Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

End stage

PC eats itself.

Scarlett Johansson is the latest target of the social-justice warrior mob. The actress is being chastised for, well, acting.

She has been cast in a movie in which she will play someone different than herself. For this great crime — which seems to essentially define the career path she has chosen—she is being castigated for being insufficiently sensitive to the transgender community.

Johansson is set to play a transgender man in an upcoming film, “Rub and Tug,” a film based on the true story of transgender massage parlor owner Dante “Tex” Gill. The announcement quickly garnered a reaction.

Trace Lysette, a transgender actress who plays Shea on “Transparent” took to Twitter: “And not only do you play us and steal our narrative and our opportunity but you pat yourselves on the back with trophies and accolades for mimicking what we have lived… so twisted. I’m so done.”

A New York Times story on the fallout described the online backlash as being “led by transgender actors, who argued that such casting decisions take opportunities away from members of marginalized communities.”

I SO eagerly look forward to evenhanded enforcement of this New Rule: gay actors must not ever again portray straight characters from now on; the end of the modern trend of remaking classic movies and TV shows with black actors in place of the original white ones (like, say, the execrable Wild, Wild West remake with Will Smith); precious, twee “reimaginings” of Shakespeare with modern settings, costume, and alterations to the language of the Bard must also cease; in fact, in keeping with the original productions, no females should be allowed to act in any Shakespeare presentation at all.

This is similar to the longstanding liberal assertion that majority-black districts can only be fairly represented in Congress by black representatives, that majority-black cities must have black mayors, etc. Which is just hogwash.

In the bigger picture, what we’re witnessing now is political correctness—liberalism itself, actually—reaching its end stage and collapsing under the weight of its own juvenile unworkability. As it must; Leftist dogma contradicts itself eighteen times before lunch every day. It’s failed miserably each and every time it’s been tried—unless it’s propped up by a bigger, stronger outside influence, such as the USSR with its satellites, or Western Europe with the US—and it’s going to go right on doing that. It can’t do anything else.

And when the inevitability of the Left’s failure becomes undeniable, you get the kind of blue-on-blue backbiting we’re seeing now. It’s delightful to watch; as Insty is fond of saying, you’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh.

I gotta mention this part, too:

Editor’s note: This column was published by Business Insider before being removed from the website for violating “editorial standards.” The Daily Beast reported that staffers complained about the column. It appears here exactly as originally published.

Hats off to the Weekly Standard for rescuing the article from the BI’s cowardly attempt at burying it. BI’s editors prattle on in their explanation:

In an email to editors on Monday obtained by The Daily Beast, global editor-in-chief Nich Carlson announced that BI would create an internally available list of employees who had “volunteered to talk about culture and identity issues” to other staff. Further, Carlson also announced that “culturally sensitive columns, analysis, and opinion pieces” would now be reviewed by the company’s executive editors before publication.

“Editors should make sure we are not publishing shallow, ‘hot takes,’ but instead, fully thought-out arguments that reflect and respect the opposing view,” Carlson said. “There should be no partisan name-calling, e.g. ‘social justice warriors,’ ‘libtards,’ or ‘rednecks.’ Opinion and arguments should feel reported and researched, and not like quick reactions.”

Uh huh. I’m not familiar enough with them to know, but I can’t help but wonder if these guys ever employ the standard lib-prop maneuver of referring to every single conservative—be he ever so milquetoast—as “right-wing,” “extremist,” or “radical,” while any and every Leftist is a “moderate,” “centrist,” or “pragmatic”?

Pull the other one, guys, it plays a little tune.

Share

The South…uhh, won?

An interesting take on Civil War v1.0.

Many still think that the Civil War was about slavery, when in fact it centered on the issue of autonomy for the states.

The North wanted to capture the Southern economies because, as producers of cotton, the South was charging high prices for the raw materials the North required to make into textiles. Vertical integration, or ownership of those Southern farms, would make more money for the North, whose economy was otherwise becoming unstable.

For those in the South, the question of war went back to the founding of America: were we a confederation of states, where each region could have its own rules, or a single federal entity, where each state was responsible for the fortunes of every other? The former favored Southern agriculture, where the latter demanded vertical integration.

One hundred and fifty-seven years later, we have our answer. Conservatives and Leftists are discovering that we cannot coexist. Under the confederation model, we would each have our own semi-autonomous states and be less reliant on the federal government. Thanks, however, to the Northern win, we have a highly centralized government.

Where force of arms could not prevail, the force of history has. Human groups cannot coexist because they are headed in different directions, whether ethnic, cultural, religious, racial, or political. Democrats now realize they cannot coexist with us, and we cannot have one leader for both factions. The USA is a dead letter, as is the EU for the same reason.

This means that the South won: their model has been proven correct, and denial of that model has proved fatal for the supposed winners of the war.

Like I said, interesting, although I’m gonna pass on further elaboration myself for the nonce. Whatever you might think of the proposition, I got a feeling most if not all discussion of our first Civil War will soon lose its appeal, having been superceded by the new one.

(Via WRSA)

Update! While we’re on the subject: Glenn Reynolds: The Civil War Has Already Started. Glenn plays around a bit with a divorce motif therein, to which Ace adds:

He’s referring to an idea I’ve mentioned before myself, that there are “Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse” that predict divorce in a couple. Those Four Horsemen are criticism, defensiveness, stonewalling, and contempt.

All of which are singularly present in modern American “discourse.”

The country is toxic. It’s time to split it up, For the Good of the Children.

Well, there’s too much hate, too much discord, too much bitterness—too much water passed under too many bridges generally—for things to go on much longer as they have been. A case of “irreconcilable differences,” if ever there was one. As the battered spouse in this abusive relationship, real Americans need to get out for their own good.

Share

Fascism finally descends on America

And it ain’t wearing a smiley face, either.

Newsflash? America, we have a problem.

Whatever guise in which they cloak themselves — actor, patron, restaurant owner, Member of Congress, Media Matters official, activist, student — in fact, behind the mask, these are America’s real fascists. The BBC noted of Mussolini’s “Black Shirts” that they were organized “into armed squads known as Black Shirts, who terrorized their political opponents” — which is, in one form or another, precisely what today’s American fascists are all about. Antifa is, in fact, as reported by the Washington Post, decidedly acting as hooded “armed squads” — in the fashion of another founded-by-Leftists made-in-America terror squad…the Ku Klux Klan.

While we are not hell and gone from freedom, we are in fact on the road to a society in which fascists are on the loose amongst us. And I use the word “fascists” (as I have before) advisedly. These aren’t “bullies” — the standard “hey I’m bigger than you” tough guys encountered periodically in everyday life on schoolyards or in executive suites or labor halls. These are out-and-out Mussolini-style fascists, determined to terrorize and silence their political opponents and anyone else they see as getting in their way.

This has been a long time coming. Decades worth of leftist violence have preceded this moment — whether at the Democratic National Convention in 1968 or the window smashing spree in Seattle when the World Trade Organization came to Seattle in 1999 or the car-burning, window smashing rage on the streets of Washington, D.C. during Trump’s 2017 inauguration — and, oh, so much more.

It’ll stop only when real Americans finally decide they’ve put up with enough of it and do something about it directly themselves…and not one moment before. Yeah, those 400 million or more guns we have are nice and all, but mere possession of them has deterred jack-nothing—and won’t, whether they’re sitting in a closet, a gun safe, or buried in the backyard. Nobody needs to bother with confiscating guns from people unprepared to use them when the necessity becomes impossible to deny.

We’re not quite there yet, perhaps. But with unhinged Lefty assaults increasing and no sign of any pullback in sight, the case becomes increasingly difficult to make. Things are going to get sporty, I’m afraid. In fact, for one side, they already have.

One only has to read the Twitter feed out there of this or that progressive — or of conservatives when progressives show up to rage — and one is struck by the mental unbalance, the raw anger, the foaming-at-the-mouth frustrated fury. Tellingly, they project on to others what is in fact true of themselves. “Fascist! Nazi! Racist!” they shriek, celebrating those who threaten or wield the clubs of verbal or physical repression not to mention the racism of identity politics. And downhill it goes from there.

The question is: what to do about the rage of now-unmasked American fascists? Before someone gets hurt?

Seriously? Lots of people—LOTS of them—have already been hurt. In a most sickening irony, it’s exclusively the people who wish only to be left alone who’ve “been hurt”; in accord with the nature of fascism, it’s the ones who refuse to leave ANYBODY alone who have done the hurting, then skated away consequence-free.

Like it or not, the only effective way of dealing with fascism once it’s taken full root remains the one used back in the 1940s—which only makes sense, since fascism itself hasn’t changed all that much since then. Hopefully, we’ll rediscover our resolve before things come to that. But as always seems to be the case, time is probably a lot tighter than we may care to think.

Update! Painting themselves into a corner that can only be escaped through violence.

When people tell you they want to hurt you, you should believe them. And we Normals are starting to listen to what liberals say.

There’s really nowhere else for the liberals to go but towards embracing widespread violence. The logic of their twisted mindset is such that Normals are not merely wrong and not merely evil, but that normal Americans and those who represent them are the evilest evildoers in evil history.

This does not leave much room for reasoned debate. In fact, it makes reasoned debate impossible. So, since they’ve taken reasoned debate off the table, there are not a lot of options left for resolving political and cultural differences. There are lies, intimidation, and violence. That’s about it. And the first two have stopped working.

Intimidation isn’t working. It makes the libs quiver with joy, but it just makes us mad. Getting your opponent riled up is a poor strategy, especially at the ballot box. Mad people tend to retaliate. November is coming, and we all fully understand that every middle finger selfie, every vicious tweet, every assault on a conservative diner, is an attack on us.

So, the left will embrace violence. It’s only a matter of time. They have to go there, because there’s nothing else left to try to undo our successful rebellion of 2016. The inertia of their hatred makes it inevitable.

Again: they already went there. Again, and again, and again.

The Democrat base won’t tolerate a retreat from extremism. They must push forward, get more extreme, pump up the volume, with each MSNBC chatterclown striving to top the previous doofus’s Hitler hyperbole. These Democrat idiots are going to talk themselves into a Second Civil War and then act surprised when it works out poorly again.

I wish I had some suggestions about how to make this not happen. I’ve pulled the alarm about it here at Townhall and in books highlighting the potential for the country to split apart and descend into chaos. But there is nothing we can do to stop this because we did not start it and we are not driving forward.

Oh, there is most assuredly ONE thing we can do. As decent, peaceable people, it’s a difficult thing to hope for, and impossible to contemplate with anything but reluctance and regret. But to say there’s nothing we can do is inaccurate.

Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence. But if they choose poorly, Normals are ready, willing, and able stop them. Last month, Normal Americans bought over two million new guns. They’ve got 400 million already. Normals are sitting on a towering mountain of lead-launching freedom.

Ready, yeah. Able, surely. Willing? Remains to be seen.

But we’d prefer the option the liberals have ignored – a return to a society where disputes are resolved via the processes outlined in the Constitution and the individual rights set forth within it are respected.

Don’t go with violence, progressives. It will end badly.

We can only hope so, which is a sad and terrible thing in itself. But as I keep saying, our differences are irreconcilable: one side must win, and one must lose. However regretful I am that we’ve been dragged to this sorry pass, I know which way I prefer things to go.

Fat chance update! I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.

Someone is going to get killed. We have gone beyond the severed presidential head held by the unfunny and untalented Kathy Griffin to mob action, including the physical harassment of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen who just days before was drummed out of a Mexican restaurant by left-wing activists protesting the separation of children from parents caught crossing the border illegally.

In the days of civil discourse, ideological opponents would target each other’s rhetoric, not each other. What you said was evil or inappropriate and must be denounced. Now, following Saul Alinsky’s playbook, it is not what conservatives stand for that is evil. Conservatives themselves are evil. They must be thrown out of restaurants, confronted at their homes and, yes, shot on baseball practice fields.

Just as in the case of Steve Scalise, those on the left are suggesting that Sarah Sanders, Kirstjen Nielsen, and even young Baron Trump, deserve the vitriol and confrontation directed at them. Their hateful end-justifies-the-means rhetoric will likely inspire someone like the loon who shot up an Alexandria baseball field to take similar action.

After all, if you believe in securing the border and enforcing the nation’s laws, you have it coming.

Oh, it’s a good bit worse than just that, I’m afraid. Christian; “cisnormal binary”; pro-life; capitalist; pro-freedom of speech; gun-owner; non-vegan; pro-Constitutional government—any one of these things justifies dealing you a beatdown, and that’s by no means an all-inclusive list. For the Goosesteppin’ Left, just not being one of Them is plenty enough.

Share

Big backfire coming

Bake me a fucking cake, retards.

A restaurant in Virginia booted the White House press secretary from the premises. The co-owner did so due to her standards, and much coercion from her staff.

This, in my opinion, is completely up to the discretion of the restaurant. No restaurant, or any business, should be forced to serve those they don’t want in their establishment. In a perfect world, the incident would be over, and the restaurant could continue feeding its clients. Unfortunately, that won’t happen.

So. You should be just fine with restaurants refusing service to blacks, Hispanics, GLBTVRYUILLXQ39SPACEMODULATORs or whomever else they may arbritrarily choose, right?

Ahh, but of course not. One can only conclude that the New Standard is that it’s now fine to refuse service based on ideological and/or political affiliation, then. Our good bud Aesop ain’t on board with all that:

Sorry, but HELL NO.

“In a perfect world”, the owner and her halfwit staff realize that absent any actions of personal misbehavior on the premises whilst dining, they treat Sarah Sanders exactly like every other customer who enters their public establishment. Because they know if they fail to adhere to that minimum standard of civility (from whose meaning-rich root, civitas, springs also the word “civilization”), the Banshees Of Comeuppance will descend on their establishment, and drive their establishment out of business, for cause, and remove their jackassical DNA from the economic gene pool, exactly the “invisible hand” predicted in 1776 by Adam Smith, the explicatory father of capitalism and its functioning.

So, for the exact same reason we have public health codes, if you’re in business to serve food to customers, you serve food to customers. Period. Paragraph. End of effing book.

This was not the Democrat Harpy Pub. It was not the Politically Correct Lounge.

Well, I dunno. Seems like, as a practical matter at least, maybe it WAS.

Stand by for a bunch of preening nonsense from the Hapless Right about how shitlibs, thanks to the self-evident hypocrisy now fully exposed by their “right to refuse service” Brand New Principle, “can no longer” force Christian bakers or anyone else to act in ways contrary to their own beliefs. Au contraire, chum; they most certainly can, and they most certainly will. You can rest entirely assured that, should a Republican-run eatery refuse service to Democrats based on party affiliation according to Brand New Principle, its proprietors and premises will be protested against, condemned, threatened, vandalized, boycotted, and harrassed because of their unacceptably unacceptable “bigotry.” Righties will sputter and fume about the obvious unfairness of this.

They will be ignored.

Lefty’s newfound reverence for the right to freedom of association is just like every other one of their supposed “principles”: conditional, compliance with which will be demanded only when it suits their purposes to do so. They themselves will continue to go right ahead and do whatever they damned well please, thanksverymuch, and just never you mind what they “can no longer” do. The only way fairness will ever enter the picture is if it’s forced on them—in other words, only if and when ignoring it does them immediate and tangible harm.

Which, in turn, brings us right back to the absolute and unavoidable necessity of inflicting serious pain on Leftards for their myriad abuses. Sniffing about all the things they “can no longer do” is horseshit on stilts, akin to complaining about liberal bias in Jurassic Media. Anybody expecting such complaints—even when backed up by ironclad examples—to inspire them to correct it, refrain from it in future, or otherwise inhibit them one iota, is headed for a lifetime of disappointment.

Bottom line:

Business owners absolutely have the right to eject anyone from their premises. But in no world, perfect or otherwise, save for one best described by Dante in Inferno, do they have any right to remain ignorantly and blissfully free of consequences for their actions, whether wise or blisteringly stupid.

Bingo, and a most important point. Progtards have gotten away with their shit, consequence-free, for way too long. They’ve now gotten it thoroughly up their noses, as Wodehouse used to say. Appeals to some phantom sense of “fair play” or “integrity” are worse than a waste of time; those consequences Aesop mentions aren’t going to just miraculously be visited on Lefty all on their own. To use an analogy that might be just a bit too apt given current conditions: if you stack wood and kindling in the fireplace, just waving an unlit match over the pile ain’t going to get anybody any warmer.

To yield the desired result, the match must first be struck.

They will not stop. They will NEVER stop. They will have to BE stopped. As unpalatable as the prospect may be to the House Of Cuck, it remains the simple truth.

Update! Aesop also provides a link to this:

As I’ve said about gay people who can’t get a baker or photographer to work for their wedding, why would you want to do business with them?

Go somewhere else.

There’s really no reason to waste your money patronizing an establishment that doesn’t like or approve of you.

The real kick in the pants is as much as the Left hates Chick-fil-A, they will serve anyone. Gay, Democrat, Hillary voter — everyone receives service with a smile.

The Red Hen of Lexington? Not so much.

But the Red Hen also did a huge favor for Sarah Sanders.

Let’s be frank. If her snowflake staff hadn’t called the owner, I’m guessing the odds are someone would have spit in her food.

True, dat. Dianny—who’s going to wind up another belated blogroll entry sure enough—also provides a pic of the Red Hen owners, and they look just exactly as you would expect them to…right down to their choice of, umm, hats.

Share

The toughest question of all

The only one that matters, when you get right down to it.

As Capitol Hill Republicans attempt for — what, the eighth? ninth? — time in the past two decades to jam through an amnesty that their voters have explicitly, loudly and repeatedly said they do not want, it’s worth asking a question that is rarely raised:

Does the United States — population 320 million and rising — need more people? If so, why?

And if so, why these particular people? Why illiterate, primitive Muslims who loathe Western Civ and consider its “decadence” an abomination before their warped “god”? Why unskilled, impoverished Mexican peasants with nothing useful to offer our society, possessing a demonstrated willingness to violate our immigration laws in order to come here and soak up resources, contributing nothing useful to our country?

Has any American ever spent a single moment of his or her day thinking, “Gee, I wish we had more drug mules, low-level cartel dupes, MS 13 killers, unemployable low-IQ indigents who don’t speak English and refuse to learn it, and sundry rapists, thieves, alcoholics, ISIS terrorists, murderers, welfare cheats, and surly unassimilables to liven up the place”? Other than among libtards pushing a barely-concealed political agenda and bought-and-paid-for CoC Republicans—for whom the “wretched refuse” are useful props and cheap labor respectively—where is the demand for such people?

To most ears, the question sounds blasphemous, which illustrates the rottenness of our immigration debate. Actually, “debate” is far too generous. One side has made sure that there is no debate. Good people want more immigration, and bad people object or raise questions. An inherently political issue has been effectively rendered religious, with the righteous on one side, sinners on the other.

Just as they always do, on this and every issue.

So again: Why do we need more people? For the extra traffic congestion? More crowded classrooms? Longer emergency room and Transportation Security Administration lines? Higher greenhouse-gas emissions?

We know how more immigration benefits big business and the Democratic Party. No one has yet convincingly explained how it benefits the American people as a whole. That’s the foremost consideration that should drive our immigration debate, and that’s what should determine our immigration policy.

And in a country with a sane and self-respecting population, it would. Surprising that this was published in the God Damned WaPo. I didn’t bother with the comments, I must admit; I’m pretty sure I already know what they’re like. New category, too: Immivasion. Shoulda done it a long time ago, I guess.

Share

Tough questions

Pat Buchanan asks ’em.

The questions America and the West face might thus be framed:

Is there a liberal, progressive, Christian way to seal a 2,000-mile border, halt millions of migrants from crossing it illegally, and send intruders back whence they came? Or does the preservation of Western nations and peoples require measures from which liberal societies today reflexively recoil?

Does the survival of the West as a civilization require a ruthlessness the West no longer possess?

All signs point to yes.

While our forefathers would have not hesitated to do what was needed to secure our borders and expel intruders, it is not a settled matter as to whether this generation has the will to preserve the West.

All signs point to no. Denninger cuts to the chase:

Again, let me point out that only somewhere between 3 and 10% of these people, depending on who’s stats you believe, show up for their hearings. The other 90-97% disappear and cannot work at any legal job in the United States. They all undertake criminal lives to be present and live in the United States as there is no legal way for them to obtain a job, place to live and means of transportation such as a driver license when they abscond from their “asylum” hearing; are you really insane enough to believe that the children with them, nearly none of whom have any sort of documentation proving they are related to the adults, are anything more than weapons to be used in their criminal pursuits?

Maybe it’s time for a hard schism in America — it appears there simply is no way to bridge differences any longer. 

So it would seem—if not right away, then soon enough, if things continue on the current track.

Update! As I said the other day, this whole shitfling is nothing but a con, a ploy, a stratagem. Nice thing is, in another week or so this will be forgotten and we’ll be on to the next one.

Well, okay, maybe “nice” ain’t the word.

So what are we supposed to be outraged about today? There’s always something, and it’s always the worst thing in the history of ever. And it’s almost always a scam designed to manipulate you into obeying the liberal elite.

That’s the real outrage.

