Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

“No big deal. They’re just stealing an election right in front of our faces”

And brazenly laughing up their sleeves at us while they do it, too. But why not? They know they won’t be called to account.

It appears that recounts will be ordered in three Florida races: governor, Senate, and agriculture commissioner. All are currently within the margin that triggers a recount. But that’s all up in the air right now because the notoriously incompetent Broward County Board of Elections keeps “finding” new votes to count. That would be fine if elections supervisor Brenda Snipes were following the laws requiring transparency in the process, but she’s not. The ballot canvassing process, which is by law subject to public scrutiny, is clothed in secrecy as Snipes refuses to obey laws requiring her to permit observers through every step of the process. Not only that, but Snipes is making no attempt to even give the appearance that the ballot tabulating process is above board. That’s why Governor Rick Scott, who is running to unseat Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson, filed a pair of lawsuits alleging that Broward County is violating election laws. (Scott also filed a lawsuit against the Palm Beach County elections board alleging that replacement ballots were improperly created.)

“Late Tuesday night, our win was projected to be around 57,000 votes,” Scott explained to reporters. “By Wednesday morning, that lead dropped to 38,000. By Wednesday evening, it was around 30,000. This morning, it was around 21,000. Now, it is 15,000.”

According to Scott, “On election night, Broward County said there were 634,000 votes cast. At 1 a.m. today, there were 695,700 ballots cast on Election Day. At 2:30 p.m. today, the number was up to 707,223 ballots cast on Election Day. And we just learned that the number has increased to 712,840 ballots cast on Election Day. In Palm Beach County, there are 15,000 new votes found since election night.”

How is it that election officials keep “finding” new votes that, oh, by the way, help the Democratic candidates? That’s a question election officials are refusing to answer.

As I said earlier, it’s a question nobody even needs to bother asking. The answer is blindingly obvious.

This is not the first time that Snipes’ competence and judgment have been called into question. In 2016 she was caught destroying ballots during Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s primary race. A federal judge in May ruled that Snipes broke both state and federal elections laws.

And then did nothing.

At the time, Gov. Scott vowed that during the midterms, “the Department of State will send a Florida elections expert from the Division of Elections to Supervisor Snipes’ office to ensure that all laws are followed so the citizens of Broward County can have the efficient, properly run election they deserve.”

And then did nothing. Also: “competence and judgment”? This is nothing to do with either one; it’s pure malevolence and corruption. This bitch shouldn’t be fired—she should be in prison.

That Scott allowed Snipes to continue as supervisor may prove his undoing as she continues to “find” votes for Nelson. She should have been canned at the first sign of malfeasance, so why didn’t Scott get rid of her? Some say it’s because her firing would have inflamed racial tensions and resulted in mass protests in the contentious county. At any rate, she’s now in the position of essentially determining Scott’s political future.

It’s no more than he deserves, for cravenly tiptoeing around this slovenly whore’s audacious criminal behavior due to fear of provoking controversy over an irrelevant issue.

Tell me again about “the sanctity of our elections,” about American “democracy” being the envy of the world, whydon’tcha. This is 100-proof, straight-up banana-republic stuff here, folks, the pure, the blushful hippocrene itself of fraud and corruption. And the Democrat-Socialist criminal conspiracy has been doing it—not just in Flore-duh but right across the nation—for decades. And getting away with it.

Because we did nothing.

Share

Nobody ever won by losing

Spinning Tuesday’s defeat by claiming that the restoration of the Democrat Socialist Insane Left to power, as some on our side are now doing, is somehow…well, if not a victory exactly, at least kind of a good thing?

Really? REALLY?

Sorry, guys, not seeing it here. Okay, I understand that keeping your chin up and trying to find the silver lining (if any) is generally a good and honorable thing. I get that, I really do. I even respect it; maintaining one’s dignity in the face of adversity and not whining like a little bitch—or a defeated Democrat Socialist—is also a good policy to follow, no matter what.

But let’s not kid ourselves here either: the loss of the House, along with seven governorships, is a serious blow. It’s going to cost the nation heavily, make no mistake. And gaining a couple or three in the Senate is pitiful compensation, although admittedly not nothing either.

The phrase I’m not seeing many of the sunny-side-up folks using is: lame duck. Like it or not, that’s what President Trump now is. He was always embattled, right from the very start. Now he’s hemmed in on all sides, in a seriously tough spot, way worse than before, with his room to maneuver greatly lessened. There will certainly be no second round of pump-priming tax cuts now; the gains made in restoring manufacturing and loosening the regulatory state’s stranglehold on the American economy can easily be undone by a House eager to cut off growth and prosperity. Yes, there are limits on the damage the Democrat Socialist House can do right enough. The Senate will have to go along with most of it, and there’s always the Presidential veto power too.

Trump better be prepared to use it, because he’s going to need to, and often—very likely more than any previous President ever has, in fact—if he wants to keep his nascent economic recovery humming and thrumming along.

Which, if there IS a bright side to this debacle, that’s it: Trump remains a cantankerous sort, a real fighter who relishes a down and dirty brawl, and excels at coming out on top even when facing truly daunting odds. For all the NeverTrumpTard harrumphing about his supposed lack of character, whatever hope remains is riding exclusively on that character now. He’s already showing his mettle, bless his heart. Example One: booting Jeff Sessions’ worthless ass. Example Two, even more delicious: booting Jim Acosta’s worthless ass, too.

The White House suspended press access for Jim Acosta on Wednesday after the CNN reporter had a tense exchange with President Trump during a press conference.

Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement that the administration will “never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman” — referring to a tussle for the microphone between Acosta and a White House intern.

“This conduct is absolutely unacceptable,” Sanders said in a statement.

“The fact that CNN is proud of the way their employee behaved is not only disgusting, it‘s an example of their outrageous disregard for everyone, including young women, who work in this Administration.”

Michael Goodwin has the right of it:

The conduct of a handful of so-called reporters during President Trump’s news conference was disgraceful beyond measure. This is not journalism, this is narcissism.

Actually, it’s a good bit worse than just narcissism, and it’s typical of a lot more than any “handful” of them too. I said long ago that Trump ought to toss the lot of the DC Enemedia out and simply refuse to grant them any access at all except under terms and conditions he sets, subject to revocation of even that should they put on another outrageous show of overt partisanship and disrespect like they did yesterday.

But it’s the reason behind their despicable conduct that’s the real problem here: they smell blood in the water after Tuesday’s disaster, just as Pelosi, Waters, Nadler, and the rest of the Leftard freak show do. If the Sunshine Boys on the nominal Right don’t know a defeat when they see one, the Democrat Socialist sharks surely do.

Hey, anybody remember when the Democrat Socialists were going to be taught a hard but vital lesson over the overturning of the fundamental principle of “innocent until proven guilty,” their contempt for decorum, responsible adult behavior, and the rule of law itself in the attempted lynching of Kavanaugh? Remember when that whole shitshow apparently “backfired” on them, and there would surely be a price paid for their despicable skullduggery, their brazen and intentional reduction of the Senate’s advise-and-consent function to a grotesque circus?

