Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

“The biggest voter suppression mechanism in American politics is Hillary Clinton’s personality”

To know her is to loathe her.

For the entire 40 years of Hillary Clinton’s public life, one thing has been consistent: The less people see of her, the more popular she is.

The Deplorables of Arkansas in the late ’70s, were not thrilled by the snooty feminist from Chicago who refused to take her husband’s name—so she was hidden at the Rose Law Firm where money could be funneled to the Clintons through her supposed legal prowess (a continuing theme).

Before Obamacare became an epithet, the term “HillaryCare” was used to stop the Clinton socialized medicine plan of the 1990s. And if you think that Hillary’s involvement in it didn’t have as much to do with popular rejection of it as its content did, then you weren’t there.

Sure, she won in New York after the Republicans went through a candidate shuffle when Giuliani declined to run (due to personal issues that seem tame today)—but hey, that was New York.

Hillary was the inevitable president in 2008—until people had to contemplate four years of the screech that Rush Limbaugh wickedly said reminded men of their ex-wives, over the dulcet tones of Barack Obama.

And so it goes. When Hillary is in the background, her popularity rises. When she is front and center, it goes down.

Hillary Clinton is right, however, when she says: “I take responsibility for all my decisions, but that’s not why I lost.”

That is correct. You lost because of who you are, not what you did.

Such a nasty woman. If Trump only ever said one perfectly true thing in his entire life, that’s it.

Share

“We hate America, and want you to elect us to be your rulers so we can set you contemptible oafs STRAIGHT!”

How dare you question their “patriotism.”

Move your sloppy Commie ass to Iran then, Buttplug. Be sure to take your “husband” along, in the interest of “dialogue” and “understanding.” We’ll see how that works out for ya. Meanwhile, from deep in a comforting gin-soaked fever dream:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said at a Los Angeles event Saturday that the 2016 election was stolen from her.

The 2016 Democratic presidential nominee spoke with her husband at “An Evening With The Clintons” event.

“You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you,” she said, according to CNN.

Yeah, piss off, you crapulous old soak; dry up, blow away, eat some paste, drop dead. I’m one hundred percent with Ace on this:

This is dangerous talk for America, and I don’t even care any longer that it’s dangerous.

Court the danger, Hillary. Secede into your own country where you can win the presidency.

I want done with these people.

Me too, times a million kajillion. I’m reaching the point where I’m willing to countenance any extreme measure at all to rid ourselves of these tiresome screechmonkeys at last. Whatever that takes, and I DO mean whatever, will be fine with me. No, mustard gas, tactical nukes, and mass up-to-the-neck live burials in a giant fire-ant mound are NOT off the table as far as I’m concerned.

As for the Democrat-Socialist supergenii, they should definitely keep on fucking that chicken. After all, everybody knows the one surefire way to win elections is to gratuitously insult more than half the electorate, making no attempt whatsoever to conceal just how fanatically you loathe and despise them.

vote_Democrat_2020.jpg

Update! Just in case anyone was wondering about the things Democrat-Socialists oppose:

Consider the latest unemployment data released Friday. Alongside an increase in productivity of 3.6%, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday that the unemployment rate fell to 3.6% over the first quarter 2019. That’s the lowest rate since we first landed on the moon. And that 3.6% matching speaks to an economy that is growing, dynamic, and moral. Consider that the data also shows Hispanic unemployment is now at just 4.2%. Aside from static year-on-year changes in (still very low) unemployment for blacks, and a 0.2% year-on-year increase in unemployment for teenagers, the economy is boosting employment for every listed demographic subset.

Yet Democrats say that Trump’s economy is somehow immoral. When they aren’t trying to assign credit for it to Obama, they claim that it punishes the middle class and the poor. And so, rather than doubling down on the economic fortune we now find, Democrats are pledging to shred Trump’s corporate tax reforms, escalate regulation, and increase state control in the economy.

So what, you ask, are they FOR instead? Easy-peasy.


Shitholehat.jpg

So this really is where we’re at now, folks. And to think, after they get Trumpified again in 2020, they’re all going to resume screaming bloody murder about the “stolen,” “fraudulent” election and blaming any and everybody else for their defeat—when all anyone really has to do is just sit back, relax, and let the stupid fucks defeat themselves.

Enemies of the people update! Yeah, throw these shitpuppies into the blender too.

Dunking on the mainstream media is as easy as tripping a fat kid in a cast, except we would probably feel sorry for a fat kid in a cast who we tripped and sent slamming into the pavement piehole first. Unless the fat kid in a cast was a mainstream media journalist, in which case it would be totally hilarious.

They hate you, so feel free to hate them back. The MSM was not infuriated with Donald Trump when he called these hack transcriptionists for the liberal elite “the enemy of the people” because he was lying. The MSM was not infuriated with Donald Trump because he was telling the truth.

The mainstream media is our enemy. That’s undeniable; to deny it is to deny what we see and hear with our own eyes and ears every day. Don’t be a “the media is garbage” denier. It would be like denying climate change if climate change was a real thing instead of a media-driven scam designed to take your money and freedom.

Worse, the mainstream media is an enemy that considers you unworthy of the courtesy of not lying to your face about obvious things. Liberal journalists have such contempt for us that they won’t even make the effort to gaslight us properly any more. Maybe it’s because liberal journalists think you are dumb. Maybe liberal journalists are themselves dumb. Or maybe – probably – it’s some combination of the two. But they are no longer even showing you the respect of trying to pretend that they are not lying to you.

WE HATE YOU, YOU BASTARDS SUCK, SHUT UP AND DIE! OH HEY, WHY AREN’T YOU BUYING OUR DYING NEWSPAPERS OR WATCHING OUR FAILING NEWS NETWORKS? NO FAAAIIIIRRRR!!!!

I’ll say it before, I’ll say it again: somebody just let me know when it’s open season, no bag limit on the whole mangey menagerie of shitlib twatwaffles. You just gotta love Schlichter’s suggested correction, too: “If we had a real media, the story would have been ‘Bitter Liberal Hillary Donors On Witchfinder General’s Team Make Pathetic Play To Try To Cause Further Political Damage To Guy Who Was Too Clean For Them To Frame.’” But Kurt, how could they have milked two years of phony anti-Trump reportage out of that, man?

Share

Stick to your guns, Mr President

Hands off Venezuela. Or boots-on-the-ground off, rather.

This is by far the closest to an actual foreign policy crisis that Trump administration has faced yet. It is also the one for which a single misstep could cause total chaos. Naturally, there were prominent (and predictable) voices calling for an intervention. While Maduro is indeed a despotic ruler, we need to think hard before suggesting any further misadventure. Consider the questions one needs to ask before another military intervention, which will inevitably result in a regime change and a civil war.

First, what strategic interests are there for the United States in Venezuela? Venezuela is an oil-rich country, but it is also an economic basket case. There’s no unity in the political class, the military is pretty solidly behind Maduro, and no large-scale defections or popular uprisings are spontaneously happening that look likely to topple Maduro anytime soon. In fact, the regime is propped up by Cuban forces.

Consider the similarity to Iraq immediately post-intervention, and the entire Baathist military and bureaucracy disbanded and pushed underground, fueling insurgency with the support of Iran. In other words, a regime change is a recipe for insurgency and civil war.

Second, what are the intervention plans, and what about mission creep? Would we have an exit strategy and timeframe? There is, so far, no clear coherent plan adopted by the administration, nor is it even possible, because of the reasons mentioned above. Dictators often leave the country and retire with their millions, but that is when they see the situation is hopeless. In this case, the situation isn’t.

The Monroe Doctrine is still active, and America is well within her rights to intervene if any other great power approaches and forms a base that can change the balance of power of the region. But 100 Russian military advisors don’t change the balance of power. It is not the Cuban missile crisis redux, and neither Russia nor China currently has any cross-continental power projection will or capability.

Venezuela is a humanitarian concern, not a strategic concern, a key difference that needs to be considered. It’s easy to sympathize and offer diplomatic support, aid, food, and even weapons. It’s entirely another thing to intervene militarily, and force regime change.

He stands within the cusp of history, of being the first American president in more than a quarter-century to not have started an open-ended and costly so-called humanitarian intervention. He should trust his original electoral instincts and aspire to make that his legacy.

Amen to all that. Let the invade-the-world-invite-the-world types, both civilian and military, gnash their teeth down to nubs over the “missed opportunity” to set up another quicksand-box in their already-oversized playground. Stepping in with anything more than an offer of bargain prices on bulk M4 purchases would be a serious mistake for Trump—and for America. The Venezuelan people foolishly voted themselves into socialism; let them learn on their own that they must shoot their way out of it.

Share

Erasing history

And “conversations” that…aren’t.

A few days ago, Kamala Harris, a.k.a. the background dancer who screwed her way to lead singer, was asked by Don Lemon if she supported Sanders’ plan to allow murderers and rapists to retain their voting rights while in prison. “I think we should have that conversation,” said the former “prosecutor.” When I saw the clip, I honestly didn’t mind the evasive nature of her answer. Politicians are evasive by nature; it comes with the job. What pissed me off was the idea that leftists ever engage in a “conversation.” When do leftists ever engage in “conversations”? They adopt a position (often a complete reversal of a previous one), and then they declare the old position to be “hate speech” and those who espouse it “hate criminals.” Where was the “conversation” on trannies in the girls’ bathroom? Where was the “conversation” on there being 1,745 genders instead of two? I don’t recall having those “conversations,” do you? One day, leftists decided that “this is the new truth,” and suddenly people like me get banned from social media for stating the scientific fact that a man can’t wish himself into being a biological woman.

Where was the “conversation” on immigration? I just remember going to bed one night when top Democrats were in favor of strong border control, and waking up the next morning to find that desiring strong border control makes you a Nazi.

If there was a “conversation,” I don’t remember it.

Affirmative action? Forced busing? Court ordered…no “conversation.” And if Democrats, who view voting rights for imprisoned murderers as a race issue (because of the disproportionately high number of blacks and Latinos who’d be affected), decide tomorrow to uniformly support that policy, overnight anyone who opposes it will immediately become Hitler.

Did any Western European leaders have a “conversation” with their constituents about flooding the continent with nonindigenous immigrants? When exactly was that referendum? At least with Brexit, there was a conversation, but has the popular consensus—the result of that conversation—been respected? Of course not.

Leftists don’t “converse.” They impose. And to do this, it often becomes necessary to erase history, ancient and recent. This is done not only to cow the current generation, but to brainwash the next. “Why, Notre Dame always had a minaret! Hell, the building was constructed by Muslims, who were always the majority in France! Just as England was always nonwhite.”

Future Europeans will learn little of old Christendom, but you can be damn sure they’ll know all about Auschwitz. In thirty years, every schoolkid in the West will know about the fifty Muslims killed in New Zealand in March 2019, and none will know of the hundreds of Christians killed in Sri Lanka a month later.

Controlling what we forget and what we remember, what we are encouraged to defile and what we are ordered to hold sacred (like Harlitz-Kern’s holy kazoo), is how you make sure there isn’t a conversation. Leftists understand this better than anyone.

If Stalin taught these bastards anything, it’s that the airbrush is mightier than the memory.

Oh, I think it’s safe to say that Stalin taught them pretty much everything they know. But while we’re talking about erasing history…no. Just…NO. Not just no—HELL NO.

The lawyers and CPAs who run Elvis Presley Enterprises have been threatening the city of Memphis for the past two years with plans to dismantle Graceland—the most hallowed redneck house in the world—and move it to another continent.

They mean this quite literally. They have offers on the table, they say, to bring in redneck historians and lovingly peel up the green shag carpet from the Jungle Room—where Elvis’ last two albums were recorded despite the rushing background noise of the waterfall that spurts out of one wall—and then move all the lacquered wood furniture in the shape of tree stumps to someplace like Dubai, where real estate entrepreneurs like to collect items of Americana and turn them into pop culture museums. It would be sort of like displaying objects from the Titanic if the Titanic had been intentionally sunk in Southampton harbor and then sold off for scrap.

Elvis was from Tupelo, Mississippi, 100 miles to the southeast of Graceland, but he would have been immersed in the African-American music that emerged from the Baptist churches and blues honky-tonks ranged up and down the Mississippi River between St. Louis and New Orleans. Dewey Phillips broadcast that music on Red, Hot and Blue, sometimes even highlighting actual church choirs, but in Memphis the blues and gospel music of black folk ran smack-dab up against all that clog dancing and fiddling that came down through the Appalachian Valley from Scotland, Ulster, and Cumberland. As all Elvis aficionados know, the King was criticized early in his career for singing like a black man, and the term “rock and roll” itself comes straight up out of the slave-based Delta rice fields.

Elvis may not have been black, but his musical DNA was as mixed-race as Alexander Hamilton. Memphis was the place where original black music met original white music. That’s what makes it American, that’s what makes Memphis the Santiago de Compostela of rock and roll, and that’s why you can move Graceland to Nairobi or Edinburgh but you’ll only be telling half the story. If Graceland moves, Graceland dies.

I’ve visited Graceland a couple of times myself—if you have even the slightest spark of affection in your heart for the King, I highly recommend it—and one of the most striking things about the place to me was that, from the backyard right up next to the house, you got an easy view right into the backyards of other houses in the neighborhood. I had always pictured it as being more secluded—at least tucked away behind some high hedges or some sort of privacy fence or something, in the manner of usually what comes to mind with other big fancy mansions.

But no, it was pretty much wide open out there; you could see laundry hanging out to dry on clotheslines all over the place, guys on lawn tractors, old ladies stooped over in their truck patch hacking at weeds, and such. Naturally, those neighbors could likewise see up into Elvis’s yard too. It was kinda cool to imagine the wild, outlandish goings-on Elvis’s neighbors had a bird’s eye view of over the years.