Don’t think! Get outraged! Let your feelings run free, feelings generated by pictures of kids in cages (under Obama, but shhhhhh!), by super selective Bible readings on MSNBC, and by pious Fredocons whining about how we’re better than that and oh well I never!

That’s the thing – when you’re caught in an outrage monsoon, you aren’t supposed to think. You are supposed to be infuriated, aroused, and activated, like a ravenous running zombie hungering for the virtue signaling lobe of the human brain. You are not supposed to ask questions that interrupt the narrative, like why would this particular subset of criminal get special privileges? Don’t we separate families every day when mommy (or daddy) commits a crime? Why don’t they just not come here?

Facts are the enemy when it comes to liberal policies, so they don’t want you messing with the message by bringing them up. Instead, they want you outraged, and your mind clouded with ginned-up anger, ready to do their bidding.

The idea is to create a crisis, to which – surprise – the liberals hyping it have a solution. And it’s inevitably a solution that benefits the liberal elite.

And harms the country, simultaneously demeaning, demoralizing, or otherwise marginalizing normal Americans as well. None of that is either accident or coincidence, of course. Schlichter goes on to provide some helpful indicators on how to know another Lefty attempt to gin up a stampede when you see one.

Another angle update! Lest we forget.

In addition, of course, this burst of OUTRAGE! was timed to bury the genuinely outrageous scandal being revealed about how Obama misadministration put the FBI and other intelligence services to work for the political benefit of the DNC and Hillary Clinton.

Not to mention that those federal agencies were so chock-a-block with fellow-traveling shitlibs as to be not just willing but quite eager to do it, too. How sad for the whole rats’ nest of them that so many are fully woke to their tactics now, wih more opening their eyes every day.

Share

Lakota, or Choctaw?

Oh, I’m gonna be abusing the hell out of “fair use” with this one.

First, we all have to accept certain realities about where we are as a nation. Rains will come and go. The stock market will rise and fall. The sky is blue. Water is wet. And government in America will just never stop getting bigger. This is simply a fact of life.

We haven’t seen our government shrink since Calvin Coolidge, and there is little appetite among the American public for shrinking the government. We are now at the point in this country where we call them “cuts” if the government doesn’t increase spending quite as much as they had planned.

As government gets bigger, freedom must get smaller. Larger government, even when under the rule of supposed Republicans, is a leftist’s dream. Every day brings a new story about the infestation of liberalism in the federal bureaucracy. Such is the way of the world.

So, barring some unforeseen awakening, America is heading for an eventual socialist abyss. It is really only a matter of dates. Will we all die in the inevitable communist purges within ten years? Of course not. Will it happen within the next century or two? Almost certainly.

Do you remember the American Indians? Most likely you at least give them a passing thought whenever you pull a stick of Land O’ Lakes butter out of the fridge or hear some liberal pretend to be outraged over the Washington Redskins. Either way, they were the randomly settled group of nomadic tribes who resided in America before a bunch of Europeans arrived, took all their lands, and conquered them.

The Indians were faced with something that faces all civilizations. It’s something we face now. They were facing the unstoppable force of inevitability. Many of them knew it. The settlers from Europe were about to take over every inch of this country. Some tribes, like the Choctaw, chose to play nice with the government in hopes that their peaceful gesture would be returned. They got a Trail of Tears for their kindness.

But some tribes, like the Lakota, chose a different path. They chose war. Leaders of the Lakota like Sitting Bull knew full well how this war would end. Nevertheless, he gathered thousands of young warriors in the Black Hills and made his enemy feel some pain before he surrendered. He scored a decisive win at the Battle of the Little Bighorn, and collected some scalps. Yes, the U.S. government prevailed in the end, but General Custer and his 200 men weren’t there to see it.

That brings us to the continuous internal battle we see on the Right. We have this ever-present acrimony between the factions because some of us will not accept where we are and the enemies we face.

Some on the Right believe that tyranny in this society, as in all societies, is inevitable. The people who will micromanage every aspect of your life are not God-fearing conservatives. They are leftists, and they are vicious.

They are not political opponents in the sense that you have a debate with them. These modern-day leftists want you to lose your job. They want to destroy you. How do you think they’re going to treat you when they finally sit in the seat of power for good? So fight them tooth and nail. Make them long for the day when you’re no longer fighting them. Be the Lakota.

Amen to that. The battle for America That Was was lost long ago. America That Was is not coming back—period. Trump amounts to a holding action, a breathing space, and I’m all for him undoing every Leftist depredation against liberty and Constitutional government he possibly can, bless his heart.

But as I’ve always said, the unmaking of America didn’t happen overnight, and no one man will ever be able to undo the tangled skein of Progressivism now woven throughout the national fabric. Worse, there’s not another candidate of Trump’s talents, attitude, and indifference to the slings and arrows of Leftism in sight. After Trump, the odds are that we’ll get another milksop Republican or (shudder) Democrat Socialist in the White House, either of which will mean that the Deep State monolith will be quickly re-established.

None of which means that the bastards who took America That Was from us ought not to be made to suffer for it, to the greatest extent we can manage. Really, it’s no more than a matter of elementary self-defense by now, as Ironbear noted in a comment to an earlier post here:

Stephen Scalise, mentioned in your post.

The guy who was killed by a SWATting, also mentioned in your post.

The older people (multiple) who were dragged out of cars and assaulted and battered during the 2016 elections and primaries.

The woman who was egged and assaulted during rally in the Primaries.

The homeless woman who was assaulted and battered while trying to defend Trump’s Hollywood walk star.

Rand Paul, beaten while mowing his lawn by an anti-Trump Democrat neighbor.

The guy who was dragged off the stage at a rally while trying to violently get to Trump.

The fire at Trump Tower.

Charlottesville…

Should I continue the list? I can.

We’re in a shooting war.

The other side is the only ones shooting – and that’s only because the Right is far more patient than one has any right to expect.

Now, it may not be the Deep State itself directly committing these broad-daylight assaults against decent Americans. But it’s being done with tacit Deep State connivance, especially when you realize how very few of these various acts of political violence saw justice done via the legal system. Having witnessed the Deep State’s own recent and ongoing efforts at election-rigging and outright coup d’état, that lapse shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.

Yeah, the bastards won. True, with Trump’s election, we’re no longer in full rout; it’s just possible we may somehow win the war yet, against all odds. But if no more than a fighting retreat ends up being all that’s left to us, then we damned well ought to make it as fierce a one as can be imagined, and make them pay most dear for every inch of ground we must cede to them.

Share

Practical solutions to modern problems

Aesop kicks a few ideas around.

Starting with the second deportation, the method of repatriation used by ICE in all cases should be by trebuchet.

Then after they’re returned to the land of their forefathers at a few hundred FPS, they’ll probably still have one unshattered femur left to limp back home, and stay there.

I’m not terribly worried about a day without a Mexican; we had a hundred and fifty years without a Mexican, and it was called America. And it would be a lot catchier title if we renamed it Another Day Without Setting $318M Of Your Taxes On Fire, and made it a 24/7/365/forever national celebration.

Frankly, they’re lucky we don’t cut the crap, and simply authorize ICE to substitute land mines for the wall, until it’s built. Then they could just deport everyone missing a leg as presumptively here illegally.

You’ll notice there’s not a lot of Norks running through minefields to get to South Korea. And we’ve got a metric f**kton of the things just sitting in storage, so we might as well put them to some good use.

And while we’re up, let’s do one more thing: announce that henceforth, anyone ever deported for entering the US illegally will be banned for life from ever visiting the US on a visa, or ever emigrating here legally, and refused any amnesty for cause, even if it’s someday offered to those already here. Caught once, banned for life. Caught here a second time: Fly Air Trebuchet home. Easy peasy.

Works for me.

Obviously Aesop is being highly satirical here, but it does draw a line under the depths of absurdity to which this grotesque national hissy-fit has plummetted. It all calls a few thoughts to mind:

  1. The Left is making a serious miscalculation here: they’re relying on the same kind of polling data that told them Hillary!™ was absolutely certain to win the 2016 election by an overwhelming margin. They’re also blithely ignoring the fact that re-establishing our national borders and vigorous enforcement against violation of them by the hordes coming here illegally was one of the principle reasons Trump was elected in the first place.
  2. Most if not all of the imagery Leftymedia is busily shoveling down our gullets to inspire shock and shame is actually from Obama’s reign of error. Since the Left didn’t have a screaming psychotic break over such inhumanely inhuman inhumanity then, it’s obvious that it isn’t a moral or “compassion” issue for them but a partisan political one. In truth, they hope to use this as a cudgel to bludgeon Trump and the rest of us into submission at long, long last.
  3. Nobody wants to see children suffering or abused. But the agent of any suffering endured by these kids (those of them who aren’t MS13 gangsters, that is) is not Trump, nor is it Americans who wish to see our border protected and to have some say over who is and is not allowed to immigrate here. It’s the parents who violated our laws by coming here illegally. If they’ve been victimized by anybody, it ain’t Trump. It ain’t normal Americans either.
  4. Those parents are NOT “immigrants”; they are NOT “refugees.” They are CRIMINALS. They have no legitimate right to be here; the act of criminally flouting US immigration law entitles them to but one thing, and one thing only: detention. Well, okay, three things: arrest, detention, and expulsion. That’s it. There is nothing whatever immoral about sending them back, at our discretion and convenience.
  5. Laura Bush and the rest of the Vichy GOPe/NeverTrumpTard baglappers eager to slam Trump for keeping a campaign promise can all go suck a fat one.
  6. If America is as nasty, callous, cold-hearted, bigoted, and generally soul-blighting a place as the Left always insists, why on earth would all these people risk so much to leave their homes, friends, and families to come here illegally? And why would libtards want to help them stay?
  7. There’s so much else wrong with this shitshow I don’t even know where to begin addressing it. So I won’t.

None of this, not a single aspect of it, is anything new. It’s a hoary old rerun right down to the last niggling detail: the smug assertion of moral superiority; the overwrought bleats of “Hitler” and “Nazi” and “Holocaust” and “genocide” hurled at normal Americans with legitimate and reasonable concerns; the distortion and/or falsification of the historical record, along with appeals to Constitutional “rights” found nowhere in the Constitution on behalf of non-citizens outside its protection; the inflation of rather mundane events of little import or relevance to most Americans into a national CRISIS!! requiring immediate and drastic action in response; the use of children as props to further a political agenda; the stampede to collusion of milksop Republicans; the brazen deception and manipulative appeals to emotion; the marginalization of mainstream thought and the mainstreaming of radical lunacy; the risible claims of near-universal “bipartisan” agreement; the establishment media’s tireless effort as cheerleaders and propagandists rather than evenhanded reporters of events.