Guess not. But at least we know what we can expect to be standard procedure from now on, don’t we?

There’s another be-of-good-cheer argument being made here and there that I don’t quite get either, which basically goes like this: the Democrat Socialists won’t be able to help themselves and will overreach with unceasing investigations, subpoenas, and general harrassment of Trump. Simultaneously Waters, Pelosi, Schumer et al will be either unable or uninterested in restraining the lunacy of their foaming-at-the-mouth base, whose violence, confrontational sexual depravity, and overt hatred for this country, its mainstream citizens, and everything they and it represent will be exposed to Normals. The renewed push for eternal Democrat-Socialist wish-list items like open borders, gun control, tax hikes, and such, along with the rest of it, will combine to repel Real Americans. Thereby Trump’s re-election and the retaking of the House will be guaranteed.

To which I have to ask: normal Americans haven’t seen enough of that already? The Left was being subtle about it up until now? There was some way Normals could possibly have missed it, that they didn’t know? Maybe they pulled the lever for America’s version of the Raving Monster Loony Party by mistake or something? How much more of a demonstration can they possibly NEED?

Sorry guys, can’t see it. The American voter knew all of it full well, and enough of them went for the reprobates, grifters, liars, and freaks anyway to give them a win they in no way deserved—a meaningful win, not a trifling or insignificant one—one that’s going to have grave repercussions for this nation no matter how hard we try to plaster it over with smiley face stickers and feeble rationalization.

Comparisons with previous midterms, too, might be soothing to some. But that very idea is what frustrates me maybe more than anything: with Trump’s election and stunning success, it seemed that a long-overdue awakening had occurred among enough of us to solidify a new political reality for the longer term. The old paradigms had been overturned, a brand-new day had dawned at last. Finally, the monumental task of upending the malificent Deep State and repairing the destruction it had wrought could begin. With the Left’s maleficence fully exposed, there would be no turning back to the Old Order, no further need for indulgence of its deceits.

Alas, it seems plain now that those were hopeful assumptions on my part, at best premature if not outright baseless. I’m forced to reluctantly resume my longstanding previous position: that, a moment’s reprieve notwithstanding, what we’re engaged in here is still a rear-guard action, a fighting retreat, and not a bold, against-the-odds offensive. America That Was is still in the rearview, and looks further away than ever. Which isn’t to say that rear-guard actions aren’t worth the effort, or that there’s no honor in fighting them. No opportunity to unexpectedly whirl on the enemy and bloody his nose should be passed up; defiance of a hateful, contemptible foe is worthwhile for its own sake, the eventual outcome be damned. But we probably shouldn’t deceive ourselves into thinking it’s any more than it really is.

No, of course it ain’t the end of the world. We’re all fortunate enough to live in a country stable and prosperous enough that half of us can ignore politics entirely and get along just fine without engaging politically in any way. As they say, there’s a lot of ruin in a nation, and this one way more than the average.

Still, there’s no way around it: this past Tuesday, Americans had a chance to vote in favor of reinforcing and expanding a nascent national restoration. Too many of us chose to revert to decline and futility instead. And so now we get to put up with this shit again:




Sorry for the gloom and all, gang, but I just can’t find anything whatsoever to like about that.

Update! The solution, you ask? Ultimately, there ain’t but one: eliminating the Left’s iron grip on the American education system. As has been said here many times, all our problems begin there; the Left would never have been able to glom the power it has without the success of their Long March Through The Institutions. How the hell we’ll do it I’m sure I don’t know. But we’d better find a way, and fast.

Share

Degenerates gotta degenerate

Part of a long, LONG list.

Ashley Judd ranting about her menstrual period and Madonna offering promises of oral sex if one voted for Hillary are words. Unfortunately, there is this disturbing trend of late on the Left where words are being replaced by actions.

Take the case of Micah Rhodes, a protest leader in Portland, Oregon. He and his group of protesters have been responsible for blocking traffic and just being general a-holes in their attempt to show their displeasure with Trump. He was recently arrested during a protest, but his court appearance was a charge of pedophilia. He faces four counts of second-degree sexual abuse. Apparently Mr. Rhodes met underage victims on a site called Grindr, were aware they were underage, yet sodomized them anyway. In fact, Rhodes had, as a juvenile, also engaged in such activity and was charged and supposedly under supervision.

There is a strange pattern here. It would seem strange when a feminist march in Washington is co-chaired by a Muslim woman- a religion that is not feminist and is homophobic. Liberals and Muslims seem like strange allies, but not if viewed in the light of making degeneracy normal. One could make a case that depraved perverts have hijacked the Left’s decadence for their own particular peculiar perversions.

But then again, the Left and degeneracy seem to go hand-in-hand. There are certainly historical antecedents. In the 1920’s, German intellectuals justified the rampant prostitution in Berlin where children were sometimes sold into revolting sex acts. Thirty to 40 years later you had the bearded Allen Ginsberg and other beatniks coming out as little boy lovers. Ginsberg even joined NAMBLA.  Michel Foucalt, Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir, three French intellectuals on the Left, wanted the age of consent in France lowered to 13.

From the decadence of Berlin in the 1920’s to the sex trafficking by black activists today, the one common thread is duplicity.  Proponents of justice, they ignore “justice” when it does not suit their narrative. The reason is simple: they do not care about justice. They do care about their own self-gratification. If society has to be burnt to the ground to satisfy the burning in their loins, so be it.

They are not at war for justice. They are at war against normalcy.

Well, yeah. In the larger picture, it’s all part of the Left’s bratty, juvenile self-absorption. While we’re on the topic of degenerates, here are few sets of said burning loins:



Oog. I just threw up in my mouth a little here. As I said the other day: can’t somebody find a way to make these unappetizing, lumpy road apples keep their damned clothes on? Ace suffers a slightly more severe reaction than mine:

Twitchy reports that an outlet called Seven Days wrote:

Unhappy with the direction of the country, the women of varied shapes, sizes, ages and backgrounds bared it all for an intimate, empowering photo session in Burlington, said organizer Dawn Robertson.

“How can we inspire women to vote after the Kavanaugh confirmation, the #MeToo movement and Trump?” said Robertson, a Harvard Law-educated attorney who writes about sexuality and relationships. “It’s a culmination of all those factors.”

Well you’ve inspired me into homosexuality so, halfway to Democrat I guess!

I have to admit that, considering all of the above, emulating the “transgender” freakazoids by chopping off my dick looks one hell of a lot more appealing all of a sudden.

Share

Look away, Dixie lamb

Is there NO WAY to convince these repulsive, blubberous, eye-tearing, saggy skanks to keep their fucking clothes on? Why must they inflict their wrinkled, baggy asses and wilted udders on all and sundry whenever they think they have some “important” statement to make? Don’t they realize that A) we don’t give a shit about their juvenile political opinions, and B) stripping off is the surest way I can think of to guarantee that any normal American, of whatever sexual proclivity, will be driven to unswerving hostility towards said opinions by even a brief glimpse of them in the buff? Heartiste says:

From Garth V., a pithy bit of insight revealing the shared motivation of ugly shitlib broads accosting people with their ugliness and totalitarian marxists forcing subjects to swallow their propaganda,

They get off on making you repeat their big lies. The more obviously false the lie is, the more you debase yourself in repeating it. When you instead affirm the truth, you’re letting them know that you will not be their slave.

