Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Slow suicide

Just deserts.

Reports indicate that The Weekly Standard soon joins LifeLookCalling All GirlsHit ParaderGeorge, and Oui on the great newsstand in the sky. (Perhaps loyal “readers” find Oui on some lower-elevation newsstand.)

Death by internet seems a tempting obit but it does not capture the self-inflicted nature of the magazine’s demise. Like the obituaries of others who “died suddenly at home” at 23, an accurate death notice for the Standard requires some reference, however oblique, to the magazine killing itself by rebuffing its lifeblood, conservative readers. The notion of a “Never Trump” publication appealing to a mass conservative audience during The Donald’s reign seems a difficult trick to pull off. The Standard sought to walk this tightrope by transitioning from Bill Kristol, now a familiar talking-head to MSNBC viewers and 140-characters-or-less-wordsmith to Twittericans also following Katrina Vanden Heuvel and Paul Krugman, to the able and less alienating Stephen Hayes as editor seemed a last-ditch survival gambit. But the magazine’s convoluted identity, aiming for that sliver of conservative America still not sold on a tax-cutting scourge of political correctness who appoints solid judges to the Supreme Court, unsurprisingly did not attract much of an audience.

Perhaps the magazine planted the seeds of its end much earlier.

Take, for instance, the publication’s response to the changing fortunes of big government during the Clinton years. The year after declaring “We Win: ‘The End of Big Government Is Over’” on its cover, the Standard schizophrenically called for “A Return to National Greatness” in the same spot. The David Brooks-penned piece seemed a response to a conversation nobody was having. This familiar problem for the Standard became the problem for the Standard, a supply-driven phenomenon powered by donors and editors in search of a magazine and not by public demand to read such a magazine.

Ultimately, it was a magazine by, of, and for the effete, smug, perennial-loser collaborationists now scornfully referred to as cucks—and the cucks and their Liberal-Lite governing philosophy have finally exceeded their sell-by date. The Left despises them, in spite of the cucks’ eternal quest to court their favor and acceptance; the new New Right—brash, muscular, eager to do real battle with the Left not on the Left’s terms but its own, undeterred by the necessity of getting down and dirty in order to secure meaningful victories—has no use for them; and the market for mushy, ineffectual, dithering pedantry has become, shall we say, bearish. So the Standard is going out not with a bang but with something more akin to the squeaky honk of a halfheartedly-suppressed fart in public: mildly embarrassing, and best overlooked by all present.

Share

Stabbing ever Rightward

Zman expands on a point I made the other day myself.

With news that The Weekly Standard is about to shut down due to the lack on interest, I wondered what would fill its place. The need for border security may not be a concern for the political leaders in Washington, but it is a necessity for the people in charge of the moral orthodoxy. The system requires there to be a predictable opposition that will squawk a bit, but eventually roll over for the Progressives. That means there are now job openings in the loyal cuck guard for men (and women!) willing to guard the walls against us.

If you are to become a paid chattering skull on the “right” then you better get used to writing and talking about the double-standard. A standard feature of all cuckservative bleating is pointing how there is one set of rules for Progressives and another set of rules for everyone else. Here’s a recent example in the premiere cuck site, National Review On-line. This one is about the black college professor, who was fired from his CNN job, for saying he hates Jews and wants Israel wiped from the map.

The standard cuck response to these events, is to shift the focus away from the actual issue onto the double-standard. In this case, the effete editor of NRO is begging the Left to stop giving wedgies to cucks like Charlie Cooke, when they fumble their lines. The real issue is why is criticism of Israel in violation of the morality codes, but hating white people acceptable? The cuck can’t allow that. His prime directive is to make sure whitey never thinks about this stuff, so the double-standard mew is employed to change the subject.

Another popular position in the cuck army is to be the guy who spends his days noodling over the rule book. Every time Lefty is about to pull a fast one in Washington, these guys pop up in the pages of cuck publications, talking about the finer points of the law. This post is a recent example from after the election. It is a long snoozer about the details of California election law, written from the ludicrous position that the rules matter. If only we can tweak the rules, the cheating in California will stop!

These are the two faces of the cuck army. When it is time to use the rules against the Left, they start talking about principles and morality. When it is time to talk about principles and morality, they start talking about the rules and the need to respect order. Every time the Left makes clear the rules don’t matter to them and that we live in a lawless age, the cuck army swings into action, lecturing us about the rule of law. That’s important to know. The tongue lashings and lectures are always directed our way, never toward Lefty.

That’s because the cucks are not really on our side, but Lefty’s.

Share

King Cuck fesses up

Principled True Conservative™ NeverTrumpTard David French just comes right out and says it.

Ask your Democratic candidate if he or she is willing to publicly condemn New Jersey senator Robert Menendez — tried for public corruption and admonished by the Senate Ethics Committee for doing favors for a wealthy contributor in exchange for lavish gifts — the way that so many conservatives condemned (and ultimately rejected) Roy Moore.

Yeah, for the exact same kind of no-evidence, unsubstantiated bullshit that very nearly took down Kavanaugh—that WOULD HAVE taken down Kavanaugh, in fact, were it not for one President Donald J Trump, who carries more weight in his sack than any six of you NeverTrump twerptards could scare up between ya’s. Onwards.

Democrats claim that now is the time to reject the politics of personal destruction. They look at a president who calls people names, who spins out wild conspiracy theories (Ted Cruz’s father participated in the Kennedy assassination? Really?), and they demand better. I agree.

Of course you do.

Democrats decry Republican extremism and alarmism. They look at wild claims about the border caravan, wasteful troop deployments, and alarmist rhetoric about criminals and Middle Easterners. They condemn family separation. They decry Trump’s “enemy of the people” rhetoric. They believe that Trump and his allies are dangerously raising tensions in the American body politic. I agree.

Of course you do.

Ask where your Democratic candidate stands on Hillary Clinton’s rejection of civility, Cory Booker’s call for protesters to “get up in the face of some congresspeople,” Eric Holder’s declaration that “when they go low, we kick them,” or Maxine Waters’s ominous demand that “if you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

And while you’re at it, ask your Democratic candidates if the challenge of Donald Trump is so grave that they’re willing to moderate their positions on abortion, immigration, health care, gun rights, or religious liberty even in the slightest to win your support.

Why the hell should they? They’ve already got your eager-to-please ass in their back pocket. You made that perfectly clear a long time ago, and have given no indication whatsoever that they shouldn’t go right on taking your continued compliance and cooperation for granted.

I don’t claim that every Democrat fails the test of character and policy, but I do know that the Democrats in general have. They demand public hygiene even as they’re responsible for much of our political filth. They decry extremism even as they stampede to the left. And there are voices — even on the right — who would help this deeply flawed party even as it demonstrates its own profound moral bankruptcy.

There certainly are. I can put a name on one of them right fucking now, in fact.

(Via Insty)

Share

UNITY!

I’m all for it. So is Kurt.

The simple truth is that these shrill demands for unity are really demands for our surrender. The elitists who are howling that we have to come together have no intention of coming together with us. Rather, they want us to come together around them and the very same policies, initiatives, and weird taboos that we’ve spent the last few election cycles repudiating.

What, exactly, do these people propose to give up to help close America’s divide? Their campaigns against our free speech? Our religions? Our guns? Our desire for people to use the right bathroom?

Nothing, nada, zip. They intend to give up nothing. We’re supposed to give up what’s ours. Why? We just are.

We can have unity, all right. We just need to do everything they want and we’ll have unity. Like ants have unity. Like the Red Chinese have unity. Like liberal college campuses have unity. Sweet, warm, huggy unity, under the benevolent guidance and iron rule of our elite betters.

Hard pass.

He goes on to spell exactly what we ARE willing to unify around, all of which I am on board with.

Share

Unholy alliance

We Are All Proud Boys Now. Excepting, of course, the cuckified pussywarts of Conservative, Inc.

Lost amid the uproar over the alleged threat of right-wing violence revealed by crude bomb-like devices apparently mailed to CNN and some top Democrats: the speed with which Conservatism Inc. endorsed the Left’s Narrative (David Frum here, Bill Kristol here, Ben Shapiro here, Rich Lowry here). It’s a Thing: increasingly openly, Conservatism Inc. is making a de facto alliance with the Left in a last-ditch effort to stop its Dissident Right’s rivals’ takeover of the Right. Case in point: its disgraceful reaction to the New York authorities’ anarcho-tyrannical drive to suppress Gavin McInnes’ Proud Boys pro-Trump fraternity, while simultaneously exempting Antifa demonstrators from prosecution.

The Proud Boys clashed with Antifa because the black-masked anarchists were robbing and assaulting people who were leaving an event addressed by McInnes at New York’s Metropolitan Republican Club. As soon as video emerged of the scuffle, the Left and their journalist auxiliaries and quickly went into histrionics. Conservatism, Inc. was all too willing to join in.

Respectable conservatives prefer standing on imaginary moral high ground rather than fight for their own supposed interests. But turning the other cheek to Antifa and denouncing anyone who dares to punch back will not quell Leftist violence. It rewards it, and only makes conservatives look like cowards.

Unfortunately for the Proud Boys, Conservatism, Inc. condemnation is the least of their concerns. The media paints them as Neo-Nazi thugs although they boast more racial diversity than HuffPost and have repeatedly disavowed white nationalism. The “Hate Group” label has stuck as usual, making anyone affiliated with the Proud Boys subject to employment termination—several in New York were arbitrarily fired from their jobs the day after Trump’s election—and other severe harassment. The Twitter accounts for the group, McInnes and several prominent members have been permanently suspended. More censorship will likely follow. 

