Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Gone hot

TL, who for some reason I didn’t have in Ye Olde Blogrolle until just now, says it already happened.

Where all of this ventures into the dangerous, civil war territory is that actions such as these have not only been condoned and encouraged by the mayors of the cities in which Antifa is active; cities that have rebuked the laws of the United States by claiming they are “sanctuaries”; cities that have refused to facilitate federal law enforcement; cities that have incited violence by refusing to arrest the perpetrators and instructing their police officers to stand down. They are trying desperately to get some patriot to the republic to take drastic action against these injustices.

When one political party encourages violent action against another political party, that is the definition of civil war. It has gone “hot” and can no longer be ignored by the political party under attack. But, where is the pushback? I mean other than rhetoric. Where are the demands that someone is held accountable for inciting violence? Once again, the Republican Party can not be trusted to protect its supporters.

As Patriot Prayer and the Proud Boys proved, when political speech cannot be protected by laws, self-defense is justified. I recently told attendees of the Patriot Conference in North Carolina that it will become necessary for them to defend themselves from these attacks, because with the support that Antifa has from communist mayors across the land in every city in the nation, the violence will only spread. This violence is designed to intimidate and drive conservative thought into the weeds and to establish communism as the only accepted form of government. I mean, that is the actual goal of both the Democrat Party and their goon squads of pink-hatted women marchers and Antifa.

Antifa is misreading its successes as acquiescence. It takes a lot to rouse a patriot to action, they have jobs and obligations that don’t allow for being arrested and tried, even if the ultimate outcome of the experience is exoneration. But, nothing stirs the blood like watching the violence in the streets that we have seen over the past few weeks.

For a while, patriots will allow the proper authorities to do their jobs; they will wait for Republican politicians to work within the system to make sure these criminals are dealt with in an orderly fashion, but if that fails (and I suggest that it will due to the weakness of Republican politicians to support their supporters) there are those patriots who will not stand by and watch people be assaulted by these goons.

Keep in mind this will not deter the Democrats Socialist Party and their henchmen. They want this civil war to go hot. They want to destroy capitalism and republicanism and recognize that a civil war is the only way to achieve that. Our engagement will only mean that they have been effective, which is why I would prefer that these thugs be arrested and sent to prison for 10 years as they should. That would do more to end this aggression than anything else we could do.

I’ve come to believe that the only way to truly end it is to put a whole damned bunch of them in Boot Hill, enough to cow the rest into frightened passivity and acceptance that America is not their country to rule against the will of its citizenry; that we neither need, wish for, nor will tolerate limitless government; and that we will never willingly be their subjects, serfs, or slaves. In a post from last month, Davis spells things out:

Those who believe in a republican form of government are incapable of understanding a communist. Their lives are designed specifically to distance themselves from politics. They might hold opinions, but think nothing more of it than to express those opinions on occasion. Their opinions are not their agenda. 

Communists live their opinions; breathe them in; they are given to them by their leaders and they become part of their soul. It is their duty to express those opinions, because they are relaying the message of their leaders to the rest. They need to use these opinions to sniff out enemies and confirm the identities of comrades.

Communists have spent generations upon generations to stand where they do now; in the land of their enemy, growing stronger and stronger. People in the United States who are not communists, joined the fight against them yesterday in relative terms, if they have joined it at all.

The fight is something small “r” republicans detest. It is politics taken to the furthest extent. What gives the communists strength is an effort for republicans.

True enough. That detachment and the accompanying reluctance to rush to extreme political measures creates a vulnerability in practical terms; if, as TL says above, you’re incapable of understanding a dedicated and ruthless enemy, you’re probably also incapable of defeating him by any means short of total war. As the Left’s violence spreads outward from the coastal cities and escalates, however, Team Liberty’s awareness that they are in a life-or-death struggle that is NOT avoidable short of surrender will change everything.

As Aesop has said, at that point this conflict becomes an extinction-level event for the Left…and we all find out just how much the world really needs more men in dresses; wretched neurotic women who become hysterical over “mainsplaining,” “microaggressions,” and being “triggered”; weedy vegans in hemp pants and clogs; punk-folk acoustic guitar duos performing in twee coffeehouses; precious microbreweries selling seventeen dollar cheeseburgers; and useless AntiFa layabouts whose only discernible skills are complaining, bluster, and sucker-punching people, then running away.

I figure the answer will be “not much.”

Share

The beat(ing) goes on

Another day, another round of Democrat Socialist assaults.

The Minnesota Democratic Party has suspended a spokesman for calling for violence against Republicans even as two GOP candidates have been assaulted in suspected politically motivated attacks…

The suspension came days after Minnesota state representative Sarah Anderson was punched in the arm after spotting a man destroying Republican yard signs. She said the attack left her scared, and her attacker only desisted when she fled to her car and threw it in reverse.

Shoulda thrown it into D, stomped the gas, and run his ass over. Twice, just to make sure.

“It was just insane. He was charging at me, saying, ‘Why don’t you go kill yourself?'” Anderson told the Washington Free Beacon. “To have someone physically coming after you and attacking you is just disheartening.”

The Plymouth Police Department investigation into Rep. Anderson’s alleged assault remains ongoing. A spokeswoman confirmed the department had identified a suspect, but declined further comment.

Anderson was not the only GOP candidate attacked. First-time state representative candidate Shane Mekeland suffered a concussion after getting sucker punched while speaking with constituents at a restaurant in Benton County. Mekeland told the Free Beacon he has suffered memory loss—forgetting Rep. Anderson’s name at one point in the interview—and doctors tell him he will have a four-to-six week recovery time ahead of him. He said he was cold cocked while sitting at a high top table at a local eatery and hit his head on the floor.

“I was so overtaken by surprise and shock and if this is the new norm, this is not what I signed up for,” he said.

Nobody did. But this is what we’ve got. Daniel says:

It’s not just radical views, it’s radical tactics. The left is growing tired of working within the system. It’s turning into a revolutionary mob bent on destroying its political opponents, economically, politically, culturally and physically.

“Turning”? We’re well past “turning,” safe to say. Here, have another.

A Democratic operative for American Bridge 21st Century, a group founded by David Brock and funded by liberal billionaire George Soros, was arrested Tuesday after the female campaign manager for Nevada GOP gubernatorial nominee Adam Laxalt accused the operative of grabbing and yanking her arm and refusing to let go.

Kristin Davison and other officials for the Nevada attorney general’s campaign said the “battery” left her “terrified and traumatized” — and with bruises on her neck and arms.

“Politics is a little bit aggressive these days, but this is just insane. I’ve never seen anything like it,” Davison, 31, told Fox News on Wednesday.

According to the Laxalt campaign and local law enforcement, Wilfred Michael Stark III, 50, was arrested by the Las Vegas City Marshals on Tuesday evening and remains in custody in the Las Vegas city jail.

“He grabbed my right arm, my leg was lodged between the door and the wall. He twisted my arm, and contorted it behind my back,” she explained. “I was scared. Every time I tried pulling away, he would grab tighter, and pull me closer into him.”

Davison said Stark pulled her head into his chest, bruising her neck, and held her there for several minutes. She said it “felt like an hour.”

“I was scared and screaming ‘stop—you’re hurting me,’” she explained.

Davison said Stark warned Laxalt, saying, “Adam, there’s only one way you can make this stop.”

Quite true—by shooting Stark’s worthless thug ass in the fucking head. Twice, just to make sure.

This next one doesn’t involve actual physical violence. Yet.

Courtney’s Restaurant and Catering owner Tom Courtney said he’s experienced a strong social media backlash because he rented the event room at his Mt. Juliet business to U.S. Senate candidate Rep. Marsha Blackburn on Saturday.

Courtney said he’s been called a Nazi, an abuser, had his life threatened and said his staff has been verbally attacked.

Hundreds of posters on social media said they would boycott his restaurant because it was a local venue to Blackburn, who is running for a seat in the U.S. Senate against former Democratic Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen.

“I did not think anything of it,” Courtney said. “I run a business. We were going to serve a hundred-plus people.”

Courtney said he initially didn’t endorse the candidate, and just was being a businessman, but after what he’s been through he can support only Blackburn.

“I’m one who votes for the person, not the party,” he said. “But with everyone saying they are going to boycott my restaurant because Marsha came here to treat my employees and customers, I can’t even fathom people like that.”

Courtney used social media to defend himself, writing “This is a family restaurant. It sells food. When people come in and order food, we sell it to them. We book events for all sorts of things including charities and business alliances, social organizations and such. We do NOT discriminate on race, religion or political affiliation. We have all manner of people eating in our establishment every day. They sit beside each other as neighbors and get along just fine. We are a family restaurant and we treat everyone as family with integrity and respect. Our employees’ political affiliations are their own. We have both parties represented and we work shoulder to shoulder each day. We would appreciate you treating us with the same respect as we treat each of you.”

Not gonna happen, because they not only don’t respect you—they don’t respect or even acknowledge your right to disagree with them, or to associate in any way with anyone who does. Nor may you enter into a purely-business relationship with dissidents from the True Faith, no matter your own views, not even if it’s a one-shot deal.

In case anyone on our side is still somehow not getting it: THEY HATE YOU. They want you either SUBJUGATED, or DEAD. They are not your friends, not your neighbors, not your countrymen. They are not “the loyal oppposition.” They are the enemy. They cannot be debated, reasoned with, compromised with, or accommodated in a manner fair and/or acceptable to both sides. They must be CRUSHED, utterly. Their megalomania, their greed, their insatiable lust for unchecked power has now brought us to the point that, to adapt a great old line, this country isn’t big enough for the both of us. Too bad and all, but…well, there it is. And there’s no avoiding the fact any longer.

Glenn says: “You don’t hear of Republicans targeting places like this for hosting Democrat events.” No, but it’s probably time we should. Otherwise, this is never going to end.

Share

Worse? Worse than WHAT?!?

He’s right. Incomprehensible though it may seem, he’s right.

Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation was more than attempted character assassination, it was the liberals’ warning shot. Intended to be lethal, it also signaled the next one will be worse. No group is more dependent on the Supreme Court’s power than America’s left and they will stop at nothing to prevent losing further ground there.

The left’s anti-Kavanaugh strategy was clear. An accretion of accusations, rolled out to roil the press, was meant to sink a nomination they could not outright defeat. Timed to coincide with the calendar’s closing and punctuated by increasing demands, it was meant to bleed the nomination to death, not down it with a single blow.