The lie here is, “These are strong, empowered women. Beauty comes in all shapes and sizes.” The Fuggernaut wants us to abide this Big Lie, and in so abiding we debase ourselves. We bring ourselves down to their level.

I say no to that.

I say HELL NO to it. All of it.

Yes, in case you might have been wondering, it does in fact appear that the last in the highly-emetic series of obscene manatees has a dick. As for that “beauty comes in all shapes and sizes” twaddle, I dispensed with that nonsense years ago:

Hey, here’s a revolutionary idea: how about we just own up to a few basic facts at long last? Beauty is what it is — an ideal, something to admire and aspire to — precisely because everybody doesn’t have it. in fact, most of us don’t; if it wasn’t rare, it wouldn’t actually be “beauty” — it would be “ordinary” or “common” or “plain.” I suppose that’s in reality why politically-correct nanny-state ninnies have such a hard time dealing with it: first, their politics-as-religion ideology requires that they cobble together a position paper and a bureaucracy to maintain control over every aspect of life, including ones that are patently outside of mortal jurisdiction — see Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly “the weather”) for further examples; and second, it sort of upends their “all must be equal in a grey drone world” agenda.

Human physical beauty is a peacock-feathered rebuke to the idea that underneath the drab, one-size-fits-all tunic liberalism would force over our heads, we’re ever going to be anything like equal, no matter how hard statists try to reshape reality.

I also included a pic with that post that I promise you you’ll like WAY better than any of the ones Heartiste ran.

No, everybody is NOT beautiful, in their own way or otherwise, no matter how many silly-assed 70s pop songs mught claim otherwise. And what’s beautiful to one person ain’t necessarily so to another. That’s the, uhh, beauty of it, see. Different societies have different standards for beauty, and even within societies there’s plenty of room for, shall we say, a wide range of opinion between individuals. You’d think, given the libtard obssession with “diversity,” that they’d get that easily enough, and maybe even be enthusiastic about it. After all, that wide range of opinion between and within disparate cultures is the very meaning of the damned word.

And yet.

Thanks a pantload to CA, the heartless bastard, for pointing us all to this horror, even going so far as to repost one of the pics himself. I suppose it IS appropriate in at least one way, it being so close to Halloween and all.

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

“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

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

Drop dead

Robert administers some due and proper Last Rites.

John McCain venerated the state, of which he was a product. His grandfather and father were admirals in the navy. He was a graduate of the Naval Academy and spent his entire career working for the government. His philosophy was consistent: there are no constraints on the state. As was his ambition: the accretion of state and personal power. Championing government both at home and abroad, he achieved bipartisan splendor.

He never met a US war, actual or prospective, he didn’t love. (Although he sort of admitted after the fact that Iraq might have been a mistake, and he came out against torture.) His was the deciding vote against repealing Obamacare. That put him at the Olympian summit of uniparty bipartisanship: the indefatigable champion of the warfare state, the welfare state, the surveillance state, and anything else the state might want to do.

That is why the flags flew at half-mast, his body lay in state in the US Capitol, Democrats and Republicans issued gushing commemoratives, and the mainstream media flowed with his praises. Powerful people’s florid eulogies were the verbal equivalent of the military’s twenty-one gun salute. McCain was the exemplar of the uniparty’s only consistent principle: the expansion of government and its power.

Which would go a long way towards explaining this tripe:



Actually, with the Uniparty now fighting Trump The Disrupter tooth, fang, and claw, it is EXACTLY how Washington still is now, how it has been for a long time. “Used to be” just flat isn’t so, and if it’s ever forced to progress to “no longer” it won’t be cause for lamentation except among Uniparty asswarts like McCain and Co; the Deep State malefactors they enable and protect; and the media spirit squad that cheers them on. To wit:

Now they’ve laid John’s body down, sad old men and women who run this town. Their sadness was feigned. One of the treasures exchanged for power is the capacity for honest and wholesome emotion. It’s all unbounded ambition, bloodless calculation, and reflexive insincerity. The “sad” is from the perspective of the wise and ethical. Many of the “mourners” are so warped, so corrupt, and so beyond redemption that they evoke profound despair among those who see them for what they are.

The “old” is real. The powers that be look and talk old. Their philosophy is ancient, tottering like Hillary Clinton falling into her van. For centuries, beneath the religious and patriotic dross, might wielded by central authority has made right. That philosophy and its adherents won’t go without an epic tantrum befitting the late McCain, but forces of decentralization beyond their control have been unleashed. The order they worship is Rome’s unaffordable, unmaintainable subjugation of its empire, undone by barbarians outside the gates and corruption within.

The future belongs to chaos as the unsustainable old order collapses. Someday an entirely different order and ethic, based on decentralized liberty, may prevail…somewhere.

This weekend John McCain has been laid to rest. Not, unfortunately, what he represents…but that will follow soon enough.

Unfortunately, they aren’t all old, and therefore won’t die soon enough. Or not naturally, anyway; they’ll have to be helped along somehow.

Update! Related? Oh, you just bet your ass it is.

The Senate adjourned this week amid self-administered backslaps for “working hard during August” (they worked a grand total of 6.5 days) and donning self-congratulatory laurels as they praised themselves for implementing “major Republican priorities.”

But for anyone paying attention, the Senate’s latest “work” session had all the characteristics of the 115th Congress: wildly exaggerated rhetoric, few actual results, a lot of excuses, and a stunning lack of urgency to accomplish anything they promised voters.

The duplicity of Senate Republicans is now a recurring theme. They claim to stand for something on the campaign trail, but then fail to support it when they get to Washington—instead hiding behind procedural excuses and “strategies” that are never intended to amount to anything.

In the case of Paul’s amendment, the Senate’s leadership claimed a vote would be counterproductive to their strategy of addressing the issue with the House in conference. Never mind that the House hasn’t even passed their Labor-HHS bill, or the fact that zero spending bills  have been conferenced successfully and sent to the president.

Moreover, the outcome of the spending process, as outlined above, will not be 12 individual bills enshrined in law. It will be yet another thousand-page, trillion-dollar December omnibus. But that painfully obvious fact didn’t stop the Senate’s leadership from trying to convince conservatives that the leadership’s palpably insincere strategy was actually meaningful.

This reflects the approach of Senate leadership to nearly everything that conservatives and Trump supporters care about. Obamacare? “Well, we tried,” is the response. Meanwhile, senior Senate Republicans keep trying to bail out the failing law.

Time and again, Senate leadership has given lip service to our priorities while trying their hardest not to work with the president to accomplish real change.

And no, Senate leaders are not engaged in some masterful sort of grand strategy on behalf of voters’ priorities. This is not tactical brilliance or a game of four-dimensional chess incomprehensible to mere mortals. There is not some year-end master stroke that is going to emerge from the leader’s office in December to solve all the Senate’s policy problems. This is exactly what it appears: political cowardice.

I maintain that it isn’t really cowardice; it’s deception, deflection, and skullduggery, stalling for time until Trump either knuckles under and gets with the standard DC business-as-usual program or is removed, by whatever means they can contrive.

Share

Chutzpah

My God, the BALLS on this woman.

On CNN Wednesday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was asked to comment on the heartbreaking case of Mollie Tibbetts, the Iowa teenager who was allegedly murdered by an illegal immigrant.

Rather than simply offer condolences to the Tibbetts family, Warren said they “have to remember” that it’s important for the country to focus on “real problems” like helping illegal immigrants. She then launched into a rote political diatribe lamenting the treatment of illegal aliens at the Mexican border.

Mollie Tibbetts has been separated from her mama forever because an illegal immigrant brutally murdered her. Unfortunately for Warren, there are no Democrat talking points to help her with that sad reality.

Yeah, sure, but how’s that going to help with beating us all over the head with the Democrat Socialist agenda?

Solway was right in the piece I excerpted below: they’re positively Luciferian. All they’re missing is the horns, tail, and cloven hooves. The sulfur stench they’ve definitely got covered, though; it wafts around freely every time they open their filthy yaps.

Update! Ace notes the Kermit Gosnell Strategy in full effect with the libmedia scum on this. Which in its turn brings us ’round to this: “And They Wonder Why We’re Angry.” If we weren’t, we’d be every bit as morally derelict, depraved, and despicable as they are.

Share

AT LAST: Russia-collusion/election-rigging smoking gun FOUND!

And it’s pointed directly at the head of the Grand Wizard of the Coup Cucks Clan himself.

In his online appeal for money after being fired this week, disgraced former FBI agent Peter Strzok credited an unlikely source to vouch for his victim status: The Weekly Standard.

At one time a leading conservative magazine, the Standard declared last month that Strzok’s plight was merely an “overwrought tale of bias” and the case against him is “just sound and fury.” The article brushed off Strzok’s actions as “several bad judgment calls” and blasted Congressional Republicans for continuing a criminal investigation into the now-unemployed G-man.

Strzok is following only 32 people on his newly-verified Twitter account. Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large of the Standard, is one of them.

So, what’s with the fanboying between the Standard—an allegedly serious publication dedicated to advancing conservative principles—and a corrupt government bureaucrat who embodies everything the conservative movement fought against for decades?

Julie Kelly has done some excellent journalistic work here—REAL journalism, not the kind we’re all too accustomed to. I’ll quote from it extensively here, because…because…well, because I just can’t help myself, dammit.

I found an article in the Standards archives this week that might explain why. On July 24, 2016, just days before Strzok helped launch a counterintelligence probe into the Trump campaign, Kristol gave Strzok and the Obama Justice Department a big assist from the anti-Trump Right by posting a flawed and questionably-sourced article. “Putin’s Party” is compelling evidence that Kristol and the Standard were far from mere sideline observers as the Trump-Russia collusion scam took shape in the summer of 2016.

At the very least, the timing of the article suggests there was careful coordination between the central players—including the Hillary Clinton campaign—and Bill Kristol to derail Trump’s candidacy just weeks before the election. But the article’s content also serves to raise alarming questions about the claims by many Republicans that “conservatives” had no knowledge of or involvement with the Christopher Steele dossier.

Kristol’s article hits on every single one of the Simpson-Steele talking points: Trump forced the GOP to water-down language on the Ukraine in the party’s platform (it didn’t happen); the Russians were behind Wikileaks’ release of the DNC’s hacked emails (unproven); Trump encouraged foreign powers to interfere in the election (he didn’t); and Trump would not honor U.S. commitments to NATO (an overblown assessment of Trump’s NATO criticism nearly all the Republican candidates made). He listed a handful of unknown Trump campaign associates who would soon become household names, including campaign manager Paul Manafort; national security advisor, Lt. General Michael Flynn; and foreign policy aide Carter Page. (Strzok and the FBI formally opened their investigation into the three men—and campaign aide George Papadopoulos—on July 31, 2016.)

The content of Kristol’s piece closely mirrored reporting by other news outlets at the same time. (Lee Smith wrote about how the Fusion-planted media echo chamber evolved before the election.) But despite the flimsiness of the accusations, Kristol took his advocacy a step further.

Did he ever. Which oughta be enough to send you off with a quickness to peruse the rest of it. Bottom line:

Unfortunately, there are still some conservatives who trust Kristol and the Standard fairly to report on the Trump presidency and Republican Congress. It’s important that the public fully understands what role Kristol and his publication played—and continue to play—in fueling the biggest political corruption scandal in American history.

Kristol asks a lot of questions on Twitter. It’s time for him to answer some now.

Meh, why bother? He’ll only lie about his key role in the most damning and damaging political scandal in American history. Hats off to Kelly anyway, for her truly great work in digging up this whole bait-shop’s worth of worms.

Share

End stage

PC eats itself.

Scarlett Johansson is the latest target of the social-justice warrior mob. The actress is being chastised for, well, acting.

She has been cast in a movie in which she will play someone different than herself. For this great crime — which seems to essentially define the career path she has chosen—she is being castigated for being insufficiently sensitive to the transgender community.

Johansson is set to play a transgender man in an upcoming film, “Rub and Tug,” a film based on the true story of transgender massage parlor owner Dante “Tex” Gill. The announcement quickly garnered a reaction.

Trace Lysette, a transgender actress who plays Shea on “Transparent” took to Twitter: “And not only do you play us and steal our narrative and our opportunity but you pat yourselves on the back with trophies and accolades for mimicking what we have lived… so twisted. I’m so done.”

A New York Times story on the fallout described the online backlash as being “led by transgender actors, who argued that such casting decisions take opportunities away from members of marginalized communities.”

I SO eagerly look forward to evenhanded enforcement of this New Rule: gay actors must not ever again portray straight characters from now on; the end of the modern trend of remaking classic movies and TV shows with black actors in place of the original white ones (like, say, the execrable Wild, Wild West remake with Will Smith); precious, twee “reimaginings” of Shakespeare with modern settings, costume, and alterations to the language of the Bard must also cease; in fact, in keeping with the original productions, no females should be allowed to act in any Shakespeare presentation at all.

This is similar to the longstanding liberal assertion that majority-black districts can only be fairly represented in Congress by black representatives, that majority-black cities must have black mayors, etc. Which is just hogwash.

In the bigger picture, what we’re witnessing now is political correctness—liberalism itself, actually—reaching its end stage and collapsing under the weight of its own juvenile unworkability. As it must; Leftist dogma contradicts itself eighteen times before lunch every day. It’s failed miserably each and every time it’s been tried—unless it’s propped up by a bigger, stronger outside influence, such as the USSR with its satellites, or Western Europe with the US—and it’s going to go right on doing that. It can’t do anything else.