The whole shitfling is very much Swampland business as usual, in hopes of accomplishing some by-now familiar goals: thwarting the agenda Trump was elected specifically to implement, his removal from office by illegitimate means, and a stern reminder for normal Americans of their subordinate, subjugated role as the ones footing the bill for Leftist folly without complaint.

Share

The REAL danger to the economy

Is the constant use of “engine” metaphors.

Every conversation about the economy invariably compares it to a mechanical device.

When the economy is going well, it’s “humming” or “chugging along.” When it’s not, it’s “sputtering” or “stalled.”

We “prime the pump” with stimulus spending during a recession and hope the economy will reach “escape velocity.” Tax cuts and more federal spending can “fuel growth” or “turbocharge” it. Money gets “pumped into” it.

Comparing the economy to an engine means that it’s made up of parts that interact in precise ways and that, if they break down, can easily be fixed by smart technicians. It suggests that pushing the right buttons and flipping the right switches, adding the right mix of fuel in the proper amounts will keep it running smoothly.

The metaphor ends up driving reality, and economic policy prescriptions. Yet these policy prescriptions almost never work as intended. Stimulus plans don’t stimulate. Fed rate hikes often cause the recessions they’re supposed to prevent. As Paul Krugman put it, “bad metaphors make for bad policy.”

IBD recommends a more appropriate and accurate metaphor for the economy, which in turn suggests the best approach to “managing” it: “At best, we can leave it alone.” Problem being, given the choice between taking their grubby mitts off of the economy to the increased prosperity and benefit of all and “managing” it right into perpetual disaster and ruin, guess which one statists will pick? I mean, it IS only the central tenet of the Progressivist religion, after all.

Share

Tactics and methods

Just more of the same duplicity, misdirection, and obfuscation that have long been the Progressivist MO.

“In the face of the federal government’s inhumane treatment of immigrant families, New York will not deploy National Guard to the border,” Cuomo announced Monday. “We will not be complicit in this ongoing human tragedy.”

Well, again, nobody asked. But the Guard diversion is a useful tool, deflecting attention from the fundamental dishonesty of the governor’s full statement. That is, the federal government is treating no one inhumanely; the “families” involved are not so much immigrants as they are economic migrants with no inherent right of entry into the United States—and to the extent that there is an “ongoing human tragedy” on the border, responsibility for it resides with those attempting to enter the county illegally.

Indeed, not since “the homelessness crisis” blossomed a generation ago to constrain honest discussions of substance addiction, disintegrating families, deinstitutionalization, and an explosion of common vagrancy has artful rhetoric so successfully obscured facts, law, and sound public policy. Then (as now) it was deemed judgmental—a grave sin—to censure personal choices or behavior. The problem, advocates and the media insisted, was lack of a home, and it was up to government to provide one. Since then, billions have been spent on housing and other programs, to no discernible long-term positive effect—and it is still all but impossible to have a serious public discussion about the addled, the addicted, and the socially dysfunctional.

Fast forward to America’s southern border, where—advocates and the media contend—children routinely are “ripped” from their mothers’ arms, shunted off to “cages,” and pretty much traumatized for the rest of their lives. Once again, facts and context are optional; politically opportunistic rhetoric drives what little debate is allowed, and meretricious politicians like Cuomo get away with simply making stuff up. Never mind that the policies now at issue date at least to the Obama administration, even if the circumstances have changed. Or that the alternative to separation is a choice between jailing the children with their illegal-alien parents, or allowing those parents free passage into the country.

Facts and context aren’t “optional” for them, actually; they’re anathema. The next bit is key:

That last point, of course, is the fundamental element in the debate: is America to have control of its borders, or not?  Once again, euphemism obscures the issues; when “illegal alien” morphed into “undocumented immigrant” in the popular lexicon, the debate was largely over.

Control the language, and you control everything. It’s a good article; read the rest of it.

Share

Toxic masculinity?

No such thing; if it’s truly masculine, it ain’t toxic. And if it’s toxic, it ain’t truly masculine.

We take a young man and kick his father out of his life, send him to school where he has mostly women teachers, barrage him with negative messages about masculinity, then turn him loose at college where we treat him like a guilty-until-proven-innocent rapist, and after all that, we blame “masculinity” when he goes off the rails despite the fact that he spent a lifetime bathed in femininity. Unsurprisingly, the more women try to change masculinity, the more negative and toxic it actually becomes. Yet, articles explaining how masculinity needs to be changed and rewired—written by women or feminized males—are practically a cottage industry these days.

All these articles are variations on the same theme. It’s either liberal women or womanly men who explain how masculinity needs to be rethought. Inevitably, the conclusions are that men need to be more feminine, androgynous, or gay. Men are encouraged to be blubbering whine boxes who break into tears every time they get a sad. Be vulnerable. Cooperate, don’t compete. Get up on a chair when you see a spider and scream. You get the idea. The message is: “Sublimate all your instincts and male ideals so you can be more like a woman.”

What has happened is that our SOCIETY HAS CHANGED. Our over-feminized liberal culture and “penis envy” feminism have helped destroy marriage as an institution. It has split dads away from their sons. It has created a culture where a man can have the fruits of a lifetime of labor stripped away in divorce court because his wife decides she wants to relive her party years with his money. A culture where feminists attack masculinity. A culture where Hollywood tells young men that the end-all-and-be-all of their existence is having sex while it simultaneously portrays the church, patriotism, chivalry and the other concepts that channel masculine energy as old-timey ideals that no longer matter. Colleges have implemented “yes means yes policies” along with kangaroo courts all designed to make it as easy as possible to convict men of sexual assault and quite frankly, nobody seems to care all that much about whether they’re guilty or not. Day in and day out, masculinity is under attack in our feminized culture, yet the poorest, most powerless man is told that he’s part of a patriarchy that oppresses women and that he has it easier because of his gender.

The damage done to our society by such wet-brained folly is damned near incalculable. As with most of the destruction so wantonly, mindlessly wrought by toxic-for-real Progressivism, who even knows if it can ever be undone. But it must be; our very survival may well depend on it.

Share

STILL winning!

Let freedom ring, baby.

The Masterpiece Cakeshop decision was not even close in terms of votes (7-2, with Sotomayor and Ginsburg naturally voting in favor of oppression), nor was it a “narrow” ruling on the merits. Instead, it was a ringing endorsement of the idea that sniveling leftist bureaucrats can’t target religious folk for hassles just because the dissenters refuse to bend a knee to the secular idols du jour.

This was not about gay marriage – conservatives are no longer monolithic on the issue (I got grief on some site for congratulating Townhall’s Guy Benson on his recent engagement). This was about the right to dissent, to think differently even if you or I or (usually) the liberal elite don’t agree. And this ruling should not be shocking, but it still sort of was.

After all, until recently the tide was with those liberal elitists whose goal was to force the religious and the patriotic to their knees on every cultural issue. First, they came for the cake bakers, then they came for us. But the militant Normals changed everything when they elected Donald Trump. Do you think we’d be reading about a win for religious liberty if whatever robed pinko Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit would have appointed had taken the bench? No way – Kagan and Breyer would have joined the other three in holding that somehow that the whole freedom of religion thing doesn’t apply if liberals disapprove and off we’d go, taking another perilous step toward the nightmare of national divorce and potential conflict.

The opinion of Justice Kennedy, who I would love to see retire and spend more time with his family, nevertheless wrote a powerful rebuke to bigoted bureaucrats who never even bothered to hide their anti-religious zealotry when persecuting a guy for refusing to submit and acknowledge their supremacy. Their prejudice was stunning, not least for its shamelessness – these moral illiterates made no effort to hide their seething contempt for believers. And guess what? That’s not okay.

You don’t get to persecute religious people in America. I know, what a drag, huh? Pretty soon lots of people are going to start openly believing things liberals don’t like. It’ll be chaos!

Well, it was only ever the one religion they hated and attacked, you know. Myself, I’m still waiting for one of these precious shit-stirring twits to mince into a halal bakery and demand they cater a gay wedding. They’d learn with a quickness what it’s like to suffer “microaggression” and have their “safe space” violated. Might even be some “triggering” going on, although not the kind they weep in public over. As for that “narrow” business Kurt rejects:

In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a decisive 7-2 majority of the justices called out the double standard that Colorado had applied against my client, Jack Phillips. The Supreme Court reversed the decision to bully Jack for his faith and further clarified that the “government has no role in expressing or even suggesting whether the religious ground for [Jack’s] conscience-based objection is legitimate or illegitimate.”

Seems unequivocal enough to me; how “government has no role” could fail to apply to other like situations I’m sure I don’t know. This part, though, is disturbing:

Justice Neil Gorsuch said it well in his concurrence: “Popular religious views are easy enough to defend. It is in protecting unpopular religious beliefs that we prove this country’s commitment to serving as a refuge for religious freedom.”

True enough, sure, but…wait, what? Is this really where we are in America now, where the Left has dragged us off to? To a place where Christianity is now an “unpopular religious belief?” Never mind; probably best not to answer that one. But don’t think for a moment the Left is across-the-board anti-religion. In fact, they have one of their very own, and it’s…well, ummmm…it’s…

The left works like Hinduism. You are born into caste. Each caste has a certain karma. There is good karma, earned by victim points. There is bad karma, earned by “privilege”. The level of your caste is decided by the difference between the two. The more victim karma your caste has, be more inherently moral you are and the higher your caste.

Nothing you can personally do will affect this Karma. A mass rapist from a high caste will always be morally superior to a saintly person from a low caste. This is how a rich black woman can still be oppressed by dirt poor white trailer trash.

You cannot change caste. You can only hope to convince the priesthood that you were actually born into another caste. Thus a white male is low caste. But if a white male can convince the priesthood he is a transwomen, he does indeed improve his victim karma and he rises in caste.

Since people from low caste are fundamentally irredeemable they deserve everything bad that happens to them.

The supreme object of worship is blackness. Blackness represents a virgin birth..the african-american nation was born in chains, thus they are free from the taint of negative karma, known as Privilege. Blacks, all blacks are inherently superior in a spiritual sense since they are free form the taint.

This offers whites, who have the lowest victim karma a chance for redemption. This can happen in two ways

1) Race mixing: Whites mixing with blacks can give birth to children with pure black souls.

2) Domination by blacks: If whites allow themselves to be dominated and oppressed their descendants may be purified by the suffering of their ancestors.

Dare we call this religion Dinduism?

Heh. Dare we call it anything else?

Share

SWATting the Hogg

I’m probably gonna annoy some people with this. Oh well.

An anonymous — and fraudulent — hostage-situation emergency call to the Broward County Sheriff’s Office resulted in a Coral Springs Fire rescue team racing to the family home of Parkland shooting survivor David Hogg.