But the persecution of the Proud Boys is no concern for Conservative Inc., even though they are the only group willing to defend patriots from Antifa violence. The Respectable Right are clearly more than happy with the Left taking out the “disreputable” elements of its Dissident Right competition.

Of course they are. They want their comfy-cozy Deep State Business As Usual back, and don’t care whose diseased cock they have to suck to get it. Where’s it all leading? Derb wonders:

So the question arises: Are we moving into a zone where street fighting between political groups becomes normal?

Antifa have had the streets pretty much to themselves up to now, courtesy of cowardly political leaders. Actions generate reactions, though. It wouldn’t be terrifically surprising to see more groups like the Proud Boys coming up, ready and willing to fight.

The New York Times, which to the best of my knowledge has never printed a single word critical of Antifa, will denounce them as Nazis and appeal to the Southern Poverty Law Center for Hate Group designations. Which is why New York law enforcement is now hunting down and jailing the Proud Boys, while doing nothing whatever about Antifa.

But you can only push people so far before they push back. (You can donate to the Proud Boys legal defense here.)

And back of my question about the forthcoming normalization of political street fighting, is a bigger, darker one.

Suppose these street fights escalate to a serious, major breakdown of public order, serious enough to need the attention of the military. Will the military stand neutral? If not, if they take a side, which side will they take?

Heartiste knows:

We crossed the Rubicon with the election of Trump, an event which shitlibs have been unable to countenance or reconcile.

America has regressed to the unexceptional default state of mankind. Perhaps it was fated.

It should be of great concern that the divisions prior to Civil War I pale in comparison to those we have today. The ingredients are already in the mixing bowl; all that’s left is to add the explosive reagent to set off the chain reaction to Civil War II.

The Left has become intolerant from decades of cultural power. Uncompromising. If they win now, and again in 2020, they will crush dissent. If they lose, they will refuse conciliation. Either way, war in some form is coming to America. Once the anti-Left loses faith in their own restraint, the battlefield will finally erupt.

And the cucks—sidelined and irrelevant until things go hot, loathed as traitors and cowards after, big-L losers first, last, and forever—will be caught in the crossfire and mowed down.

(Via Ol’ Remus)

Share

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

A dissection of Jonah Goldberg, and cuckoldry in general.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why incessantly lament it so?

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

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

Share

Don’t gloat?

Yeah, no.


Ace sets up his response to this “please can’t we just get back to losing with dignity” bushwa in an earlier post. Reposted here in full, and to hell with fair use, since the central point (which I’ll take the additional liberty of boldfacing) is one I’ve already made a thousand times and don’t feel like restating myself:

A Look Back at the NeverTrumpers Who Brainlessly Taunted Trump Supporters With a Stupid Twitter-Snark “But He Fights!” Jab
—Ace of Spades

But Gorsuch.

But Kavanaugh.

But a 49 Year Low in the Unemployment rate.

But He Fights.

Let me point out that the same people who attack Trump for juvenile baiting on Twitter try to do so themselves. Oh, I’m sure they’ll make excuses why they should be permitted to do this while Trump should be condemned; phony moralists and sanctimonious hypocrites are forever minting reasons why they are entitled to do things that other people are forbidden to.

SJWs do this a lot. And the SJWs of the nominal right, get this, imitate them.

They’ll say “But he’s the President!”

Okay– but you guys are writers for what pretends to be an important intellectual magazine, National Review. We might say Trump should have more care to defend the dignity of the office.

Should not Jonah Goldberg et al take more care to defend the dignity of a once-illustrious magazine? Or are the juvenile taunts an admission that that magazine no longer has much dignity to protect?

The other thing I’d note is that these people do fight, in their own condescending, nasty twitter-coward way.

It’s just that they believe in fighting conservatives and fighting to defend the leftist-dominated culture and institutional order.

They will fight — but for causes they believe in. Such as the prerogatives and privileges of the left.

What they’re really complaining about is Trump’s mainstreaming of the idea that the liberal, Rockefeller-Republican-dominated fake-conservative Republican Establishment should be fought.

They don’t want that fought. They don’t want their progressive friends fought, or not too seriously at least. (They like pretend-fighting and then having cocktails later.)

What they want are genuine conservatives and grassroots activists — the dirty upstarts! — fought.

Ace’s link above is the same one Steyn used in the post I excerpted below, which I didn’t transcribe. You should check it out despite my laziness, because it’s a stinging evisceration of a whole slew of NeverTrumpTards who deserve every bit of it, climaxing thusly:

The list goes on and on.

As noted:  They take the one thing that’s actually the most true, and marginalize it to reduce or eliminate its potency. And Trump beat them all because they thumb-wrestle for participation trophies while he dropkicks people for the win.

Just to be very clear: If Trump didn’t fight, then Brett Kavanaugh would be a footnote and right now we’d be fending off claims that Amy Coney Barrett once attended a party where someone said something racist.

You’re damn right Trump fights. And it’s a good thing too.

The greatest, most biting irony of all this? What got them Trump in the first place was that they never bothered to fight anybody but other conservatives, just as Ace notes (“The great thing about never fighting is that you never win and therefore never had the opportunity to gloat“) and I’ve said over and over again. As for “don’t gloat”? Well, it just so happens that that article was written by longtime liberal activist and Obama-admin appointee Cass Sunstein, headlined: “GOP’s Toasts to Kavanaugh Are Unspeakably Cruel.”

So, y’know, yeah. Sunstein even has the balls to trot out a Lincoln comparison (!), and moans piteously about the importance of “empathy” and not “mocking human suffering” without once acknowledging the suffering Kavanaugh and his entire family were put through by a dishonest smear campaign waged against him by “people” who took enormous pleasure in the pain they inflicted in service to a lie.

“Empathy”? Kiss my ass, shitlib. “Don’t gloat”? Better peddle that someplace else, ain’t no market for it here. You and yours will never, EVER suffer pain enough to suit me.

Share

Never NeverTrump

Once a cuck traitor, always a cuck traitor.

For two years, NeverTrump has united with the Left to sabotage Trump’s presidency, smear congressional Republicans who support him, and ridicule Trump voters. Led by Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large-and-getting-larger of the Weekly Standard, this group is as culpable as the news media and Democratic politicians for the smoldering hellscape that now is American politics.

NeverTrump has bolstered the sham special counsel probe into phony claims of election collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin; they have joined the Left on several occasions to demand that the president be removed from office—in late August, Stephens insisted the president’s actions met the “high crimes and misdemeanors” standard for impeachment. They mock Trump supporters with the childish, “But, Gorsuch!” mantra at every presidential misstep, an insult aimed at Americans who voted for Trump singularly out of concern about the future composition of the Supreme Court.

Many NeverTrumpers including National Review’s Goldberg and David French have helped legitimize Michael Avenatti, the creepy porn lawyer also trying to take down Kavanaugh. The president has been compared to Adolf Hitler and Mussolini by this crowd, while they compare themselves to courageous dissidents who fought communism. “Expert” Tom Nichols claimed Trump voters are ruining the country, and the Washington Post’s reprehensible Jennifer Rubin condoned violence against Trump aides, including Sarah Sanders, the first mother to serve as White House press secretary.

On every issue, big and small, NeverTrump worked in lockstep with the media, Hollywood and the Democratic Party to undermine Trump’s presidency and damage anyone aligned with him.

There are still NeverTrump holdouts. Kristol, Nichols, Rubin and Boot are not just opposing Kavanaugh’s nomination but urging people to vote for Democrats this fall, which would empower the very thugs who are leading this assault on our political system and our democracy. Nichols argued that Kavanaugh’s conduct is worse than the Democrats, and accused him of buying into conspiracy theories. So NeverTrumper nutters still abound.

But their numbers are shrinking, and it’s only a matter of time before they turn on each other. That will be a gratifying scene to watch unfold. Sadly, the pile of post-2016 political wreckage lies all around us, with Brett Kavanaugh now in the center of the debris. And NeverTrump, even those now seeking atonement, is as responsible for this as anyone.

I always said I considered Vichy GOPers to be even more reprehensible than the Democrat Socialists. Admittedly, some are worse than others; even Kurt Schlichter, after all, was a NeverTrumper early on. The likes of Rubin, Kristol, Goldberg, and French, and Boot, however, are beyond redemption, and needn’t look for leniency or forgiveness from me. Not that they’d care about such a thing, of course.

Rubin, for one, was never really a conservative anyway; she was one of a handful of liberals terrified by 9/11 who embraced the neocon War On Something Or Other and has slowly slid back into liberal-“moderate” irrelevance since, as the threat to her personally seems to have receded. The others seem to be burdened with a smug, sanctimonious sense of being part of an “elite” which causes them to recoil in horror at Trump’s “obnoxiousness,” his “rudeness” and “coarseness,” his cantankerous eagerness to go to the mattresses in bare-knuckle, down-and-dirty battle with his (our) enemies. Their preference for losing in a genteel fashion rather than risk winning by involving themselves in a vulgar brawl long ago rendered them useless and obsolete. Their obvious disdain for the ill-bred, ignorant hoi polloi who support Trump is no less offensive than the Left’s always has been.

And all that makes them something perhaps even more damaged, crippled, and contemptible than being merely “traitors,” at least in the current intoxicating climate of WINNING: it makes them losers. Sore losers, at that. They can do their sniffing and grumbling from the sidelines now; they’re as far removed from the great struggle to reclaim and restore this country as Julius Caesar’s ghost is, and nothing they say or do matters even slightly to anybody but themselves. They’ve reduced themselves to spectators now, and the pain that surely causes them is no more than their just deserts.

Share

Another distinction without a difference

Fascism and Bolshevism: different sides, same coin?

