Archive

Archive for the ‘Brilliant!’ Category

Immoral puritans

October 13th, 2017 1 comment

Schilchter has been so damned good of late, I kind of regret the coming of the weekend, since it means two whole days of eagerly waiting to see who he unloads on next.

You can tell a lot about a people by who they hate and who they idolize. They hate Donald Trump, and it’s because he has no allegiance to them and because he knows them so well from first-hand experience that he has absolutely no respect for them. All their hard-earned status within the hierarchy of the elite? He doesn’t give a flip, and the normals love it. Finally, someone is holding these pompous perfumed princes to account.

But who does the elite idolize? The aspiring elite, college students, seem to idolize Che and Bernie Sanders, as if we needed more evidence of their terribleness.

Our allegedly grown-up elite admired Ted Kennedy, the scummiest scion of America’s scummiest family – you should get a waterproof edition of Howie Carr’s astonishing Kennedy Babylon so you can save time by reading it in the shower. Camelot? More like Clap-a-lot. That bulbous scuzz didn’t just fix a waitress sandwich with Chris Dodd – who, of course, left the Senate to work as a lobbyist for…wait for it…Hollywood. No, he actually killed a woman on a drunken bender, skipping off to new sordid triumphs with barely a slap on the wrist.

And the bipartisan establishment hailed him as “The Lion of the Senate,” never mind the body count.

Don’t forget their other idol, the Stogie-Stasher-In-Chief, Bill Clinton. He was such an icon that the ruling class offered up his wife as its presidential candidate twice. Oh, and plenty of alleged Republicans were cool with that – class solidarity controls, after all.

But the ultimate documentation of the utter moral vacuum in which our elite dwells is noted Hillary donor Harvey Weinstein. Hollywood has, for decades, taken upon itself to chide and chastise us normals for our many, many, many faults, because when you want to learn the difference between right and wrong, you need a movie star to help you out. And, to the surprise of no one, it was all a crock.

They knew. They all knew, and they didn’t care. Meryl Streep’s Sophie’s choice was between her career and her conscience, and let’s just say she didn’t agonize over her pick. Others took his cash to shut up, leaving other ingenues to his sweaty clutches because getting the gigs trumps sisterly solidarity every time.

Hillary Clinton managed to put down her super-sized Chardonnay goblet long enough to issue a 38-word comment/cliché on her pal and benefactor’s icky adventures in gardening. In her defense, she was probably thinking, “I was married to Bill. This guy’s an amateur.”

So why should we normal Americans respect these people? Why should we submit to being constantly scolded, lectured, and treated as morally bankrupt simpletons anymore?

We shouldn’t, and we aren’t, not anymore.

They wonder why they got Trump.

They are why they got Trump.

Read the rest, naturally.

Share

Good reads

October 12th, 2017 2 comments

You CF lifers will know Francis Poretto as a long-time friend of this site, a highly-skilled fellow blogger in his own right, and a damned excellent sci-fi novelist as well. He’s been serving of late as a sort of part-time spiritual mentor for me as well, for which indulgence I am very grateful to him.

You might also recollect my recommending his powerful Spooner trilogy a while back in this space, which endorsement resulted in Francis’s selling more copies of the books in a week than he usually did in a month. Both Francis and I were thrilled with that, as you might imagine.

So with all that in mind, allow me to commend your attention to Fran’s latest: Innocents. In his own words:

A novel of the Onteora Canon, set in the very near future. Genetic engineering and zygotic microsurgery have produced both wonders and horrors. Wonders such as drugs tailored to attack a specific disease in a specific sufferer, or surgery to eliminate genetically borne handicaps before mitosis can begin. Horrors such as blindness or deafness deliberately inflicted upon unborn babies, or pitiable creatures whose bodies and minds are warped to satisfy the whims of wealthy perverts.

Security specialist Larry Sokoloff is on vacation far from home, straining to forget a woman he loves but cannot have, when Fountain, a teenaged escapee from a malevolent institution, comes under his protection. What he learns of her nature and origins lays bare the darker face of the Janus of biotechnology, and catapults him and his colleague Trish McAvoy into a mission of vengeance and cleansing. For adults only.

Francis was kind enough to gift me with a complimentary copy, which I’ll be plowing into this weekend—and expect to be unable to claw myself away from until I’ve read it all, if he’s true to his usual form with this one. A bit more, from one of our e-mail exchanges:

Now that Innocents is out, it’s time for me to decide what to tackle next. It was the most difficult of all my novels to finish, even though it’s the shortest. Writing it very nearly put me off fiction altogether. Yet a few early readers have already inquired about a sequel. There are days I wonder about this business…quite a lot of them, lately.

Yeah, well, don’t spend a whole lot of time wondering, my friend. You got plenty to say; a precious God-given gift for saying it; a distinctive, near-unique perspective and literary style; and a growing audience eager to hear more from you. Take a short breather, and then it’s back to the salt mines for you, buddy.

As for the rest of y’all, go buy the book. If you have any liking for sci-fi at all—and how could you not?—I guarantee that you’ll be glad you did. Hey, at $2.99, how can you go wrong?

Share

The feel-good story of a lifetime

October 11th, 2017 2 comments

Seriously, seriously wonderful.



If you aren’t reaching for the hankies after clicking on the vid for the backstory here, you must truly have a heart of stone. I’ve watched it about five times already, and haven’t gotten tired of it yet. May God bless everyone involved. I repeat: wonderful.

Share

Where’s your Pussyhats NOW, Leftards?

October 10th, 2017 Comments off

Yes. Yes. A thousand times yes.

Today is the one-year anniversary of the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape. (I know. It feels more like 10 years ago.)

For days, Americans were subjected to an ongoing audio loop of a private conversation in 2005 between Donald Trump and the show’s co-host, Billy Bush. I don’t need to remind you what Trump said because anyone with a pulse can probably recite it verbatim. Some gals even have hats to commemorate Trump’s secretly recorded, indecent remarks.

The ensuing outrage should have been a clue of how intense, consuming, and exhausting the daily political climate would be under a Trump presidency.

Now, here we are, one year later, and the New York Times just published a bombshell expose about one of Hollywood’s most powerful men, Harvey Weinstein. The lecherous behavior of this disgusting man is one of Hollywood’s worst-kept secrets; no doubt the Times could have an ongoing series of articles about this movie-making, sexual predator. Like many Hollywood moguls, Weinstein parlayed his fortune and influence into political power, becoming a major Democratic party donor and fundraiser. Since 1990, he has contributed more than $1 million to Democratic PACs, officeholders, and candidates, many of whom must have been aware of Weinstein’s reputation as a first-rate vulture.

So, let’s take a little trip down Social Media Lane and see how our virtuous, high-minded celebs who wanted Trump charged with rape a year ago have reacted to the Weinstein story.

Do you hear the crickets? I sure do.

And that’s absolutely ALL you’ll hear, too. Read all of it; Kelly’s conclusion is dead on the money, as is all the rest of it. Limbaugh, too, sees the bigger picture clear as crystal:

But let’s just look, from Ted Kennedy to Bill Clinton to Woody Allen, Bill Cosby to Harvey Weinstein, Anthony Weiner to Eliot Spitzer, they all exploited women without consequence because they were card-carrying members of the liberal establishment, which includes the media and Hollywood and Washington.

