Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

I’ve been waiting years for this and didn’t even know it

Steyn reviews one of my all-time favorite movies. Alas, he doesn’t seem to think much of it.

The point is Andy and Larry Wachowski figured they’d hit on the perfect wrinkle for a classic postmodern nerd franchise — the Star Wars of our generation. And if you say, “Hang on, old boy, surely Star Wars is the Star Wars of our generation?”, I’d say, nah, it’s too 1930s radio serial, and its grandiosity is plonkingly earnest and squaresville instead of as coolly meta as Keanu Reeves’ too-bored-to-act acting style. The Matrix was quickly followed by The Matrix RevisitedThe Matrix ReloadedThe Matrix Recycled, and Neo got paleo pretty quick. None of the sequels could quite match the initial red-pilling of surface reality, and so they simply dug the rabbit hole deeper. Zion is the last outpost of humanity – but maybe it’s merely a Matrix-within-the-Matrix? Ever consider that, huh? And what if Neo himself is a Matrix-within-the-Matrix-within-the-Matrix? He was supposed to be “The One” – but maybe one of the others is The One. Maybe The One flew over the cuckoo’s nest.

By the sequel, the Wachowskis’ “innovative visual style” (a Cecil B De Mille-scale computer game peopled by sullen pouters) was looking a lot less innovative: they did all the same things they did in the first film all over again, just more expensively and even more arbitrarily — the scene in which Keanu/Neo is fighting a hundred guys in black and doesn’t win, doesn’t lose, but just finds himself fighting vainly the old ennui and so buggers off after 15 minutes pretty much sums it up. By the second movie, Keanu had perfected his morose blank look, and fine actors like Laurence Fishburne were turning in performances so clunkily solemn you’d think they were auditioning for George Lucas. As usual, the subterranean city of Zion proved to be just another generic dystopian underground parking garage; and the orgiastic dance party looked like a weekend rave in Huddersfield.

But by then the Matricians or Matricists or Matrons or whatever they’re called were hooked. In the original film, Neo discovers that the meaning of our lives is an illusion; in the first sequel, the meaning of the film is an illusion. It doesn’t make much sense as it’s flying by, and it makes even less if you pause the tape and copy out all the dialogue. The rabbit hole doesn’t go deep at all; the buck stops about four inches down.

Oh well, no two of us can expect to agree on everything, right? I loved ’em all then, and I still love ’em now. I am willing to grant that the second one was the weakest of the series; that extended Zion-party sequence was indeed tedious at best. It felt like filler, a superfluous time-killer without any real narrative point or purpose. That stipulated, however, I did still like at least some of the rest of Reloaded, and thorougly dug Revolutions start to finish.

Share

Schadenfraudalicious

Gonna need to borrow a few of Ace’s notorious pudding cups over here. You know what for (explanation here).

teary-farmer.png


Speaking of Madcow, looks like she has Teh Sadz again. Ace—who is also doing a bang-up job himself, and having a ball doing it—offers his scaly, spike-covered shoulder in sympathy:

Check it out if you, like me, get cry-boners.

Oh man, seriously. She sounds like the little boy saying that Old Yeller will get better, he just needs to rest a bit.

I won’t bother re-posting the vid of Cartman refreshing himself with a cool, satisfying drink of Scott Tenerman’s tears again, but you all know I’m thinking it, right? Meanwhile, Schlichter frets over the damage done:

The damage to our country is hard to calculate right now. It will take a while to fully appreciate how this betrayal by our alleged betters has undermined the foundations of our Republic. But the signs are ominous. Normal people, those of us who build, feed, fuel and defend this country, have been awakened to the utterly incompetent and thoroughly venal nature of what Instapundit Glenn Reynolds correctly identifies as the U.S. franchise of a useless trans-national elite that prioritizes its own power and perks over the welfare of those is purportedly serves.

We’re woke now. We see that the people we’ve been electing – the people they allow us to elect – are really all the same. Only the labels are different, but the objective – their own money and influence – is identical. Except for Trump, who neither respects the elite nor plays by its shabby rules. And that’s why they threw away any pretens of honesty, integrity or respect for the rule of law to drive him out of the Oval Office they covet.

Congrats. This whole fiasco has convinced Americans that there are two sets of rules in America, one for the elite and one for us, and that the justice system is just a scam designed to help the elite hold onto power by punishing those who would challenge its rule. That’s poison to a free country, which is probably okay with our scuzzy elite since it does not actually want a free country. It wants a happy-face dictatorship, and it wants to do the dictating.

So, what next? What do we do?

Follows, a few suggested courses of action—all of which I endorse, some of which may actually happen. His conclusion I endorse also, albeit with a caveat:

The Mueller report marks the proverbial end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end, of this grave crisis. It’s a crisis where our Republic is in danger of becoming something very different, and something very much less free. Eliminating the Electoral College, letting in millions of illegal aliens, packing SCOTUS, banning guns – these are all leftist policies designed with one singular purpose, to dispossess you of the power to participate in your own governance and to ensure that we can never again elect someone like Trump who might challenge the elite’s stranglehold on control. We won this battle, but there is a long campaign ahead. Get ready, because if we let up then we will lose our liberty forever.

We’re already much farther along down those shadowy paths than we should ever have allowed ourselves to come, and it’s by no means certain that we’ll ever find our way out of the woods. The implosion of the Mueller witch hunt is undeniably a win not just for Trump but for all of us, and a big one at that. But as Kurt says, it isn’t the end of anything; the Left will quickly shove it down the memory hole, then move on to their next sordid scheme. They’ll keep right on coming, until they are not just defeated but utterly destroyed. And next time—or the next, or the next, or the one after that—we might not be so fortunate.

Share

“Soft beatings inevitably turn hard”

A calm voice in a turbulent time.

In March of 2016, during the heat of the Republican primary contest, Josh Marshall, the tetchy founder of Talking Points Memo, offered an ominous augury about the raucous Trump campaign. “Someone will die,” he thundered, giving, at the time, the umpteenth warning about the violent effects of the real estate magnate’s aggressive rhetoric. “It may sound like hyperbole. But this is the kind of climate of agitation and violence where someone will end up getting severely injured or killed. I do not say that lightly,” Marshall warned his loyal audience.

I’ve thought about the piece a lot since Trump’s unlikely election and the Democrats’ slow descent into madness. Every new instance of liberal-concocted violence brings it back to mind, like a nagging reminder. Whether it’s James Hodgkinson’s attempted killing spree, Trump supporters accosted in public, or even hoaxed hate crimes, Marshall’s prediction might appear prescient, albeit in a backwards way.

In “No Hate Left Behind,” Thomas Edsall cites a study from political scientists Nathan Kalmoe and Lilliana Mason on the growing ease at which Americans are willing to employ violence against their partisan opponents. “Just over 42 percent of the people in each party view the opposition as ‘downright evil,’” Edsall despairs, unaware that one of his byline colleagues once suggested “good people can’t be Republicans.” The data only gets worse from there. When asked if their favored party loses the 2020 presidential election, “18.3 percent of Democrats and 13.8 percent of Republicans said violence would be justified on a scale ranging from ‘a little’ to ‘a lot.’”

Then there’s the question of ontological moral status. The researchers found that “nearly one out of five Republicans and Democrats agree with the statement that their political adversaries ‘lack the traits to be considered fully human — they behave like animals.’”

Ahh, there’s that increasingly annoying false-moral-equivalence again. And false it is.

Consider: one side endorses murdering newly-born infants as “a woman’s right to choose”; one…doesn’t. One side commits actual acts of violence as punishment for expressing a dissenting opinion, even for merely wearing a certain hat in public. The other…doesn’t. One side holds rage-fueled rallies and protests which leave mountains of rubbish, ruined landscaping, broken windows, even bags of human feces and/or urine in their aftermath. The other holds mannerly, entirely (not “mostly”) peaceable events at which no one but themselves need fear assault, and thoroughly polices up its mess afterwards.

One side primarily inhabits decaying urban areas enlivened by crackheads, hookers, vagrants, and raving madmen; sidewalks festooned with piles of human shit; and miscellaneous other signposts of sophistication, superior intelligence, and gracious living. The other prefers clean, quiet, well-tended suburbs or more remote country homes, also clean and well-tended. In those areas, any shambolic wino stumbling groggily onto someone’s nicely-manicured lawn to pinch an open-air loaf will find himself remanded into police custody with a quickness, with three hots and a cot the only compensation for the “injustice” visited upon him. Hell, when somebody’s dog shits on the lawn it’s usually cleaned up right away.

No, one of these things is NOT like the other. I’ll leave it to you guys to discuss which is the more civilized and which is more closely comparable to “behaving like animals.” It seems pretty danged obvious to me, but YMMV. Then comes the calmer perspective:

Saying there’s too much hatred in America’s air is like saying there’s too much salt in the ocean. The country was founded on partisan bickering, which occasionally turned violent. It’s narrow-minded to suggest we’re at a more perilous time in our history than, say, the Civil War or even the frequent riots of the ‘60s and ‘70s or the Galleanist bombings of 1919. The last guy who tried to wage a national bombing campaign only sent duds from his bumper-sticker-laden creeper van.

Aside from hyperventilating Hollywood types, who get an outsized amount of media coverage, and the discursive rantings on Facebook, we’re not quite at the point where neighbors turn on neighbors, kids turn on parents, brothers turn on brothers, all in a bloody free-for-all. Go to a supermarket on any given day and you’ll see all types of Americans quietly going about their business. Few people let the fear of mass shootings or terrorist attacks disrupt their plans. We have yet to see roving gangs of marauders targeting MAGA-hat wearers or Beto devotees.