Anti-fascism evolved from an academic fetish among Frankfurt School members into a cult of sorts in the 60’s and 70’s. The Antifa loons of today are well within the tradition of prior anti-fascist loons. The puzzle is why no similar movement ever started in response to the Soviet atrocities. Even if you think the Nazis were worse than the commies, in terms of intensity, the Bolsheviks were around a lot longer. They also managed to kill, or cause to be killed, millions around the world. The commies were a global killing machine.

Why is the former the symbol of evil, while the latter is still popular?

Paleocons, like Paul Gottfried, have suggested that communism may have an appeal to Christians that fascism lacks. That is, communism in the abstract is inclusive, universal and egalitarian. These are concepts that you find in Christianity, at least in the general sense. Anyone can become a Christian and everyone is equal before God. The Social Gospel sounds a lot like neo-Marxism and post-colonial socialism. Liberation Theology in South America is explicitly Marxist. The current Pope is out of this movement.

The problem here, of course, is that, in Europe, the Latin countries were explicitly Catholic and fascist. In fact, some scholars argue that fascism is an outgrowth of Catholic ideas like corporatism and localism. Spain under Franco was both Catholic and fascist. Portugal under Salazar was also Catholic and fascist. Of course, Mussolini’s Italy was very popular with American Progressives until the outbreak of the war. The best you can argue is that fascism seems to have had less appeal to Protestant academics that Bolshevism.

he fact is, the anti-Semitic and philo-Semitic arguments explaining the popularity of Bolshevism versus the demonization of fascism, don’t hold up under scrutiny. Both answers have some truth to them, but they don’t provide a complete answer. A big reason is that no one, especially anti-fascists, can provide a workable definition of fascism. In the book Fascism: The Career of a Concept, the aforementioned Paul Gottfried does an excellent job explaining the various and contradictory definitions of historical fascism.

This is why conservatives fall for the “liberals are the real Nazis” stuff peddled by grifters like Dinesh D’Souza and Jonah Goldberg. Fascism is a poorly defined political movement that can mean just about anything at this point. Even in the interwar period, the various fascist movements had some things in common, but they also had things in common with the Bolsheviks. After decades of anti-fascist proselytizing, fascism is simply a catch-all term for that which the Left currently finds upsetting or threatening.

As Z says, the Left liked Mussolini before the war; Hitler was also quite popular with the original Progressives…right up until he betrayed Stalin and invaded Poland, to general Leftist amazement and dismay. They and their descendants have never forgiven fascism for that. Z maintains that there’s a meaningful distinction to be made between fascism and Bolshevism, and maybe he’s right about that per se. But I think flatly declaring that no common ground exists between fascism and modern Leftist “thought” just might be a bridge too far:

Editor’s note: For the past year scholars James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian have sent fake papers to various academic journals which they describe as specialising in activism or “grievance studies.” Their stated mission has been to expose how easy it is to get “absurdities and morally fashionable political ideas published as legitimate academic research.”

To date, their project has been successful: seven papers have passed through peer review and have been published, including a 3000 word excerpt of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, rewritten in the language of Intersectionality theory and published in the Gender Studies journal Affilia.

Another, entitled “Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism” reworked, and substantially altered, part of Mein Kampf. The most shocking, (not published, its status is “revise and resubmit”) is a “Feminist Approach to Pedagogy.” It proposes “experiential reparations” as a corrective for privileged students. These include sitting on the floor, wearing chains, or being purposely spoken over. Reviewers have commented that the authors risk exploiting underprivileged students by burdening them with an expectation to teach about privilege.

From “My Struggle” to “Our Struggle” ain’t exactly what you’d call a giant leap. But in the end, nobody needs to spend a great deal of time splitting these ideological hairs. What we’re really talking about, then and now, is tyranny versus liberty. Hang whatever name on it you like, that eternal struggle remains the basic distinction, and the bottom line.

Share

Suckers!

One born every minute.

There’s a great quote from the poker movie “Rounders”: “If you can’t spot the sucker in the first half hour at the table, then you are the sucker.” Time and time again, Sen. Jeff Flake has allowed the left to use him as a tool to advance their agenda.

Flake’s desire to be accepted and loved by the left all too often ends with him knifing conservatives in the back. Repeated attempts to be liked by his enemies has now morphed into Flake working against the small-government ideals he once claimed to champion.

Flake didn’t delay Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation vote out of some sense of higher moral duty. Giving the FBI another week to take the same sworn statements we already have on record isn’t going to move anyone a single step closer to determining if Kavanaugh assaulted Christine Blasey Ford. For all his weakness, Flake knows this. For all his flaws, Flake is not an idiot. Well, not entirely.

I say “not entirely” because he seems to miss an essential awareness of reality. Flake is constantly being played for a fool by the left because he relates to the leftist’s desire to live in a world of make-believe. He thinks there can be some “return to civility” in Washington. If he can just shine enough Democrat shoes, pick up their dry-cleaning, or maroon himself on an island with enough of them, then all will be nice and civil.

His efforts at “civility” all too often end with him siding with the enemy.

Um, hate to bring it up and all, but it seems to me that Flake might not be the one missing “an essential awareness of reality.” Flake, like McStain before him, keeps doing the same thing over and over again: betraying the Right and assisting the Left in advancing their agenda, sometimes quite openly. Milquetoast Righties, for their part, always seem shocked to find each new knife between their shoulder blades. Stipulated: there’s a sucker here, all right. I humbly submit that it ain’t Flake.

Update! Schlichter, to my surprise, seems not to see it either.

That simpering sap Jeff Flake – he’s the kind of guy who voted for Evan McMullin and still doesn’t regret it. It’s sad to see what was once allegedly a man be utterly emasculated in public and then proceed to dance to please his new masters. He ought to be, and henceforth shall be, known as Jeff! since he’s essentially Jeb! without the pedigree or – here’s the scary part – the spine.

Flake has spine aplenty; he’s got brass and gall, too. He’s as anti-Trump as they come, he’s enjoyed playing us all for saps with his is he for/is he against Kavanaugh kabuki this last week, and in the end, he gets to cock his snook at all of us, Trump especially, by giving the Democrat Socialists time and cover enough to gin up another smear or two and delay the vote, if any, until after the midterms. Which is exactly what his partners across the aisle wanted.

Flake, spineless? He’s got balls the size of church bells, if you ask me. Schlichter does come around in the end soon enough, sort of:

Flake does not care about you Normals, especially you Normals from the Grand Canyon state who are now regretting your decision to send McCain Superlite to the Senate. At least John McCain, for all his faults, flew fighters and took no guff; Jeff! takes a little guff from some shrieking leftist in an elevator and he’s suddenly primed for his Democrat buddies to talk him into helping carry some of the wood for the Brett Kavanaugh witch burning.

The “Democrat buddies” part is key. See, they are his real constituency. Like all Fredocons, he chose trying to please his elite pals over keeping his promise to serve Normals like you. But, of course, he’s been doing that for a while, ever since he was so greatly disappointed in you for choosing Donald Trump and not Moby McMuffin or even Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit. So, it was no surprise that the Dems ID’d him as the weak link, swarmed, and rolled him. In a town like DC that is known for changing the soft and feckless, Jeff! was especially mushy and feck-free. 

Rolled him? He was in cahoots with them from the git-go, along with some other usual-suspect types whose perfidy should come as no surprise:

The plot to further stall the Kavanaugh nomination was hatched Thursday night in Senator Susan Collins’ (R-ME) office.  Also allegedly in attendance were Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Joe Manchin (D-WV).  The four put their heads together and realized that as only Flake serves on the Judiciary Committee, they couldn’t pull off their devious plot without the assistance of another Senator serving on the committee.

They somehow landed on Senator Chris Coons (D-DE), and as noted above, Flake has been putting him to good use as a political prop and general useful idiot.

I repeat: there’s a sucker here all right—suckers aplenty, and they’re sure enough getting rolled. Flake ain’t among ’em. He’s as brazen and ballsy a Blue Falcon as ever breathed swamp water. Back to Schlichter for a heartening denouement:

Fortunately, he’s gone. He quit knowing the people of Arizona would vote for a rotting cactus rather than him in the GOP primary. Of course, to Jeff!, what happened is that the people of Arizona grew unworthy of him. They no longer meet his exacting standards. Jeff! is too good for them, to pure, too elite, so he sadly must to deprive them of his virtue.

It’s happening a lot. The sissies, punks, and RINOs are going away. The hacks of Conservative, Inc., are right about one thing – it’s a new GOP. It’s a GOP that fights. Oh, not all of them. You still have weak sisters like Collins and Murkowski. Collins is safe because she’s about as conservative as Maine is going to get, and Murkowski is getting primaried if she backstabs us. But Normals have put righteous fear into the rest of them. 

The conservagimps want to claim that the Republicans are now the Party of Trump, but that’s a self-serving narrative designed to obscure the fact that they brought their downfall upon themselves through their legacy of failure in the fight against progressivism. Donald Trump is the avatar of the Militant Normals. None of the establishment was fighting for their rights and their interests, so they found someone who would and would not apologize for doing so.

Damned skippy, bless his stout heart.

Share

More on Flake the Fake

Started to append this to the post below as an update, but Flake-level duplicity deserves to be considered entirely on its own.

Friday’s agreement to give the FBI a week to supplement its background check by looking into existing misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh guarantees the nightmare will continue, especially for him and his battered family. You don’t have to be a cynic to assume the rabid left will come up with more outlandish accusations in an effort to make up in quantity what it lacks in quality.

The extension is the devil’s bargain Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake struck with his conscience. First he said he would vote to move Kavanaugh out of committee, then was shouted at in an elevator by leftists and cornered by Senate Democrats. Naturally, he caved in to their demands for the extension while supporting Kavanaugh, pending the outcome of the probe.

