Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Patriots and principles

And the rise—and fall—of nations.

American patriots–and by patriots I mean simply those who recognize the principles expressed in the drafting of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution as commendable and workable principles upon which to build a society–must recognize that our nation is in our own hands. While there is no way to convince the leftist and collectivist enemies of this nation that we have the right and obligation to confront them and their ideology on whatever grounds present themselves, the patriot knows this to be true.

The clever assistance lent to the communists by establishment Republicans and “conservatives” by suggesting that patriots need to be civil and orderly about their differences with these political adversaries are aiding and abetting the destruction of the nation and more specifically, the destruction of the patriots. Patriots have no color; they have no religion; they have no gender; they have no age; they simply have a common belief in a set of principles…

Nations are made of these principles (and others not recognized here). Nations are disbanded for violations of these principles. The least we can do to preserve a set of principles that helped to guide our nation for over two hundred years is to follow the lead of Wes Rhinier, who recently published a set of questions that a patriot would be hard pressed to answer in front of a mirror. Ask yourself why these things are allowed in a nation established, built and supported by patriots.

I don’t know what triggering event will bring us together on these issues. The trouble with independent thinkers is that they tend to have a wide and diverse set of conditions upon which they will act, making cooperative action nearly impossible. Some will not act at all. Some will act too soon and simply become a martyr without a discernible cause. But, we have to start somewhere, sometime…don’t we?

The Wes Rhinier questions TL links to above are indeed penetrating, and deeply unsettling:


I don’t pretend to have the answers anymore than TL does; at this point, I despair of the general public’s likely responses to them. But they’re definitely the right questions to be asking, and maybe that’s the necessary first step.

Update! CA throws a highly pertinent Solzhenitsyn quote into the mix:

And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?…The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.

That “We didn’t love freedom enough” bit especially smarts.

This is NOT the Founders’ America, because WE are not the Americans of the Founding generation. We have long been on a slow road to becoming something less—less independent, less honorable, less admirable, less worthy. In slight mitigation, it’s not America alone but Western civilization entire that has weakened, degenerated, and declined. The Left might well be at least partially correct in their assertion that the arc of history always bends in a certain direction: not towards socialism necessarily, but towards enervation, self-indulgence, narcissism, and decay.

One more question: how bitterly ironic is it that, as confirmed by all chronicled precedent, the roots of a culture’s failure are usually to be found in its success?

Share

The character of revolt

Our old and dear friend Claire Berlinski, another of the ever-dwindling handful of real journalists out there, ably plying her craft and reporting the news.

I spent Saturday speaking to the Gilets Jaunes near the Bastille, where I figured I’d have a good vantage point on a traditional protest site. I walked with them as they slowly made their way to the city hall, or Hôtel de Ville. It was obvious from a single glance that these weren’t Parisians, but rural people who couldn’t afford to buy expensive Parisian clothes or get chic haircuts. I instantly understood why Macron rubs them the wrong way. They looked worn out; their hands and faces were lined; they were mainly in late middle-age. They seemed to be decent, respectable, weary people who had worked hard all their lives, paid their taxes, and played by the rules.

They couldn’t have seemed less disposed to violence, nor more apolitical. They were respectful of the police, and vice-versa. As cops drove by, relaxed, the Gilets Jaunes smiled at them, like kids excited about their first trip to the big city, waved at the officers, and gave them the thumbs-up. The cops reciprocated. The sentiment was fraternal. “We’re all weary, overtaxed working men,” they were saying to each other. “We’re on the same side.”

I concluded they were just what they were advertised to be: family men and women who couldn’t make ends meet and who were tired of Macron’s attitude. Why this protest, why now, I asked? The fuel tax was just the straw that broke the camel’s back, they said; it made the difference between “able to make ends meet, barely,” and “not able to make ends meet.” It had just been getting steadily worse every year since the economic crisis began. They had run out of hope.

My heart went out to them. I was prepared to go home and report that the protests had fizzled out. “There isn’t much to this,” I concluded. I had no sense that if I continued walking, toward the Charles de Gaulle Étoile, I’d find myself amid the worst riots Paris has seen in decades. These protesters weren’t about to vandalize a thing, and no one seemed to mind them. The cops seemed sorry for them.

People at the Charles de Gaulle Étoile saw something else entirely. There, the police were physically overwhelmed by about 5,000 Gilets Jaunes who had come explicitly prepared to do violence. About 200 demonstrators showed their ID and allowed police to search them before they entered a security zone on the Champs-Elysées, but the rest refused to play by the rules. From about 8 am, hostile crowds of Gilets Jaunes emerged, in large numbers, from all the avenues around the Arc de Triomphe, trying to push their way onto the Champs-Elysées. The police were physically overpowered because so many of them were protecting the Champs-Elysées and the perimeter around the area where government buildings are concentrated. They were overrun. There were no cops behind the rioters to stop them from burning cars on the other avenues around the Étoile.

The rioter demographics were surprising. They were mainly aged 30-40, the police reported—a bit old for rioting, you’d think. They were “socially well-inserted” into the movement, but unlike the majority of the protesters, they had come with the goal of breaking and smashing things, rejecting the authority of the state and its symbols as savagely as they could. Of the 378 people taken into custody on Saturday, only 33 were minors. Most were rural men. The security services had drastically underestimated the number of violent protesters who would arrive and where they would be. It was immediately clear that this represented a massive police intelligence failure. The Elysée called a crisis meeting. Reports leaked to the press that the failure to anticipate the size of the violent and radicalized contingent of Gilet Jaunes was of a magnitude that “could lead to a deep reform of the Paris police headquarters,” as one television channel put it.

But it isn’t hard to understand how this mistake was made. Most people’s contact with the movement, including the police’s, was like mine—again, most seem to be peaceful, sympathetic people, respectful of authority, and simply too old for that kind of mayhem. What kind of 40-year-old guy from a rural farm comes to Paris carrying a gas mask and a makeshift weapon to desecrate the Arc de Triomphe? I sure wouldn’t have guessed there were so many of them, either.

At this point, the government has no choice but to deploy troops to defend static targets, while allowing mobile forces to police the demonstrations and deal with any rioting that breaks out. No matter what, France must reestablish the principle that governments can only be changed by elections, not violence.

Ahh, but what about when changing the government doesn’t do the trick; what about when a government has lost its mandate, forfeited its legitimacy, and must be replaced? What about when election after election after election changes nothing more substantive than the names of the people in charge? What then? What happens when its subjects finally, as Claire says above, “run out of hope”?

Just asking. I have some friends who’d like to know, see. Of course none of those things apply here or are the least bit relevant to Americans, mind. Ahem.

In any event, read the whole thing; as is her wont, Claire has done excellent work here, and puts us all some real knowledge with her efforts. She’s also crowdfunding a new book, so if you’re flush you might consider tossing a few francs in her GoFundMe jar.

Share

Vive le révolution!

Uprising.

Fearing that an “enormous violence” will be part of “Act IV” of the mobilization of the “Yellow Jackets,” authorities have announced the mobilization of “exceptional measures” of more than 65,000 security forces deployed throughout France, and putting the finishing touches the security presence already in Paris.

As the fourth Saturday of mobilization of the “Yellow Jackets” approaches, l’Elyssee dreads that “an enormous violence” will explode in Paris this weekend. Throughout France, the calls to gather in Paris and demolish the current establishment rule are multiplying. Last week, a young man encountered by Le Figaro near the Saint-Lazare station was shouting: “This is not a protest, this is the Revolution!” Tuedsay night, on BFM TV, one of the leaders of the movement, Eric Drouet, had even declared wanting to “return” to l’Eyssee Saturday.

Ace provided that translation from Le Figaro, which my own long-ago college-boy French is far too rusty to gainsay. More from Diplomad:

The immediate cause of the disturbances in France is, of course, the “green tax” that the government sought to impose on French people. In the name of protecting Gaia, the already sky-high fuel prices in France were to be hit with additional taxes. That, however, is only the tip of the iceberg. The foolish economic and social policies of France (and the EU) are making average French people into poor people. To an even greater extent than we have seen on these shores, the middle class is being eliminated, ground into dust. I read some interesting stats on France which now I can’t find that showed that the average French citizen is out of money by the 20th of the month. Of course, it’s all very different if you have a senior government or EU job. As one of the Diplosons commented to me the other day, “What does a young Frenchman do to accumulate wealth?” Most avenues to potential wealth are heavily taxed, regulated, or otherwise controlled and put out of the reach of the average person. The French education system is a leftist disaster–Perhaps even worse than ours? Hard to believe–and produces the usual crop of highly credentialed and useless morons now standard fare in the West. On top of it all, the chocolate on the soufflé, France continues to support the immigration of other countries’ poor. What possibly could go wrong? Rhetorical question, folks, the list of answers is too long…

Back to the riots. One thing that struck me was some Rebel Media video in which you can see, through the swirling clouds of tear gas, demonstrators waving the Tricolor and hear them–gasp!– singing La Marseillaise, arguably the most stirring national anthem in the world. I am not French and don’t pretend to be, but that gave me goose-bumps. It, more importantly, also showed that these are not your run-of-the-mill Antifa-type thugs on the street. We might be seeing the rise of militant nationalism in revolt against the elitist globalism that has ruled and ruined the West for the past fifty or so years. De Gaul would have been proud…

France’s absurd President Macron has backed off for now on the new taxes–Gaia can wait, I guess. I don’t think, however, that he and his fellow “leaders” have gotten the message. Perhaps France needs a President Trump to drive home that it’s time to Make France Great Again? I also wonder how a Frexit vote would look? Fat chance that will be allowed…so, France continues to churn.

California should emulate the French citizens in the street. Right.

They should, actually. Then again, though, how many actual, legal American citizens can there be left there by now, anyway? In any event, best wishes and hats off to the Yellow Vests. Diplomad suggests perusing the always-excellent No Pasarán blog for more on all this as it happens, and he’s right.

Share

“How Much Blood Would Leftists Be Willing To Shed To Disarm Patriotic Americans?”

ALL of it, of course. They’d prefer that anyway.

My question for Congressjerk Eric Swalwell is pretty simple: “How many Americans would you murder to achieve your goal of disarming us?”

It’s a fair question. 

Now, we know that some Americans would resist this kind of tyranny. People all over the world are resisting the elite’s commands. The Brits Brexited. The French are rioting because they don’t want to sacrifice their livelihoods on behalf of the global elites’ weird weather religion. And a decree that the Second Amendment is not a thing anymore would certainly provoke some serious pushback here.

The Brits ain’t “Brexited” shit yet, and aren’t likely to, more’s the pity. The French, on the other hand, look like getting their act together at last, on which I hope to have more in a bit. But I still think Kurt is right about the likelihood of at least some pushback in the event of a serious gun-grab, although whether it would end up with full-on insurrection is something I’m not quite as confident of as I was before Black Tuesday.

Rep. Swalwell, some people are going to fight rather than cave in, so what’s the number of bodies you would be willing to pile up to win? Let’s put aside the right or wrong of resistance; it’ll be a thing. It’ll happen. You’re from near San Francisco, so you don’t know any real Americans, but even though I am from that hellhole too, I’ve met a few Americans in my travels. They are an ornery people who don’t give in to the kind of bullying you advocate. So, you’re going to have to kill some people to do what you want, and I just want to know how many you’re prepared to off to achieve your goal.

After all, it’s not as if you Democrats don’t already have a history of killing people for having guns you disapprove of.

Remember Waco? The raid on David Koresh’s compound was because his weird band of misfits allegedly had scary, outlawed guns. That’s why Democrat Janet Reno initially decided to send in the troops. The government got four of our ATF agents killed, then slaughtered the resisters, including women and kids.

I’d guess Kurt wouldn’t much like this sentiment, but I can’t say the loss of the ATF agents in the course of doing their “duty” of murdering men, women, and children at the behest of Leviathan is anything I ever lost any sleep over, or ever will. And while we’re at it, abominable government hitman Lon Horiuchi ought to have been pushing up daisies a long time ago himself, instead of looking forward to a nice cushy federal pension after he retires as a true FBI “hero.”

Now, Congressman Strangelove properly took a lot of grief for suggesting nuking fellow Americans, but even if you accept his backtracking about how this was a joke – nothing’s funnier than suggesting the mass murder of fellow Americans! – he only put nukes off limits. What killing systems are still on the table? Infantry? Artillery? Bombers? Because his answer assumed that he would support prosecuting a war against those who failed to obey and submit to arrest.

So, Congressman, what means of destructions are still on the table to use against fellow Americans who refuse to allow you to strip them of their Second Amendment rights because you Bay Area liberals want to show those hicks in Jesusland who’s boss? Is shooting them okay? Shelling them? Bombing them, just not with nukes?

Again: all of it, plus whatever else it might take to get the job done. This is why:

Understand that the leftists with Swalwell’s mentality are not driven by notions of justice or reason, but by cold hatred for Normal Americans. We’ve been disobedient. We’ve been defiant. We’ve refused to surrender our means of defending our own sovereignty to our elite overlords, and that is intolerable.

Exactly. Which is why, as Kurt concludes, anybody who still thinks of them as “our fellow Americans” needs to get woke, and fast. There are a lot of Swalwells out there—a LOT, probably more than any of us dare to imagine—with government schools churning out more of them every day.

Share

On outrage

Walsh links to a WSJ piece lamenting outrage:

People have been mad as hell for much of the 21st century, starting roughly with the stalemated Bush-Gore election in 2000, followed quickly by 9/11. Fundamentals have been changing fundamentally: marriage, sexual identity, racial politics, geopolitics. Outrage flourishes also because of the rise of social media—the endless electronic brawl—and because it plays so well on our screens. Cable news draws pictures in crayon, in bold primary colors that turn politics into cartoons. On the left, “stay woke” means “stay outraged.” Trumpians want to “lock her up” or “build a wall.” Outrage is reductive, easy to understand. It is an idiom of childhood—a throwback even to the terrible twos.

