Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Gibson has his say

No, I ain’t talking guitars now, but bakeries.

A business is only as strong as its reputation.

For more than 130 years, this principle served my family well. We own and operate Gibson’s Bakery in the City of Oberlin, Ohio — home to Oberlin College. Over that time, we have worked hard to build a reputation on our homemade baked goods, candy and ice cream, and on our commitment to our community.

Started by my great grandfather in 1885, the bakery has always been a source of pride for our family. For decades I’ve worked alongside my father, Allyn W. Gibson, known around Oberlin as “Grandpa Gibson.” At 90, he still comes to work nearly every day, where I’m joined by my son, and my 11-year-old grandson on the weekends.

On Nov. 9, 2016, a student attempted to shoplift two bottles of wine from our store. Unfortunately, theft is all too common at Gibson’s Bakery. Like many small businesses in Oberlin, our employees have caught plenty of shoplifters over the years — many of them students.

Police arrested the student. But the next day, hundreds of people gathered in protest. From bullhorns they called for a boycott. The sidewalk and park across the street from our store were filled with protesters holding signs labeling us racists and white supremacists. The arrest, they said, was the result of racial profiling. The narrative was set and there was no combating it.

Despite the lack of any evidence, our family was accused of a long history of racism and discrimination. Oberlin College officials ordered the suspension of the more than 100-year business relationship with our bakery, and our customers dwindled. We were officially on trial — not in a courtroom, but in the court of public opinion. And we were losing.

As time went on, the truth began to emerge. The shoplifter confessed to his crime and said the arrest wasn’t racially motivated. But Oberlin College refused to help set the record straight by issuing a public statement that our family is not racist and does not have a history of racial profiling or discrimination.

The damage had been done. And the truth seemed irrelevant. In a small city like Oberlin, having the largest business and employer against you is more than enough to seal your fate.

Running out of options, we decided to pursue a lawsuit against Oberlin College. Two regional law firms agreed to take our case.

As the extended legal battle dragged on, many asked why I didn’t just quit. Wouldn’t it be easier to close up shop and move on?

In the end, the words of my father inspired me to continue the fight. He said, “In my life, I’ve done everything I could to treat all people with dignity and respect. And now, nearing the end of my life, I’m going to die being labeled as a racist.”

Gibson closes with the hope that Oberlin’s Little Hitlers will learn something from this, take stock, and abandon the evil of SJW ideology. But as Bill Jacobson says, that hope is already being proven vain:

There is no evidence that Oberlin is ready to “take stock and correct course,” as Editorial Board of the Pittburgh Post-Gazette suggested it do to avoid going the way of Antioch College. As we have written, Oberlin College is doubling and tripling down on portraying itself as the victim, blaming as it has in past incidents, the media.

Then the full weight of the judgment should be rammed right down their throats until they choke to death on it. And if being forced to pay just restitution to the innocent people whose lives they intentionally ruined closes Oberlin college for good, well, tough shit. Full stop, end of story, no tears shed, world’s smallest violin.

Share

NeverForeverTrump

The Trump train: alllll aboooaaaarrrrd!

Years from now, history will note a major event that occurred in 2016. An event that significantly altered the course of the country and the world. At the time, the U.S. was in, what turned out to be, the last year of a 10-year economic slump. It was, in fact, the only 10-year period in history where the economy did not achieve 3% annual growth in any year.

From 2006 to 2016 economic growth averaged about 2%. That subpar growth rate led to fewer opportunities for Americans. That led to poor employment prospects and stagnant wages. There were many people who had absolutely no opportunity. That led to resentment.

Wary citizens were beginning to reject the capitalistic system in favor of socialism. The country was headed in an un-American direction.

On the world stage, a number of threats existed. There were numerous problems in the Middle East, Russia and China were going on offense, and North Korea was getting serious about displaying their strength. As for America’s foreign policy, it was as if someone gave the “stand down” order to every conflict, which resulted in the U.S. taking very soft, and ultimately weak, positions.

So Donald Trump came along. He was a very, very successful businessperson and TV personality. Although elected president, he was not a politician. But Trump’s message was welcomed by Americans. He told people to look in the mirror. He asked them to see where they were and what they had.

He emphasized being great, winning, and returning to prosperity. His vision was always clear. Unfortunately, his unpolished and politically incorrect communication skills were not as clear, which allowed the strong Trump opposition to make things extremely difficult for the president.

Although he did nothing wrong, the opposition insisted the election was a fraud. This led to a nearly two-year investigation by a special prosecutor, which found the president did not collude with any foreign government and he was not guilty of any other charges. Still, Trump continues to live with the constant media barrage, which seems to convict him of a new crime almost daily.

Yeah, well, there’s a reason for that, and it goes far beyond being about Trump alone.

America cannot continue as a republic without the acceptance that one party routinely will be turned out of office. Democrats no longer accept that bedrock principle of American liberty. They see themselves as the only party entitled to govern. “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and the Russian collusion frame-up are two faces of the same coin: Democrats now reject the orderly succession of power through duly constituted elections.

Democrats have whipped the nation into mass hysteria for three years. It’s a destructive game, manipulating people into a rage until Americans see each other as enemies. Most dangerous of all, driven by the social justice agenda of Obama progressives, Democrats are purposely delegitimizing our democratic institutions.

Democrats are playing an entirely different game than Republicans. Democrats think they have a mandate from history to seize power for people of color, LGBTQ minorities, and radical feminists. They don’t like America or Americans, who they consider bigoted and backward. They don’t like the principles of our founding, which recognize the God-given rights of individuals, not groups.

They don’t like how we elect presidents, because the Electoral College protects the heartland from domination by big cities, mostly controlled by Democrats. Social justice Democrats don’t want to control immigration, legal or illegal, because they are successfully replacing the existing American population with new people who will vote for them. They are substituting their Marxist vision of redistributive social justice for the American Dream.

We must go on the offensive. It is time to delegitimize Trump derangement. Stop answering and reporting on each lie and rabid attack as if they are part of normal politics. Attack Trump derangement head on, as a dangerous rejection of our democracy. Call out the stooges, Democrat and Republican, who take part in it.

The propaganda blitzkrieg of false accusations that fuel Trump derangement has never been seen in American politics before and it has no place in American life. It is left-wing fascism. It is devastating to the civility, tolerance, and basic unity that make the American experiment possible. We need to call out Democrats non-stop to match their waterfall of lies. They are destroying our democracy on purpose.

Bang, zoom, NAILED it, read the rest. Meanwhile, over to Aesop for more of the antidote:

He wasn’t my guy in 2016. He’s not, and never was, an actual conservative.

But he’s governed more conservatively than any president since Coolidge, including Reagan, and that ain’t nothing. I don’t care what you say, I care what you do.

The NeverTrumpTards and other lunatics will want to carp about him in comments.
A) Don’t. It’ll be blasted to the ether the minute I see it. I’m all out of patience with that level of idiocy and stupidity. Ride your convictions right into the ground, and STFU here.
B) You think you have reasons. Consult what we got in 1993 as a reward for “punishing Bush(41)” for his awful “No New Taxes” flip-flop disaster. The Clintons are like herpes. We’ll never be rid of them until their entire pustulent line finally dies out. And now you’d take a chance on giving the country genital warts or AIDS too? Yeah, no.
So just don’t go there. Srsly.

And let’s get serious: watching CNN’s ratings crater, and seeing Rachel Madcow and Bill Maher cry and rant and gnash their teeth in impotent rage was pretty damned funny in 2016. Imagine seeing their heads actually exploding in 2020!

That, alone, is a platform I can get behind, wholeheartedly.

Amen to that, brother. For all those prone to whining about this or that or the other supposed Trump failure, betrayal, or defeat, a clue: you don’t get “Perfect” as an option here. It ain’t on the menu in this life, nor did it appear on any ballot I ever laid eyes on. Mostly, we get either “Godawful” or “Catastrophic,” cushioned by a whole hell of a lot of pillowy, comfortable “More of the same.” Once in a while we find ourselves comparatively blessed with “Good enough,” which can then pleasantly surprise us by turning out to be “Better than expected.” That’s Trump, more or less, although I had high hopes for him all along, myself.

What Trump is, is EXACTLY the man we needed, at EXACTLY the right time. The fact that he’s a total outsider who pisses off pretty much all of the political establishment, Left and housebroken Right—elected officials, pundits, the DC bureaucracy, Enemedia, lobbyists, consultants, EVERYBODY—isn’t “problematic” or “troublesome”; IT’S THE WHOLE DAMNED POINT. It’s why those of us who like him, like him. And that, in turn, is the very thing all these so-called “experts” just can NOT figure out.

No, he won’t be able to “save” the country. No, he will not reverse America’s long, agonizing decline. No, he can’t “restore” the country either, other than temporarily; the next Uniparty president will undo every one of Trump’s accomplishments and restore us to Once-Great Britain v2.0 status so fast he, she, or Zxhirm will appear blurry around the edges to the naked eye. But you can be certain Trump still has plenty more Making Madcow Cry left in him yet. That’s good enough for me, a solid win no matter how you slice it.

Update! Oh, and by the way: yes, he’s going to win. You just watch.

Yet Trump remains the change agent in the campaign. It’s the Democrats who are the party of the status quo, the sorry state of the union pre-2016.

Decline.

Despair.

Declarations of how much we Normal people suck.

That’s their platform. It’s not very appealing in places where people have jobs that involve sweating and headgear. And while the Dems may run up 60%-70% margins among baristas and public employee union parasites in the blue states, who cares?

Electoral College, baby!

Thank you again, Founders, for the wisdom to set up a system to keep us from being ruled by the freaks in New York City and Scat Francisco!

I wasn’t a Trump supporter until he beat my guy Cruz. He earned my support by keeping his promises and running up the score. But my assessment of his chances is objective, not subjective. The competition is going to get crushed. That’s a fact.

That’s my belief. I could be wrong, of course. But hey, I called it right the last time around. And unless the Democrat-Socialists come up with a way to slip something into the water supply that will make Real Americans as bugfuck-nuts as they are, I firmly expect to be right this time, too.

Share

Senator Tom Cotton wins the Innarnets!

Economic power as weapon.

There’s a troubling trend among giant corporations using this wealth and power to force liberal dogma on an unwilling people. As liberal activists have lost control of the judiciary, they’ve turned to a different hub of power to impose their views on the rest of the country. This time it’s private power, located in a few mega-cities on the coasts.

And that’s not an exaggeration. The overwhelming majority of companies that lashed out against the pro-life movement in that New York Times ad are headquartered on the coasts, hoping to rule the rest of us like colonies in the hinterlands. More than three-quarters are headquartered in New York or California alone. More than a dozen are foreign companies. Yet those same companies presume to tell all of America what we should think.

And for some reason, this outrage only seems to go in one direction. As states like Arkansas have passed pro-life laws, other states have sadly gone down a different path, stripping unborn children of recognition and protection under the law. States like New York, Illinois, and Vermont recently passed laws declaring abortion a “fundamental right,” accessible until moments before birth for practically any reason as long as you have a doctor’s note.
We’ve already begun to see the consequences of these laws, which strain so mightily to defy and deny the humanity of the unborn. In New York City, prosecutors recently dropped a charge of abortion against a man who brutally stabbed to death his girlfriend and her unborn child. They dropped that charge because the pro-abortion law that had just passed the legislature in Albany removed all criminal penalties for killing an unborn child. According to the laws of New York State, that woman’s child never existed.

Pro-abortion laws passed in New York, Illinois, Vermont, and elsewhere truly deserve the label “radical.” So why isn’t the national media covering these radical laws with the intensity they’ve reserved for states like Georgia? Where are the indignant CEOs who profess to care so much for their female employees? Nowhere to be found, because their outrage is very selective. They don’t speak for the majority of Americans, much less for women. Instead, they’re actively trying to force a pro-abortion agenda on an unwilling public.

These companies want to wield a veto power over the democratic debate and decisions of Arkansans and citizens across our country. They want to force the latest social fashions of the coasts on small towns they would never visit in a million years. They want us to betray our deeply held beliefs about life and death, in favor of a specious account of “equality.” If there’s one thing the New York Times ad got right, it’s that “the future of equality hangs in the balance” when it comes to abortion. But their idea of equality doesn’t include everyone: it omits and degrades unborn babies as expendable, lesser than, even “bad for business.” That’s a strange kind of equality, if you ask me.

Nailed it, clean and tight. Humble thanks to Ace for so generously providing that transcription for us, bless his coal-black heart. His own remarks, wherein he moots the idea of shareholder lawsuits against the CEOs of these WOKE! corporations, are as always worth a look:

Now, most such suits are over stuff like corporate charity but those suits don’t work because of the very malleable concept of “goodwill.” If a corporation thinks that donating to Planned Parenthood buys it more goodwill, it’s within the corporate charter (as increasing goodwill is always or almost always permitted as a basic function of business).

HOWEVER, moves that alienate half the country, threaten states, BOYCOTT entire states, etc., do not increase goodwill. They decrease it.

Also, I’m 99% sure they don’t run polls about this stuff to determine if such a move would increase goodwill or not. I think I know that because I know a guy who does consulting and was asked about this sort of issue, asked by the CEO of a MAJOR, MAJOR corporation for advice (because he thought all the liberal marketing department people and mid-level managers were just telling them their Get Trump opinion, not necessarily reflective of popular opinion).

How major a corporation? Well, one of the blue chips.

Anyway, he started to do a study, and so began looking for previous studies on this sort of issue for a background and template for his own study.

His findings? THERE HAS NEVER BEEN AN ACTUAL STUDY OR POLL DONE ON A CORPORATE POLITICAL POSITIONING MOVE. N-E-V-E-R.

His was the first.

Corporations just make these decisions based on the personal political preferences of the officers and board, and their vague “feels.”

True enough, but my guess is even that ain’t the whole story. These corporations—many of them headquartered in urban liberal citadels like NYC—are not ony acting in accord with their executives’ personal political leanings, but are also responding to the loud, shrill demands of Proggie activists—who have more than adequately demonstrated their willingness to launch protests cum riots at the very doorstep of those corporate HQs, complete with threats, human chains blocking main entrances, plus the usual assorted piss-and-shit-flinging, sabotage, and senseless, random violence.

The Left has long been the squeaky wheel, and the squeaky wheel gets the grease. And when that greasing is in harmony with corporate leadership’s own political preferences anyway—and when they also know that conservatives/Normals/whatever are unlikely in the extreme to make things as uncomfortable for them as they already know the Left will—well, just what would be the downside for the CEOs here?

It always boils down to the same old thing in the end, doesn’t it? The comfortably-numb Right, accustomed through long habit of passively accepting defeat after defeat, must find a way to rile itself up enough to start directly confronting the Left—ALL of the Left, from individual political-street-theater performers right up to corporate malefactors who must be forced to make a choice as to whether their business is, y’know, the business they’re in, or politics. Until that happens, the Right must resign itself to being antagonized, harrassed, attacked, and ignored.

Share

The most dangerous game

A sneaky end-run aimed at shattering one of the last jagged shards of Constitutional governance.

While the Supreme Court might rule against allowing an interstate compact to go into effect without the prior Congressional consent that the Constitution’s Article I section 10 requires for states to enter into interstate compacts, it also might not. And since the National Popular Vote folks think they can change the Constitution while flouting the rules for changing the Constitution, they might feel equally free to ignore whatever the Supreme Court tells them the Constitution requires. And whatever can or cannot get through today’s Congress is no guarantee that some future Congress might not find the National Popular Vote acceptable while ignoring the pesky requirement of prior Congressional consent.

Yet the basic reason why the so-called National Popular Vote scheme threatens democracy is that it does not, and cannot, enact a national popular vote that is nationally regulated and supervised. The whole scheme rests on the constitutionally entrenched state control of the selection of presidential electors. What its backers call the “national popular vote” is, as they themselves acknowledge, the aggregate of votes in 51 separate jurisdictions with 51 separate sets of ballot access laws, voter identity checks, and voter eligibility requirements.

And if state officials can’t steal an election legally, they can always do so illegally. In states like Washington and Oregon, which have only mail-in balloting, or in states like California, which allow absentee voting without any demonstrated need, federal authorities cannot in practice keep officials from flooding or allowing activists to flood the “state popular vote” with out-of-state residents with fake addresses, who mail in ballots in every state for which they can download and send in a ballot, or outright ghost voters who are nothing more than a name and a fake registration. With the electoral college as it is, one-party states like California can allow as much fraud and force as they like, but they can only swing their own state’s electoral votes. With the National Popular Vote scheme, California officials can swing Maryland’s and New York’s electoral vote by stuffing ballot boxes without bothering to leave Sacramento.

Can—and most certainly will. The Electoral College remains the most obvious confirmation of the brilliance of the Founders, a means of averting mob rule, and guaranteeing the right of residents of smaller states to a say in their own governance rather than having the entire country ruled according to the arrogant caprice of NY, California, and other shambolic disaster areas.

I’ve long said that the tyrannical depredation most likely to spark Civil War v2.0 is an open, no-shit national attempt at gun confiscation. I still think that’s so, however unlikely it may actually be. But a strong case can be made that the disenfranchisement of great swathes of the country via a contra-Constitutional nullification of the Electoral College by rights ought to be at the very top of the list. Should such an abomination actually come to pass it cannot—it MUST not—be allowed to stand, lest our already-fading birthright be stolen from us entirely, and forever.

I’ve quoted this stark passage many times here already, but it can’t be repeated enough:

But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Every word a gem, shining like the brightest of diamonds; how disgracefully far we’ve wandered from a proper dedication to our duty to live up to them.

Share

Escalator ride of Destiny

Another Steyn rerun that bears repeating, re-posting, and re-reading. From the intro:

Three weeks after Donald Trump launched his campaign – on July 10th 2015 – I wrote the column below on the two old white males shaking up their respective nominating contests. Four years on, Bernie is running again in an entirely Berniefied party: His rivals are all presenting themselves as merely younger, comelier, blacker, gayer versions of the original, or in the case of the pitiful Joe Biden, unloading every morning positions he’s held for half-a-century, an even more geriatric Bernie. On the right there are NeverTrumpers but on the left no NeverBernies.

Is it necessary to say anything about those NeverTrumpers? The guys who told us it was a stunt, he’d be out by Labor Day, he wouldn’t win a single primary… Some very smart people were just incredibly stupid. My old National Review colleague Kevin Williamson:

Witless Ape Rides Escalator

Soooo, how’d all that work out for ya, Kev? Here’s how: shortly after the gratuitous, nasty bit of snobbery above, dear old ULTRASUPERTRUECONSERVATIVE!!! Kevin tried his hand at another act of typical Conservative Inc rumpswabbery: peddling his wares in the rarified climes of The Atlantic—from whence he was sent back, howling and tail tucked, to his comfy NRO sinecure with a quickness. He’s still licking his wounds and hacking away at Trump from there.

Kevin and a lot of others – including many of the right’s most illustrious names – didn’t grasp how disconnected Conservatism, Inc had become from its base. Donor-servicing masquerading as doctrinal purity had fewer and fewer takers, even before you offer it in the ludicrous form of a third Bush presidency in twenty-five years. Actual voters wanted something else, and no house-trained Republican was willing to give it to them. So cometh the hour, cometh the witless ape. Four years on, the Democrats have a base, Trump has a base, but, as Bill Kristol and The Weekly Standard learned the hard way, it’s not clear pre-Trump Republicanism has any base at all.

True, unlike Bernie re the Dems, the President does not preside over a wholly Trumpified Republican Party. The Ryan-McConnell Congress spent the new commander-in-chief’s first two years acting as if the program that got him elected was so self-evidently crazy they didn’t need to go anywhere near it. They’re still figuring Trump is an aberration, and that once he’s gone normal business will resume and they can go back to nominating milquetoast candidates who know how to give a great concession speech.

The closer of Steyn’s rerun piece:

The Donald is not really a conservative, nor much of a Republican. He’s given more or less evenhandedly to both parties over the decades, because, at Trump’s level, that’s just the price of doing business in a sclerotic and corrupt republic. The Clintons attended one of his weddings, because, for New York operators, that’s like the King of Spain attending the Prince of Wales’ wedding: it’s just A-list power-schmoozing. Whether the Chinese Politburo would respond positively to a President Trump whose opening conversational gambit is “Now listen, you muthaf**kers” is doubtful.

Yet Trump, like other philosophically erratic politicians from Denmark to Greece, has tapped into a very basic strain of cultural conservatism: the question of how far First World peoples are willing to go in order to extinguish their futures on the altar of “diversity”.

As Ann Coulter’s new book Adios, America! lays out in remorseless detail, Kate Steinle is dead because the entire Democratic Party, two-thirds of the Republican Party and 100 per cent of the diseased federal-state-municipal bureaucracy prioritizes myths over reality. Yes, it’s distressing to persons of taste and discrimination that the only person willing to address that reality is Donald Trump. But that’s because he’s not the reality-show freak here. The fake-o lame-o reality freakshow is the political pseudo-campaign being waged within the restraints demanded by the media and Macy’s. So, if Donald Trump is the only guy willing to bust beyond those bounds, we owe him a debt of gratitude. If, as Karl Rove proposes, other candidates are able to talk about the subject in a more “inclusive” way, so be it. But, if “inclusive” is code for not addressing it at all, nuts to that.

Step back and let’s be bipartisan about what Rove calls the “disruptiveness” factor: Be honest, which would you prefer and which is a bleaker comment on the political health of the republic – Bernie vs the Donald? Or Hillary vs Jeb?

Unfortunately, Steyn is wrong for once when he names Trump’s Big Bee-yooty-ful Wall proposal as his most consequential act as President. As we’ve seen, he’s been thwarted at every turn on that one, and will continue to be. A seriously effective border wall will never be in play as long as the Vichy GOPe remains on the field.

It’s disappointing, sure. But politically at least, Trump isn’t entirely wrong to adjust his rhetoric to a more modest position, declare victory anyway, and move on, pecking away at the Wall as and when he can without doing damage to himself. His only other option is to go to outright, full-tilt war with Mordor On The Potomac entire—something I’d actually love to see, but unlikely in the extreme due to Trump’s old-fashioned patriotism and his stubborn if erroneous belief that the American ship of state can be righted and put back on its proper course. Total, scorched-earth war against the hopelessly corrupt establishment would be simply too alien, way out of character for him, and it’s unrealistic to expect it.

No, Schlichter knows what Trump’s real achievement is, and it’s something that almost nobody but me (ahem) saw coming:

The greatest thing about Donald Trump is how his election has caused our enemies to reveal exactly what kind of seedy, corrupt weasels they truly are. 

Yep. The most important thing Trump has done—UNEXPECTED!™—is to clarify the battle lines, expose the frauds (or drive them to expose themselves), lift the lid on the boiling cauldron of Deep State worms, and reduce the Democrat-Socialists and their freakshow-base to uncontrollable paroxysms of daylight barking madness.

In short: he has lifted Real Americans from their accustomed defensive crouch and demonstrated what the offensive might accomplish. In graphic terms, Trump is what I’ve always said he is; this, right here.

TrumpGig.jpg

From Real Americans to you—all of you—from deep in our trousers, with feeling: Swamp rats; shitlibs; butt-sucking, fake-“conservative” NeverTrumpTards one and all; Enemedia propaganda hacks; jet-setting Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly “the weather”) alarmists; witless, hectoring Hollywood twits and entertainment-industry celebutards; scurrilous race-pimping grifters; imported Muslim grievance-mongers like Omar and Talib; man-hating, home-wrecking Feminazis; LGBTQWERTY fruits, flakes, and nuts who get in our faces to demand not tolerance but applause; and the whole goddamnable flea-circus of rent-seeking, crony-corporatist assholes, from soup to bugfuck nuts.

Yes, we really, really mean it. To paraphrase a maudlin, sobbing Sally Field’s Oscar-night ejaculation: We don’t like you. We really don’t like you.

More rich, buttery goodness from the Schlichter piece coming, which I’ll jailbreak into a separate post because reasons.

Share

A school of fish

Don’t know why anybody would bother to even try understanding the Left. They’re uninterested in real dialogue or debate; enraged by dissenting opinion; immunized against fact; ignorant of history; incapable of logic or reason; indifferent to truth; detached from observable reality; and unalterably convinced of their own superior intelligence and morality. Their beliefs aren’t the product of reflection and intellectual rigor, but are instead dogmatic in nature—articles of faith, particularly inflexible ones, which are not usually amenable to polite persuasion. As the saying goes, you can’t reason somebody out of a position they never reasoned themselves into in the first place.

A part of every religion is ritual. Even the crudest, most simple of religions have some rituals that reinforce the belief system. Those ceremonies and rituals are physical manifestations of the shared belief. Step inside a synagogue and it is nothing but ritual and ceremony. The same is true of the Catholic Church. Old religions have had a long time to develop and fine tune their rituals and ceremonies. Without those rituals, the religion ceases to exist, just as the death of the body kills the consciousness.

That is the power of Progressivism. It is a self-contained, self-validating shared reality for the adherents. It’s why so few people break from it. More important, its immune system has evolved highly complex defenses against the way in which the Right prefers to debate. Those appeals to facts and reason are quickly turned into fuel to energize the believers into huddling closer in common defense. It’s how the Left maintains its power. It has turned the enemy’s best weapons into fuel.

It is why engaging with the Left is a tactical error. As much as dissidents like to accuse the Buckley conservatives of being controlled opposition, they never really got the value of the Buckley types to the Left. They were not their designated punching bags. They were the ritualized manifestation of the devil, the universal threat against which the Left is organized. It is a reminder of why they believe, why they must stick together and why they must fight by any means necessary.

An authentic alternative to the Left will therefore not confront the Left, but hide from it, refusing to engage in the traditional way. More important, it can never manifest in the traditional ways. Those white boys in fashy haircuts at Charlottesville were the best controlled opposition the Left has had since David Duke. They were what the Progressive prophesies foretold, thus confirming the shared beliefs of the coalition of the ascendant. It’s why Charlottesville looms so large for the Left.

The authentic alternative to the prevailing orthodoxy will have to evolve in the shadows and evolve its own immunity from the weapons of the Left. Instead of being attracted to confronting the Left, it will have to be repelled by it. The decisive weapon will be never manifesting in a way that allows the Left to anathematize it. Instead of playing the role carved out for them by the Left, the successful dissidents will seem formless and inexplicable. The people in charge will never see them coming.

Better just to shoot the dumb fucks and be done with it. They won’t see that coming, either.

Share

Reconstitution

Clown nose OFF.

Conservatives must realize that in terms of creed and culture, we are past the point of no return. It’s time for an offensive strategy.

That subhed slams a drum I’ve been banging on myself for years now. Onwards.

From my vantage, it seems as if we are already living in a hollowed-out shell of a once-great nation where there is diminishing allowance for dissent—and, therefore, diminishing possibilities for recourse. Conservatives have not met the challenge. Whether to Huntington’s standards or to Kesler’s, they have decidedly failed in the “republican task.”

If, in the early 2000s, Americans were concerned for the viability of a society wherein broken families and communities were becoming the norm, we seem to accept one now where brokenness is the norm—and our elites, at least, have just stopped pretending to care. We now reside in a kind of bizarro-land, or, as some in my generation have termed it, “clown world.”

“Clown world” is one of the of the most striking memes to emerge in the realm of online political commentary lately. Like any spicy meme, it has been copied and edited by countless different groups, including some vile ones. But its reach is the product of a simple, philosophically devastating message. “Clown world” is used to describe instances of abasement that at any other point in history, to any person of dignity, would be regarded as incomprehensibly evil or stupid—so outrageous that they must be a joke. State-enforcedsexual transition hormones for children! Drag queen story hour! Voting rights for terrorists! This is Aristophanes with a shot of Nietzsche.

The next line is so damned sweet it makes my few remaining teeth ache.

The resistance to insist on the American way, for no other reason than it is ours and that this is reason enough, has resulted in the Right’s effectual acceptance of the Left’s constantly moving goalposts of woke sensibility.

MMMMMMMMyeah; cleanup in Aisle Mypants, please. Onwards ag’in.

In other words, conservatism gave up on culture. So afraid was the Right of charges of identity-based discrimination that they gradually ceded the whole symbolic, moral, and linguistic ground to the Left, relegating themselves to the “objective” realms of economy and war.

But conservative pundits continued to emphasize disembodied principles. They delayed action. They forwent dignity for the libertine. And as nascent clown world found no substantial pushback from their supposed enemies, it metastasized into a public dogma—an evisceration and replacement of both American culture and creed.

No more. The (“small”-r) republican task should no longer be played as a game of liberal one-upmanship with progressives. What we now face is a culture and a creed subverted beyond recognition. Treating any of its distorted major features as something to be conserved would be like applying makeup to a rotting corpse.