As popular as a rattlesnake in ­Arizona, Flake is “retiring” from the Senate, yet has outsized leverage because of the GOP’s narrowest possible majority, 51-49. He used it to reward those who debased the Senate he claims to love.

Dems and their media handmaidens were quick to praise Flake for his “bipartisanship,” a term they ­reserve for when a Republican crosses over to pass liberal initiatives.

But the favor is rarely returned, and there is no Democrat equivalent to Flake or Susan Collins of Maine. Even when more centrist Dems vote with Republicans, they never supply the crucial votes, joining only as add-ons to a majority.

Again, there is no modern GOP equivalent to those tactics. As Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) reminded the nation in his fiery denunciation, he voted for both of Barack Obama’s nominees, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Looking at Democrats, Graham angrily declared, “I would never do to them what you’ve done to this guy!”

True, but it had no effect except to remind Republicans that their opponents take no prisoners.

Bold mine, and the most important line in the piece if you ask me, if not for the reason you might at first assume. Truth is, nobody needs to think the Repukes need any such reminders, or that they’re incapable of taking the no-prisoners, scorched-earth approach themselves; when it comes to battling Tea Partiers, real conservatives, or Trump, they’re every bit as willing to go the limits as any Democrat Socialist ever was.

Share

Peace for our time!

The Chamberlain Republicans, maybe?

From the playground to geopolitics, appeasing an aggressor invites only more aggression. This timeless truth of human nature is one that we moderns can’t seem to accept. We reflexively assume that a rational accommodation or concessions will be reciprocated by those proven to be ready to use any means necessary to achieve their aims, no matter how amoral, unfair, or vicious. Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court illustrate that this false assumption leads only to more demands, and ultimately to defeat.

The last-minute accusations from Christine Blasey Ford, a woman who claims that decades ago Kavanaugh groped her at a high school party, and Deborah Ramirez, who accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her at a frat party at Yale, are transparent acts of aggression against the judge and Republicans, one engineered by the Democrats.

The point is to delay confirmation by slandering Kavanaugh and baiting the Republicans into appearing to abuse victims of sexual assault. Why? Facing his likely confirmation, the Dems, egged on by the mainstream media––especially The New Yorker, which published a story too badly sourced even for The New York Times–– are desperately attempting to obstruct and delay the process until after the midterm elections, when they hope they will retake the Senate and thus stop any more Constitutionalist judges from being confirmed to the Court for the rest of Trump’s term.

The Democrats have stooped so low with these smears because they know the stakes. The courts and especially the Supreme Court have been critical to the progressives’ program since Woodrow Wilson. The biggest obstacle to the progressive dream of government controlled and managed by a technocratic oligarchy has been the Constitution. Its divided and balanced powers were designed precisely to rein in overreaching ambition and concentrations of power. Hence the Constitutional order must be subverted by the Supreme Court and its unaccountable justices enjoying lifelong tenure.

But if Kavanaugh is confirmed, there will be five reliably Constitutionalist justices on the bench, who are unlikely to tolerate judicial usurpation of Congress’s law-making powers. That’s why this current nomination is a hill the Dems are willing to beclown themselves on.

The Dems know that most Republicans come to this conflict with the huge disadvantage that results from accepting your opponent’s dubious ideology and dishonest narrative. The progressive party can dare the Republicans to ignore the endless specious demands, stop the show-trial, and proceed to a vote on Kavanaugh, because they know the Republicans, fearful of the “optics,” will cave. They know that the eleven male Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee dread the #MeToo movement casting them as knuckle-dragging Neanderthal sexists who want to “silence” the accuser with their “cavalier treatment of a sexual assault survivor,” as one Ford lawyer has said. Republicans still don’t get that no amount of appeasement will stop the left from demonizing them anyway. Just ask Boy Scout Mitt Romney, who was savaged for his innocuous “binders full of women.”

Is there a long-term solution? Of course there is, unlikely as it is to ever be implemented:

What can we do to end these confirmation circuses? Just stop holding them. There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the Senate’s power to give “advice and consent” to the president regarding his nominee must entail days of televised hearings replete with caterwauling protestors and grandstanding Senators who’ve already made-up their minds. Invite written questions from the Senate, then schedule one day for the nominee to respond. Don’t put it on television, but make public a written transcript. Remove the television cameras, and attention-craving, politically ambitious Senators will be gone like a cool breeze.

For now, Grassley needs to end this farce if Ford doesn’t show up on Thursday or continues to negotiate for more delays and concessions. No more concessions. No more delays. No more ceding control of the process to Democrat Party lawyers. Don’t give Ramirez the time of day. Hold the vote no later than Thursday, or Friday if Ford does show up. Make Senators go on the record with their votes, and hold them to account in November. Put to the test the Dems’ claims that a critical mass of women, many of them with sons they don’t want falsely accused, believes the fundamentalist feminist narrative and will vote accordingly. To borrow Churchill’s definition of appeasement, stop feeding the alligator in the hopes that you will be eaten last.

I still say there ain’t gonna be no vote. I’d be tickled to death to be proved wrong, naturally. I’d also be surprised as hell. On the other hand, Kavanaugh’s judicious letter hit all the right notes and was a smart move which may give him a much-needed boost in some meaningful places. But the Demonrats are all in on this one, and the assist for their madhouse tantrum from disingenuous turncoats like Murkowski, Flake et al will probably be enough to forestall any vote. We’ll find out soon enough.

Share

Declassify all the things!

It’s clobberin’ time.

WHITE HOUSE –  At the request of a number of committees of Congress, and for reasons of transparency, the President has directed the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice (including the FBI) to provide for the immediate declassification of the following materials: (1) pages 10-12 and 17-34 of the June 2017 application to the FISA court in the matter of Carter W. Page; (2) all FBI reports of interviews with Bruce G. Ohr prepared in connection with the Russia investigation; and (3) all FBI reports of interviews prepared in connection with all Carter Page FISA applications.

In addition, President Donald J. Trump has directed the Department of Justice (including the FBI) to publicly release all text messages relating to the Russia investigation, without redaction, of James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Bruce Ohr. 

You can tell what a knockout punch this is by how hysterically certain rectal polyps are reacting to it:

Adam Schiff, the California Democrat who has served as drum major for the Trump Collusion marching band, called the declassification order a “clear abuse of power.”

“[Trump] has decided to intervene in a pending law enforcement investigation by ordering the selective release of materials he believes are helpful to his defense team and thinks will advance a false narrative,” said Schiff. “With respect to some of these materials, I have been previously informed by the FBI and Justice Department that they would consider their release a red line that must not be crossed as they may compromise sources and methods.

“This is evidently of no consequence to a President who cares nothing about the country and everything about his narrow self-interest,” he concluded.

Not to be outdone, Schiff’s colleagues Elijah Cummings and Jerrold Nadler declared that Trump’s “reckless and irresponsible decision” was “a desperate attempt to distract from…the mounting evidence of multiple criminal enterprises among his closest advisors.

“For the past year, Republicans in Congress have been running interference for President Trump, promoting baseless conspiracy theories, mischaracterizing numerous documents, and attacking our law enforcement and intelligence officials,” they howled. “This effort has been devoid of facts, but it has been incredibly destructive to our democracy.”

If you want to interpret that sky-screaming, it’s easy. It means “uh-oh.

Those documents include the FISA applications involving the surveillance of Carter Page, which are likely to include an admission that the Steele dossier was the sole item of evidence producing surveillance on an innocent man. They also include reams of text messages between Bruce Ohr, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, former FBI Director James Comey and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe which could very well contain convincing evidence of a fixed investigation. We already know that to be true, but more proof in advance of the midterms, no?

If the Deep Staters knew this was coming, and at least some of them probably did, it could explain why they were willing to greenlight Feinswine’s Kavanaugh hail-Mary desperation move as a distraction. In the comments to Julie Kelly’s media-suicide piece I linked earlier, a commenter says:

In other news, CNN is tearing its hair out claiming the unredacted FBI texts are a threat to our “national security:” CNN spinning unredacted text messages as “threat” to national security. Have you ever seen reporters try so hard to not cover a story, and not want to see more documents? It is nothing but a distraction now that everyone of us can see the actual documents they were so busy spinning.

They don’t want to cover it and they are unable to cover it up

Sundance, as is his wont, digs deep into the stinking sinkhole of Deep State corruption:

Many of the corrupt lower-level officials within the administrative state have goals in conflict with with sunlight and truthful discovery. Other officials, like FBI Director Christopher Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, have more specific goals to protect their institutions. Because the preservation of the institution is the primary focus, their goals may therefore align with the more openly corrupt officials.

This is the nature of political bureaucracy. It is not a grand conspiracy, it is more often ordinary corruption. However, failure to accept this simple truism leads to cognitive dissonance, intellectual dishonesty and, even worse, creates a false perception of what is possible.

Absorb information without rational and logical discernment long enough, and you get ridiculous “Q Theories” and proclamations about grand “Stealth Jeff Sessions” plans.

Because the corruption happened during their tenure, current officials within the FBI, DOJ and much of the larger intelligence apparatus, are not in alignment with the reform goals demanded by change-agent President Trump. Their goal is to fight Trump’s goals.

The executive branch is holding Trump hostage and trying to wait out the election hopeful to have a change in congressional power. This preserves their institutions and executes their goals. It is the legislative branch who are trying to help the President and force the officials within the cabinet to admit the corruption.

And few enough even of them, despite Republican control of both Houses of it. So howl, howl, you Deep State curs. With every anguished wail, you reveal who and what you really are, for more of us to see.

Share

Ergo sum

The Deep State speaks.