A local TV station reported that “Hogg was not home at the time of the incident and is currently in Washington, DC with his mother to accept the RFK Human Rights award.”

SWATting is the dangerous “prank” of calling in fake crime reports in order to get heavily armed police to show up at the victim’s house. The resulting situation is potentially deadly.

The condemnation for today’s SWATting attempt on Hogg and his family has been swift and universal — and that’s just the condemnation coming from the Right.

Follows, a whole passel of Tweets from Righties screaming about how just awfully awful it is that it happened to the little twit.*

But honestly, guys? I just ain’t feeling it. Yes, yes, it’s a horrible, no good, and very dangerous thing to do. No decent person would ever dream of doing such a thing. It puts innocent lives at risk, wastes police resources and time, and has resulted in at least one wrongful death that I know of.

And as with doxxing, it’s now become just another arrow in the Leftist quiver; they’ve used it against their enemies—that would be us, in case you were uncertain about it—without a thought or care, way more than once. It represents another line of civilized behavior trampled under Lefty jackbooks with nary a look back.

So do I get upset when the Left has it thrown back at them? Why no, I can’t say that I do. Do I wish such abuses didn’t happen? Sure I do. Would I rather things hadn’t come to such a godawful pass? Of course. Would I ever dream of doing such myself, or recommend that someone else do so? Not in a million years. Am I going to join others on the Right in anguishing over it happening to the Left now that they’ve long since declared open season on us, with no holds barred and no bag limit?

Nope.

It goes back to what I’ve been saying for a while now: the Left needs to be made to feel pain—real pain, pain that can’t be waved away or brushed off—for their ever-escalating depredations against decency, civilized behavior, and the right to dissent. Seems to me that this is one way to make that so, if an admittedly extreme one.

Anybody see this story earlier today?

Congressman Steve Scalise returns to baseball a year after he was shot at practice

Watch the video. It’s pitiful…and enraging. Hats off to Scalise, of course; he’s shown nothing but class, heart, and courage throughout what one might call his man-caused ordeal, and one can but admire him for that. But he was crippled, most likely for life, by a Democrat Socialist true-believer who only differs from the so-called “mainstream” in his willingness to act on the things they’ve all been saying.

Note, too, that the nearly-successful attempt on his life was “condemned” in only the most mealy-mouthed, half-hearted, and self-serving terms by Democrat Socialist leaders, and even that only after they’d been hectored about it by the Right. As for the Progtard rank and file, the main takeaway from their response was the openly-expressed regret that the shooter didn’t succeed in killing the guy.

And this same despicable response happens every time any similar atrocity occurs. Every. Single. Time. You could set your clock by it.

Now, I’m not slamming all those well-intentioned folks on the Decent Right who reacted with honest horror over Hogg’s SWATting. But I’m not going to be joining them. It sounds to me like the old “This is NOT WHO WE ARE” argument writ larger, deployed on a different battlefield than the usual NeverTrumpTard one.

We’re in a war here, people; maybe not a shooting war, not yet, but a war just the same. Seeing how they’ve brutalized good, honest people on our side again and again and again without repercussion, my patience with them is exhausted, my sympathy when some of their own splashes back on them nonexistent. Some lying, clueless liberty-thief gets himself SWATted, or doxxed, or sucker-punched? Meh. It’s just sauce for the fucking goose as far as I’m concerned. Most of them deserve a lot worse. And if they keep on pushing their fascist agenda, they’ll quite likely get it, too, before all’s said and done.

*Note, too, that the whole thing smells to high heaven anyway, if Hogg’s own too-blasé response is any sort of tell—and it is.

Update! Dang it, I double-posted this one by accident, discovered the error this morning, and deleted the one with the comments attached before heading out to work. Gonna try to fix that in just a bit if I can; sorry for the glitch, guys.

Share

Getting sporty

Solway on civil war.

This is about as serious as it gets. Sarah Hoyt at PJ Media — along with a fair number of her readers — believes America can recover its spirit without a “revolution” — a term which muddies the waters somewhat. The revolution we are witnessing is a vendible of the Left; what is needed is a counter-revolution. “Let’s hope we can recover our liberty without [a revolution],” she writes in guarded optimism. “The other side will still win some battles, but we’re winning the war.” Were it only so. Hoyt uses the metaphor of the half-empty/half-full glass, opting for the latter. The trouble is, there is no glass. Since at least the time of Woodrow Wilson, the Left has been carving longer and deeper inroads into the culture and the political landscape, and is now occupying the citadel. It is not about to go away or shrivel into a benign archaism. Despite the election of a people’s candidate like Donald Trump, the Left’s power continues to grow and consolidate.

Realism must finally prevail. The battle for the nation’s survival as a constitutional republic cannot be won until the domestic Left is torn root and branch from the body politic. As David Horowitz writes, “It would be a healthy development for everyone, rich and poor alike, if future generations put Karl Marx’s manifesto on the same sinister shelf as Mein Kampf and other destructive products of the human soul.” One may justly view the Manifesto as a synecdoche for the Left in toto, itself, collectively speaking, a destructive product of the human soul.

Clearly, the Executive Branch is profoundly compromised. Trump cannot rely on praetorian agencies like the FBI, the DoJ, the DNI and the CIA, which have gone rogue and are part of the swamp he promised to drain. Public sentiment is fractured. The Washington elites, as Peter Schweizer reveals in Secret Empires, are hopelessly corrupt and are more preoccupied with preserving their clandestine profits than with preserving the Republic. A decadent media would flood the nation with headlines, editorials, and reports claiming an alt-right takeover of the nation. The so-called Deep State continues to pursue a policy of conspiratorial subversion, conducting what is nothing less than a planned emeut; the intrigue “to undo the results of an election,” writes Patricia McCarthy, “is the most serious, most villainous political scandal in American history.”

What, then, are the alternatives? America now has a president who, despite his personal flaws — and what president has been without blemishes of character? — his tempestuous administration and the wall-to-wall barrage of denunciation, slander, lies, unmitigated hatred and surreptitious attempts at delegitimation, represents the best hope since Reagan for righting the foundering ship of state. As Thomas O’Malley fears, a racially diverse and politically divided country like the U.S. is not likely to survive, but may in time undergo a violent break-up into several independent demographic units, as happened in Yugoslavia. It follows that a nation in the throes of an infrared insurgency must act without hesitation to ensure its existential integrity. But Trump may not be able to do it by conventional initiatives or normal institutional means alone and certainly not by intemperate tweeting. The canker has gone so deep, penetrating to the very marrow of the nation, that there are few doable ways to “take back the culture.”

None at all that I can see, but hey, I don’t know everything. Solway ponders the possibilities in Part 2:

In any event, it seems to me that only some form of determined action by the current administration can prevent the future dissolution of the country. Here it is important to be specific. For there is little point in merely describing or deploring a dire situation unless one furnishes proposals for empirical action. The sources of Leftist activism and recruitment are both multiple and ubiquitous and must be met head-on.

Ergo, the academy, from which the ideological contamination has emerged and spread, should be selectively defunded. A sectarian press and accessory internet sites, which are not “free” but propaganda arms of the Marxist axis — American Pravda, as James O’Keefe calls it — need to be prosecuted for flagrantly violating the SPJ Code of Ethics. Organizations that have proliferated for decades with the intent of sabotaging a constitutional republic — the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Planned Parenthood, among an innumerable host — must be disbanded.

Similarly, powerful corporations that use their wealth and influence to eviscerate the economic, social, cultural and political structures meant to sustain a strong and prosperous nation — such corporations as the Tides Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the infamous Clinton Foundation — have to be neutralized, and individuals whose billions go to fund the revolutionary enemies of the Republic and foment schism and turmoil must be arrested, deported or extradited.

In addition, guerilla outfits like Antifa need to be declared domestic terrorists and face the might of a loyal military. Groups that play the racist card to extort illegitimate advantages and sow discord should be put on notice. UN-supporting globalists need to go the way of desuetude along with an anti-American anachronism like the UN itself. The U.S. should deal diplomatically with nations on an individual basis rather than subsidize a Wilsonesque institution mired in corruption and Security Council obstructionism. The Democratic Party and their assorted Republican allies should be exposed for the oligarchic fifth column they are.

Let us not mince words. Desperate times call for desperate measures failing which the writing is lividly on the wall. There is no compromising with an enemy for whom compromise is not in its arsenal. The lure of reconciliation is a mirage in the cultural desert. Gradually healing what is irremediably broken is pure wish-fulfilment. In short, however the task is definitively undertaken, the Swamp must be drained and the Deep State deep-sixed if the licit State is to survive.

My boldface above is key: unlikely as it may seem and as tall an order as it is, Trump is the only guy I see out there who might conceivably do it. Should he fail, real Americans will be demoralized; the Deep State will seize upon that to reassert itself, grabbing power so tightly and weilding the machinery of the Superstate so ruthlessly it can never be dislodged or credibly threatened again except by outright violent rebellion.

But here’s the hopeful thing, if hopeful it is: the methods by which his enemies now seek to thwart and bring Trump down are so brutish and brazen they carry within them the seeds of their own destruction. No serious, honest person can look at what’s been going on and fail to see what’s really happening: an all-out, no-holds-barred fight to illegitimately undo an election. The only question left is whether we sit back and let it happen—not behind closed doors, but very much in our faces. I keep thinking about Ed Koch’s old line: “The people have spoken. Now they must be punished.” He meant something a bit different by it, but that is EXACTLY, LITERALLY what’s going on here.

It seems pretty clear to me that Trump is headed for a resounding win in 2020, unless the Left manages to murder him before then (and don’t think for one second they’d balk at such a thing). If you think the Left has gone bugfuck nuts now, just wait till that happens. Weeks of violent urban rioting will only be the start of it.

It’s a vain hope to think the Left will somehow come to their senses, moderate their position, and agree to leave us the hell alone. They intend to win, and to regain total control over us by any means they can contrive. We cannot allow that to happen. Things are rapidly coming to a head; something has to give. And it’s going to, probably sooner rather than later.

As Solway says, this is about as serious as it gets. If martial law and a forceful crackdown on inarguably seditious Lefty groups is what it will take to restore lawful order and allow Trump to get on with his mandate of righting the errant ship of state and getting it back on its proper course, best get on with it then. No, such a flexing of federal muscle ain’t something anybody on our side should be completely comfortable with. But the alternative is either slavery…or war. If the Left is to be stopped relatively non-violently, wringing our hands over Muh Principles!™ isn’t going to do the job. We’re going to have to use every tool in the drawer, including some that are hazardous if misused. We won’t get another chance.

Share

“Dear Ex-Friends in #TheResistance”

Open letter to the loony bin.

The weirdness started on social media late on Election Night, as it became clear Hillary was going to lose. A few of you actually admitted that you were cradling your sleeping children, weeping, wondering what to tell your kindergartner the next morning about Trump’s victory. It continued over the next several days. Some of you seriously expressed fear about modern-day concentration camps. Despite living a privileged lifestyle, you were suddenly a casualty of the white patriarchy. Your daughters were future victims; your sons were predators-in-waiting. You threatened to leave Facebook because you could no longer enjoy the family photos or vacation posts from people who, once friends, became Literal Hitlers to you on November 8 because they voted for Donald Trump.

I admit I was a little hurt at first. The attacks against us Trump voters were so personal and so vicious that I did not think it could be sustained. I thought maybe you would regain your sanity after some turkey and egg nog.

But you did not. You got worse. And I went from sad to angry to where I am today: Amused.

For my own part, I have to confess that “sad” ain’t on the list of emotions I felt for ’em, then or now. Read it and weep, losers.

Share

Point: missed

Basically right, but still wrong.

Purdue University President Mitchell E. Daniels, former President Ronald Reagan’s political director and a two-term Indiana Republican governor, sees the nation dividing into feuding “tribes” that gravitate to tyrants who “bludgeon” opponents.

In two separate reports, the two opposites come to a similar conclusion that the nation and even families are terribly divided and that the media has played a big role in creating the split.

Daniels is well regarded as level-headed and has been dubbed the best university president in the nation. He has used his commencement addresses to push for openness and understanding, but this year he noted a shift to “tribalism,” where sides cluster in cliques.

“It’s no longer just a matter of Americans not knowing and understanding each other. We’ve seen these clusters deepen, and harden, until separation has led to anger, misunderstanding turned into hostility. At the individual level, it’s a formula for bitterness and negativity. For a self-governing people, it’s poison,” Daniels told his students this month.

The hostility is justified and legitimate, and comes not from “misunderstanding” but from understanding, in truth—from an overdue awakening to what Progressivists really want and intend for us. Hint: it is assuredly NOT “self-government.” Although it’s poison, sure enough. This, though, is where the analysis goes off the rails completely:

Among the culprits he cited were biased media, the “anti-social media.” Said Daniels, “Our various modern media lead us to, and feed us from information sources that reinforce our existing biases. They put us in contact with other tribe members, but rarely those who see things differently. We’re starting to resemble ominously our primitive forebearers, trusting no one outside the tribe.”

And he called that “dangerous,” warning “almost all of history has belonged to the tyrants, the warlords, the autocrats, the totalitarians. And tribes always gravitate toward tyrants.”

He didn’t name names, mention President Trump or former President Barack Obama, on purpose. The reason: both sides and their mouthpieces are to blame. “It’s a general phenomenon,” he said in an interview in which he bemoaned “there is no overlap anymore.”

With all due respect: bullshit. The REAL reason: freedom cannot co-exist with tyranny. There is no “overlap” because between liberty and tyranny, well, there is no overlap. You either have one, or you have the other. They cannot coexist. And THAT is our big problem. It’s probably the main reason the status-quo statist types hate Trump so much: he’s unmasked them, revealed them for what they are, whether he did so by design or not. Clarice Feldman calls it the Great Unmasking. She gets quite specific about the thing, in the preamble to which she tosses out a great quote from Scott Adams:

Four things to understand about SPYGATE: 
1) There was no spy in the Trump campaign. 
2) The spying that did NOT happen was totally justified.
3) It would be bad for national security to identify the spy who doesn’t exist. 
4) His name is Stefan.

Spygate, hell. We should start calling it by its proper name: Obamagate.

SpyGate: Did the Obama administration spy on the Donald Trump campaign because it feared Russian hacking of the 2016 election? Or was it merely a smokescreen to cover up the real reason: to keep Trump from winning the presidency or take him down if he did?

As the saying goes, timing is everything. Recent revelations keep pushing back the beginning of the CIA and FBI investigation into “Russian hacking” or “meddling” in the 2016 election further and further in time.

This is significant, since the farther back in time the actual origin of the spying on Trump, the less likely it is that it had anything to do with Russian involvement in the 2016 elections, but everything to do with stopping the surprising surge of Trump during the GOP primaries and beyond.

Increasingly, a political motive seems not only likely, but almost certain.

At the risk of becoming boringly repetitious, I’ll say it again: always assume the absolute worst about whatever Obama might be doing or saying and you’ll never go far wrong. True then, true now, true forever.

Share

Nothing in common

The divorce, she is a-comin’.

The question all boils down to this – is it acceptable for the party in power to use the intelligence and law enforcement communities against its rivals? Are these convoluted and often delusional explanations – RUSSIANS TREASON OK NO RUSSIANS THEN UH QATARIS YEAH QATARIS TREASON! – enough to take that step, even if true?

Of course not. Even if Trump’s people sought to get the Russians to release the contents of the emails Hillary Clinton should never have had on her literally “password“ password-protected illegal server – and after two years, there’s zero evidence they did –was that enough to send spies into the campaign, to tap its phones, and leverage the power of FBI et ceterea to surveil them? Does the liberal elite have any concern that maybe, just maybe, it has to be about as serious a situation as you can get to do that? Is a coordinated campaign by the FBI backed up by the NSA and probably the CIA the proper remedy for the unauthorized release of Hillary’s yoga dates and wedding plans, because that’s all Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit said was on the 33K emails she deleted, right?

Hey, it’s diff’runt when they do it.

No one objected. The Democrat Party is committed to the New Rules. And the New Rules are tyranny.

It can’t be a surprise. After all, the Democrat Party has bulldozed every norm, custom, and tradition out there in its quest for undisputed power. It spews hatred at its opponents – hey, everyone reading this is racist, sexist, and a denier of #science and so forth. The Democrats will happily deny you your free exercise of religion – put on your aprons people, because you can bake a cake or be bankrupted. They seek to suppress speech by encouraging fascism both in academia and by online tech companies, and if you think they won’t pass laws to limit speech given the chance, you’re fooling yourself. Hell, they tried to amend the First Amendment to overturn Citizens United, a case where the government tried to ban a movie critical of Hillary Clinton.

Let’s say that again, because it’s madness. The position of the left-of-center party in the United States is that the government should be allowed to arrest and imprison people for making a film critical of a politician.

Only when they’re running it.

We cannot have a functioning republic where about half of the population actively supports the trappings of tyranny. We can’t. No nation, especially one full of citizens who zealously guard their freedom, can tolerate a double standard for political behavior. It won’t be double for long. The New Rules, should they become ingrained in our systems, will inevitably go both ways.

Ah, but there’s the rub: we DIDN’T “zealously guard” our freedom; we sat back, all docile and complacent for the most part, and let them take it. They became accustomed to our acquiescence, and now that we’ve made the first halting steps at revoking it, they’re shocked, surprised, and enraged—to the point of mental pathology, quite literally.

A Great Awakening has occurred. A Great Reckoning will be hard on its heels. No one among us should think for a moment that just because we’ve belatedly withdrawn our compliance, the Left will just give back what they’ve taken from us. They won’t. Not without a struggle, they won’t. As a closer, Kurt asks: “Do they really want to go down this road?” Sadly, I don’t think it’s a matter of choice any longer—for any of us. The only way I can see it becoming one again is for Lefty to relent, to back off. Much as I might wish things were otherwise, I just can’t see that happening.

UNEXPECTED update! Hillary!™ is…gulp…right?!?

“Right now we’re living through a full-fledged crisis in our democracy. No, there are not tanks in the streets, but what’s happening right now goes to the heart of who we are as a nation, and I say this not as a Democrat who lost an election but as an American afraid of losing a country.”  — Hillary Clinton to Yale graduates.

She is absolutely correct. The refusal by Barack Obama to be a Man and peacefully hand over power to the duly elected president of the United States is an unprecedented attack on our nation’s beliefs, our rights as citizens, and our way of life.

The fascist use of the FBI and the national intelligence system to spy on Mister and to harass his supporters and appointees is a malevolence never visited upon this land, even by King George III.

The abuse of power allowed Jimmy the Weasel Comey to destroy evidence and allow Hillary to walk away despite her many felonies, while his predecessor at the FBI wages a witch hunt against the Real President.

Face it, we have the enemy within. Its name is the Democratic Party.

Lock her up.

Lock all of them up.

From Don’s lips to God’s ears.

You betcha it’s related update! More from Surber:

How Obama became the first communist president
The use of the state to spy on and infiltrate the campaign of a political opponent is the final proof of the truth that we have averted our eyes from for the last 14 years.

Barack Obama is a communist. Mild compared to Castro or Mao, but nevertheless a believer in state control of everything.

Electing a communist president was easy, although it took more than seven decades. While the steps were many — Stalin’s Soviet Union collapsed before achieving his goal — the major ones are obvious in hindsight.

Don really did his homework with this one, and shows his work, as they used to say in math class. His closing ‘graph is right on the money, too.

Share

Blue wave?

Or blue dribble?

Each day, the impending electoral “blue tidal wave” gets upgraded on the Hawaiian scale of electoral wave strength. Every special election, no matter how small, is inflated to an epic scale that “spells disaster” for the president and the party he commandeered in 2016.

Just one thing stands in the way of this electoral disaster of biblical proportions.

Reality.

Yeah, that’s always been the thing that trips Lefty up.

Liberals no longer call themselves “liberal” because they have abandoned the values that word embodies: “liberty.” Instead they now use the Orwellian term “progressive.” Only what we want is progress. Those who disagree will report to the Ministry of Love for re-education.

The far left, which has become the mainstream left, has turned on core liberal values like the presumption of innocence; freedom of speech; freedom of the press; the right to a secret ballot; racial integration; and freedom of religion. (The last one doesn’t even require a citation.) So basically, progressives have declared war on the core tenets of democracy.

Many even want to get rid of democracy.

The modern left has waged a constant, relentless attack on American culture. Their main victim has been the Democratic Party itself.

Which is as it should be. How does one go about getting votes from people one so openly detests—especially after it has become entirely obvious that one intends to begin radically extending his power over those people the moment one takes office?

That, combined with their now-amply-demonstrated incompetence, corruption, and disingenuousness, is the Democrat Socialist dilemna in a nutshell. They let their freak flag fly to the fullest possible extent—only to find that normal Americans, while willing enough to live and let live when it comes to freaks, don’t necessarily wish to be governed by them.

Dry well update! As with the Mueller coup-attempt circus, they got nothin’.

The only stab at “issues” has been a lame, warmed over set of liberal policy prescriptions wrapped up in the generic title of “A Better Deal.” Other than that, their only agenda has been to attack Trump at every turn.

Nevertheless, it’s a sign Democrats are starting to realize that their plan to ride Trump hatred to victory this November isn’t panning out the way they’d hoped.

The Mueller investigation — now in its second year — has failed to bear any impeachment fruit. Trump is racking up successes foreign and domestic — the tax cut and resulting economic boom, the embassy move to Jerusalem, the impressive progress with North Korea, tough stands with China and Iran. More importantly, the public is starting to realize that Trump isn’t the cartoon villain Democrats had portrayed.

But if Trump-bashing won’t work, what else can Democrats talk about? Repealing Trump’s tax cuts? Imposing still more ObamaCare? The return of job killing regulations and mandates? Gun control? Free college?

No wonder Democrats are now looking for someone else to blame if they don’t win big in November.

Well, they could always take a page from their last loser, climb inside a bottle of cheap gin, and travel the world muttering about “misogyny” and “sexism” to whoever will listen, I guess.

Share

A level playing field

Except when it doesn’t suit us.

Last week, track and field’s world governing body limited entry into women’s events to athletes who have testosterone levels that are capable of being produced solely by ovaries.

These rules apply across the board to athletes however they presented at birth. Advocates for intersex and transgender athletes have vigorously attacked the International Association of Athletics Federations’ new rules, but they are an extraordinary compromise for women’s sports, including for traditional feminist proponents of equal access to sports for girls and women, guaranteed in the civil rights legislation known as Title IX.

Understanding the rules and why they make sense is hard. They are based in biology people don’t know or don’t like to talk about and, let’s be honest, at least in some circles, they’re politically incorrect. They force us to talk about women’s bodies when it is increasingly taboo to do so, and they run counter to the movement that seeks to include transgender and intersex people in social institutions based on their gender identity rather than their biology.

These are important progressive developments, but their effects on valuable institutions like women’s sport are real and they need to be understood before positions harden on bad information. Pretending that the female body doesn’t exist or that we can’t define the boundaries between men’s and women’s bodies is a bad idea for many reasons. Replacing traditional sex classifications with classifications based on gender identity certainly has steep costs in contexts like competitive sport, where the likelihood of success is precisely about sex-specific biology.

A lot has been written about intersex athletes who identify — or are identified in their legal documents — as women. What is important to know is that there are many different intersex conditions, but the I.A.A.F. is only concerned with the subset that involves athletes who are biologically male. They are “in between” only with respect to the pre-birth underdevelopment of their external genitals. Intersex athletes who are biologically female aren’t affected by the rules.

Specifically, the athletes who are the focus of the I.A.A.F.’s rules are those who have testes. Starting in puberty and as adults, their testes produce sperm, not eggs, and supply testosterone in quantities that biologically female bodies and their ovaries never come close to producing.

The male range at its lowest is three times higher than the female range at its highest. At puberty these athletes developed male, not female, secondary sex characteristics: increased muscle mass and strength, including increased heart size; higher hemoglobin levels, which result in better oxygen carrying capacity; and different muscle types and ratios of fat to muscle.

Advocates for intersex athletes like to say that sex doesn’t divide neatly. This may be true in gender studies departments, but at least for competitive sports purposes, they are simply wrong. Sex in this context is easy to define and the lines are cleanly drawn: You either have testes and testosterone in the male range or you don’t. As the I.A.A.F.’s rules provide, a simple testosterone test establishes this fact one way or the other.

This is actually a highly sensible editorial, especially as it ran originally in the NYT. I hate to argue with her, since she’s taken basically the same position and used the same words I have myself, many times over. But…no. HELL no. No way. To begin with: despite current PC fashion, sex in just about ANY context is “easy to define,” with cleanly drawn lines.

The writer, being an athlete, focuses exclusively on sports. Sorry, but that’s not sufficient. From the military to fire departments to just about any field where biology and physical reality puts women at a disadvantage, standards have been lowered to allow females access at the behest of so-called “third-wave” feminists. For decades, these “feminists” have angrily insisted that there are no meaningful differences between men and women, and that every obstruction to total male-female “equality” must therefore be demolished. They’ve forcibly reshaped society to square with these absurd contentions. Any common-sense pushback is dismissed with enraged howls of protest, or mocked as anachronistic stupidity at best.

Fine by me, then. Every womens’ sports league, at every level from professional down to junior-high, must be disbanded by law. Transgenders must be accommodated as whichever of the 357 Flavors of Fluidity suits them that day, week, month, or season. There shall be no more women-only public bathrooms, gym showers, or university housing. Likewise sororities, hobbyist groups, social clubs, and all other female-only organizations. The WNBA must take its place on the ash-heap of history’s discarded lies, a shameful monument to discrimination and bigotry from a less-enlightened era. If aspiring female firefighters can’t carry the dummy the requisite distance in the requisite time—a dummy of the exact same size and weight as the men must qualify with—then they don’t get to ride the truck or carry the hose. Can’t beat the boys in the fifty-yard dash, wrestling, or powerlifting? Can’t manage as many pull-ups as a male SEAL or Marine? Better learn how to be a good loser, then.

No shortcuts, do-overs, handicaps, or ladies’ tees. No weeping rooms, fainting couches, or “safe spaces” either. Plumbing problems, flat tires, any home repair requiring a circular saw, a sledgehammer, or a prybar? Your arms ain’t broke, fix it yourself. Nut up or wash out. If you can’t stand the heat, get back in the kitchen.

Don’t like that, “ladies”? Please allow me to commend Alinsky’s Rule 4 to your attention, following which you can all go pound sand. Sorry, but you don’t get to have your cake and eat it too; you want to be “equal,” then you will BY GOD BE EQUAL, according to the truest, sparest, most literal definition of the word. It’s only fair.

Careful what you wish for, Lefty dopes.

Share

Questions

Trump must NOT let his ego and lust for battle lead him into doing this.

The leak of what may or may not be (for such is the nature of anonymously sourced leaks) Robert Mueller’s questions for Donald Trump gives the president his best opportunity yet to put an end to the Mueller investigation, the Russian “collusion” meme, the idea of a special prosecutor, and the “Resistance.” He ought to take it.

The questions themselves are not the problem, although they are certainly problematic—transparently so, in fact. They are not designed to elicit any useful information in what was supposed to be a counterintelligence investigation; rather they are barely disguised perjury trap inquiries, which should come as no surprise to those aware of the favored tactics of this Irish/FBI mafia. They are the same kinds of questions that put Martha Stewart in jail (James Comey, prosecutor) as well as the recently pardoned Scooter Libby (Patrick Fitzgerald, prosecutor).

That Mueller isn’t posing these questions in good faith is beyond question. As I have been writing for well over a year, the “resistance” to the duly elected president of the United States was an intelligence operation from the start, engineered by Barack Obama, James Clapper, John Brennan, Loretta Lynch, leading Democrats, rogue Republicans, and using a deeply partisan and thus compromised media as its vengeful Greek chorus.

Funny how the same names just keep popping up again and again in these show-trial “proceedings,” innit?

By now, it’s clear that Mueller never had any intention of investigating Russian “collusion,” aside from issuing some meaningless indictments of persons over whom he has no legal authority. Rather—as the enemedia breathlessly hopes!—the inquiry has morphed into an “obstruction of justice” investigation into the firing of Mueller’s pal, Comey. And now we arrive at the heart of the matter.

Enemedia—gotta remember that one. And yes, the Mueller/Deep State witch hunt was never about “Russian collusion.” It was about getting rid of Trump—about undoing an election that didn’t go their way, despite the ham-handed effort by their supposed “best” and “brightest” to securely rig it. As such, Trump would have to be a far bigger, blinder fool than I believe him to be to walk into this trap with eyes wide shut. Steyn elaborates:

To reprise my old line: The process is the punishment. That’s particularly true at the federal level, where as a matter of policy they first wipe you out – drain your savings, empty your retirement account, nuke the kids’ college fund …and then dangle a deal in front of you in exchange for you pleading guilty “only” to a process crime, like lying to the lyin’ liars who run the FBI. It is an awesome thing to behold – particularly by comparison with, say, military justice, where the US has been holding 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for almost four times as long as the First World War and still can’t manage to bring him to trial.

In a sane system, he’d have been convicted and hanged in a fortnight. Instead, his lawyers are now arguing he’s been brain damaged by the United States. Who knows? But, given that the US has been nursemaiding him for over fifteen years, it’s not unreasonable to argue that, whatever medical ailments afflict him, they developed during Uncle Sam’s leisurely custody of him.

Thus American justice in the 21st century: It can ruin a no-name Trump campaign volunteer in nothing flat. But it can’t try a guy who murdered three thousand innocents in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, another two hundred in the Bali nightclub bombing, plus Daniel Pearl in Pakistan …and has confessed to all this and more.

It’s all a joke: civilian, military; federal, state; criminal, civil; family, probate. As my old boss Conrad Black likes to point out, the United States has as many lawyers as the rest of the world combined. One entirely inevitable consequence of that malign distortion in the labor market is that far more aspects of life are litigated, and, when they are, the natural tendency of the system is for everything to take far longer than it would anywhere else. So what counts is not plaintiff or defendant, but which party is in the position to inflict the most pain on the other – whether that’s a lavishly endowed government or a billionaire scumbag reduced to suing his own company to avoid paying a court judgment. Whatever it takes for as long as it takes.

And yet despite this being the most litigious society on earth huge numbers of Americans remain oblivious to the vast amount of human wreckage piled up: Every day on cable news, I hear some Democrat telling the host that, if these former minor Trump aides have nothing to hide, then they have nothing to fear from investigation-without-end: We need to let the law do its job, and let the process play itself out.

I heard the same thing six years ago, when Michael Mann, the hockey-stick huckster and climate mullah, sued me for defamation: “Well, if Steyn’s innocent, he’ll get his day in court and the process will play itself out.” That was 2012, and my day in court is no nearer than it was, and a First Amendment that protects my right to a 270-word blog post only after a decade of my life and an eight-figure sum isn’t, as a practical matter, in terribly good health, is it?

When the process plays itself out as lethargically and ruinously as this, the process itself is the problem – as Michael Caputo has discovered.

And as Trump will too, if he’s foolish enough to think he can beat Mueller at his own carefully-rigged game. All Trump has to do is let Mueller get him talking, and hey presto! He’ll get himself got, left with no good options beyond clock-watching out his days in a suddenly lame-duck, one-term presidency. The ship of (Deep) State will have righted itself, resuming the journey on its circular course to nowhere. And the country at large will have been condemned to either tyranny or eventual dissolution, if not outright war.

Share

Gimme back my wig

And my culture. Bonus points for knowing where my title was, umm, appropriated from.

The Utah high school student who wore a Chinese dress for her senior prom has a message for those who attacked her for “cultural appropriation” on Twitter: “I would wear the dress again.”

Keziah Daum, 18, wanted to find a dress for her prom that would stand out while also being classy, saying that she wanted a dress that “didn’t reveal too much of the chest and neck area [or] too much legs and shoulders.”

Daum quickly found the tweet that was directing harassment at her, which came from a man named Jeremy Lam, who wrote: “My culture is NOT your g*****n prom dress.”

Follows in the linked article, a list of sidesplitting Tweets supporting her, my favorite of which would have to be this one:



Another good ‘un lambasting the twit:



There’s lots more of ’em, but I’ll close it out here with Schlichter’s hearty fuck-you:



Amen to all that. It’s a beautiful dress, Miss Daum is a beautiful girl who looks great in it, and whiny-ass bitch Jeremy Lem should go take a flying fuck at a plate-glass window at the earliest opportunity.

Update! Strong message follows, from Klavan:

Cultural appropriation is not a glitch of American life. It’s a feature. It’s part of what makes the country great. We take your culture, we get rid of the oppression, the mass murder, the slavery, the intransigent poverty and the endless internecine wars. We keep the pasta and the funny hats, and occasionally we dress up as you on Halloween. It’s a good deal for everyone.

People who get angry about pretty girls wearing pretty dresses have lost the plot of life. Same with people who get angry about comedians making jokes, silly characters in television cartoons and rap stars who disagree with their politics. These are not bad things. They are good things. They are what real diversity looks like: people of different colors from different places living together as one nation, disagreeing with one another, making fun of each other, stealing fashion ideas from one another, eating each other’s food, marrying each other and celebrating that out of many lesser cultures we are making one new culture, free and prosperous, powerful and great.

Does that bother you? Guess what: you’re an idiot. Are you giving a young lady a hard time about what dress she chooses to wear to prom? Hooray: you’re a bully and a schmuck. Does everything that everybody does or say make you feel offended and angry? I’m happy to report there’s a cure for that. Stop being a leftist and the world will suddenly become very beautiful indeed.

Pretty much, yeah. Note well too, that, as was pointed out by one of the above-mentioned Tweeters, bitch-boy Lem was issuing his petulant demands on the internet—without the slightest trace of irony or awareness of which culture he has to thank for that little innovation. But then, he probably had a cheeseburger for lunch yesterday, too.

My my, but ain’t it just enjoyable as hell when some PC fucktard beclowns himself to such a hilariously fulsome degree?

Share

Obstruction

The very thing he was elected to do.

The justice that today’s ruling class seeks to impose is the unfettered discretion of the modern administrative state.

Donald Trump is trying to obstruct these bureaucracies. He fired James Comey, an executive official, and has every constitutional right to direct or to fire any and all others. The media, the professors, the major corporations, and their clients who are characterizing his actions as obstruction of justice speak from a frame of reference wholly peculiar to the war they are waging on America’s constitutional order—not to mention the classic understanding of justice on which it is based.

That’s only the very end of Codevilla’s latest, of which you will want to read the all.

Share

The collapse that wasn’t

Culper insists on the mot juste.

I hate using the words “civil war” and “collapse”, because they’re not specific. Whenever I read the words “societal collapse” or “economic collapse”, I wonder: collapse to what level? 100% collapse? 50% collapse? (Even a 25% collapse in employment and living standards is going to cause significant problems.) One could argue that we’re witnessing a societal collapse right now — a collapse of established, normative sociopolitical behavior and attitudes. It might be more accurate and specific to say that we’ve entered into a period of societal decline, but it only goes to show just how vague the word “collapse” actually is. The collapse of the Roman Empire lasted for centuries, and we only know that because we can read the history. I wonder if those living in any given 50 year period of that collapse understood that collapse was occurring. The same can be said of civil war. Will states be fighting each other in the Second Civil War? Is the North invading the South again? Will we be battling for control over Washington D.C.? What, exactly, is meant by the term civil war?

Now, you may be thinking, Well, that’s just a semantic game. Everyone knows what a civil war is. This may work for a cursory understanding of where we’re headed, but in intelligence we deal with specifics. The commander needs to know the who, what, when, where, why, and how of the situation. You don’t prepare for a civil war, you don’t prepare for an electromagnetic pulse, you don’t prepare for economic collapse. You prepare for the effects of these events. And if we’re not deliberate with our understanding of these threats and their second- and third-order effects, then we’re not truly prepared.

Predicting the future is hard, especially when we define our terms and arrange our expectations in reference to definitions and historical conditions that no longer apply, something we humans are wont to do.

Sam is right: we’re well into the collapse of what Normals think of as our traditional cultural arrangement and organization. The social contract as Americans once knew it is long gone, and it ain’t coming back. Not when half of us are obnoxiously determined to inflict authoritarian tyranny on the half resistant to such, it ain’t. As I keep saying, there is no bridging this gap; the two positions are incompatible, irreconcilable, and not amenable to negotiation or compromise. One side must prevail, and one side must capitulate. It’s a pretty sorry pass all right, but it’s where we are.

Update! Zman puts up some interesting thoughts on civil war as social war:

Continue reading “The collapse that wasn’t”

Share

Fuck you—WAR

While we’re talking about Codevilla and all.

Political-war-by-accusation-of-crime is common in the world. As a rule—Charles de Gaulle was not the first to note it—“peoples are moved only by elemental sentiments, violent images, brutal invocations.”

But in America, political war used to be rare. The Federalist Papers begin thus: “it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice.”

Was America ever ruled by reason? For the most part, and relative to the rest of the world, yes it was. How did this come to be? In 1816, Thomas Jefferson answered: “our functionaries have done well, because… if any were [inclined to do otherwise], they feared to show it.” In short, America was exceptional because the American people were exceptional. 

Today, Americans seem to be regressing to humanity’s sad norm.

Once again: not accident, not coincidence, not happenstance.

The 2016 election campaign gives insights, positive and negative. The majority of Americans’ sentiment that the ruling class has been warring against their way of life in word and deed overshadowed all issues. Donald Trump led from the beginning because his words showed the same disdain toward the bipartisan high and mighty that they, in turn, show to the rest of Americans. His (relatively mild) “brutal invocations and violent images” called forth the most elemental of sentiments: Your detractors are bad, you are good. Consequently, people who felt demeaned and pushed around by their pretend-betters came to feel that although Trump shared the ruling class’s culture more than their own, at least a Trump presidency would not threaten them; and that perhaps Trump might be their champion. Trump’s presidency lived up to minimal expectations. His administration is not leading the media’s, the judges’, the bureaucrats’, the corporate executives’ continuing war on ordinary Americans.

But that war is unabated because the power of the people who degraded our lives in their own image is undiminished. For them, the rest of America is and will remain irredeemable. They well nigh removed Christianity and Judaism from the public square. Their schools have dumbed down a generation. They reduced raising children within marriage to a vanishing majority in the country at large and to a rarity among blacks. They have filled our streets with criminals. Their corporations try dictating what people may say and even think. They have stigmatized the verbal currency of two centuries, and bid to outlaw it as hate speech. And they continue to tighten their vise. In the process, however, these rulers are convincing the rest of Americans that they are irredeemable as well.

When one side rejects persuasion in favor of war, what are the other’s options?

Nobody likes war; nobody wants war. But as with Muslim terrorism, when war is brought to one’s doorstep, there can be but two options: victory, or defeat. To insist on remaining above the fray in hopes of preserving one’s genteel “diginity” is a tacit acceptance of defeat, whether one likes it or not.

Codevilla goes into some interesting and unexpected places with this. I’m not sure I agree completely with all of the ideas he comes up with; some of them are damned good, if unlikely to actually come to pass. Being Codevilla, all of them are worth a look anyway. For my money, his biggest error comes right at the end:

The ruling class has conquered commanding heights over every part of American society. Because, as it did so, this class convinced itself unalterably that the rest of us are a lower class of beings, re-conquering those heights could not restore citizenship among us.

The ruling class didn’t “convince itself” of anything “as it did so.” The belief in our innate inferiority—of the absolutely necessity of micro-managing the lives of the Great Unwashed “for their own good”—was baked right into the cake from the outset; it is Progressivism’s most fundamental tenet. Without that arrogant presumption, Progressivism would not and could not exist at all. None of us should be fooling ourselves for a second that they’re the least bit likely to give it up, or to accept any resistance to it from the likes of us.

Share

Chickens

Home to roost.

The recent Vanity Fair article detailing the more lurid underbelly of online dating—the barrage of dick pics, the endless swiping, the death of romance—was grim, if not horrific. Dating, Vanity Fair would have you believe, is evolving into an elaborate charade of deception: Everybody is petrified of giving someone the “wrong idea.” Men are impolite to the point of viciousness to ensure that the women they just hooked up with understand they don’t want a relationship. Women “self-objectify” in profile pictures to get men interested, renouncing the “wrong idea” that they might want something more than a one-night stand. No matter which way you spin it, landing yourself in a committed relationship seems to be, by millennial standards, “the wrong idea.”

I want to believe that Vanity Fair selected only their most salacious interviewees to quote, but I know that’s not true. I’ve received my fair share of lewd attention during my online dating tenure to verify: It really is that bad. But I’ve noticed a new strategy among my set of female friends—lovely, intelligent, independent women—to combat the grime of the online dating world: date up.

I don’t mean status, I mean age. More and more women I know are dating men twice, yes twice, their age. In her new film, The Intern, Anne Hathaway stands with Robert DeNiro and a bunch of young male colleagues in a bar and draws a harsh comparison: “How in one generation have men gone from guys like Jack Nicholson and Harrison Ford to…?” She gestures despairingly at the four men in front of her, archetypes of my generation in their hoodies, craft beer in one hand, iPhone in the other, with their untrimmed beards and general lack of ambition. I see what Hathaway means: Why put up with Tinder when there’s a whole generation of men out there who wouldn’t dream of using it?

Poor, poor babies. They denigrate, attack, and degrade masculinity for decades. They declare us all rapists, every last one. They place a premium on weakness, indecisiveness, self-doubt, and “sensitivity.” A confident, self-assured male is a monster, one who evinces any interest in or attraction to the opposite sex a fiend in human shape. He might as well drink a quart of fresh blood in the village square in broad daylight as demonstrate the least little bit of assertiveness.

As Ed says, these shrieking harpies used their talons to carve themselves an effiminate, pussified Pajama Boy-effigy of manhood—then declared him contemptible. Now here they are agonizing over why whatever real men are left out there aren’t clamoring in droves and herds to marry them.

Sympathy: nonexistent. Interest: none whatsoever. Misery: earned. Bed: you made it, so lie in it, you stupid bints. Next time save yourselves a bunch of heartache and frustration and just buy a fucking teddy bear to bitch at, whydon’tcha.

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