Not only are prominent Democrats guilty of egregious hypocrisy when it comes to feminism, they are equally guilty when it comes to environmentalism. Leftists denounce carbon footprints. They denounce the overabundant use of CO2. They routinely shame people for their lifestyles and yet produce volcano sized carbon footprints themselves.

On practically every seminal issue, the Democrats mandate, the left mandates a certain behavior for everybody but themselves. They are always exempted from the punitive policies that they want imposed on everybody else. They claim the sea levels are rising. They’re apoplectic in public crying about rising oceans. They shrewdly buy up beachfront property when the cameras aren’t looking. They live in the very places they claim are going to be underwater in a number of years. They know the sky isn’t falling, and they know the oceans aren’t rising.

Liberalism is a con game. They have no intention of using the same health care system they devise for everybody else. They do everything they can to make sure no law affects them. Affordable health care is the kind of stuff they give us. It’s neither health care nor affordable. It’s a sop to their donors. And it turns out they’re bullies, sexual bullies in the workplace.

Equal pay? Equal pay for women, equal pay here, equal treatment there, look at the way they treat women in Hollywood. Equal pay at the Obama White House? That was a joke. Equal pay at the Clinton Crime Family Foundation? We find out that there is no equality in any of these institutions that the left run. There’s no equality, and there’s no safety. Look at Chicago, look at Detroit, look at places they run.

It’s a giant con game that liberalism has going.

It certainly is. Trust me folks, you’re gonna want to read all of this one too.

Share

A different view

October 10th, 2017 1 comment

John Ringo shares it with us.

I may be the only person in the ‘pundit’ world who can put what we know about the Las Vegas shooter in perspective because I’ve dealt with something similar before. My personal take, at this point, is ‘homicidal psychotic break, rationale currently unknown, possible pharmacological.’

To debunk a few of the recent urban legends and prolapse some of the stupider arguments:

ISIS: Nothing in his electronic trail indicates any contact with ISIS despite their claims and some rumors. Nothing.

‘There were multiple shooters/he was a patsy!’: All the guns in the room were registered to Paddock. He was covered in GSR and even had burns on his hands from hot barrel/rounds.

‘He was antifa killing Republicans!’: Nothing in his electronic trail indicates the slightest political affiliation or interest. Nothing.

Well, perhaps not. But the videos of him at various anti-Trump events wearing a Pussy Hat might tend to lead one to reasonably suspect a certain, umm, inclination, shall we say. Onwards:

He was a perfectly normal, successful, retired accountant well-invested in real estate with very little or no recent change in demeanor or actions.

Perfectly normal guy and only a ‘loner’ to the extent he wasn’t terribly socially active. ‘Loner’ apparently means he didn’t frequent wild parties. If he had the narrative would be ‘wild party animal.’

‘Homicidal psychotic break means he couldn’t have done the planning!’ 

Au contraire. Deep sigh. Been here, had someone in my life nearly do if not that than similar. With their permission I will now recount a story and show why everything about this makes a terrible sort of sense to me. The story is about my lovely and extremely loving wife, Miriam, and her descent to homicidal psychotic break due to a nasty drug interaction.

It’s a fascinating—and heartbreaking—story about the twists and turns of mental disorder and the nearly incredible influence psychotropic drugs can have on a person chemically susceptible to the side effects. Hats off to Ringo for sharing it, and his wife for granting permission. Agree or disagree with the likelihood of its applying to the Las Vegas atrocity, it’s certainly worth pondering, and is well worth a read. John closes with a summary, and a warning:

So, Paddock doesn’t really surprise me. I’ve seen it before.

My guess is it will be doctors who figure it out. And if they do they’ll find he either was having a bad drug reaction (in which case nobody will admit nothin’ just as they’ve never admitted it was Cymbalta that caused the Westroads Mall Shooting) or neurological degeneration of some sort. (A tumor caused the University of Texas ‘Bell Tower’ shooting.) If pharmacological, the drug doesn’t even have to be a definitively ‘psychotropic’ drug. Many drugs these days from heart medicine to anti-malarials have some psychotropic effect.

(If this had anything to do with a drug reaction, any drug of any type, I hope the survivors sue the shit out of the drug manufacturer. Because most of these recent ‘crazy’ mass kills, going all the way back to the ‘postal worker’ epidemic (overdosage of Prozac) and Columbine (both kids were hopped to their gills on prescription anti-depressants and anti-anxiety drugs), have had SOMETHING to do with psychotropic drugs pushed by drug companies. Many of the murder/suicides of returning military personnel were closely linked to an anti-malarial. And nobody seems to be willing to speak truth to power on the subject. Just writing this post will probably get me sued.)

The only lesson to take from this is ‘keep an eye on your loved ones especially if they have ANY changes in prescription.’ Doesn’t matter if it’s heart medication. Keep an eye on their personality as well as health.

Homicidal break does not always happen quickly. Sometimes it creeps in like the fog on cats feet. It is only at the last that the cackle of madness is heard. By then it is too late.

May God rest all their souls and let them find peace.

That, I think we can probably ALL agree on.

Share

Live by the liberalism…

October 5th, 2017 7 comments

Die by it.

Football players who call for equality are throwing rocks from a glass stadium. The NFL’s high-paying jobs are only given to men with specific physical skills, while the rest of the people are pushed aside.

It’s time for the league to start leading by example. The time is right for the NFL Equality Plan.

The first step in the plan is to guarantee everyone’s right to participate in the games.

Every player in today’s NFL is male, which is obviously unfair. The new balance will be 51% women, 47% men, and 2% transgenders. This means the 53-player roster of every team will have 27 women, 25 men, and one transgender person. Each team shall have 32 Caucasians, seven African-Americans, 10 Hispanics, three Asians, and one person of Native American heritage. At least three players will be gay.

Nor can we ignore age discrimination. Each NFL roster shall include seven players between ages 19 and 25, eight from ages 26-34, seventeen from 35-54, nine from 55-64, and ten players who are 65 or older.

The disabled will be fully represented in the new, inclusive league. Every team shall have no fewer than ten players with physical or mental impairments that significantly affect their major life activities.

The Office of Player Equality will monitor the composition of each team and assess penalties for non-compliance. Temporary, minor variations may be allowed – requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The demographic ratios will be regularly adjusted to stay current with population trends.

Next summer, the NFL will host gala events in every stadium to celebrate and welcome the newcomers, who will be called “rainbow players” to honor the complimentary aspects of humanity they represent.

To make room for the rainbow players, many current NFL players will be released from their contracts. This should not be a source of regret, since all these men have benefited unfairly from their physical privilege. The former players will be provided with job-placement services and exit counselling.

Nothing reveals the preposterous unworkability of the central tenets of liberalism better than highlighting them.

Share

The ultimate National Conversation

October 5th, 2017 2 comments

Careful what you wish for, “liberals.”

I don’t agree with liberals often, because I’m not an idiot and because I love America, but when they once again say, “We must have a conversation about guns!” I still couldn’t agree more. And, since all we’ve heard is you leftists shrieking at us all week, I’ll start it off.

You don’t ever get to disarm us. Not ever.

There. It sure feels good to engage in a constructive dialogue.