In the instantly infamous anonymous op-ed published in the Sept. 6 New York Times, “The Quiet Resistance Inside the Trump Administration”, the Deep State found its voice. Anyone who doubted its existence can set their doubts aside. The op-ed is the Deep State’s equivalent of the burning bush and the voice proclaiming, “I am.”

The op-ed contains both less and more than meets the eye. It may shock the average American to think that members of a President’s own administration would work against his agenda, but anyone who has served in Washington knows it happens all the time. And not only to Presidents; Senators, Congressmen, Cabinet members, military commanders, anyone senior enough to have a staff also has staffers with their own agendas. They push those agendas when and as they can, including when they conflict with the agenda of the person they serve. It is so common it has become a rule of institutional behavior, known as Rankovic’s Law: It is easier for the subordinate to control the superior than for the superior to control the subordinate. The op-ed’s boast that there is an organized faction in President Trump’s administration working against parts of his agenda goes a bit beyond the norm, but it has certainly been seen before.

Also unsurprising is the op-ed’s revelation that this faction is attempting to promote orthodox Republican Establishment policies such as deregulation, tax cuts, and more money for the Pentagon as opposed to the populist policies that got President Trump elected. Much of what goes on in Washington is an effort to subvert the popular will. Those who can do so successfully on behalf of monied interests often get very rich.

Here is the significance of the op-ed, not in what it reveals about President Trump but what it says about the Deep State itself, namely that it thrives on unnecessary and strategically counterproductive international conflicts. Those conflicts justify the trillion dollar “national security” budget off which the Deep State feeds, they provide the arenas in which the “national security team” builds its careers and power and they distract the public from our sorry military performance against the real threat, the threat of Fourth Generation war and the entities that wage it. They are, in short, bread for the Establishment and circuses for the citizens.

The op-ed seeks to paint a picture of a valiant band of prudent senior officials holding a dangerous, half-mad President in check. What it actually portrays is a corrupt bunch of interests that feed off the status quo sabotaging a President who seeks to improve relations with Russia and North Korea, avoid unnecessary wars (except possibly with Iran), and put America first. The op-ed should, as it intends, leave Americans scared–scared not of a maniac in the White House, but of a Deep State so confident of its own power and invulnerability that it can go public with the truth it has previously tried to hide: the Deep State, not the people elected to the office, runs the country.

Suffice to say: anyone who still bothers trying to deny the Deep State’s existence is either a fool…or in league with it.

Share

The death of the liberal media

Faster, please.

After reviewing last week’s news coverage, I would encourage President Trump to come up with a more accurate taunt than “fake news.” Maybe “garbage news.” Or perhaps “bottom-feeding news.” Even try “we-are-a-collection-of-dishonest-miscreants-who-are-unworthy-of-an-ounce-of-the-American-people’s-trust news.”

But “fake news” is tame in light of the media’s misleading, destructive, and willfully ignorant reporting last week that was intended further to inflame a divided body politic.

And it wasn’t just the dependable lunatics on the Left pushing trash commentary. Bret Stephens, the NeverTrump “conservative” columnist for the New York Times, compared Trump to a drug addict. Washington Post “conservative” blogger Jennifer Rubin warned that if Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) voted to confirm Kavanaugh, their names would be, “as was the case with [Nazi-era traitor] Vidkun Quisling—synonymous with ‘sellouts,’ ‘collaborators,’ or, to use a Trumpism, ‘phonies.’”

As the week came to a close, the New York Times was forced to append its misleading article that criticized U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley for buying pricey curtains to decorate her official residence. The window coverings, it turns out, actually were purchased by her predecessor in the Obama Administration. But it was too late. Social media had pounded Haley all morning for being extravagant and heartless.

Disgraceful.

But there is a more sinister agenda behind this collective media cacophony: To hide their complicity in the biggest political scandal of all time, which included the weaponization of the nation’s most powerful government agencies to spy on a rival presidential campaign; the illegal leaking of classified information to friendly journalists to defame American citizens associated with the campaign; and the sabotage of an incoming presidency, the media is happy to distract us with manufactured non-scandals that advance the political interests of their friends.

The media’s scorched earth strategy to take down Trump as they cover their own asses is not an accident. They are doing whatever they can to try and stop the inevitable: the self-inflicted extinction of their integrity and credibility. Seventy percent of Americans—including 90 percent of Republicans—have lost faith in the news media over the past decade. More ignoble performances by the press only will deepen Americans’ distrust of this once-respected institution—and prove that the president is right.

And that we’re all right not to trust the lying liberal bastards. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of assholes; their malignant, destructive industry is a blight on the nation, and it can’t go toes-up soon enough to suit me.

Share

STAMPEDE!

Hard to believe, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by any of this:

Sen. Jeff Flake wants to postpone vote on Brett Kavanaugh; Update: Statement from Sen. Collins.

Bob Corker, too, is on board with this shameless nonsense. This guy has the right of it:

Screen-Shot-2018-09-16-at-20.27.32-573x600.png

If True Conservative Principle™ Quislings like Flake and co. want to ensure that no Republican SC nominee will ever again make it past the Democrat-Socialists to a seat on the Court, let them go ahead and “delay” the Kavanaugh vote because of some made-up, irrelevant, thirty-year-old horseshit spoon-fed to ’em by their master Feinstein.

Let ’em see what happens to their corrupt sham of a political party afterwards. And then let ’em burn in the fire they will have ignited via their own despicable, sleazy machinations, the slimewads. To a fucking crisp.

Outbreak of sanity update! The plain truth.

Sen. John Kennedy called the confirmation hearings for Judge Brett Kavanaugh “an intergalactic freak show” and said he was embarrassed for Congress by the accusations of sexual misconduct leveled at the Supreme Court nominee.

“So far, it’s pretty much been an intergalactic freak show,” Kennedy, R-La., told Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday.” “Most Americans are looking at this – most mainstream Americans – and they’re thinking that Congress has hit rock bottom and started to dig.”

Kennedy added: “I have been embarrassed by the whole process and, frankly, I’m – no disrespect to Senator Feinstein or to Stanford Law School – but I’m a little bit offended. I sit on Judiciary Committee. They’ve had this stuff for three months. If they were serious about it, they should’ve told us about it.”

Oh, they’re not serious about investigating the allegation. They’re not serious about getting the truth out, nor about seeing “justice” done, nor about providing succor or closure to the “victim.” They’re serious about hogtying Trump—about securing him to the Deep State leash at last. And with the aid of baglapping Uniparty-GOPe scum like Flake, they might possibly even win this one.

Share

They never learn

Another reach-across-the-aisle RINO stabbed in the back by her erstwhile admirers, McCain-style.

We have all seen those grisly stories in the news about people who adopt dangerous predators as pets only to be torn limb from limb by the very creatures they have cosseted for years. This is analogous to what is now happening to Susan Collins. The Maine Senator has frequently curried favor with the left by taking “principled stands” against her fellow Republicans on issues like Obamacare, and basked in the praise of progressives. Collins presumably thought this meant she was safe from the left’s innate brutishness when she took a perfectly reasonable position regarding SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Inevitably, like anyone who naïvely believes that vicious animals can be civilized by simple kindness, Senator Collins is now being mauled by the left and its mouthpieces in the media. In what should be an eye-opening lesson, one of the organizations she has bucked her own party to defend has launched an expensive ad campaign whose purpose is to bully her into voting against Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation. The Hill reports that Planned Parenthood, a direct beneficiary of Senator Collins’ steadfast refusal to support last year’s Obamacare repeal legislation, began running these ads against her on Wednesday:

Planned Parenthood Action Fund is going up with a six-figure ad buy targeting GOP Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) as the fight over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh enters a crucial stretch.… Collins is facing an onslaught of pressure to oppose the nomination.

Included in the “onslaught of pressure” has been a standard tactic employed when the Democrats loose the dogs of disinformation — harassment of her family and staff. There have been profane out-of-state voicemails left on their answering machines, thousands of coat hangers sent in the mail (presumably suggesting that Judge Kavanaugh would somehow return us to that mythical age when countless women received abortions in back alleys), protesters yelling obscenities in her front yard, and of course that old lefty standby — overt threats of violence. Senator Collins told the Wall Street Journal:

In one case — and we are going to turn this over to the police, but unfortunately, of course, the person didn’t leave a name or number — but they actually threatened to rape one of my young female staffers.

The Democrats continue to behave in an utterly irresponsible manner in the Kavanaugh confirmation process. They made jackasses of themselves during the judge’s hearings, resorted to an anonymous source to defame him, and sit by as their special interest accomplices engage in a campaign of intimidation against a Republican Senator they heretofore claimed to admire. There’s a lesson in all this for “moderate” GOP politicians and the electorate. The Democrats can’t be trusted — ever. They, and the people who finance them, are dangerous political predators who will always turn on you, sooner or later.

The only real option for dealing with such predators effectively is to either put ’em away, or put ’em down.

Share

Reach across the aisle…

And blow me.

Who is the John McCain of the Democratic Party? The “maverick” who disagrees with his or her party’s orthodoxy and is willing to confront it? Is there such a figure?

Instead, an analysis of Congress by the Lugar Center found that, of the top 10 most bipartisan U.S. senators, just one—Joe Donnelly of Indiana—is a Democrat. Overwhelmingly, most of the “reaching across the aisle” is reaching from the Right.

In a piece that almost reads like parody, for example, the Washington Post just ran an article entitled “Five of John McCain’s most courageous political moments.” At the top of the list: The speech he gave when he lost to Barack Obama. (“Of course the media loved McCain,” one longtime Republican told me this week. “He’s a Republican who lost.”)

All the other moments involved McCain either attacking a Republican or defending a Democrat.   

The media can’t stop admiring the many times Sen. McCain took to the floor of the Senate to criticize Republican positions on issues like immigration or campaign finance reform. OK, fine. So where is the Democrat who’s done the same?