That liberals’ orchestrated effort took both Congress and Court to new lows was not their concern. Their one and only goal was in not seeing the Supreme Court move any more to the right. Yet, the left’s effort also served notice: If they have their way, the process will only get worse.

That such an effort would be expended on this pick may seem surprising. After all, Kavanaugh was replacing Kennedy, another Republican nominee who often voted with conservatives. Kavanaugh’s ascension to the Court would not so much quantitatively change its 5-4 conservative majority, as it would qualitatively change it.

Looking ahead, the left’s reasoning becomes clearer, though. The Court’s next two oldest justices are liberals Ginsburg and Breyer. At 85 and 80 respectively, they are 15 and 10 years older than the next oldest justice, the conservative Thomas.

Liberals could easily see the Court move quantitatively to the right quite a bit — potentially going to a 7-2 conservative majority — before having an obvious chance to swing it back to the left.

Looking backward, liberals’ fear is understandable. America’s left have a long history of dependence on the Supreme Court. The Court has been the primary means of advancing their political agenda for decades. Unsurprisingly, they have a sentimental attachment to the Court.

The Court’s lack of dependence on a political majority has been crucial to liberals, America’s smallest ideology. Lacking the thick edge of the political wedge, America’s left have sought the thin one of the Court to advance issues for which they could never have constructed a public majority.

Of course, nobody ever went far wrong expecting more and worse from the Left. But they seem to have found another tack to take now that the Court is slipping from their grasp:

In 2016, Harvard Law professor Mark Tushnet urged liberal judges and justices to abandon “defensive-crouch liberalism” and remake legal precedent in their image. Two years later, he told Vox it’s time to “abolish” the Supreme Court by reversing the idea of judicial review — giving the Supreme Court a say on whether or not laws are constitutional.

“Do you think we’d be better off if we abolished the Supreme Court in its current manifestation?” Vox’s Sean Illing asked. Tushnet responded, “Yeah, I do. I’m a big fan of the dialogic approach.”

Tushnet also argued that judicial review would prevent the American people from debating constitutional issues on their own. “Judicial review may actually impair the public’s ability to engage in serious thinking about what the Constitution means…In a way, the Supreme Court simply takes on this conversation for itself, and leaves the citizenry as bystanders.”

Discussing the rejection of judicial review, Tushnet insisted, “I’ve felt this way for my entire career, regardless of the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court.”

The Harvard law professor even suggested that Supreme Court justices should be subject to 18-year term limits. “I think there is some enthusiasm among Democrats about alternative constitutional designs, but they can’t do anything about it now. But if they win in 2018 or 2020 or beyond, who knows?”

I do like that sneaky little “alternative constitutional designs” subterfuge, don’t you? Weasel-wording rarely gets more slippery than that construction, and my hat’s off to this oleaginous tyranny-pimp for it. Most scrumptiously delicious part of the whole grease-pie, though? This:

Despite Tushnet’s insistence that he has always “felt this way,” in 2016 he argued something entirely different. In an article published in May 2016, the Harvard Law professor argued that liberals should abandon “defensive-crouch constitutionalism.”

Among other things, the professor argued that liberals should embrace the idea that “The culture wars are over; they lost, we won.” He boldly compared the conservative “losers” to the defeated Axis powers from World War II.

“My own judgment is that taking a hard line (‘You lost, live with it’) is better than trying to accommodate the losers, who – remember – defended, and are defending, positions that liberals regard as having no normative pull at all,” he argued. “Trying to be nice to the losers didn’t work well after the Civil War, nor after Brown. (And taking a hard line seemed to work reasonably well in Germany and Japan after 1945.)”

To quote Treacher yet again: they’ll say anything they think will get them through the next five minutes. Absolutely anything at all. And they’ll directlt contradict themselves eighteen times before lunch each and every day, and never bat an eye over it.

Ahem. You lost. Live with it, fuckface—every last sobbing, squalling one of you. Or go lie down in the tub and open a vein, for all I give a shit.

Share

Circle jerks

Walsh takes a peek at some root causes.

At some point, America’s high schools, liberals arts colleges, and universities got taken over by Leftist radicals, who starting in the 1960s had burrowed into the system as eternal graduate students and who gradually emerged, like parasites, to devour their hosts. The result has been increasingly politicized, feminized institutions that, in many cases, bear almost no resemblance to their original incarnations besides their names. They’ve become an expensive parody of education, some costing into six figures per year, all in. Obsessed  with “social justice,” they bristle with diversity administrators and other barnacles; teaching has become secondary to the schools’ primary mission of ideological indoctrination; and the diploma has become simply a very expensive certificate of attendance, different from a mail-order diploma mill only in the prestige of the name on the piece of paper.

Okay, okay, we all know that by now. But what we didn’t know for sure — but were certainly beginning to suspect — is that all this “education” is also making our kids crazy…

This story by Sylvia Mathews Burwell in Foreign Affairs seems to me to have the wrong end of the stick. The snowflakes streaming into the shrinks’ offices have, in some cases, literally been driven mad by the “intellectual” atmosphere they’ve been marinating in for years. Further, she accepts with credulity the value of “mental health professionals,” most of whom never met someone who was not also, in their eyes, a prospective “patient.” When you have a degree in psychiatry or psychology, everybody looks like a nut to you.

There are several possible causes for all this angst, agita, and anomie examined, but for my money Burwell could have just stopped with this one:

Today’s young adults seem to arrive at college with less resiliency and a lower appetite for risk and failure. In raising their children, parents have focused more on protecting them from stress and anxiety and less on teaching them how to cope. Today’s incoming classes are of a generation that received athletic trophies merely for participating. Becoming so used to winning makes it all the harder to deal with losing. It makes it harder to learn resiliency. On top of this, parents have created a culture of risk aversion. Today’s students were warned as children not to walk home alone, and they grew up playing on playgrounds designed to break their falls. In many ways, children have been taught both explicitly and implicitly to avoid risk, and for many of them, the resulting safety has made them less capable of coping with failure and disappointment.

Right on the money, although I’d say it’s by no means the whole story, and that the problem has its origins way, way before college. Either way, Walsh offers a solution:

The real solution, of course, is not to be found in Viennese Voodoo, but in forcing children to confront the fact that life isn’t fair, that bad things happen to good people, and that bumps, bruises and broken bones aren’t all bad if the trade-off was worth it. Today’s students are suffering from a problem inherent in liberalism: that when the gap between what ought to be and what actually is becomes unbridgeable, something’s got to give.

Naturally, Burwell’s “solution” is “more education, creating awareness, and teaching faculty, staff, and students how to prevent, recognize, and respond.” In other words: more talky-talk, more touchy-feelz, more “dialogue,” more “counseling,” more bootless self-absorption and navel-gazing. More of the very thing that created the problem in the first place.

And round and round and round it goes, never getting anywhere. As with psychiatry itself, there’s never any cure, just eternally ongoing therapy—which means no resolution, ever. Even the very concept of “cure” itself is rejected as an unenlightened view, a sort of false consciousness one needs to be “educated” out of; the process is all that matters. Walsh calls it “the perfect racket,” and that’s exactly what it is.

Share

Two kinds of power

An astute take on the situation.

Clinton, who is still smarting over winning the popular vote and losing the Electoral College vote (the only vote that matters — for now), has spent the better part of two years trying to delegitimize the 2016 election. Her voters — the sort who scream helplessly at the sky in protest — have been pumping each other up, grasping for any and all justifications for their “resistance” to the “authoritarian regime” now occupying the White House.

It’s not enough to say Republicans and Democrats differ on policy or even disagree on first principles. According to the true believers, the other party is in the business of destruction. We used to believe in a democratic republic, we put “ballots over bullets.” Today, votes are the equivalent of violence.

It was remarkable to hear the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee effectively endorse that point of view. No civility is possible until Democrats win.

Why such rhetoric? Why now? Truth is, it’s been a long time coming.

Antonio García Martínez, an author and contributor to Wired magazine, summed up the landscape perfectly in a tweet: “The Right is angry because they have near-total political power, but little cultural power. The Left is angry because they have near-total cultural power, but little political power. Each covets what the other has and feels is rightfully theirs.”

Underneath it all is a deep and seething resentment that’s palpable, but also a feeling of powerlessness. Why can’t they understand? That’s what all the screaming on Kavanaugh was about on Capitol Hill. That’s why the screaming continues today.

How much worse could it get? Plenty.

It’s a fairly short distance from a gaggle of protesters screaming at a senator and his wife in a tony Washington, D.C. restaurant to shooting a senator whose vote “put our lives at risk.”

We’ve seen it before. We saw it in the 19th century before the Civil War, when a pro-slavery Democrat nearly beat an abolitionist Republican to death with his cane on the Senate floor. We saw it in the early 1970s, when there were more than 1,900 bombings in 18 months targeting police and military installations.

Whether or not Kavanaugh’s confirmation rallies Democrats or Republicans to the polls on Nov. 6 doesn’t really matter. A narrow Democratic majority in the House resolves little. Politically and culturally, we’ll remain as divided as ever.

An inescapable state of affairs, given that the divide is a direct and inevitable result of the eternal conflict between liberty and tyranny, between (at least somewhat) Constitutional government and despotism. Those are the sides, and you can only pick one, with no possible way to split the difference, compromise, or bridge the gap. He’s right to say that “…a narrow Democratic majority in the House resolves little.” No one election could do it. In fact, it may well turn out that the dispute can’t be resolved via elections at all. But in the end, it WILL be resolved—one way or another.

Share

The Trigglypuff vote

They deserve each other, and real Americans deserve better.

Commenting on the irrational female rage unleashed by the Kavanaugh confirmation circus, Stephen Green remarks: “The Democrats have worked hard to lock down the Trigglypuff vote, but at what cost of even slightly more moderate voters?” But do such voters really exist?

We are more than 25 years into a cycle of increasing polarization that arguably began with Bill Clinton’s election as president. Clinton’s radicalism — remember the so-called “assault weapons” ban? — sparked a backlash that cost Democrats the control of the House that they’d held for 40 years. Everything thereafter increased the partisan divide: The budget standoff that led to the government shutdown, the Lewinsky scandal and the impeachment crisis, the Florida recount in 2000, the Iraq War, the recapture of Congress by Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats, Obama’s election in 2008, the Tea Party movement, on and on.

It is not the case that America’s politics have become more divisive because the Republican Party has moved further right. Liberal pundits, commenting from within their ideological cocoons, habitually apply labels — “far right,” “extremist,” “white nationalist,” etc. — to depict the GOP as beholden to a dangerous fringe, but this is just paranoid propaganda. The typical Republican voter in 2018 is actually no more “extreme” than his father was in 1988. Nor is the policy agenda of the GOP now any more “far right” than it was in the presidency of Ronald Reagan. The cause of the increased partisan divide is not that the Republicans have moved right, but that Democrats have moved left.

What happened, when did it happen and why did it happen?

Just this: enough Americans woke up to what the Democrat-Socialists really were—as opposed to what they misleadingly claimed themselves to be—to reject them firmly and fully by putting Trump in the Oval Office, which drove them batshit insane. Room for lots more detaIled analysis, natch, but that’s the nut of it.

Having worked so hard to lock down the TrigglyPuff vote, as Stephen Green says, Democrats are now held hostage by the mob mentality of the identity-politics “social justice” coalition they’ve built.

This is what the Kavanaugh confirmation circus confirmed: Democrats are now the party of TrigglyPuff, of angry college girls driven to fits of insanity — a deranged mob clawing at the doors of the Supreme Court — by the irrationality of their “progressive” belief system.

What about those “slightly more moderate voters” who might be alienated by the Democrats’ surrender to extremism? They don’t seem to exist. Polls indicate that the Democrats’ advantage in the generic congressional ballot is holding firm around 7 or 8 points. Why?

I’ll just answer that question with a quote from Huck Finn: “H’ain’t we got all the fools in town on our side? And ain’t that a big enough majority in any town?” In towns like NYC, Chicago, LA, San Francisco, Detroit, etc, yes. Yes, it surely is.

(Via Insty)

Share

Why they’re mad

Fighting mad, one might say.

Kavanaugh was angry because his life had been destroyed. The left is angry because it wants power.

Leftist political anger inflicted sadistic torments on Brett Kavanaugh for political reasons. And the media pretends that this political anger is somehow more worthy than the outrage of its victim.

The media left demanded to know what right Brett Kavanaugh had to be angry. They mocked his pain, ridiculed his suffering with the venal contempt and snarky hatred that now passes for leftist comedy.

But a better question would be what right does the left have to its endless anger?

Eight years of running the country didn’t leave it any more generous toward its opponents, any less hungry for power, or any less tribal, partisan and furious than it had been in 2007. The left isn’t angry because it cares about rape victims. Not when it’s lining up to buy tickets to Bill and Hillary’s latest tour.

It’s angry because, as Holder tweeted, it wants power.

And it’s willing to destroy every political, civic, cultural, social and moral norm to get it. The left doesn’t believe in norms because it doesn’t believe in any compromise or standard. All it has is its will to power.

Some people have the right to win elections (Hillary Clinton) and others (Donald Trump) don’t. Some justices have the right to be confirmed without campaigns of personal destruction (Democrat nominees like Kagan and Sotomayor) and others (Republican nominees like Bork, Thomas and Kavanaugh) don’t.

And some people have the right to be angry (New York Times and Washington Post readers) and others (Trump supporters and Front Page Magazine readers) don’t. The entitlement of double standards is essential to the leftist quest for power which is about manufacturing perceived inequality in order to administrate mandates of total inequality. Disparate impact justifies affirmative action. If black workers or students underperform, then poor white workers and students must go to the back of the line.

It deprives people of their rights and it responds to their anger with more anger. In its rage, it wipes out every political and social norm it can manage until its opponents are being hounded out of restaurants, fired from their jobs, assaulted on the street, shot at charity baseball games, smeared as rapists, doxed by reporters and staffers, censored on the internet and eavesdropped on by corrupt federal agencies.

There isn’t a legal or political norm that Obama didn’t violate during his time in office. Reporters were spied on. So were Republicans. The IRS and the FBI were used to target political opponents. A man was sent to jail for making a YouTube video. The DOJ was used to go after folks who mocked Obama.

After eight years of political terror, the Democrats have settled into accusing their political opponents of treason and demanding their imprisonment, everything from intimidation to death threats to attempted murder, and trying to destroy a Supreme Court nominee based on the most baseless allegations.

This is what leftists have done to our political norms. And what enrages them about Kavanaugh is not any feigned concern for our political norms, but that our norms survived their tantrums and dirty tricks.

To Hell with them, too. If they want to see anger, let them keep right on. They just might find out eventually that “Kill ’em all, let God sort ’em out” ain’t just a bumper sticker anymore.

Share

Ignorance, or malice?

Explaining things to dumbasses.

The Senate was always intended to represent the states, not the people and, as such, its equal membership across the states makes sense. It is not that the people are represented unequally in the Senate, it is that they are not supposed to be represented in that way.

As James Madison wrote in Federalist 62, “the equal vote allowed to each State is at once a constitutional recognition of the portion of sovereignty remaining in the individual States, and an instrument for preserving that residuary sovereignty.” The Senate he helped create did both, representing the states as states, while reflecting and preserving the balance of federalism struck at the constitutional convention.

The Senate did exactly what it was designed to do until the populist progressives last altered its makeup in 1913 with the passage of the 17th Amendment. There were some problems with the old system, in which state legislatures elected U.S. senators, and increasing deadlocks around the turn of the 20th century meant that seats went unfilled more frequently. But rather than fixing that system, progressives abolished it and made the Senate a mal-apportioned version of the House by making its members elected by the people directly.

This, perhaps, is the root of the problem. Changing to popular election makes the Senate look no different from one of the state senates, where voters elect state senators from districts that, while larger than state house districts, are nonetheless equal in size. The change in electoral method has made us forget the Senate’s purpose of representing the states as political entities, not merely as oversized districts.

The results have been clear. Since 1913, power has flowed steadily away from state capitals and toward Washington, D.C. The Senate, in this respect, has worked in Democrats’ favor for 100 years as the former bulwark of federalism is now subject to the same centralizing trends as the House and the presidency. In a nation that is increasingly diverse, the trend should be the opposite, with states gaining more power from the central government so that the people need not be governed by one-size-fits-all legislation. The only change the Senate needs is returning it to its intended purpose as the representative of the states.

A Senate in which states are represented equally is not broken. If reporters and pundits have deficiencies in their civics education, that is not the fault of the Senate, and neither is it the Senate’s fault that Democrats have not held a majority since January 2015. Four years’ absence from power is not a structural defect; it is a flaw in the quality of their Senate candidates. Instead of tearing down institutions, Democrats should gain power the old-fashioned way: by nominating candidates who can win elections.

Which is their whole problem: not enough of us are either brainwashed enough, stupid enough, or cowardly enough to sit back and humbly accept the burdensome yoke of communist tyranny. Not yet, anyway. Meanwhile, half of the dimbulb Left doesn’t have the vaguest clue about the hows, whys, and wherefores of American government. And the other half is violently, unalterably opposed to it, and hate it worse than cancer.

Fundamental transformation update! Walsh cuts right to the chase:

Hillary Clinton, the most vengeful, spiteful loser in the history of American electoral politics, has abandoned the Left’s always deceptive, now evanescent call for “civility.” She insists there can be no civility between the parties until the Democrats are restored to power—and, by extension, the Republicans are vanquished.

What Hillary Clinton and her allies are really calling for is not civility, but submission. Like True Believers everywhere, theirs is a Manichean view of the world in which one side is wholly and manifestly good, the other deplorably and irredeemably evil. There can be no victory but total victory, no matter how long the struggle takes. After all, “there is only the fight.”

Short of civil war, there’s a clear solution to this two-state problem, and it’s been available from the beginning: federalism. The Left’s drive to diminish the power of the states and to consolidate power at the federal level is the reason why it hates the Senate and the Electoral College. The bulk of Hillary’s popular-vote margin came in California, where every vote for her beyond a one-vote majority in a winner-take-all state was wasted. The irony is that as long as Democrats flock together along the coasts, they’ll continue losing.

So their endgame is clear: the effective abolition of the states for all national political purposes. Talk about “fundamental change.” Because when you cut away all the boilerplate and the verbiage, the mock-piety and pretend horror, and strip the battle down to its essentials, what’s left is this: will the United States remain, as its founders intended, a federal republic, or will it become something more akin to a plebiscitary democracy, in which all important questions are decided in the heat and passion of the moment?

Actually, they aren’t any too interested in democracy either, unless it’s the sham, rigged variety wherein the dictator always takes a hundred and twenty percent of the votes and is the only one on the ballot, his prospective opponents having all been murdered or jailed. Or, say, like Philadelphia back in Comrade Barrack’s day.

Share

Burn in Hell, loser(s)

I missed out on commemorating this most joyous anniversary last week.

Fifty-one years-ago this week, Ernesto “Che” Guevara got a major dose of his own medicine. Without trial, he was declared a murderer, stood against a wall, and shot. If the saying “What goes around comes around” ever fit, it’s here.

“When you saw the beaming look on Che’s face as his victims were tied to the stake and blasted apart by the firing squad,” said a former Cuban political prisoner to this writer, “you saw there was something seriously, seriously wrong with Che Guevara.”

The one genuine “accomplishment” in Che Guevara’s life was the mass-murder of defenseless men and boys. Under his own gun dozens died. Under his orders thousands crumpled. At everything else, Che Guevara failed abysmally, even risibly. For instance, during his Bolivian “guerrilla” campaign, Che split his forces whereupon they got hopelessly lost and bumbled around, half-starved, half-clothed and half-shod, without any contact with each other for six months before being wiped out. They didn’t even have WWII vintage walkie-talkies to communicate and seemed incapable of applying a compass reading to a map. They spent much of the time walking in circles and were usually within a mile of each other. During this blundering they often engaged in ferocious firefights against each other.

“You hate to laugh at anything associated with Che, who murdered so many,” says Felix Rodriguez, the Cuban-American CIA officer who played a key role in tracking him down in Bolivia. “But when it comes to Che as “guerrilla” you simply can’t help but guffaw.”

So, for many, the question remains: how did such an incurable doofus, sadist and epic idiot attain such iconic status?

Well, essentially, because all Leftists are moronic shitstains nursing violent revenge fantasies against everyone who is more successful, more talented, more courageous, more intelligent, and more worthwhile human beings generally than they’ll ever be. Via Ed, Tim Blair takes the ball and runs with it, by linking the socialists’ standard-issue fever-dreams of mass slaughter as embodied by the hideous and despicable Che to another murderous commie Progtard.

I repeat: burn in Hell, every last demonic man Jack of youse.

Share

White on white

Re the hilarious irony attendant to the previous post, Porter spells it out for the obtuse.

The truth is if you’re not really looking you won’t find much about Portland in which to take offense. It’s when you tune into the ambient noise that the inputs become ugly. That’s because Portland isn’t just a liberal town. It’s a red or dead one. It’s a place where Maoists, Bolsheviks, and Khmer Rouge can be safely nurtured without fear of hostile intrusion by humanity.

What that means in practice is that a visitor from Earth is as likely to see a lunatic woman stepping over homeless on the sidewalk while shrieking to no one about heartless Trump, as they are a riot of unemployed black-clad baristas unselfconsciously smashing the city’s progressive retail outlets. I have seen both.

That’s why I found the following two tweet-embedded videos so unsurprising.

In them, antifa takes it upon themselves to commandeer a public intersection and scream racial profanities at confused or disobedient motorists. By racial profanities, I obviously mean anti-white.

In the first video, an obese middle-aged moron whose legs can not be seen because they are camouflaged in cut-off shorts confronts a driver who is so fascist that he actually tried to drive on public streets. Understandably enraged, the communist plumbs the vast empty expanse of his brain for the most vile insult he can imagine to hurl. And there it was.

You’re a Little Whitey, Aren’t Ya?

I hope liberal parents will be content in the knowledge of their 1.3 children suffering that sneer for a lifetime.

Though perhaps realizing he had unerringly pinned the tale on the Nazi, the perceptive pylon repeated his accusation multiple times. White! White! White! You’re White! screamed the white.

I understand there is no more hideous pejorative to the leftist mind, but to the swarms of extraterrestrials that cloud the Oregon skies, this act of militant idio-supremacist moral preening must seem like ample enough reason to turn this planet into a bauxite mine, and move on to more intelligent locales.

While white men screaming “white man!” at other white men as an insult is a stupidity difficult to exceed, his ‘comrades’ certainly weren’t dissuaded from the attempt. In another intersection hijacking, an elderly driver induced antifa’s crusaders to attack his car at not one but two traffic lights. Would you guess this attack was triggered by the driver dragging Tom Robinson by the neck to a lynching tree? Well, it was nearly that bad: he was dragging his own old white body through a green light. And that, Atticus Lenin, is even more raysis.

In the sidebar Tweets, he elaborates:


And then a commenter unleashes this astute observation:

The older I get, the more I see it as a spiritual problem. I heard a talk by a priest where he describes a consistently unnecessary negative attitude as a mindset that is only different in degree from those in hell.

These people are practicing for hell and it’s terrifying. From a human perspective, I do legitimately pity them, and I’m not being sarcastic. Their internal world is entirely thirst, itch, dryness, insecurity, bitterness, self loathing. Even their jokes aren’t really jokes, just mean spirited punchlines lacking either structure or joy.

That doesn’t excuse the need to restore order and restrain their violence by a long shot. You can’t have violence running rampant. But it’s all to say it’s a spiritual problem at heart. Argument by itself is not going to work. This is why we’ve failed reaching them, at least in part. They’re looking for meaning, and lower taxes and slogans (but libertarian or conservative) is not going to cut it.

Nothing is. Well, except maybe actual edged weapons. And projectile types, too. And maybe, at some further point, canister, grapeshot, and a few good helpings of time-on-target. Which is probably a good thing, since it’s become nigh impossible to parody them, and they’re so self-righteously thick they’re oblivious to mockery.

Share

The Loser Party

T’is a consummation devoutly to be wished.

In spite of what the polling may say, the Democrats are going to be hurt badly next month. The party line is that the Kavanaugh confirmation has energized voters as never before. But the failure to stop Kavanaugh’s nomination will result in some Democrats becoming so dejected with constantly losing, that they will simply refuse to vote.

Many Democratic voters may feel they are going to lose anyway, so what is the sense of voting? This would represent another in the long string of losses for the Democratic Party.

These losses started in 2010 when the GOP gained control of the House of Representatives by picking up a whopping 63 seats. This was the largest midterm election loss of a sitting president’s party since 1938.

Although Barack Obama was re-elected president in 2012, his party’s losses continued. In 2014, the Democrats lost control of the U.S. Senate. In 2016, Democrats lost the presidency. Since Trump’s election, the Democrats keep vowing to “resist,” yet—with the notable exception of the Obamacare repeal—they lose every major policy decision.

What will happen in 2018?

The Democrats are likely to suffer more losses. Republicans are running on a record of a vibrant economy, a more secure world, and lower taxes for all Americans. The Democrats are running simply to stop Trump. While the polls may show that Trump is unpopular and has a low personal approval rating, the president’s policies are actually quite popular. Ultimately, those polls do not reflect how Americans will vote.

A more fundamental problem with the polls is they tend to use samples that are not representative of the population. Nearly all give too much weight to Democratic voters. This is what happened in 2016 when the polls indicated there was almost no way Trump could win the presidency.

My prediction: the midterms will end with 57 or 58 Republican U.S. Senators, though depending on how a couple of key races break, the GOP could have as many as 60 seats when it’s all over. The House will be more of a challenge, but the Republicans will maintain their majority and Democrats will feel even more disgusted with their party.

The Democrats will become the party of losers. Insisting on policies that remedy perceived social “injustices” instead of concentrating on economic issues that benefit the majority of Americans will continue to erode their base. The name-calling and disdain for a president whose policies have galvanized the economy around after eight years of Obama stagnation will erode the base even further.

America could use a healthy Democratic Party. But it’s doubtful this dysfunctional party leadership will change its priorities any time soon. If that’s indeed the case, we could be witnessing the Democrats’ death throes.

America could maybe use a Democratic Party that wasn’t A) Leftist; B) filled with hatred for all things American; C) something better than pig-ignorant about American history, its founding ideals, its very reason for existing; D) corrupt and treasonous to its very marrow; E) ehhhh, why go on? That Democratic Party 1) does not exist; 2) has not existed for decades; 3) is not coming back, ever.

So yeah, let them crash and burn. They’re a plague, a curse, a suppurating boil on the neck of this nation. They’re parasitic, a luxury we can no longer afford. They’re a threat to American liberty and institutions. And thank merciful Heaven, with their Kavanaugh fiasco they have finally gone too far and look like being on the way out at last. Aesop notes just one of the more amusing among many signs of the coming apocalypse:

So after President Trump endorsed the Republican in the TN Senate race, and celebutard rookie Saylor Twit endorsed the gun-grabbing Democrat jackhole, the (R) has jumped overnight to an 8 point lead.
 
Thanks, Tay, you airheaded fluffbrain. Maybe you could endorse Fauxican Bob O’Rourke in Texas, while you’re up.

It all adds up to nothing good for the Democrat-Socialist scum. But the writing on the wall has an additional aspect which might bode even worse:

Democrats have behaved badly before, and it certainly didn’t unify the GOP. The Kavanaugh attacks and the GOP defense against those attacks had some very unusual characteristics that gave them that unifying potential and ensured that the potential was fulfilled:

(2) Kavanaugh was seen by all as a sort of Boy Scout. He was nominated in part because there was no hint of scandal around him.

(3) And yet the most vicious attack ever seen against a SCOTUS nominee was launched against this particular candidate. The Roy Moore attacks worked in large part because the moderate wing of the GOP hated him, and he was seen even on the right as a bit loopy. Brett Kavanaugh had none of those characteristics. So although the GOP was expecting Kavanaugh to be attacked during his hearings, they were not expecting a combination of Borking (in the first stage for Kavanaugh) and the Clarence Thomas hearings (in the second, post-Ford stage), with the offensiveness of the accusations in that latter stage exponentially more serious than those leveled against Clarence Thomas by Anita Hill.

(7) At that point, it was the moderate wing of the GOP that was galvanized. They suddenly discovered that the rules they thought they’d been playing by all this time, the ones they thought at least some of their Democratic colleagues shared, meant nothing to the opposition. They either had never held them at all, or were more than willing to abandon them—and all sense of decency—in their lust for power.

(8) And that’s why it was the moderate side of the right that stepped up to the plate and delivered the goods in the Kavanaugh fight. Lindsay Graham, Susan Collins, Chuck Grassley, Mitch McConnell, all of them harshly vilified in the past by the more conservative wing of the party, found themselves uttering words that those who had previously reviled them were now cheering.

It remains my firm belief that the Democrat-Socialists—having so extravagantly and irreversibly dropped the mask and let their freak flag fly, and with real Americans invigorated by win after win since Trump took office—are headed for a shellacking in November of truly historic proportions. And then the fun will REALLY start.

Share

Declaration of intent to double-down

Because the crazy we’ve seen over the last two years, having reached a scalding supernova with the Kavanaugh Krapfest, hasn’t been NEARLY batshit loony enough.

Politico “After failing to stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Democrats wonder if it’s time to be more ruthless.”

No, really; it would seem that, against all odds and reason, they’re actually serious. Aesop, needless to say, is on it.

Seriously, Sh*tForBrains Libtards, last warning:

Make one move in that direction, and this is where your party ends…

Same day. Hand to heaven.

You will be hunted for sport, tortured for pleasure, and dissected, alive, for practice.
And then, your families, lest the error multiply.

You’re not as smart as feral hogs, not as hard to find as deer, and not as wary as bear, all of whose heads decorate legions of trophy walls from coast to coast. You’ll last about a New York minute, which is ironically fitting.

Nobody’s going to give you a proportional response, they’re going to pay you back 1000:1 at minimum, and most likely, simply decide that you’re all a luxury we can no longer afford.

You’re going to start disappearing in batches, and your heads are going to be used as decorations in the town square. People will tell their grandkids about how you all went suddenly and completely extinct, and then your final resting places will, likely as not, be roadside ditches as you flee, in scenes reminiscent of the Highway To Hell from Kuwait City to Baghdad circa 1991. (And FTR, Canada doesn’t want you, and Mexico will eat you for lunch, and those are the friendliest responses to your would-be refugee status. Cuba is liable to just sink your rafts at sea, and let sharks and crabs solve that problem without letting it get to their shores.) What happens to you will be used to frighten children around campfires for decades, and then you’ll be completely forgotten.

And everyone else will nod their head, cluck their tongues, and mutter something like “Fucked around and found out…”

He’s just getting warmed up, pulling it all together with this:

You might want to call that party off before it starts. Because once it does, it’s not going to be half-assed: it’s going to be for keeps. And you’re going to get sorted out once and for all.

Too bad they ain’t listening. They really do seem to believe that there’s a market out there for even more puerile, obnoxious, shit-witted tantrums, hissy fits, disruptions, harrassment, and random violence.

Also, note well: this is official representatives of the Democrat-Socialist Party who are talking about being “more ruthless,” not their semi-coherent, drooling, slope-shouldered, asylum-escapee footsoldiers. The Party apparatchiki are supposed to be the reasonable ones—the grownups, the ones with careers, bank accounts, and secure positions invested and therefore at least some motivation to resist careening off the rails entirely. They’re supposed to be the brakemen on Krazy Train, the ones holding the others back, preventing the fringe characters from taking a flying leap right over the edge.

“More ruthless”? “MORE”? Somebody needs to ask Steve Scalise about that one. Or Mrs Rand Paul, at the very least.

Update! Hillary!™ really is the gift that keeps on giving, ain’t she?

In an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton said it’s time for the left to stop being civil and take the gloves off.

“You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about,” she said. “That’s why I believe if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again. But until then the only thing the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength.”

Wow. I’m just…wow. I mean…WOW.

Her remarks come just a day after Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was ceremonially sworn in to serve at the highest court in the land following a weeks-long campaign by leftists to paint him as a serial gang rapist. While he was taking the official oath of office on Saturday, protestors stormed the Supreme Court building and banged on the doors in an effort to force them open. Several Republican senators who supported Kavanaugh’s confirmation have received death threats, have had their home addresses published online, and been chased out of restaurants.

So the question remains: What civility do liberals have left to abandon? How can the left get any less civil than they already are without breaking into open street riots? Does this mean instead of threatening violence liberals should actually follow through and harm those who disagree with them?

Umm, maybe you didn’t notice, but both of those things—riots, and the escalation from mouthy threats to actual acts of violence—have already happened, you know. They’ve been going on for two years now, actually. Which sad, sorry fact brings us ’round to this:

Take the example of Hillary Clinton. In the very first sentence in her new scaremongering essay, which makes the case that America’s “democratic institutions and traditions are under siege,” she attacks our democratic institutions and traditions. “It’s been nearly two years since Donald Trump won enough Electoral College votes to become president of the United States,” the piece begins.

The intimation, of course, widely shared by the mainstream left, is that Trump isn’t a legitimate president even though he won the election in the exact same way every other president in U.S. history has ever won election. According to our long-held democratic institutions and traditions, you become president through the Electoral College, not the non-existent popular vote.

So when Clinton, or writers at Vox, or The Atlantic, or Politico, or new liberal favorite Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, say it’s “well past time we eliminate the Electoral College, a shadow of slavery’s power on America today that undermines our nation as a democratic republic,” you’re either tragically ignorant about our system or cynically delegitimizing it. Or maybe it’s both.

The Electoral College isn’t ornamental; it exists to undercut the tyranny of direct democracy and ensure the entire nation is represented in national elections. When you attack it, you’re not condemning Trump, you are, in a very palpable way, attacking a core idea that girds much of our governance.

With this in mind, it’s not surprising that the anti-majoritarian Senate is also suddenly problematic for many Democrats. When a NBC reporter, commenting on a Washington Post article, says “the idea that North Dakota and New York get the same representation in the Senate has to change,” he’s probably not ignorant about why the Founders implemented proportional voting, or why there is a difference between the House and Senate, or why the Tenth Amendment exists. He simply favors a system he thinks would allow liberals to force others to accept his preferred policies.

How many times did a Democrat even mention the Constitution during the Kavanaugh hearings? I imagine, if we’re lucky, a perfunctory handful. Trump, far more than the previous administration, has strengthened proper separations of power. One of the ways he’s done it is by his judicial appointments. And Democrats’ inability to make any distinction between the neutral processes of governing and their partisan goals makes them, to this point, a far bigger threat to constitutional norms than the president.

The Constitution, like just about everything else, is brought up by them only for purposes of undermining it further.

Share

Bought and paid for

And very, very organized.

I started following the money for the “resistance” when it was born, hours after Election Day 2016. I have organized my findings in a spreadsheet I have made public. At least 50 of the largest organizations that participated as “partners” in the Jan. 21, 2017, Women’s March had received grants from Mr. Soros’s Open Society Foundations or similar funds in the “House of Soros,” as his philanthropic empire was once called internally. The number of Soros-backed partners has grown to at least 80. At least 20 of the largest groups that led the Saturday anti-Kavanaugh protests have been Open Society grantees.

On Saturday I also studied the fine print on the signs as protesters waved them defiantly at the Capitol and the high court. They came from a familiar list of Democratic interest groups that have received millions from Mr. Soros: the American Civil Liberties Union, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the Center for Popular Democracy, Human Rights Campaign and on and on. MoveOn.org, a Democratic organizing and lobbying group founded with Soros money, sent its army of partisan followers regular missives that led them to a Google form to ask for train tickets and places to stay.

Under a ginkgo tree on the East Lawn of the Capitol, Center for Popular Democracy field marshals put protesters through a “training” Saturday morning. “Are you ready to be arrested?” she asks. “Yes!” the crowd shouts, although one woman asks quietly: “For what?”

“If not,” the field marshal orders, “stand in line for the visitor’s gallery so an experienced protester can go inside and yell.” One organizer hands out tickets to the Senate visitors gallery for the express purpose of violating the law. That they did—the proceedings were repeatedly interrupted by shrieks from the gallery.

MoveOn.org wrote a guide, “How to Bird Dog”—harass officials in public places—in the spring of 2017, in preparation for town-hall meetings during a congressional recess. Over the past year, I have dialed in to MoveOn.org’s Sunday evening phone calls where they plan the operations and tell their “troublemakers” how to corner lawmakers. I still get alerts for their planning sessions. The last ones have been to #stopKavanaugh.

The treasonous manipulations of the nefarious Nazi collaborator and international criminal Soros need to be stopped, permanently, by any means at all. Period. As long as he’s at large and free to work his Machiavellian schemes, liberty and Constitutional government will be endangered.

Share

Force and will

Methinks he might be a mite too optimistic about the likelihood of the Left ever accepting defeat.

Plenty has been written about the absurdity of running a republic by way of whisper campaigns, uncorroborated smears, and malicious innuendo. There is no need to rehash the mistreatment—some of it irrevocably damaging—of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. What’s important to remember is that this will now be the new norm of nomination battles. It marks the inevitable decline of our confirmation process over the last 30 years. I write “inevitable” because as soon as progressivism’s explicit living constitutionalism and implicit legal “realism” became dominant on the Left, the descent of the judiciary committee from respectable judiciousness to partisan bedlam was foreordained.

Our national politics in recent decades has lost its bipartisan consensus. The middle has collapsed, and the Democrats and Republicans are pulling away from one another on the deeper principles of politics, with policy disagreements following in train. The standard and incorrect explanation for this divergence is mere partisan recalcitrance and stubbornness. It is more profound than that.

Truth is, we are polarized now about foundational questions of human nature, constitutionalism, and justice. Our cold civil war and partisan rancor will only end when one party finally wins the argument about these fundamentals in a decisive and conclusive victory and uses that victory to solidify and sustain an enduring electoral coalition for a generation or more. Should such a turn come, the losing side, as has been the case repeatedly in American history, will then be forced to accommodate, regroup, reevaluate, and moderate (we of course have the one glaring historical exception of the Democrat-led secession movement in defense of slavery that led to the tragedy of our hot Civil War in 1860).

The stakes are high right now in American politics. When Michael Anton wrote “The Flight 93 Election” in September 2016, many on the political and intellectual Right objected in strong (and often histrionic) terms. It has been encouraging to watch in recent weeks as independents and moderate Republicans have come to Kavanaugh’s (and, on behalf of Kavanaugh, to Trump’s) defense. The president and his nominee are players in a much larger fight over fundamental questions about who we are as a people and who ought to govern and for what purposes.

Even with these high stakes, all Americans ought to pray fervently and hope fondly that we continue this passionate and spirited national argument as fellow citizens, rather than as enemies. Come what may, each side must abide the consequences of legitimate political victory when and if it comes.

Umm, hate to bring it up and all, but they’ve spent the last two years demonstrating beyond any possible doubt their total unwillingness to do just that, leaving no stone unturned to undo a “legitimate political victory.” As for “enemies,” they’ve openly declared us as their enemies, and have done one hell of a lot of violence to back it up, with many flat promises of more to come. I see no prospect of any sudden change of heart on their part, although I’d certainly love to be proven wrong about that.

Share

The preliminaries are over

Francis links to a sobering, link-rich piece:

The unhinged left is planning violence against conservative members of congress, supreme court justices and their families

A lot more than just those specific groups, you may rest assured.

We are now learning that left-wing domestic terrorism groups are openly discussing “kill team” tactics on Twitter and Facebook, discussing methods of carrying SBRs (short-barreled rifles) under their clothing, blending in with crowds, then popping out of the crowds to assassinate prominent conservatives such as U.S. Senators, Supreme Court justices and prominent conservative radio personalities. All this was first reported by PJ Media.

I have recorded and published a warning to all Americans, detailing the plans of unhinged, deranged Leftists who continue to be driven to insanity by a lying, dishonest left-wing media which “feeds the frenzy” on a daily basis. With USA Today now printing columns that essentially declare Brett Kavanaugh to be a pedophile who should never be allowed near children, the so-called “media” in America has jumped the shark, abandoning anything resembling the First Amendment role of reporting the news and now resorting to smearing innocent people while encouraging mass hysteria and violence among left-wing lunatics.

The media is deliberately driving America into a bloody civil war in a desperate attempt to destabilize the nation, invoke shooting in the streets and ultimately call in United Nations “peacekeeping” troops that will depose President Trump and attempt to disarm the entire U.S. civilian population. (Fortunately for America, the people own 100+ million firearms and have a Second Amendment right to defend their nation against foreign invaders.)

All that used to be the stuff of paranoid conspiracy-theorizing. No more; nowadays, it’s observable reality. And, as Aesop notes, it’s only the beginning:

In case you thought the recent shenanigans were Peak Crazy, we have bad news for you.
It could very well be that was all just a set-up for what happens next.

Later today, we may (or not) see Judge Kavanaugh confirmed to the vacant seat on SCOTUS.

Either way, in less than a month, the chickens from all the Dumbocrat mind-losing will come home to roost, and may turn the electoral wave from blue to red. (Be still, my beating heart.)
HopeyDopey got the Left President Trump. The Kavanaugh Caper could get them slaughtered (metaphorically) in the mid-terms. And how pleasant that would be. Even more so if it turns into a two-fer.

And at any time after today on into November, or beyond, the Leftardian legions may finally unleash their unhinged end game, and go full retard. Not metaphorically.

“May”? Ain’t no “may” to it, I’m afraid; like I said, what we’ve seen with the Kavanaugh freakshow is merely the opening salvo. Wait till the anally-inserted popsicle stick propping up Ginsberg’s mouldering corpse finally breaks and Trump nominates Amy whatsername to replace her. Or even earlier, maybe, after this November’s impending electoral shellacking. Even if they can somehow contrive to restrain themselves through those sore trials, Trump’s landslide reelection in 2020 will assuredly open the madhouse gates for real. Count on it.

Share

What are the rules?

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

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

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

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

What’s the rule?

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

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

Share

Mob rules

Not just a Black Sabbath album anymore. Unfortunately.

For the first time in history, we have a populace who will not abide by the results of our election process, and its effort to obstruct and destroy is damaging the fabric of our society and the foundation on which this country rests. We have a lawful process in place to address the will of the people, and currently we see the Democrats destroying the institutions we have relied on since our founding to carry out the will of the people. Whether it is the unlawful plots at the FBI and the Justice Department to frame an innocent President Trump, the weaponization of the IRS to silence conservatives, or the theater of the absurd at the confirmation hearings for Judge Kavanaugh, the left’s dirty tactics are now a threat to our liberty and democracy. There is not an institution that has not been impacted. Many of us are asking what institutions we can still trust and rely on.

Since the left has not been able to advance its agenda at the ballot box, its followers rely on activist judges in black robes to advance their radical agenda. It was a process that worked well for them under Clinton and Obama, but now, without Congress or the Executive Branch and with the possible loss of the Supreme Court, they see their grasp on power slipping away, and they have become unhinged. They have openly stated they will stop at nothing in their effort to remove a duly elected president. In an effort to  hang on to power, they are now employing mob rule and character assassination in the halls of Congress, as we witnessed during last week’s congressional hearing.

Thus, it is not enough to denounce the thugs. George Soros, the billionaire funding the assaults and attacks, must be brought to justice for not only inciting violence, not to mention investigated for sedition, a crime we need to begin to take seriously. He and his minions are obstructing the agenda we voted on and one we won. It is imperative that Republicans in office begin to use the term “sedition” in public.

Those who plot the overthrow of the United States as a constitutional republic for a one-world order, as Soros has openly advocated, can no longer be ignored. He and his marching minions must be prosecuted for funding a war waged against our republic, and let it be a warning that we will no longer sit idly by as we watch our country destroyed from within. 

He calls for real Americans to vote the Treasoncrats out en masse in November, and he isn’t wrong to do so. His call to bring the truly, literally evil Soros to justice and resurrect the concept of sedition is also right on. Certainly, a Red Wave that removes large numbers of Democrat Socialist politicians from the halls of power can only be a good thing.

But anybody who thinks the ballot box is going to end—or even slow—the Left’s descent into violent, revolutionary madness is dreaming. They’re only to get worse instead, and harsher measures than the vote will be required to rid ourselves of them, if such is ever to be done at all.

Update! Did I just say Leftist insanity and violence will get worse? You bet it will.

Sen. Rand Paul’s wife on Wednesday demanded that a Democrat take back his comment encouraging activists to “get up in the face of some congresspeople,” and said she now keeps a loaded gun near her bed after Paul was mobbed by protesters this week at an airport.

“Preventing someone from moving forward, thrusting your middle finger in their face, screaming vitriol — is this the way to express concern or enact change?” Kelley Paul wrote in an open letter to Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., condemning the incident. “Or does it only incite unstable people to violence, making them feel that assaulting a person is somehow politically justifiable?”

“I would call on you to retract your statement,” Paul said in the letter. “I would call on you to condemn violence, the leaking of elected officials’ personal addresses (our address was leaked from a Senate directory given only to senators), and the intimidation and threats that are being hurled at them and their families.”

It ain’t gonna happen. Violence is all they have left, and they’ve already demonstrated that they’re too power-crazed to just let it go at being defeated in an election. Bless your heart, Mrs Paul, and your husband’s too, but what we’ve seen so far is only the beginning, I’m afraid.

The New America update! Hinderaker says:

I am sure a lot of Republicans in Washington are upgrading their security systems and making sure they are prepared to defend themselves against crazed Democratic Party activists. This isn’t the America I grew up in, but it is the America we all live in now.

The thing I don’t understand is, why do Democrats like Cory Booker, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer, etc., think they are the only ones who can use violence to advance their cause? Do they not understand what a whirlwind they will unleash if they try to use political violence as a path to power?

They don’t care; they think they’ll win, and the depth of the fanatical hatred that drives them won’t allow them to stand down.

Share

Let’s just stop pretending here, ‘kay?

Ace gets down to brass tacks on Ballsey-Fraud:

I’m getting a little tired of bending over backwards to claim “something certainly happened” to Blasey. I think she’s straight-up lying.

I can’t be sure of that, of course.

But she seems to act in bad faith a lot. I can’t fly. I went to a marriage therapist to discuss the ongoing strife of a fucking second entrance we put in two years before. I never heard you wanted to come to California to talk to me, even though it was in news accounts.

The party was near the country club. What’s that? Investigators can’t find any known “party houses” near the country club? Oh, I meant the party was somewhere between my house and the country club, a 20 minute drive by car.

Wait, none of the people I named as being at the party lived in a house that conformed to my description of it? Oh there were some other people there too. I don’t know who. I guess it was a house that belonged to a Conveniently Unknown Person.

But for me, the worst example is the nasty passive-aggressive mean-girl insinauation she dropped about Leland Keyser, claiming, innocently-sounding, that she hopes that Leland Keyser gets over the “health challenges” she’s having, strongly implying that Keyser has some kind of brain-affecting progressive disease like Alzheimer’s.

Spoiler alert: It’s not. She has back and neck problems. Nothing to do with the brain.

But Lil’ Miss Innocent Baby-Talk Vocal Fry strongly implied that her “friend” was deranged.

Some friend.

So excuse me if I do not join in with the pretend “Facts don’t care about your feelings” crowd in asserting that I know, somehow, as a fact, despite the total lack of facts to establish it, that “something happened” to Blasey.

There is absolutely no actual evidence, beyond a sneaky, deceitful woman’s say-so, that anything happened, ever.

After seeing some of her fraudulent, kid-gloves “testimony” last week, my take was/is: the woman is insane. Like, clinically, pathologically not right in the head. Mentally disturbed. Truly, deeply, pathetically off the rails.

She may in fact believe that “something happened” to her; she may well believe that, whatever it may have been, it was Kavanaugh who did it. Doesn’t matter. She’s quite clearly delusional. She appeared, throughout the part of the hearing I saw, to be hovering right on the edge of a complete breakdown. I’d bet she spends a good part of her average day teetering on that same razor’s edge between “treatable, maybe” and “completely hopeless, lock-her-up-in-a-rubber-room-and-throw-away-the-key” cray-cray. Or so it looked to me, anyway.

Kavanaugh was dead-on when he testified that he believed SOMETHING must have happened to her, but he has no idea what. And maybe something, God only knows what, actually did, sending her permanently around the bend into La-La Land. Either that, or she deserves a Best Actor Oscar for her performance. Given her intricate, years-long maneuvering to prepare for savaging Kavanaugh, perhaps the thing to do is to embrace the healing power of “and” here, eh?

Update! A vote for “calculating” over “demented.”

At first, those of us paying attention were anxious to hear Ford’s story. The bits of news that preceded her appearance before the Judiciary Committee were titillating. Was it possible that this man, Brett Kavanaugh, with a thirty-years-plus record of impeccable judicial service to his country, had a dark side? Then we heard Blasey Ford “testify.” How anyone who listened to her practiced, phony childish act could believe that this was not calculated is a mystery. She was obviously scripted, coached, and performing.

Perhaps she did not expect to have to appear before the committee. She and her handlers may have assumed that the taint of her accusation would bring about his withdrawal from the nomination or that Trump would withdraw it. Guess they have not been paying attention to how Trump operates or who Kavanaugh is. They guessed wrong.

Given the numerous falsehoods of the FBI and DOJ we now are aware of – the “two front doors” lie, the fear of flying lie, the claustrophobia lie, her polygraph lies – what seems credible now is that this was a manufactured, orchestrated setup at the outset. They used Mark Judge’s book as a template and contrived a tall tale.

And then, thanks to Lindsey Graham, Trump, and Kavanaugh himself, it blew up in their faces.

Share

Conversion therapy

Let a million Breitbarts bloom.

Anyone who knew the late Andrew Breitbart knew that there was one seminal moment in his youth that altered the course of his life and, by extension, the course of American history: the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings of 1991.

Fresh from his American history degree at Tulane University, Breitbart was a self-described “default liberal.” As a child growing up on the tony streets of Brentwood in West Los Angeles, he was surrounded by liberals. The only real and legitimate “permissible” political identity was liberal. “It was my factory setting,” he would say. Four years at a liberal arts university did nothing to alter that fact.

So there he was with the rest of America watching the Anita Hill sexual harassment testimony play out on national television. He heard that Judge Thomas was some kind of predatory monster who had to be “taken down” for his horrible behavior. He tuned in expecting, wanting this man to get what he deserved for being so horrible to Ms. Hill.

“I watched Day One, I watched Day Two, I watched the entire thing,” he said years later in an interview on C-SPAN. “I went from wanting him to be taken down to saying, ‘Where’s the beef? What’s going on here?’

“I don’t understand what I’m watching here. I don’t understand the color commentary that’s on the screen, where they’re saying, ‘Oh, this is outrageous.’ And I didn’t understand the bumper stickers that were going by me on the streets that say ‘I believe Anita.’ I believe Anita WHAT? What’s going on here?”

Breitbart not only was unmoved by the laughable allegations made against Judge Thomas, but he was also dumbfounded by the experts, pundits and journalists proclaiming to the world that what we were hearing was so outrageous and “disqualifying” that Judge Thomas should be removed from consideration for the nation’s highest court. He (and most other Americans) could see through the partisan efforts of the media and the political class who didn’t pause for a moment of reflection before trying to destroy a good man’s reputation for the sole purpose of keeping him and his unacceptable political ideology from sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court.

He saw through the duplicity masquerading as political analysis and reporting. He also saw through the hypocrisy of those who sat in judgment of Judge Thomas. They were the heroes of his political party. They were all Democrats.

“I didn’t understand how Ted Kennedy … THE Ted Kennedy from Chappaquiddick fame … how Howard Metzenbaum and Joe Biden, a series of privileged white men, could sit in judgment of this man who was the son of grandparents who were sharecroppers who raised him. And he went to Yale Law School. He did everything right. I did not understand how it could be that these white men of privilege were attacking this black man who was in this historic position while the mainstream media took him down.”

Sound familiar?

All too. The most salutary long-term effect the Demonrat-Socialists’ late circus might end up having isn’t necessarily putting Kavanaugh on the Court, but the spawning of a legion of new Breitbarts out there.

Biting ’em in the ass update! Thanks to the Demonrat-Socialist self-immolation, a McMuffinhead (!) sees the light.

I have wobbled back and forth on the idea of supporting President Donald Trump in 2020. I opposed him in 2016 and voted third-party. The candidate I supported, Evan McMullin, has, like so many others, abandoned all his values as his hatred of Trump poisons his conscience. I dare say the worst mistake in my life was not when I climbed a mountain only to remember I was scared of heights, or when I played with a scalpel that nearly cut off my finger as a kid. It was voting for McMullin.

Jennifer Rubin, who the Washington Post fraudulently claims is a conservative, has become the most predictable mouthpiece for the insanity that has affected a certain brand of Republican. They view Trump as anathema to their values, so they have abandoned their pre-Trump values. Rubin once favored moving our embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. She now opposes it because of Trump. She once supported withdrawal from the Paris Accord, but now opposes it because of Trump.

I have long been critical of Republicans who abandoned principles to stand with Trump, and I am as critical of Republicans who abandon principles to oppose Trump. Principle should stay, because people go. The Kavanaugh nomination has been clarifying in this regard. Seeing some conservatives aid and abet character assassins because Trump nominated Kavanaugh is disgusting.

I find myself in an odd position where, for the first time, I see myself, one of the original so-called “Never Trump conservatives,” voting for Trump in 2020. I have inevitably concluded at times that Trump would do something to push me away from him. He has not disappointed on that front, from tariffs to character issues. But now I do not see how anyone else can offer a more compelling alternative to the president. Each time the president does something I do not like, his opponents play a game of “hold my beer.”

Yeah, well, in truth, Erick, most of the things you probably don’t like about him aren’t really true anyway. And the others—his “obnoxious,” “crass,” “rude” behavior; his cantankerousness; his pull-no-punches, confrontational bluntness, to name a likely few—are actually assets. Bottom line:

Between Trump and his opposition, I would rather vote for him, despite his flaws, than for his opponents who want a flawless progressive utopia. Trump is neither an ambassador for my values nor the articulate champion of my principles I would prefer. But he is a safe harbor in a progressive storm that seeks to both destroy my values and upend our constitutional republic.

“Safe harbor”? No, Trump is a lot more than just that; he’s exactly the bare-knuckle brawler we need to fight these bastards. Far from being a grudgingly-accepted last resort, there’s simply nobody better out there to do the job that needs doing. Erickson will likely come to realize that before the end. Baby steps, people, baby steps. Welcome the Dark Side, E. I promise you you’re going to enjoy all the winning.

Share

Dead ideals

They’re gone. And they ain’t coming back.

As the spurious case against Brett Kavanaugh disintegrates, splinters, and re-forms into a cacophony of whiny, irrelevant expostulations, it is instructive to step back and survey the field upon which this battle took place.

The ground is littered with dead and wounded ideals: civility, dead; basic decency, dead; the presumption of innocence, gravely wounded, ditto for the idea of due process. And this disgusting carnage is all on you, O ancient one, Dianne Feinstein, and your self-important, preposterous colleagues. You were desperate to keep Brett Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court so you abandoned any semblance of decency and respect. You travestied the processes of the United States Senate for the sake of a cynical grab at power. I’d say that you should be ashamed of yourselves, but, like the thugs that you are, you have no shame. You believe the acquisition of power is a magical antidote to shame. You are wrong about that, and one can only hope that you will one day reap some portion of the obloquy you have sowed.

At a rally last night, President Trump, speaking about Judge Kavanaugh, said: “A man’s life is in tatters. His wife is shattered.” Musing on the attempted public execution the country just witnessed, the president continued, “They destroy people. They want to destroy people. These are really evil people.”

Yes, they are. But here’s the saving grace. The president, like Brett Kavanaugh, is a fighter. The president’s support has been as unwavering as Judge Kavanaugh’s determination to stay the course. Senator Spartacus (neé Cory Booker, and the accent is not a mistake) says that whether Judge Kavanaugh is “innocent or guilty”the Senate should “move on to another candidate.” Why? Because he’s tainted.

So: Democratic jackals on the Senate Judiciary Committee, aided and abetted by their loyal public relations firms — the mainstream media — and hectoring unpleasant people funded by George Soros, heap mud on Brett Kavanaugh for weeks and then step back and say: “He’s got mud all over him! Let’s move on to a more pristine victim.”

Funny how that works, innit? But seeing as how it’s the nature of who and what we’re dealing with, it therefore behooves us to acknowledge the sorry situation and get on with the necessary if distasteful task of getting in their faces, of punching back twice as hard—and of crushing them so completely that the very thought of ever again attacking us in such a way makes them literally want to vomit from fear and horror. It’s either that, or accept defeat and adjust to our newfound serfdom as best we can. Muir has the right of it:


DBD-10-3-18.jpg


Indeed. Best we get on with melting their asses right down to bubbling slag, then. It’s the only way to be sure.

Share

“I wasn’t 100 percent sober…”

No, I should say you weren’t. That much is obvious enough.

Blame it on the alcohol.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg blames falling asleep at this year’s State of the Union address on not being “100 percent sober.”

“The audience, for the most part, is awake because they are bobbing up and down and we sit there, stone faced,” Ginsburg said Thursday during an event hosted by The Smithsonian Associates in Washington, D.C., according to CNN.

She continued, “But we’re not, at least I was not, 100 percent sober.”

She was drunk as a boiled owl—blackout drunk, no less—not decades ago, at a long-since-forgotten teenage party, but as an adult, a Justice of the highest court in the land, during the performance of one of her solemn if admittedly peripheral duties. Any Republican even halfway serious about fighting shitlib fire with fire and beating their asses like a big bass drum would be screaming loud and long about the absolute imperative necessity of impeaching her and getting her alkie ass off the court.

And then she repeated the disgraceful performance five years later, too. Now, I personally am inclined to be forgiving of such a lapse myself, but then again I ain’t a liberal, either. Obviously, the woman has a problem—one that clearly indicates she lacks the judicial temperament required to be on the USSC. So here’s the deal, libtards: either shut your fat yaps about Kavanaugh’s teenage peccadilloes, or send Rummie Baked Ginsot’s ass packing, toot damned sweet. Thank you.

Slap back update! That’s how you do it.

President Trump hinted Tuesday at a rally in Mississippi that Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., could have a drinking habit.

“Patrick Leahy — oh he’s never had a drink in his life,” Trump sarcastically said at the campaign-style rally. “Check it out. Look (online) under ‘Patrick Leahy slash drink.’”

Trump, who does not drink, seems to be flipping the script on Democrats who have thoroughly questioned the drinking habits of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh when he was a teenager.

“‘How dare you have a beer when you’re in high school?’” Trump said in a mocking tone toward the Democrats who questioned Kavanaugh.

And the NeverTrumpTards still can’t figure out why we love the guy. They oughta lay off of whining about Trump and get busy taking notes instead.

Share

“The smear campaign against Kavanaugh is anything but good for the Democrat Party”

So, good for America, then.

You may see polls showing Kavanaugh isn’t a particularly popular Supreme Court nominee. You might see legacy media reports indicating that Kavanaugh is a political problem for Republicans. Take all of that and throw it in the trash, because it’s wishful thinking by partisan Dems in newsrooms.

Here’s what’s real: to have any chance of capturing the Senate in the midterms, the Democrats have to hold on to better than a half-dozen seats in states President Trump carried in 2016. And in all of those states, the Kavanaugh nomination is going to be a major negative for those incumbent Democrat senators.

Regardless of how they vote.

Let’s say you’re Joe Manchin in West Virginia. What you needed was for this nomination to be uncontroversial, and a sure thing for confirmation. A party-line contested vote the whole country is watching is a nightmare. Why? Because in a red state like the one Manchin represents, the majority will favor confirmation and find it to be a decisive issue in their vote — so Manchin voting against Kavanaugh will set him up to reap the wrath of the voters in a state which went 65 percent for Trump in 2016.

But it’s worse than that for Manchin, because he doesn’t have a good escape from the Kavanaugh confirmation. You’d say his easy way out is to vote yes, except what the Left has done is to so whip up their voters with the Ford allegations and the copycats who followed that Manchin will lose votes from his own side if he votes to confirm the judge.

This isn’t a theory, by the way. It’s what the polls show.

You all know my attitude towards polls: there’s only one that matters, and it happens on election day. Nonetheless: from McKay’s lips to God’s ears. After the Democratic Socialists’ noxious Kavanaugh freakshow—itself the culmination of a massive two-year public psychotic break appalling and scarifying to any Normal American—a mortal maiming at the polling place is the very least the Despicable Party deserves. Conrad Black is pretty sanguine about the overall picture:

We are in the midst of the fourth and fifth rounds, now unfolding simultaneously, in Donald Trump’s revolutionary eviction of the Democratic establishment with its allies in the media, Hollywood, Wall Street and on K Street, and its lookalike post-Reagan Republican also-rans and regional managers. Trump won the Republican nomination and election and has taken control of the Republican congressional delegation.

What we are witnessing is the parting fusillade of the NeverTrumpers and goal-line stand of the Democrats who have only recently realized that they had a serious survival problem on their hands, and that Trump is a formidable enemy and cannot easily be banished.

If Trump succeeds in the next two rounds-winning a conservative majority on the Supreme Court and consolidating his congressional position, (and seeing off the NeverTrumpers as a bonus), he will dominate all three branches of government, something that only Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson have done in the last century.

Flake, one of the Senate’s last NeverTrumpers and on his way out, personifies the battle for control of the Republican Senate and House delegations. Like a flak-riddled World War II bomber returning with its wings wobbling and pieces of the fuselage falling off, Flake cast his vote to report out the Kavanaugh nomination on condition that the FBI do a supplementary inquiry “limited in time and scope.”

Whether Flake wishes it or not, this was an elegant final turn as a senator, in vivid contrast to John McCain’s deathbed rescue of the remnants of Obamacare, in what amounted, as he turned thumbs down for the cameras while casting his last vote, to an obscene digital gesture to the White House. Kavanaugh served many years in the George W. Bush White House, and his sponsorship by President Trump is an important step in the Trump ascendancy within a Republican Party ossified for nearly 30 years after the retirement of Ronald Reagan.

Again: from his lips to God’s ears.

Update! Julie Kelly, too, is seeing the sunny side to all this:

A bungled political assassination attempt on Brett Kavanaugh will cost the Democrats more than a seat on the Supreme Court: The party might also have killed its edge with suburban women just weeks before the pivotal midterm elections. The near-unanimous reaction to this travesty among my fellow suburban moms is unlike anything I’ve seen in the Trump era.

Until now, Democrats have been confident that women living in the suburbs would propel the much-vaunted “blue wave” this fall because President Trump remains unpopular with this traditionally Republican constituency. Polling conducted over the summer indicated suburban women had a strong preference for Democratic candidates over their Republican opponents. Several vulnerable Republican-held congressional districts are located in suburban areas.

But Democrats have overplayed their dirty hand, and women might exact their revenge in November. Republican women are outraged at Democrats and their media accomplices for what they’ve done to Brett Kavanaugh and his family. One poll taken right after Kavanaugh’s testimony showed 71 percent of Republican women believed Kavanaugh was telling the truth. In a Morning Consult poll released late Monday, 58 percent of Republican women described Dr. Christine Ford as “opportunistic.” Republican women are the only voters whose support for Kavanaugh’s nomination has increased post-hearing.

A CNN segment aired Monday featured dozens of women visiting fence-sitting senators to demand they vote against Kavanaugh; at the end of the piece, the reporter confessed that “while the opposition is loud, there is quiet support for Brett Kavanaugh among women.”

The shared tears and collective fury are galvanizing women voters, but not in the way Democrats initially calculated. The Democrats’ insistence that due process and a presumption of innocence don’t apply to men (particularly conservative white men) is a terrifying prospect for the husbands, sons, fathers, and brothers we love. The Left still doesn’t understand that we don’t hate men like they do.

The Democrats’ shameful conduct also has quashed their most convincing argument, which is that Donald Trump is a vulgarian who does not have the temperament to lead. What Republican woman now believes that Senator Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)—who warned American men to “just shut up and step up for once”—or Cory Booker (D-N.J.) or Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) are more prudent or civilized than Trump? Why would any suburban mother vote to empower a lowlife, bottom-feeding hustler like Michael Avenatti? Trump’s tweets look tame compared to the bile coming from these people.

What wouldn’t? Too bad for them that at this point, bile and hatred is really all they have left.

Sweet reason update! Just a reminder.

Till-1.jpg

Share

SQUIRREL!

Guess we’re back to the Outrage Of The Week again.

Robert E. Lee’s last words were, “Strike the tent.”

This afternoon, the New York Times struck the tent on the Anti-Kavanaugh Circus by publishing a 14,000-word report on President Trump’s financial history.

It’s over because the New York Times wants to change subjects. Polls show Marxist Democrats are taking a pounding over this nomination in red states, which means they will lose Senate seats.

So the Times changed the subject with the story — “4 Ways Fred Trump Made Donald Trump and His Siblings Rich” — which it bills as a blockbuster but we all know it is a diversion.

Within an hour of posting the story online, it had 80,000 mentions on Twitter, mainly from liberal loyalists eager for another venue to vent their hate.

It is Kavanaugh Who? time for liberals.

The story could have been held. A story of that length consuming pages of newsprint belong in the Sunday newspaper, not in the middle of another busy week in the news.

My guess is the story was supposed to run this Sunday, but a panic-stricken New York Times was horrified to witness the evaporation of its dream of the Democratic Party taking over the Senate and leaving a Supreme Court vacancy open for a Democratic president in 2020.

The story about President Trump’s fortune is the Stormy Daniels of financial reporting.

The Times story said, “In Donald J. Trump’s version of how he got rich, he was the master dealmaker who parlayed an initial $1 million loan from his father into a $10 billion empire. It was his guts and gumption that overcame setbacks, and his father, Fred C. Trump, was simply a cheerleader. But an investigation by The New York Times shows that by age 3, Donald Trump was earning $200,000 a year in today’s dollars from his father’s empire. He was a millionaire by age 8. By the time he was 17, his father had given him part ownership of a 52-unit apartment building.”

Isn’t that how NYT’s Sulzberger family operated?

Well, you know the rule, Don: whatever they’re shrieking loudest about is the thing they’re guilty of themselves.

Update! Next up from the NYT smear factory:

Having failed to corroborate any allegations of rape against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, The New York Times is now preparing to smear him for organizing party planning and logistics more than 30 years ago. This comes on the heels of a blockbuster Times report alleging that Kavanaugh might have thrown ice at someone at some point in the 1980s.

The Times is calling around to classmates asking them about a letter Kavanaugh allegedly wrote to a classmate to organize a week at the beach during the 1980s, according to multiple sources. The letter notes the location on the Maryland shore where the classmates planned to stay, the estimated costs for each organizer, and items they should bring with them, such as “sheets, pillowcases, blankets, etc.”

The letter noted that a total of eight friends, including Kavanaugh, were “in charge” and that they would each get to have beds to sleep in at the designated rental property and a say in who else was invited. The tongue-in-cheek note, infused with inside jokes, said they should talk to neighbors of the property ahead of time and give them a heads up that a party would be hosted there and that alcohol and obnoxious students would be involved.

“P.S. It would probably be a good idea on Sat. the 18th to warn the neighbors that we’re loud, obnoxious drunks with prolific pukers among us,” the letter said. The note also joked that “the danger of eviction is great and that would suck because of the money and because this week has big potential.”

The letter also made note of their awkwardness with girls, whom the teenage boys very much hoped would join them at the party.
“I think we are unanimous that any girls we can beg to stay there are welcomed with open …” he wrote.

Ahh, but wait, there’s yet another damning revelation just out:

I first met Julie Setnick in 1993 at a Washington, D.C., bar near Wisconsin Circle. I was at a going-away party…

As I sat alone at the end of the bar, Julie approached me. She was alone, quite beautiful, well-dressed and no drink in hand. Consequently, my initial thought was that she might be a high-end call girl because at the tine I weighed 350 lbs so what would a girl like her want with me?

But, there was no conversation about exchanging sex for money so decided to talk with her for a few minutes. I had never been hit on in a bar before.

I didn’t leave with her that night, although we talked about getting together. Over the next couple of weeks we met at what I believed and still believe was Julie’s place. From the beginning Julie knew I was married and that I was having marital problems.

As we shared conversations, my lasting impression of Julie was that she was smart, fun, and funny. But she was also an opportunist. I felt she only had an interest in me because I was on television and well known.

During a conversation about our sexual preferences, things go derailed when Julie told me that she liked to have sex with more than one guy at a time. In fact sometimes several at one time. She wanted to know if that would be okay in our relationship.

I asked her if this was just a fantasy of hers. She responded that she first tried sex with multiple guys while in high school and still liked it from time-to time. She brought it up because she wanted to know if I would be interested in that.

So I think we can now say the reason she went back to those “rape train” parties TEN TIMES just became clear: she’s a cum-guzzling cockhound. Ace wraps that one up:

This story had been a bus crash.

Then it devolved into the crash of a bus filled with clowns.

Now it has entered a new phase: A bus full of circus clowns crashing into a school for blind children and even worse the clowns were doing their “Gasoline Comedy” act that day and now all the blind children are on fire and the clowns are trying to squirt water on them with their stupid lapel-flowers but the flowers are just squirting out more gas and the children are crying tears of fire out of their Unseeing Dead Eyes and holy shit a couple of the clowns look like they have boners and they’re chasing around the fiery blind children trying to rub up on them with these bobbling clown-boners with big red bulbs on their tips.

Pretty much. As I said Monday: at this point, it’s just becoming funny.

Share

Get it now?

Word to Yertle: these people are NOT your friends, your colleagues, or your countrymen. They are the enemy. Period, full fucking stop.

Anti-Kavanaugh Protesters Harass Mitch McConnell at Airport
‘Do you always turn your back on women?’

Details:

Two of the activists have been identified by The Huffington Post as Tracey Corder, Center for Popular Democracy’s “racial justice campaign director,” and Naina Khanna, Positive Women’s Network USA’s executive director.

McConnell, seemingly unfazed by the harassment, looked straight ahead and even shook a random man’s hand on his way out of the airport.

This did not sit well with the feminists, as you might imagine.

“It is really telling that you shook the hand of a man while a woman is trying to tell you her story,” yelled Corder.

“We would like to know if you believe survivors of sexual violence?” said Khanna.

At one point, Khanna bizarrely accuses one of the men escorting McConnell of “assaulting” her after she repeatedly brushes up against him. “I keep stepping on her feet,” he responded, explaining why he moved.

As McConnell walked up an escalator, Khanna yelled, “Senator McConnell, do you always turn your back on women like this?”

He was also asked if we would “support a full FBI investigation.” There is already an FBI investigation underway, of course.

“We walked up to him respectfully. We really wanted to ask him about his vote and how he felt,” Corder told The Huffington Post. “This is three women of color trying to talk to him. He saw a white man and instantly shook his hand. That felt pretty hurtful.”

You weren’t trying to “talk to” anybody, bitch. And if it had been me, it would have been a lot more than just your feelings that got hurt, I promise you. How McConnell kept from hauling off and popping these contemptible, lying whores right in the mouth is beyond me. Hard to believe his bodyguard let these crazed cunts anywhere near him.

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

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