Okay, I can see already that I’m getting ready to bend “fair use” over and give it the rogering of its young life. I just don’t see any way I can avoid lifting this most excellent of Schlichter rants almost entire.

Now, we should have this conversation because in recent years we’ve seen a remarkable antipathy for the fact that normal Americans even have rights among those on the left. We should have this conversation to clear the air before leftists push too far and the air gets filled with smoke. But we really don’t need to have a conversation about our rights to keep and bear arms. They’re rights. There’s nothing to talk about.

This goes for all our rights that the left hates, like the rights to speak and write freely, to practice our religion as we see fit, and to not be railroaded by liberal authority without due process. Leftists hate our rights because they hate us, and when we assert our rights it gets in the way of their malicious schemes to dominate and control us. It makes them stamp their little sandaled feet in rage when we normals just won’t cooperate and surrender our rights. But we love our rights – rights are wonderful things with which we were endowed by our Creator, and which our beloved Constitution merely reiterates. But the left, including its pet media, thinks that our rights were merely iterated, and that the left can take an eraser to the parchment and—voila!—no more pesky rights for you flyover people.

Nah. I think we’ll keep ‘em. All of them, unchanged. And there’s only one way we can lose them, unless a lot of leftists buy a lot of guns, conduct a lot of tactical training, and stop being little weenies. I’m not worried about any of those things happening, particularly the last one. So, as a practical matter, we only lose our rights if we allow ourselves to be shamed, threatened, whined, and lectured into giving them up by skeevy tragedy-buzzard pols, mainstream media meat puppets, and late night chucklemonkeys whose names and faces all blend together into one unfunny, preachy blur.

I just don’t see Jimmy Kimmel donning Kevlar to molon labe and risking his sorry carcass trying to separate normal Americans from their ability to defend themselves, their families, and their Constitution from the people who constantly tell us how much they hate us.

Well, not unless there’s about thirty of him surrounding one of us, as per the usual liberal-fascist MO. Otherwise, it’s doubtful he’d so much as lift a finger to prevent his wife and daughter getting raped and murdered in front of his very eyes. Probably by a gang of those “moderate Muslims” the Left is so enamored of, without ever being able to find a single living example of.

On the bright side, I DID manage to honor fair use by leaving out a few paragraphs there, which you’re going to want to go and read anyway. But then Kurt really cuts loose with the Clue Bat, fungo-ing huge, achy lumps onto those empty “liberal” heads:

So, let’s continue our important conversation. How about this? How about we continue to speak freely, saying whatever we want however we want, and you leftists just sit there and be offended? How about we practice our faiths however we want, even if that means some of us don’t end up validating every one of your preferred personal peccadillos (I checked under all of the penumbras and emanations in the Constitution and I can’t find anywhere that you have a right to have us high-five everything you do). And how about we insist that everyone accused of something gets due process and the chance to defend himself – or herself, or even xirself?

Yeah, we know that us having rights is inconvenient, but that’s too damn bad. Because we aren’t asking you for our rights. We’re telling you we aren’t giving them up.

See, we’re done walking on eggshells and playing your verbal minefield game. You’ll call us “murderers,” “racists,” “sexists,” “homophobes” and every other kind of “phobe” you can invent no matter what we do anyway, and it’s all a lie. It’s also all meaningless. You don’t even believe it. It’s just a rhetorical weapon, and a lame one, but you’ve fired all your ammo. The chamber is empty. Keep pulling the trigger on your slanders, but we’re now woke to the scam and you’re just shooting blanks.

Anyway, let’s continue our conversation. You’re not going to pin the rampage of some scumbag on millions and millions of people who didn’t do it. You’re not going to leverage this spree into disarming us – which is your ultimate goal. We know how you hate the idea that we are armed and independent, that we hold a lead veto over your fever dreams of tyrannical rule over us. You know how important it is to us to be free citizens; you yearn to humiliate us by stripping us of our self-respect by taking away our means of keeping ourselves free from the tyranny of people like you.

You never cared that 59 people were murdered – some of you, as we have seen, cheered – and I gotta say, it’s a bad look to screech “I’m glad you crackers are dead, now heed my command to give up your guns!” If you really cared about 59 people being murdered, you’d demand that the Chicago PD flood the ghetto and stop and frisk until every punk with a gun was disarmed because 59 people get murdered there in a slow month. Oh, but wait – their rights! Gee, I thought that RIGHTS DON’T MATTER IF TAKING RIGHTS AWAY SAVES JUST ONE LIFE… I guess it’s really about whose rights, isn’t it?

So, let’s finish our conversation about guns. Where was I? Oh yeah. No.

BANGFUCKINGZOOM. I’m gonna leave out his conclusion too, which is another thing you won’t want to miss. I’ll close my own post here with a quote from the great Charlton Heston, directed at Al Gore at the time and still readily applicable to the rest of the gun-grabbin’ Left: from my cold, dead hands, motherfuckers. You jump on up and start the ball any time you think you’re ready to dance. We’ll be waiting.

Share

Just the facts

October 4th, 2017 1 comment

No wonder libtards hate ’em. But good on this one; hers is a remarkable story of true open-mindedness, of willingness to adjust one’s own beliefs when a careful examination of hard facts fails to unearth any evidence to support them.

Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.

Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.

I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths.

When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.

As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer. Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless.

By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. Policies that often seem as if they were drafted by people who have encountered guns only as a figure in a briefing book or an image on the news.

All of which adds up to make this bird (yeah, I said it) the most rare of rara avises. My cap is duly doffed to her for her integrity, at the very least.

Share

The milkman’s kid

October 4th, 2017 3 comments

Annnnnd it’s Muslims liberals both.

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

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

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

(cough)BULLSHIT!(cough)

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

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

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

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

Sh’yeah, thought so.

“Just snapped”, my ass.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share

The REAL solution

September 30th, 2017 Comments off

As Bill says: it’s about time.

Asplundh, the tree-trimming company, has been hit by a $96 million penalty for hiring (and rehiring) illegal alien workers. According to the federal prosecutors it is the largest payment ever levied in an immigration case.

The company pled guilty to criminal charges in a federal court in Pennsylvania, where its headquarters is located, apparently moving swiftly to minimize the damage to the corporation’s image. As a result of the guilty plea, there will not be a public trial.

If the illegal immigration problem is ever to be solved, this is how it will be done. No amount of arrests, deportation, enforcement measures, or wall-building will be as effective at drying up the flood of illegals inundating us as a combination of much tighter restrictions on welfare access…and this right here. When serious punishment for the corporations that take criminal advantage of these people becomes less of a rarity and more routine, we’ll know the government is truly serious about re-establishing our borders and enforcing immigration regs at last, and not before.

Elsewhere, Bill links to another article that explains what’s at stake, at least in part:

The swelling population of illegal immigrants and their kids is costing American taxpayers $135 billion a year, the highest ever, driven by free medical care, education and a huge law enforcement bill, according to the the most authoritative report on the issue yet.

And despite claims from pro-illegal immigration advocates that the aliens pay significant off-setting taxes back to federal, state and local treasuries, the Federation for American Immigration Reform report tallied just $19 billion, making the final hit to taxpayers about $116 billion.

State and local governments are getting ravaged by the costs, at over $88 billion. The federal government, by comparison, is getting off easy at $45 billion in costs for illegals.

President Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and conservatives in Congress are moving aggressively to deal with illegals, especially those with long criminal records. But their effort is being fought by courts and some 300 so-called “sanctuary communities” that refuse to work with federal law enforcement.

Every one of which ought to see every last dime of federal money they receive cut off, cold. Trump has promised to do just that; he ought to get on with it.

Securing its borders is Job One for any national government. A nation that fails to—or refuses to—is not really a nation at all. “Liberals” seem to think that the US is the only country in the world required as some sort of demonstration of superior “morality” to fling its borders open and welcome every last bedraggled parasite that wanders in—one supposes as the necessary first step towards the One World Government they’ve always fantasized about. I’d love to see them try to sneak across into, say, Mexico from the south and watch what happens to them.

Share

Tell us how you REALLY feel…

September 28th, 2017 3 comments

In the comments here, the esteemed and estimable Aesop says:

The National Felony League has no clue what a firestorm they’ve unleashed by coddling this crapola.

I’m betting that Mattis’ DoD comes down on them next, followed by the advertisers, then the owners dump Goodall, and the @$$clown player purges start with a vengeance.

If they’re smart, and do this in a hurry, they get over it in 5-10 years.

If they dig in harder, they become roller derby.

Okay, that’s good squishy right there sure enough. But then, over at his place, he REALLY uncorks:

For the benefit of the illiterate double-digit IQ players: any display whatsoever during the national anthem is still a me!me!me!-fest, for you attention-whoring douchebags, and just as obnoxious as the original displays, @$$holes.

Probably more so, since you have yet to apologize for the earlier virtue-signaling grandstanding, sh*tting on America, and wiping your @$$#$ with the flag, and have in fact doubled down, doing it now without the slightest bit of shame.

The national anthem isn’t about you pampered sports pussies, it’s about the country of US.

You want to put your hands somewhere, it’s easy (unless you were born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia): your right hand goes over your heart, and your left hand goes at your side.

Linking your arms is the same middle finger to America that all your other antics have been, and we’re not buying the bullsh*t.

Until you stop ALL DISPLAYS during the national anthem, other than one of humble respect for the flag and nation you live in, and under whose blessings you’re all favored to be paid far more than you deserve for a pretty meager set of skills in anything but a society of bountiful plenty, you’re all still just a bunch of disrespectful bums, who deserve to be kicked to the curb until you’re forced to earn a real living at a real job, or fired by the spineless jellyfish who nominally run your League Of Losers.

Ouch. That stung all the way over here. Pretty much says it all, too—especially his closing statement, perfectly expressed in graphic form.

Out of the mouths of babes brats update! Moron accidentally stumbles upon wisdom, fails to recognize its significance:

Don’t come to the game.

That’s the message a couple of the Titans’ star players have for any outraged fans threatening to turn their back on the team…

“First off, I’m going to say this: We’re not disrespecting the military, the men and women that serve in the Army. That’s not what it’s all about,” Titans tight end Delanie Walker said…

“And the fans that don’t want to come to the game? I mean, OK. Bye. I mean, if you feel that’s something, we’re disrespecting you, don’t come to the game. You don’t have to. No one’s telling you to come to the game. It’s your freedom of choice to do that.”

That right there is advice we should all be heeding…until Walker and his ilk are all stocking shelves at Wal Mart, manning drive-thru windows, filling in potholes, or cleaning hotel rooms for a living. And as Stephen adds: we’re way ahead of you, pal.

Share

#WhiteLives(Don’t)Matter

September 28th, 2017 Comments off

Francis on “white privilege.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Don’t you believe them.

Share

Doing his part

September 28th, 2017 Comments off

Diplomad steps up and puts the boot in.

The Center for Security Policy has issued a letter to President Trump (see text below) calling for him to get the US out of the fake deal, and to implement the Bolton Plan for dealing with Iran. I urge everybody to read the letter and Ambassador Bolton’s proposal for a way forward (also provided below). I was delighted and honored to be asked to sign the letter.

He includes the Bolton proposition in the post, name duly attached. Good for him—and for America, too.

We can but hope there are still a few sensible patriots like the ol’ Diplomad remaining in the State Department. Probably deep under cover and fearing for their jobs if not their very lives, sure, but still.

Call ’em American stay-behinds, maybe.

Share

Annnnd we’re back!

September 23rd, 2017 6 comments

Thanks to a timely assist from our old friend Bob, that is. Sorry guys: once again this year I committed my usual muttonheaded error and forgot to renew the domain name. Don’t know why, but I seem to have a real mental block about that thing; year after year, the renewal date comes up, and year after year I space out completely and forget it until the day when I go to post on the site and find that nothing is working. Apologies to all and sundry, and thanks for your expressions of concern, too. I did a bit of posting over at Bill’s place while things were being sorted here, so if you didn’t peruse those yet, well, here’s your chance. Thanks also go to Bill for his generous hospitality. And as always, thanks to you CF readers just for being here in the first place.

And yes, my choice of “Brilliant!” as a category for this post is entirely ironic. Ahem. Now, on with the show.

Share

Fond farewell

September 11th, 2017 2 comments

RIP to the late, great Jerry Pournelle. If you haven’t read The Mote In God’s Eye or Lucifer’s Hammer, you ain’t no sci-fi fan. But the good news here is that Vox Day has declared it Jerry Pournelle Week, and has been kind enough to make Volume One of Pournelle’s classic sci-fi anthology, There Will Be War, available for free here. The blurb for it ought to tell you all you need to know:

Created by the bestselling SF novelist Jerry Pournelle, THERE WILL BE WAR is a landmark science fiction anthology series that combines top-notch military science fiction with factual essays by various generals and military experts on everything from High Frontier and the Strategic Defense Initiative to the aftermath of the Vietnam War. It features some of the greatest military science fiction ever published, such Orson Scott Card’s “Ender’s Game” in Volume I and Joel Rosenberg’s “Cincinnatus” in Volume II. Many science fiction greats were featured in the original nine-volume series, which ran from 1982 to 1990, including Robert Heinlein, Arthur C. Clarke, Philip K. Dick, Gordon Dickson, Poul Anderson, John Brunner, Gregory Benford, Robert Silverberg, Harry Turtledove, and Ben Bova.

Snap ’em up while you can, folks.

Update! Pournelle’s last Chaos Manor post:

Back from DragonCon with both a cold and the flu. Was supposed to go to the Mars Society meeting in Irvine, but I didn’t feel up to it and would have been a burden on Larry who generously offer to drive me. I suspected that would be sure exposure to this ConCrud and since he escaped it he doesn’t need it. But mostly I didn’t feel up to it. I’m still in pajamas. I type horribly as well. But that’s the way it goes. I did read all the mail and sort out a pile that needs answering.

The news is full of the Dreamers. The Constitution says the President must take care to see that the laws are faithfully enforced. Mr. Trump didn’t want to deport the “Dreamers”, particularly those who have integrated into the society, but the law gives him no leeway, and the Presidential Order Obama signed giving them amnesty is unconstitutional. He solved that dilemma by giving it back to Congress who created it. We’ll now see what happens.