Can you imagine a Democratic senator giving a speech condemning the #AbolishICE, open-borders wing of his or her own party? Making the case, as economists have, that large-scale immigration by low-skill workers hurts the wages of Americans at the bottom of the economic ladder? A speech arguing, as labor unions did for decades, that the Democratic Party should be the party of strong borders in the name of economic justice?

That speech will never be given, because there isn’t a single “maverick” on the Democratic side of the aisle to give it.

A speech like that would actually help create the sort of bipartisanship we’ve been celebrating in the life of Sen. McCain. The tricky part: Finding a Democrat with the courage to give it. They would be ostracized from their own party.

Don’t believe me? Ask Joe Lieberman. In 2000, he was the Democrat’s nominee for Vice President of the United States. In 2006, he was driven out of his own party in a primary and had to run as an independent to hold onto his Connecticut U.S. Senate seat. What was Lieberman’s alleged sin? Working too closely with Republicans. One in particular: Sen. John McCain.

They’re fine with self-seeking schmucks like McCain, right up until they’re no longer useful to them or threaten them in any conceivable way. Then the knives come out again, until such time as the phony “Maverick” can be made use of once more. The Real Right ought to start treating its conciliatory “bipartisan” turncoats just like the Left does theirs…and the NeverTrumpTards would be a fine place to start.

(Via Ed)

Share

“They Are Not Never Trump – They Are Never You

Lots of folks still seem not to like the term, but for my money there’s never going to be an epithet that cuts more directly to the chase than: cuckservatives.

They hate you because you refuse to honor and respect them, to validate their cheesy status within the Beltway hierarchy, and to acknowledge them as your betters. Your pig-headed uppityness has disrupted their scam. The old paradigm, the model of go-along/get-along and feed the crackers out there in America articles about lib outrages to keep them writing checks, no longer cuts it. You’ve stripped them of their status by holding them accountable for their failure to fight for conservatism, and for us.

And it is such a pathetic status – maybe they are fighting so hard because the stakes are so low. For some, it’s a mention on the masthead of an anorexically thin magazine that now publishes only because some zillionaire keeps handing its boss wads of cash, the actual subscribers to the cruise-shilling brochure having abandoned ship after the seven hundredth “Trump Is Icky!” expose. For others, it’s the chance to be the nominal conservative voice on Morning Joe, ready to pretend that actual conservatives concur with the ideological stylings of the Mick Jagger of flaccid, self-indulgent momrock.

Then there are those lucky few who get the “Here, boy!” to come live inside the house, collared and lying at the feet of their masters by the fire. What’s horrifying is that this is their dream, their sad, sad dream. Take the current occupant of the non-David Brooks prissy poodle position at the New York Times, Bret Stephens. He eagerly accepted the iron discipline of his new job after his first column hinted that the weird weather religion of the ruling class – the one that demands you Normals sacrifice your money and your sovereignty for the sake of the elite’s virtue – might not be, you know, totally a thing. He thank-you-sir-may-I-have-anothered, learned to heel, and pleased his masters by coming out hard against the Second Amendment like a good boy. Having got a taste for biscuits, he is still seeking treats – and gets them – like when he praised the firing of Rosanne and then praised the non-firing of actual racist Sarah Jeong.

Hypocrisy, thy name is True Conservatism™.

Read the rest of it, wherein Schlichter scorches ’em good.

Update! Movement Conservatism=Kabuki Konservatism.

I’ve addressed the programmatic Left in my two most recent books, The Devil’s Pleasure Palace—a study of the eternal battle between good and evil, centered on the moral nihilism of the Frankfurt School of 20th-century Communist philosophers—and The Fiery Angel, a series of interlocking essays regarding some of the touchstones of Western art and culture, from the Greeks through the 20th century, and how they provide the antidote to the spiritual poison injected into Western veins by the Frankfurters and their fellow travelers in academe and now journalism.

Now, does everything from the Oresteia to Wagner’s Ring cycle form a coherent, intellectually and emotionally consistent “conservative” program, by which we can live our lives? Clearly not.  The great works of art are and must always be non-didactic. Politicized art is worthless; but art that has political resonance generally stands the test of time.

To my ears, then, the constant harping in some quarters on “movement” conservatism is reminiscent of everything I’ve ever heard from the Left, or experienced in East Germany and the old Soviet Union. I’m not suggesting that “true” conservatism involves replacing one (transient) set of “preenciples” with another one, albeit far older. Rather, my argument is that conservatism isn’t a movement at all. Nor should it be. Rather, it’s a simple acknowledgement of timeless verities and a willingness to defend them against malevolent faddishness masquerading as “progress,” whose object is the destruction of our culture and its replacement with… well, nothing.

In short, it’s a recognition of great cultural peril, and the willingness to do something about it.

And that we did, by rejecting the “movement” phonies in favor of an obstreporous outsider eager to step over the supine Repukes to duke it out with the Deep State swamp-dwellers toe to toe. Now, after Kid MAGA’s having landed some solid haymakers on the Left’s glass jaw, the shattered sissy-marys are flopping around on the canvas in conniptions, their manager belatedly trying to rig the fight by bribing the judges with a few “candid” pics of Nancy Pelosi in the shower. Meanwhile the GOPe Fauntleroys, having been roused from their slumber by heavy administration of buckets of ice water and smelling salts, wander around the arena trying to pick fights with members of the crowd, enraged over being heckled by them.

Share

Citizenship: a responsibility, not a right

Michael Anton, of “Flight 93 Election” fame, addresses “birthright citizenship” sophistry:

I have been accused of wanting to strip citizenship from those already born to illegal immigrants and thus already granted citizenship. Of course, I said nothing of the kind, nor does my argument demand any such conclusion. We may grant that our current understanding of birthright citizenship is a mistake and correct that mistake without retroactively stripping anyone of citizenship. Indeed, I believe that the American people in their generosity would support exactly such a measure. Correct the issue going forward. Make clear to the world that the United States will no longer grant birthright citizenship to the children of non-citizen illegal immigrants, birth tourists, or people here on temporary work or student visas. The citizenship of those already born would forever be honored—even enshrined into law if necessary.

This is a reasonable way forward. The alternative—illegal immigration, population growth, and all their attendant problems forever—is not sustainable. Nor is it—once again—in the interests of the current citizens of the United States, including those born to illegal immigrant parents.

Birthright citizenship—as I and others have argued—is a magnet for illegal immigration, an ongoing problem that worsens many of our other problems. The longer we continue the practice, the more illegal immigration we will get, with all its ensuing effects. As I have argued elsewhere, the United States does not need more people. We need to do a better job meeting the needs of the citizens we already have.

Birthright citizenship also undermines the consent-based social compact, which is the basis for the legitimacy of the U.S. government and for all our law, constitutional and otherwise. If we don’t have a social compact, we don’t have a country. A social compact that can be joined contrary to the will of its existing members is an impossibility, a self-contradiction.

It’s no wonder, then, that only around 30 countries out of nearly 200 practice birthright citizenship. The highest accounting that I have seen says 33. There are 197 countries in the world (193 UN members, two observers, and two non-members). Thus 83% of the world’s nations do not allow birthright citizenship. Those countries that do have a combined population of 958 million (in all cases, rounding estimates up in order not to be accused of fudging the numbers in my direction). According to the UN, the world population is today 7.6 billion. Our “conservatives” insist that opposition to birthright citizenship is “nativist, xenophobic, bigoted, racist, white nationalist, white supremacist” and more. This means that 6.642 billion of the world’s people (give or take) must also be “nativist, xenophobic, bigoted, racist, white nationalist, and white supremacist.” The latter two would truly be something, given how few of those people are white.

It’s an ugly thing to hear and read the worst of these epithets from ostensible allies. But of course, those hurling these calumnies are in no sense allies. That was clear in 2016, if not before, and it’s even clearer now. Clarity is good. Let’s all make clear where we stand on the issues of the day and in relation with others in the big tent we used to call “the Conservative Movement.”

It’s clear to me that those who use this kind of language are leftists—leftists in rhetoric and in philosophy.

That’s about the size of it, yeah.

Share

Jordan for Speaker

I’m down with it.

“Where is Congress?”

That is the refrain we hear from voters all over the country, and not just from conservatives. The courts and the bureaucracies are determining the outcome of every policy issue, and Congress, the strongest branch of government, is too wishy-washy to act. Jim Jordan actually has a novel idea: Fulfil the actual campaign promises made to the American people.

What ever happened to plugging the leaky borders? What ever happened to defunding sanctuary cities? What ever happened to fixing health care? What ever happened to cutting spending? Why is Planned Parenthood still funded? Why is Obama’s amnesty still in place?
In each of these areas, to the extent that Congress has ever addressed the issues, it makes them worse. It has sought to codify amnesty, it has busted the budget, it has done away with the debt ceiling, and it has accepted the core premise of Obamacare. It has grown almost every agency Trump promised to cut.

Why? Because leaders of both parties fundamentally share the same philosophy – to grow government, to empower private monopolies in health care backed by government, and to cater to open-borders interests, while putting Americans last instead of first in sovereignty, national security, and foreign policy.

The House of Representatives is the most powerful body of government in the sense that it’s closest to the people and is fully controlled by a simple majority. Republicans have controlled this body for 20 of the past 24 years, but what has it gotten us? They hold the power of the purse with a simple majority and can wield the most influence over the budget. After all, all revenue increases must begin in the House. Yet our sovereignty is going to hell in a handbasket, the courts control everything, interest on the debt will surpass military spending, and Congress has essentially ceded health care and military policy to the executive branch.