Ahh, but isn’t outrage appropriate when one side is so clearly right, and the other is not only wrong, but also dishonest about it?

“Trumpians” may well be the only ones who want to “lock her up”—but she damned well SHOULD be locked up, if the rule of law is to have any meaning at all. She committed numerous criminal acts, some of them at best skirting the margins of actual, literal treason—at BEST. She has so far evaded consequence; hell, she’s evaded even honest investigation into those crimes, with the collusive connivance not only of the useless GOPe but also the very federal agencies charged with enforcing the law.

Being outraged over such corruption and malfeasance is supposed to be somehow unreasonable and regrettable? REALLY?

And with illegal immigration so out-of-control as to make it evident that we barely even still have a southern border at all, what the hell is the least bit out of line about being outraged at resistance to building a wall?

Sorry, Charlie, but I humbly submit that there ought to be one hell of a lot MORE outrage over these things, along with plenty of others. The fact that there AIN’T is what we should be fretting about, such fatalistic nonchalance representing as it does a very real threat to the Republic—whatever’s still left of it, that is.

So where IS the outrage? Why, rat cheer:

What’s dispiriting about the 2018 midterm election is that –- voting by district for the House of Representatives -– a slim majority of Americans voted AGAINST the soaring job numbers, the increasing wages, the restoration of the steel and aluminum and auto industries and the rest of our proud industrial manufacturing base in the process of being restored by the Trump trade miracle (which PROVES the globalists and their house negro, B. Hussein Obama, were lying through their teeth when they said this was impossible, that it would “take a magic wand.”)

Instead, that slim majority of mostly urban “blue” voters clearly, unambiguously voted FOR what today’s Democrat party openly stands for: open borders; “sanctuary cities” with sidewalks full of discarded syringes and human feces; illegal aliens (few of whom understand or embrace our constitutional system of limited government) raping and murdering at will (see Kate Steinle’s murderer, just for starters), said illegals now in the process of being fully normalized, issued drivers’ licenses and allowed to vote…

…and let’s not forget the destruction of the traditional heterosexual American family, its mandatory replacement being “gender fluidity,” in which cross-dressing male rapists and child abusers are literally encouraged to use the little girls’ bathrooms, to fraudulently dominate women’s sports, even to be sent to women’s prisons when convicted for their crimes, based merely on the assertion that “When I woke up this morning and scratched my balls, I decided I wanted to wear a dress and call myself ‘Nicole.’”

Why on earth would anyone vote for all that — and against renewed American pride and prosperity? As Victor Davis Hanson articulates so well, they are surrounded, 24/7, by the droning, shrill and shrieking mass media banging the drum that Trump and all he stands for is/are “racist, sexist, homophobic, the whole basket of deplorables.”

Didn’t we troop to the polls and reject and overrule that absurd and totally unsubstantiated charge, in 2016? If they refuse to accept the results of that election, what do they think our next step will be? Accepting the results of elections, after all, is the consensus way we have agreed to avoid settling our disputes through force of arms. Right?

To survive, pending that test of arms, Trump needs SOME kind of counteroffensive to re-energize his dispirited base. Yes, I know he wants to concentrate on arm-wrestling the Chinese into giving us a better trade deal. I get that. But he can’t let himself be seen as a powerless buffoon, assaulted without consequence from all sides on the domestic front, nibbled to death by weasels and ferrets. We need a counterattack. We need several.

We sure do. And it all begins with outrage—RIGHTEOUS outrage, JUSTIFIED outrage, from the put-upon millions being used as human ATMs to foot the bill for a shitpile of unworkable, destructive Leftist insanity they wholeheartedly oppose. While being insulted and slandered every step of the way, to boot.

Be sure to read all of that last link, gang; it’s a long ‘un, virtually guaranteed to stoke the fires of outrage in all the right places, for all the right reasons.

Share

Scut Farkus strikes back!

For God’s sake, let’s not be giving them any more bright ideas.

Why Haven’t SJW Bullies Destroyed A Christmas Story Yet?
I triple-dog-dare social justice warriors to sit through the 1983 classic “A Christmas Story” this holiday season. The movie about a kid at Christmas, his 1940s family, and a fragile but sexy leg of lamp is so perfect that Hollywood would not make it today. Hollywood could not make this film today, and it’s only a matter of time before its banished from TV.

He’s right, and you know he is. Part of the reason why:

The Parkers are average working-class folk living on the Indiana side of the Chicago suburbs in postwar America. Ralphie’s parents are happily married, and neither is an idiot, a cheater, or a crook. Having returned from the war, “Old Man” Parker (the father is never named and played impeccably by the great Darren McGavin) has a job, owns a home in a good neighborhood, raises his family, profanely battles the furnace, and is always in search of a way to make life better. Mom loves him and dotes on their boys. The parents are not human helicopters—the Parker kids are free-range boys who walk themselves to school without being tracked by Mom with a smartphone GPS app.

Ralphie is about 9 years old. His fondest Christmas wish is—brace yourself—a gun. Specifically, a Red Ryder Carbine Action 200-shot Range Model air rifle. Can you say raging “toxic masculinity”? Someone call the liberal arts department! We need a class to explain why someone would want a BB gun for Christmas.

Wait, it gets worse. “A Christmas Story” isn’t all sunshine and light. It has a dark side, thanks in part to director Bob Clark. He used his success on a very different film, “Porky’s,” to lift “A Christmas Story” to the big screen.

Ralphie is a victim of a big, mean bully. This isn’t some misunderstood kid or anti-hero, he’s a typical nasty neighborhood bully named Scut Farkus and an ever-present menace. He mocks, threatens, and beats up on everybody, even his own lackey sidekick. One day, Ralphie has had enough and gives the bully a serious bloody-nosed beatdown. It’s epic, and handled perfectly in the film. You want that bully to get his due, and when he does, it’s satisfying.

After the battle, amazing things happen. No police are called. No charges are filed. No one is suspended from school. There’s no hate crime investigation. No two week breathless discussion on CNN. In fact, Ralphie’s mom seems proud of him, and when she tells the old man Ralphie was in a fight, he seems to be aware of it and proud of him, too. But not so proud they make a big deal about it. Everybody doesn’t get a trophy, even after a TKO.

This was America before the anti-bullying campaigns that seem to put bullies in control of today’s schools. Dads used to tell their sons to stand up for themselves. Dads even said they would back their boys up if it came to all that. Punching your bully was a rite of passage. That’s the America the ’60s radicals and today’s SJWs hate—the America of the Greatest Generation. It’s gone now, like so much more in the world of “A Christmas Story.” Bullies of the past got handled by a street code, now they just hang out on Twitter.

All good, entertaining stuff here, which if you still love this classic movie like I do is bound to make you laugh right out loud in spots. But underneath runs the grim undercurrent I intimated above: they’ll surely get around to this too, sooner or later. They can’t leave ANYTHING alone, and eventually A Christmas Story will prove to be no exception. Just you wait and see if it don’t. The only real question is what, if anything, sane people will do about it.

Share

Mask, off

One of them finally said it, so Correia runs the numbers in response, and it’s truly a thing of beauty.

Last week a congressman embarrassed himself on Twitter. He got into a debate about gun control, suggested a mandatory buyback—which is basically confiscation with a happy face sticker on it—and when someone told him that they would resist, he said resistance was futile because the government has nukes.

And everybody was like, wait, what?

Of course the congressman is now saying that using nuclear weapons on American gun owners was an exaggeration, he just wanted to rhetorically demonstrate that the all-powerful government could crush us peasants like bugs, they hold our pathetic lives in their iron hand, and he’d never ever advocate for the use of nuclear weapons on American soil (that would be bad for the environment!), and instead he merely wants to send a SWAT team to your house to shoot you in the face if you don’t comply.

See? That’s way better.

We are so divided it’s like we are speaking two different languages. Hell, on this topic we are on two different planets. And it is usually framed with a sanctimonious left versus right, enlightened being versus racist hillbilly, unfailing arrow of history versus the knuckle dragging past sort of vibe.

But basically it boils down to one side making the argument: The idea of the 2nd Amendment resisting a tyrannical government is obsolete, because the federal government is too overwhelmingly powerful, and has too many advanced technologies.    

Which, especially in light of Kill ‘Em All Swalwell’s oops-did-I-say-that threat to nuke 2A-supporting Americans, pretty neatly provides confirmation of everything we’ve been saying all along. But never mind that right now, on to the really good stuff.

First, let’s talk about the basic premise that an irregular force primarily armed with rifles would be helpless against a powerful army that has things like drones and attack helicopters.

This is a deeply ironic argument to make, considering that the most technologically advanced military coalition in history has spent the better part of the last two decades fighting goat herders with AKs in Afghanistan and Iraq. Seriously, it’s like you guys only pay attention to American casualties when there’s a republican in office and an election coming up.

Nobel Peace Prize Winner Barack Obama launched over five hundred drone strikes during his eight years in office. We’ve used Apaches (that’s the scary looking helicopter in the picture for my peacenik liberal friends), smart bombs, tanks, I don’t know how many thousands of raids on houses and compounds, all the stuff that the lefty memes say they’re willing to do to crush the gun nut right, and we’ve spent something like 6 trillion dollars on the global war on terror so far.

And yet they’re still fighting.

Okay, so let’s say Congressman Swalwell gets his wish, and the government says turn them in or else. And even though the government has become tyrannical enough to send SWAT teams door to door and threaten citizens with drones and attack helicopters, rather than half the states saying fuck you, this means Civil War 2, instead we’ll stick to the rosiest of all possible outcomes, and say that most gun owners comply.

In fact, let’s be super kind. Rather than a realistic number, like half or a third of those people getting really, really pissed off and hoisting the black flag, let’s say that 99% of them decide to totally put all their faith into the government, and that the all-powerful entity which just threatened to kill their entire family will never ever turn tyrannical from now on, pinky swear, so what do they have to lose? And a whopping 90% of gun owners go along peacefully.

That means you are only dealing with six and a half MILLION insurgents. The entire active US military is about 1.3 million, with about 800,000 reserve. Which is also assuming that those two Venn diagrams don’t overlap, which is just plain idiotic, but I’ll get to that too.

Let’s be super generous. I’m talking absurdly generous, and say that a full 99% of US gun owners say won’t somebody think of the children and all hold hands and sing kumbaya, so that then you are only dealing with the angriest, listless malcontents who hate progress…  These are those crazy, knuckle dragging bastards who you will have to put in the ground.

And there are 650,000 of them.

To put that into perspective, we were fighting 22,000 insurgents in Iraq, a country which would fit comfortably inside Texas with plenty of room to spare. This would be almost 30 times as many fighters, spread across 22 times the area.

And that estimated number is pathetically, laughably low.

In one of the bluest states in America, the New York SAFE Act only has like a 4% compliance rate. And that’s mostly just people choosing to ignore an onerous law. Because the further you get away from the major cities, the more people just don’t give a crap about your utopian foolishness. Its benign neglect, and most Americans are happy to ignore you until you mess with them. You start dropping Hellfire missiles on Indiana? Fuck you, its game on. And that 1% is going to turn into 50% damn quick.

So just by the numbers, it’s an insurmountable problem, but we’re just getting started with how stupid this idea is.

And, incredible as it seems considering the level of stupidity already dispersed and put to rout here, Larry’s right—he is just getting started. Really, though, this bit is what it mostly boils down to:

In something that I find profoundly troubling, when I’ve had this discussion before, I’ve had a Caring Liberal tell me that the example of Iraq doesn’t apply, because “we kept the gloves on”, whereas fighting America’s gun nuts would be a righteous total war with nothing held back… Holy shit, I’ve got to wonder about the mentality of people who demand rigorous ROEs to prevent civilian casualties in a foreign country, are blood thirsty enough to carpet bomb Texas.

You really hate us, and then act confused why we want to keep our guns? But I don’t think unrelenting total war against everyone who has ever disagreed with you on Facebook is going to be quite as clean as you expect.

Probably not, no. It certainly shouldn’t be, anyway.

But that’s what we’re dealing with here, isn’t it? It’s a completely child-like, petulant, spiteful outlook, one wholly divorced from anything resembling reason or reality; it wants what it wants, because reasons, and it expects to get it toot fucking sweet, too. Or else.

Believe it or not, Larry has plenty more yet, and it’s…well, it’s reassuring, is what it is—more so than anything I’ve come across since Black Tuesday, in fact. Disastrous and dark a portent as the midterms were, some small hope still remains to us, a hope tightly interwoven with America’s gun culture and its 2A devotees. Which, I can’t think of anything more fitting, more right, than that. Conclusion:1““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““1

To pull off confiscation now you’d have to be willing to kill millions of people. The congressman’s suggestion was incredibly stupid, but it was nice to see one of you guys being honest about it for once.  In order to maybe, hypothetically save thousands, you’d be willing to slaughter millions. Either you really suck at math, or the ugly truth is that you just hate the other side so much that you think killing millions of people is worth it to make them fall in line. And if that’s the case, you’re a sick bastard, and a great example of why the rest of us aren’t ever going to give up our guns.

No reason it can’t be both there, Larry. But it ain’t just math they suck at; as I always say, it’s reality that’s always been their biggest problem.

(Via WRSA)

Share

No going back

TL proposes a first step.

From a rational point of view, there is no way ever to get back even one scintilla of freedom or liberty. No matter how hard we vote, no matter how outraged and screaming we get, there is NO way to ever return to a semblance of liberty and freedom. It cannot happen. Not in this system. Not with this debt. Not with the contempt of every government official toward our rights, property and privacy.

It is time, then, to draft a Petition of Dissolution. Our friends on the left will be as willing to do so as those on the right. The things of government are unmanageable; it is too corrupt; too trapped by its own arrogance; too divisive in its manner to listen to reason or work to solve the nations problems. This government created over two hundred years ago is no longer capable of working as designed. It cannot even obey its own codes. There are laws for government officials and other laws for citizens. There are few if any actual punishments of government employees, while every word is a potential prison sentence for the citizen. The republic has become some sort of kingless Kingdom with only barons, lords and sheriffs running amok, demanding satisfaction for their whims.