I can solve part of the problem. Any volunteer of any age who serves 7 years overseas in Army or Marines gets a Green Card and an application to apply for Citizenship along with his honorable discharge. The Citizenship application and test need not be very difficult and I would expect all who applied to pass it. The swearing should be public and conducted by an officer of rank Colonel or above.

As to girls, we can think of something similar or suitable; they need not join the combat arms. Surgical Assistant comes instantly to mind.

Their parents are a more difficult problem, and it will take ingenuity to find a path that does not offend the legal immigrants who obeyed the law.

More later I’m experiencing a wave of nausea.

Smart, on point, and perfectly lucid and logical, right to the end. He’ll be sorely missed.

Share

Irreversible revolution

September 4th, 2017 1 comment

Another great one from Codevilla.

As I explained a year ago, by 2016 the ruling class’s dysfunctions and the rest of the country’s resentment had pushed America over the threshold of a revolution; one in which the only certainty is the near impossibility of returning to the republican self-government of the previous two centuries. The 2016 election is not reversible, because it was but the first stage of a process that no one can control and the end of which no one can foresee.

Donald Trump is not and never has been the issue. With or without Trump, the nightmare of those who resist the 2016 election was, is, and will remain the voters who have chosen and will continue to choose candidates who they believe are committed to reducing the ruling class’s privileges and pretensions.

Let us be clear: the 2016 electorate chose Trump and they saw Trump as the vehicle by which to challenge the ruling class. During the first half of 2017, the Republican Party finished discrediting itself as a possible vehicle for that job. Since this is so, were Donald Trump seriously to bid for the presidency in 2020, it would have to be by leading a new party focused on the identities of anti-ruling class Americans. Carrying the Republican label would be an impossible burden.

Were an energetic, unambiguous, unapologetic Trump to affirm the majority of Americans’ political identity, not all Republicans would follow. Nor does he need them all. By bringing new elements into his following and, yes, by dropping some Republicans from it, Trump would effectively build a new party, with intact credibility. The departure of major corporations from his business council—big business is deeply unpopular on Main Street America—is an example of  how to gain by shedding baggage. At any rate, it was never possible that the entire Republican Party would represent America against the ruling class.

But by the same token, each action taken by anyone who is creating a new movement must speak for itself more loudly and clearly than the words used to explain that action. Democracy does not tolerate pairing big words with small accomplishments. Today, Trump’s role in fulfilling the political marketplace’s demand is up to him even more than it was in 2016. But now as then, America’s open political marketplace invites all. The anti ruling class constituency is bigger than ever. If Trump does not lead it, someone else will.

Precisely. As Glenn Reynolds always says: if you hate and fear Trump and end up succeeding in seeing him thwarted, just wait till you see what we send you next.

Read all of it.

Share

Shoo-in

September 3rd, 2017 1 comment

Michigan’s future junior Senator tells Leftard twits where to stick it, in no uncertain terms.

The musician has been publicly toying with the idea of vying for a seat in Michigan for a while, but Common Cause has urged Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to investigate whether Kid Rock, real name Robert Ritchie, has violated the law by acting as a Senate candidate without officially registering his candidacy.

Beyond frequently tweeting about the idea, Kid Rock has gone as far as even setting up a website – kidrockforsenate.com – on which he sells merchandise emblazoned with the words, “Kid Rock for US Senate ’18”.

“Given the activities we’ve documented in the complaint, he can’t reasonably claim to be merely testing the waters of candidacy and thus exempt from candidate filing requirements,” said Common Cause VP of policy and litigation Paul S. Ryan. “He is a candidate and is obligated to abide by all the rules and make the same disclosures required of everyone else running for federal office.”

In response, Kid Rock released a statement to his website that read merely: “I am starting to see reports from the misinformed press and the fake news on how I am in violation of breaking campaign law. #1 I have still not officially announced my candidacy. #2 See #1 and go f*ck yourselves.”

THAT’S how you do it. Note, too, his deft use of the term “fake news” here. Take no shit off of the rotten, lying, devious bastards, Kid; real Americans will love ya for it. Personally, I’m hoping for a term or two as Senator, then a successful run for the Presidency—assuming our cold Civil War hasn’t gone full-on hot by then.

Share

Devil’s Dictionary redux

September 3rd, 2017 Comments off

If Bierce could only see us now.

Brave: The Progressive religion is built around the concept of the struggle. Prog loonies all imagine themselves as paladins fighting the monster called fascism. Therefore, anyone who sallies forth into the public square to preach the good word is called brave. The irony is that it is totally safe. Antifa is called brave, while the people they are beating with clubs are called cowards.

That’s not who we are: This is one of those phrases that is not intended for the wider audience. It’s almost always said by a so-called Conservative in reaction to something normal people are doing. The person saying it is trying to signal to The Hive that they are not associated with the bad thing in question. When Paul Ryan says to his voters, “This is not who we are” he literally means he is not one of the dirt people in his district.

Send a message: This is another code word that people in The Hive use in public, but it is not intended for the public. When a politicians talks about “sending a message” he means to signal his virtue to the rest of The Hive. The message to the rest of us, if any, is that the person saying it should probably be hurled into the ocean before she gets us killed.

Problematic: This is a favorite of Prog loonies. It means the speech or act in question could be ruled heretical. The problem is they lack the words to condemn it and an easy escape route to run away from it.

Troubling: This is the same as problematic.

Vibrant: This is a favorite term to mean no white people. A neighborhood is vibrant when it is full of boarded up houses and gang-bangers with pit bulls.

Sustainable: This is one of those words that should be included in the humor section, but the people who coined it have no sense of humor. Anything that is labeled “sustainable’ is always something that is not sustainable. Alternatively, it may be sustainable, like organic farming, but will require a great die off of humans. Whenever you hear this word, assume the person using it fantasizes about putting you in an oven.

Of course, the all-time champ would have to be Liberal: Reactionary; not even remotely liberal at all. Or, say, Mostly peaceful: Violent.

Share

Tear down all the things!

September 1st, 2017 2 comments

T’is a consummation devoutly to be wished.

The proper response of conservatives to the moronic and vicious attack by leftists toward any monument that could conceivably offend the highly developed leftist sense of aggrieved feelings is to join the campaign by identifying monuments to corrupt leftists who have been eulogized in politically corrupt history.

There is no problem finding such corrupt leftists. Consider JFK and all the wicked machinations involving his sordid career. He used organized crime to win the West Virginia primary in 1960, which paved the way for his winning the nomination. JFK stole the 1960 election through massive voter fraud. JFK had affairs not only with movie stars like Marilyn Monroe, but also with underage interns whom he tried to entice into using drugs. 

Or consider Betty Friedan, another idol of the far left. This Marxist toady fought ferociously for America not to send help to Britain when Britain was standing alone against Hitler. Friedan took the position that there was no difference between Britain and Nazi Germany right up to the day Hitler attacked Stalin. During the period in which this ghastly woman was on the side of both Hitler and Stalin – what could be more evil? – she followed Moscow’s party line slavishly.

Friedan rewrote her life into something that never resembled truth. She wrote of the drudgery of housework, though she had household servants who did the real work. She invented whatever was needed to fill her narrative as an exploited woman.

Might we also want to remove all public images of Franklin Roosevelt, who allowed the internment of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War and who sold down the river all those people in Eastern Europe who had been victims of Nazism – Poles, Czechs, Estonians, Lithuanians, Latvians, and Yugoslavs – into being victims of Stalinism? These were not people whose government had sided with Hitler. They had resisted Hitler.