For far too long, Republicans have had leadership that fundamentally accepts the policy premises, priorities, and messaging of the status quo Swamp. To that end, leaders only bring up nanny-state fiscal bills and open-borders initiatives, but won’t allow any number of good, innovative conservative ideas to come to the floor. The only thing they are willing to do is cut taxes, and they plan on using the tax issue every year as political morphine to mask the pain of every other policy betrayal.

That’s not because they’re hapless, inept, or cowardly, as some still insist; they’re Ruling Class frauds, actively on the other side. Who knows if Jordan could or would do any better. It’s for dead sure he couldn’t do any worse.

Share

Who will rule?

Walsh seems to be getting kinda pissed.

But crippling Trump is now the be-all and end-all of the “Resistance,” a group of un-Americans devoted to the destruction of our constitutional system while flying the false flag of “real” patriotism. Even assuming that Trump is a bad man — a sexual libertine (Bill Clinton, take a bow!), a rapacious, dishonest businessman, an unfaithful husband, and an all-around shitheel — that is not enough to constitutionally disqualify him from the White House, whether during an election or — even worse — in its aftermath. No matter how venal the man, how unscrupulous or untrustworthy, as president he will have access to all the classified information the government has to offer, whether he could in any other capacity get a security clearance that high or not. Neither Clinton nor Obama could have, and yet we elected them both anyway.

The Democrats and their stooge Mueller know they have no chance of removing Trump from office but they don’t care: it is enough for them to wound the president so badly that the cry for his resignation will grow, even among the milquetoasts among the GOP (which is to say, most of them), and that he will ritually fall upon his sword. After which they will put his head on a pike and exhibit it outside the Capitol as a warning to any other interloper tempted to think that he, too, can be president. Of no concern to them at all is the furious reaction at least half the nation would have to such a turn of events, or the consequences thereof. The fact that this does not trouble them in the slightest indicates just how much they have to hide, and have to fear once the depths of their political perfidy become known.

A better use of Trump’s sword, however, would be to swing the vorpal blade, snicker-snack, at the Gordian Knot that is the Rosenstein-Comey-Brennan-Clapper-Mueller-CNN-New York Times-Washington Post axis of evil and, like Alexander the Great, unravel the Deep State with one mighty blow. For the great knot of Russiagate-Stormy Daniels-Michael Cohen-DNC hacking-election tampering-emoluments clause-Trump Foundation-Putin is a thicket of intertwined snakes that will only continue to writhe and entangle themselves ever more until an end is put to their own manifest collusion. For what the Left is doing is (like the aliens in Independence Day) using our own “satellites” against us, in this case our over-lawyered legal system, via which they can “raise questions” and launch charges with near-absolute impunity, there being no penalty for prosecutor-driven false allegations.

…the political question is not whether Manafort committed financial crimes in his business dealings in the Ukraine, or whether Trump has had extra-marital sex with various women (everyone knows he has) and didn’t want it to come out during the election (duh), or whether a sandbagged Gen. Mike Flynn “lied” to the FBI on one of his first days on the job, and thus gave the Left their first taste of blood.

No, the question is much simpler: who is going to rule: the people, via our Constitution, or the Ivy League mandarins who believe in the rightness of their oligarchy — which more and more resembles a kakistocracy of conniving villains bent on the destruction of the United States. No matter what one thinks of Trump personally or professionally, the integrity of our electoral system is what is really at stake here.

Of the many unsavory things on which Trump has managed to pull back the curtain, one of the least edifying is how very little integrity remained—in our electoral system, and everywhere else in Mordor On The Potomac too.

Share

For sale, cheep

The “conservative” con.

Now, the Right was always just the dancing partner for American Progressivism. A great way of putting it is from Robert Louis Dabney, “American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition.” You’ll note that he wrote that over a century ago. What tends to lead people into dissident politics is the realization that the so-called conservatives are just body men for the people they claim to oppose. Their ideas are intended to enhance, rather than reject, the morality of the Left.

The reason the modern Right seems like a barren field with tumbleweed bouncing across it is that their dancing partner is now just a shuffling zombie. The Left has not generated a serious insight about modern society in over a generation. Their last big public policy idea was ObamaCare. Otherwise, it has been a series of bizarre gestures toward increasingly narrow fringe groups. They are the dog that caught the car. The Left has a free hand to do what they please in America and they have no idea what to do.

The result of this lack of ideas is that politics is now just a combination of money grubbing and hysterical public tantrums. The hilariously over-the-top reactions in the media to Trump’s meeting with Putin is a good example. None of these people can tell us why Putin is suddenly the devil. They don’t even try. Instead, they carry on like teenagers in a slasher film. They took turns trying to outdo the previous loon’s contrived outrage. It’s as if they are trying to scream the devil into existence, so they can have a reason to scream.

Much gets written about the impact of cosmopolitan globalism on the middle class and the cultural identity of western nations. It is assumed that the people doing this to us have a purpose, but in reality they are working on inertia. They don’t move forward toward a goal, rather, they just move forward because that’s what they do. The politicians are feckless airheads and their advisers are craven ninnies. Everything is a bust-out now, not because they are crooks, but because they can’t think of another reason to get up in the morning.

Oh, I don’t know about their not being crooks; after all, nothing says it can’t be both those things at once.

Update! Naturally, I had to take a look at the short Robert Louis Dabney article Zman mentions above, and…wow. It’s goddamned eerie, that’s what it is.

This is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution; to be denounced and then adopted in its turn.

From 1897, but could just as easily have been written this morning. And to think, it only took us well over a hundred years to see the flim-flam for what it was. Maybe in another century or two we’ll be fired up enough to do something about it, eh?

Sheesh.

Share

Switcheroo

Another enjoyable rip on the Loser GOPe.

George Will. Max Boot. Jennifer Rubin. David Brooks.

A few years ago, the names of these prominent columnists would have reminded us that while most mainstream newspapers do lean to the left, there were a few prominent conservative voices present in their pages. But in the era of Trump, these “conservative columnists” are anything but. They’ve jumped on the anti-Trump bandwagon and chosen the left’s adoration over their commitment to conservative principles.

Max Boot just wrote an op-ed entitled “I left the Republican Party. Now I Want Democrats to Take Over.” George Will, long a conservative icon, penned a piece encouraging people to vote against the GOP this November.

Jennifer Rubin’s WaPo column, ironically still labeled “Right Turn,” has devolved into a demented stream of Trump Derangement Syndrome. She’s rallied against President Trump, #resisted the tax cuts, and rebelled against the pro-life cause — yet Rubin still presents herself as conservative, or at least as right-of-center. This gets to the heart of the issue with the left’s faux-conservative columnists — they allow newspapers and big media alike to feign intellectual diversity while actually existing as an echo chamber on the issues that matter most.

Newspapers like the New York Times and the Washington Post aren’t explicitly ideological publications. Even if in practice they lean heavily to the left, in theory they dedicate their opinion pages to debate, discussion, and diversity of opinion. So it makes sense that they’re expected to employ at least a handful of conservative columnists—but right now, that’s not the case. Rubin, Boot, Will and others alike may not be liberals, but they’re not even close to conservative anymore.

With the few conservative voices in the mainstream media flipping sides, there’s almost no one in the opinion sections of many mainstream publications and newspapers espousing the ideology of half the country. The Washington Post employs socialists and the New York Times op-ed page has their fair share of radicals, which is fine, even admirable. All ideas, within reason, should be represented. But why isn’t there one obvious pro-Trump columnist at any of the major liberal publications that claim to value diversity of ideas?

The answer is right there in the one word: claim.

No need for puzzlement here, though. What’s happening is the clarifying and hardening of ideological differences, with those who have long straddled the fence and misrepresented themselves caught in a trap of their own devising. A natural, inevitable clash of incompatible ideals is on the horizon, and people are being forced into thinking very hard about just who they are and what kind of government they believe a free people ought to arrange for themselves.

More effete, timid types like Will, Boot, and Rubin, however, prefer to think of themselves as above such a dirty, uncouth fray, as is appropriate for self-proclaimed elites. In truth, they’re deathly afraid of any conflict more unruly and fraught with hazard than the blowhard bait-and-switch displayed on the Sunday morning liberal-network chat shows, where their Proggy masters allow them to pointlessly preen and pontificate as the housebroken token-neuters they always were.

They’re leashed, caged, gelded. Like their professional-politician GOPe counterparts, they’re accustomed to losing by long habit; it was part of the devil’s bargain they made long ago to gain a modicum of toleration for their very presence. The whole sordid mess was never anything but Opposition Theater, and it must be admitted that they had a good, long run—far longer than their performance merited, really. But the advent of Trump and the Real American Uprising that brought him to power disrupted this comfy kabuki and brought down the curtain on the whole show.

Everything for them now depends on their finding a way to pull the wool back over a now fully-woke public’s eyes. Tough noogies for them; try as they might, it can’t be done. There’s no unseeing the slime-pit of corruption, cowardice, and double dealing the Trumpening has exposed, no going back to the old way of quiet, clandestine DC business as usual. For real Americans, the only way forward now is to run right over the Uniparty hacks and their pet scribblers, which as it turns out they are quite damned willing to do. All in all, can anybody honestly wonder why all the Swamp creatures, Left and faux-Right alike, hate President The Donald with such irrational, obsessive, self-destructive zeal?

Oh, one more thing, about this bit from the excerpt above:

The Washington Post employs socialists and the New York Times op-ed page has their fair share of radicals, which is fine, even admirable. All ideas, within reason, should be represented.

It’s quite offensive, or it should be, that presentation of socialist ideas should be considered by any knowledgeable person as “admirable.” I very much doubt the author would say the same about Nazi ideas, say, or South African apartheid, or the CSA’s defense of the “peculiar institution” of slavery. Permissible? Sure. “Admirable”? Hell NO.