I’d love to excerpt a lot more of this, but I’ll back off now and insist—nay, demand—that you go read all of it. Trust me, you’ll like it. Excellent work, Ms Yang.

Update! Codevilla ponders whether there can even BE a conservative resistance in the first place.

#TheResistance began as an attempt by Clinton and her staffers to explain why their unexpected electoral defeat had to be illegitimate. It burgeoned quickly into rejection of rule by voters because so many on the Left and in the ruling class rallied to it, having already decided that ordinary Americans have no right to stand in their way.

Clinton’s characterization of Trump voters as “deplorables” and “irredeemables” and Barack Obama’s description of rural Republican voters as “clingers” to Bibles, guns, and racism, has long been ruling-class conventional wisdom. This attitude is what crossed the threshold of revolution.

Because the Resistance succeeded so well in limiting the impact of the 2016 election, it solidified the Left and the ruling class’s sense of common identity and entitlement. Henceforth, the bureaucracies, the educational establishment, the judges, the corporate establishment and the media will continue to impose themselves, regardless of conservative election victories or laws, never mind the Constitution. This attitude is not the result of a policy decision, but the expression of an evolving identity.

That last line is the truly important bit: it confirms that those who still hold out hope of the Left “coming to their senses” or backing off in any way, shape, or form from their seditious lunacy are kidding themselves. For Proggy, “the political is personal”; politics has been elevated to unchallenged dominance over every least aspect of Progressivist lives, and they will never countenance any less of a commitment from the rest of us. Which brings up another burning question:

Question For Bernie: What Happens To Those Who Don’t Want To Join Your Commune?

Easy: the gulags, the Killing Fields, the Holodomor, Siberia, Auschwitz. The same thing that always happens, in other words.

Much like Hillary Clinton feeling the need to reintroduce herself to voters multiple times, Bernie Sanders has decided to tell us again exactly what democratic socialism is. Maybe the need for so much explaining indicates that voters know what DemSoc is and want no part of it.

Naahh; only the sane, well-informed ones, that’s all.

The big question that never gets addressed regarding these and other “explanations” of socialism is: Why do the self-identified “democratic socialists” feel it’s OK to force those who’d rather be free into their collective?

Because they’re smarterer than we are, being “experts” who are way more qualified than we’ll ever be to make the correct choices. They’ll decide what “correct” is; your input will be neither sought nor permitted, thanksverymuch.

The system Sanders wants to force on this country of ostensibly free people requires more coercion than that which we are already under. Without force, both real and threatened, socialist systems cannot work. They require governments to take from some and give to others. Its subjects are obligated to participate.

Feature. Not bug.

If Americans learn nothing else about socialism, they should at least know this. “The goal of socialists,” writes William L. Anderson, “is socialism — not prosperity.” In other words, the objective is to use promises of abundance and a better life to do nothing more than amass raw political power.

Precisely so. Now, with the desperate necessity of mounting an effective resistance to such horrors thus established, back to Codevilla we go.

The conservative resistance would have to be organized, openly as a revolution, by national-level political leaders, whose credible voices could not be silenced. This resistance would have two assets: state-local government backed by the people, and economic boycotts.

But rallying the deplorables would have to overcome the natural conservative reluctance to acknowledge that the Republic of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the republic of “all men are created equal,” is beyond our capacity now to restore. It must be understood that it needs instead to be reasserted anew.

The ruling class, unwilling to loosen its grip on America, will appeal to “the rule of law,” use its control of the bureaucracy to cut funds, its control of the media to intimidate, and might even send some federal agents to give substance to that intimidation. They might point guns. But knowing what they are up against, they dare not shoot.

America has already come apart. The conservative resistance can conserve only one of those parts.

Fine and dandy; only one part was ever worth conserving anyway. The other one can rot, its denizens and promoters to be remanded—by force, surrounded by walls and armed guards a la Escape From New York, if necessary—into their crumbling urban Thunderdomes so as to savor the fruits of their ideological “victory” to the absolute fullest.

Or we could just, y’know, shoot them all and be done with it.

Share

“Why Are the Western Middle Classes So Angry?”

Because reasons.

What is going on with the unending Brexit drama, the aftershocks of Donald Trump’s election and the “yellow vests” protests in France? What drives the growing estrangement of southern and eastern Europe from the European Union establishment? What fuels the anti-EU themes of recent European elections and the stunning recent Australian re-election of conservatives?

Put simply, the middle classes are revolting against Western managerial elites. The latter group includes professional politicians, entrenched bureaucrats, condescending academics, corporate phonies and propagandistic journalists.

Elites masked their hypocrisy by virtue-signaling their disdain for the supposedly xenophobic, racist or nativist middle classes. Yet the non-elite have experienced firsthand the impact on social programs, schools and safety from sudden, massive and often illegal immigration from Latin America, the Middle East, Africa and Asia into their communities.

As for trade, few still believe in “free” trade when it remains so unfair. Why didn’t elites extend to China their same tough-love lectures about global warming, or about breaking the rules of trade, copyrights and patents?

The middle classes became nauseated by the constant elite trashing of their culture, history and traditions, including the tearing down of statues, the Trotskyizing of past heroes, the renaming of public buildings and streets, and, for some, the tired and empty whining about “white privilege.”

If Western nations were really so bad, and so flawed at their founding, why were millions of non-Westerners risking their lives to reach Western soil?

How was it that elites themselves had made so much money, had gained so much influence, and had enjoyed such material bounty and leisure from such a supposedly toxic system—benefits that they were unwilling to give up despite their tired moralizing about selfishness and privilege?

It’s long past time for folks to realize that it’s better to be pissed off than pissed on. And with the advent of Trump the Disrupter and his peeling back the lid on the can of greasy grubworms that have misruled us for lo, these many years, it’s finally beginning to happen. But if one wants to seriously delve into the reasons why anger has boosted Real Americans into apoplectic orbit, look no further than the outrageous hypocrisy of double-dealing blowflies like Adam Schitt.

Democratic California Rep. Adam Schiff appears to have reversed his position on the ethics of using “stolen” information against political foes.

“It’s not OK to use materials they stole from your opponent, or to make it part of your campaign strategy,” Schiff tweeted on Sunday.

Schiff was responding to a Sunday morning interview during which Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani argued that, while he would have advised against it, “There’s nothing wrong with taking information from Russians.”

But when “the Russians” contacted Schiff in 2017, offering him information that they promised would prove compromising to President Donald Trump, he had a very different reaction.

Two Russian comedians, known as Vocan and Lexus, placed a prank call to Schiff pretending to be Andriy Parubiy, the chairman of the Ukrainian Parliament. They claimed to have recordings proving that Russian President Vladimir Putin, in an effort to force Trump to relax sanctions, was blackmailing the president with photographs of him and a model named Olga Buzova.

Schiff responded by asking, “What’s the nature of the kompromat?”

After being told that there were naked photos of Trump and the Russian model, Schiff instructed members of his staff to follow up — which they did, attempting to set up a meeting with Parubiy in order to move forward.

Because of course they did. After all, it’s diff’runt when Democrat-Socialists do it. Right, Schiff-for-brains?

Vocan and Lexus provided a copy of that email to The Daily Mail, at which point Schiff and his staffers claimed that they had known it was a hoax all along.

Uh huh. SURE you did, you suppurating pustule.

Y’know, I fret now and then over the horror that Civil War v2.0 will indubitably bring down on us. Then I read about some outlandish shit like the above, and suddenly a small, dark part of me just can’t wait for the ball to drop—when it will become open season, no bag limit on oxygen thieves like Schitt and his loathsome ilk.

New category, in honor of Schitt and pals: Kill ’em all, let God sort ’em out.

Share

Shut ’em up, shut ’em down

ALL the way down.

The jury just rendered its verdict on punitive damages in the Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin College case.

Daniel McGraw, our reporter in the courtroom, reports that in addition to the $11.2 million compensatory damages awarded last Friday, the jury awarded a total of $33 million in punitive damages, which will probably be reduced by the court to $22 million because of the state law cap at twice compensatory (it’s not an absolute cap, but probably will apply here). That brings the total damages to $33 million. We will have the breakdown soon. The jury also awarded attorney’s fees, to be determined by the judge.

The Gibsons suffered a typical SJW Alpha-strike assault for “racism” after nabbing a couple of scumbag black Oberling students for shoplifting. The persecution campaign, intended from the start to destroy a family-owned bakery in business since 1885, was spearheaded by Oberlin College and its head, an odious, frumpy, disheveled bag of lard yclept Meredith Raimondo. After losing the case, Oberlin immediately began whining that awarding proper damages to the victims of their vicious, relentless persecution would put the school out of business for good, and I hope to God it does just that. It’s like this:

Some of the defenders of Oberlin College have claimed that the Gibsons’ were just in it for punishment on this case, and never tried to settle. That could not be further from the truth. According to Lee Plakas, lead attorney for the Gibsons’, a letter was sent before the case was filed in Nov. of 2017 asking for at least some talks on settlement and no answer was sent back (this reporter has seen it).

In early 2018, according to Plakas, two days of talks with a mediator were done, but nothing close to a settlement was achieved. In fact, the talks were initiated by the Gibson’s and “We were ready, willing and able to not have this case go to trial, but Oberlin College and their insurance company seemed to have no interest in settling this case,” Plakas said.

“As they have done throughout this case, they thought that they were above everyone else, and that the rules and working to settle such an egregious case of defaming a good family like the Gibsons’ was beneath them,” he added.

In his closer, Plakas added another stiff shot of 100-proof truth.

Why is the country watching you. Because the country agrees that what happened to the Gibsons should not happen to anyone, but could happen to everyone.

Could…and has, to far too many of us. Letting Oberlin skate would have sent a strong, clear message; this verdict and award does too—the right one.

The above report comes to us from LI’s own William Jacobson, who has done yeoman’s work on this from the start and offered a pretty pungent statement himself:

Oberlin College tried to sacrifice a beloved 5th-generation bakery, its owners, and its employees, at the altar of political correctness in order to appease the campus ‘social justice warfare’ mob. The jury sent a clear message that the truth matters, and so do the reputations and lives of people targeted by false accusations, particularly when those false accusations are spread by powerful institutions. Throughout the trial the Oberlin College defense was tone-deaf and demeaning towards the bakery and its owners, calling the bakery nearly worthless. The jury sent a message that all lives matter, including the lives of ordinary working people who did nothing wrong other than stop people from stealing.

Can’t win a war without fighting back; thankfully the Gibsons, finding themselves forced into a war they never asked for, didn’t want, and in no way deserved, fought back hard. They gave all of us a big win by doing so. As I always say: when liberal tears are flowing, it’s great news for America. Hearty congrats to the good guys, all of ’em. And to the losers: Learn to code, bitches.

Share

Another day, another win

Why no, I’m NOT tired of it yet.

President Donald John Trump once again roped the dopes in the media with his Mexican tariffs.

Like Wile E. Coyote thumbing through the Acme catalog, they knew better but gave into their worst impulses.

To be sure, President Trump was deadly serious about the imposition of tariffs.

But he also knew he would not have to.

President Trump had the battle won the instant he tweeted tariff. The Mexican government did not bother putting up a fight. The words were kind and diplomatic, and the capitulation was swift and painless.

The government seized the money of human traffickers, sent thousands of its National Guardsmen to its southern border, and agreed to stop the caravans.

But the political side also had a success as President Trump watched his critics throw their grenades — into telephone wires that shot the grenades right back at them.

National Review’s editors huffed and puffed, “The president here is unnecessarily complicating his own life. He has just overseen the successful renegotiation of NAFTA, which will be reconstituted as the U.S.–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA). But that agreement has not yet been ratified — not by the United States, and not by Mexico. Imposing punitive tariffs over a policy dispute unrelated to trade five minutes after negotiating a new trade pact makes the Trump administration — and the United States — look like an unreliable negotiating partner. Mexico is not wrong to resent it, and even Trump allies such as Senator Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) are against him on this.

“Also, it’s a good rule of thumb to fight one trade war at a time. If the administration, correctly, wants to focus on China’s malign trade practices — and not just during the current dispute but over the long term — it needs good trading relationships with its allies, especially here in North America.”

Who knew there was a rule of thumb on trade wars?

Y’know, you’d think #NeverTrumpTards, having been wrong every damned time about every damned thing, would be getting tired of all the losing already. And now, after having shrieked their throats raw and bloody in indignation over the abominable, inhuman atrocity of tariffs, they find themselves looking at yet another piping-hot, jumbo-sized platter of delicious crow on the menu. It still comes down to the same thing I’ve always said it would: Trump The Disruptor.

Democrats and their allies in the media continually bemoan President Trump breaking long-standing political norms. They still seem unwilling to grasp one of the central tenets of the 2016 movement that led to his election. Yes, accepted practices and “norms” of Washington worked well for apparatchiks of the administrative state and their crony allies among big business and K Street influencers. But this crooked system failed miserably to enhance the well-being of millions of working-class Americans who therefore chose, very knowingly, to send an agitator to Washington, D.C.

President Trump has been particularly forceful in breaking protocol and bucking conventional Beltway wisdom in the international arena. For example, he scuttled our participation in the unfair Paris climate accord. He also successfully shamed NATO partners into paying their proper share of the alliance’s defense burden. In international trade, he demands reciprocity and honest dealings from China, a country that has serially abused America for decades. 

Trump also smartly confronted Mexico over its inaction regarding our volatile shared border. The recent situation there has grown totally untenable, on pace this year to send over 1 million unvetted and uninvited trespassers pouring into our country. The overwhelming majority of these people, contrary to media narrative, are economic migrants willfully abusing our nation’s generous and well-intended asylum provisions. But, because the Democrats in Congress seem to prefer a controversy to a solution when it comes to illegal migration, the internal options for Trump and his Department of Homeland Security remain limited. But thinking creatively, the president determined that our immense economic leverage over Mexico could be summoned to coax them into acting as a good neighbor. For too long regarding Central American migrants, we have allowed Mexico to transfer its temporary trouble into our permanent problem.

But President Trump warned Mexico of imminent trade sanctions unless it shared proactively in the burden of stopping this dangerous flow of people and the attendant humanitarian border crisis it caused. Predictably, critics shrieked in disapproval over the last week.

But Trump did precisely what Trump was elected to do. He saw past the prevarications of the media, the self-serving platitudes of corporate plutocrats, and the pusillanimity of purported allies in the legislature. He took decisive executive action that forced the Mexican government to honor its obligations and respect the sovereignty of our land. After all, if Mexico or any other country wants access to the crown jewel of global commerce — the American consumer market — then it must act as a responsible partner. Our nation seeks prosperity and friendship with all nations, but will not be abused. 

And, note ye well, THAT is a big part of why they loathe him so intensely. The American consumer market is by orders of magnitude the largest in the world—the most powerful economic force on the planet. Corrupt, destitute Mexico simply cannot afford to be denied access to it. Like wise China, who needs to avoid being shut out of the American market WAY more than America needs rack upon rack of shoddy, ill-fitting, poorly-made 4XXXXL cargo shorts at Wal Mart.

No, the only strange thing about all this is that Trump seems to be the only one in Mordor On The Potomac who knows it—or, more accurately, the only one to whom it matters, and who is unashamed about acting as if it mattered. Thus:

Assuredly, these steps will not end the border crisis. Longer-term, our country desperately needs reform of our inane migration laws, particularly as they relate to asylum. We need a wall. We must harness technology to better track visa overstays. But given the options available to him at present, President Trump negotiated masterfully in this confrontation. He recognizes that in the global trade “poker game” America has the strongest hand and must play like it. His steadfast refusal to accept the status quo or cower to the elites validated the hopes that tens of millions placed in him when the voted to send a “disruptor-in-chief” to the Oval Office.

I remain convinced that, try however he might, Trump ain’t gonna be getting any wall; the Ruling Class has too many ways to stymie and stall, and it’s probably the one issue they’re least likely to ever yield on. But he’s still winning anyway, and even the most trivial loss for the Democrat-Socialists is still a win for America.

Update! Desperate, defeated, discombobulated.

Trump’s success in getting Mexico to agree to do more to curb the flow of illegal immigrants through their country and into the United States should be receiving universal praise, but unfortunately, Democrats, who we all know want to see illegal immigration increase to help secure their party’s power in government, couldn’t concede that Trump’s plan worked.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Trump’s tariff threat, which succeeded in its goal, a counterproductive exercise in “threats and temper tantrums.”

“President Trump undermined America’s preeminent leadership role in the world by recklessly threatening to impose tariffs on our close friend and neighbor to the south,” Pelosi, a California Democrat, said Saturday morning. “Threats and temper tantrums are no way to negotiate foreign policy.”

Ummm, actually, Stretch, those “threats and temper tantrums” are more widely known in grown-up circles as “negotiating from a position of strength,” you clown-faced buffoon.

Pelosi said she was “deeply disappointed” by the asylum provisions of the deal, which she claimed “violates the rights of asylum seekers under U.S. law and fails to address the root causes of Central American migration.”

But the most absurd comment came from Senator Chuck Schumer.

And boy, did it ever:



I’m sorry folks, but it would take a heart of stone not to laugh right out loud at that pitiful, all-thumbs attempt at spin. Again: when Democrat-Socialists are crying, America is winning.

Can’t repeat it often enough update! Sefton puts it well, especially with the closer.

Good morning kids. Start of a new week so let’s get with it. The big story over the weekend and continuing is President Trump’s yuuuge win over Mexico, who folded like a wet taco when for the first time in my lifetime a US president actually threatened to seriously punish them with tariffs if they did not stop aiding and abetting the depopulation of Central America (and their own failed kleptocratic third world shit-hole) into our country. From a purely political perspective, it represents a Nelson Muntz laugh of epic proportions to the Democrat-Left-Media Complex and their remoras in the GOP-e who claimed it would destroy our economy, it’s racist and xenophobic or who just openly hate America and have no phony excuses but are grumbling at being kicked hard in the nadlers by Orange-Man-Bad. Yes, the winning – I ain’t now ways tahr’d of it.

Heh. Good as that is, JJ knows this is no real solution, and also knows what is:

Look, we can talk about walls, and troops on the border and all the rest of it all we want. The real long-term solution is to create a virtual wall that for sure is 100% impenetrable: Disincentivizing these people from coming here in the first place. No welfare, no food stamps, no free schools, no college tuition, no free medical care, no drivers licenses…Nada del Tio Azucar, nunca. It’s bad enough that upwards of 30 million foreigners are eligible to drain our Treasury legally. But take a look at the story in the links about a blood-sucking tick convicted of substantial food stamp fraud and multiply that by millions as well and, to quote Everett Dirksen, sooner or later you’re talking about some real money. The other half of that equation, as I stated, rests with our own citizenry. Any person or business that knowingly hires illegal aliens should be punished with severe fines and serious prison time. Does that mean someone who has a lady from Guatemala come in once a week to clean the apartment? Not sure. But something like a food processing plant, garment factory (if we still have them here anymore) or other industry employing masses of illegals should be shuttered, the assets seized and the owners chucked in D-Block.

He’s right, and you know he is. Now on to a truly golden meme, ripped off from elsewhere at the ol’ HQ:

winner-loser-2019.jpg

Jeez-O-Pete, Trump yuks it up with the Queen while Her Herness can’t draw flies even at a Costco warehouse—a place hardly known for drawing celebrities to hang out there. Hope poor old Hils found herself a good deal on pallets of cheap gin to ease the pain and humiliation, at the very least.

Share

The last great act of defiance?

Time to take the gloves off.

For more than half a century, as leftist judges have preempted or nullified our efforts to govern ourselves, conservatives have staked much on the appointment of judges who would follow the law rather than legislating or administering from the bench. And indeed, the number of such judges has been growing for a generation.

But since the 2016 election, it has become clear that merely appointing good judges cannot stop what the bad ones are doing, as leftist federal judges continue to strike down one after the other of the Trump Administration’s initiatives, as well as conservative state laws.

Even if a majority of the Supreme Court were to overrule every district court judge’s usurpation once an appropriate case reached it, leftist judges would still be a major brake on one side of American public life. Until conservatives somehow stop this judicial malpractice, all the work they do to elect whomever, to pass whatever laws, to appoint more good judges, is guaranteed to be undone by some bad judge putting his seal on some leftist group’s brief.

Nor can honest, nonactivist judges provide a counterweight on the other side of political conflict. If conservative judges were the mirror image of leftist ones, there would be a cadre of them ready to invalidate the next leftist president’s every move, as well as every law and practice of California’s and other blue states’ governments. But there is not such a cohort in waiting.

Defying the reach of a federal court ruling—even one of the Supreme Court’s, never mind that of a district court—is within everyone’s power. Alexander Hamilton had made that point in Federalist 78: the judiciary’s fundamental power is neither more nor less than the power to persuade. You may be otherwise persuaded. Hamilton is clear that there is no constitutional duty to obey the courts—certainly not on policy.

Andrew Jackson applied that principle even to the Supreme Court’s decision in the specific case of the Bank of the United States in 1832: “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” There is no constitutional reason why any president, or governor, should forbear from carrying out a law or an executive decision just because a federal district judge’s opinion is that it violates some standard, The president or governor has his own opinion. In the final analysis, all depends on executive power, which, in turn, depends on popular support.

Kinda goes hand-in-hand with my proposition that, should the Democrat-Socialists ever be allowed to election-fraud another of theirs into the Oval Office, the correct Republican response would be to make sure that Xhe/Xhim/Whatever would face every jot and tittle of #Resistance that Trump has endured, plus a BUNCH. Alas, it ain’t gonna happen, I don’t think, any more than Codevilla’s worthy suggestion above will. Still, though, the fact remains:

Ace, of AOSHQ. has bruited the concept of The Great Divorce, that is, that the eventual upshot of the current massive divisions in America will be a near complete separation, even legally and physicially, between the urban Democrat hordes, and the rest of America and Americans.

In this scenario, the only real question is whether that separation will be accomplished peacefully, or with varying levels of violence.

I tend to think there is considerable validity to the scenario, because of the uber-narratives that dominate both sides. On the right – read “America as we knew it, and still know it in many places,” – that narrative boils down to “We just want you to leave us alone to live our lives as we wish.” On the left, the other side of that coin is embraced as religious scripture – “We want to control every aspect of your lives for your, and our, own good.”

The left, in the bubble-redoubts they believe give them control of what they also believe are “the commanding heights of the culture” – media, the educracy, majoritarian politics, the deep state, the looming corporate state, the GoogleZon technocracy – assume themselves assured of victory. This is, unfortunately for them, a sad misreading the reality, as they will, to their shock, inevitably discover.
 
The resultant mass cognitive dissonance within the left will be devastating, and is one of the principle reasons I don’t think The Great Divorce will be entirely bloodless.

And after that? This, like as not.

Should we blow everything up, just to see how we could fix it?
Don’t be asinine; of course not.
But don’t assume just because something is craptastic in the moment, it’s going to be that way forever.
That’s a four-year-old’s view of time: “everything is about me, right this minute.”
So grow up. And perhaps, take a longer-term view than just right this minute, or even until the day after tomorrow.

Don’t take my word for it. Because while no one I know would like to go live at Florence and Normandie nearly 30 years after the L.A. riots, you won’t find anyone in Normandy, France bitching too hard about the war that landed on their shores 75 years ago this coming Thursday. Go there and ask if you don’t believe me.

Ask 100 people which world they’d rather live in:
One populated entirely by rifle-toting, bible-clinging rednecks having a barbeque.
Or one populated by Emo Antifa twinks and purple-haired lesbian land whales all shrieking and moaning about how evil white mankind is, and the contest is over in five seconds.

A conflict here is almost certainly an extinction-level event for the left, for generations yet unborn.
(Whereas their victory would be the continued genocide of the unborn.
So don’t try to pretend there’s any moral equivalency between baby killers, and those who’d rather kill baby killers.)

Tell me again why we don’t just open the ball first, and prosecute that whole party now, to the hilt.

We’re already the merest momentary pause from that question becoming purely academic, and the discussion getting overtaken by events as it is.

Let the dog catch the car.
Then watch what happens to him once he’s got it, and doesn’t know what to do next, with a mouthful of bumper.

I repeat: the Leftwits now openly advocating schism, war, and genocide should be very careful what they wish for, lest they get it—good and hard, and for all time. Go ye and read the rest of it, if only for the great Mark Twain quote at the end.

Share

Milkshaking

Now the Left is even ruining milkshakes by politicizing them.

In the grand tradition of primates tossing feces at perceived rivals, leftists in the UK have lately taken to throwing milkshakes at right-leaning figures they hyperbolically refer to as fascists. And as with the multifarious nasty things that they do, they justify it in the name of some “greater good” that they are comically incapable of quantifying or even articulating.

Once again we see the absurd and grating tendency of leftists to justify physical assault based on the warped notion that certain ideas inevitably lead to…well…physical assault.

The trend apparently began early in May when Danyal Mahmud, a 23-year-old Muslim living in England, threw a milkshake in the face of anti-Islamist agitator Tommy Robinson, who was born Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. By Mahmud’s own admission, he had joined a group of leftist protesters in taunting Robinson by chanting that he was “scum”—again, leftists see nothing wrong with dehumanizing others based on the premise that the people they are dehumanizing deserve it because they, um, dehumanize others—before Robinson and some cohorts came over to have a little chat about the prevalence of Muslim grooming gangs in England. Mahmud apparently couldn’t handle the discussion and dumped his shake on Robinson’s head, which immediately led to Mahmud receiving a beating.

Just like a woman who hits her partner and then claims victimhood when he hits back, the man who called Robinson “scum” and assaulted him with a milkshake is now whining that he feels under threat:

I’m a low-key person, I didn’t anticipate this publicity and I don’t want it—I’m getting death threats on social media and I am worried about me and my family being targeted.

Well, good. I’m happy to hear it. Somebody oughta doxx his ass for good measure, pour encourager les autres.

Well, maybe you shouldn’t have targeted him by calling him “scum” and pouring a milkshake over his head, no? (I realize the question is an exercise in futility, because by definition, ideologues are blind to their own hypocrisy.)

Typical mewling, pussified Lefty scum: commit violent assault, then whine like a little bitch when some splashes back on ’em—in this case, literally.

Unless you count the scene in the 1971 film Billy Jack where the local rednecks pour flour over a Native American girl’s head to make her white, I can’t recall the last time an alleged “right-winger” decided to throw food on someone as an act of political protest. And in the film, the rednecks get their brains beaten out by Billy Jack—and it’s considered a perfectly righteous thing to do. And, mind you, this was a movie.

Yet for most of my life I’ve witnessed leftists throw eggs and glitter and pies and shoes at people they consider unacceptably “right-wing.” One thing the leftist press neglected to mention about all those “peaceful anti-racist protesters” in Charlottesville is that they threw urine-and-feces-filled balloons at their perceived ideological opponents and justified it because that’s just what you do to “Nazis.” And though these types would likely cheer the scene where Billy Jack stomps the rednecks into the ground, it never seems to occur to them that they might be begging for a similar ass-whipping.

And if we ever hope to check their ever-escalating violence against us, they need to get those ass-whuppin’s, too. Otherwise, this:

Milkshaking apologists have also scoffed at the idea that this is a slippery slope and that if we justify tossing milkshakes, soon we’ll justify throwing bricks. Sorry, but this has already happened: Muslim activists recently threw bricks at supporters of Tommy Robinson, while an English woman said that Nigel Farage should have acid lobbed in his face. And just as Burger King appeared to suggest that they supported milkshaking, a British beer manufacturer recently said that its clients shouldn’t waste their beer on “fascists” and should instead clobber them with bricks.

And the modern left is so predictable, we all know that even after 100,000 milkshakings, if one intrepid “right-winger” were to respond by knocking out someone’s teeth, this would be all the evidence the left would need to “prove” that the right wing is violent and needs to be exterminated.

Meh, let ’em bawl. They’re becoming more and more up-front about wishing to exterminate us anyway, and like every Leftist regime in history has, they’ll do it if this crap isn’t nipped in the bud sharpish. Like it or not, those teeth need to be knocked out—and more than just a single instance of it, too—simply as a matter of self-preservation. In fact, I’d say preemptively breaking the jaw of any Leftist who gets within twenty feet of you with a milkshake in his hand is no more than sensible. Better make it thirty if Proggie is toting a brick. Better safe than sorry, right?

Share

With friends like French…

Lowly cuck-boy David French is sure getting himself a most thorough reaming this week, ain’t he? Not that he’ll notice, natch. First up to take a swing of the Almighty Clue Bat, Julie Kelly:

French responded to his critic the next day in a piece for National Review Online titled, “What Sohrab Ahmari gets wrong.” Insisting he’s not a “milquetoast,” French proceeded to attempt to debunk Ahmari’s “misrepresentations” by citing his service as a U.S. Army judge advocate general in the Iraq War and his past court victories for maligned Christian college professors. (Commendable, of course, but hardly dispositive.)

But then French misrepresents himself in the piece. He portrays himself as “walking humbly,” careful “not [to] fan the flames” of political enmity—but French can be as vituperative, dishonest, and petty as anyone in the public square, especially if his target is Donald Trump, his family, or his supporters. The Mueller report, a political document based on an investigation into a fabricated crime, should “shock our conscience,” he wrote in April. “The lies are simply too much to bear. No Republican should tolerate such dishonesty.”

He often brags about his personal and professional achievements to both assert his moral authority and blunt any criticism of him. He occasionally injects his adopted black daughter into political battles, using anecdotal evidence to accuse Americans, particularly Trump supporters, of being racists. (As the mother of an adopted Asian daughter, I find this tactic offensive and out-of-bounds.)

French claimed that he did not promote the Russian election collusion hoax, as Ahmari stated in his piece. That is patently and provably false.

So, to briefly recap then: the Last True Principled CONservative is all in for the Mueller impeachment swindle; supported the whole Russia Collusion conspiracy from go; demanded that one of our vanishingly few Congressional stalwarts, Devin Nunes, step down even as he defended nefarious liar Adam Schitt; ridiculed those who saw right through the Klown Kar Koup attempt as the “Conspiracy Theory Right”; eagerly parrots the Left’s despicable accusations of racism, dishonesty, and corruption against the most successful Republican President since Reagan at least. All that and more, but still he arrogantly refuses to admit to either error or bad faith on his part. Apart from abortion, can anybody think of a way in which the PRINCIPLED CONSERVATIVE™ French differs even slightly from the Democrat-Socialists, pray tell? Bottom line on both French and every other faithless Cruiseship Cuck:

Let’s say “French-ist” Republicans take over the GOP after Trump is gone. Is there any doubt that they would compromise with Democrats on some form of a Green New Deal? Or an expansion of government-paid health care? Or college loan forgiveness? Or higher tax rates on the wealthy? Or laws that impose quotas on private industry to force the hiring of more women, minorities or LGBT workers? Or the continued deplatforming of controversial figures on the Right? Or the requirement to teach a variety of destructive, anti-family, anti-Christian, anti-capitalist garbage in public schools?

Would “French-ist” Republicans have the stones to effectively challenge, and defeat, any of these proposals under a President Kamala Harris or a House Majority Leader Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?

Having already seen it demonstrated time after time from the Vichy GOPe over the course of several decades, we know the answer all too well. Next in the batter’s box is Ben Domenech:

When French asks, “what did politeness, respect, and dignity cost anyone?”, he sounds like a hockey coach planning to run an all-finesse team out onto the ice. Perhaps their politeness, respect, and dignity will be awarded with a honor in defeat medal. Ahmari is more interested in a form of victory, as he sees it – which could be defined as a restorationist aim, or perhaps “leave us alone, or else” – and he blames French’s mindset for much of the losing.

“What did politeness, respect, and dignity cost anyone?” Damned near everything, you blibbering fool. You weak-ass TrueCon pissants stood idly by, abhorring breaches of an etiquette observed only by yourselves, as the Left hijacked a nation from under us. And STILL you either can’t seem to see it, or you’re hoping nobody else notices. Which means that anybody who might be thinking you’ll ever be of the slightest use in taking it back is a blasted idiot. Thus:

I had the good fortune to grow up around a great many Christian people with Frenchian sentiments. They are very good and decent, but they also had a skewed perspective on politics and culture that assumed their foes in the public square would abide by certain rules and expectations that went out the window decades before.

There is a sweet naïveté and optimism to this belief, unburdened by awareness of the cultural Hindenburg we all currently inhabit. How could the ACLU, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and Bernie Sanders take stands against the active expression of religious belief when they all endorsed RFRA themselves two decades earlier? Bill Clinton signed it! Wouldn’t the hypocrisy shame them straight into the corner? Haha, you bigoted saps, watch and learn.

It is not particularly comforting to recognize we have reached a point in America where politeness and decency is no longer the best approach to politics.

Well, perhaps not. But honestly, now: was it ever? Look back at political cartoons and op-eds from all the way back to the Civil War, when Lincoln was lampooned as a semi-sentient ape, and not just in fringe newspapers either. Go back further yet, when a writer clandestinely hired by Thomas Jefferson outrageously smeared John Adams as “a repulsive pedant” and “a hideous hermaphroditical character.” Then try again to convince me that politics has ever been anything but a dirty, stinking cesspool in which the very worst of us happily bob and swim in their quest for power. Go ahead, try.

Most of the political class agrees with French. They would vastly prefer a world where everyone in politics has an approach like Paul Ryan. But even as the political elite, both leaders and staff, have insisted on that approach for years where culture and policy fights are concerned, something has come along which disrupts their chiding message about a cultural defense with the ease and give of a soft-boiled egg. It embraces the happy while forgetting the warrior part. Domesticated animals are always more welcome at the garden party atmosphere of the plexiglass roundtables shot through the airwaves, where people say “I think” about the news.

Consider the possibility that the people, honorable or dishonorable alike, who forever urged politeness and good behavior are wrong. Consider the possibility that the progressive movement has embraced views that will no longer tolerate even the presence of offensive views, as they are now practically the same as violence. Consider the possibility that a lifetime New York limousine liberal, mugged by the reality of abortion and convinced of the transactionalism of Christian voters, recognized a more brutal approach, an approach which actually spells out on national television what happens in a late term abortion, could be a better cultural defense than a thousand phone-ins to the March for Life.

It would be comforting to believe David French is correct about all of this. Many, even if they believe he is wrong, will continue to personally emulate his approach, unwilling to choose a more confrontational approach. The distaste with the Molotov is understandable. But the truth is the culture has long ago passed the point of consensus where it is possible for a peaceable navigation of the conflict.

True, with bells all over it a-ringing. Koup Kucks Klowns like French, bitterly clinging to a politesse that hasn’t existed since the 60s at least (if it ever did), should maybe ask the fella who brought a knife to a gunfight how things worked out for him. They’d get themselves a schoolin’, assuming any of them have any interest in learning something.

Lastly, Taylor Lewis steps to the plate for his innings:

Cross-dressing storytime is what set New York Post op-ed editor Sohrab Ahmari off in a scathing attack on one right-wing writer. In First Things, which has latterly become a kind of authorial billet for non-traditional traditionalistic conservatives, Ahmari takes issue with what he calls “David French-ism,” which takes its name from National Review essayist David French.

Ahmari treats French like a synecdoche for all hail-fellow-well-met conservative types who think the Left will leave them be with their personal religious beliefs, even if they’re viewed as bigoted. Ahmari contends that French and other libertarian-friendly conservatives believe that “the institutions of a technocratic market society are neutral zones that should, in theory, accommodate both traditional Christianity and the libertine ways and paganized ideology of the other side.”

Ahmari is not so dewy-eyed. He knows the score, and it’s heavily weighed against the side of conservative Christians. A converted integralist and recent recruit of the “politics as war and enmity” vision, Ahmari thinks rapprochement with a cultural left that showers preteen strippers with dollar bills is unrealistic. Instead, he’d rather bring a sword, capturing the state to carve out a permanent place for the faithful. In his own words, Ahmari wants to fight the “culture war with the aim of defeating the enemy and enjoying the spoils in the form of a public square re-ordered to the common good and ultimately the Highest Good.”

French, in Ahmari’s dichotomy, wishes for only a respectful counterpoise to liberalism’s ever encroaching reach into private and public life. Ahmari forthrightly wants to beat it back into submission.

Lewis goes on to offer a few ‘graphs in defense of French, saying “Ahmari chose the wrong figure to personify naïveté.” Sorry, but as long as French and his ilk prefer to caterwaul about Trump and his Deplorables without once condemning venomous Swamp snakes like Schitt, Mueller, Comey, et al ad nauseum, I can no way no how agree. French, well-meaning though he may be, is and will assuredly remain part of the problem. In the twilight struggle against creeping Leftist tyranny, he and his effete compadres are worse than naive, and worse than useless—they’re obstacles, an active hindrance. Thankfully, they’re already fading from view, whatever influence they may once have had speedily dwindling into nothingness, as the rest of us keep slogging on without them.

Share

Culture war?

More like total war, if not entirely conforming to the traditional conception of the thing.

Yet.

Of all the cultural changes that endanger the well-being and happiness of Americans and impair the governability of the nation, severing the present from the past and the rise of division and intolerance are probably the two greatest threats. In the last 25 years, division and intolerance have increasingly become defining characteristics of American politics and culture — attributes at odds with the vision of the founders and most successive presidents who understood that shared values and unity were the bedrock of American strength.

Ahh, there’s the rub: we no longer HAVE shared values. We are instead plagued by an unbending, intolerant, and fanatical opposition whose values are antipathetic to everything we think of as the traditional, enduring American ones.

As Orwell also noted, “the whole aim of Newspeak and Doublethink is to narrow the range of thought.” Political correctness has the same goal and that’s why its adherents are so intolerant — seeking to shut down and silence people with whom they disagree on college campuses across the country, clamoring for removal of historic statues and monuments, and demanding that people with differing views on such subjects as climate change and LGBT rights be silenced, fined or arrested.

Shocking as it might seem, a pattern has been emerging in the U.S. with similarities to the longstanding standard practices in Communist and Fascist totalitarian states — that is: to rewrite history and indoctrinate the youth so as to be able to manipulate and control the future cultural and political landscape.

“Shocking”? Oh, please. Who could be shocked to find that the allegiance of self-avowed socialists is to Marxist despotism instead of democratic, capitalist liberty?

In that sense the U.S. is closer to a future that is reminiscent of developments that led to persecution in 1930s Germany than anyone would like to contemplate or admit. The Nazi propaganda machine censored non-conforming views and sought to isolate and discriminate against Jews — a strategy intended to engender hatred and prejudice against them within the greater German population, thus setting the stage for the genocidal “final solution” of the Holocaust.

This is not to say that Christians are on the threshold of massive physical persecution in the U.S.

You quite sure of that? Sure enough to bet your very life on it? Because by mincing daintily away from forthright acknowledgement of the depth, breadth, and implacability of the true evil the Left represents, that’s exactly what you’re doing.

In every last incidence of their ascencion to power across the globe, Leftism has unfailingly put its millions of victims into mass graves, sometimes using almost fantastical-seeming methods. Every. Single. Time. The (anti)American Left, sooner or later, will be no different; their own escalating rhetoric, bloated with hatred and menace, attests well enough to that. We should take them at their word, and prepare ourselves accordingly. To flinch from historical reality, hideous as it is, is to de facto collaborate in your own destruction.

Share

Men without chests

Sucks to be cuck.

First, there was the essay against David French. Then there was the answer that was a defense of David French. Then French defended himself. Ahmari takes the knife to French. Dougherty defends him, but it sounds more like a defense to keep French in the big tent. They both have points. I like Dougherty, but I agree with Ahmari. I care not what French says.

French symbolizes the Never Trump scum that revealed their controlled op status in ’16. They were willing to throw away just about everything to lose with honor. French is the symbol for it because of his failed entry into the presidential race to do what else but run a spoiler campaign. Even better, he grasps the knife and stabs his fellow conservatives in the back whenever possible. French represents the idiots who will adhere to the procedure when the procedure is obviously a sham and the other side will do whatever it takes to win and rule. French symbolizes the thought leaders who will gladly lose but tell their flock that it was a good, righteous loss. This might be understandable if the left was still pretending to adhere to any procedure. They do not. They also have escalated every single crazy identity politics fight. They are not stopping, and they will only formalize into law and regulation what the loons on campus shout now.

I will concede to Dougherty that French represents a wing of the right that we want to include. But wait one second… did French and his ilk grant that to us? Do they forget when French and Erick Erickson accused patriotic Americans of being Russian bots, Democrats and then Russian bots again? I clearly remember NRO guys sharing on Twitter screencaps of a blogpost of mine noting how Erickson and his Never Trump crew were like W.F. Buckley with ostracizing and purging the right, and them calling me and our crowd conspiracy theorists. After ’16, there was no integration of the populist nationalist crowd into the main right wing propaganda outlets. Tucker Carlson has carried that banner, and takes flak for it from the French crowd. On deeper reflection, it can be argued that many young right wingers were abandoned and tossed out into the cold for associations with what is now deemed evil, icky identitarians.

This hurts us today as these losers of a dying movement still control things, well them and the deep state plants. Who do you think has a better shot of getting a job in the Trump admin: a nationalist who openly states his support of the president or a neocon from Westchester or an evangelical from the Southern network that worked for every other candidate and likely pulled the lever for McMullin or Gary Johnson?

The ground shifted beneath their feet and they still act like nothing happened. These are the same people who mocked universities while letting the left completely dominate them. Any single one of them recommend deep red state governors and legislatures defund universities and take a baseball bat to hiring practices? We are two generations into the cultural revolution and are seeing the fruit of it with socialist chic.

Dougherty ends his essay with the following line, “My intention is to bring good men such as David French into that fight even if I have to drag him there“. I do not remember any mainstream right winger asking Ricky Vaughn for his help. I do agree with Dougherty in one way. Having every warrior on our side matters as the empire declines and the left goes insane. One word of warning. Do not be surprised if you drag French to the fight and he stabs you in the back.

This treacherous, false, cuckish breed—Frenchy, McCain, McMuffin, Kristol, Flake, et al ad nauseum—”good men”? It is to laugh. As for backstabbing, no one should expect otherwise from such; they always fought a lot more ferociously against their own side than they ever did Obama’s. But at this point, there should be no surprise in any of this. Might be a fine time to trot out the full Chesterton* quote from whence my title was swiped:

And all the time—such is the tragi-comedy of our situation—we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the statement that what our civilization needs is more ‘drive’, or dynamism, or self-sacrifice, or ‘creativity’. In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.

Anybody who thinks the best way of demonstrating fidelity to their “principles” is to pimp for the likes of HILLARY!™ over absolutely anybody else on the fucking planet has got the wrong damned principles.

*Duke of P-burgh points out that it ain’t a Chesterton quote, but a CS Lewis one. I knew that, I swear I did, but my tired old brain just ain’t what it once was—and it wasn’t much to begin with, alas. Thanks to the Duke for the heads-up.

Share

Most righteous walkout

Boss move.

When Trump tries to engineer a revamped trade deal with Mexico and Canada, he knows that each side will negotiate to achieve its respective goals. Once the deal is signed by all parties, the inference is that everyone sees a path to achieving many or at least some of those respective goals. Going forward, each side has motivation to cooperate productively. Certainly there will be disappointments on some or all sides that certain hoped-for goals will not be achieved, but they will proceed to obtain at least the meaningful benefits for which they successfully have bargained.

By contrast, when dealing with Democrats driven by an insane desire to impeach Trump or “at least” to destroy him personally — to ferret through his personal taxes, to go after his family and associates, to concoct one hoax after another aimed at bringing down his very reputation and raising preposterous specters regarding treasonous collusion with enemies or engaging in “cover-ups” — there is no point in his proceeding with them. No matter what is agreed, they ultimately will sabotage him and the agreement. For example, if an infrastructure agreement is reached, and subsequent polls reflect that voters are pleased with the results and credit the President for moving that infrastructure agenda forward, then Democrats will turn around mid-way and sabotage the agreements. Any person who ever has been in a real world situation like this in the private sphere has seen this done.

President Trump is not facing “Congressional Oversight.” Rather, he is enduring Congressional Torture. He was investigated for two years by a high-powered, unrestrained team of prosecutor sharks thirsting for blood, with an unlimited budget to feed their every whim, and they came up with nothing. In a reasonable world, that would be the end of the collusion fantasy. You hit him with your best shot — like the mental case who recently kickedArnold Schwarzenegger in the back — and you accomplished nothing. That investigation was a colossal waste — of time, of money, of national civility — and there is no further oversight needed on that front. So this is not about “Congressional Oversight.”

From Day One, Maxine Waters has been chanting “Impeach 45!” Now that she incomprehensibly sits as the chair of the House Banking Committee, with a gang of confederates alongside her including Rashida Tlaib, Ocasio-Cortez, and Al Impeachment Green, she gets to move forward on trying to drive Trump out of office. So it is with every other House committee. They are not doing “oversight,” and they are not accomplishing anything. Rather, they are on a vendetta against a guy who did not wrong any of them. He certainly cannot work with such people.

With an economy blazing, yet with inflation modest, the “wisdom of the American People” proved itself once again in 2018 to be a Henny Youngman joke: an old, old, quick one-liner. Instead of allowing the Trump Administration to carry its program to conclusion, the voters spiked the tires and jammed the cylinders. They gave the Democrats a majority in one chamber, electing a maniacal House that has no agenda but to destroy Trump.

The Demonrats aren’t entirely stupid at that: they figure if they can hinder, smear, and hamstring Trump badly enough, the crippling ineffectualness they themselves inflicted on him can then be used as a weapon against him in 2020. Thus can the Swamp status quo ante be restored, its Deep State support systems preserved, and the ruling PTB regain their eternal throne. As a bonus, future pretenders to it will have been taught a valuable cautionary lesson: don’t fuck with us, at your own peril.

As detestable, swinishly corrupt, and seemingly intractable as the whole DC circle jerk is, no one should ever expect any different from its enthusiastically parasitic participants. The truly depressing part is where the blame for the Democrat-Socialists’ incomprehensible 2018 resurrection must be placed:

It is the most amazing thing to watch. Iran is enriching uranium. North Korea is rumbling. China is strong-arming us economically, waiting to see who blinks first. Yet in Washington all House Democrat majority eyes are fixated on getting Trump’s taxes. The 2020 Presidential campaign already has begun. Debates are around the corner. Primaries soon thereafter. All focus is moving to 2020, with the Democrat House having accomplished nothing and on a collision course to produce nothing but more subpoenas.

If this is what American “swing voters” want, then they may revel in their “wisdom.” They had a situation that was almost too good to be true. Obama mockingly had sneered that it would take a “magic wand” to achieve such results. Yet the maniacal Democrat House has stopped all progress. In an environment of Congressional abuse, the frenzied Democrats are like a rabid dog unable to focus on anything other than chasing its tail. Healthcare coverage is not being improved. Infrastructure will not be addressed. Forget about fixing the border emergency.

Meanwhile, the Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians, Russians, even the Europeans and others, cannot be blamed for thumbing their noses at the United States as they watch an American government in paralysis while utter fools issue subpoenas and demand a man’s back taxes that have absolutely no bearing on his job performance as President since January 2017. The world’s most evil dictatorships — the ones that threaten us globally, militarily, economically — have absolutely no reason to be responsive to a Trump Administration that they see handcuffed within, in peril of being ousted in eighteen months. These dictators know that they themselves will remain in power, will face no such nonsense from within, and can wait out the worst flaws in American democracy as they almost always do. This is the mess created by the “wisdom of the American people.”

I’m just fine with American liberal stupes getting the government they want—good and hard, as much of it as they can stomach, force-fed them until they puke on it. What I don’t like is saner, more intelligent folks having it crammed down their throats into the bargain.

The 2018 elections were exactly what I said they were at the time: a no-shit, full-on disaster. It’s surely one that will be costing us all for a long time, in all kinds of ways. Maybe this time we’ll learn.

Share

Peeping Tom politics

Rogue, wrong, out of control.

Obama Judges Kill Americans’ Privacy to Help Democratic House Harass Trump
Two Obama appointees just greenlit two of the most invasive Congressional subpoenas for private financial information in American history. Their orders eviscerate and endanger privacy for all Americans.

Gee, imagine my surprise. Note ye well that this balls-out-illegal outrage is for records from a period when Trump A) was NOT President; B) was not RUNNING for President; C) was NOT under suspicion of phony “Russian collusion,” a specious connivance that has now been exposed as such.

Supreme Court precedent “makes it plain that the mere semblance of legislative purpose would not justify an inquiry in the face of the Bill of Rights.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 198 (1957). Congress cannot “unjustifiably encroach upon an individual’s right to privacy nor abridge his liberty of speech, press, religion or assembly.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 198 (1957). The Supreme Court warned “there is no congressional power to expose for the sake of exposure.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 200 (1957). The sole and whole goal must be “collecting information for a legislative purpose” which is limited to “obtaining facts upon which the full legislature can act.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 200 (1957). This imposes “a jurisdictional concept of pertinency” that constricts inquiries to factual issues needed for legislation. Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 206 (1957). This “scope of inquiry” must be “defined with sufficiently unambiguous clarity to safeguard a witness from the hazards of vagueness.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 217(1957).

“There is no general authority to expose the private affairs of individuals without justification in terms of the functions of the Congress…Nor is the Congress a law enforcement or trial agency. Those are functions of the executive and judicial departments of government. No inquiry is an end in itself; it must be related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of the Congress. Investigations conducted solely for the personal aggrandizement of the investigators or to punish those investigated are indefensible.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 186 (1957).

Not ONE of which conditions apply here. What this is is yet another completely illegitimate Democrat-Socialist fishing expedition, hoping to unearth something—anything, anything at all—that can then be inflated into a justification for impeachment. It is Constitutionally insupportable; legally without basis; ethically repellent; destructive to whatever tattered shreds remain of national comity; and despicable in every way. It is a low, frankly dangerous abuse of powers the Congress not only does not have, but has been explicitly denied them by the Supreme Court. It is political and personal harrassment, perpetrated by a party running scared and desperate, terrified that all the skeletons lurking in their closet might now rattle into public view. Here’s the telling, and infuriating, part:

The judges’ mutual refusal to stay their judgment pending appeal further reflects the partisan motivation behind their conduct. Anyone think they would have approved Congressional subpoenas into Obama’s still-sealed educational records? Anyone think they would have approved Senatorial subpoenas into Biden’s family finances that concern the large sums of money foreign countries and their agents paid his family during his Vice Presidency under Obama? Anyone think they would have approved wide-scale subpoenas into the activities of the Clinton Foundation during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State?

This judgment presents a risk far beyond the politics and personality of Trump, though it is the premise for the courts’ conduct; these court orders open Pandora’s box for any snooping, stalking, surveilling politician to pry open the most intimate private aspects of any person’s life at any time for any reason as they long as they write a memo to themselves that says: we need this for legislation someday, maybe, kinda.

Does anyone think these peeping Tom politicians will limit their window shopping to Trump Tower?

The legal and political left continues to attack the first freedoms of the Constitutional republic in ways even Orwell thought too implausible to foresee. The failure to protect privacy for those related to Trump is the failure to protect privacy for everyone. Let us hope SCOTUS steps in before 2024 becomes Orwell’s 1984.

Umm, hate to say it, but that ship has already sailed. No matter, though. The Democrat-Socialists are stepping heedlessly onto explosive ground here, still thinking themselves immune to any possible harm. They MUST be stopped, by whatever means necessary to do so, before it’s too late.

Trump needs to resist this indecent assault on his and his family’s privacy, vigorously and uncompromisingly; not only for his own sake, but even more for ours. For our part, we need to support him in that, unambiguously and without reservation. I know, I know, he hasn’t done this, he’s failed at that, he’s only halfheartedly attempted the other. He’s a boob, a blowhard, a deceitful fraud. Doesn’t matter now; he remains our very last chance to stem the Progtard tide politically, without an actual bloody, catastrophic shooting war. I am HIGHLY doubtful that such can be done, even more so with each successive shitlib shitfit. But we gotta try as hard as we can.

Share

Quick hit

A short one from Steyn that, its brevity notwithstanding, is well worth posting:

On Wednesday I returned to the Golden EIB Microphone for three hours of substitute-host-level Excellence in Broadcasting on America’s Number One radio show.

The broadcast began with Trump walking out of a meeting with Schumer and Pelosi after three minutes, and saying he wouldn’t be working with Democrats until they stopped investigating him. Good luck with that. I pointed out that the logic of their situation demands investigation without end: first, to distract from the fact that their agenda is nuts – open borders, transgender supremacism, fourth-trimester abortion – and, second, because it is necessary to investigate Trump for “obstructing” their previous investigation of him in order to prevent him investigating the rottenness of the original investigation of him: the counter-intelligence surveillance operation launched by Obama’s guys against the Trump campaign.

There IS no working with Democrat-Socialists now—period—and it’s worse than a waste of time to bother about it. There is only victory, or defeat; they’ve left nothing else to us, no matter how hard we might wish otherwise. Anybody willing to “work with” or “compromise” with them has a question to answer: which of the Bill of Rights, which of your essential God-granted rights and freedoms, are you willing to give up? What degree of liberal-fascist tyranny and control do you consider acceptable?

On the bright side, Steyn is right: they’ve well and truly painted themselves into a tight corner, and have no option but to carry on. Their metastasizing lunacy is both the agent of and the consequence for their self-destructive lurch into extremism. At this point they can only play the string out, hoping for a miracle to come along and save their stupid asses. One way or another, their ultimate ruin is inevitable. That’s the sic semper for all tyrannus.

Blind staggers update! Senile, or just dead drunk? Pursuant to the Trump walkout mentioned above, Stretch Pelosi weaves and wobbles her way through a completely incomprehensible monologue about…well, God only knows what it was about. But it’s quite disturbing. And hilarious. Fuckerberg doesn’t allow video embeds outside the Fakebook cage, so you’ll just have to hit the link to see it.

(Hat tip to Brak)

LOL get fucked update! More deets:

President Trump on Wednesday cut off infrastructure talks with congressional Democratic leaders after Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said he was engaged in a “cover up,” then lit into Democrats and declared he would not work with them until their investigations are over.

After their meeting abruptly ended, Trump appeared in the White House Rose Garden and demanded that Democrats “get these phony investigations over with” before talks resume.

“I’ve said from the beginning that you probably can’t go down two tracks,” Trump said. “You can go down the investigation track or you can go down the investment track … We’re going to go down one track at a time.”

The sudden, public blowup came as House Democratic leaders are facing increased pressure to begin impeachment proceedings against Trump, which has further raised partisan tensions in Washington.

Pelosi traveled to the White House for the long-planned infrastructure meeting shortly after she met with members of her caucus to discuss possible impeachment, during which she said her colleagues agreed Trump is “engaged in a cover-up.”

“I don’t do cover-ups,” Trump responded during his remarks.

Just another example of the habitual Democrat-Socialist MO of accusing others of the very things they’re guilty of. Good on ya for stiff-arming the obnoxious bastards, Mr President. Tawdry, slanderous innuendo and open discourtesy and disrespect, all disgracefully flaunted by conniving, unscrupulous pustules right before what’s supposed to be a serious conference, aren’t things anybody is required to put up with, much less a sitting President who was just exonerated by their own damned handpicked Grand Inquisitor.

But does it get even better, you ask? Hold onto your hats, friends.

“As a nation”? Kinda hard to call this a “nation” anymore with a straight face, Dickie-boy. How could it be, when half the population, their elected officials, and a significant chunk of the permanent federal bureaucracy all refuse to peacefully abide by the results of any election they don’t win, eagerly resorting instead this time around to a baldfaced coup attempt founded on flimsy pretexts and lies to overthrow the legitimate President? That sounds nothing like a nation to me; it sounds like a faltering, doomed banana republic, well on its way to collapse and dissolution. A people so bereft of any sense of civitas that they no longer accept the outcome of their elections is by definition ungovernable; the society has come unglued, the bond of a shared sense of civic duty and responsibility dissolved.

The supreme irony being, of course, that Despicable Dick portrays himself as “deeply concerned” about our great national unraveling—even as he himself is one of the ill-intentioned tapeworms working tirelessly to bring it about. That one pegs the chutzpah needle as deep into the red as it will go, shattering all previous records and setting a new standard for shameless hypocrisy.

And they call US deplorable.

Share

Fighting words…

…or empty threats? First, the backstory:

The journalists at CBS This Morning on Tuesday laughed at a new trend by militant leftists: Dumping milkshakes on politicians they don’t like. Co-host Tony Dokoupil began with a whimsical recounting: “In the latest of a series of attacks on right-wing politicians, Brexit Party Leader Nigel Farage was doused with a milkshake yesterday. That was actually salted caramel if anyone is wondering.”

This prompted laughter from Dokoupil’s co-hosts. Continuing the jovial discussion of political violence, he added, “I’m sure it feels great. I’m sure people love the feeling. Pictures fly around the world.”

Ace responds:

You know what else might feel great?
Throwing milkshakes at CBS personnel, both when they’re doing live-shots and when they’re just walking down the street on their own private time.

The rules you make for me, you also make for yourself.

For people who bitch and complain when they’re jeered at the opposite political party’s campaign rallies, they sure take a more blithe attitude about conservatives being physically assaulted.

Well, like I said: We’ll see how great it feels when the media starts getting pelted with some harmless, fun, happytime street justice.

The sentiment expressed is perfectly true, I have no quarrel with it. Problem is that, as with the Ogabe-era blogosphere bluster about how the Democrat-Socialists were surely going to regret it when their own tactics were thrown back at them by newly-empowered Righties, it never, ever comes to pass.

Sadly enough, the only person even making an attempt at forcing the Left’s New Rules down their throats has been one Donald J Trump, President of the United States of America. And when he does, or even talks about doing it, the weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth each time from the fraudmeisters of Conservative Inc over the horror of it all is truly dismal to witness. My God, the pathetic feebs even get their panties in a bunch when he so much as hurls a few insults at them on Twitter. And THESE are the ones we think are going to finally draw a line, say enough already, and finally start dealing out some quid pro quo most righteous in return?

Note ye well, all this is a problem for more reasons than just the obvious one: that the effective suppression of all dissent is simply unacceptable. For one, the too-reliable Righty all-talk-no-action response to continually escalating violence has clearly emboldened and encouraged the Leftist enemy, rather than instilling a healthy sense of trepidation and caution in them. This accomplishes absolutely nothing beyond guaranteeing that the assaults will continue, and worsen. For another, it amounts to abdicating the field of battle and tacitly yielding to the Left’s encroachment on our liberty and our rights, granting them victories they don’t deserve and accepting self-inflicted losses we can’t afford.

Not to jump on Ace too hard for this, mind. Vengeance fantasies and daydreams about seeing justice visited upon our enemies at last are very satisfying things to ponder now and then, a harmless enough way to pass the occasional idle moment—actually, a reasonable, completely human response to intolerable provocation. But if we really want this crap to cease, the sorry truth remains: They will not stop. They will have to BE stopped. Sorry, but I’m afraid we all need to face up to the fact that it’s going to take a bit more than just talking amongst ourselves to do it.

Share

A war unfought is a war unwon

The Koup Kucks Klowns, exposed.

A common occurrence is to hear or read “conservative” commentators discussing the notion that the left and right are engaged in some sort of grand kulturkampf for the soul of the West.

If only.

The left throws at us wave after wave of panzer battalions and we respond with water balloons.

To call the pantomimic resistance proffered by the pundits of the so-called “conservative” movement a war is a ludicrous overstatement. The left throws at us wave after wave of panzer battalions and we respond with water balloons.

Sure, every now and then an intellectually honest and professionally brave culture warrior sticks his head above the parapet and returns some decent fire, but these brave voices are few and far between and do little to repel the relentless onslaught of “progressive” modernity.

Moreover, both discouragingly and damningly, those happy few who dare resist the left’s cultural revolutions with anything more aggressive than a shrug are often felled by not-so-friendly fire. It seems whenever we get a warrior, there are already voices on our side ready to defenestrate them. This is of course hardly surprising, given that the Mainstream Conservative Movement is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Globalism Inc.

Conservative timidness was bad enough in the 90s and early 2000s, when the left was promoting things like affirmative action and civil partnerships, and invasions of migrant masses were but a distant nightmare confined to the pages of The Camp of the Saints. 

Now we have blatant anti-white bigots like Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar in Congress and self-obsessed LGBT mayors running for office lecturing us on the true meaning of Christianity. Meanwhile, crossdressers are brought into children’s libraries for story-time, and white kids are picked up from school in tears because their curriculum is so virulently racist against them.

The sour cherry on top of this dystopian progressive cake is that anyone that dares to resist the madness is deplatformed, depersoned, and dehumanized. We are living in the age of thoughtcrime, and it is clear beyond doubt that those who question either progressive or globalist orthodoxy will be reprogrammed or ruined.

The refusal of many in the so-called “conservative movement” to engage fully in any sort of cultural war is a sign that they are not really on our side.

Exhibit A:

WASHINGTON — The Senate has confirmed a new federal judge in Eastern Texas, despite comments he made disparaging former President Barack Obama.

Lawyer Michael Truncale was confirmed, 49-46, on Tuesday. Utah Sen. Mitt Romney was the only Republican to vote against President Trump’s nominee.

Romney said in a statement that his “no” vote was not a matter of qualifications or politics, but because of Truncale’s 2011 comments in which he called Obama an “un-American imposter.”

Romney, who lost to Obama in the 2012 presidential race, called the comments “particularly disparaging” and said that “as the (former) Republican nominee for president, I just couldn’t subscribe to that in a federal judge.”

Got that, folks? This, from a “severe conservative” who has thrown much worse, again and again, at Trump, calling him “a phony, a fraud,” “very, very not smart,” and more. He’s accused Trump of “bad character,” incompetence, and dishonesty. And then there’s this cheap smear from the 2016 campaign:

“Today, there is a contest between Trumpism and Republicanism. Through the calculated statements of its leader, Trumpism has become associated with racism, misogyny, bigotry, xenophobia, vulgarity and, most recently, threats and violence. I am repulsed by each and every one of these,” Romney wrote in a Facebook post at the time.

So here we have a “man” who has viciously insulted Trump, doggedly worked to undermine his agenda as a Senator—in other words, NOT a guy who has any real problem with talking some smack about his political adversaries. But now, in a petty, cheap gesture of defiance towards Trump, this “severe conservative” has joined the Democrat-Socialists in voting against the appointment of a conservative judge because he once expressed a derogatory opinion about…BARRACK FUCKING OBAMA?!?

Yeah, fuck that greasy weasel over, under, sideways, and down—with a rusty razor blade, and sand in the Vaseline. He’s a grimy, grubby, vindictive pissant, a snake in the grass of the same filthy stripe as his pal Obama. He’s a two-faced rumpswab, all butthurt from being passed over for the SecState job after he so obsequiously kissed Trump’s ass trying to get it. Unfortunately, Mittens has plenty of company in the ranks of “Conservative” Inc:

You probably don’t know Senator Richard Burr (R-Chamber of Commerce), because he’s utterly undistinguished in everything except his total commitment to doing the bidding of his corporate donor masters in service of reinforcing the Establishment’s grip on power. He allegedly represents North Carolina, but he is actually the Distinguished Gentlemen from Open Borders. 

And he’s a sap.

He’s chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee – go ahead and insert your own oxymoron joke – and it was with him that Donald Trump, Jr., agreed to give 20+ hours of testimony about the whole bogus RUSSIA TREASON EMOLUMENTS TRAITOR COLLUSION lie on the condition that his testimony was once and done. In the end Mueller, who would have gleefully charged Don Jr. with anything he could have found or invented charged Don Jr. with nada. So, after Mueller reluctantly put a stake in the heart of this garbage scandal – because you know Mueller and his pack of Democrats was slobbering at the thought of a Trump scalp – what did Burr decide to do?

1.Celebrate the total exoneration of the President of the false charges made against him by Democrats and their lying mainstream media transcriptionists?

Or

2.Decide to play along with the Democrats’ craven and malicious effort to keep the lie alive by subpoenaing Don Jr. to testify again about claims made by Federal Convict #86626, aka Michael Cohen, currently a resident of the old stoney lonesome for lying to Congress, as part of an attempt to frame the President’s son for perjury?

“Well, gosh,” you might think, “Only a Democrat-collaborating hack, or slack-jawed idiot, or both, would choose Option Two,” but then you remember we’re talking about an Establishment bot like Richard Burr.

This kind of nonsense is just part and parcel of what Never Trump is. See, though Burr is apparently not running again in four years, he’s laboring under the delusion that by then America will come to its senses and welcome him and his gooey ilk back into unchallenged power. He’s counting on some sort of Establishment payback down the road – a nice job on K Street, an appointment as the token GOP Secretary of Mediocrity for President Creepy Joe, or maybe some CNN hits along with Ana Navarro. He’s burnishing his credentials as one of the Republicans the ruling class can always count on to submit and obey.

He’s Mitt Romney without the dog tormenting. BTW, Mitt was last seen voting against a federal judge nominee because of True Conservatism™ or something.

Heh. Also: ouch. That invidious comparison had to have hurt Barr some.

Share

Fascist is as fascist does

Just another Democrat-Socialist “hero.”

PHILADELPHIA — When Brian Sims first ran for state representative in 2012, he ran as a new pro-business voice. He was going to be a bridge-builder, brimming with commonsense ideas on pocketbook issues.

Sims never met that promise.

Instead, he became many other things: an outdoor adventurer who climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro, a partisan attack dog who accused fellow state Rep. Martina White of saying she wanted to deport all immigrants, something his staff had to admit she never said, and a celebrity activist whose lucrative, nationwide speaking circuit earned him an ethics investigation.

He also became the guy who tweeted a photo of himself wearing a suit and a smirk and raising his middle finger to the vice president of the United States as Mike Pence headed to Philadelphia.

Sims wrote: “Let me be the first to officially welcome you to the City of Brotherly Love and my district! We are a city of soaring diversity. We believe in the power of all people. Black, Brown, Queer, Trans, Atheist, & Immigrant. So…get bent, then get out!”

“The power of all people”—except Caucasians, males, heterosexuals, etc. Actually, though, he DID provide a helpful list of who he means by “all people.” Basically, if you ain’t on that list, you’re fair game.

Last week, Sims decided to film his own harassment of a woman outside an abortion clinic here in Philadelphia, calling her an “old white lady” and her beliefs “grotesque” to her face and to the camera. The clear plan was to incite his audience against this peaceful protester, whom he saw as clearly bigoted and evil.

This was an emboldened, out-of-touch, arrogant elected official who woke up one day last week and made a conscious decision to go to Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of fighting and badgering.

And he chose a woman, standing by herself. And he didn’t start a dialogue. He didn’t introduce himself. He badgered her. Repeatedly. Relentlessly. Angrily. He badgered an enemy he himself described as an old lady.

We must reflect on this. This is the extreme Left acting out in public in exactly the manner they ascribe to conservatives: confrontational, intimidating, police tactics, berating women, threatening the First Amendment.

This stunning behavior — premeditated, confrontational, abusing the power of office, targeting women, contrived to gain political benefit — all occurred and was criticized by no one to date on the Left. No elected Democrat has come out and condemned Sims publicly.

Think about that.

No need to. And nobody needs to “reflect” on anything, either; there’s no use in it, it’s worse than a waste of time. Nor will there be any Democrat-Socialist condemnation of Sims’ repulsive violence against his foes. We all already know why: because this is who they are, this is what they do.

No, I’d say “thinking” and “reflecting” time is well behind us, and if any Democrat-Socialists DID condemn his actions, it would be false—they’re all for it, one hundred percent behind him. Hell, getting them to halfheartedly denounce Bernie Bro James Hodgkinson was like pulling teeth. And he was, y’know, shooting people.

No, next time this obstreperous, bullying punk decides to show everybody what a total badass he is by strongarming little old ladies or teenage girls because they dared to disagree with his dumbshit politics, those little old ladies or teenagers need to make sure to have brought along some muscle of their own. Then, should Sims show up feeling frisky, that muscle should proceed to stomp a fucking mud puddle in his worthless ass and walk it dry. Next time, and every time, until the pain of his injuries inspire the necessary “reflection” on his part.

Hate things had to come to this and all, but…well, here we all are. We ain’t the ones that need to “reflect,” as if we were guilty of anything other than being victims of liberal-fascist abuse and violence. We didn’t start this crap. But unless we’re okay with having it continue—and continue to escalate—we cannot, we MUST not, flinch from finishing it. Because that’s all too clearly the only way it’s ever going to stop.

Share

I have a plan…

A sudden flood of developments in the unraveling of the “Russia Collusion” diversionary hoax and Barr’s counter-investigation, of which I’m going to restrict myself to this one:

Washington attorney Joe diGenova claimed in an interview last night that the Department of Justice inspector general has determined that “the final three FISA extensions were illegally obtained,” and the first one is still being investigated.

For the past year, DOJ IG Michael Horowitz has been investigating the FBI’s 2016 surveillance activities and his report is expected later this month or in early June.

Washington power couple Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing appeared on Lou Dobbs’ Fox Business Network show Thursday night to talk about the latest turns in the “SpyGate” saga.

“The only question now is whether or not the first FISA was illegally obtained,” diGenova said.

He told Dobbs that the latest revelations in investigative reporter John Solomon’s piece at The Hill, have prompted further investigation from Horowitz’s team.

Delusional Democrat-Socialists in Congress, still trying to win the 2016 election by any possible means since they failed to via the legitimate one, are now grudgingly moving on to their next wildly desperate gambits. They’re now yammering on about Deutschebank, Trump’s tax returns, bankruptcies, and other financial minutiae. None of that ought to come as a surprise; their mad thirst for power is unslakable, and the failure to remove Trump has maddened them further still.

Glossing over all that for the nonce, though, there’s another point I want to make here. To wit: sooner or later, nauseating as it is to contemplate, Americans will elect another Democrat-Socialist as president. Kinda hard for some of to see, especially afte the Mueller implosion, but there are still plenty of us stupid enough to see it done. When they do, the Republics should—dammit, MUST—see to it that that individual endures THE EXACT SAME treatment as Trump has.

I absolutely, positively mean it: the next Democrat-Socialist president should be harrassed, investigated, accused, and pursued with precisely the same insane vigor as Trump has been. If the GOP retains control of the House at the time, the impeachment-proceeding paperwork should issue from the Juidiciary Committee no later than ten minutes after the inauguration. In any event, rhetoric threats and speculation about impeachment should be unceasing.

The election itself should be assumed to have been fraudulent, its results regarded as tainted. As it happens, Republicans should be doing this anyway, since—given the Democrat-Socialists’ established historical penchant for vote fraud and election-rigging—it’s by no means an unreasonable accusation. But even if whatever corrupt pit-viper the Democrat-Socialists nominate wins all fifty states, the Repukes ought to go ahead and make the accusation anyway…and back it up with some sort of Mueller-type panel to investigate, no matter how long that might take or how badly it might impair President Commiecrat in the performance of his sworn duties.

Conspiracy-theorizing over possible “collusion” with foreign adversaries should begin on inauguration day also, with every last little “suspicious” thread fully unraveled. The president him/her/zhe/zhim/itself should never enjoy a single peaceful hour free of allegation, innuendo, and calumny, however spurious or self-evidently absurd. He should be forced to endure examination so microscopic and minute it would make a veteran proctologist recoil in sheer horror. No stone should be left unturned. After what they’ve done not only to Trump but to his supporters—who, as we well know, are the real targets here—Republicans should damned well see to it that the last American president ever to be allowed to serve a full term reasonably unmolested left office a long, long time ago.

It won’t happen, of course. Even if the handful of Trumpublicans in government were willing to undertake the project, and I ain’t saying they are, the Vichy GOPe would make the welkin ring with their “we’re better than this,” “this is not who we are!” horsepucky, thereby short-circuiting the whole effort. But if we want obnoxious, beyond-the-pale garbage of the sort we’ve had to put up with the last two years to finally stop, giving our Democrat-Socialist enemies a hearty dose of their own medicine might well be the only way to do it. Short of stacking their stinking corpses like cordwood, that is.

Update! Levin puts a big bright line under it.

What ought to happen here is, there ought to be a grand jury impaneled. Comey should give testimony, Andrew McCabe should give testimony, James Baker should give testimony, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, the whole cabal, they all should be giving testimony. They should get a little bit of their own medicine.

We should have a criminal grand jury, and we should have either a Special Counsel or a United States Attorney take charge of this case and get to the bottom of it. Put these people under oath and let them get the Donald Trump treatment. We want all of their documents. No privileges, nothing. Drag them in and maybe drag their kids in too.

What we have here is an attack on the President and an attack on his family. Collusion, Special Counsel, contempt, obstruction, constitutional crisis – I just started writing them down, impeachment, tax returns, bank accounts, they want – they’ve already leaked some of his tax information. They accuse him of campaign violations. They accuse him being a racist and anti-Semite, mentally unfit for office.

Let me tell you what’s going on. This is a Democrat Party cabal, trying to reverse the 2016 election, trying to disenfranchise 63 million voters, mostly Republicans, independents and some Democrats, led by a Speaker of the House from San Francisco, a Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee from New York, the Chairman of the Oversight Committee from Baltimore.

And they maybe will have special counsels against them, because if they want to use Soviet tactics against Republicans, then the only way the Democrats know to stop is if Soviet tactics are used against them. That’s it.

From your lips to God’s ears, Mark. As Picard used to say: Make it so.

Share

TINVOWOOT

And TINTOWOut, either.

It’s certainly wonderful to think that “all we need to do is find ways to constructively disagree with each other,” and think that this would solve most, if not all, of our problems. But there’s a tremendous difficulty with applying this to the modern ideological divide between Right and Left, the “reactionary” (true or otherwise) and the progressive. The difficulties lie in that this line of thinking implies that there are two sides which actually want rational discussion and a settling of differences rationally. Yet, there are not.

Indeed, what the Left wants is precisely the opposite of this. The progressive Left has not, does not, and never will seek some sort of accommodation with its ideological enemies. Instead, the Left seeks to acquire for itself the institutional and social power to silence its enemies. Ultimately, this proclivity stems from the very nature of what drives the “progressive idea,” which is that the “arc of history” is always bending towards the advancement of what the Left believes is “progress.” Since this trend is inexorable, there is no need, ultimately, to compromise with the Right, merely find various ways to outlast them and hasten their demise. This sort of thinking is responsible for everything from doxxing to the gulags and explains why progressivism is the single greatest evil that this world has ever seen.

At the risk of sounding like a progressive myself, one of the overarching problems with the modern world – which includes the worldview of the “classically liberal, libertarian” soft centre – is that it still holds onto essentially bourgeois attitudes about social and civic participation. These attitudes include notions of fair play, the “marketplace of ideas,” approaching consensus through reasonable discussion and the free and open exchange of ideas, and so forth. To the average American and Westerner, these all sound like pretty straightforward goals.

But they are not goals which the progressive Left shares. Indeed, the Left has absolutely no desire to see a “free and open exchange of ideas” because when that happens, they lose. When stacked against virtually any alternative, progressivism has a horrible track record, and deep down inside they know this. This is why they spend so much effort using institutional power to suppressed dissenters from their orthodoxy.  It’s why when they do appear to be engaging with ideological competitors, it nearly always takes the form of screaming about “fascism,” “racism,” or some other slur designed to signal to their fellows the presence of an enemy, much like the moaning of a brain-dead zombie in a horror movie.

From the progressive Left/SJW perspective, there is literally NO advantage to actually having open and honest dialogue with those on the Right about any topic, and especially not with the genuine-but-currently-dissident Right. They know that when they engage us in the “marketplace of ideas,” they lose. All that can happen for them is to see defections from their ranks and to lose their grip on institutional power. So why would they ever accede to an open exchange build about “rules of fairness,” if they don’t have to?

The short answer is, “they won’t.” So why would we ever expect them to?

The short answer is: we shouldn’t. The longer answer is: we MUSTN’T. Rather, we should concern ourselves exclusively and entirely with smiting them, crushing them, defeating them utterly. At each and every opportunity we can find or contrive. No quarter, no mercy, no remorse. Nothing less can suffice. What they intend for us is neither benign nor tolerable, and no stratagem or tactic is beyond them in the pursuit of their sinister goal. Full stop, end of story.

Via Gerard, who appends a Tweet that fleshes the whole thing out quite nicely.

Share

Asked, answered

Roger Simon asks the silliest of questions:

Should Journalists Go to Jail for Spreading Russia Lies?

A: Yes. Just on the off-chance he’s being serious: HELL yes.

As a First Amendment maximalist, I am inclined to reply an automatic “no” to my own headline – should journalists go to jail for spreading Russia lies? But a penalty of some kind, indeed a serious one, should certainly be levied for misinforming the public on the most important subject of our day, which has happened repeatedly over the last few years concerning the Russia probe. And when these prevarications can be shown to have been deliberate, to have been done knowingly, difficult as that may be to prove, the line to sedition may have been crossed and there is an argument the reporters involved should face legal consequences. They should also be fired.

Unfortunately, because reporting is an occupation with no official standards like law or medicine, no professional organizations to disbar them, and because, as A. J. Liebling wrote long ago, “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one,” with media operations like CNN and NBC often encouraging those very lies, this is unlikely to happen.

Nevertheless. As Kimberly Strassel indicated in “For Fear of William Barr: The attorney general gets attacked because his probe endangers many powerful people,” heads of those who instigated the Russia probe are likely soon to roll. Shouldn’t members of the press who gave them voice be more than unindicted co-conspirators?

A: YES. These nothing-of-the-sort “journalists” weren’t reporting; they were participating, providing active, enthusiastic assistance in the most outrageous, brazen scandal in American history. High among the reasons they should be locked up for it:

Will these journalists have learned a lesson and change their habits? Not likely. For the most part, they are moral narcissists, primed to feel confident of the righteousness of their cause even when faced with countervailing reality. And in any case, to change would lead to personality disintegration, loss of friends and family and, worse, to being fired by the profiteers who run their companies. That’s the way of the media world today.

It is that. But it shouldn’t be, and Americans should no longer be willing to put up with it. The way to change things is to deal out some seriously painful consequences. Anything less must be flatly rejected by We, The People, by whatever means we must use to get that message across. Treason and sedition should be returned to their proper status as the most serious of crimes; let every Leftwit coup-plotter, in government and out, tremble at the mere contemplation of such heinous acts.

As for our degenerate Propagandist Class, a good, long stretch in the hoosegow ought to be a distant second in their list of worries, with hanging by the neck until dead comfortably in the lead. Otherwise, we will surely have to confront more of this nonsense from these charlatans, and worse, before very long.

Share

Cheney V2.0?

More rich, buttery Barr goodness.

Barr is the new Dick Cheney: a stocky, bespectacled, confrontational, blunt, intelligent, unapologetically conservative, experienced, and high-powered official who believes in and fights for the office of the president. Just as Democrats loathed Cheney as a bugaboo manipulating President George W. Bush to further the interests of Halliburton, they attack Barr as a dishonest factotum of President Trump’s. The qualities that drove Democrats batty over Cheney—his inscrutability, his cleverness, his asperity, and above all his success—make them incensed about Barr. These happen to be qualities Republicans find appealing.

What’s behind conservative support for Cheney and Barr is their lack of embarrassment. Most Washingtonians, no matter their party, find it important to be held in esteem by the city’s tastemakers, who are overwhelmingly liberal. Not these two. The classic Cheney moment was his 2004 exchange with Pat Leahy on the Senate floor. Cheney complained that Leahy had called him a war profiteer. Leahy responded that Cheney had said he was a bad Catholic. So Cheney ended the conversation by telling Leahy to perform a physically impossible four-letter act. “You’d be surprised at how many people liked that,” Cheney recollected in a 2010 interview. “It’s sort of the best thing I ever did.” He’s selling himself short.

Republican fans of Barr circulated clips of his Senate appearance Wednesday even as media coverage of his testimony was uniformly negative. No Democrats are held in less esteem by conservatives than the ones on the Judiciary Committee. They will never live down their treatment of Brett Kavanaugh. Trump supporters nodded in agreement when Barr said the controversy over his March 24 description of the Mueller report is “mind-bendingly bizarre.” They chuckled when he said Mueller’s March 27 letter to him was “a bit snitty and I think it was probably written by one of his staff members.” They guffawed when Barr described the verb “spying” as “a good English word.” They cheered when Richard Blumenthal asked for notes Barr had taken of his phone conversation with Mueller and Barr told him no. “Why should you have them?”

Where his predecessor was genial and deferential to Congress and the press, Barr is disdainful and combative. At his April 18 press conference before the publication of the Mueller report, a CBS reporter asked Barr if his use of the word “unprecedented” to describe the circumstances of the Russia investigation was “quite generous to the president and his feelings and emotions.” Barr replied, “Is there another precedent for it?” “No,” the reporter acknowledged sheepishly. Another reporter wondered, “Is it an impropriety for you to come out and sort of spin the report before people are able to read it?” Barr said, “No,” and left the room. Lib owned.

Some out there are reminding us of something we all already know: that the chances of top-level malefactors like HILLARY!™ and Ogabe ever facing justice remain slim, and I can’t disagree. Nor do I anticipate meaningful reform of dangerously powerful and corrupt federal bureacracies from Barr’s efforts. Nonetheless, it sure is enjoyable to watch Barr roughly manhandle the Democrat-Socialists, making them squirm like a salted slug on a hot sidewalk. Elsewhere, Lindsay V2.0 scores a stinging, smarting hit himself, calling Mr Integrity out for his weaselly manipulation.

I am filing this story in the “put up or shut up” category of invitations. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham Friday morning sent a letter to Special Counsel Robert Mueller inviting him to testify about the phone call he had with A.G. Barr following the letter Mueller sent to Barr about the summary of findings the A.G. issued, pending release of the full report. That letter, purportedly meant to be private, nonetheless was leaked right before Barr testified before Graham’s committee and was used by Democrat members to criticize the A.G.

Mueller knows that Barr had him on a speakerphone, with witnesses present and taking notes. (Incidentally, what does that tell you about the actual regard in which Barr holds Mueller — a man he has known for decades?) Reportedly, during the conversation, Barr asked Mueller if there were any inaccuracies and was told by Mueller, no.

Meanwhile, the Democrat-controlled House Judiciary Committee is negotiating with Mueller over possible testimony. Just a guess: They are not demanding that staff members be given a half-hour to question Mueller.

The last line in Graham’s beautifully direct request to get all the cards on the table: “Please inform the Committee if you would like to provide testimony regarding any misrepresentation by the Attorney General.” Time to fish or cut bait, Slippery Bob.

Update! Gerard posts a Solzhenitsyn quote made all the more poignant by current events.

In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.

We are also dishonoring our own integrity and posterity, thereby sowing the seeds of bloody strife, upheaval, and misery for those new generations sooner or later, as faith in the system and justice itself crumbles into ruin.

Obstruction update! Via Insty: “Barr is investigating Democrats. Democrats call for Barr to resign. According to Nadler, that’s obstruction of justice!” But it’s more than just that. It’s also this:

Don’t fool yourself. This latest assault on Attorney General Barr is a coordinated hit job cooked up between the media, the special counsel, and their allies in Congress. And it has only one purpose, to stop or slow Barr’s inquiry into the gross abuses leading up to the effort to spy on the Trump campaign.

I explained exactly why Mueller defied Barr here: “By salting the report with grand jury information that required redaction, Mueller guarantees the president remains subject to the innuendo and suspicion that comes with unnecessary secrecy.” In other words, it was a dirty trick. Open your eyes, Mr. Attorney General, because they’re coming for you now.

Oh, he seems like a smart enough fella. I’m pretty sure he already knows.

Coordinating with their allies in the media and the Senate, Mueller has attempted to set-up the attorney general. Barr was asked whether he knew why Mueller’s team was upset with the attorney general’s summary. He said he did not know what their concerns were. That was a truthful statement. But Sen. Patrick Leahy has attempted to use Mueller’s leaked letter to argue that the attorney general lied to Congress when he said he didn’t know what was of concern to Mueller’s team. The attorney general gave a factual and able explanation for the ginned up discrepancy.

What is Mueller’s endgame here? Impeachment? Don’t be ridiculous.

To answer that question, go back and look at where the Mueller people were standing on the night that Donald Trump shocked the world by upsetting Hillary Clinton. Robert Mueller left a $3.4 million partner job with WilmerHale, the same law firm that had just won a lawsuit for the Clinton Foundation, keeping Clinton emails secret. The Mueller probe provided former Clinton Foundation attorney Jeannie Rhee with the opportunity once again to protect Clinton by making sure the word “Fusion” never appeared in the Mueller report and by steering the Papadopoulos prosecution to help obscure the role of the Clinton-financed dossier in the hoax. The end-game is to continue to protect the coup plotters and deep-state bad actors who have used surveillance of Americans in much the same way the Soviets used it in Eastern Germany.

This is high stakes stuff. If the elites can continue using intelligence and law enforcement to interfere in American elections, they will eventually get good at it and we will lose our republic. The deep state allies are fighting like the “Unsullied” protecting the gates of Winterfell to cover for the bad actors still fumbling for their golden parachutes. Bottom line, the report, these new leaks, they’re just desperate attempts to delay the reckoning. The attorney general is now subject of a campaign of smear and intimidation and he must be protected so he can hold these villains to account.

Seeing as how the Clintons are up to their necks in this, Barr needs more than merely political protection; he should consider putting some serious private security on the payroll, lest he be found on a DC park bench after having committed suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head seventeen times.

Share

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

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

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

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine." - Joseph Goebbels

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it." - NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in." -Bill Whittle

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