We can look at fault if we want to, but does it matter? Is anything more clear than the fact that this government is not capable of understanding how ridiculous it is when it speaks of laws for one citizen and different laws for others? That special groups can murder, maim and rape children and others will be tried and imprisoned for the same actions? That is a system that has FAILED. There is no other way to view its actions or its reasons. A judge in one circuit overrules the President?

I know that by suggesting a Petition of Dissolution that it is exactly what George Soros wants. It is what the communists in the federal government want. But the trap has already been set to slowly grind resistance to these groups into dust. The push to disarm the citizenry will only get more insistent and resistance to it more fractured and distanced as time goes on. Each city will enact illegal confiscations and then states and little by little all rights will be lost. The Second Amendment is the only one that matters at a time like this.

Now, while the greatest majority still hold the weapons of resistance, is the time to dissolve this union no matter how difficult it is for the heart to conceive it. The alternative is an inexorable decline into misery, destitution and ultimate ignoble slavery. It is our right and duty to alter or abolish. It is the only thing left to which we should swear an oath. I don’t know what is on the other side of such an act, perhaps the exact same outcome, but with the knowledge that we stood and we gave everything to deny the tyrants their victory. But, maybe something better…after the worst.

I still can’t see this as remotely likely; should such a thing be undertaken, FedGovCo will certainly quash it with a quickness anyway. But TL is absolutely right about that “right and duty” business; the Founders spelled that out in no uncertain terms for us. To wit:

…when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government…

Which brings us ’round to this:

If one thinks about how America’s cold civil war could be resolved, there seem to be only five possibilities. One would be to change the political subject. Ronald Reagan used to say that when the little green men arrive from outer space, all of our political differences will be transcended and humanity will unite for the first time in human history. Similarly, if some jarring event intervenes—a major war or a huge natural calamity—it might reset our politics.

A second possibility, if we can’t change the subject, is that we could change our minds. Persuasion, or some combination of persuasion and moderation, might allow us to end or endure our great political division. Perhaps one party or side will persuade a significant majority of the electorate to embrace its Constitution, and thus win at the polling booth and in the legislature. For generations, Republicans have longed for a realigning election that would turn the GOP into America’s majority party. This remains possible, but seems unlikely.

As for moderating our disagreements and learning to live with them more or less permanently, that too seems unlikely given their fundamental nature and the embittered trajectory of our politics over the last two decades.

So if we won’t change our minds, and if we can’t change the subject, we are left with only three other ways out of the cold civil war. The happiest of the three would be a vastly reinvigorated federalism. One of the original reasons for constitutional federalism was that the states had a variety of interests and views that clashed with one another and could not be pursued in common. If we had a re-flowering of federalism, some of the differences between blue states and red states could be handled discreetly by the states themselves. The most disruptive issues could be denationalized. The problem is, having abandoned so much of traditional federalism, it is hard to see how federalism could be revived at this late juncture.

That leaves two possibilities. One, alas, is secession, which is a danger to any federal system—something about which James Madison wrote at great length in The Federalist Papers. With any federal system, there is the possibility that some states will try to leave it. The Czech Republic and Slovakia have gone their separate ways peacefully, just within the last generation. But America is much better at expansion than contraction. And George Washington’s admonitions to preserve the Union, I think, still miraculously somehow linger in our ears. So secession would be extremely difficult for many reasons, not the least of which is that it could lead, as we Americans know from experience, to the fifth and worst possibility: hot civil war.

Under present circumstances, the American constitutional future seems to be approaching some kind of crisis—a crisis of the two Constitutions. Let us pray that we and our countrymen will find a way to reason together and to compromise, allowing us to avoid the worst of these dire scenarios—that we will find, that is, the better angels of our nature.

Unlikely in the extreme, since the nature of the Left—hungering to enslave all Americans under an all-powerful federal tyranny of exactly the stripe the Founders dreaded and abhorred most—allows for no “better angels.” We’ll just have to see how it all plays out, for better or worse.

Share

Degeneration

Sowing chaos, with nefarious intent.

A Florida school district allowed a self-described transgender female student regular access to the boys’ locker room, with no advance warning to the boys or their parents. The first time she walked in, she caught “boys (literally) with their pants down, causing them embarrassment and concern by the fact that they had been observed changing by an obvious girl,” says a complaint letter to Pasco County School District from Liberty Counsel, a pro-bono constitutional law firm.

With a “gag order,” school administrators forbade teachers from talking about the change, and ordered a male P.E. teacher to supervise the potentially undressed girl in the Chasco Middle School locker room, the letter says. When he refused to “knowingly place himself in a position to observe a minor female in the nude or otherwise in a state of undress,” administrators told him “he will be transferred to another school as discipline for ‘not doing your job in the locker room.’”

In an email, an administrator initially threatened to put the male coach on administrative leave, telling him that refusing to supervise a potentially naked female student would “not be tolerated,”said Liberty Counsel attorney Richard Mast. The school’s other P.E. teacher, who is female, also objected and was ignored.

Pasco parents have yet to be informed by the school of this situation, yet the transgender student continues to have open access to private male areas, according to Liberty Counsel. Despite the initial September incident, then legal contact in October, the elected board for the district with 70,500 students has so far taken no action and administrators have refused to budge.

“Unfortunately these things are going on across the country, primarily with school psychologists and guidance counselors,” said Mast. He noted that it’s standard for public schools to pass transgender policies without informing parents, voters, or taxpayers first. That means the public only hears about it after children have been affected, withholding all opportunities for parents to prevent their child’s exposure to this kind of sexual indoctrination, confusion, and exploitation.

Last year in a Georgia public school, a five-year-old girl was allegedly sexually assaulted by a “gender-fluid” male classmate in the school bathroom after a transgender policy allowed him access. He allegedly pushed her against the wall and repeatedly jammed his fingers into her genitals while she struggled. The district refuses to believe the alleged victim and the mother has pulled her daughter from the school, which never notified her of the incident and maintains its bathroom policy.

Unpossible. We’ve been repeatedly told by our betters that this kind of assault has never happened, because it can’t happen, because reasons.

It appears Pasco schools adopted their transgender policies with no notice to their elected school board, parents, or voters. Instead, they were implemented after the district hired Jackie Jackson-Dean, a school psychologist, as a LGBT liason. Her website lists her as the “primary author of the school district’s [LGBT] best practices guide,” which names her as its”lead content developer.” That guide says transgender pronouns, locker room, bathroom, dress code, and sports access are a student’s “right.”

So, having a school “LGBT liaison” is now a thing, is it? Say, just how deep DOES this rabbit hole go, anyway?

An OutCoast.com article from 2017 says Jackson-Dean uses her position at the school to connect students with an organization called Metro, which has nine Tampa Bay locations. Metro helps LGBT minors and adults meet, gives counseling to LGBT-identified and questioning people including minors, and hands out drugs that aim to reduce HIV transmission when people have risky sex. Metro website notes that the Food and Drug Administration has approved this drug for children 15 to 17, meaning legal minors.

What, no NAMBLA referrals? If not, why not? Is this “expert” some kind of closeted H8RRR or something?

An “LGBT-Inclusive School,” Jackson-Dean’s guide says, has: “Health and sexuality education that is inclusive of all sexual orientations and gender identities”; “curriculum that regularly includes information about LGBT people, history, and events”; and “Library resources and displays that are inclusive of LGBT people, history, and issues.” It also has “Proms, homecoming, and athletic events that allow for gender-neutral alternatives to ‘King’ and ‘Queen’”; and “Observations of Mother’s Day and Father’s Day that affirm all family structures.”

We are building a better world. All of them, better worlds.”

A school that is helping LGBT students will not only treat families as potential sources of trauma whose rejection directly leads to LGBT children’s depression and suicide, but also have “‘Out’ teachers,” “Inclusive paperwork (e.g. NOT mother/father),” and “Messaging from administration regarding non-tolerance of harassment and discrimination,” the guide says.

Jeez, but what a sprawling, destructive, indecipherable mess. Which, if you think that isn’t the entire point and purpose of all this balderdash, you got yourself some more thinking to do.

The boundless, balls-out arrogance of these “educators” is what really stands out like a beacon to me. They manipulate the children for PC purposes, ignore or openly defy the rights of parents to any authority or even input regarding the “education” of their own children, operate in secret without oversight, and are unaccountable to anyone other than their own superiors at the state and federal level. They infantilize parents, sexualize children, and politicize the education process itself.

A number of commenters to the article say that this is the hill to die on—the line in the sand dividing peaceful attempts at dialogue, reconciliation, and redress from violence and war. Given that, as I’ve so often said, all of our problems with the seditious Left begin with government-school indoctrination of our youth, I’m having a hard time finding a way to argue with that.

Share

Preach it, brother

Oh, how I love this.

A Chicago pastor who asked a man dressed in drag to leave a worship service because he was dressed like a woman stands by his actions after coming under fire.

A Facebook video of the Sunday night encounter shows Antonio Rocquemore of Power House International Ministries asking the unidentified man to step out into the aisle.

“Can you leave my church and go put on man clothes? And don’t come here like that no more,” Rocquemore can be seen telling the man in the video, posted by Christian James Lhuillier.

“i hold a standard in here. Whatever you do on the outside is your business, but I will not let drag queens come in here. If you’re gonna come in here you’re gonna dress like a man.”

People in the crowd cheered and said “Amen” and “thank you Jesus” as Rocquemore addressed the young man.

Then, as predictable as the fucking sunrise, here comes the liberal bullshit.

But Lhuillier posted the video on Monday because he was angered by what he saw. It has been viewed more than 420,000 times.

“Some of y’all are going to have to excuse my language but I am tired of this s**t,” Lhuillier wrote in his post.

“In a place that is supposed to be a place of change a place of deliverance whatever you want to call it why would you destroy someone in front of a room full of people. This is the kind of bulls**t that causes people to go home and commit suicide.

“S**t like this is the reason that the church has no power in 2018 because they are so worried about the wrong things.”

Hardly. If the Christian church truly has no power in 2018, it stems not from “worrying about the wrong things” but from putting up with disrespect, denigration, insult, and attack from the Left with no stronger reaction in its own defense than running out of cheeks to turn.

The good Reverend Rocquemore is right on the beam: this cross-dressing fucktard needs to leave his sexual kinks at home on Sunday instead of bringing them to church—just as I need to, just as you do, just as we all do—be those kinks what they may. The church is no place for that crap, and anyone serious about his/her faith knows it, respects it, and wouldn’t have it any other way.

I strongly suspect that this episode, like the contrived bake-me-a-gay-wedding-cake-or-else imbroglio, is the precursor to a lawsuit intended to degrade and humiliate everyone not on board with Lefty’s destructive, degenerate agenda, forcing us once again not just to tolerate the bizarre and/or dysfunctional, but to actively celebrate it. Count on it; they’re working a plan here, and they will never stop until either we knuckle under or they are dead, dead, dead.

Rest assured: if by chance this asshole is more or less apolitical (unlikely) and not a conniving Lefty himself, then the people who put him up to this little stunt most assuredly are. Not content to politicize everydamndthing under the sun, they also have to sexualize it all, too. Not because they’re driven by rampant libido, mind, but because it’s just another way of working their tiresome old political wheeze—another arrow in the Progtard quiver, and another aspect of life they just can’t keep their grubby, strangling mitts off of.

Good for the Rev for telling the skeevy weenie-wagger off, and for the supportive flock he shepherds too; nice to know that at least some traditional values survive in Shitcago even yet. I can’t see anyone hearing a whole lot of “God DAMN America” bushwa on Sundays from Rev Rocquemore either, although that’s just a gut assumption and I could be all wet on it.

Bottom line: you wanna attend Sunday worship? You dress appropriately and show the proper decorum in the house of the Lord, then. You wanna put on a freakshow and get your rocks off by drawing attention to yourself, rubbing your warped urges in others’ faces—well, there are plenty of places out there that cater to people like you, places which Normals are perfectly happy to pass by and let be. Stay out of our churches—to adapt a line from the great Larry Brown: take your goober-grabbing on down the road someplace else—lest you walk into the wrong church one fine Sunday and wind up getting way more attention than you figured on, or wanted.

Via Ace, who forgoes the “degenerate” angle to amusingly work the “RAYCISS!™” one instead.

Update! After looking over this story again and thinking on it some more, I failed to mention two more things that frost the hell out of me. One: “…after coming under fire”? Now, we know this phrase is just another of those Enemedia stratagems, like “sources say” or “concerns have been raised” that allow the “journalist” to sneak in his own opinion with a little weight added by the subterfuge. But if the Reverend truly DID “come under fire” by people in his community other than the cross-dressing fruit, the media, and Angry Guy who posted the video—well, that would be another in a long list of recent indicators of just how far gone this nation is.

Two, viz Angry Guy himself: he says a church is “supposed to be a place of change a place of deliverance whatever you want to call it.” Oh, rilly? IS it now. That’s some way sophisticated understanding of liturgical shit there, bub. Especially that “whatever you want to call it.” Why, anyone can see you’ve given the doctrine of this church—of Protestant Christianity itself, in fact—one hell of a lot of Deep Thought, in your own clumsy, semi-literate way.

And here I’d always thought church was a place of worship, a place of repentance, self-denial, and humility—a place of rejection of the mundane and corporeal and embrace of the spiritual, ineffable, and sublime. Above all else, a place of joyful expression of the congregation’s love and devotion to God, of their gratitude for His mercy and forgiveness, of glorifying and praising Him. “A place of CHANGE”? Well, I suppose it actually can be thought of that way as well, superficial and generic as the notion is. But that is by NO means the central focus or purpose of the church.

I have to wonder if this putz had ever even attended services, there or anywhere else, before launching this bullshit campaign to force the Reverend Rocquemore into line with current shitlib canon. If by some chance Angry Guy IS a regular, then I wonder, too, if he usually records the service on video. Myself, I’d bet that he just HAPPENED to show up this one time—on the particular day that the freak put on his provocative little act—and just HAPPENED to record the freak’s ouster and posted it on Fakebook, too. Five will get you ten Angry Guy is MUCH better acquainted with the cross-dresser than he is with the Reverend, or any of his congregants.

Because he’s “tired of this shit,” see. If so, I can wholeheartedly assure him that he is NOT the only one.

I wonder, too, why they didn’t try to spring their little Drag Night shit-stirring extravaganza on a mosque instead of a Christian church. Kinda gives the whole game away right out of the gate, don’t it?

Share

Emboldened, and all-in

So you probably know by know about the latest Lefty restaurant attack, this one merely verbal, launched by some slime-encrusted, mentally unbalanced pustule against Tucker Carlson’s daughter. Naturally, sewer-crawling lawyer Michael Avenatti has involved himself, “investigating” the risible charge that Carlson “assaulted” said pustule in retaliation for cruelly browbeating his daughter. That’s the backstory; I’ll let Steyn take it from there:

While we’re on the subject of Tucker: The thing about Michael Avenatti, the Creepy Porn Lawyer, is that he’s better at being creepy than at being a lawyer. In fact ,he’s an even crappier lawyer than Eric M George, which is kind of impressive and a point to bear in mind if you’re thinking of retaining his services: So, while Creepy is planning his presidential run, his most famous client Stormy Daniels is broke and working cheap strip joints following the dismissal of her meritless defamation suit against Trump, after which Judge Otero additionally ordered Stormy to pay the President’s legal fees. That’s extremely rare in America: a penniless nobody has to have a real stinker of a case to get stuck with paying for a billionaire’s lawyers. But that’s how good a job Avenatti did. Creepy’s second most famous client, Julie Swetnick, swore that Brett Kavanaugh organized drug-and-gang-rape parties in the Eighties, and she’s now been referred to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation. So Creepy Porn Lawyer is moving on. Hence this Saturday night Tweet:

We are investigating an alleged assault on a gay latino immigrant committed by T. Carlson.

On TV last week, after the mob besieged Tucker’s home an hour before the show when he was already at the studio, Brian Kilmeade asked him about how he felt about not being there to protect his wife, and then qualified the question by conceding that it was a little, in Brian’s word, “retro”. And Tucker said something to the effect that he wouldn’t want to live in a society where men didn’t instinctively want to protect their wives. Likewise, I wouldn’t want to live in a society where men and boys didn’t instinctively want to defend their daughters and sisters in the face of provocations like the above. “Retro” as it might be, I would certainly punch out any guy who said anything remotely close to that to my own daughter. Because the alternative – accepting it and continuing through to the desserts and digestifs as if nothing has happened – is unconscionable, not just for the individuals concerned but for the broader culture.

This is where all the “safe space” “micro-aggression” “hate speech” rubbish leads. Tucker and this guy don’t know each other; they have no personal relationship; they differ only on matters of public policy – on immigration or sexual identity politics or whatever the hell his bugbear is. But, if your reaction to a fellow who advocates a different immigration policy is to go after his teenage daughter, you’re a goon who’s making any kind of public discourse impossible – indeed, making democratic politics and representative government impossible. The left is going to have to re-learn how to debate – the issues, that is, not whether the chap raising the issue has a “whore” for a daughter. Because the alternative, the way these morons are going, is civil war.

It’s a vain hope, Mark; these filthwads aren’t in the least interested in “debate,” and will definitely not be brought around to re-learning how. We should only hope there’s still enough stalwarts on our side to bring them their civil war; to win it resoundingly; and to thoroughly grind their faces in defeat for years afterward, until all the will to violent Marxist revolution is crushed out of them entirely.

As for Carlson, if ever there was an instance of punching some bully-boy ass-welt in the face being eminently justifiable, it would have to be this one. Tucker should have beaten this coward into bloody goo and let the legal chips fall where they may. If America is so ethically adrift that it could provide a jury willing to convict a man for reacting vigorously—and appropriately—to a vile, completely unprovoked assault on his daughter, then the country is too far gone to be worth saving.

As my dad used to say, the guy was aching for a breaking; he damned sure should have gotten one, not only as a matter of simple justice but also pour encourager les autres. Every time we let another of these Lefty shitweasels slide on outrages like this, we guarantee that there will be more of it…and worse.

Share

The monkey in the wrench

Gum up their works.

These people, these communists, these greenies who are communist red on the inside, these foreign citizens, these would-be tyrants and dictators have decided that only their views are important, only they know how to do the right thing and you are either too lazy, stupid or inbred to conceive of their magnificence and brilliance. They know who to choose for a governor, or a mayor, or a representative, or a senator and since you are too stupid to agree with them, they will just have to vote ten times more often to ensure that the right thing is done.

That is exactly how they see you, but those are just the useful idiots, the trolling dupes, the ragtag Antifa leadership, the self-righteous college graduates who actually swallowed the vomit spewed by their communist professors and assistants. They are the elementary, middle school and high school teachers and principals who look down on the poor, confused parents, who are so politically backward, they have to send messages to them on how to behave by their own children, who themselves are victims of this diabolical disease called communism, collectivism, socialism and authoritarianism.

These are the overpaid athletes who laugh at you for wanting them to at least show a modicum of respect for the nation that has taken them out of the gutters and placed them at the highest level of societal status, so they kneel when you want them to stand as an insult to everything patriotic and decent about America. They are the celebrities who have not even a smidgen of understanding of what it takes to get up everyday and go to a job you hate in order to send your child to college. They are the deep state clerks and mid-level Senior Executive Service (SES) employees who have the game so rigged none of you serfs will ever get a hint of the lifestyles you would live if they did not spend every dime you pay in taxes monitoring, recording and using illegal means of surveillance to destroy any hope you have of living a life like theirs. They will regulate you, tax you, use your money to defeat you, to defeat your candidates, offer lies and  defamations to keep you right where you are putting tax dollars in their pockets to hate, despise and some even pity you for the uninformed dolts they believe you are.

They are all communists, they are all traitors, usurpers, criminals, thieves, bullies, tyrants and the real problem is, they laugh about it. They enjoy their evil. They enjoy your pain and fear. It gives them power.

Ask yourself why banks got bailed out, insurance companies got bailed out, investment firms got bailed out, automakers got bailed out, the richest 1% kept all of their money, but not one home loan was forgiven despite the fact that companies that held the mortgages went bankrupt and in some cases no one even understood who actually held the mortgage to these people’s homes and yet they were taken from them when they had paid more than half the balance. These people might have paid $250,000 on a $260,000 loan and because they got laid off when almost every business was struggling to stay alive due to the malfeasance of bankers, stock brokers and mortgage companies, they lost their homes, homes they had spent a lifetime trying to pay off so they could retire on a marginal income. That’s what they think of you, that they can take your life savings and save the banks and they will do it again.

But, the one thing left out in all of this is one simple, undeniable fact that gives you, the individual, power over all of them, total, utter and complete power to overcome your status as a slave to their nefarious plans.

TL spells out exactly what that one thing is, and he has a plan.

Share

“War for the soul of America”

And if you think that could ever mean anything less than real, true war, you’re dreaming.

The war in Washington will not end until the presidency of Donald Trump ends. Everyone seems to sense that now.

This is a fight to the finish.

Trump has been warned by congressional Democrats that if he in any way impedes the work of Mueller’s office, he risks impeachment.

Well, let’s find out.

If the House Judiciary Committee of incoming chairman Jerrold Nadler wishes to impeach Trump for forcing Mueller to fish or cut bait, Trump’s allies should broaden the debate to the real motivation here of the defeated establishment: It detests the man the American people chose to lead their country and thus wants to use its political and cultural power to effect his removal.

To a world watching with fascination this death struggle convulsing our capital, one wonders how attractive American democracy appears.

And just how much division can this democracy stand?

We know what the left thinks of Trump’s “base.”

Hillary Clinton told us. Half his supporters, she said, are a “basket of deplorables” who are “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it.” Lately, America’s populist right has been called fascist and neo-Nazi.

How can the left “unite” with people like that? Why should the left not try to drive such “racists” out of power by any means necessary?

This is the thinking that bred antifa.

As for those on the right — as they watch the left disparage the old heroes, tear down their monuments, purge Christianity from their public schools — they have come to conclude that their enemies are at root anti-Christian and anti-American.

How do we unify a nation where the opposing camps believe this?

More importantly: why would we even want to? If you’re willing to compromise with Leftists in order to enjoy what will certainly end up being a quite brief period of phony “unity” with such, then tell me: which of the Bill Of Rights are you willing to give up?

That haven’t already been taken from you, I mean.

Via WRSA, along with a useful diagram at the end of the post to help with proper trigger technique.

Update! It’s war all right—cold at the moment, perhaps, but heating up quickly.

Moving away from the strictly sectarian, Tucker Carlson has his finger on the pulse of the left-wing speech stiflers of every persuasion who use tragedy as a justification for shutting down right-leaning opinion.

Accusing them of committing “moral blackmail,” Carlson argued the other week, “They want to take charge of what you want to say and think…until the range of free speech narrows until it resembles a CNN script.”

“This is how free speech dies,” Carlson said. A little over a week later, an Antifa mob tried to break down Carlson’s door while his wife locked herself in the pantry and called the police.

So Carlson knows what he’s talking about. And he’s right—free speech is in peril and may very well die. But only if conservatives give in to the leftist bullies instead of fighting them.

True enough. But does either Carlson or the author of this piece fully realize that “fighting” is almost certainly going to mean not merely debating or campaigning or voting, but actual, physical fighting?

Yet again, I’m reminded of good ol’ Malone:

Malone: [talking privately in a church] You said you wanted to get Capone. Do you really wanna get him? You see what I’m saying is, what are you prepared to do?

Ness: Anything within the law.

Malone: And *then* what are you prepared to do? If you open the can on these worms you must be prepared to go all the way. Because they’re not gonna give up the fight, until one of you is dead.

The Left has to date given no cause whatsoever to doubt their dedication to their cause, their absolute commitment to seeing the transformation of America into a socialist Hell through to completion. They are very close to achieving their objective and have no intention of giving up now, particularly after Black Tuesday’s gains. Malone’s statement, sobering though it is, is both wise and true. His stark question will have to be answered by each and every one of us, probably sooner than we would wish. You don’t have to like it. You DO have to live with it.

Share

Times a million billion gajillion

This. This right here.

It’s Time These Bastards Got A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
In case you weren’t aware of it, an AntiFa mob stormed Fox News personality Tucker Carlson’s home yesterday evening and tried to break in, ruining his oak front door in the process. They screamed and chanted outside, terrorizing his wife and children, for some time. Here’s left-wing shill, ignorant, bigoted, generally despicable waste of flesh Matt Yglesias’s reaction:

I think the idea behind terrorizing his family, like it or not as a strategy, is to make them feel some of the fear that the victims of MAGA-inspired violence feel thanks to the non-stop racial incitement coming from Tucker, Trump, etc. https://t.co/hmBTBtcTBM
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) November 8, 2018

I agree that this is probably not tactically sound but if your instinct is to empathize with the fear of the Carlson family rather than with the fear of his victims then you should take a moment to reflect on why that is.
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) November 8, 2018
(link to this transcription here—M)

I want this bastard to suffer. Does he have a family, or is he just another left-wing cocksucker who would never undertake the responsibility of a wife and children?

They must taste their own medicine, or the harassment will never stop.

Precisely so. These villainous scum need to be hurt, and badly. But until such time as enough of us reach the tipping point and start truly taking care of business in the only way remaining to us that will actually work—ie, harming them physically, punching back twice as hard, and, in the most egregious case, deleting these vile cocksuckers entirely—this will suffice:

Yglesias, who co-founded Vox and is a senior correspondent there, was widely criticized for his tweets, including by me. (Disclosure: Yglesias was my colleague at Slate from 2011 to 2014.) By Thursday night he had deleted them.

Before he did, however, at least one Twitter user responded by posting Yglesias’ own home address in a reply thread. The implied threat was clear: Yglesias had failed to denounce the harassment by left-wingers of a conservative media personality at his home, so now he and his family deserved the same treatment.

My favorite part? This whine:

At least two users, one of them Yglesias himself, said they reported the tweet to Twitter. Twitter responded to both by saying that the tweet didn’t violate its rules, and took no action. In an email that was forwarded to Slate, Twitter wrote: “Thank you for your recent report. We have reviewed your report carefully and found that there was no violation of the Twitter Rules regarding the posting of private information.”

And so Yglesias’ private information remained on Twitter, endorsed by Twitter, throughout Thursday afternoon, overnight, and well into Friday morning. One of the users who had reported the doxing tweeted about it and tagged CEO Jack Dorsey. Still nothing happened.

At 11:20 a.m. Friday, I emailed Twitter’s public relations department to ask for comment on the decision to allow Yglesias’ doxing. By noon, a Twitter official responded that the company was looking into it. When I checked minutes later, the tweet was no longer online.

Aww, did poor widdle Wefty get a solid dose of him’s own bullshit crammed right down his fucking throat?

Well, GOOD. Fuck you. War. To the fucking knife, until not ONE of you commie carbuncles is left standing. Not. One.

Francis is perfectly correct above: none of this shit—Antifa harrassment, #BlackLiesMurder riots, bike-lock beatings, Democrat Socialist election thievery, Enemedia lying and manipulation, serious liberal-mob threats, Deep-State coup attempts at overthrowing a duly-elected President, NONE of it—stops until our enemies suffer real consequences for their effrontery. And I do mean suffer, very damned literally. Until then, all our complaints are nothing more than wind.

Update! Steyn, a good friend of Tucker’s, weighs in.

On Wednesday night Tucker Carlson was subject to an outrageous thug assault on his home by pampered decadent “anti-fascists” and “anti-racists” who have no idea what those words mean – and that, when you’re battering on a front door and forcing the woman inside to hide in the pantry in terror, you’re the fascist.

They need to get themselves a good, hard taste of the real deal to wise their stupid, whimpering, melodramatic asses up. If we really WERE fascists, they’d all be dead already. And if they don’t figure out the advisability of leaving us the hell alone, they’ll soon end up that way anyway.

This is an appalling reflection on where our politics is headed. In recent years I’ve seen enough friends in Europe forced out of public life and into hiding by Islamic fanatics in the cause of their lunatic caliphate. To see the same template adopted by 28-year-old Navel-Gazing Studies resistance poseurs is pathetic but disturbing nevertheless. Did they mean to assault him and his family? Or were they just mouthing off? Well, they broke an oak door. But, in any case, that’s not a calculation that should be forced on even as decayed a public discourse as ours.

“An appalling reflection” it sure is…but here we are. We didn’t do it; certainly, none of us are any happier about this sorry state of affairs than Steyn is, and devoutly wish things were different. But if we have to fight them, then we have to be sure we win, and unfortunately that means doing things we’d much rather not have to do.

So be it.

These are not the poor and downtrodden: The poseur resistance is largely what Americans call “upper middle-class”, for whom identification, arrest, trial and conviction would have serious consequences. We will see whether the District of Columbia has the will to do that – or, as in other US cities, whether they’re content to cede the streets to the paramilitary wing of Media Matters.

Steyn pulled that last punch a mite; seeing as how the time for that sort of courtesy is well behind us, I feel I must correct him: they are NOT “the paramilitary wing of Media Matters.” They’re the paramilitary wing of the Democrat Socialist Party, just like the Klan used to be. Media Matters is a branch of the propaganda wing of the Democrat Socialist Party, see. The Democrat Socialist Party is the bumbershoot all those wholly-owned subsidiaries currently cower under, the parent conglomerate governing MarxoSedition Inc and all its affiliated offshoots, partners, and unindicted co-conspirators.

In all things, precision, Mark, ol’ boy.

Share

Proud Boys NYC ass-whupping: the REAL story

It’s ugly, all right.

I’ll try to piece together the facts as carefully as I can and to the best of my knowledge:

Shortly after the Metropolitan Republican Club invited former Taki’s Mag contributor Gavin McInnes to speak at an event on Friday, October 12, club representatives say they were besieged by “increasingly contentious phone calls at the Club, coordinated by activist groups on social media” for days demanding the event be canceled.

On the morning of the event, vandals spray-painted the anarchy “A” on the club’s front door, smashed windows, glued locks shot, and damaged a keypad entrance system.

They also left a note that, to a sane person, sounds a touch threatening:

Tonight, we put the Republican Party on notice, in defiance to the policy of mass misery they have championed.

The U.S. government has established concentration camps around the country for Latino people, shamelessly murdering black people, and continues its war machine that has slaughtered Muslim people with impunity for decades.…

While these atrocities persist unabated the Metropolitan Republican Club chose to invite a hipster fascist clown to dance for them, content to revel in their treachery against humanity….

Our attack is merely a beginning. We are not passive, we are not civil, and we will not apologize.

Maybe it’s my reptilian brain speaking here, but when I see groups of people showing up in public with their faces covered and screaming that you should be exterminated, I suspect they may be up to no good.

After Gavin delivered his speech, video shows members of his Proud Boysfraternal order of “Western chauvinists” leaving the club and being escorted away by police who were protecting them from shrieking throngs of predictably PMSing leftists spouting vitriol and threats.

The video proceeds for a little over three minutes as police shunt the Proud Boys away from the howling throngs. Then at some point it shows them suddenly darting down the street. Before you know it, there’s a street fight in front of a storefront.

Separate surveillance video from behind the storefront window shows a group of five masked people clad in black. Then it shows one of those “peaceful protesters” throwing a bottle. Then it shows those faceless “activists” getting swarmed by Proud Boys and beaten into the ground.

As far as I can tell, this was a case of mutual combat where one side lost and then cried foul.

Yep—just like the mewling, gutless, putrid little pukes they are. So far so good, far as I’m concerned; miserable little shits provoke a fight, miserable shits get their asses whupped and run crying from the scene. Read on for the ugly part, which came along in the aftermath and won’t surprise you in the least. The denouement:

Meanwhile, Antifa remains free to send threatening letters and smash windows and throw bottles.

In this sick social-status game over “tolerance,” only one side will be tolerated. In this war for the streets, only one side will be allowed to fight.

For however much longer the authorities can keep a lid on our side, anyway. Then, all of a sudden, what anybody might or might not be “allowed” to do won’t matter in the least. And after that, it REALLY gets ugly.

In a conversation the other day with someone lamenting the seemingly boundless forebearance and tolerance for abuse—to even include physical assault—on our side, I said this: there are basically two things humans won’t sit still for forever. One is hunger; no one, absolutely no one, is going to just sit back and let himself starve to death. The other: no one will put up with being used as a punching bag and a target indefinitely. Sooner or later, even the most tremulously meek schoolkid will get fed up and lash out in some fashion against a bully.

The Antifa fascists think they can go right on getting away with their bullshit. They’ve been encouraged to believe this by the authorities who have shielded them from consequence so far. One way or another, that, too, will not go on forever.

Update! In praise of the Proud Boys:

I was preparing to host a large event on the L.A. Westside for Ann Coulter, where she was going to give a talk and sign copies of her new book, Resistance Is Futile (buy it if you haven’t!). This was to be my first such event in five years. Back when I used to do high-profile conservative events on a regular basis, times were very different. No Trump, no Antifa threat. I never used to break my ass over security. I’d hire a minimum number of security guys, and I used venues that were far from impregnable, because the idea of violent thugs crashing them was not on anyone’s mind. In 2011, I did a large-scale gala right on Hollywood and Vine. Anyone walking down Hollywood Boulevard could have jumped a gate and they’d have been right in our midst. But we never worried about it, and it never happened. Ah, memories.

This time, I chose as impregnable a venue as I could. Second floor, no windows, no street access, only two doors, and underground parking. I asked the L.A. Proud Boys if they would serve as my security for the night, an offer they gladly accepted. The event was going to be completely private, invitation only, with the attendees culled from my personal, vetted mailing list. I was glad the Proud Boys were going to be there, but a week before the event, things took a turn for the bizarre, and all of a sudden the Proud Boys’ presence became far more vital.

My former podcast partner, Edwin Oslan, a self-proclaimed “punk rock right-winger” who moved to L.A. last year from West Bloomfield, Mich., was initially going to assist me on the event. After he cocked up the first task I gave him, I let him go. Bitter and angry, he demanded money from me. He also demanded that a Proud Boys leader pay for his drinks all night at the shindig. He had no rationale for those demands beyond a sense of entitlement. When he was refused, he decided to publicly dox the event, and then he embarked on a weeklong campaign to entice Antifa to violently disrupt the function.

Due to the doxxing, the venue received threats (including bomb threats).

The L.A. Proud Boys stepped up in a way that went beyond my expectations. Marshaling a force of almost forty men, they kept us, and the venue, safe—at the doors, inside the room, inside the garage, and at the perimeter. They were as discreet and professional as the highest-paid security guys I’d ever hired…and they didn’t ask for a penny. Far from being a band of “thugs,” they were disciplined, coolheaded, vigilant, and friendly. I cannot say enough good things about them. They saved the day. In fact, at the start of her speech, Ann remarked that she’d never felt safer in California.

That’s why the left is so committed to destroying the Proud Boys. They are our anti-Antifa, and we need them. Without them, who knows what might have happened at the Coulter event?

Truth is, I was caught off guard by Edwin’s behavior. I knew him for a year and a half, and I missed the warning signs that he was one of those guys who might pop off. But the Proud Boys saw it. Several months prior to my event and Edwin’s campaign to disrupt it, he’d tried to join the Proud Boys, and the L.A. Proud Boys leader smelled a rat immediately. This cycles back to my point about knowing there can be nutcases in our midst, and learning how to guard against them.

I slipped up this time, and I was saved by the Proud Boys. My personal debt to them is immense, and that’s the note I want to end on. As the left targets them for annihilation, the Proud Boys deserve support from all of us. Because one day, any one of us might need their help…to guard against our foes, or even one of our own.

Say what you will about ’em, but I’m all for the Proud Boys myself. They didn’t come along a moment too soon, and whatever you might think of Gavin McInnes he’s done good work with this, and my hat is off to him for it.

Share

National IQ test underway!

Roger Simon sure has that right:

This Tuesday America takes an IQ test.  Or perhaps we should say a common sense test. Or even more a test to see the degree to which it has been brainwashed.

This test has been going on for a week or two now in early voting in rather large numbers, but the results will be in, for the most part, late Tuesday night.

You would think that with all economic indicators at or near an all-time high, unemployment at an all-time low (notably for minorities and women), wages rising as they haven’t in years, the country at peace with the threat of evil doers from ISIS to North Korea on the wane, and an incredible, indeed unprecedented, number of presidential accomplishments in 20 months this election would be the proverbial no-brainer for voters.

Depends on how many of the voters are no-brainers themselves. But if enough of them want to go back to spiralling unemployment, lower wages, higher taxes, more despair and hopelessness, laughingstock status on the international stage, undefended borders, and entire demographic segments of the population eternally dependent on the largesse of a flat-broke government—well, they’ll get the government they deserve for sure.

Unfortunately, we’ll get it too. That’s the problem with commies: they always drag everybody else down with them. In fact, their ridiculous and unworkable program depends on it.

Share

Build the dam wall!

Hate speech.

There seems no way that the caravan of 4,000–14,000 migrants approaching our southern border is going to end without blood being shed. There probably will be blood. And, while the debate over “man-made climate change” is far from over, the debate over The Wall is finally over:

The Wall finally must be built. Just as a dam serves as a last-ditch physical barrier to prevent or control a flood, The Wall now is revealed as the only logistical way to create a barrier to prevent or control a flood of Illegals. So, as an Orthodox Rabbi who must restrict certain words I use, it is not inappropriate for me to say: Build the Dam Wall already!

Let it be clear: If we let them in — and, yes, they are people with feelings and sensitivities and loves and hopes and dreams — then there will be another Caravan after it, and next time it will be a Caravan of 10-15,000 sensitive lovers and hopers and dreamers. And three months later it will be another Caravan. And then another. What $38 million cash raised and wasted in one calendar quarter could not buy for Beto O’Rourke and his Kennedyesque DUI driving record and his Kennedyesque attempt to flee from the scene, the hordes will solve: Texas really will turn bold shades of “overnight blue.” Arizona will turn blue. Alabama and Mississippi will turn blue. North Dakota and Montana and Idaho will turn blue. We will lose this country — exactly as the Democrat playbook seeks. Despite their losing the male vote, the Caucasian female vote, the married woman vote, the blue-collar union worker vote, the Democrats simply will import hordes of new voters to seize power.

It is the same Leftist strategy as their new dream of stacking the federal courts: if they cannot gain majorities fairly under the established rules, then just change the rules by stacking the numbers. The Left’s model is California. With the exception of Donald Trump, we elect Presidents who either have held prior significant elected office (e.g., United States Senators, Congressional representatives, Governors, Vice Presidents) or who have been heroic generals who won major American wars (e.g., George Washington, William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, U.S. Grant, Ike) or both (e.g., Andrew Jackson, James Garfield, Teddy Roosevelt). Not all that long ago, California gave us Sen. Richard Nixon and Gov. Ronald Reagan, whose elected offices entitled them to reach the Presidency. Today, with California’s “jungle primary” that effectively limits most statewide elections to races between two Democrats, neither Nixon nor Reagan would even be on the ballot for statewide office. So Reagan never would have become a Governor and, therefore, not a President. Great and successful California governors like George Deukmejian and Pete Wilson never would have been elected. Instead, we have a paltry polity defined by Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, and other “jungle primary” arrivals. Just consider the drek from which Californians now will choose a U.S. Senator: Dianne Feinstein or Kevin Leon (who later changed his named to “de León” to get more Spanish votes).

If the Democrats succeed in eviscerating our southern border — and that is their plan: DACA, catch-and-release, abolish ICE — they can overcome a century of their losing the support of Americans who once trusted them — blue-collar ethnic Catholics, union workers, married women, seniors. Instead, they can win just by importing tens of millions of new voters unschooled in American values, clueless as to the Constitution, knowing and caring nothing of our culture and higher purposes. Between suffering Illegals, encouraging cemetery turnout, and granting suffrage to felons, they can win back lost numbers. It is a sensible strategy.

The incoming throngs have no jobs, few marketable skills, no assets. No family or friends vouching for them or guaranteeing that they will not impose a burden on American taxpayers. They arrive expecting and receiving free schooling, publicly guaranteed taxpayer-sponsored health care and free hospital access, and every imaginable free public service. Meanwhile, the children of long-time California taxpayers find that they cannot get into University of California schools that have set aside protected seats for the undocumented. The Illegals further receive food stamps and welfare, and they even are assured that these are not “charitable hand-outs” but “entitlements”: It’s OK, you’re entitled. Meanwhile, virtually every California city is pocked with tent cities of homeless residents, with San Francisco streets reeking of urine, feces, and syringes, and with epidemic outbreaks in Los Angeles of Third World diseases like typhus. It is only natural that Illegals will align electorally with the Democrats who buy them off for a generation or two with the taxpayer-funded goodies that will flow their way.

This cannot be permitted to spread. This just has to stop.

Indeed it must. Our ace in the hole? Trump himself.

The most fascinating feature of the Trump era is the President’s uncanny ability to bilk the media into providing coverage that confirms the percipience of his political positions. Their 24/7 coverage of the migrant caravan, complete with images that couldn’t be better for his stance on illegal immigration had they been produced by the White House Press Office, is little short of an in-kind contribution to the GOP. Combined with the incredibly irresponsible Democratic open borders platform, the media are materially improving Trump’s approval numbers and reducing the chances that the Republicans will lose either house of Congress next week.

The media reflexively supply the public with countless images of people marching toward our border, breaking down barriers and fighting with Mexican police, and have no idea that they’re proving Trump right. The optics of the caravan are so bad for the open borders crowd, in fact, that even Trump-haters like Andrew Sullivan are advising the Democrats to adopt a more rational position if they want to prosper in the near future. He points out that the pervasive influence of social media worldwide allows ever more people to learn what life is like here and encourages them to head our way. He then spells out the political consequences for the Dems:

As we can see right now in front of our eyes, elections can turn on this.…Until one Democratic candidate declares that he or she will end illegal immigration, period, shift legal immigration toward those with skills, invest in the immigration bureaucracy, and enforce the borders strongly but humanely, Trump will continue to own this defining policy issue in 2020.

The Democrats have, thus far, failed to listen to such advice. Instead, they collectively call for the abolition of ICE and change the subject to fictitious Republican threats to their health care. They seem to believe that, combined with the usual whoppers about the GOP’s dark conspiracy to cut Social Security and Medicare, this will allow them to escape the illegal immigration issue. The Democrats are trying to divert voter attention from a huge problem they can see on their television screens every night by yammering about pre-existing conditions. Trump, meanwhile, is exploiting this blunder by reminding the electorate why immigration is broken.

As with their Kavanaugh debacle, the Democrat Socialists seem not to realize just what a catastrophe they’ve created for themselves here. Can there be anyone so blind as to think it coincidence that each and every one of their recent “causes” and campaigns, if brought to fruition, would do grave injury to this nation?

By pimping this “caravan” of American-flag-burning indigent immivaders—denouncing this country every step of the way while demanding their nonexistent “right” to cross our border illegally and start immediately leeching on Uncle Sugar for their subsistence—they’ve painted a very ugly picture showing what they’re really all about, for all Real Americans to see: destruction, disorder, and dragging this country to its knees for good.

Share

A funny thing happened on the way to the Blue Wave

It collapsed in on itself, creating a black hole of post-election wailing and despair on the Left from which no sanity will be able to escape the bounds of the event horizon. You just watch.

The Democrats typically lead Republicans in early voting during midterm and presidential election cycles. In 2016 the Democratic lead in early voting was such that it inspired major news outlets, AP for example, to run articles with titles like “Early voting: More good signs for Clinton in key states.” Among the states in which early voting portended a victory for Hillary, according to AP, were Florida and North Carolina. The story went on to quote her spokesperson as follows: “The Clinton campaign describes both North Carolina and Florida as ‘checkmate’ states.” Trump won both of course.

And, make no mistake, there is a GOP surge that has rendered this year’s early voting pattern unique. Interestingly, the only major network that has covered this story in detail is by no means remarkable for its Republican-friendly reporting. On Monday NBC reported, “The data suggests enthusiasm among early GOP voters that could put a dent in Democratic hopes for a ‘blue wave’ in the midterms.” Early GOP voters were leading Democrats by large margins in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Montana, Tennessee, and Texas. And that was not an anomaly. By Thursday NBC reported:

The current nationwide total of early or absentee ballots counted exceeds the 2016 total from two weeks before Election Day.… Republican-affiliated voters make up 44 percent of the early voting electorate and Democratic-affiliated voters make up 40 percent of the early voting electorate.

So, there are two unusual phenomena associated with this year’s early voting — the overall participation has been far higher than is usually the case in a midterm election, and Republican ballots are materializing in significantly higher numbers. At this point in the 2016 election, early Democratic ballots led early GOP ballots by 45 percent to 38 percent. This cycle, the Republican percentage has increased by 7 while the Democratic percentage has dropped by 5. Does that mean the oft-predicted blue wave was BS?

Gee, it’s a real head-scratcher there, that one.

As each and every successive act of seditious refusal to acknowledge they lost in 2016 blows up in their faces, they ratchet up the insanity another turn, then scream in frustrated rage when Real Americans’ will to defy them doubles and redoubles. Everything they do now—absolutely everything—reinforces the Normals’ suspicion of them, deepens our loathing for them, and strengthens our resolve to fight back against them. We don’t believe them, we don’t trust them, we don’t like them. They’ve spent decades giving us good reasons for it.

They’re now trapped in an inescapable cycle of self-destruction, a powerful vortex of futility and debacle in which every attempt at escape only strengthens the suction and draws them deeper. Their inability—or refusal—to see just how fed up Americans are with them inspires them to even more obnoxious extremes of insult, assault, and general depravity.

They think this is going to win them votes and elections. They’re wrong about that. That is precisely as it should be. Which is yet another thing they just don’t get.

UNPOSSIBLE update! Looks like it ain’t just Kanye jumping the sinking Democrat Socialist ship.

With a little more than a week left until the midterm elections, Democrats appear to be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The matchups were theirs to lose, and they seem poised to underperform in a bunch of them.

A reader recently asked me: “I don’t understand why Latinos are not motivated to vote against a bigoted POTUS and willing enablers.”

I can help with that. The answer has to do with how Latinos feel about Donald Trump, and how they feel about Democrats as an alternative.

As for Mr. Trump and the Latinos, that’s a complicated relationship. Trump began his campaign for president by kicking Mexicans in the teeth, calling them rapists and drug traffickers.

Liar. He didn’t call “Mexicans” anything at all. He referred specifically to illegal-alien border jumpers and MS13. You and other liberals like you dishonestly conflated that to mean ALL Mexicans for political purposes, that’s all. So how’s that working out for ya now, liar?

He also showed his ignorance about immigration when he said that Mexico doesn’t send their best people to the United States when that is exactly who they send — dreamers, doers and risk-takers.

Also bullshit, you liar.

Then a strange thing happened. Once Trump emerged as the Republican nominee and squared off against Hillary Clinton — who often tries to out-Republican the Republicans as an immigration hardliner — polls began to show Trump’s support among Latinos climbing.

Probably because those who waited in line and went through the process tend to resent those who didn’t even more than native-born Americans do.

As a Never Trumper, I didn’t get it. So, I interviewed some Latinos for Trump and I got an earful. Many of them saw themselves not as Latinos but as Americans, and so they weren’t hung up on Trump’s anti-Latino screeds. They didn’t like or trust Clinton, appreciated Trump’s frankness, wanted a strong leader, and thought he was right about a lot of issues, including trade and immigration.

Yes, immigration. What most non-Latinos don’t grasp is that Latinos are ambivalent about illegal immigration. They have a front-row seat not just to the pain of deportations, but also to how many immigrants commit crimes or abuse social services.

Wait—”commit crimes,” “abuse social services”? I thought they were “dreamers, doers, and risk-takers,” Mexico’s best and brightest?

In 2016, an astounding 29 percent of Latinos voted for Trump.

And now, two years into his presidency, polls show that his support among Latinos is somewhere between 33 and 41 percent. That’s insanely good for a president who is so bad on issues that Latinos supposedly care about.

If you’d take off your NeverTrump blinders and switch that to “issues that LIBERAL Latinos supposedly care about,” you’d probably be on the road to “getting it,” bub. Needless to say, I won’t be holding my breath,

Share

Problem, meet solution

The boy’s a damned genius.

You don’t fly 1000 miles away to bomb a refugee column, even if it’s 98% military-aged male invaders. If we ever do that, it gets done when they’re 20 miles away, not 1000 (and after the mid-term elections, if ever). This nonsense is just a sideshow to bigger things.

But if we decided to seize a one-mile-wide buffer 2000 miles long on their side, and invest it with troops while we build the wall, that would be reasonable.

Seizing all remittances to those countries automatically, as the fruit of illegal activity, and contributing to terrorism, would also stop this nonsense in about a heartbeat, fund the military action, and hit those countries where they live. In Mexico alone, it’s some good fraction of their yearly GDP, and if it were gone, they’d be in open revolution in about a week.

It would also cost $0 to implement Monday morning.
Demanding Congress permanently outlaw the practice to those countries would similarly be reasonable.

Telling Mexico if they want that brand new trade treaty to stand they’d better end this nonsense is also correct.
If they want to see their food prices quadruple, all they need to do is ignore us.
Once again, that’d be the cue for open revolution in Mexico.

Which would make a military buffer both prudent and necessary.
It means we could then start rounding up illegals as enemy aliens, and deport them permanently over that wall, once and for all.

27 problems solved, by Friday next, at that point, and without bombing anyone or mostly without firing a single shot.

Works for me, right down the line. Diplomad puts some more meat on dem bones:

It is a hostile act, an overtly hostile act, by the government of Mexico and those of El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. The so-called march northward is clearly funded by somebody with deep pockets and good organizational skills, and abetted by officials in those countries. The immediate victims, of course, are thousands of poor people being lied to, exploited, and put in great physical danger.  We see pictures of marchers painting swastikas on American flags and then burning them, and waving flags of Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador at the head of long columns of marchers. These people apparently so hate racist, xenophobic America, and feel so patriotic about their home countries, that they are putting their lives at risk to head for the USA and get away from their non-sh*thole countries.  

The usual morons in the media are having a field day trying to blame these marches on Trump. I guess, in a way, Trump is to blame as under him the US economy rockets along and generates new jobs and rising wages for our workers, all of which serves as a magnet for the poor of the world. We should ask President Trump to stop winning for the USA, and that would, I assume, slow down the rate of marching. Right.

In other words, elect the Democrats and that will make the USA a much less attractive place to live for everybody. We could do that…or we could do what we should have done long ago: build the wall; change the immigration laws so that you can’t come here to mooch or work illegally; and punish the traffickers. By traffickers, by the way, I include the governments of Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, and the funders of these marches. Do what I long ago suggested, that until these countries begin to act as “friends,” use our military and other elements of national power to shut the border to all traffic in goods and people; suspend issuance of visas to nationals of those countries; and, of course, drastically reduce those nations’ diplomatic and consular presence in the USA. Yank us out of NAFTA, and tell those American companies who build their factories in Mexico, that doing so is a bad bet on the future. Prosecute any American individuals or organizations involved in funding, organizing, or leading these marches.

Beginning with one George Motherfucking Soros, Nazi collaborator, international financial criminal, and uber-destructive America-hater nonpareil. Deporting him to Hungary would be a suitable alternative, I guess, but a fair trial followed by a first-class hanging would indeed be better. But there’s also a problem—one you’d probably not expect, from a seemingly unlikely source:

In April of this year, Secretary of Defense James Mattis approved a memo ordering the deployment of up to 4,000 U.S. National Guardsmen to the southwestern border (provided that the governors of border states approve of the action and that the Department of Homeland Security reimburse the Department of Defense for its troubles). Yet, the DoD instituted such strict rules of engagement for the National Guardsmen that they’ve proven useless to the Border Patrol.

What’s more, the 800 active-duty troops that are being deployed to the border are not charged with providing physical support of the Border Patrol and National Guard. Instead, the Pentagon has opted to send its doctors, lawyers, and engineers. What do you think military doctors, engineers, and lawyers are going to do to turn back the human wave threatening America’s porous southwest? (Hint: they’re not going to physically turn back that caravan; they’re going to accommodate it in all likelihood!)

As I reported earlier this year, the Pentagon has already approved the Department of Homeland Security’s request to turn unused areas of large U.S. military bases along the southwestern border into tent cities. Clearly, the Pentagon has decided to engage in its own bit of policymaking, regardless of what the president has ordered — or what the American people want (and what the United States Constitution outlines).

Remember that treasonous op-ed in the New York Times written by an anonymous senior Trump Administration official detailing the effectiveness of #TheResistance from within the government to Trump?

Taken together, it is clear that the Pentagon today is simply going through the motions. It is as uncomfortable about physically protecting the U.S.-Mexico border as the Democratic Party is. Without a direct, inviolate command from the president explicitly ordering the Pentagon to take decisive actions to physically turn back the caravan, the Department of Defense will slow-walk and half-ass its response to this pending invasion — hiding behind process until the caravan has arrived, and there is no choice but to take the human mass in.

Just another indication that America’s biggest problems originate not beyond our own borders, but within ’em…which in turn means that President Trump, just as he’s said from the start, will not be able to solve them all by himself.

Share

“We are all Proud Boys now”

And not a moment too soon, either.

“Our attack is merely the beginning,” Antifa’s terror manifesto read after they led a premeditated and well-coordinated assault on our Metropolitan Republican Club in Manhattan’s Upper East Side. They hoped we would cancel a scheduled event the next night with founder of the Proud Boys Gavin McInnes as a result of their violent outburst. They were wrong.

It is not easy to be a Republican in New York City, but our ragtag group does the best we can to fight for conservative values in the belly of the beast. Earlier this week, we refused to back down in the face of extreme oppositiony from the leftist mob. Those of us who have been in the fight since at least the 2016 Trump campaign have seen our fellow patriots demonized, ambushed, insulted, defamed, beaten, and robbed of their livelihood. From our experience, we know that to acquiesce to their ultimatums and threats is to surrender. We stood defiantly in the face of those anti-American terrorists in the street, and welcomed Gavin McInnes to our event as he held a rubber sword to honor legendary Japanese anti-socialist Otoya Yamaguchi.

The leftist terrorists shouting unoriginal slogans in the streets were enraged that we exercised our 1st Amendment rights. Despite all their threats, the event proceeded, largely thanks to the great work of New York’s Finest. They guarded the doors even while chanting Antifa berated them as “Pigs” and “Fascists.”

After leaving the event, a colleague and I witnessed a right-leaning independent journalist being assaulted and mugged by multiple masked Antifa thugs who did not want their likenesses revealed to the greater public. We saved the man from a vicious mob beating from Antifa, who called me a “Nazi” despite my being Jewish and having family who died in Europe during the Holocaust. These Neo-Brownshirts even attacked the man’s girlfriend, showing that these enemies of America will stoop to any depth in order to shut their opposition down, all under the guise of “Fighting Fascism.” 

After meeting with the police to give a statement on what I saw, I was confident that justice would be served. I could have never imagined what was next to come. A complete inversion of reality was widely reported by the press, who seized upon the incident to fabricate an “October Surprise” to damage the GOP’s chances for November’s midterm elections. Top Democratic officials, including the New York governor, New York City public advocate, and the attorney general all badmouthed the Proud Boys publicly and called for their prosecution for defending their rights and engaging in self-defense during other incidents that night. Antifa assailants are referred to simply as “protestors” while a multiracial and multiethnic group of Proud Boys are defamed as “White Nationalists” in the press, being simultaneously “doxxed” by the online wing of the Antifa mob. Now, the feeding frenzy has started. Our stand for freedom against leftist terror has been completely spun. Out-of-context quotes from Gavin McInnes are being used to paint him as a right-wing militant leader when he in all actuality he just runs a patriotic fraternal group who like America and beer. Antifa’s acts of terror and manifesto promising more violence were glossed over completely in nearly all reports.

This is what makes Antifa so dangerous. It is not their fighting skills, which are subpar at best, but it is their immense establishment support. These people would be laughable otherwise, but they operate with near impunity due to supporting the establishment’s values of open borders, globalist socialism, censorship, social degeneracy, and limitless centralized power. There is an organized network of leftist lawyers who will defend these terrorists free of charge, and countless deep state apparatchiks working as judges, journalists, law enforcement officials, university administrators, and federal bureaucrats who regularly abuse their power to protect these unabashedly violent activists. This is a far worse problem than Antifa merely getting payoffs from Soros and other far-left oligarchs through their shady non-profit networks.

Read all of it—and at long last acknowledge fully and without flinching that we are in fact already at war with the TWANLOC mob…and that all the desperate wishes for “civility” and “dialogue” will not and cannot alter that, or deflect it, or defer it, or make it go away. Which essential truth necessitates a new category, in honor both of Breitbart, who coined the phrase, and the Proud Boys, who are breathing new life into it in defiance of the both the thug Left and the mewling cucks who moan about their righteous actions: FUCK YOU, WAR!

Update! It might be a little OT, but in poking around to find a link explaining the origins of Breitbart’s immortal line, I ran across some other good stuff and felt it was worth adding into the mix. Such as this, from a speech to a Massachusetts Tea Party group:

I must say, in my non-strategic… ‘cuz I’m under attack all the time, if you see it on Twitter. The [unclear] call me gay, it’s just, they’re vicious, there are death threats, and everything. And so, there are times where I’m not thinking as clearly as I should, and in those unclear moments, I always think to myself, ‘Fire the first shot.’

Bring it on. Because I know who’s on our side. They can only win a rhetorical and propaganda war. They cannot win. We outnumber them in this country, and we have the guns. [laughter] I’m not kidding. They talk a mean game, but they will not cross that line because they know what they’re dealing with.

And I have people who come up to me in the military, major named people in the military, who grab me and they go, ‘Thank you for what you’re doing, we’ve got your back.’

They understand that. These are the unspoken things we know, they know. They know who’s on their side, they’ve got Janeane Garofalo, we are freaked out by that. When push comes to shove, they know who’s on our side. They are the bullies on the playground, and they’re starting to realize, what if we were to fight back, what if we were to slap back?

There’s just a part of me that wants them to walk over that line.

And so they have, in spades. This next is from a pretty decent Slate article shortly after Andrew’s untimely death, written by Dave Weigel, of all people:

Every time they upload a story or tweet, Breitbart.com’s editors are answering a question: How do you keep this stuff going without your star? Can you keep getting on CNN and Fox and the Drudge Report? Does your inbox keep filling up with tips and video scoops? How do you replace Andrew Breitbart?

You really don’t. Breitbart’s death was commemorated by memorials in L.A., New York, and—twice—in D.C. The admiring bloggers who put on the first D.C. memorial went on to start the Breitbart Scholarship. Ideally, board members like James O’Keefe will use it to dole out cash for enterprising student journalists.

The second D.C. memorial, which I attended last night, was held at the Newseum in a theater a few steps away from a giant slab of the Berlin Wall. Four members of Congress gave speeches paying tribute.

“I don’t know anyone who can, with clarity, articulate the left and what they’ve done over the last 100 years,” said Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican, after the memorial. “I didn’t think I was the only one who understood it, but when I read his book, I realized—wow, he really understood it. Marcuse, the Frankfurt School, all of that.”

The tribute ended with a short video tribute by the makers of the upcoming documentary Hating Breitbart. The #war hashtag started with their original trailer. It ends with Breitbart closing a long rant with, “Fuck you,” staring at the camera for a few seconds, then saying, “War” like he was trying to spook somebody out of the hiccups.

“We didn’t even push that hashtag,” said Andrew Marcus, the director of the documentary. He rattled off some of the other Breitbart memes that have spread since the Web pioneer died. “IAmBreitbart, BreitbartIsHere, the posters—that’s all organic. Nobody’s planning that.”

I don’t think Breitbart’s importance to the consolidation and crystallization of Fed Up Americans into a movement working to reclaim and restore America That Was can be overstated. A reformed Leftist himself (his disgust with the Clarence Thomas hearings is what finally drove him from Progressivism’s cold, choking embrace, ironically enough), he was one of the first high-profile figures on the Right to lose patience with the moribund GOPe’s politics of appeasement and perpetual defeat and unabashedly, aggressively punch back at the Left instead. He was bold, indomitable, and effective. He was a wholly serious, dedicated man, but he also managed to maintain his sense of humor and a casual, almost flippant attitude about his own role in the struggle to right our shipwrecked country.

Regrettably, Weigel is right: you don’t replace a Breitbart. He’s far from forgotten, and his fingerprints are all over the Trump Revolution and its string of welcome, overdue victories. He was the right man at the right time, and that’s a fact. But we could certainly use him now, maybe more than ever. He is sorely missed.

Share

The collapse

Annnnd here it comes.

Mueller report PSA: Prepare for disappointment
President Donald Trump’s critics have spent the past 17 months anticipating what some expect will be among the most thrilling events of their lives: special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report on Russian 2016 election interference.

They may be in for a disappointment.

That’s the word POLITICO got from defense lawyers working on the Russia probe and more than 15 former government officials with investigation experience spanning Watergate to the 2016 election case. The public, they say, shouldn’t expect a comprehensive and presidency-wrecking account of Kremlin meddling and alleged obstruction of justice by Trump — not to mention an explanation of the myriad subplots that have bedeviled lawmakers, journalists and amateur Mueller sleuths.

That’s because there’s no there there, and there never was. And since Trump never did allow Mueller to maneuver him into a trap by sitting down for an interview with him, Mueller couldn’t even gin up a process-crime nothingburger to use against him. Meanwhile:

CNBC Survey: Soaring Economic Optimism Points to No Blue Wave in 2018

Florida Mail Ballots Show No Blue Wave So Far

Why the blue wave is dying in the fight for the Senate

The Nevada Senate Race Was Supposed To Be Easier For Democrats. It’s Still Up For Grabs.

House Democrats’ hope for wave election diminishes as Republicans rebound

Plenty more of that, anywhere you care to look. Another indicator:

A small group of angry diners confronted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell at a restaurant Friday night, but were met with calls from other customers to leave the Kentucky Republican alone.

Video obtained by TMZ shows at least one diner berating McConnell on issues such as Social Security at a restaurant in Louisville. The video starts with him yelling at McConnell and arguing with Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao — to whom McConnell is married. The outlet reported that four men first confronted McConnell.

“Oh yeh, why don’t you get out of here? Why don’t you leave our entire country,” the protester tells the couple.

As Chao argues with the protester, McConnell appears unperturbed and sips on a drink. But other diners begin yelling at the protester, telling him to “leave him alone” and making shoo-ing gestures.

Bold mine. Kinda suggests that average, ordinary, usually peaceable don’t-make-waves types are well and truly fed up with the shit, wouldn’t you say? Even better:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was harassed by an anti-communist mob of protesters at a campaign visit in Florida this week.

Pelosi was approached and yelled at while stopping to meet with Democratic leaders and activists in South Florida on Wednesday. Video of the moment surfaced on YouTube with the caption: “Nancy Pelosi was heckled at a Miami Restaurant by Trump Supporting Cuban Americans.”

In the video, Pelosi can be seen entering the restaurant and getting rushed by a mob of protesters. The protesters held anti-communist signs and yelled, “Look at Nancy Pelosi right here – f***ing communist. Get the f**k out of here. F**k you and your f**king Democrats.”

The bewildered Pelosi looked at the protesters before ducking into a doorway with security. The protesters chanted, “Communism sucks” at the closed door.

OH. HELL. YEAH. About damned time; more just like it, please, and I hope ol’ Stretch was scared enough to literally piss herself over it, too. All in all: yeah, still feeling pretty confident over here. Good as the Pelosi story already is, though, it gets even better:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was confronted by protesters in Florida on Friday organized by a local Republican chapter and a local group of the “Proud Boys,” who shouted pro-Trump slogans and blasted the Democratic House leader as a “communist.”

Oh, FUCK yeah. God, I love those guys.

Video of the confrontation recorded by a member of the “Proud Boys” shows protesters holding signs and cursing at Pelosi as she entered a campaign event for Donna Shalala, the Democratic nominee in Florida’s 27th District.

“Look at this piece of sh-t Pelosi,” the cameraman is heard yelling in the video.

“You don’t belong here you f–king communist f–k,” a voice is also heard saying on the video. “You and your f—ing Democrats.”

Pelosi’s office told The Hill in a statement that it was ironic to hear President Trump accuse Democrats of being part of an angry “mob” after events such as the protest in Florida. The Proud Boys are considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center over anti-immigrant and racist views espoused by members.

“It is deeply sad but unsurprising that we now see that ugliness rearing its head,” her spokesman Drew Hammill told the Post. “It is stunning that Republicans have the gall to call courageous survivors of sexual assault a ‘mob’, at the same time they incite and condone violent actions like this. Republicans must condemn this vile and dangerous conduct, and stop the reckless and dangerous rhetoric that encourages it.”

Hold your breath waiting on it, commie shithead. Alternatively: go fuck yourself to death with razor blades.

“Some holier than thou keyboard warriors may not agree with our methods, but I’ll remind them about Maxine Waters condoning violence, and the rest of her party not denouncing the masked leftist domestic terrorists aka antifa,” the Miami chapter wrote on Facebookafter the video of the confrontation with Pelosi was released.

Damned skippy. Again: In their faces. Twice as hard. Call Pelosi’s Miami misadventure “collateral damage,” if you like. Here’s hoping for plenty more where that came from, bitch.

Getting back to the foundering blue wave, Limbaugh lays out some good reasons why it just ain’t likely:

See, what informs me, what makes me make these kind of predictions is reality. As I also mentioned last night, since Barack Obama was elected in 2008, starting in 2010, including the midterms in 2012 and the midterms in 2014, and the election in 2016, the Democrat Party has lost 1200 seats. The trend is people voting out Democrats. And that was happening while the Democrats were in the White House with Obama there. That could be a factor.

Obama is gone, so maybe the anti-Democrat sentiment is not as high as it used to be when he was there. Because I do believe he was a drag on the Democrat Party. But then I asked myself what has happened in the last two years to make people all of a sudden want to elect Democrats again? As everybody is telling us is going to happen, “House is gone, Rush.” The Senate. Yeah, we’ll probably pick up a couple of… “Houses is gone…”

And then they say, “Because Rush, these House races have nothing to do with any of the way you’re looking at this. These are really local races, and they have to do with things that are not on any national radar.” Well, not true, if these races are being nationalized by the various candidates in them. But anyway, what has happened to make people all of a sudden stop rejecting Democrats? Are the Democrats, have they done a 180?

Are they now performing and executing and behaving in ways that make people love them again? Well, no, not in a just and sane world. The Democrats aren’t doing anything that would grow support. They’re promoting rage and anger. They’re promoting insanity and lunatic behavior. So then, okay, maybe is it Trump? Is there this much opposition to Trump from people who didn’t care one way or the other two years ago?

Has the media succeeded in creating a bunch of anti-Trump sentiment in a midterm turnout profile of voters? Well, that would have to be what it is because the Democrats are not…The Democrats, as I say, the justice associated with what the Democrats are doing is landslide defeat. The Democrats are not responsible for anything good happening in this country. And they’re not even trying to be associated.

They don’t even try to claim credit for the economy. They did for a couple of weeks. They trotted Obama out. Remember, Obama was trying to say the economy was his. Well, that went over like a lead balloon, and they died with it. So they abandoned that. And outside of that, there hasn’t been one attempt by the Democrats to associate themselves with anything good happening in America.

They have instead continued to try and portray America as this unfair, unjust, undeserved, exceptional superpower that discriminates, that violates, that impugns, that…It’s all negative. So I’m just… Where is this body of evidence that suggests the trend of voting against Democrats has reversed?

The Red tide is rising. I could be wrong, of course. But if I was a betting man, I wouldn’t put one thin dime on it.

Update! Blue wave? Yeah, no.

Is it possible that the “blue wave” Democrats had hoped would return them to power in Washington will leave them high and dry? Every analyst now agrees that Republicans are likely not only to maintain control of the Senate, but to expand their majority, perhaps to as many as 56 seats. Rep. Marsha Blackburn looks likely to keep the Tennessee seat vacated by retiring Sen. Bob Corker for the GOP, and Nevada Sen. Dean Heller, once viewed as highly endangered by Democrat Jacky Rosen’s challenge, has edged ahead in polls since the Kavanaugh hearings. Meanwhile, Democrat Sen. Heidi Heitcamp appears doomed to defeat by GOP challenger Jon Cramer, and four other incumbent Senate Democrats (Jon Tester in Montana, Claire McCaskill in Missouri, Joe Donnelly in Indiana and Bill Nelson in Florida) are in toss-up races that could go either way. Friday night, President Trump held a massive rally in Arizona, where Martha McSally is fighting to keep the seat opened by the retirement of Sen. Jeff Flake in Republican hands.

Even as Republicans seem ready to gain Senate seats, however, analysts still say it’s likely Democrats will win a majority of House seats, returning the Speaker’s gavel to Nancy Pelosi. As of Friday evening, the Real Clear Politics House map showed 205 seats counted as either solidly, likely or leaning to Democrats, 198 for Republicans, and 32 rated as toss-ups. Yet this is a slight improvement over the RCP rankings a month earlier, when only 189 seats were in the GOP column. Both parties are performing a sort of triage process on the key House races, pulling resources out of districts that appear lost and moving them to better prospects. Just as Democrats more or less gave up on TX23 last week, they similarly retreated from other House races in Minnesota, Iowa, Florida, and Nebraska.

One analyst quoted by Politico, David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report, estimated there’s still a 30 percent chance Republicans might hold on to their House majority, although by the narrowest of margins. Of course, 30 percent is far better than chances the analysts predicted of a Trump victory two years ago, and the president has been campaigning relentlessly across the country in recent weeks.

At his Arizona rally Friday, supporters waved signs poking fun at Democrat Kyrsten Sinema’s characterization of their state as “crazy,” and Trump called Sinema a “dangerous candidate” and a “far-left extremist.” He referenced the Honduras caravan and said, “As you know, I’m willing to send the military to protect our southern border if necessary.” He also used a slogan coined as a hashtag by online activists to contrast the GOP’s best issue — the roaring economy under Trump — with the radical protest tactics of the Left: “Democrats produce mobs, Republicans produce jobs.” With the crucial midterm election now barely two weeks away, we’ll soon see which agenda American voters prefer.

The final nail, via Bill:

SANTA MONICA, California — Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams looks thoughtful in in the lobby of a beachfront hotel on a sunny Thursday afternoon as he tells me that the phrase “jobs not mobs,” which he suggested on Twitter six days before, would be catchy — though he adds that Republicans had not yet used it.

Literally minutes later, President Donald Trump tells a rally in Montana: “Democrats produce mobs. Republicans produce jobs.” The president tweets soon afterwards: “#JobsNotMobs.”

dams predicted in August 2015 that Donald Trump would win the Republican nomination for president, based on his analysis of Trump’s persuasion skills. He also suggested that Trump had a chance of defeating Hillary Clinton.

At the time, few others agreed, but Adams was correct — and has made several other successful predictions since. His Twitter feed and his morning Periscopes have become essential reading and viewing — and are evidently followed closely by the White House.

He told Breitbart News it is too difficult to predict which party will win the November midterm elections, because there are too many local variations in state-by-state and district-by-district battles, “too many variables bigger than persuasion.”

But he predicts that we will see “the greatest turnout by Republicans, maybe ever.”

His explanation:

My hypothesis is that humans are primed by whatever they’ve already seen. So if they’ve seen a pattern, they’ve already fallen into it. And one of the patterns Republicans enjoyed in 2016 was having the other side be surprised. And they really enjoyed it — I’m talking about the kind of joy you can talk about over the course of your lifetime. And the Republican personality — I realize this is a gross generalization — is that it’s not always about the talk, it’s about the showing up. Republicans are going to show up. And they’re driven by all the things people are talking about, but you cannot underestimate the fun, either. I’ll tell you this: if the Republicans pull out the House [win] — I’m still thinking it’s unlikely, only because other people say so and I don’t know any different — it’s because there’s a shitload of Republicans who are saying to themselves, “They’re gonna be surprised.” It’s predictable from the fact that they have felt that pattern and that payoff before. They see the same thing happening again, and are reminded of it.

Asked whether Democrats or Republicans have the more persuasive message heading into the final two weeks of the midterm elections, Adams notes that Democrats’ claim that Republicans want to take away people’s health care was undone with a single tweet earlier Thursday, in which the president promised to sort out any Republicans who dared propose denying coverage for pre-existing conditions — a move Adams called “magically good.”

Verily, from his lips to God’s ears.

Share

Our revolution

Okay, it’s becoming clear to me that I really need to put The American Mind, the Claremont Institute’s new online publication, into the blogroll and bookmarks toot sweet—especially seeing as how they’ve added Codevilla to the stable.

The 2008 financial crisis sparked an incipient revolution. Previously, Americans dissatisfied with their Progressive rulers had imagined that voting for Republicans might counter them. But then, as three-fourths of Americans opposed bailing out big banks with nearly a trillion dollars, the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates joined; most Republican legislators joined all Democrats; The Wall Street Journal joined The New York Times, and National Review joined The Nation; in telling Americans that doing this was essential, and that their disapproval counted for nothing. And then, just as high-handedly, all these bipartisan rulers dropped that bailout scheme, and adopted another—just as unaccountably. They showed “government by the people, for the people” to be a fable.

This forced the recognition that there exists a remarkably uniform, bipartisan, Progressive ruling class; that it includes, most of the bureaucracies of federal and state governments, the judiciary, the educational establishment, the media, as well as major corporate officials; that it had separated itself socially, morally, and politically from the rest of society, whose commanding heights it monopolized; above all that it has contempt for the rest of America, and that ordinary Americans have no means of persuading this class of anything, because they don’t count.

As the majority of Americans have become conscious of the differences between this class and themselves they have sought ever more passionately to shake it off. That is the ground of our revolution.

Our time’s sharp distinction between rulers and ruled, the ever decreasing interchange and sympathy between them, is rooted in the disdain for ordinary Americans that the universities have sown since the Civil War. Ordinary Americans and their rulers are alienated now in ways unimaginable to the Northerners and Southerners who killed each other a century and a half ago, but who nodded when Abraham Lincoln noted that they “prayed to the same God.” Both revered the American founding. Both aspired to the same family life. Often, opposite sides’ generals were personal friends. And why not? The schools they attended, the books they read, did not teach them the others’ inferiority. They were one people. Now, we are no longer one people.

The anti-establishment “wave elections” of 2010 and 2014, in which the Democratic Party lost Congress and control of a majority of state legislatures, only led America’s Progressive rulers to double down on their positions of power in the judiciary, the media, corporations, etc. The Supreme Court struck down a referendum by liberal California defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The federal Defense of Marriage Act, which had become law by near-unanimity, was overturned bureaucratically and judicially. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, on the books just as firmly, was undone by executive, judicial, bureaucratic, corporate, and mediatic subordination of religious freedom to anti-discrimination. By the 2016 election, America’s Progressive rulers were demonizing and punishing persons who define male and female by their birth and personal plumbing. 1984’s Big Brother had not been so imperious.

The 2016 election’s primaries were all about the American people’s search for means of de-throning increasingly insufferable rulers. Even on the Democratic side, many bridled at their self-serving unaccountability. But since the Democrats are the party of government, it was clear that protection from and vengeance against the existing power structure would have to come from the nominal opposition party. Yet the Republicans were very much part of the problem. That is why 2016’s real struggle took place within the Republican primaries, the most enduringly significant fact of which is that Jeb Bush, the candidate most closely identified with the Progressive ruling class, spent some $150 million and secured only three convention delegates. Americans in general, and Republicans in particular, were looking for the polar opposite.

Donald Trump was out of central casting—seemingly a caricature of what the ruling class said about its opponents. But the words he spoke were less significant than that he spoke with angry contempt for the ruling class. That—and the crowded field that never allowed a head-to-head choice—is what got him the chance to be the alternative to the ruling class. And that is what got him elected President of the United States.

Those who voted for Trump believing or hoping that he would do a, b, or c, were fewer than those who were sure that he offered the only possibility of ending, or at least pausing, the power of an increasingly harmful, intolerant, disdainful, socio-political identity. In 2016 one set of identities revolted against another. That was the revolution’s first turn.

The ruling class’s “resistance” to the 2016 election’s outcome was the second turn. Its vehemence, unanimity, coordination, endurance,and non-consideration of fallback options—the rapidity with which our revolution’s logic has unfolded—have surprised and dismayed even those of us who realized that America had abandoned its republican past.

The “resistance” subsequent to the election surprises, in part, because only as it has unfolded have we learned of its scope prior to the election. All too simply: the U.S government’s upper echelons merged politically with the campaign of the Democratic Party’s establishment wing, and with the media. They aimed to secure the establishment candidates’ victory and then to nullify the lost election’s results by resisting the winners’ exercise of legitimate powers, treating them as if they were illegitimate. The measure of the resistance’s proximate success or failure would come in the 2018 elections.

Partisan “dirty tricks” are unremarkable. But when networks within government and those who occupy society’s commanding heights play them against persons trying to unseat them, they constitute cold civil war against the voters, even coups d’etat. What can possibly answer such acts? And then what?

Nobody, but nobody, is as perceptive and sees this stuff as clearly—and can enunciate it so powerfully and deftly—as Codevilla. Along with Michael Anton’s brilliant Flight 93 Election essay, Codevilla’s seminal Ruling Class/Country Class piece will endure as truly historic, a defining moment in the ongoing revolution of which he speaks here. It’s a long article, scholarly and deep, as is his wont. Trust me, you want to read all of it—probably more than once. I guarantee you’re going to see it referenced again and again, for a long, long time to come.

Share

The alternative to force: sometimes, there ain’t one

A dissection of Jonah Goldberg, and cuckoldry in general.

The alternative to force, of course, is persuasion. There are times when persuasion does not suffice, however, to establish justice—and in such moments of crisis the greatest of statesman have often used persuasion to spur the rightful use of force. In fact, in such times winning is often the best means of persuasion available. To what extent would Abraham Lincoln’s speeches have mattered if the North didn’t win the Civil War?

Of course, war is messy. It inexorably escalates, tempting both sides to throw principle to the wind, to use any means necessary for the sake of winning, and to dehumanize the other side. It risks lasting damage to the alpha and omega of politics—shared principle and common purpose. That is why no sane statesman would choose it willingly.

Nonetheless, there are times when shared principle and common purpose are already in dispute, and the war comes to you.

Goldberg acknowledges that the battle over Kavanaugh had to be fought, but the fact that “many voters rallied to Trump on the grounds that ‘at least he fights,’” troubles him greatly. Yet the “at least he fights” sentiment that Goldberg seemingly finds deplorable isn’t some kind of intrinsic evil. It was echoed by none other than Lincoln himself, who famously told the detractors of General Ulysses S. Grant, without denying Grant’s undeniable flaws: “I can’t spare this man–he fights.” Dan McCarthy superbly develops this point this week in his thoughts on “Consensus as Surrender.”

Goldberg, however, wrestles in National Review recently with his own “misgivings about the price of victory” in the effort to confirm Kavanaugh. He doesn’t like the fact that winning was “the least bad option.” Twisting and turning, Goldberg finds himself “less enthusiastic about the pro-Kavanaugh forces winning” than he was about the Left losing.

Why this anxiety? Goldberg plaintively warns that “there will be bad consequences no matter what, because we now live in a world where sub-optimal outcomes are the only choices available.” But we have always lived in such a world. This is practically the definition of political life in which, to use the parlance of our times, only the gradation of suckitude changes.

Why incessantly lament it so?

The central problem both parties face is not a matter of tone or rhetoric in the midst of the chaos and confusion—rhetorical and otherwise—caused by the fall of the old modes and orders. The salient fact of the moment is that the race is on to rethink and reground policy in light of our Republic’s founding principles. The Republican party must realign itself with the real needs of real people if it is to survive. There is no going back; the only way out is through.

And I’ll take winning—led by whoever can contrive to do so, using whatever means—over losing gracefully, seven days a week and twice on Sunday. Particularly when losing to the demonic Left means losing absolutely everything. To paraphrase the great Vince Lombardi, who could surely have taught today’s Cuckpublicans a thing or two: show me a dignified loser…and I’ll show you a loser. Another great Lombardi-ism, maybe even more relevant to this discussion: “If you can accept losing, you can’t win.

Share

Predictions

Steve Grammatico puts some meat on the bones I’ve been rattling all along, winding up with this:

Predictions (and yes, they are optimistic): Democrats lose 15 seats in the House (sparing the country of Speaker Pelosi) and the GOP gains 7 in the Senate.

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

More specific than I’ve yet dared to be, but I think he’s on the beam. Steve has a whole list of reasons to back it up, all of which you’ll enjoy reading.

Share

Showdown in the desert

Just do it.

President Donald Trump tweeted early Thursday morning that he will send troops and close the border if Mexico lets the latest caravan of thousands of migrants marching north reach the boundary between the two nations.

“The assault on our country at our Southern Border, including the Criminal elements and DRUGS pouring in, is far more important to me, as President, than Trade or the USMCA. Hopefully Mexico will stop this onslaught at their Northern Border. All Democrats fault for weak laws!” Trump said in the first of a series of impassioned tweets on the growing crisis.

Trump said that “in addition to stopping all payments to these countries, which seem to have almost no control over their population, I must, in the strongest of terms, ask Mexico to stop this onslaught — and if unable to do so I will call up the U.S. Military and CLOSE OUR SOUTHERN BORDER!…”

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) tweeted video Wednesday of what he described as cash being given to women and children to join the march. “Soros? US-backed NGOs? Time to investigate the source,” the congressman said.

Time to arrest “the source”—Soros, and you know it as well as I do—and give him a fair trial for treason, followed by a first-class hanging.

I expect Trump will be extremely reluctant to actually send troops to close the border for political reasons, which is at least somewhat understandable; he no doubt knows that such a move will in turn send hordes of dimwit Leftist agitators scampering down there too. Those enemy combatants will do their level best to interfere with those protecting our southern border by just about any means you could imagine and probably some any decent person couldn’t, up to and including violence.

Our soldiers will attempt to retain control of the situation through nonviolent means; the ROE for this situation will probably require it, actually. Nonetheless, the chances of one or more of the shitweasel protesters getting seriously hurt or even killed in such a dangerously fraught situation is by no means slim. Should such a thing happen, you can expect a sudden explosion of violent protests in urban areas across the country.

And then things get sporty. And very, very messy.

(Via Mark Tapscott)

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

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil." - Skeptic

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