FDR tried to pack the Supreme Court. He created fascist-like government departments whose oppression of ordinary Americans was well documented at the time. FDR might have even allowed the attack on Pearl Harbor – John Tolland and a number of other historians found that argument compelling, which would surely qualify FDR as the most monstrous president in history.

Surely also America ought to remove every monument to Robert Byrd, the middle-level leader of the Ku Klux Klan, who elicited not the slightest protest from “Civil Rights” leaders, lackeys of the Democratic Party.

If Americans could be persuaded to remove these goons and creeps of the left from all monuments and buildings, then who should replace them? Barry Goldwater would be a good choice.

He damned sure would. I like it. Ohhhh, how I like it. But should this delightful idea ever somehow come to pass, you can be sure it won’t be Republicans who make it happen.

Certainly another candidate is President Reagan, whose life was another example of courage, wisdom, and strength and who, like Goldwater, had not a hint of scandal, bigotry, or self-indulgence. If everywhere that a statue of Robert E. Lee was taken down, a statue of Ronald Reagan were put in its place, that might cool the left into reluctant quiescence. 

Okay, now you’re just dreaming, man.

Share

Miscarriage of “justice”

August 28th, 2017 1 comment

Trump did it! Trump did it!

The monster.

President Trump stood up for justice and for enforcement of our immigration laws when he courageously granted a pardon Friday to Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona. Despite knowing he would face criticism, the president did what was right.

Arpaio was convicted by a federal judge in July of criminal contempt after being charged with violating a court order that attempted to prevent suspected illegal immigrants from being targeted by the sheriff’s traffic patrols. The sheriff acknowledged continuing the patrols, but said that targeting was not the focus.

Hearing testimony during Arpaio’s trial, I realized that any reasonable person who was there to pass judgment on this honest law-abiding man – who gave his life to the rule of law – could never have found him guilty on the evidence presented.

However, the only one who could pass judgment on the former sheriff was U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, because Arpaio was denied his right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The judge’s verdict convicting Arpaio was a travesty of justice.

Arpaio’s critics have claimed for a long time that he is a racist and biased against Hispanics. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Under his command, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office boasted the highest percentage of Hispanic deputies, detention officers and staff in the state of Arizona. Moreover, he promoted more Hispanic officers to command positions than any other law enforcement agency in the state.

On top of this, Arpaio has two grandchildren who are of Hispanic descent. To say he is biased again his own family members is absurd. Labeling him a racist for enforcing U.S. immigration law is a tired, exhausted, left-wing strategy that fails time and time again.

Arpaio’s case has been politically motivated from the beginning, when the Obama administration’s Department of Justice filed misdemeanor charges against him a mere two weeks before the election, contributing to Arpaio’s loss in his reelection bid.

The Department of Justice typically refrains from taking legal action against an elected official so close to an election in order to avoid influencing the outcome.

So let’s tally up here:

  • Denying Arpaio his Constitutional rights by acting as if they simply don’t exist
  • Using the machinery of the Deep State against somebody duly enforcing laws they don’t like
  • Ending someone’s career for simple spite
  • Smearing and denigrating an honest American law enforcement officer for failing to coddle criminals to the degree they deem appropriate
  • And all of it in service of a lie about his supposed “racism” and “bigotry,” both patently absurd charges

Yep, that’s our very own Goosesteppin’ Left goofballs all right, up one side and down the other. Just about every box was ticked in this typical example of their relentless quest to destroy yet another decent American.

Contrary to a whole passel of hysterical psychotics, Trump was more than just within his rights as President to pardon the man; in truth, he HAD to do it, lest the entire idea of justice and the rule of law be forever dismissible as no more than a bitter joke. Good for him for standing up to the monstrous tyrants of the PC Left once again. And hats off to Sheriff Joe for standing firm under the never-ending onslaught of these despicable cretins, from their jug-eared-moron Savior on down.

Share

Elvis Week wrap-up

August 23rd, 2017 Comments off

Amazing.

Well, if you pick up almost any Elvis Greatest Hits compilation, you’ll find:

Love Me Tender, love me sweet
Never let me go
You have made my life complete
And I love you so…

Words and music by Vera Matson and Elvis Presley.

So who wrote what?

Answer: Neither of the above.

The tune for “Love Me Tender” was by Geo. R. Poulton.

Geo. R. who?

So who re-wrote “Aura Lee”? Step forward, Ken Darby. He was born in Nebraska in 1909, so he was no rock’n’roller, but a talented mainstay of the music world. A fine choral arranger, he had a group called the Ken Darby Singers, who backed Judy Garland in a studio album of the Wizard of Oz songs in 1940, and two years later sang with Bing Crosby on the original single of “White Christmas”. On the radio, he provided the music for “Fibber McGee and Molly”, in which capacity he performed a version of “‘Twas the Night Before Christmas”, his first point of contact with those two great cultural contributions from the Troy area. He was Marilyn Monroe’s vocal coach on Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, and there are certainly worse ways of passing your time than getting up in the morning and going to work to spend the day teaching Marilyn how to sing “Diamonds Are a Girl’s Best Friend”. And by the time he was done he had three Oscars on his shelf, for scoring The King and IPorgy and Bess and Camelot.

The Reno Brothers project was just another day at the office for Ken Darby. Told that they needed a Civil War song for the picture, Darby picked out five ballads from the early 1860s and played them for Elvis. “Aura Lea” was the third or fourth. “This is the one,” said the singer. So Darby set about turning “Aura Lea” into “Love Me Tender”, and did it very expertly. Unlike Mr Fosdick, he imposed a song form on the tune – nothing too obtrusive, just that two-thirds echo of the title: “Love Me Tender, love me sweet”… “Love Me Tender, love me true”…

Love me Tender, love me long
Take me to your heart
For it’s there that I belong
And we’ll never part…

All that “love me” repetition could get a bit boring, except that they alternate between the low notes of Poulton’s verse (“Love Me Tender, love me long”) and then the high notes (“Aura Lea, Aura Lea”) of the chorus (“Love Me Tender, love me dear”), which gives a real ache and intensity to the reprises. It’s very deftly organized. And I doubt that Ken Darby thought it was anything more than just a solid professional job that served the needs of the picture.

Elvis’ manager, Colonel Parker, looked on it a little differently. His boy was a raucous rock’n’roller, but this movie song was going to be his first mainstream love ballad, and Parker thought that would be a big deal with the public, and potentially very lucrative. “Aura Lea” was out of copyright, so they didn’t have to pay Poulton and Fosdick anything …or even mention them. And, if nobody knew who wrote the song, why couldn’t Elvis have written it? So, when they heard Ken Darby had rewritten “Aura Lea” into “Love Me Tender”, the Colonel and the Aberbach brothers, who ran the Presley music publishing operation Hill & Range, politely informed Mr Darby that they’d be publishing the song and that in addition Elvis would be getting a credit as co-author.

Darby didn’t mind, because 50 per cent of an Elvis record still works out better than 100 per cent of a Ken Darby Singers record. But there was a problem. American songwriters have two copyright collection agencies, Ascap and BMI, the latter of which was founded in opposition to the former’s monopoly. Broadly speaking, Ascap had the Broadway and Hollywood writers, and BMI had the country & western and rhythm’n’blues guys. Elvis had been signed up as a member of BMI, whereas Darby, being a motion picture composer, was Ascap. And in those days it was not permitted for an Ascap writer and a BMI writer to share credit on the same song. So Darby risked losing his 50 per cent of “Love Me Tender” to a non-writing writer who’d contributed precisely 0 per cent to “Love Me Tender”.

Happiness lies/Right under your eyes, as they sing in “Back in Your Own Backyard”, and so it proved for Ken Darby. He signed up Mrs Darby – Vera Matson – as a member of BMI, and gave her his 50 per cent of the song.

It’s remarkable, it really is; Steyn is like a walking encyclopedia on this stuff, and every time I read another of his music pieces I stand in slackjawed awe of his voluminous store of knowledge. And remember how I said the other day that when it came to his music, Elvis was far from the hapless, clueless rube some still believe him to have been, and always knew exactly what he was doing and where he wanted to go? Further confirmation:

(Darby) was impressed by the way Presley took charge in the studio: “Elvis has the most terrific ear of anyone I have ever met,” he said. “He does not read music, but he does not need to. All I had to do was play the song for him once, and he made it his own! He has perfect judgment of what is right for him.” “What is right for him” turned out to be something the wailing Elvis of “Heartbreak Hotel” had never done before on record.

In Elvis’s own mind, what was “right for him” stretched far beyond the boundaries of rock and roll. His reach may have exceeded his grasp here and there, but for the most part he was tremendously successful at expanding those boundaries artistically, whether his audience was willing to follow him on his journey or not. Contrary to what some have said over the years, it was less his eclecticism that did him in, I believe; more blame for that could be placed at the foot of all those empty, witless movie songs he sang so disinterestedly, if you ask me. He was insulted by them and contemptuous of them…and rightly so. They were beneath him, and he was diminished by them, in more ways than just one.

In any event, read all of this one too; Dennis Hopper (!) even puts in an appearance, if you can believe it. Good as he is on politics and the Muslim threat and such-like, Steyn is as good a music writer as I know of. He could write a lengthy treatise on a soda-pop jingle and make it fascinating, I’d bet.

Share

The Democrats haven’t been this pissed off since Republicans made them give up their slaves

August 21st, 2017 3 comments

Let’s ban all the things! And I do mean ALL if them. Starting here:

As an African-American, Sharpton believes that using federal tax dollars to subsidize the Jefferson Memorial is wrong. And even though the flames of Cultural Revolution are burning hot, you can understand this.

History is important, but history can also be quite offensive.

But there’s one thing wrong with Sharpton. It’s not that he goes too far. It’s that he doesn’t go far enough.

Because if he and others of the Cultural Revolution were being intellectually honest, they’d demand that along with racist statues, something else would be toppled.

And this, too, represents much of America’s racist history:

The Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party historically is the party of slavery. The Democratic Party is the party of Jim Crow laws. The Democratic Party fought civil rights for a century.

And so by rights — or at least by the standards established by the Cultural Revolutionaries of today’s American left — we should ban the Democratic Party.

Not only get rid of it in the present, but strike its very name from the history books, and topple all Democratic statues of leaders who benefited, prospered and became wealthy by cleaving to the party. And shame Democrats until they confess the truth of it.

the new Cultural Revolution was serious, wouldn’t it also demand that the Democratic Party be put in a museum somewhere, away from decent people, along with those Confederate statues?

We could put Democrats in exhibits, behind glass, watching white political bosses chomp cigars and pass out goodies for votes, as minorities were relegated, as they are today, to failing schools and lost educational opportunity and neighborhoods that have become killing fields for the young and old.

And in great museums, the Democrats could be studied, safely, without endangering the sensibilities of the children.

Of course, the Democrat-Socialists, being fucking lunatics to a man/woman/amorphous non-gendered blob/thing, are well on their way to rendering themselves electorally extinct anyway. But why shouldn’t decent Americans express their disgust with the Party of Slavery by making it legal and official through a legislative ban?

Share

A little history

August 18th, 2017 8 comments

Real, true history, as opposed to the neo-Marxist alternative.

Robert E. Lee, before the outbreak of the war, was overwhelmingly regarded as the finest military mind in the U.S. army. Winfield Scott offered him command of all Union forces at the outbreak of hostilities. But he chose allegiance to his state of Virginia, rather than the Federal government. He didn’t fight for slavery. He freed his slaves. He was fighting for states’ rights. He was an honorable God fearing noble man. Stonewall Jackson was an extremely religious man who waged war with a passion, but also taught Sunday School to slaves. Lee and Jackson must be viewed in the context of the 19th century rather than being judged by the standards of the 21st century.

The vast majority of Confederate soldiers who did the fighting and dying during that war didn’t own slaves. They weren’t fighting to maintain slavery. They were fighting because a foreign army had invaded their land. In 1860 this nation was more an amalgamation of states than a centralized government. States still had a tremendous amount of power and leeway to run their states the way they chose. The ever increasing power of a central authority occurred during and after the Civil War. The South were not the bad guys. Their leaders, generals and soldiers were not evil. They were Americans.

Which is something you can’t really say about the fascist “antifa” vermin.

These courageous left wing politicians, like the mayor of New Orleans, have statues removed in the middle of the night to avoid protests by those who understand you cannot erase history by removing statues and names. In a hysterical development, Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh on Monday said in a statement she intended to move forward in removing several city statutes, including those of Lee and Stonewall Jackson. I suppose the soaring murder rate, blacks rioting and burning down neighborhoods, crumbling infrastructure, failing schools, and white flight is due to a few Confederate statues. It’s good to see this diverse mayor has her priorities in order.

The ignorance and disregard for history knows no bounds for generations taught to feel rather think in our government run indoctrination centers known as public schools. The left wing media reinforces their ignorance with misinformation, fake news and government sanctioned propaganda. Snowflakes across the land melt at anything they are instructed to find offensive. Everything and everyone who doesn’t agree with their half baked views are declared racists.

Pointing out that leftist antifa thugs, without permits to protest, initiated the violence in Charlottesville is racist. The uproar against Trump’s truthful assessment of the situation by CNN, MSNBC and Fox proves there isn’t a wit of difference among these corporate media outlets. True colors are revealed. The ongoing coup attempt against Trump continues unabated.

And in the end, that’s what all this really comes down to. The Charlottesville dustup, an event manufactured by the treasonous Left to use as a club to bash Trump and his supporters with, now stands revealed as just part and parcel of their ongoing coup attempt.

You MUST read all of this one, folks; Quinn is absolutely dead on, and pulls no punches whatsoever. This part is especially on point:

The funniest part about watching these social justice warriors wail and gnash their teeth about the racism of these monuments is knowing these unemployed functional illiterates couldn’t tell you when the Civil War occurred, name two major battles, name five generals, provide a death count within 250,000, or fill in the blank in the phrase Surrender at __________. They don’t know jack shit about history, the Civil War, Lincoln’s true feelings about blacks, or the fact the Democratic Party is the party which suppressed blacks for one hundred years following the Civil War. Only truly ignorant snowflakes think they can erase history by protesting it and trying to destroy monuments to those who fought and died for a cause they believed in.

If these social justice warrior weaklings were transported back in time 154 years to the Gettysburg battlefield where real men displayed real courage and bravery, they would be covered in their own urine cowering behind a tree as Pickett’s charge commenced. Could you imagine any of the Soros paid professional antifa protestors charging across an open field towards certain death? Those pussies would be high tailing it south as fast as their fashion designer sneakers would take them.

If they keep on like they are, we’ll all get to witness that immensely edifying spectacle soon enough…through the scopes of our Evil Black Assault Weapon Rifle Guns, most likely.

Like I said: read it all.

Update! Again: nailed it.

We end the work week with the Media now openly inciting violent insurrection and terrorism against a duly elected President and the citizenry in the wake of what is appearing to be more and more a staged event in Charlottesville; one made all the more tragic in that it cost someone their life. But to the terrorists it’s a matter of eggs and omelets. That said, it’s indeed a sad day when an horrific terror attack in Europe is now categorized in the Day-Ending-In-“Y” Dept. but on our shores a real Confederacy composed of real racialists and real Nazis is in the opening stages of attempting a real coup. And I’m not merely referring to the George Soros rent-a-thugs paid to shatter glass and crack skulls. That is just the fig leaf smokescreen of an excuse for the criminal element that sits in the Senate and House to make a mockery of our laws and traditions and remove a President that threatens their power structure and whom they have a personal hatred for; and by extension all of us who support him and elected him to clean it up and attempt to halt the 100-year slow poisoning of America as founded.

Some of the commenters here say we should chill; that the insane pronouncements from the media are in direct proportion to the loss of power and influence they traditionally have wielded. Maybe so. But when fringe totalitarian groups have the cover of law enforcement to shield them as well as politicians now on both sides legitimizing them as “the good guys” we are heading for an inflection point. Something’s got to give.

Oh, it will. And it damned sure shouldn’t be us. We’ve already given plenty—entirely too much, in fact. I repeat yet again: careful what you wish for, Progressivist fascists.

Share

Playing into their hands?

August 17th, 2017 8 comments

Leave it to Daniel to get to the heart of it.

Street violence raises the bar so that only the violent will participate in protests. If you “no platform” campus speakers, then the only speakers you get will be those willing to face bomb threats, arson, and physical assaults. If you fire people for their views, political activism becomes the province of anonymous trolls and unemployed street thugs. Extremism limits political discourse to extremists. 

If Democrats really want to stop the rise of Neo-Nazi violence, there’s a very easy way. Stop normalizing black nationalism and the Alt-Left. End the racist witch hunts for white privilege. Make it clear that street violence is unacceptable and that racism is bad no matter who it comes from. Allow people you disagree with to express their views without trying to destroy their lives. 

But that’s the opposite of what the Dems will do. They don’t want fewer Neo-Nazis; they want more of them. They don’t want fewer attacks like Charlottesville and Charleston. They want more of them.

Charlottesville is what happens when civil society fails. And those who set the terms of permissive discourse, who control the media, academia and social norms, are responsible for the failure. 

Conservatives don’t have that kind of power. It’s the left that does.

When the left insists that everyone with white skin is part of white supremacy, that Shakespeare, Beethoven and all of Western civilization embody white supremacy, it’s echoing the actual talking points of white supremacy. 

If you tell all Obama critics and Trump supporters that they’re racists often enough, some will decide that maybe they are racists. 

If you tell a student who objects to racially segregated areas on campus that she is a white supremacist, she will be more likely to become one.

Uncomfortable compromises are how we learn to live with each other. It means that there can be memorials of Robert E. Lee and streets named after Malcolm X. Tolerating people whose views we don’t like is one of the best ways to marginalize domestic extremists. When one set of extremists is empowered to wipe out the other, we end up with a civil war. Just ask Edmund Ruffin and John Brown. 

Democrats claim a mandate from the “Right Side of History” to eliminate all the compromises. Catholic nuns must pay for abortions and birth control, Christian bakers and florists must participate in gay weddings, every white person must confess their racism, and every left-wing extremist must get their way. 

That’s how you tear a society apart.

Daniel ends with a plea to the Democrat-Socialists to decide if this is what they really want. Unfortunately for all of us who only wish to be left alone and don’t want to have to make the same hard choices about going to war for their freedom that our Founders did, I think the answer to that question is already clear enough. The real question is whether they can somehow be forced to reconsider before it’s too late—for all of us.

Share

Back on track

August 16th, 2017 1 comment

I admit, I kind of lost a little faith in Trump after his first statement on Charlottesville.

It would seem I was wrong. Or at least a little premature.

REPORTER: They have called on you to defend your national security adviser H.R. McMaster against these attacks.

TRUMP: I did that before. Senator McCain? Senator McCain. You mean the one that voted against Obamacare? Who is Senator McCain? You mean senator McCain who voted against us getting good health care?

REPORTER: Senator McCain said that the alt-right is behind these attacks, and he linked that same group to those that perpetrated the attack in Charlottesville.

TRUMP: Well, I don’t know. I can’t tell you. I’m sure Senator McCain must know what he is talking about, but when you say the alt-right, define alt-right to me. You define it. Go ahead. Define it for me, come on, let’s go.

REPORTER: Senator McCain defined them as the same group.

TRUMP: Okay, what about the alt-left that came charging at [indiscernible] – excuse me – what about the alt-left that came charging at the, as you say, the alt right? Do they have any semblance of guilt?

REPORTERS YELL INDISTINCTLY

TRUMP: What about this? What about the fact that they came charging – they came charging with clubs in their hands swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do.

REPORTERS YELL INDISTINCTLY

TRUMP: As far as I’m concerned, that was a horrible, horrible day. Wait a minute, I’m not finished. I’m not finished, fake news. That was a horrible day.

REPORTERS YELL INDISTINCTLY

TRUMP: I will tell you something. I watched those very closely, much more closely than you people watched it. And you had, you had a group on one side that was bad. And you had a group on the other side that was also very violent. And nobody wants to say that, but I’ll say it right now. You had a group – you had a group on the other side that came charging in without a permit, and they were very, very violent.

REPORTER: Do you think what you call the alt left is the same as neo-Nazis?

TRUMP: Those people – all of those people, excuse me – I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups, but not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch.

They most certainly weren’t. But you can be sure that all of the Antifa scum were Marxists, to the last man Jack of them.

It took the Prez a couple of days, but he finally got it dead on, and every word he said was true—Lying “Liberal” spin notwithstanding. Do note the slams against McCain and the “fake news” press gang, too. Attaboy, Mr President, and bravo.

Update! Bill has more useless blah-blah from McStain and Mittens Romneycare, two of the biggest, most hapless losers ever put forth to march off to ignominious preplanned defeat by the collaborationist GOPe swine. Pigs in a poke, the both of them, bereft of both honor and shame. McStain’s second Tweet is especially revealing of his true allegiances; he’s the perfect embodiment of the Founders’ abhorrence of the very idea of a Career Politician class. Know what I really do enjoy about this, though? The sure knowledge the whole while that neither of these dreary empty-suit connivers will ever be President—just another thing they have in common with their respected colleague, dear friend, and partner in crime, Felonia McPaintsuit.

Share