But socialism/communism/Marxism was responsible for far more deaths than all of those combined, and those deaths weren’t any more the result of misguided good intentions or plain “bad luck” than Hitler’s body count was. They were nothing less than systematically-planned-and-executed murders—in some socialist hellholes, actual, literal attempts at genocide. The single moral distinction between them and Hitler’s Holocaust that I can think of is that the Marxist death-machine didn’t usually discriminate along racial or religious lines, the Soviet Union’s own persecution of Jews excepted.

The Left has manufactured a bizarre pass for itself regarding its atrocities; their ongoing ability to evade accountability for the direct and predictable results of their preferred mode of misrule is nothing short of remarkable. That needs to end. The mountain of corpses created by Leftist ideology of right ought to be hung around the proper necks at last, if only for the sake of historical accuracy and simple justice, and espousing it should be considered every bit as provocative as openly sporting a swastika armband in public is.

Via Ed, who goes on to quote from an old Jonah Goldberg column, apparently unaware of the attendant irony. Even more ironic: Jonah makes a good point.

[Here’s] a short rule of thumb for how to tell who is a “respectable” conservative in the eyes of liberals: any conservative out of power or not seen as supportive of those in power. An even shorter rule of thumb would be: conservatives are respectable if they are useful to liberals. Pat Buchanan became respectable, even adorable, among a loose coalition of liberals leftists, from MSNBC’s Chris Matthews to Ralph Nader, when he turned on the GOP establishment. Kevin Phillips, David Gergen and John Dean have been “real” Republicans — though rarely conservatives — for decades because they are willing to confirm the assumptions of liberals. An even more telling example would be the “neocons.” Before the Iraq war, neocons were the nice conservatives, the good conservatives, the idealistic conservatives the un-racist conservatives, according to academics, The New York Times and others. This is not to say that they aren’t nice, good, idealistic and un-racist. Rather, it’s to point up the way in which conservatives become evil as they become influential, relevant, or otherwise inconvenient to liberals. John McCain was touted as a good choice for president by The New Republic and other liberal voices. Today, McCain is increasingly vilified by many of these same voices because, it turns out, he’s actually a Republican.

What McCain was and remains is a backstabbing, vicious, untrustworthy, self-serving professional politician. He’s a Swamp critter through and through—another “conservative” who never conserved a single thing. But Jonah is nonetheless on the beam: once McStain was no longer useful to the Left, they didn’t hesitate to crucify him. Later, when he was back to being no conceivable threat to them, he was rehabilitated as “reasonable” and once more worthy of (some) respect—mostly owing to his recent attacks on Palin, probably. On down the page, a commenter notes the irony Driscoll missed:

Goldberg has been on relatively high rotation on NPR’s smartypants weekend morning talk shows, and he always, very consistently, bangs on Trump for this, that, and the other. That’s about as respectable as any ‘conservative’ can get.

Meanwhile, I’ve never once heard Mark Levin or Mark Steyn on NPR…..it’s the strangest thing.

Ain’t it, though? Ain’t it just. At this point, I’m just about ready to pronounce a blanket rule here: if they’re appearing regularly on NPR, CNN, the broadcast networks, or in the WaPo or NYT, they’re part of the problem, and not on our side.

Update! Strong message follows. And I do mean STRONG.

So, you douches want to leave now that we’re routing the enemies of America on nearly every front, both at home and abroad?

Be still, my beating heart!

Go! 

We should have pushed you douchecanoes out of the boat in 1993, but it took this long for your spots to show beyond a reasonable doubt. And it’s clear now they’re not leopard spots, but more like smallpox. Calling for voting in senile fruitcake Nancy Pelosi and Chuck U. Schumer is pretty much getting caught handing the British army the plans to West Point, you historically illiterate gasbag traitors.

Those calling for “punishing” the GOP for the sins of – let’s be clear about this – the overwhelming majority of the actual voters who comprise that party, and who have been spat upon, ignored, and derided by these same hacks for DECADES, unstintingly – are, and always have been, fifth-columnist Democrats in sheep’s clothing, and should be sent back across Traitor’s Bridge with all due pomp, ceremony, and public castigation, and heartily awarded the Benedict Arnold Trophies which they so richly deserve. They go from being big fake fish in a small pond, to being the turncoat lackwits in an ocean of communist traitors, and will gain the ignominy and derision from both sides they so richly deserve, and in full, glorious measure.

Much, much more, including some tasty Animal House riffs.

Hard truth update!Media’s anti-Trumpers aren’t ‘leaving’ the GOP. They’ve been fired.” OUCH. Good, hard smack, that one.

Share

Beautiful losers

I swear, the headline just never gets old, does it?

Never Trumpers Suffer Yet Another Utter Humiliation

I got chills over here.

Last week was especially glorious not just because we rejected the latest GOPe amnesty scheme, not just because we defunded the left’s union cash extortion machine with the Janus decision, and not just because Justice Kennedy is leaving to be the swing vote on his retirement community HOA. It was especially glorious because these enormous victories – these latest enormous victories – were the direct result of normal Americans giving the gimps, grifters, and geebos of Never Trump the George Costanza treatment by doing precisely the opposite of our alleged betters’ political instincts.

Everything they told us was wrong. If we had done what they demanded, we would not be revelling in the joy of conserva-victory. We would be resigned to yet another defeat.

Oh, that ain’t no coincidence. It was their whole program, which was working quite nicely until fed-up Real Americans went off the reservation and put Trump The Disrupter in the White House. But naturally Kurt knows this as well as anybody else:

A principled loser is just another kind of loser – an especially annoying kind because he never seems to shut his Zima-hole about his precious principles.

And the remaining rump of Never Trumpers is here to lose. That’s their goal. Team Muh Principles always intended to lose. Oh, they try to play off their objections to the president as purely one of style. It’s because Donald Trump is so…so…so…oh well I never. But their displeasure with Trump’s aesthetic deficiencies is not the sole, nor even the most significant, reason for their fury at the orange-y interloper. They are really mad because, under Trump, these dorks can’t get the White House to return their calls.

They’ve been stripped of their silly status, but that silly status – “Oh, I am an assistant fellow at the Institute to For Conservative Studies and Mailing List Compilation” – was all they had. In the DC milieu they want to return to, they were never kings, or even princes (though they sure dig the hereditary titles vibe), but just minor royalty jealously guarding their little, tiny fiefdoms. Sure, the liberal establishment ran things, but the Professional Cons had their own petty gigs pretending to resist, pretending to care, all the while treading water in a sea of mediocrity and ineffectuality.

And then Schlichter gets REALLY rough with ’em. Singled out for specific humiliation is hapless fuzznuts George Will, who was also laid into good and proper today by Limbaugh:

You know who’s really, reeeally taking it on the chin about now? And that is the conservative Never Trumper crowd.

I could easily roll out a bukakke joke here. But I won’t. No need to thank me. Onwards.

You know, I haven’t talked about this on purpose, by design, but I’m just gonna mention it here in reference. George Will, before the retirement announcement of Anthony Kennedy, was so frustrated that he wrote a piece suggesting the only hope for America is if all Republicans vote Democrat to get rid of Trump and everything related to Trump.

Now, stop and think about that for a minute. That’s almost as off the wall as people on the left are off the wall. That’s in the midst of policies that all of these intellectual conservatives have ostensibly been fighting for their whole lives. Trump is implementing much of what they have claimed to believe in. But maybe they didn’t believe it that much, because as it’s being implemented, they can’t bring themselves to support it because of the guy who is president while it’s happening.

Actually, I think it’s less because of that than because it’s being implemented at all. They never intended it to be; the idea was to get elected and re-elected on promises to do fierce battle with the Democrat Socialist “opposition,” then get back to business as usual the minute they disembarked at Dulles. These fighty-fight-fighters were content to wave their arms around menacingly without ever landing a single punch. It was a pretty good grift as long as nobody paid much attention to it. But the very second Normals elected someone who would show actual fight, they all folded up like a cheap accordion and went into a confused frenzy of sniffy condescension, predictions of disaster, and…well, whatever the hell else it is they think they’re doing now.

Think of it: media blowhards like Will and status-quo GOPe politicians have both been shown up as con artists. They’ve been rejected by a constituency angry at their confirmed duplicity in favor of an outsider they have no way of controlling. The huffy scribblings of “opinion leaders” like Will go unread, except now and then by guys like me sifting through their outraged puffing and blowing for blog-fodder for making sport of them; the professional politicians have been cast into the darkness of impotence and irrelevance as Trump blows right by them on his way to yet another triumph.

You’d think the embarrassment of Egg McMuffin’s died-a-borning campaign for president would be enough self-degradation for these guys. But no, here’s George Will, sitting in the smoking ashes of his pitiful ruin, demanding that we reject all the happy progress made and turn back the clock by returning control of Congress to the fucking commies. To “save” conservatism. Or something.

NeverTrumpTards’ discombobulated anguish is remarkably similar to the Left’s, lacking only the shitlib penchant for violence and unhinged sobbing to make them perfectly congruent. That’s no coincidence either. The distinction is not of kind but of degree; as always, the Fake Right’s “opposition” is weak tea indeed—ineffectual, impotent, not much good for anything.

Vote Democrat Socialist, just when they’re in full-on panic and disarray? Well, thanks and all, Georgie-poo, but…no. Hell no. We much prefer to keep the American Restoration ball a-rolling along. Dismaying as it may be to you DC swamp critters and Sunday-morning-show tame “conservatives,” we ain’t no way no how tired of all the winning yet; it makes for such a refreshing contrast with the bushwa you chumps have been handing us all these years. We want as much more of it as we can get.

Share

Categories

Archives

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix