behind Treacher’s evergreen observation about saying anything he thinks will get him through the next five minutes. If I remember right, that line was in reference to somebody other than His Royal Majesty. But it applies perfectly well to just about every Democrat Socialist tapeworm you could name.

Via Ace, who adds:

Unrelated, but it turns out that Comey used personal email for government business too. Giving him a conflict of interest on this point: He had to claim a lack of ‘intent” saved Clinton, or else he’d be making the case for his own criminal prosecution.

And of course he didn’t recuse himself.

Well, I mean, DUH. It’s diff’runt when they try to rig an election, cover up their criminal and treasonous behavior, fail spectacularly at that too, and then try to overthrow the duly-elected president via a frame-job built on manufactured evidence, see. Because reasons, y’all.

Most galling of all: these are the people—yes, these fucktard stumblebums—who believe themselves so much smarter than you that their Divine Right To Rule should just be automatically assumed by all, never to be questioned or even examined. And they’re STILL shocked unto hysteria and hissy fits that they didn’t get away with it, too.

No, really. The big fat raised middle finger real Americans waved in their faces by elevating Trump to the Presidency is something they’ll never recover from. There’s only one thing left to do, which will put the lock on the rubber-room door for all time.

Lock her up. Lock him up. Lock ’em ALL up, the whole kit and kaboodle.

Update!Anyone can see what’s going on here.

Let’s bear in mind that this IG report doesn’t even get started on the Robert Mueller investigation, which we now know is the fruit of a poisonous tree planted by Clinton partisans at FBI as they believed their candidate would win. That report will come later, and it is exceptionally likely to deliver a lot worse to the Deep State gang.

All of this is very bad. The American people, who probably haven’t followed this the way they did the Watergate investigation simply because of the diversity of media coverage available today compared to the mid-1970s, still get it — the in-crowd in Washington didn’t want Trump to win and were willing to break the law and screw the Constitution in order to make Clinton president and yet were too pathetically incompetent to make that happen despite all of the resources of the federal government at their disposal. That’s reflected in polling which indicates the folks are less and less impressed with the Mueller investigation — which is the bastard child of the FBI’s 2016 bias.

This is a hopeful thing, at the end of the day. It suggests we are not slaves to our supposed masters in Washington and can still beat them when push comes to shove.

If the American people haven’t followed this the way they did Watergate, I submit that it’s due not to “diversity of media coverage” but to a near-total lack of faith or trust in the federal government: the growing awareness that every one of the rotten bastards, elected or appointed, is corrupt to the bone, and hopelessly incompetent into the bargain. But this is a hopeful thing in its own way, since it happens to be the simple truth—with more supporting evidence being unearthed every day. It’s another reason why we chose an outsider instead of just another professional politician, in fact.

Share

We cannot spare this man

Devin Nunes, bless his heart, battles on against the swarm of Deep State vermin.

House Intel Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) was flabbergasted to find that the Strzok-Page text messages released with the IG report were redacted. He called it a “classic case of obstruction” from Congress. On the Thursday edition of FOX News’ Ingraham Angle, Nunes promised the committee is “going to get all of the documents” and the question will become, “Who is going to get busted? Who’s going to jail?”

The IG report was a whitewash, which is the only result one could expect when a Mordor on the Potomac bureaucracy as profoundly and irretrievably corrupt as the FBI/DOJ is allowed to “investigate” itself. Nunes knows all this.

“I mean, this is a classic case of obstruction, but then, the question is, who’s going to go investigate these guys?” he added.

“I want to read, to you, an exchange between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, the star-crossed lovers. She basically said, you know, she was worried (ph) he’s — Donald Trump’s not going to get elected, right, right. And he answers, basically, don’t worry, we’ll stop it. No, no, no, no, we’ll stop it,” host Laura Ingraham said to the Congressman.

“He was the lead investigator on the Clinton e-mail case,” Nunes responded. “He’s the lead investigator that starts off the counter intelligence investigation, using our intelligence agencies to go after and target the Trump campaign. This is the guy who leads that off, but worse than all that, worse than all that, and I just want to repeat what I said, in the opening.”

“Why wasn’t that given to Congress? Why did I find out about that, today, at noon?” Nunes asked.

Oh, I think we can all figure that one out easily enough.

Nunes said he doesn’t know how the Mueller investigation can “end up fairly” after at least five people have already been kicked off the team and Clinton donors make up the “rest.”

It can’t. It was never intended to. That wasn’t its purpose.

“So if there’s five people who’ve been kicked off the campaign, I mean off the Mueller team, how is it possible that – if you look at the rest of the people that are there, I mean they were all Clinton donors. So – I – you know, I don’t know how this is – this is going to end up fairly. I don’t know where this is going,” he said.

It’s either going to fizzle out eventually with a shrug and a “meh,” followed by a very loud silence, or it’s going to lead to an upheaval so violent—yes, perhaps literally—that it will shake the very foundations of our metastized, malignant cancer of a national government.

Share

It isn’t paranoia if they’re really out to get you

Another set of eyes opened.

I used to be a doubter who would cringe, just a little, at any mention of “the deep state.” I admit it, it all seemed a little far-fetched to me that there was this cabal of careerists conspiring from within the government to harm President Donald Trump when I first heard it. I never doubted there were individuals doing it, but a wide net of conspirators seemed like something out of a bad movie more than anything that could actually happen in the United States. I was wrong, very wrong, the deep state is real. But there is much more than just this small group of powerful people working toward a common goal, there is an entire infrastructure created by the left not only to destroy Trump, but to indoctrinate unsuspecting Americans into their agenda.

As the curtain is pulled back on the Obama administration’s unprecedented efforts to spy on the Trump campaign, there is a good possibility many of the perpetrators could face criminal charges, or at least should. But it’s important to understand that liberals didn’t just create this out of the blue in 2016, it’s the culmination of everything they’ve worked toward for decades. 

As it stands, liberals have that infrastructure in place, they had that support system ready to go. And, not to get all Scooby-Doo on you, they would’ve gotten away with it were it not for the existence of conservative media.

Which, of course, is why they worked so hard and so long trying to get Net Neutrality and the “Fairness” Doctrine passed. Welcome to the party, pal.

Share

Out of control, out of sanction, out of reach

Hey, anybody remember when Trump’s assertion that the FBI was running spy ops against his campaign was totally absurd, a laughable bit of near-clinical paranoia?

Nah, me neither.

The big story today, and it’s a biggie yet it really comes as no surprise (which is both big and tragic) is the report that leakers to Slim’s Slimes (the NY Times for you rookie morons [new readers]) are confirming that the FBI essentially ran a completely illegal spy operation against the Trump presidential campaign. There were no warrants, there was no judge. The FBI at its highest levels went out and spied on a US presidential candidate for the purposes of gathering information that could be used to either sabotage his campaign or to take him out, politically or by prosecution in court. I suppose the question is did Obama and Clinton know of, authorize, approve of or even plan and initiate this or did we (and still do) have a group of “little Eichmanns” committing crimes all on their own merely because they were fellow travelers?

Oh, I think we all know the answer to that one well enough.

And all things considered, is that even an important question to ask anymore considering the nature of these revelations which, frankly, we all have suspected for quite a long time now? Fact: We have a bureaucracy that lords over us no matter who we elect. Fact: we have a rogue judiciary that mostly exists to violate the Constitution in order to move the country ever leftwards. Fact: we have one political party that is hell bent on overthrowing the nation as founded and another whom we elect in the futile hopes they will oppose it, yet do the exact opposite of what they promise and what we elect them for. Read the links about Paul Ryan and DACA and the GOP and Net Neutrality.

Every damn day I get up to put this post together and every damn day it seems as if it’s f**king Groundhog Day all over again (sorry, Yogi). Sigh. I guess we’re just in the middle of it all and we won’t really be able to assess the meaning of all of this for at least 10 years. This much I do know; what cannot go on – and surely, what is happening in DC and in the courts and the impunity of Obama, the Clintons, Brennan, Mueller and all the rest – ultimately will not go on.

Ahh, but there’s the rub: why exactly can’t it go on? It’s been going on for years and years already—decades, in truth. What we’re talking about here is not just a couple or three rogue agencies; we have a rogue government. And the only way this is going to stop “going on” is if We the People rise up and stop it.

Share

Ford forever! And Kingsford, too

I saw a mention of this on one of the weekend morning shows, and was intrigued enough by it to research it a bit further.

Ford Motor Company sold more than one million Ford Model Ts in 1919, and each of those Model Ts used 100 board feet of wood for the parts such as frame, dashboard, steering wheels and wheels. Because of the amount of wood that had to be used in the cars, Henry Ford decided he wanted to produce his own supply. He enlisted the help of Edward G. Kingsford, a real estate agent in Michigan, to find him a supply of wood. Coincidentally, Kingsford’s wife was a cousin of Ford – making the partnership a reality. In the early 1920s, Ford acquired large timberland in Iron Mountain, Michigan, and built a sawmill and parts plant in a neighboring area (which became Kingsford, Michigan). The mill and plants produced sufficient parts for the car but generated waste such as stumps, branches and sawdust. Ford suggested that all wood scraps were to be processed into charcoal.

A University of Oregon chemist, Orin Stafford, had invented a method for making pillow-shaped lumps of fuel from sawdust and mill waste combined with tar and bound together with cornstarch. He called the lumps “charcoal briquettes.” Thomas Edison designed the briquette factory next to the sawmill, and Kingsford ran it. It was a model of efficiency, producing 610 lb (280 kg) of briquettes for every ton of scrap wood. The product was sold only through Ford dealerships. Ford then named the new business Ford Charcoal and changed the name of the charcoal blocks to “briquets”. At the beginning, the charcoal was sold to meat and fish smokehouses, but supply exceeded demand.

By the mid-1930s, Ford was marketing “Picnic Kits” containing charcoal and portable grills directly from Ford dealerships, capitalizing on the link between motoring and outdoor adventure that his own Vagabond travels popularized. “Enjoy a modern picnic,” the package suggested. “Sizzling broiled meats, steaming coffee, toasted sandwiches.” It wasn’t until after World War II that backyard barbecuing took off, thanks to suburban migration, the invention of the Weber grill and the marketing efforts. An investment group bought Ford Charcoal in 1951 and renamed it to Kingsford Charcoal in honor of Edward G. Kingsford (and the factory’s home-base name) and took over the operations. The plant was later acquired by Clorox in 1973.

How cool is that, huh? The story of Kinsgord charcoal isn’t merely “an American story,” as their website proclaims. It’s the bone and sinew of Americana itself, from start to finish; the history of American gun and bicycle (yes, bicycle!) manufacturing are very like to it, among others. Maybe I can find time to cover that here one of these days.

Funny, too, how sour old Henry always seemed to find a way to make his famous parsimony pay off somehow—and if he couldn’t find a way, he’d manufacture one himself. For a grouchy, greedy Capitalist Pig Industrialist, he was a damned creative fellow, full of unconventional ideas he wasn’t the least bit timid about pursuing.

Oh, and if you aren’t watching The Henry Ford’s Innovation Nation on Saturdays (no, that ain’t where I saw the Kingsford story, or I don’t think it was anyway), you’re missing something good. And no, I ain’t just referring to the truly luscious and personable Alie Ward either, you lecherous toads.

Share

Drop dead

McStain slams Palin.

As death flutters around the back-yard deck of Senator John McCain, it’s sad to read reports that the scrappy Sandcutter regrets picking Governor Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate and wishes he had instead picked Senator Jos. Lieberman. The only person diminished by this kind of talk is Senator McCain himself, and the heroic Arizonan deserves better.

Heroic? Like hell. Back to that in a moment.

At rallies all across red state America, Mrs. Palin outdrew the leader of the ticket by a factor five to one. Her own error was undercutting her populist message with a divisive démarche about “real Americans.” The tragedy is that pro-growth, inclusive, capitalism was waiting for both of them to embrace. Mrs. Palin understands it better than many in the GOP, including Mr. McCain.

This became increasingly evident after the Republican defeat. Mrs. Palin understood energy better than any leading Republican. She was the only Republican prepared to reach out to organized labor (she herself, like Ronald Reagan, had once carried a union card). Most importantly, by our lights, Mrs. Palin was the first Republican to breach for monetary reform.

Mrs. Palin showed character in reacting to the reports of Mr. McCain’s regrets. She said the reports felt like “a perpetual gut punch.” And of the senator’s complaint, she said: “That’s not what Sen. McCain has told me all these years.” So far as we can tell, she’s never said an ill-word about the man who lifted her to glory, however fleeting. She’s always called Mr. McCain the hero that he is.

“Lifted her to glory,” is it? The only time—the ONLY time—McCain led in the 2008 polls was in the wake of choosing Palin as his running mate:

In the general election, facing Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, McCain was trailing during most of the season, only gaining a lead in national polls for a period after the Palin announcement and the 2008 Republican National Convention.

After announcing Palin as the presumptive vice-presidential nominee, the McCain campaign received US$7 million in contributions in a single day. According to a Washington Post/ABC News survey published on September 9, 2008, he had gained huge support among white women voters since the announcement; he had not only surpassed Obama in white women voters, but also amassed a lead of five percentage points in the Gallup polls. John Zogby found that the effects of Palin’s selection were helping the McCain ticket since “She has high favorability numbers, and has unified the Republican Party.”

Who was lifting whom again, now? McCain lost the election not because of Palin, but because of McCain. His mushy-moderate positions; his legendary treachery, arrogance, and viciousness; his failure to recognize that decades of sucking up to the liberal media would never buy the “Maverick” a thing from them when running against any Democrat Socialist, much less Obama; most of all, his ill-advised blunder in “suspending” his campaign to deal legislatively with the “financial crisis.”

As for his “hero” status—well, sorry, but I ain’t quite buying that one either.

You may like heroes who weren’t shot down, but that doesn’t make them traitors or torture “songbirds.” In the case of John McCain, this particular myth is long-since debunked. When McCain was running for president, a group opposed to him sent out a flyer with this exact charge. They called him a “Hanoi Hilton songbird.” Far from accurate, McCain was not only uncooperative, he endured great pain and hardship on behalf of his country and his fellow prisoners, resulting in injuries that have lasted a lifetime.

Indeed he did endure great pain and hardship…and then, by his own admission, he broke.

Sen. McCAIN: I wrote a confession. I was guilty of war crimes against the Vietnamese people. I intentionally bombed women and children.
WALLACE: And you did it because you were being tortured and you’d reached the end of the line?
Sen. McCAIN: Yes. But I should have gone further. I should have — I never believed that I would — that I would break, and I did.

For the earlier part of his military career, Juanny Mav did arguably serve honorably, if not ably: he was a lousy pilot whose negligent hotdogging caused two crashes (which he lied about afterwards), followed by the more notorious aboard-ship incident for which he was never officially blamed. On the other hand, in the incident for which he won the DFC and in which he was shot down, he showed great courage and determination.

But we still have the small matter of treason before us, which Bill states flatly:

Guess what? There is no “torture exception” to the definition of treason, among which is “giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war.”

McCain is a traitor, no matter what Ed Driscoll or the cuck foofs at PJM may think about it.

I’m quite sure I would have behaved much more shamefully under torture than McCain did; it’s surely to his credit that he stood up for as long as he did. But in the end, the matter of treason is pretty cut and dried, and I don’t see any way for McCain to wiggle out from under it. As such, to hail him as a “hero” is a bit much; to wax indignant over the “myth” while using that falsehood to take a gratuitous jab at Trump’s admittedly rude statement is downright indefensible.

John McCain is a right bastard who has betrayed his country, his party, his supposed “conservative” principles, and now his former running mate. His last-ditch slap at her is pure vintage McStain: self-serving, bilious, cruel, and dishonest. Whatever he may or may not have once been, he is a professional politician now—a hack, the original RINO, a backstabbing son of a bitch undeserving of either trust or high regard. Back to the NYSun article for another look at Palin’s characteristically classy last word:

So far as we can tell, she’s never said an ill-word about the man who lifted her to glory, however fleeting. She’s always called Mr. McCain the hero that he is.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

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