And when the inevitability of the Left’s failure becomes undeniable, you get the kind of blue-on-blue backbiting we’re seeing now. It’s delightful to watch; as Insty is fond of saying, you’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh.

I gotta mention this part, too:

Editor’s note: This column was published by Business Insider before being removed from the website for violating “editorial standards.” The Daily Beast reported that staffers complained about the column. It appears here exactly as originally published.

Hats off to the Weekly Standard for rescuing the article from the BI’s cowardly attempt at burying it. BI’s editors prattle on in their explanation:

In an email to editors on Monday obtained by The Daily Beast, global editor-in-chief Nich Carlson announced that BI would create an internally available list of employees who had “volunteered to talk about culture and identity issues” to other staff. Further, Carlson also announced that “culturally sensitive columns, analysis, and opinion pieces” would now be reviewed by the company’s executive editors before publication.

“Editors should make sure we are not publishing shallow, ‘hot takes,’ but instead, fully thought-out arguments that reflect and respect the opposing view,” Carlson said. “There should be no partisan name-calling, e.g. ‘social justice warriors,’ ‘libtards,’ or ‘rednecks.’ Opinion and arguments should feel reported and researched, and not like quick reactions.”

Uh huh. I’m not familiar enough with them to know, but I can’t help but wonder if these guys ever employ the standard lib-prop maneuver of referring to every single conservative—be he ever so milquetoast—as “right-wing,” “extremist,” or “radical,” while any and every Leftist is a “moderate,” “centrist,” or “pragmatic”?

Pull the other one, guys, it plays a little tune.

Share

The science law is settled!

Susan Collins is an idiot.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Sen. Susan Collins, a key vote on President Donald Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court, said Sunday she would oppose any nominee she believed would overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

The White House is focusing on five to seven potential candidates to fill the vacancy of retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy, a swing vote on the court. The Maine senator said she would only back a judge who would show respect for settled law such as the 45-year-old Roe decision, which has long been anathema to conservatives.

“I would not support a nominee who demonstrated hostility to Roe v. Wade because that would mean to me that their judicial philosophy did not include a respect for established decisions, established law,” Collins said.

Oh, absolutely. Which is why Dred Scott, Plessy, and a whole slew of others are actually still in effect. Right, genius?

Such a judge, she said, “would not be acceptable to me because that would indicate an activist agenda.”

Yeah, that would surely be a dangerous thing all right. Why, next thing you know, such an “activist” judge might be creating rights never mentioned in the Constitution at all, just making stuff up to suit the passions of the day. Y’know, like…Roe V Wade.

As with Arizona and McCain, the people of Maine who keep sending this nimrod back to Congress again and again have one hell of a lot to answer for. Bill’s response is the only reasonable one.

Share

All too happy to oblige

Gonna need some brain bleach over here, stat!

Thursday’s The View started off with an astounding nearly 10-minute-long meltdown over Justice Kennedy’s retirement from the Supreme Court, and the second chance for President Trump to appoint a judge for the highest court of the land, during his first two years in office. Liberal Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar were the most upset about the news with Whoopi angrily attacking host Meghan McCain, Republicans and Christians for potentially challenging Roe v Wade.

It was then Whoopi’s turn to rage that abortion rights we’re going to be “taken away” from Republicans who “don’t care” about women’s rights:

I don’t like hearing, again, that I’m trying to take your rights away. I have to tell you, as a woman, I think you’re trying to take my rights away. Okay? You don’t care.

Well, you got that bit right, at least.

And as a person, who believes in the constitution which tells me that I have the right to be myself and do the things I want to do,

Pretty sure that bit ain’t in there, actually. But then, the constitution you claim to “love” and “believe in” bears no resemblance to the one the Founders established anyway. You shitlibs have practically made a full-time career out of finding things in there that ain’t, while denying or ignoring the things that are.

and I don’t have to listen to what your religion is, and I don’t have to listen to what you want it to be I have to make sure that as an American citizen, I’m doing the right stuff and taking care of business.

I don’t like this line that I, as a Democrat, or an independent or whatever is trying to take away anything from you.

Except my liberty, my right to self-determination, my 2A rights, my freedom of speech, my right to be left alone, my right to hold conservative views free from harassment and assault and to have them respected, my right to elect a president of my own choosing without having the election overturned, my right to dissent from Left orthodoxy without enduring your scorn and derision, and one hell of a lot of others—yeah, you don’t want to take away a damned thing, do ya?

I’m trying to hold onto my personal rights so that you can have the rights you want. See? Because if you take mine, I feel like you’re the one with the problem. If you take my right away from me, to judge what I do for my family and my body

“Family”? WHAT family? You killed it a-borning in an abortion mill.

I got a little problem with that. You got a problem. You don’t want people to take your guns?

Slight but crucial distinction here: it’s not so much that we “don’t want” you to take our guns; we AREN’T GOING TO ALLOW liberal fascists like you to take our guns. There’s a difference, see. Another difference: my right to own guns is actually, y’know, quite specifically and clearly enshrined in the Constitution, supported by every single damned word every one of the Founders ever uttered on the topic both before and after it was written. Your “right” to heartlessly murder innocent unborn children because you consider them an inconvenience…umm, well, isn’t.

Get out of my behind! Get out of my vagina! Get out!

And there it is. Whoopi, I absolutely, categorically assure you that there ain’t enough money and/or booze on this planet to induce me to be anywhere near your vagina at any time, for even a moment. Full stop, end of story.

An aside: please understand something here, folks. Speaking strictly for myself, I do NOT support a blanket ban on abortion, everywhere and in all circumstances, and I doubt I ever will. I have no idea how many of us out there DO, honestly. There are instances—regrettable, tragic ones to be sure—where abortion is necessary, the lesser of two evils. Threat to the life of the mother would be one; it happened to some close friends of mine, in fact, and was an awful, shattering thing for all involved. I myself would say that cases of rape or incest might be another; I just can’t see forcing someone to bear a child produced by such severe trauma and violation against her wishes, myself. But YMMV, and probably does.

What most of us are arguing for, and have been from the start, is the return of such decisions to their proper Constitutional realm: the states. The above-mentioned are deep, highly personal matters, of great consequence to those involved, and as such are best handled by those closest to the situation and immediately affected by it. Which is, y’know, the exact reason the Constitution says what it says, and does what it does. The Founders knew all this, and agreed with it, and did their level best to restrict the ability of an overlarge, meddlesome federal government to botch things up with one-size-fits-all edicts from Mordor On The Potomac, just as they in their prescient wisdom knew it would.

This is why Roe V Wade was such a self-evident, ass-backwards screwup. By manufacturing a nonexistent “right” to unfettered, limitless abortion-on-demand, Roe stood the Constitution on its head, magicking the foundational principles behind it into their exact opposite. The incredible irony here is that with their insistence on a phony “living Constitution,” liberals provided for the eventual destruction of its flimsy, written-in-quicksand “guarantees” and denied themselves the protection, fragile though it may sometimes be, provided by the real one. Their ignorant, underhanded dismissal of a literal interpretation of the Constitution weakened it, just as they intended. Their establishment of a grotesque federal Superstate in its stead made all of us vulnerable to tyranny in direct consequence.

UNEXPECTED!™

None of which—the Constitution, states’ rights, limited government, respect for the rights of the individual—is what Whoopsie and her ilk are arguing for, which is why they have to lie about our position on abortion and other issues the way they do. In the case at hand specifically, what they really demand is abortion as a means of post-facto contraception—often enough, to be paid for by the tax dollars of people who find abortion morally repugnant, which is itself yet another kettle of stinky, rotting fish. On the larger issues, they’d have been a lot better off to insist not on a boundless federal government empowered to rule at its own whim, but on the greater responsiveness, flexibility, and accountability of the one the Founders set up. It’s kind of remarkable they can’t see it, when you think about it.

Share

Free trade flimflam

It has never existed on this planet. And it never will.

Generally-speaking, the US has low to zero tariffs on darn near everyone — well, we did until recently. That’s changing, and it’s changing because other nations won’t drop their tariffs.

EU nations generally levy a 10% tariff on US cars. Ours is 2.5%. Explain to me why we should allow that, when the entirety of the EU is considered a first-world nation and needs no special protection.

Canada tariffs a wide variety of agricultural products, from dairy to beef. Some of the tariffs are outright confiscatory, including dairy at more than 200%. Please explain to me how this is “free trade” and why Canada should have zero (or near-zero) tariffs on steel they wish to export into the US — especially when some of it is being diverted from China to evade anti-dumping penalties we leveled against them.

If the G7 is about first-world nations doing business on equal footing, which is it’s claim to fame, then let’s insist that it be exactly that. Those who are unwilling to live up to the rules can get out or be kicked out, but it’s time to quit pussyfooting around and coddling jackasses who think America is their ATM machine to prop up whatever political fetish they have been afflicted with today, whether it be rapefugees or glo-bull-warming.

Know what actually makes free-traders, libertarian ideologues, libtards, and NeverTrump GOPe nitwits alike squeal in horror over this? The possibility that, after so many years of being the world’s whipping boy, America’s willingness to be taken advantage of via the free-trade/tariff grift might at last be coming to an end.

How they can think they’re going to somehow win more votes by being viscerally opposed to Trump’s insistence on putting America first—which is exactly what Karl is getting at in his last line above—is way beyond me.

Update! Schlichter slams the elitist scam.

I keep asking the establishment shills why America has some moral obligation to tolerate foreign countries imposing higher tariffs upon us than we impose upon them. Seems facially unfair, right? So, there’s got to be a really good reason because how can you support our working people facing a higher obstacle to trade than the foreigners do? I’m just wondering what’s wrong with a level playing field. Fair is fair, right? But I never get a good answer.

When your job gets shipped to Oaxaca so somebody who looks like Mitt Romney can import the products you used to make back into the USA, don’t look to the elite to care. Care? They’ll applaud.

They are seeking to ensure their own gravy train doesn’t get derailed. This is why they tell you, in between informing you how stupid you are, that there are only a few tariffs out there and they don’t matter. Well, they sure as heck don’t matter to these think tank jockeys and media scribblers. They are not the guys getting up at 4 a.m. to milk the cows or to harvest the soybeans the tariffs target. They’ve never worked on a vehicle assembly line in their lives, so what’s it matter to them if Germany’s tariff on US cars is four times ours to theirs? Of course, the tariffs on US products don’t matter to the elite. They aren’t the guys who lose their jobs when their company picks up and moves to Vietnam.

I don’t like tariffs. I’d tear them all down, everywhere, just like Trump proposed. But the elite isn’t for that. It’s only against tariffs we impose to retaliate for the tariffs the foreigners impose.

Pretty much, yeah. But as I said above and Kurt provides examples of, it ain’t just the tariffs they’re against here. It’s the oh-so-gauche notion of putting America first that really frosts their nuts.

Share

Desaparicido

Hey, remember when this sort of thing happened mainly in Third World commie dictatorships? Oh wait

The arrest of British free speech activist Tommy Robinson has sent shockwaves across the Anglosphere. The United Kingdom, once dedicated to the values of freedom, has taken a path toward authoritarian government and away from freedom. The once great nation, which created the Magna Carta and once commanded an empire, is now the land of tyranny. Unless the British people love their freedom enough and fight this injustice in fierce fashion, it will remain a land silenced by intimidation and fear.

Robinson, a former member of the English Defense League whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is being unfairly persecuted by the U.K. government.  Robinson’s “crime” was that he yelled questions outside Leeds Crown Court and named the alleged defendants, like any other reporter. So what? The state broadcaster, the BBC, and the mainstream media had already named them. Why was he arrested, and why were they not arrested?

If gangs of white men had spent decades torturing and raping little Muslim girls and a justly outraged Muslim reporter were covering the case, in a similar manner as Robinson, would he be arrested?

We all know that the answer is “no,” and we know why. The U.K. is so invested in its politically correct multiculturalism diversity project that it has applied a different treatment of Muslims under the law, which accepts the diversity of legal systems and places the country on a path toward ruin.

Americans should be highly concerned over this case, because the same type of “hate speech laws” used against British citizens are currently being advocated in the U.S. Senate, by Marco Rubio (R), Kamala Harris (D), Susan Collins (R), and Dianne Feinstein (D) and a long list of others. Hillary Clinton pushed the same laws in 2012 and 2015 and 2017. Three similar unconstitutional laws aimed at our First Amendment rights were advanced in our Congress, after being drafted by Emgage USA and the Muslim Public Affairs Council, two Islamic organizations and defenders of designated terrorist organizations and their supporters, according to the Investigative Project on Terrorism. The passage of any such anti-freedom of speech bill would place our country on Britain’s same ruinous path.

I only wish I could say I find any of that surprising. With just this one grotesque crime against liberty and decency, the Brits have moved themselves from “pitiable” right into the “despicable” column. There could not be a more revolting statement than the one the British government has just made with this outrage: that they much prefer tolerating and protecting Muslim child-rape gangs to safeguarding freedom of speech. But I can’t say I’m much surprised by that either; as noted, we have no shortage of Moonbat Lefties (and gutless RINO sellouts, sadly enough) right here in the States who feel the same way about it.

The very idea of “hate speech” laws is an abomination which of right ought to be intolerable in even a half-free country. Once-Great Britain is well and truly finished; it will soon begin to live up to its “Old Blighty” nickname in ways its benighted subjects never imagined. I don’t pity them; they deserve their ignoble fate, having earned it many times over. But there’s a small, guttering spark yet flickering in some of them:

In a land that once could proudly state, “The sun never sets on the British Empire,” the torch of freedom has been extinguished. It’s a land divided by diversity that has now descended into the darkness of tyranny.

If the globalists in both American parties and the U.S. State Department have their way, America will be next.