As Joe Bob says: Move Graceland, Graceland dies. Whatever law or ordinance the Memphis city council needs to pass to bring this ill-considered, near-criminal nonsense to a screeching halt, they oughta do it if you ask me. It’s an arrogant affront to history itself. While admittedly nothing like as significant or weighty as Notre Dame, Graceland’s legend is bigger than the present owners seem able to grasp. It doesn’t belong only to them.

Share

Ghouls out

Here they come, predictable as the sunrise. Ladies and gents, I give you the vile, despicable Left, in all its pus-oozing depravity.

“I wonder how many art pieces and artifacts that were sitting in the Notre Dame were stolen from former colonies,” said user Shaziya. When confronted with criticism and backlash, she doubled down: “I’m criticizing French colonialism, if this bothers you so much then you ought to reevaluate your morals, bye.”

Well, SOMEBODY certainly ought to, yeah.

“I think it sucks that Notre Dame is burning but f*** imagine if we had this same energy for every historic building we carpetbombed in the Middle East,” said another user.

Other users reveled in the fact that “white people” were saddened to see Notre Dame go up in flames. “I’m dying at the white people triggered,” said one person named Aly. “It’s a damn building that’s literally used for tourism, no one died, move on.”

While Notre Dame indeed invited tourists to look upon its magnificent beauty, becoming one of France’s most iconic landmarks, the cathedral still served as a home to practicing Catholics who worshiped God through the Holy Mass every Sunday — not to mention the multiple popes in recent history who have led processions there. The church hosted weddings, funerals, and consecrations. It never sacrificed its Christian mission at the altar of commercialism, as perhaps best exemplified by the priceless relics — including the crown of thorns said to have been worn by Christ — that Notre Dame housed within its walls.

“Notre Dame on fire is the most aesthetically pleasing visually I’ve ever seen,” said another user.

“This one’s for colonizing African countries b****,” said another user.

“Notre Dame burning is cosmic karma for all the historical sites and artefacts [sic] France destroyed and stole when being colonialist scum,” said the blue-checkmark “culture writer” Hikikomori Povich.

Sickening. Elsewhere, Rick Moran shits the bed.

It may turn out that the fire that destroyed most of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris was deliberately set. Maybe it was terrorism. Maybe it was a protest against President Macron. Perhaps it was your garden variety right-wing or left-wing nuts.

But jumping to conclusions at this point is silly and stupid. My colleague Monica Showalter wrote the proper takedown of these fools. And kudos to Fox News hosts Shep Smith and Neil Cavuto for actually cutting off conspiracy theorists who appeared on their shows.

Don’t you wish hosts on other networks had cut off the wild speculation from liberals about the fantastical idea of Russian collusion?

I have no real problem with Moran’s call for caution in the immediate aftermath of events like these, when rumors are flying, no one really knows a whole hell of a lot for sure, and solid facts are awfully thin on the ground. But in this case he’s wilfully brushing past certain realities, particularly Parisian ones, and his shrill accusation of “conspiracy theorizing” on the part of Catholic League president Bill Donohue is just over the top.

Smith’s reaction was exactly right. Cavuto echoed his sentiments:

Several hours later, Cavuto had a similar experience with Catholic League president Bill Donohue, who immediately raised the notion that this inferno was tied to other church burnings.

“Well, Neil, if it is an accident, it’s a monumental tragedy,” Donohoe said. “But forgive me for being suspicious.”

He added: “Just last month, a 17th-century church was set on fire in Paris. We have seen Tabernacles knocked down, crosses have been torn down, statues have been smashed.”

Cavuto went on to request that Donohue avoid bringing up his suspicions as no connections have been made by officials. The Catholic League leader, however, was unable to help himself, eventually asserting: “I’m sorry, when I find out that the Eucharist is being destroyed and excrement is being smeared on crosses, this is what’s going on now.”

The Fox News anchor interjected, letting Donohue that while he appreciates his time, “we cannot make conjectures about this.” Cavuto then dropped the call.

Too often, the media allow this kind of speculation to run rampant, feeding the paranoia of right- and left-wing extremists who will believe anything bad about their perceived enemies. For any news outlet, speculation without evidence is irresponsible. If you want to feed your conspiracy habit, there are plenty of nutcases posting nonsense on the internet where you can get your fix.

Professional news organizations are supposed to be in the business of reporting facts. Intelligent speculation is one thing. But wild fantasies with zero evidence to back them up belongs on social media, not on news broadcasts.

Um, sorry to have to point it out and all, Rick, but like it or not, Donohoe didn’t say anything in the above quote that wasn’t…ummm, y’know…established, well-known fact. Maybe he got into some “wild fantasies” elsewhere in the truncated interview; I didn’t see the thing, so I can’t say. But if the above is what you call “wild fantasies,” “extremist,” “paranoia,” and “conspiracy theorizing,” well, your definition of those things differs one hell of a lot from mine.

Donohoe noted that attacks on Christian churches in Paris are numerous, and escalating. Which, y’know, is true. He cited some specific desecrations. Which, y’know, happened. He then said, calmly and not unreasonably, that this history left him “suspicious”—without naming any names, or accusing anybody of anything at all.

For this, Cavuto went full-on hysterical and cut him off. Moran then took up the cudgel and bashed Donohoe over the head with it, for his “irresponsible speculation” among other atrocities. Both, for no good reason at all. Oddly enough, I can’t seem to recall either Cavuto or Moran reacting quite this intensely to the Left’s knee-jerk penchant for blaming every recent mass-shooting incident on “right-wing extremists” of one stripe or another—a tired, seemingly involuntary reflex the Left maintains despite nearly every one of those shootings later turning out to have been perpetrated either by a Left-leaning psycho or a politically-incoherent or -disinterested one.

I myself am perfectly comfortable with speculating—based on both recurrent historical fact and the oft-stated intentions of Muslims themselves—that it’s very damned likely one (or more) of them was behind the Notre Dame fire. Should it turn out that I’m wrong this time I’m okay with that too, and have no problem owning up to it. Seems to me that maybe my reaction is a good bit less irresponsible, unhinged, and extreme than Moran’s and Cavuto’s were. But hey, YMMV and all that jazz.

Limbaugh, who also includes herein the complete transcript of Cavuto’s unfairly interrupted interview with Donohoe, makes the telling point:

Well, I’ll admit here this could all be irrelevant. The Notre Dame fire could very well have been accidental, caused by some construction worker flicking a still-burning cigarette. But as a thought experiment, apply all the numbers that I just recited to black churches in the United States, and then imagine a fire like the one at Notre Dame at a black church in America, and then imagine how the media would react to that.

Using the same theory, if there had been over a thousand black church fires, acts of vandalism, cemetery violence, if that had been happening in the last two years in the United States and a big black church erupted in flames yesterday, what do you think the story would be? The story would be who on the right did this? What white nationalist is doing this?

The speculation on who on the right could have been responsible would be the story. There wouldn’t be any, “Hey, let’s not jump to conclusions. It could be arson. It could be totally innocent. Let’s not go there.” Every guest would have been required to blame such a fire at a black church in America on white nationalists.

I’ll be honest with you here, folks. I’ve never understood… That’s not the right way to say it. I understand it. That’s the problem! I understand it. You go back to 9/11, and at the time, we knew who did it. The next day, who knew who did it! There were their pictures all over the news of the 19 hijackers. We knew who did it. We knew their names. We knew where they grew up. We knew where they were trained, that the majority of them were from Saudi Arabia — and then Osama Bin Laden is out claiming credit for it.

It’s a no-brainer who did it. And yet, within a few short days the entire narrative changes and becomes our fault. “What did we do to inspire this kind of attack?” The State Department! The State Department convened a symposium on, “Why do they hate us so much?” And it didn’t take long after 9/11 before you weren’t allowed to talk about the people who did it. You know the old saw about, “Oh, we’ve got to guard against the backlash against Muslims in the United States.”

What do you mean guard against a backlash against…? It’s descended from there consistently to today, where you’re not even allowed to mention it, speculate, talk about it. Even things that we know were Islamist terrorism we’re not really supposed to say this.

At some point, it becomes far more irrational and damaging to blind ourselves to observed reality than it is to make speculative judgment based on it, even if such judgment might turn out to be incorrect once in a while. As far as I’m concerned, we passed that point with Muslim terrorism a long time ago. I repeat: if this story quietly goes away in a few more days, you’ll know we’ve just taken another step down the primrose path…with folks like Cavuto and Moran skipping happily along in the lead.

Share

Fire of fires

As Bill says, I’m sure this is nothing.

A cell of radicalised French women guided by Islamic State commanders in Syria was behind a failed terrorist attack near Paris’s Notre Dame Cathedral last weekend and planned another violent attack this week before they were intercepted by police, the Paris prosecutor has said.

This too.

A sampling of the Facebook users taking delight in the tragedy…see if you notice anything in common:

Wahid Hadji
Oubbad Jsk
Yusuf Mohammedzai
Hessam Massa
Mohamed Hiadi
Mohamed Bensalem
Alaa Atfeh
Raidh Khaled
Ammar Sofiane
Abdelhakim Noui Oua
Mohamed Amin

You get the picture.

And then there’s this:

The cause of the fire has not yet been determined, the BBC reported. The fire comes at the beginning of Holy Week, the week celebrating the days between Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday and His Crucifixion on Good Friday and His Resurrection on Easter Sunday.

The timing of this fire is quite suspicious.

Ain’t it just. Pro tip: we’ll know for sure it was Mooselimbs behind the fire if the story suddenly disappears from all Enemedia coverage by the end of the week. ZMan says we all already know what’s really going on here.

As news spread of the fire consuming the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, the first reaction of most people was shock and sadness. You don’t have to be Catholic or French to feel as if some part of you has been lost. That was not just an old building or a historically important place. It was a symbol of Western civilization. Stand inside a great church and you feel the awe and power that inspired the builders. That cathedral was the primal roar of a people celebrating their creator and the essence of who they were as a people.

Of course, it did not take long for people to notice that its burning was a metaphor for the current crisis in the West. As Europe is swamped by Muslims, promising to replace Europeans in their own lands, it is only a matter of time before the great churches are turned into mosques or destroyed. Despite the endless propaganda from our rulers, most people here and there, are well aware of what’s happening. They don’t know how to articulate it or react to it, but they know. Watching the fire, they knew what it meant.

That anger people feel is not the sort of barbaric rage our rulers assume is in the heart of every white man. There will be no occidental riots or calls for pogroms against the invaders. It’s a slow buzz as the batteries charge up, waiting for the moment somewhere down the line when the circuit is finally closed. That’s how these things go. Decent people are willing to tolerate what seems like an unlimited amount of deprivation from their rulers, but it reaches a point when the batteries are charged and the circuit is closed.

That’s why it is good to watch the footage and follow the coverage of this thing. Many of us have disconnected from the news, because it’s just propaganda. You can be sure the media will first try to wave it all away as an accident, but we know how they would be reacting if it was a dumpy old mosque or a synagogue that burned, rather than a masterpiece of Western civilization. We know. Everyone knows. Watching it will make you a little angry, but that’s a good thing. We need to charge those batteries.

Obviously, we’ll never know what really caused the fire. A black church burns and the usual suspects tell us there is a rash of hate crimes against black churches. Catholic churches all over France have been burning for years and we’re told it is a racist conspiracy theory to see a pattern. The same will happen here to people who wonder how an unoccupied building that withstood air raids suddenly caught fire in two places. It will be infuriating, but it just charges those batteries a little more each time you hear it.

Even if the cause was recklessness by some workers, that’s probably worse. Like America, this kind of work in Paris is done by foreigners now. The work crews are no doubt Algerians, Tunisians and maybe some Africans. The few French involved spend their time keeping these tribes from murdering one another. To these strangers, that cathedral was as meaningless to them as the fire. There, as here, the cost of cheap labor is the loss of your heritage. Is cheap stuff really worth feeling like this every day?

I can’t find the thing now, but earlier I saw a Tweet from somebody or other that, paraphrased as closely as my piss-poor memory can manage, said this: “It took 200 years to build it; it stood for 800 years since. In that span, it endured through 2 World Wars, the Nazi occupation, five French revolutions, innumerable violent protests and riots, and more. But in the end, it couldn’t withstand Diversity.” A good friend, CF lifer, and regular e-mail correspondent ain’t surprised:

I have a good friend, a prominent businessman in his 60s, who is a genuine, authentic, practicing Catholic. That is to say that he has changed churches three times in the past few years when the priest tacitly endorsed symbols of moral decay such as abortion and faggotry. I asked him what he thought of it this morning, and he said that he believes it might be genuine wrath of God stuff. After all, in his opinion, the Church has spent the last several decades turning away from all it claimed it believed in – so why not? Catholics used to believe in a wrathful God, and perhaps that God has visited them. Of course – in his opinion – the Church leaders wouldn’t know it if that’s what it was.

He has a point. The Catholic church is but a shadow of what it used to be. From turning a blind eye to the Holocaust, to actively participating in Nazi ratlines after World War II (this is particularly galling, since Nazism was completely secular and anti-religious in nature), to allowing “Cafeteria Catholicism,” to the ongoing homosexual child molestation scandals (and yes, it’s homosexual – you could host a meeting of female victims in a broom closet), to endorsement of gay marriage, to not excommunicating abortion advocates such as Nancy Pelosi, to Pope Frankie washing the feet of Muslims, to advocating for mass third world immigration, it’s difficult to find exactly what the Church stands FOR these days. Perhaps it’s better that not only Notre Dame, but the entire Church, burns to the ground.

Other denominations, of course, are no better, and many are worse. The fact is that no Western religion is true to its purpose. Nearly all ‘leaders’ are but false prophets these days. Is there anything dumber, or more counter to purpose, than Jews advocating for more Muslim immigration? It’s no wonder that church membership and attendance are down – what centering philosophy or moral code can one find there, except, “Hey, dude, it’s okay, do what you feel.” Shit, I can get that anywhere.

There is one thing you do have to give the Muslims. They are low IQ savages (in fact, there is an inverse correlation of acceptance of Islam and societal average IQ), barbarians, and a drag on human society. It’s been centuries since a single Muslim did anything to add to the human condition. BUT – dammit – they have the courage of their convictions, and that’s why they are winning. They don’t equivocate, they don’t virtue signal, and they don’t back down. They have ZERO guilt. They tell you, right to your face, what they believe, and dare you to disagree. Too few are willing to take that on head to head.

So, maybe it really was an accident, although I doubt it. If it was truly the wrath of God, as my friend thinks, it might be appropriate. And, if it was Muslims doing what Muslims do – conquering and destroying – well, that would be appropriate, too, would it not? France has certainly been overrun from within. Better not to have those symbols of a past defeated society and culture.

It all comes back to the old joke: “How many soldiers does it take to defend Paris? Don’t know, it’s never been tried.” So, no, you won’t see me posting any memes about “standing with Paris,” or wailing over the fact that I never got to see the Cathedral, or that I never visited Paris. I no longer want to, because I don’t visit Muslim countries.

I can’t argue with a word of it, no matter how hard I might wish it weren’t so. In a damned-right-it’s-related story:

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in the midst of a regional and municipal elections campaign, has again threatened to turn the Byzantine Patriarchal Cathedral of Hagia Sophia (Holy Wisdom of God) , which after the fall of Constantinople was turned into an imperial mosque and into a museum in the 1930s, into a mosque once again.

For centuries the largest and most resplendent cathedral in Christendom, Hagia Sophia was turned into a museum by the founder of the modern Turkish Republic, Kemal Ataturk, who brought sweeping secularisation to his country.

Erdogan’s comments come after the manifesto of the mass murderer who killed dozens of Muslims at two mosques in New Zealand, in which the terrorist stated that Istanbul will be renamed Constantinople and that the Turks will be limited to the Asian side of the city.

Of course, defiling Christian churches and holy sites and either converting them to mosques or just reducing them to rubble is a longstanding tradition among the Musselmen after a conquest. Let us note, too, that Erdogan’s pestilential Moslem shitrapy is a member in good standing of the useless and outdated NATO. Yeah, shriek at me again about how stupid and insane Trump was to propose extricating ourselves from that clusterfuck, whydon’tcha.

Miraculous update! Steyn brings news both good and…well, depressing.

Twenty-four hours after Notre Dame de Paris began to burn, there is better news than we might have expected: More of the cathedral than appeared likely to has, in fact, survived intact – including the famous rose windows, among the most beautiful human creations I’ve ever seen. The “new” Notre Dame will be mostly high up and out of sight, which is just as well given that modern man prides himself on having no smidgeonette of empathy with his flawed forebears and thus the chances of historic recreation of the animating spirit of 1160 are near zero.

There is an architectural debate to be had, I suppose, about whether a reconstructed twelfth-century cathedral requires nineteeth-century appurtenances such as its spire. But the minute that starts you risk some insecure dweeb like Macron, on whose watch the thing went up in smoke, getting fanciful ideas about bequeathing to posterity some I M Pei pyramid on the top of the roof. France’s revolution, unlike America’s, was aggressively secular, and it ultimately found expression in the 1905 law on the separation of churches and the state. Since then the French state has owned the cathedral, and thus it will be Macron who ultimately decides what arises in its place.

Beyond that are the larger questions: When the iconic house of worship at the heart of French Christianity decides to mark Holy Week by going up in flames, it’s too obviously symbolic of something …but of what exactly? Two thousand churches have been vandalized in the last two years: Valérie Boyer, who represents Bouches-du-Rhône in the National Assembly, said earlier this month that “every day at least two churches are profaned” – by which she means arson, smashed statutes of Jesus and Mary, and protestors who leave human fecal matter in the shape of a cross. This is a fact of life in modern France.

As it is, there is no shortage of excitable young Mohammedans gleefully celebrating on social media. In 2017 some inept hammer-wielding nutter yelling “Allahu Akbar!” had a crack at Notre Dame, and a couple of years before that the historian Dominique Venner blew his brains out on the altar to protest same-sex marriage. I love France but, in recent years, it’s hard not to pick up on the sense that it’s coming apart – and that, when the center cannot hold, the things at that center, the obsolete embodiments of a once cohesive society, are a natural target.

In addition, the authorities’ eagerness to assure us that it was an accident at a time when such a conclusion could not possibly be known – and when their own response to the emergency was, to put it politely, somewhat dilatory – was itself enough to invite suspicion: “Sure, it might be an accident. But, even if it weren’t, they’d still tell us it was…”

So, precisely because Paris is full of people who would love to burn down Notre Dame four days before Good Friday, it seems bizarrely improbable that it should happen by accident: that a highly desirable target should be taken out by some slapdash workman leaving a cigarette butt near his combustible foam take-out box – the lunchpack of Notre Dame – and letting the dried-out twelfth-century timbers do the rest.

The cornerstone for the cathedral was laid in April 1163 in the presence of King Louis VII and Pope Alexander III. The builders who raised up those stones through great vaulted spaces soaring to heaven were primitive, ill-educated men who nevertheless had a sense of something beyond themselves and the present tense. Once lost, that’s hard to re-inculcate. Douglas Murray’s Spectator colleague Jonathan Miller writes: “Perhaps this will be the wake-up call that France needed.” Perhaps. But there have been so many others, haven’t there?

And yet the next time in Paris I shall visit again those magnificent rose windows and feel something akin to the connection Keats did to the figures on that Greek urn. Civilization is always a paradox: deep roots and yet a thin veneer. To raze Notre Dame to the ground would have been a grand victory for barbarism. If not a “wake-up call”, the sight that arises this Tuesday on the Île de la Cité is a kind of pre-Easter resurrection, or at least a reprieve.

I expected Francis to have something worthwhile to say about this, and he didn’t let me down.

It wasn’t the most glorious of Christendom’s cathedrals, but it was one of the oldest. It was deeply embedded in the history of France. Now a lot of it is gone. Will it be restored? A good question, given Europe’s flight from Christianity and its welcome of Muslim savages. Indeed, I would expect restoration efforts to be opposed rather vigorously, especially if the French government proposes to lend a hand. Can’t afford to anger the Muslims!

This is what Europe has done to itself. Yes, I know the “official story” is that the fire was “an accident.” I also remember the old maxim about such things: “Never believe anything political until it is officially denied.”

The despicable Ilhan Omar referred to the cathedral somewhat dismissively as “art and architecture.” But then, Omar is a Somali Muslim, and is given to excusing Muslims and Islam for anything and everything. (Hey, so “some people did something.” So what?) On the other hand, she regards depictions of the horrors of September 11, 2001, which I still call Black Tuesday, as a threat to her life. She got some concurrence from the equally despicable Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who called a video of the attack “triggering.”

My God, yes, it’s “triggering.” Any red-blooded American should feel his trigger finger twitching as he watches it. He should yearn for a properly sighted-in rifle, ten thousand rounds to hand, and a federal declaration of “open season,” to continue until every Muslim within our borders is a corpse.

How can any American worthy of the name watch what Europe is suffering yet support the continued importation of Muslims to our shores? For many do, as if we owe them something, though specifics on that matter are sorely lacking. After those Muslim “refugees” have been here a short while, they strat trying to recreate the hellholes from which they emerged, by creating Islamic exclaves, bullying and terrorizing American Christians and Jews, and “progressively” inflicting shari’a law upon regions of American cities. Yet the Left tells us we’re supposed to welcome them, in the name of “diversity.” Note that these selfsame cheerleaders for mass Islamic immigration have no sympathy for Christian refugees from Islamic persecution. I can’t help but wonder why.

Oh, I think we can all take a pretty fair guess at that one.

Eyes on update! My old friend Claire Berlinski provides an up close and personal account:

My doorbell rang insistently. It was my father. “Notre Dame is on fire,” he said through the intercom. I rushed downstairs. “It’s burning to the ground,” he said. I was speechless.

He had been evacuated. He had not brought his phone or his glasses. “You’ll stay with me,” I said. He wanted to go home. He lives by the cathedral. It has been part of his daily life for 20 years. My grandfather gave a recital there once, when I was a child, playing the organ in the stone platform above the West portal. Inevitably, I think of him whenever I hear that organ. (Thankfully, the organ has been saved.)

We walked toward his home together. It was horrible to see. The spire was no longer there. How could that be? It’s always there, rising against a stormy horizon or a clear morning, juxtaposed against the sky. It will always be there, even when we’re long gone, a permanent thing in an impermanent world. But it isn’t. My grandfather is in that cathedral, somehow, and my father will be, too, and somehow, like this, civilization endures. But it doesn’t.

The police wouldn’t allow us back. They were worried that the fire would spread to the neighboring buildings, or that parts of the cathedral would collapse on top of them. So we stood across the Seine and watched it burn, the forest of symbols that had gazed on us with familiar glances.

Read all of it; Claire is just brilliant at real journalism like this, one of the very best I know of out there.

Share

Slowly, then all at once

The long, slow slide into once-great nation status begins with the military.

We’re hanging our whole maritime strategy in the Pacific Ocean around a few of these big, super-expensive iron airfields. If a carrier battle group(a carrier rolls with a posse like an old school rapper) gets within aircraft flight range of an enemy, then the enemy will have a bad day. So, what’s the super-obvious counter to our carrier strategy? Well, how about a bunch of relatively cheap missiles with a longer range than the carrier’s aircraft? And – surprise – what are the Chinese doing? Building a bunch of hypersonic and ballistic anti-ship missiles to pummel our flattops long before the F-35s and F-18s can reach the Chinese mainland. We know this because the Chinese are telling us they intend to do it, with the intent of neutering our combat power and breaking our will to fight by causing thousands of casualties in one fell swoop.

The vulnerability of our carriers is no surprise; the Navy has been warned about it for years. There are a number of ideas out there to address the issue, but the Navy resists. One good one is to replace the limited numbers of (again) super-expensive, short-range manned aircraft with a bunch more long range drones. Except that means the Naval aviation community would have to admit the Top Gun era is in the past, and that’s too hard. So they buy a bunch of pricy, shiny manned fighters that can’t get the job done.

Another mistake is over-prioritizing quality over quantity, which is the same mistake the Nazis made with their tanks. The Wehrmacht had the greatest tanks in the world – all top notch. Really good tanks. Tank-to-tank, they were the best – the dreaded Tiger had an 11.5-to-1 kill ratio. The Americans and Russians had merely decent tanks, just multiples more of them. Quantity has a quality all its own. Right now, America has something like 280 ships. We’ll have about 326 by 2023. That’s to cover the entire world. We had 6,768 ships when WWII ended in August 1945

This is inexcusable, but it is being excused. The focus of our military has shifted from victory to satisfying the whims of politicians. Here’s a troubling thought – if you go to one of the service branches’ War Colleges and poll the faculty and students about America’s greatest strategic threat, as many as 50% of the respondents will tell you it is “climate change.” That’s not an exaggeration. Our military is supposed to be dealing with the Chinese military and its brain trust is obsessing about the weather in 100 years.

The Chinese are going to continue dumping exponentially more carbon than America into the air and preparing to take us down while we focus on this kind of frivolous nonsense. Did you know the Chinese are pillaging our tech here in America, while our intelligence community’s incompetence led to our spy networks in China being rolled up? Probably not – these are one-day stories because the elite in DC and the media are busy trying to push the guy who won the last election out of office.

Here’s how the Chinese win. First, they take out our satellites. You know the GPS location service on your phone? Satellites, which are easy to hit. Say “bye-bye” to much of the ability of our precision weapons to find their targets. Also up for destruction are the communications satellites we rely on to coordinate our operations. And then there is the Chinese cyberattack, not only on our military systems but on systems here at home that control civilian power, water and other logistics. A U.S military with no comms and no computers is essentially the Post Office with worse service. An America with a ruined internet is Somalia.

Then they hit our land bases on Guam, Okinawa and elsewhere with a blizzard of missiles, knocking them out and annihilating our aircraft on the ground. Maybe we could respond with B-2s flying from the continental United States. We have 19 whole combat-capable aircraft, assuming a 100% operational readiness rate, which is just not a thing. We might even take out a few missile batteries on the Chinese coast. We won’t know the difference though. As for our carriers, if they come to play, they are likely going to get sunk, and if they stay out of the fight, they are merely useless – assuming quiet diesel subs do not find and sink them.

This is not a surprise. We play wargames against the Chinese all the time, and we lose.

The world’s “lone superpower” has absolutely NO business sending the putative “strongest military in the world” into combat against anybody until it can, first, somehow muster the will to win in its people, and second, clearly define what victory might consist of. Until such time, we’re doing nothing more than offering up the nation’s blood and treasure to provide our heavily-politicized flag-rank officer corps with a convenient playground to futz about in…which fecklessness will surely get our asses kicked up between our shoulderblades. In war most especially, if we ain’t in it to win it, we shouldn’t oughta be in it at all.

Share

“Bad decisions have consequences”

As they should. But those consequences ought to be more serious than just packing up and moving elsewhere once you’ve ruined the place you were living before, only to repeat the whole damnable process in your new home. Call it a “teachable moment,” if you like.

A recent article in a Beltway publication warned about a potential recession and considered how it might affect President Trump’s chances at re-election. The story began—no joke: “The luxury real estate market in Manhattan is sagging.” It goes on to argue that softening in the real-estate market in high-tax Northeastern states is caused by the 2017 tax-reform law. Thus the claim is that because taxpayers can deduct only $10,000 in state and local taxes from their federal returns, America is heading for a recession.

Nonsense. The tax-reform law stops high-tax states from burdening the rest of us with their irresponsible decisions. America is a marketplace where states are competing with each other, and New York is losing. Their loss is Florida’s gain—and Texas’ and South Carolina’s and Ohio’s and Indiana’s.

I would like to tell New Yorkers on behalf of the rest of America that our hearts go out to you for your sagging luxury real-estate market. But you did this to yourself, and you can fix it yourself. If you cut taxes and make state and local government efficient, maybe you can compete with Florida again.

They did it to themselves, yes—and they’ll do it to Florida too, if you let them. Instead of welcoming them in to wreck a new habitat as is their wont, maybe Scott and his fellow Floridians ought to be seeking a way to force libtard locusts into fully confronting the results of their own folly. Perhaps a “Stay home, it sucks down here!” ad campaign or something? They could mention the suffocating, murderous heat in all months that don’t feature hurricanes instead. Cockroaches only slightly smaller than your average hamster, mosquitos big and plentiful enough to exsanguinate your dog or cat. Look all you want, you still ain’t gonna find a good bagel or pizza slice. Plus: Alligators! Under your fucking house!!!

The elites in New York and Washington should commission a study of Florida to see what happens when conservative ideas are put into practice. The luxury real-estate market in Manhattan may be sagging, but Florida’s economy is thriving, expanding at a record pace.

There’s a reason Florida surpassed New York as the third-largest state. There’s a reason Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s mom left New York for Florida. 

Heh. Also: ouch.

Share

Constitution Shmonstitution

A rueful reminiscence from Wilder.

When I was in grade school the teachers spoke of the Constitution with reverence. As second graders, we listened as the teacher told the story of how it was written and the freedoms it guaranteed us and the responsibilities that it demanded of us. My grade school teachers were all married women, and they loved America. It was a small town, and the teachers had grown up in the area. Some of them had taught their own children and their own grandchildren in the same school where the chalkboard dust, lead paint dust, water from lead-soldered pipes, and asbestos floor tiles soaked into my skin daily. Even the early reader books were taped together with yellowing cellophane tape at the bindings, and most of the books had been printed decades before. I got to See Spot Run like legions of boys before me, running my fingers over the same dog-eared pages that had been read for years, young mouths quietly sounding out the words.

And these boys before me, who had sat in the same desks, drew beginning math on the same blackboards, pulling chalk from the same worn, wooden tray that I did, got paddled in the same principal’s office that I did. They had traveled the world to strange places that their teachers never named when they opened the geography books during the time they spent in second grade. These were places with foreign names like Guadalcanal. Bastogne. Chosin Reservoir. Da Nang.

One of these boys in particular, a blonde haired young Ranger, was barely eighteen when he was shot climbing the cliffs at Pointe Du Hoc on the sixth of June, 1944. His sister was a friend of my father. As a young boy that Ranger sat in that same room, learning the same math decades before I was born. He sat in that same classroom just a few short years before he was buried in Normandy in late spring at the age of 18. No member of his family could afford to visit his grave until over fifty years had passed and his sister walked to his grave and touched its cold marble stone and ran her fingers over his name. Despite that, the young Ranger isn’t lonely – he is surrounded by 9,387 of his comrades who died during the invasion of France.

The school was torn down some time ago – I don’t know when. A bond issue was finally passed, and a new school was built. There aren’t many more students than when I went there, but there are new classrooms. These new schools are gleaming with whiteboards and new furniture and new books, and from the pictures you can see that the kids look a lot like the kids from when I went there; but the connection with 100 years of history went when the building was torn down.

Change is inevitable, but the one thing that my teachers taught us was that the Constitution was a rock, something special, something that every American had shared for hundreds of years. It was important, and it protected us, and protected our freedom.

I believed that, the way the boys that live forever on Pointe du Hoc did.

Today, however, the population of the United States is at least 14% foreign born, but I’d bet that number undercounts illegal aliens.  Second generation Americans, people born here of immigrants, account for at least 10% of the population. A quarter of the population of this country simply has no connection to anything American. 10% were born here, but were raised in a household that had little to no connection to anything American.

These residents also don’t have teachers that teach that the United States is good, that the Constitution is a meaningful document – times have changed and that just isn’t the “woke” take. They don’t get any of this from their family, either. Their family simply doesn’t know anything about freedom and the Constitution in most cases, and probably wouldn’t care if they did. It’s a document that foreigners put together – it is not part of their history at all.

If we have politicians that actively create divisions between Americans with a heritage of limited government and an increasing number of people for whom the history of the United States means nothing, the Constitution won’t mean anything. It will be a speed bump for those who have no connection to it and who have no love of it. The Constitution in the hands of those who hate the limitations it puts on them will, in the long run, provide no safety at all as it is interpreted away, as the press revolts against it, and as the newly imported electorate ignores it.

And what meaning will the blonde Ranger of Pointe du Hoc have then?

Not a whole lot different from what he has now, I’d say. It’s more a matter of which group of us we’re talking about; those of us who have cherished the meaning and memory of that Ranger right along still do, and will forever. Problem is, there’s a large and growing cohort that not only does not cherish that meaning, but has either abandoned the memory or never acquired it in the first place. A bigger problem is that not all of said cohort—probably not even most—are immigrants, unassimilated or otherwise. But there’s a bigger problem still.

In the comments John says, “I’m not trying to make people comfortable with nostalgia – I’m trying to show what we’ve lost.” We’ve lost quite a lot, and stand to lose more yet. The Pointe du Hoc Ranger will be forgotten, as surely as will the lessons he once taught, the example he once provided, and the inspiration and pride he instilled. Partly, that’s just the relentless tide of history clearing the sand of footprints, as it inexorably does—a fact better accepted than lamented or railed against, probably.

But not everything has to be forgotten; not everything should be. And then there are those things whose memory must at any cost be preserved, because the price of allowing them to fade is nothing less than our own extinction. Not for nothing did John begin this excellent post in an old schoolhouse, I think. Because it’s there where our enforced loss of memory and meaning begins, and the cultural amnesia and indoctrination occurring in those classrooms is the biggest problem of them all. Only by addressing that issue will our memory problem be put fully right, if ever it is. Only then can we say we’ve given that valiant Ranger and his comrades their due, our eternal debt to them sufficiently serviced, and their rightful place in our hearts and minds restored.

Share

Ho hum, just another random nut

Prepare yourselves for the Christchurch mosque killer’s light-speed trip down the memory hole. The “right-wing H88888R!!! Islamophobic bigot™ right-winger” libmedia narrative doesn’t quite seem to be holding up—as usual—so you can be sure the whole thing will very shortly be dropped—as usual—never to be brought up again.

All jihad is local, but all “Islamophobia” is global. So, if a Muslim of Afghan origin shoots up a gay nightclub in Florida and kills 49 people, that’s just one crazed loner and no broader lessons can be discerned from his act. On the other hand, if a white guy shoots up two mosques in New Zealand and kills 50 people, that indicts us all, and we need to impose worldwide restraints on free speech to make sure it doesn’t happen again. I’m ecumenical enough to mourn the dead in both gay clubs and mosques, but I wonder why we are so conditioned to accept Islamic terror as (in the famous words of London mayor Sadiq Khan) “part and parcel of living in a big city” that it is only the exceptions to the rule that prompt industrial-scale moral preening from politicians and media. [UPDATE: Utrecht isn’t that big a city – 350,000 – but it’s today’s designated “part and parcel”.]

The Christchurch killer published the usual bonkers manifesto before livestreaming his mass murder on Facebook. Brenton Tarrant purports to be an environmentalist – indeed, a self-described “eco-fascist” – who admires Communist China (notwithstanding, presumably, its indifference to environmentalism). He wants to massacre Muslims in order to save the planet:

The environment is being destroyed by over population, we Europeans are one of the groups that are not over populating the world. The invaders are the ones over populating the world. Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation and by so doing save the environment.

Does he mean this? Or is it a giant blood-drenched leg-pull?

No matter. For the the politicians stampeding to the nearest camera to dust off their tropes, what counts is that, if you’re American, Donald Trump pulled the trigger; and, if you’re British or European and you’re not prepared to say that Google-Twitter-Facebook should silence anybody to the right of Trevor Noah, then you’re part of the problem.

Call me a H8888!-filled Islamophobic H88888RRR!™ if you wish, but I confess that among my first thoughts after hearing about this business was to wonder how many future Muslim terrorist attacks had just been forestalled. My second was to wonder where the mosque-goer who seems to have stopped the attack by shooting back might have gotten his gun, how many more of them might be found in storage at this mosque, and what might be the reason for their being there.

I would be interested to know why Mr Adler thinks it is in the national interest to lend the imprimatur of the Crown and the state to as specious and opportunistically deployed a conceit as “Islamophobia”. One of our Antipodean Steyn Club members, Kate Smyth, drew my attention to a fine example of that: After the Islamic terror attack in Melbourne four months ago, Muslim community leaders refused to meet with Aussie Prime Minister Scott Morrison because of all the systemic Islamophobia. After the Christchurch attack, the same Muslim community leaders are demanding a meeting with Morrison because of all the, er, systemic Islamophobia. To say Terror Attack A is something to do with Islam is totally Islamophobic; to refuse to say Terror Attack B is Islamophobic is even more totally Islamophobic.

Were the Queen or the Governor General to pull an Andrew Scheer and sign on to this somewhat selective view of the world’s travails, it would necessarily imply that “Islamophobia” is now beyond and above politics, and in that sense beyond criticism. The use of “Islamophobia” in the Melbourne attack is, in fact, its standard deployment: it is an all-purpose card played to shut down any debate.

Not, of course, that there’s much debate as it is. And there’s likely to be even less in the future. Facebook, which is unable to devise algorithms preventing a depraved psychopath livestreaming mass slaughter on its platform, is busy fine-tuning its controls to expel the most anodyne dissenters from the social-justice pieties. Less speech inevitably means more violence – because, if you can’t talk about anything, what’s left but to shoot up the joint?

Things are changing faster than you think. The urge to change New Zealand’s gun laws might be politely excused as a reflexive response to the means by which an appalling attack was carried out. But the demand throughout the west to restrict both private gun ownership and free speech are indicative of a more calculated clampdown, and of broader assumptions about control of the citizenry on all fronts. In the transition to the new assumptions, we are approaching a tipping point, in which the authorities of the state (as in the average British constabulary’s Twitter feed) are ever more openly concerned to clamp down on you noticing what’s happening rather than on what is actually happening.

And isn’t it just funny as all hell that, no matter the event, situation, or putative contretemps, Big Boss Man is always able to find a way of using it to keep on workin’ for the clampdown?



Share

Dispossessed by Californication

Heritage Americans have been relieved of their country, having had it quietly, stealthily yanked out from under them by the Left. Pat Buchanan examines the process.

How does the left expect to permanently dispossess Middle America?

Let us count the ways.

In 2018, over 60 percent of Floridians voted to expand the electorate by restoring voting rights to 1.5 million ex-cons, all of Florida’s felons except those convicted of sex crimes and murder.

Florida gave Bush his razor-thin victory over Al Gore. Should Trump lose Florida in 2020, he is a one-term president. If the GOP loses Florida indefinitely, the presidency is probably out of reach indefinitely.

Florida’s Amendment 4 is thus a great leap forward in the direction in which the republic is being taken. Gov. Terry McAuliffe of the swing state of Virginia restored voting rights to 156,000 felons by executive order in 2016, calling it his “proudest achievement.”

In California and Oregon, moves are afoot to reduce the voting age to 17 or 16. Understandable, as high schoolers are more enthusiastic about socialism.

Last week, a bold attempt was made by House Democrats to lower the U.S. voting age to 16. It failed — this time.

The Democratic Party does not want to close the door to voting on migrants who broke our laws to get here and do not belong here, as these illegals would likely vote for pro-amnesty Democrats.

If the new U.S. electorate of, say, 2024, includes tens of millions of new voters — 16- and 17-year-olds; illegal migrants; ex-cons; new legal immigrants from Asia, Africa and Latin America who vote 70 to 90 percent Democratic, the political future of America has already been determined.

California, here we come.

As noted in this post: there can be no question that the Democrat-Socialists are going to attempt to steal the next election. The 2018 midterms, a veritable circus act of fraud and chicanery, were a successful test run for the Greatest Show On Earth in 2020. Think we’ve seen extremism, frothing lunacy, and fascist violence from Proggy creeps already? I promise you all: if they manage to swindle their way into a “win” in 2020, you ain’t seen NOTHING yet.

Share

Democracy dies in dumbass

The WaPo has it all wrong with their cutesy little masthead slogan; it’s socialism that “dies in darkness.”

Literally.

Venezuelans have grown begrudgingly accustomed to power cuts, but nothing like the one that hit during rush hour Thursday evening, sending thousands of people on long nighttime treks in the dark to their homes. It reached virtually every part of the oil-rich country of 31 million, which was once Latin America’ wealthiest but is now beset by shortages and hyperinflation projected by the International Monetary Fund to reach a staggering 10 million percent this year, compelling about one-tenth of its population to flee in recent years.

Venezuelans struggling to put food on the table worried that the few items in their fridges would spoil. One hospital advocate reported there were at least two confirmed deaths due to the outage: A baby in a neonatal unit and a patient at the children’s hospital. Venezuelans with chronic conditions liked diabetes searched for ice to preserve their limited supplies of medicines.

The blackout promptly became a point of dispute between Maduro, who blamed sabotage engineered by the “imperialist United States,” and U.S.-backed opposition leader Juan Guaido, who said state corruption and mismanagement that have left the electrical grid in shambles were the cause.

Too bad, so sad. Venezuelans voted for it, and they got it—good and hard. Now the So-Am auxiliary of the Free Shit Army gets to pay the price and maybe learn the lesson. Alas, my sympathy for their self-inflicted suffering is just a mite, umm, limited.

Stupidity should be painful. And with socialism, sooner or later it is.

Share

Giving up the ghost

Looks like the Democrat-Socialist effort to separate Trump from his base of support is beginning to bear fruit, as folks disappointed with his lack of progress on core issues begin to announce they’re all done with him, while others begin to feel their faith in his ability to wrest change from a calcified superstate ebbing.

Sadly, some of their gripes have merit: Trump’s baffling staffing choices; his misplaced faith in the essential soundness of our broken system; his hesitation and backpedaling on withdrawal from Syria; his recent inexplicable reversal on immigration; his failure to go balls to the wall on any of his primary agenda items—all are beginning to wear on at least some of his supporters. Even Vox Day, as staunch as he’s been, is speculating on the prospect of failure and proposing a possible alternative candidate for 2020:

If the God-Emperor cannot, or simply will not, build Americans their promised wall, drain the swamp, stop the foreign invasions, repatriate the post-1965 immigrants, or put America first, then perhaps Americans need to turn to a leader who is actually capable of leading his nation on its behalf…

His audacious alternative? Well, see…ummm…it’s, like…well, uhhh…

Russian President Vladimir Putin congratulated Russian women for everything they do in life, like taking care of the home and staying beautiful. He made the remarks to a group of Russian female policewomen on International Women’s Day, which was celebrated throughout the Soviet Union.

“You manage everything at work and at home, whilst staying beautiful, bright, and charming,” Putin said, adding that “It is hard to imagine the history and development of our country without the contribution of the great Russian women.”

“What does a young woman need to maintain her figure? Three things: a workout machine, a masseuse and a suitor,” Putin told the police officers….

“Our women’s ability to achieve success is remarkable. You manage to cope with everything at work and take care of the family. Your love unites, encourages, supports, consoles makes us feel warm,” reported Russian state news agency TASS on Putin’s official comments.

“You are destined to go the whole way of creating new life – the miracle of childbirth. This great happiness of motherhood and child-rearing transfigures this world, fills it with kindness, gentleness and sympathy and asserts the traditional values that have always made Russia strong,” Putin said.

Heh. What the hell, I’m down with it. With traditionalist views like that and the guts to come right out and nakedly espouse ’em, we could do worse. All kidding around aside, though, Vox knows our real problem:

Don’t get me wrong. President Trump remains the best available option for the USA. He has exceeded expectations and is one of the best Presidents the country has ever had. But unfortunately, it appears he was too little, too late. And as I warned from the start, there was very little chance that a civic nationalist would be up to the challenge posed by the realities and social rifts of a waning multiethnic, multireligious empire.

Pretty much what I said all along too. I expected Trump was going to do things I wouldn’t like. I also considered the notion that he could somehow magically reverse 60 years of decline and bureaucratic mission-creep overnight, in the face of virulent opposition from both wings of the Uniparty status-quo establishment, to be little short of ridiculous. So I can’t say I’m overly frustrated with him just yet; it’s all gone pretty much the way I figured it would, although I do find the above-mentioned immigration flip-flop in particular disturbing. But for anybody still holding out any hope at all for positive change short of open revolution and bloodshed, Trump remains the only game in town: he’s still the only guy even talking about most of these things, let alone making any honest attempt at, y’know, actually doing them.

Which doesn’t alter the likelihood that we’ll get violent revolution anyway, mind, no matter what Trump or anybody else does. The Deep State is neither reformable nor removable by political means. The long-running Uniparty distraction and masquerade has about run its tired, shabby, circular course. The Left’s genocidal intentions for us have now been openly declared. Things are falling apart; the center cannot hold. Robert Gore tots it all up:

As the middle class watches the America it once knew and cherished collapse, and comes to understand why, it realizes its head is on the chopping block. A bright middle-schooler can see that the Green New Deal will bring the economy to a shuddering stop and plunge many who have managed to escape so far into poverty. Yet the Democrats’ leading lights rush to praise the imaginary raiment of would-be empress Ocasio-Cortez.

The middle class has always aspired to better things—the American dream. Talk of 70 percent or higher tax rates and wealth taxes capitalizes on hatred of the rich, it’s open season. Why work and sacrifice to get rich if the government gets it all? Take away middle class dreams and you may well be taking away the last thing that keeps them paying their taxes, observing the law, supporting the troops and police, in short, everything that from the vantage point of the ruling class, “keeps them in line.”

What began as a gentle squeeze a century ago has become python-like constriction. Government has drained economic vitality and shuttered opportunity as the once politically stable, prosperous, and optimistic middle class dwindles. A few still reach the upper echelon, but most are consigned to creeping poverty, blunting the economic consequences with credit and the personal consequences with cannabis, alcohol, opioids, pornography, and promiscuity. It’s only going to get worse as debt grows, massive unfunded medical and pension liabilities come due, taxes rise, economies shrink, and promises are broken.

The ruling class has backed the middle class into a corner. Shoving them into poverty and vanquishing their dreams amounts to an unprecedented and dangerous experiment. Aristocratic arrogance, condescension, exclusivity, and isolation add to the combustibility. Yet they remain steadfastly oblivious to the rising anger and the risks. They don’t even recognize the danger of billing the governments they control (or the global one they want to create) as the solution to all problems. Who’s going to get the blame when things fall apart?

Love Trump or hate him, any decent, sane American simply must continue to hold out hope for him to succeed against all odds. The alternative—unpredictable, uncontrollable, irreversible, horrible—just doesn’t bear thinking about.

Share

Gettin’ sporty

Coming Unpleasantness is…unpleasant.

In recent months I’ve made frequent reference to military historian Michael Vlahos, who, as another regular guest on Mr. Batchelor’s nightly show, has been discussing the possibility of civil war in America. One of the points he’s made often is that it’s hard to say, except in retrospect, when civil wars actually begin; before the armies take the field there are years, or often decades, of deepening strife in which comity disintegrates and the two sides learn to hate and dehumanize one another. When, for example, did America’s civil war of the nineteenth century really begin? At Fort Sumter? Or was that merely the moment that a civil war already in progress for decades burst into flame? In hindsight, it’s clear that the bitter antipathy between North and South was already beyond all hope of reconciliation long before the shooting started. The evidence is plain enough: Bleeding Kansas, the John Brown atrocities, the caning of Charles Sumner, the Congressional brawl of 1858 — or even the Graves-Cilley duel, which happened all the way back in 1838, and became a rallying point for an already darkening North-South antagonism.

So: has our new civil war already begun?

I’d say so, yeah. It’s my belief that any Point Beyond Which Etc has been passed, probably longer ago than many might imagine. Certainly the brazen lawlessness of the Obama junta could be said to have amounted to a Rubicon of sorts; the metastasizing unbending fanaticism and batshit lunacy of the fascist Left after Trump’s election, along with the now-obvious malevolence of the Deep State, makes where we now stand plain enough to any with eyes to see. Thus:

How did we come to such a pass? For those of us on the Right side of this gaping chasm, the answer is clear: the ground under our own feet hasn’t shifted much at all, while everything to our Left has torn away at an accelerating pace. Cultural and political opinions that were shared, without controversy, by almost every American just a few years ago — opinions still held by half of the nation’s people — are now “right-wing extremism”, and their public expression denounced and suppressed as “hate speech”. Saying a thing that once was obvious to everyone can now cost you your reputation, your livelihood, and in many parts of the West today, your freedom.

We know how close we are to the edge, to the dissolution of civilized order into chaos and tyranny. We can feel in our bones the implacable hatred of our would-be commissars for everything we believe is good and right and true — along with a growing understanding that their hatred doesn’t stop at our traditions and beliefs. As long as we live and breathe, we are a threat. If the blood-soaked history of the twentieth century can teach us anything at all, it should teach us that it will not be enough to see us displaced and destroyed. They will want us dead and gone.

One of the milestones along the road to civil war is the normalization of violence as a rational response to a dehumanized enemy, followed soon after by an eagerness for general conflict.

Oh, rilly. You don’t say.

This eagerness arises first in the breasts of those seeking radical change, who see violence as justified by the righteousness of their cause, and who are usually young and excitable people who have a much better sense of how to destroy what exists than to build and preserve a system that, however flawed, actually works. (This also reflects that the Right, almost by definition, moves toward order, while the Left is always entropic.) But the Right is eminently capable of reactive, or even proactive, violence when confronted by an existential threat to order, and is every bit as liable to the “othering” and dehumanization of its enemies in preparation for war.

There is, then, a spiral of mutual threat and provocation in the run-up to war, along the course of which a people can go from general comity and commonality, to political or cultural division, to rancorous debate, to increasingly bitter struggle for political power, to “othering” and dehumanization, to normalized violence, to bloodthirsty eagerness for war, to general armed conflict. We are already well into the latter stages, and even on the Right I see martial enthusiasm increasing: the hatred of the enemy, the idea that we are now so far beyond reconciliation that there is going to be a fight, and that we might as well get on with it (especially as we are the ones who will most likely win).

If you ask me, the Right’s “hatred of the enemy” is not merely understandable; it is justified. In fact, I’ll go ya one further: it is necessary, a matter of survival. No, we don’t want a Civil War v2.0, or anything resembling one. All we ever wanted was for them to leave us the fuck alone. But the Left long ago took that option off the table, and we were NOT consulted about it.

Those of us on the Right tend to be a lot better educated when it comes to history than our enemies. We know already what will be the inevitable upshot of their ascension to total power over us: gulags, killing fields, death camps. Holocausts. Holodomors. Great Leaps Forward. That sort of thing.

They’ve become unabashed about threatening us directly and unequivocally, about declaring without the least reticence that they want us dead. So regret and deplore it all we might, we’re still left with only just the two choices here: bow our heads and take whatever they decide to deal out, or…this:

They are going to have to be not just beaten back, but utterly destroyed. All memory of them wiped from human reckoning. Not just their army destroyed, but their women killed, and their babies’ heads smashed on rocks, and all those who cheered them on eliminated to the last man. Their livestock slaughtered, their temples of error pulled down until one stone lies not upon another, and their fields sown with salt, that nothing will ever grow there again. Like Carthage after the Third Punic War, which policy ensured for all time that there never came a Fourth Punic War.

And their calling cards are the same ones throughout history.
They want to shut you up.
They want to disarm you.
And then, free of your arguments and your arms, they want to kill you.

That’s why they now openly proclaim the outright plan to strip the clear acknowledgements of the First and Second Amendments, and muse before God and everybody how joyful and pleasant it would be to come and round you up, and kill you.

Take such thoughts and such people exactly at their word.

Some historically-minded wonder what it would have been like if only someone had strangled Hitler in his crib. It would never happen, for the same reasons you aren’t doing it now. You have half a Congress full of would-be führersgruppenführers, and gauleiters, openly telling you what they want, and will do given the slightest chance, and yet nobody’s fired so much as a single shot. And likely, nobody will. They wait until the columns march into whatever suffices for Poland these days before they’ll recognize they let things go too far, and only pay attention too late. Pray the response is not too little.

As Aesop elsewhere says, they think they want this. But there’s a slight problem: they know not what they do. And as always the case, the absolute worst thing that could ever happen—to Leftards and to everybody else—is for them to get it. You average white male American is a very peaceable and forgiving sort. He’ll endure whole backhoes full of shit being dumped over his head with little in the way of retribution beyond angry complaint…right up until the moment he won’t. Force him to admit that, as Aesop says, it’s necessary for him to take his enemies at their word, that his way of life, his family, his home, his very life itself is threatened, he will buckle down with a quickness.

And then? A few historical reminders might be useful at this point: Hiroshima. Nagasaki. Tokyo. Dresden.

Those last two should be particularly noted. White Male Americans were so absolutely, positively determined to defeat utterly their last batch of existential foes that we actually came up with the idea of the fuel-air bomb—a bomb so vicious and evil that it works by quite literally sucking all the oxygen from the surrounding area to feed itself. Whereupon the enemy is confronted with two highly unpleasant options of his own: he can burn to death, or he can suffocate. Oh, all right, all right; he can also be crushed under the rubble of buildings leveled by the initial blast wave, too. Or torn to shreds by said blast wave his own self, should he be in its path.

By the way: did I mention that we hit Dresden with this hell-weapon more than once?

In four raids between 13 and 15 February 1945, 722 heavy bombers of the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and 527 of the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) dropped more than 3,900 tons of high-explosive bombs and incendiary devices on the city. The bombing and the resulting firestorm destroyed over 1,600 acres (6.5 km2) of the city centre. An estimated 22,700 to 25,000 people were killed, although larger casualty figures have been claimed. Three more USAAF air raids followed, two occurring on 2 March aimed at the city’s railway marshalling yard and one smaller raid on 17 April aimed at industrial areas.

The attack on Dresden quickly became controversial, which is subject to popular debate into the 21st century. Immediate German propaganda claims following the attacks and post-war discussions on whether the attacks were justified have led to the bombing becoming one of the moral causes célèbres of the war. A 1953 United States Air Force report defended the operation as the justified bombing of a strategic target, which they noted was a major rail transport and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the German war effort. Several researchers claim not all of the communications infrastructure, such as the bridges, were targeted, nor were the extensive industrial areas outside the city center. Critics of the bombing have claimed that Dresden was a cultural landmark of little or no strategic significance, and that the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the military gains. Some in the German far-right refer to the bombing as a mass murder calling it “Dresden’s Holocaust of bombs”. According to other critics, given the number of civilian casualties and a claimed paucity of strategic targets, Dresden’s destruction was unjustifiable and should be called a war crime. They claim the city could have been spared, like Rome, Paris, and Kyoto, though both British and American militaries defended the bombing as necessary.

Large variations in the claimed death toll have fuelled the controversy. In March 1945, the German government ordered its press to publish a falsified casualty figure of 200,000 for the Dresden raids, and death toll estimates as high as 500,000 have been given. The city authorities at the time estimated up to 25,000 victims, a figure that subsequent investigations supported, including a 2010 study commissioned by the city council.

So to recap, then: the German authorities have only in the last decade been able to finalize the official body count from these truly nightmarish attacks…which were launched against a city of no real strategic or military importance at all. Because we WANTED TO, that’s why. The Germans are still complaining about the inhuman ferocity of them, and they ain’t entirely wrong. Our response? Meh; don’t start no shit, won’t be no shit. Start some shit, God have mercy on you. Because WE sure won’t.

I’ve said it a bunch of times already, even though I have no expectation at all that any such thing will be happen. But Proggy REALLY needs to think all this through.

Share

The playground of social justice

Should we ever foolishly allow our national “leadership” to drag the US into yet another pointless, eternal war, we are going to get our asses kicked up between our shoulder blades.

What follows is a compendium of my own personal observations as a Marine Corps officer, as well as an exploration of official policies that reveal the Leftist corruption of our military institutions.

Like academe and the mainstream media, the American military bows before the altar of political correctness, offering up sacrifices of its very being and purpose in order to satisfy this jealous god. The indoctrination into the sacred rites begins early in a marine’s career. For me, it started at The Basic School (TBS), the 6-month initial training for newly commissioned Marine Lieutenants. Throughout the course, the new officers attend a variety of social mixers with senior Captains and Majors in different occupational fields in order to discern which job they wish to be selected for at the end of the training.

The staff of TBS and the Infantry Officer Course (IOC) set aside one of these mixers for women and minorities only, so they could plead with these groups to join the combat arms—artillery, infantry, and tanks. While the staff fêted the “oppressed,” the white males returned to barracks to clean.

After the mixer, the Commanding Officer of IOC made an appeal to our class as a whole to join the infantry, while reiterating the need for women and non-whites as platoon commanders for the grunts. In his words, “Without diverse leadership that looks like America, future marines would not respect their officers.”

This kind of favoritism for “marginalized peoples” was manifest throughout my entire instruction. The treatment of women was especially egregious. Female marines rarely carried squad or platoon gear such as radios, machine guns, or batteries. They were more likely to fall out of hikes. Their injury rate was higher overall. During one hike, I witnessed a male Lieutenant, one of the largest in our platoon, carry not only his pack but that of a diminutive female officer who had been injured in the course of the march. While she limped along in tears, he plodded with her gear on top of his own in order to prevent her from falling out.

Basic School instructors, mine included, liked to say that in the Marine Corps “there is only one standard, the Marine Corps standard.” This is a lie. There are two standards: one for men and one for women. Thus, on the annual Physical Fitness Test, required of all marines, a perfect score for a 21-year-old male is 23 pull-ups, 110 crunches, and a 3-mile time of 18 minutes. For a female of the same age a perfect score is 9 pull-ups, 105 crunches, and a 3-mile time of 21 minutes.

Women also receive special benefits for family life. After giving birth, female marines receive 42 days of non-chargeable leave and can take an additional 12 weeks of maternity convalescent leave. “Secondary caregivers”—that is, fathers—only get 14 days. Female marines can take the 12 weeks of leave at any time in the year after giving birth. Although their duties are interrupted by taking leave, that cannot be used as a factor in determining whether women shall be promoted.

That’s only for starters. Boyd then links and excerpts a Heather MacDonald WSJ piece:

In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training—unsurprising, since men’s higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.

The upshot to this PC nonsense? This:

The double standards and censorship wrought by the Left evidence the corruption their ideology inflicts in our ranks. The Marine Corps, like the rest of the American military, no longer places winning wars and defending the nation at the top of its priorities. If it did, how can we explain the insistence on special privileges for an entire class of physically and spiritually inferior “warriors?”

Easy: the Left doesn’t care about winning wars, and actively dislikes warriors, see. In addition, infiltrating, undermining, and eventually destroying organizations, institutions, cultures, and entire nations is part of Leftard DNA: that’s what they are, that’s what they do. So nobody should be in the least surprised over the predictable result of their insidious tinkering with the Marine Corps. And let’s not be kidding ourselves that the termites’ gnawing is limited to the Marines, either:

Improving diversity and acceptance across the Air Force isn’t just about being politically correct, it’s a “warfighting imperative,” USAF Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein said Friday.

Speaking to a room packed full of airmen at AFA’s Air Warfare Symposium, Goldfein said for himself and many leaders across the service, it can be hard to recognize issues other airmen face. These leaders need to accept that “we have blinders on as leaders,” and need to reach out to airmen from all backgrounds, races, genders, etc., to point out ways to improve.

To illustrate his point, Goldfein told a story about his first chief master sergeant when he was a squadron commander, and a box. One day, the chief came into his office and handed him the box and said that it “makes your airmen mad” and it “oughta make you mad.” He said he couldn’t understand his point. Looking closer, it was a box of flesh colored Band-Aids.

“I ain’t getting it,” Goldfein said he told him.

The chief pulled out the pink, “flesh-colored” Band-Aid and put it on his skin. The chief is black, the Band-Aid is made for white people, and the bandage completely stuck out.


He said, ‘That ought to make you mad, because it makes a lot of your airmen mad.’ And he winked and he walked out,” Goldfein said.

Then those airmen are basically your Mark-1, Mod-0 oversensitive pussyfarts, who need to be vigorously encouraged to nut up and get right the fuck over it.


“The challenges we face as a nation are wicked hard, and it’s going to take folks with different backgrounds, different life experiences, and different perspectives to be able to come in and sit down together and provide the creative solutions that we as a nation need to be able to fight and win,” he said.

That’s twaddle, feel-good liberal word salad that means nothing whatsoever. What those “wicked hard” challenges will require is wicked hard warriors—doughty, resilient, clear-eyed fighting men, not whiny snowflakes who might lose their shit over the color of a goddamned Band-Aid.

Share

Anatomy of feminism

Like the Progressivism that enfolds and inspires it, it’s a fabric of dishonesty draped over sinews of authoritarian/totalitaranism, all supported by a skeleton of stark raving madness.

Feminist leader Kate Millett wrote Sexual Politics in 1970, which the New York Times called “the Bible of Women’s Liberation.” But her sister Mallory Millett reveals in this interview the destructive legacy of radical feminism.

Mark Tapson: Your sister was an icon of female empowerment, but what do you think the reality of feminism has been for generations of women since Kate helped launch the second wave of the movement?

Mallory Millett: How bizarre it is to have to argue the obvious; to have to prove over and over again what is self-evident so let me be as offensive as I possibly can: Men are men and women are women. They are essentially different and designed for a natural division of labor. Period.

I get a kick out of the feminists’ love affair with the word “empowerment.” They have clever formulas for ensnaring hapless souls into their deceits. One of their slicker moves is to create a vocabulary designed to get around long-held beliefs, mores, taboos or fears. “Pro-choice” is their Newspeak euphemism for the casual murder of a human being; “Dreamers” means illegal immigrants; “Progressives” denotes a group dragging us back to the cave; “Sanctuary City” means a place where no actual U.S. citizen is safe. This “empowerment” thing makes me especially crazy.

When women ran society, power emanated from the home. Men labored to keep their families sheltered, warm, clad and fed while women mostly stayed in the home to run the children and the community. Mother oversaw the household and carefully watched the children’s behavior. Most of the neighborhood women knew each other and had informal meetings in their living rooms and kitchens, called “coffee klatches.”

It was here that the community developed ground rules on how to manage children and husbands. Any mother was free to chastise anyone else’s child should they misbehave. It was pretty unheard of for someone to say, “How dare you correct my child!” They would agree amongst themselves what was desired behavior. Good manners were required and trained. Neighbors backed each other up. It was expected.

The essential rules that Moms formed in their infants and homes radiated outwardly into streets, schools, offices, boardrooms, departments, factories and agencies to form the framework of Western ethics. The communities, churches and schools all echoed the same values because most people went to Church or Temple and so, the foundation of our mores being Judeo/Christian, Mom’s rules were designed by the Ten Commandments. Many towns didn’t lock their doors, even at night.

So, after fifty years of the almighty “consciousness-raising” experiment to empower women, and during the recent Harvey Weinstein [sexual assaults] scandal, what we are hearing from the little girlish voices of the victims is, “I froze, I was paralyzed. I gave in because I didn’t know what to do. I was terrified!” Hey, that’s some weird kind of empowerment. When I was a girl we did what our moms instructed: we yelled “NO,” slapped his face, and left the room or called a cop.

Today, 60 percent of babies who escape abortion are born outside of marriage. On top of that they are miserably reared, thrown into child-care shortly after birth, with not only a lousy education but a miseducation in classrooms infiltrated by Mao, Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Karl Marx, and Saul Alinsky rather than readin’, writin’, and ‘rithmatic, American history, and civics. Our children now score poorly compared with other countries, whereas before the feminist “experiment” we led in almost all categories. In 1964 we had 90 percent literacy and 5 percent illegitimate births. We now score shockingly low on literacy (38 percent of American men read at the lowest levels; only 11 percent of men and 12 percent of women are proficient readers) and of course, those out-of-wedlock births at 60 percent.

I would say that raising several ill-prepared fatherless generations of slackers, meth and opioid users, porn dogs, disheveled rockers, and illiterates speaks poorly of any degree of empowerment in parenting. Most parenting is done by absent single women since two-thirds of mothers are raising their youngsters outside of marriage. So, we have the filthy clothes, ten o’clock shadows on guys, shocking grammar, plethora of tattoos, sullen misfits in torn filthy clothing listening to violent hate-filled so-called music; entitled attitudes and non-existent manners say it all. Empowerment? Why, the facts scream that feminists are two generations of the worst-ever educators of America’s children. In what manner does this speak of empowerment?

The stuff I elided, chronicling the heavy hand of Maoism as it guided the founding of NOW, is interesting indeed. And then we get to the “madness” part:

Tapson: Can you tell us a bit about Kate’s mental instability, and if you think it had anything to do with her radicalism? Or vice versa — do you think her radicalism affected her mental state?

Millett: Kate was mentally ill for as long as I remember. She was five when I was born and our elder sister Sally says that once I arrived, Kate was hanging over my bassinet plotting my murder. We shared a bedroom from my birth. From my earliest memory I recall trembling from the vibrations of her insanity. She was the most disturbed, megalomaniacal, evil and dishonest person I have ever known. She tried to kill me so many times that it’s now an enormous blur of traumatizing horrors. She was a sadist, a torturer, a deeply-engrained bully who took immense pleasure in hurting others. Incorrigible and ruthless, she was expelled multiple times from every school she attended. I spent my childhood with heart hammering as I tiptoed through the house so as not to be noticed by the dreadful Kate. Our mother was helpless, paralyzed with terror in the face of Kate.

It’s a grinding hardship to bring oneself to write such harsh things about one’s own blood. It took some bucking up for me to start telling the truth. I must say here that, always and forever, I had a reservoir of love for my sister Kate, but reality trumps all and her brand of nihilistic darkness was an implacable obstacle.

I love the term “Feminazi,” as these humorless women are, indeed, fascists, killers of faith and society. So many people think the rise of women and the evisceration of our culture are somehow coincidental. But it’s been calculated and deliberate. It’s the only way America can be “fundamentally transformed” into the Marxist test-tube to dazzle the world. It’s the result of HATE: hating God, hating life, hating society, hating men, hating babies, hating history, hating our fathers, hating our families, hating our white male founders, hating happiness, hating heterosexuality, hating Western civilization. Is this not madness?

If it isn’t, then the word has no meaning. Damned smart woman, this Mallory Millet is. Read all of it.

(Via WeirdDave)

Share

The mother of all clusterfucks

This one focuses specifically on Syria, but the same applies throughout the Middle East, and always will.

Put simply, Syria is a clusterf%$# of American proportions—and it’s only getting worse the longer we stay there.

The Assad family has ruled Syria since the 1970s. They’ve been a perennial geopolitical problem for Washington since that time. When the Syrian people began revolting against the autocratic reign of Bashar al-Assad in 2011, everyone in Washington grew excited. Soon, calls from the Obama Administration to the effect that “Assad must go!” informed America’s official policy toward Syria.

From there, America’s intelligence services began acting in accordance with Obama’s proclamation. Groups of Syria’s rebels were armed and trained by CIA operatives. Meanwhile, the U.S. military began getting involved, selecting their own Syrian rebel factions to arm and train—without telling the intelligence agencies. Before long, American armed and trained Syrian rebels found themselves not only fighting Assad, but also each other (thereby negating whatever opportunity they had at overthrowing Assad).

It quickly became apparent that the competing factions of America’s military-intelligence complex were were not only fighting each other, but that many (if not all) of them were jihadist groups as committed to the destruction of the United States as they were to the overthrow of Assad in Syria. It was in Syria where ISIS built its caliphate. It is believed that ISIS fighters unwittingly may have been trained and equipped by the CIA in Turkey!

These facts about Syria’s opposition not only were ignored by Washington elites, but the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party continued to provide varying levels of support for the Syrian rebels (even as American troops went to Syria in order to decimate the ISIS caliphate that had grown there). America’s covert intelligence and military services had become lost in a wilderness of mirrors and shadows. Rather than step back from the situation and reassess, Washington just kept plunging forward, hoping that the problem would sort itself out with the right combination of American military aid and pressure.

Then came the added complication that Assad was being supported by Iran and Russia. Washington’s apparatchiks reasoned that the United States could not simply leave Syria then because to do so would be to hand the country over to Iran and Russia! Of course, under the Assad Regime, Syria has been a Russian client going back to the 1970s and an Iranian one going back to the 1980s. This is to say nothing of the fact that the Assad family belongs to the Alawite clan, which are a subgroup of the Shia Islam faith (and Iran is a predominantly Shiite state). Dislodging either Russia or Iran from Syria—without totally removing Assad from power—was a fantasy that only Washington’s uniparty could convince itself to believe.

Nevertheless, Washington chose to intensify its operations in Syria—risking war both with Russia and Iran, even as its Syrian “rebel” factions turned on America and each other.

As difficult to believe as you may think it—and it is—the story gets even more convoluted and clusterfuck-ish from there, with Turkey providing on object lesson on why NATO is useless, outmoded, unhelpful at best, and no longer worth the trouble or expense of preserving. It’s long past time for us to get out of Syria, among too many other withering conflicts that are draining our resources, exhausting our personnel, and grinding down our equipment—all to no good end, serving no legitimate national interest, in futile pursuit of no readily-identifiable goal. Just…clusterfuck, forever and ever, amen.

Share

“The Navy still hasn’t said what it’s going to do about the fact that it can’t afford the ammo for the boats’ fancy guns”

Y’know, I bet you could find plenty of folks over in Ole Blighty who still think theirs is the most powerful, militarily awe-inspiring country on Earth, too.

The USS Lyndon Johnson, the third and final Zumwalt-class guided missile destroyer, floated out of its dry dock over the weekend. Meanwhile, the second of the class, USS Michael Monsoor, arrived at its future home port of San Diego, California.

While the launching of the Johnson completes the construction of the controversial destroyers, the program—which was cut by more than 90 percent, and still lacks ammunition for the six advanced gun systems—remains deeply troubled.

The USS Johnson is the third and final destroyer of the Zumwalt class that includes sister ships USS Zumwalt and USS Monsoor. Once upon a time, the Zumwalts were planned to be a mighty class of destroyers meant to replace the firepower of the Navy’s four Iowa-class battleships. The retirement of the four Iowas left a gaping hole in the U.S. Navy’s ability to provide fire support for the Marine Corps during amphibious landings. To make up for the shortfall, and to support land wars in the post-9/11 era, the Navy had planned to build 32 Zumwalt class destroyers.

Instead of 32 ships, the U.S. got three. Rising production costs, combined with the huge cost of those land wars and an economic recession, truncated the number of Zumwalts from 32 to seven, and finally to just three. According to the Congressional Research Service (PDF) the three destroyers will wind up costing taxpayers a grand total of $13 billion. That’s enough to buy seven Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyers at current prices. And unlike the Zumwalts, the Burkes are a proven design with a full suite of working sensors and weapons.

One major, lingering, embarrassing problem with the Zumwalts: The Navy has no plans to buy ammunition for the main guns. Each destroyer was built with two 155-millimeter Advanced Gun System weapons, which lower into the ship’s stealthy profile when not in use. The AGS was meant to be armed with the Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP), a GPS-guided shell with an effective range of 60 miles.

In 2001, at the very beginning of the Zumwalt program, Lockheed Martin estimated each LRLAP round would cost about $50,000—expensive, but fair considering each was practically guaranteed to hit its target. But cutting the number of ships built from 32 to 3, along with the rising development costs, dramatically increased the cost of each round to up to $800,000 each. That was too expensive even for the U.S. Navy, and the service announced it would not buy the LRLAP.

You can see where this leaves the Navy with a dilemma. The service now has three destroyers with no ammunition for their long-range guns, which was the entire point of building them to begin with. The Navy is reportedly planning to reconfigure the destroyers as hunter-killers, meant to seek out and attack enemy ships and land targets with precision-guided missiles. In such a case, the Zumwalts would rely on the 80 vertical-launch missile silos per ship to provide offensive firepower.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Marines are still awaiting the fire-support replacement for the Iowa-class battleships, 26 years after the last battleship was retired. Now that the Zumwalt program has become a billion-dollar misfire, the Marines are unlikely to ever get a dedicated naval gunfire platform again.

On the bright side, though, if we’re smart they’re not likely to be storming any beaches again either, so they won’t be needing one. America, at this stage of its journey down Great Britain’s road to once-great-power status, has no business contemplating any war that can’t be fought exclusively from an armchair in a dark, quiet room underneath the Midwest plains, by drone pilots. We no longer have either the national will or the gear for much else.

Which, given that we have a far more important battle with the Left imminently confronting us here at home, the new circumstantial restrictions on US overseas adventurism might not be an entirely bad thing, actually. Attempting to export democracy to places across the globe that don’t want any part of it never has worked out too well for us, any more than acting as the World’s Policeman has. Of course, it would be far more desirable to have any pullback from the “foreign entanglements”* Washington warned of occur as a result of a carefully-deliberated, honestly-debated decision rather than forced upon us by military-industrial incompetence and corruption. But whatevs, I guess.

*NOTE: Washington did NOT use those exact words in his farewell address, and his position on how foreign affairs should be conducted was a bit more, umm, nuanced than is broadly assumed. In my opinion, he’d likely have been in favor of making war if necessary to protect the nation under specific, well-defined conditions—even pre-emptively—but opposed to the kind of pointless, open-ended, half-a-war adventurism we’re bogged down in all over the world now.

Share

Annnd here come the Democrat-Marxists!

Gird your loins.

Rep. Brad Sherman plans to introduce articles of impeachment against President Trump on Thursday, the first day of Democratic control of the House.

Sherman (D-Northridge) is reintroducing a measure that he first rolled out in 2017. But this year it carries more political significance: The decision of whether to act on it rests with Democrats — not Trump’s Republican allies.

That’s what the American people voted for. Now let them get it. Good and hard.

No way the Senate will go along, though. I mean, no way. Right? Not with such stalwarts to hold the line as, say, that Severe Conservative from Utah who…uhhh, never mind. Ah, but that’s not all:



This is—quite literally, in fact—just the beginning, folks. And don’t anybody bother trying to tell me that they “can’t do” this or they “won’t do” that. You just watch and see what they “can’t” or “won’t” do.

Update! With Democrat-Marxists ascendant once more, we can all expect one hell of a lot more of this too:

My strong belief in my Second Amendment rights is core to who I am. I know that is not understood by many today, however I am not asking to be understood. I’m asking to be left alone.

Be sure to ask nicely. Then let’s see what it gets you.

I am asking for progressives who run city government to live up to their assertion of tolerance and just let me be.

Because I own a long gun with a pistol grip and a detachable magazine, I had to the end of December to self-identify to the police, present myself for investigation and my gun for inspection, pay fees in order to receive a police-issued permission slip, all to avoid jail time, monetary penalties, and the confiscation and destruction of my gun.

I have never been convicted or even charged with a crime in my 54 years of life, but this week I became a criminal. I am no different then potentially thousands of other Boulderites who cannot bring themselves to submit to this ugliness. And yes, I know, most people today don’t see this as ugly or intolerant, but simply a reasonable thing to do about this “epidemic.” After all, something needs to be done.

For publicly stating that I will not comply, my daughter has been targeted at her Boulder school, the one with posters celebrating tolerance and diversity all over the walls. My refusal to submit has been commented on by teachers in front of their classes. She has been ganged up on by students and bullied because “her father is a murderer.” She is worried that I will be taken to jail. As a single dad to her and her handicapped brother, I have to admit I’m worried about that too.

I respect the police, greatly. The cops I know hate the idea of enforcing this intolerance.

Which ain’t gonna stop them from doing it, bub. Like I always say: it isn’t a “right” if you have to get a permit from the government to exercise it.

Updated update!It’s time to debate how to Begin.

How’s that Voting thing working out for you?

While Trump has done some good for us, the main thing that he ran on The Wall has not come to fruition, Obamacare has not been repealed and our national Debt is about to hit 22 TRILLION! There’s more but you get the point.

Our forefathers’ worst nightmare has now come upon us. They created a free government, limited in its powers and a servant to the people. But today the United States has become an empire, fast decaying into tyranny; and we their children have become strangers and subjects in the land our fathers won. Instead of a free and just social and political order, today we are threatened by a Godless national culture and a corrupt, despotic federal government that knows no limits to its power.

What happened to the Rule of Law? We all witnessed James Comey lay out Hillary Clintons crimes one by one and then he stood there and said Sorry about your Luck but she is untouchable and flipped the big middle finger to the American People. I used to think that restoring the Rule of Law would save us from this path of Civil War we are on. Now I think the only way to restore the Rule of Law is by exterminating a great many people who think the law should only apply one way.

It’s ugly all right, and a deeply disturbing thought. But if you think this isn’t related to the rest of the post above, you got some more thinking to do.

Share

Farewell to Texas

The beginning of the end.

The prospect of a purple and eventually blue Texas thrills progressives who see the Lone Star State as the key to their drive for post-Trump domination. Before draining their champagne glasses and filling their bongs, the coastal crowd should sober up enough to consider what happens if the Texas miracle comes to an end.

Many Republicans, meantime, have come to consider Texas their sovereign territory, a deeply conservative place where even Democrats were generally pro-business and growth was the prevailing religion. This last election ended what remained of that hallucination. In virtually every big metro—the increasingly dominant geography of Texas—the Democrats grabbed control.

In the election for Senate, the uniquely unattractive Ted Cruz lost the 25 largest counties to his challenger, media darling Beto O’Rourke, by a combined 700,000 votes. Only the hard-right remnants of small-town Texas allowed Cruz to claw out a narrow victory. Due in part to slate voting, large counties also turned control over to Democrats, as in Harris County, the home of Houston, which is now led by 27-year-old -progressive Lina Hidalgo, a 27-year-old part-time student with almost no work experience.

Several factors seem to be driving this change, including a growing population shift to large metropolitan areas, a diversifying economy and, most of all, rising migration both from abroad and from the rest of the country. This changing electorate—younger, more ethnically diverse, better educated—has shifted the state’s politics away from a Republican Party operating under the shadow of Donald Trump and his fellow travelers.

Ironically, the arrival of these newcomers is changing the policy environment that created the conditions for this migration.

The rest of America should care if Texas abandons its model. Without it, we will increasingly resemble European countries—like France—where all power and wealth is concentrated in the largest, densest and most established cities, while everyone else is on the outside looking in.

Well, yeah. That’s the plan. It’s exactly what they want, it’s the whole idea—and not just for Texas, either.

And the country will have lost its premier safety valve for young people and families priced out of the coasts.

Tough shit for them; since they’ll be the ones who caused it by insisting on the exact same policies that ruined the places they migrated from, well, let’s just say my sympathy is VERY damned limited. Let ’em enjoy the fruits of their stupidity, and to hell with ’em.

The new Texans might not like Ted Cruz (who does?) but one wonders if they would welcome a policy regime like that in California, where the middle and working classes are confronted with an ever more feudalized reality.

Of course they would, and will. When have they not? In fact, as the rest of the article makes clear, they’re doing it already.

America can endure, and even thrive, with a New York or a California to service the rich and employ their servants. But it also needs a place for upward mobility and the chance to buy a house. If Texas stops providing that, we may be running out of dynamic states where the less than affluent can achieve their aspirations. America needs a Texas that is still Texas, not a big, flat, dry place trying and failing to impersonate San Francisco.

Sorry, but with the incoming plague of liberal locusts swarming in to eat out Texas’s substance and demand a rerun of the same wetbrained Progressivist folly that turned San Francisco into a literal shithole, that’s exactly what we’re going to have.

“America needs a Texas that is still Texas”? Maybe so. But much more than that, America needs an America that’s still America. Unfortunately, that just ain’t on the menu.

Share

4GW

A primer.

What are some examples of 4th Generation warfare?

  • The Intifada: Palestinians use children to attack Israeli soldiers, hoping for an Israeli soldier to kill the children for an awesome photo opportunity. Palestinian leaders then launch rockets and missiles at Israel from hospitals and schools, again hoping for as much of their followers blood to be spilled as possible. Israeli victory depends on…not killing these kids.
  • Mogadishu: The warlords walked the streets, surrounded by women and children, again knowing that an American Marine is not going to shoot up non-combatants to get to a bad guy.
  • Antifa™: To the mother that left her kids out in Berkeley, could you come pick them up? They’re beating up both Antifa® and the police.
  • The Caravan.

Wait, what? The Caravan?

Illegal aliens strike at the heart of the nation-state. If a nation isn’t allowed to control its borders, then how is it a nation? And there is a group of people inside the United States that are collaborators with the invasion. They deny that borders should even exist.  An example of tweets from #abolishborders:

  • Shooting teargas at women and children is not “border security”. It’s terrorism.
  • Guess it wasn’t enough for the U.S. government to throw children in concentration camps. This is beyond inhumane. All dirt is the same, and free movement is a human right.

Military force is ineffective against an invasion like the Caravan. Scenes of violence against unarmed people on TV is powerful propaganda against the middle portion of the United States population that can be swayed to support the aliens. Imagine the sympathy fest as weepy single moms emote on their way to drop off Brayden, Jayden, Hayden, Aiden and Kirk to their dad who lives in a one-room apartment above the pool hall hear the news on NPR®. How sad!

Von Clausewitz talked about war being waged on three levels:

  • Physical – Breaking stuff and killing people and taking land.
  • Mental – Making the enemy think what you want them to think. Confusing them.
  • Moral – You have to believe that what you’re fighting for is right, just and correct.

Most military thinkers through the ages (including that French dude, Napoleon) feel that the moral level of war is the most crucial. If you think what you’re doing is wrong and evil, it’s probably a good bet you’re going to lose. And if the people back home think you’re evil? Well, we have Vietnam where news that was looking to support a narrative convinced the majority of the American people that we were on the wrong side morally in the war. So, we declared victory and left the communists to win.

But there are 4th Generation collaborators on the inside of the United States right now. A primary organizer of the Caravans is the United States based organization Pueblo Sin Fronteras. Started by leftist Emma Lozano, this organization is also affiliated with La Familia Latina Unida (LFLU, “The United Latin Family”), and Ms. Lozano is virulently against the United States, noting, “We ride for freedom from our oppressors and we don’t say, ‘please, accept us, we are good workers,’ and make contributions, and wave the U.S. flag. We know our history – half of the entire United States was originally Mexico. We have every right to be here.”

Ms. Lozano is a general in a 4th Generation war. She is actively seeking to abolish the United States – by directly replacing its people with people that she likes better. And these activists seek photo opportunities that allow them to establish moral superiority. I watched footage where a Mexican police officer said (more or less, I’m going from memory): “Please, please don’t put your women and children in front like this man,” pointing to an activist, “tells you to do. It’s dangerous. And he doesn’t care about you or your children. I’m begging you, don’t put your children up front.” Pueblo Sin Fronteras is certainly willing to sacrifice your children for a cool photo.

How an organization that encourages and abets breaking the law (Pueblo Sin Fronteras) can operate and not be indicted based on conspiracy charges is beyond me – if this were a right-wing organization I believe the organizers would have been taken to the International Space Station just so they could be shoved out of an airlock as a lesson to others that embarrassing the state is simply not an option. I guess that I’m forced to conclude that Pueblo Sin Fronteras is doing exactly what government wants them to do.

We are in a war.  Are we ready to fight?  Because I don’t think that the 5th Generation of war will be quite as nice as the 4th…

Yep, pretty much. In the course of wholeheartedly endorsing John and his blog, Aesop says:

Somebody who can think well, write clearly, and gets it right. On everything under the sun.
If his site isn’t on your daily reads, fix that. Today.
And if P.J. O’Rourke dies, relax.
We’ve found his replacement.

Well, good. We’ve been needing one since the old one went stale.

Share

Deep State fangs bared

What a shitshow.

President Donald Trump threatened to shut down the government during a heated argument with Democratic congressional leaders in the Oval Office on Tuesday in a remarkable display of partisan bickering just 10 days before a partial shutdown is set to take effect.

“I am proud to shut down the government for border security,” Trump said bluntly. “I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it. The last time you shut it down, it didn’t work. I will take the mantle of shutting down. And I’m going to shut it down for border security.”

“The fact is, you do not have the votes in the House,” Pelosi said, to which Trump insisted: “Nancy, I do.”

Schumer then confronted Trump directly over his exaggerations and mistruths about the border wall.

“We have a lot of disagreements here. The Washington Post today gave you a whole lot of Pinocchios because they say you constantly misstate how much of the wall is built,” a defiant Schumer said. “You have called 20 times to shut down the government. You say, ‘I want to shut down the government.’ We don’t. We want to come to an agreement.”

At one point, Trump jabbed at Pelosi, saying, “Nancy’s in a situation where it’s not easy for her to talk right now.”

Pelosi fired back immediately, telling the president, “Please don’t characterize the strength that I bring to this meeting as leader of the House Democrats who just won a big victory.”

Nah, they’re not emboldened or anything. This is still a conservative-majority nation, and we’re still winning. Just keep telling yourself that, and maybe the horse will learn to sing.

The partisan jabbing, which came during a photo opportunity before Trump was set to negotiate with Pelosi and Schumer behind closed doors, represented a preview of what to expect with a divided government next year, when Democrats officially take control of the House of Representatives.

Lamentably, incredibly, depressingly, it most certainly is—the opening salvo in what’s going to be a long and dismal war. Kudos to Trump for fighting on anyway, from the deep end of a real shitpile dumped on him by the fickle, witless, and liberal (BIRM) American voter.

Share

Murder and mayhem

And impeachment too, as part of the Summer Of Hate.

One result of the Obama years was a rise in black violence, peaking with series of BLM murder sprees set off by the White House. From the 2010 election forward, Team Obama had been working to get their voters angry, hoping that would result in good election results in 2012 and 2014. The trouble was those angry blacks thought it was authentic and they expected something to happen. When it did not happen they decided to take matters into their own hands. The result was a summer of BLM murder and mayhem.

Will something like that be in the cards for the summer of 2019? It’s hard to know, but the Democrats take the House in January and they are showing few signs of restraint. They toned it down a bit in the election in order to not scare the remaining whites in their coalition, but they seem to be determined to go full crazy once in power. Maybe it is just a pose. Perhaps they are hoping a well choreographed bit of theater is enough to satiate the howling mobs of their coalition. Maybe they have unleashed forces they cannot control.

On the other hand, Trump has been a cunning political animal, even if he has been all thumbs when it comes to governance. He clearly thinks having Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi as foils is good for his re-election campaign. That means he will be doing everything he can to poke that hornet’s nest. The stage is set for a year of NeverTrump loons stoking the impeachment fires, while the steam whistles in conservative talk radio and cable TV blow full blast making sure the red hats are fully engaged in the fight.

The trouble with the future is it is unpredictable, so how all this unfolds cannot be known in advance. Most likely, the Democrats have not yet worked out how to proceed and Team Trump is a circus of confusion. Still, the ingredients are in place for a very ugly year and when the Left gets ugly, it always means bloodshed. Now that those Antifa mobs no longer have Richard Spencer to chase around, they will need to do something. Odds are, it means attacking red hat wearing Trump supporters in the coming summer of hate.

Oh, I think we can count on that much, for sure and at the very least. But the real coming-attractions black pill is in the comments:

Trump can’t fire Mueller; only the Attorney General can fire him. Trump should have accepted Sessions’ resignation immediately after he recused himself from the Russia investigation. I had some hope that Matthew Whitaker was the outsider brought in by Trump to fire Mueller and end the investigation, but it’s clear that’s not going to happen. And Trump’s nominee to replace Sessions, William Barr, is a swamp creature with extensive experience in the CIA and the DoJ. He’s a GOPe company man. Mueller’s clown show of an investigation will continue unabated.

Trump will likely be indicted in 2019 by the US Attorney’s office in Manhattan for campaign finance violations. (The US Attorney for SDNY in Manhattan was appointed by Jeff Sessions.) These are felony charges with the potential for jail time. Like the Mueller investigation, the indictment is BS, but it will further cripple Trump’s presidency. I won’t be surprised if Trump resigns in exchange for a full pardon for himself and his family from Pence. Soft coup completed.

Trump took on the establishment but failed to install a loyal leader to keep the careerists at the DoJ under wraps, and now they’ve won. It’s game over for Trump–he’s finished. The Democrats in the House will hound him for the next two years. He’ll get no meaningful support from the Republican establishment. He’ll be indicted in 2019 and will either resign in early 2020 or will lose badly in his bid for 2020. Sessions will publish a memoir and will emerge as a sort of folk hero to the left, rather like Comey. What a shit show.

Z seems a lot more sanguine about the likelihood of impeachment than I am, and the idea that going “full crazy” might be “just a pose” for the Democrat-Socialist loons seems to me little short of absurd at this point—when, especially over the last two years, have they been anything but?

The comment excerpted above, unfortunately, is dead on, with the part I bolded being the key to understanding the whole sordid mess. What a shit show indeed.

Impeachment BINGO update! It’s all about the hamstringing and obstruction.

Since Robert Mueller and his revanchist inquisitors filed their sentencing memoranda on the President’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, the Democrats and their friends in the legacy media have been squealing with undisguised glee. They clearly believe that it marks the beginning of the end for an “illegitimate” presidency. Never mind that the filings contain no evidence of criminal collusion between the Trump campaign and any foreign entity, an odd omission for a “Russia Probe.” Forget that payments of hush money to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal aren’t in and of themselves illegal. Trump’s enemies believe that impeachment is now inevitable.

And they’re right.

But this has nothing to do with the ridiculous Mueller probe. That farcical “investigation” is, and always has been, nothing but a stalking horse. The event that guaranteed Trump’s impeachment was the November election in which the Democrats “harvested” a majority in the House. Nancy Pelosi discouraged the use of the “I” word by her accomplices during the final months of the midterms, but there was never any doubt that it would be the number one item on the Democrat agenda if she managed to get her hands on the Speaker’s gavel again. Nor does Pelosi much care that Mueller hasn’t uncovered anything resembling “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

It isn’t really about “getting” Trump per se, although I’m sure at least some of them think they can. It’s about ending the Trump presidency by other means, de facto instead of de jure. This is nothing more than the Deep State fighting back as hard as it can, by any means it can conjure up. And since Americans voted for exactly that on Black Tuesday, I can’t say their newfound confidence—their newly-restored arrogance, more accurately—is at all misplaced. It all comes down to this:

Alright, is it really plausible that the payoffs to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal were somehow within the bounds of the law? Yep. To begin with, such payments aren’t a crime at all — and they certainly don’t reach the level of a “high crime.” According to the law, they are just as legal as paying these two people to be quiet about Trump’s affinity for fast food. Nor does it rise to that level even if candidate Trump directed Cohen to make the payments and the cash came out of campaign funds. This is not, of course, what we are hearing from bloviating political hacks like New York Democrat Jerrold Nadler, who claims that such actions are impeachable:

They would be impeachable offenses. Whether they’re important enough to justify an impeachment is a different question.… Certainly, they’re impeachable offenses, because, even though they were committed before the President became President, they were committed in the service of fraudulently obtaining the office.

Fraudulently obtaining office? What is Nadler talking about? This novel legal concept has no basis in statutory or constitutional law. Nor is there any such offense mentioned in the Mueller sentencing memo. Even the New York Times seems a little befuddled by the charge, which it discusses in a piece titled: “Prosecutors Effectively Accuse Trump of Defrauding Voters. What Does It Mean?” Powerline’s Paul Mirengoff suggests, “It may mean that the prosecutors haven’t found a crime, but are still pissed off that Trump won the election.”

Once again: BINGO.

Share

Echoes

And last gasps.

Over the last two plus years, the prevailing assumption has been that the Trump phenomenon is part of a greater populist backlash against the corrosive effects of cosmopolitan globalism. Trump’s alleged populism is linked to nationalist movements in Europe, where natives are rebelling against the migrant invasions. Despite the superficial similarities, what’s happening in America may not be analogous to what’s happening in Europe. Instead, the Trump phenomena may be the last echo of old stock America.

If you look at what Trump has actually done in office, versus what he has said, his presidency has been rather conventional. He has cut a lot of regulations, which is pretty standard Republican stuff. He got a tax overhaul passed, which is also standard issue Republicanism. His judges are all right out of the Federalist society. Otherwise, the Trump administration has been what we would have got from Jeb Bush, except the marketing of it has been much more entertaining than what you get from standard issue conservatives.

Dunno if I quite agree with that last. Trump never has claimed to be any sort of doctrinaire conservative, and no one should have expected him to govern like one no matter which way the Black Tuesday elections turned out. Nonetheless, however dire you think Trump’s shortcomings have been to date, we wouldn’t have gotten even that much from ¡Yeb! or any other of the Sixteen Dwarves.

And I figure that’s probably the last time ¡Yeb!‘s name is ever mentioned on this blog. Which, at least we got that going for us.

What Trump’s presidency looks like is an echo of the Reagan presidency. Reagan ran on a platform to roll back the cultural revolution of the 60’s and 70’s. He did not explicitly say it, but that’s what everyone assumed. He talked about shrinking government, reforming taxes, rolling back the cultural excesses like abortion and affirmative action. He also talked about economics and foreign policy, but the people who voted for him were looking at the domestic items. People really believed the Reagan revolution was a rollback.

That last bit has been understandably forgotten by the current ruling class. They don’t even talk about the Reagan Democrat phenomenon. That was the great re-alignment in the 1980’s that carried into the 1990’s. Working class whites, who had always voted Democrat, changed parties over the culture issues. Things like taxes and regulation were nice, but what got them to change parties was the culture war. They voted for Reagan because they believed he would fix everything broken in the 60’s and 70’s.

Instead, Reagan delivered a huge military buildup, massive deficits, bigger government and a debt fueled economic boom. All the talk of entitlement reform ended, for example, when it threatened the military buildup. Despite the enormous support from social conservatives, Reagan delivered nothing on that front. Of course, the currency reforms in the Reagan years made today’s debt boom possible. Then there was immigration reform, which is turning out to be the Gipper’s most important policy achievement.

Trump won election as a remake of the Reagan election. It’s not a perfect analogy, but people forget that the Gipper talked pretty tough on the campaign trail. The tone police followed him around too. As much as Trump gets cast as the white nationalist’s president, he’s pretty much just standard middle American white guy, in terms of his politics and delivery. Like Reagan, the white working class voted for him thinking he would roll back the last three decades of excess. Just as with Reagan, none of that is going to happen.

The trouble, of course, is that middle-class boomers are a shrinking block. The invasion plus the actuarial tables are making them less of a factor. The remnants of the old Reagan coalition came out of mothballs to shock the pollsters and the political elite in 2016, but they are not making that mistake again. As we saw in the midterms, they can manufacture all the foreign votes they need to win the 2020 election. This echo of old heritage America, is going to be weaker and shorter than the Reagan echo. It will be the last.

It ain’t a happy thought, but all things considered I can’t see much reason to expect otherwise.

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