Tommy Robinson represents a large segment of Britain’s people, with over 500,000 signatures on a petition already to “Free Tommy.” The people sent a clear message on Saturday, May 26, 2018, that they have had enough, as thousands of British people stopped traffic, chanted, and pressed the gates of 10 Downing Street and threw bottles at machine gun-toting policemen. Their anger hung thick in the air, because they want Robinson, at the very least, to be released from prison and allowed to get back to his life and enjoy the same protection and human rights and dignity as Anjem Choudary, the terrorist-supporter, was afforded by the authorities. Short of this, the summer in Britain will turn out to be a season of riots and civil strife, awaiting the spark that moves the good and decent Brits – of a long ancestry dating to 1066 and William the Conqueror – to fight furiously to make their land free once more.

Well, possibly, I guess, and I wish those folks well. But I have little expectation of any such thing, and none at all that it might be successful. They can anticipate neither succor nor sympathy from these shores; we face a grim enough struggle ourselves, with victory by no means assured.

Share

When the personal is political

Another big backfire for the annoying harridans of the Left.

The press says Mr. Trump is pushing the battle of the national anthem because it plays to his base. I suppose it does. But here’s what galls even non-Trumpians about this kneeling kerfuffle: We live in a world soaking in partisan politics. Then one day you wake up ready to relax with NFL Sunday, and you discover that “The Star-Spangled Banner” has become totally politicized. Any normal person, including liberals who won’t admit it, would have a three-word reaction to this spectacle, and the first two words begin with “w” and “t.”

So what else is new? Today, if someone has a grievance or beef, first thing they do is look for something to attach it to—the anthem, the Pledge of Allegiance, 19th-century American fiction, Mom’s apple pie—anything that will draw the world’s attention, meaning the attention of the viral plague called social media.

I got an email this week from San Francisco flogging “Artists Get Political Ahead of Midterms.” How? By embedding political messages in everyday objects, such as bus kiosks, hand towels, bedspreads and toilets.

Then, even now, the people who voted for Hillary still claim to be shocked and stunned that an electorate beaten down by the politicization of everything in life voted for the guy who makes a mockery of all that.

They don’t get it. They never will. They’re so accustomed to people lying down and taking their abuse without demur, they really can’t get it. What they need to do is calm down, lighten up, and get a life like the rest of us. But they’re so obssessed with controlling us all, so convinced of their own righteousness and superiority, that they can’t do that either.

Share

Calling it by its name

The Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party.

As it happens, the leaders of the PBFP sat for a group portrait the other day. The occasion was the funeral of former First Lady Barbara Bush, wife of George Herbert Walker “Poppy” Bush and mother of George Walker Bush, American presidents 41 and 43, respectively. Also in the photograph was the man who beat Poppy, William Jefferson Blythe III, more commonly known as Bill Clinton; and Barack Hussein Obama II, also known as Barry Soetoro, the man who succeeded George W. Bush. And their wives, of course, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, former senator from New York, former secretary of state in the Obama Administration, and the defeated candidate in the 2016 presidential election.

But the man who defeated Hillary—Donald J. Trump, the 45th president of the United States—was nowhere to be seen. The Bush family, which bears him no love after his demolition of heir-apparent Jeb in the 2016 Republican primaries, had made it clear that Trump would not be welcome in Houston. And so the Trump family was represented by First Lady Melania, while the president stayed behind in Washington under the fig leaf of protocol (presidents don’t normally attend first ladies’ funerals) and not wishing to “disrupt” the event.

The picture is less evocative of a group portrait of past presidents as it is of a family, in this case the Kennedys, with Poppy sitting in for old Joe, the crippled paterfamilias, surrounded by the offspring who went on to wreak so much havoc upon the American body politic. For, like some Biblical genealogy, Bush I begat Clinton who begat Bush II, who would have begotten Clinton II were in not for Obama, who might have begotten either Clinton II redux or Bush III (Jeb!) were it not for Trump.

If it all sounds rather incestuous, that’s because it is.

No wonder Trump was not invited. The racket was proceeding quite nicely until he came along.

That they hate him ought to be reason enough all by itself for any true, red-blooded American to get behind him.

Share

Mogadishu, Minnesota

I couldn’t improve on their title, so I swiped it.

When it was noted that the carry-on bags of multiple airline passengers traveling from Minneapolis to Somalia contained millions of dollars in cash, on a regular basis, law enforcement was naturally curious to know where the money came from and where it was going. It soon emerged that millions of taxpayer dollars, and possibly much more, had been stolen through a massive scam of Minnesota’s social-services sector, specifically through fraudulent daycare claims. To make matters worse, the money appears to have wound up in areas of Somalia controlled by al-Shabab, the Islamic jihadist group responsible for numerous terrorist outrages.

Starting in the 1990s, the State Department directed thousands of refugees from Somalia’s civil war to Minnesota, which is now home to the largest population of Somalis outside Somalia itself. As the Washington Times noted in 2015, in Minnesota, these refugees “can take advantage of some of America’s most generous welfare and charity programs.” Professor Ahmed Samatar of Macalester College in St. Paul observed, “Minnesota is exceptional in so many ways but it’s the closest thing in the United States to a true social democratic state.” A high-trust, traditionally homogenous community with a deep civil society marked by thrift, industriousness, and openness, Minnesota seemed like the ideal place to locate an indigent Somali population now estimated at 100,000.

Still waiting to hear where the clamor of demand for the importation of all these America-hating Muzz-rat swine is coming from. They have no right to be here, they have no reason to be here, and they provide no benefit to our country by being here. At the very least, they owe us reparations for a couple destroyed Blackhawks and some dead US soldiers.

A September 2015 report of the House Homeland Security Committee task force on combating terrorist and foreign-fighter travel revealed that Minnesota led all states in contributing foreign fighters to ISIS. Reviewing the public cases of 58 Americans who joined or attempted to join ISIS, the task force found that 26 percent of them came from Minnesota. Somali Minnesotans occasionally appear in the headlines as “Minnesota men” who have taken up terrorist jihad. In 2015, ten such Minnesota men were charged with seeking to join ISIS in Syria; six pleaded guilty, and three were convicted in June 2016 (one is presumed dead in Syria).  

Well, I guess you COULD call it a “contribution” of sorts. Just not to Minnesota, or America.

Read the rest of the CJ piece, which is by Powerline’s Scott Johnson, a local Minnesota boy who knows whereof he speaks. It’s just disgusting, start to finish.

Share

Disgusting, in so many ways

Saw this on the local teewee news earlier, and…well, see for yourself.

RALEIGH, N.C. (WNCN) – The dress code at Kickback Jack’s has some customers a little upset.

“The sign is bogus,” said customer Zaena Graham. “I think it’s a bunch of…rubbish.”

The sign is hanging in the window of HIS FUCKING RESTAURANT, to establish the rules for acceptable dress and conduct that HE FUCKING PREFERS in HIS FUCKING RESTAURANT. You don’t like it, you are perfectly free to go eat somewhere else, you whiny dipshit. Know what really is “bogus”? The fact that you think you have some innate “right” to take issue with this man’s rules IN ANY FASHION WHATSOEVER—and to have attention paid to your whining by sensible people as if said whining was worth the simple chronic halitosis used to expel it, or was deserving of any response other than to chuck you out bodily into oncoming traffic.

The sign posted inside its restaurant lists the dress code and behavior requirements. The list starts off prohibiting negative attitudes, offensive language, and any attire containing profanity.

“In a family atmosphere other than just a sports bar, I think profanity should be restricted in any public place,” said John Baucom, a customer.

“The first part sounded OK, but it just got, to me, more discriminatory,” said Laurie Washington, who was eating at the restaurant with her husband, Thomas Washington.

The dress code goes on to say no low-hanging pants or shorts, no plain white T-shirts, and no excessively baggy attire.

Laurie and Thomas Washington believe it has a racial undertone and is offensive to them.

“That’s typically, younger African-American type attire,” said Laurie Washington.

So, if I don’t want to look at the crack of some thug-life teenage twerp’s ass while I eat—white OR black—or have the disgusting sight of his underwear exposed by having his pants down around his knees inflicted on me during dinner out, that’s RACIST!™ now, is it?

Well, allow me to share my specific thoughts on all that: FUCK YOU, IDIOT BITCH. You, and everybody else who “thinks” like you. Word to the clueless: it’s called UNDERwear for a fucking REASON. And just because you and yours think you have a “right” to do anything you damned well please, up to and including being patently offensive to civilized people possessed of a sense of decency and decorum you so clearly lack, does NOT mean that you actually and in fact do. You do NOT.

If feeling that way about this spurious complaint makes me a racist, then fine, I’m a motherfucking racist then. What else you got?

Baucom said not having the policy could be offensive to others.

You’re gott-damned right about that, buddy.

“The way they wear their pants and exposing certain parts of skin or whatever, I think that should be a manager’s discretion as far as offensive to other people,” he said.

And in a free country, it certainly would be. But when anti-smoking Nazis did away with the right of restaurant and bar owners to have a smoking and non-smoking section in their own joints if they so chose, this stopped being the case. So expect a lawsuit from these gibbering retards forthwith—and expect Kickback Jack’s to lose.

Myself, I’m considering walking around from now on with my pants around my knees too…commando-style, no underwear at all. Because I gots myself a RIGHT to walk around enjoying the free feeling of my junk swinging in the breeze, yo, and to hell with you if you don’t like it. Wonder what the reaction to that might be, eh?

O brave new world, that has such assholes in it. The great thing, though, is that the more idiots like this cry RACISM! over such self-evident tommyrot, the more they reduce the sting of the word, thereby undermining their own idiocy and removing one more arrow from their quiver.

Share

A female cuck?

You don’t concede the Left’s premises. Not ever, not even once, not for any reason.

Speaking of silly women inviting snakes into the fold, let’s address a recent essay published by National Review, titled “Conservatives Are Wrong to Dismiss Feminism.” It is written by one Sarah Quinlan, a woman who, we are told is a “front-page contributor to RedState.” This is intended as a credential, when in fact, it is rather more like calling someone a former lead engineer for the Hindenburg. But one supposes it was the best the likes of Ms. Quinlan could do under the circumstances.

One of Quinlan’s unlisted associations, however, is her sometime affiliation with one of the sadder outings in NeverTrump history, the so-called Buckley Club, an infected little pimple of an organization that knew so little of its namesake that it once mistook one of Buckley’s favorite phrases—“immanentizing the eschaton”—for a conspiracy theorist slogan.

Holt goes on to dismantle Quinlan’s convoluted mess of an argument pretty thoroughly, culminating in this stinging closer:

I’m sure she’ll get around to making a mockery of her other conservative principles in time, but we needn’t waste any more exertion waiting on her to do it.

At best, Quinlan’s piece is a vapid extended emotivist wail in search of a shoulder and a pint of vanilla ice cream to dash itself against. At worst, it is a hostile ultimatum that the Right must trade Trump for Teen Vogue, and transform William F. Buckley into William F. Becky-with-the-good-hair so that it can attract the votes of women whose character validates the assumptions of every misogynist who ever lived. Either way, it deserves to be rejected in the strongest possible terms.

And so, I will do just that. Conservatism needs feminism like National Review needed Sarah Quinlan’s byline: only as a tool for suicide. NRO’s brand needs to be hospitalized and any dangerous objects need to be taken away from the editors after this. As for True Conservatism (™), after the publication of this article, it will need a rape kit, which, unlike the thousands that Quinlan complains remain untouched, we have been obliged to process.

Ouch. Better put some ice on that, sweetie.

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

Boy/Girl/Whatever Scouts

Anybody hear a death-knell ringing?

IRVING, TX—In a bold move designed to garner praise from the nation’s progressives, the Boy Scouts of America finally admitted girls into their ranks, but were discovered to be hopelessly bigoted upon the revelation that they are still excluding the 49,247 other genders that have been scientifically identified.

The Scouts immediately drew heavy criticism for only allowing one additional gender to join their ranks while ignoring the tens of thousands of other genders who might wish to become a Scout.

“How can they call themselves progressive when they still won’t recognize even basic gender identities like toothpaste and Space Marine?” one progressive leader said in a Huffington Post article slamming the organization for its obvious traditional biases.

“It’s 2018, and a person who identifies as a metronome still can’t join the Boy Scouts. Let that sink in,” she added. “I mean, seriously. Let that kid who thinks he’s a sink join the group for cryin’ out loud.”

And so the Left claims a victory with the wanton destruction of another venerable American institution. Prediction: the Scouts will be a thing of the dimly-remembered past, disbanded entirely and for good, in 5…4…3…2… Hats off to the Babylon Bee though, for doing the very-nearly impossible and successfully parodying the idiots behind this utter nonsense.

Share

How you got Trump

A blast from the past (July 2016, to be exact) by Dan McLaughlin at NRO.

There’s a lot to digest here, and few people come out of Coppins’ piece looking good; even its author has his own remorse over mocking Trump’s odds of running, as did many of us who had observed his numerous publicity stunt feints in the past. It’s clear that the Romney campaign’s sensible-at-the-time efforts at keeping a safe distance from Trump fed into Trump’s sense of grievance at the GOP, helping egg him on to a campaign aimed at humbling the party and fracturing its voter base. But perhaps the strongest conclusion one can draw from it is that the White House Correspondents’ Dinner should be abolished.

The WHCD was once a sort of icon of well-intentioned false bonhomie, in which the administration and its adversaries in the press would lay down their swords for a night of good-natured ribbing. The president would deliver some self-deprecating humor, sometimes pointedly making light of their own failures: Bill and Hillary Clinton satirizing the “Harry and Louise” ads that sank HillaryCare, George W. Bush doing a mock hunt for missing WMDs. A comedian would come in to roast the President, as Stephen Colbert did to Bush in 2006. True believers and populists hated the way it made light of substance and played into the idea that everybody in DC thinks the whole thing is a game, but there was also a virtue in enforced civility and the Commander-in-Chief eating humble pie for laughs.

IE, it was a self-congratulatory circle-jerk for the guardians of the status quo.

Continue reading “How you got Trump”

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