America doesn’t have an anger problem so much as it has an anger-management problem. We’re a naturally het-up people. Sometimes that leaks out into scrums of fisticuffs. But, a lot of frustration that drives these physical altercations comes from a double standard. Those who go unpunished for aggression aren’t going to see the light and make peace with their ideological adversaries. One side gets a clear pass when it comes to acting on its frustrations, and it’s not the side Jussie Smollett tried to blame for his botched publicity stunt. When leftists haul off and slug conservatives, the media-driven outcry is not nearly the same as when the inverse occurs.

Josh Marshall inadvertently revealed as much by focusing on Trump’s coarse language and not the left’s own lack of self-control. Yes, someone has died as a casualty of a twisted political ideology. But the threat of a mass breakout in violence remains overstated. How we act in person is different than what we say on Twitter or to a pollster. One-on-one conversation can ease years of Facebook-fueled tension in just minutes. As Great Britain’s P.G. Wodehouse once admitted during the Blitz, “when I’m about to feel belligerent about some country I meet a decent sort of chap” who causes him to lose “any fighting feelings or thoughts.”

That can all change, of course.

It can at that. We’ll know soon enough which way things go.

Share

Can’t get no…satisfaction

Naked and belligerent” is no way to go through life, honey.

FEBRUARY 18–Cops today arrested a “naked and belligerent” Florida Woman for allegedly attacking her fiancée after he declined to have sex with her, according to a police report.

Officers responding early this morning to a disturbance call at a Vero Beach apartment building encountered Samantha Jewel Hernandez, 21, sans clothes and in an ornery mood. Hernandez (pictured at right) denied doing anything to her fiancée, “but was too intoxicated” to provide further information.

The victim, 21, told police that Hernandez “wanted to engage him in sexual intercourse,” which he declined. “Hernandez was angry at the fact that [the victim] did not want to have sex and began attacking him, striking him in the face and ripping his shirt.”

Saw this tucked into MisHum’s ONT thread, and of course you know I clicked on through wondering just how fat and ugly this gruesome manatee would be. So imagine my surprise:

nakedandbelligerent.jpg


Well, I’ll be danged. Proof positive of the truth in the old joke: no matter how cute she is, somewhere out there is a guy who’s tired of fucking her.

Share

Belated enlightenment

Another NeverTrumpTard awakens from delusional slumber.

I chose a third path in 2016 and the nation decided otherwise. Now, as we head into 2020, it is clear the paths forward are still between the Republicans and Democrats. The path of opting out or protesting now to me seems irrelevant as we have a President who is no longer a hypothetical against any of a host of Democrats who too extreme for the nation.

We have three years on which to judge President Trump’s administration and vision for the country. We also have lots of real world examples of where the Democrats want to head.

We have a party that is increasingly hostile to religion and now applies religious tests to blocking judicial nominees. We have a party that believes children can be murdered at birth. We have a party that would set back the economic progress of this nation by generations through their environmental policies. We have a party that uses the issue of Russia opportunistically. We have a party that has weaponized race, gender, and other issues to divide us all while calling the President “divisive.” We have a party that is deeply, deeply hostile to large families, small businesses, strong work ethics, gun ownership, and traditional values. We have a party that is more and more openly anti-Semitic.

On top of that, we have an American media that increasingly views itself not as a neutral observer, but as an anti-Trump operation. The daily litany of misreported and badly reported stories designed to paint this Administration in a negative light continues to amaze me. Juxtapose the contrast in national reporting on the President and race or Brett Kavanaugh and old allegations with the media dancing around the issues in Virginia. Or compare and contrast the media’s coverage of the New York and Virginia abortion laws with their coverage of this President continuing the policies of the Obama Administration at the border, including the Obama policy of separating children from adults. Or look now at how the media is scrambling to cover for and make excuses for the Democrats’ “Green New Deal,” going so far as to suggest that maybe, just maybe, the outline of policy initiatives was an error or forged.

Now, I don’t mean to bang on poor ol’ Erick too hard here, mind; at least he didn’t outright advocate voting for Her Herness in 2016, unlike a lot of other NeverTrumpTard twatwaffles we could name. Nonetheless I just have to ask: what part of the above WASN’T true of the Demonrats way, way back in 2016? Does Erickson really think they’ve changed that radically since all of…umm, two-three years ago? Or is he only just getting around to realizing these things now? Neither of those possibilities says anything complimentary about his political astuteness, however dedicated he may be to Muh Principles. In all fairness, though, his closer is clear-eyed enough, if still a bit Pollyanna-ish.

My friends in the center-right coalition who are flirting with Democrats are, more often than not, not really socially conservative. But I am. That party offers me no home and is deeply hostile to people of faith. The President has shown himself to not share my faith convictions any more than the other side, but the President has shown he is willing to defend my faith convictions and is supportive of them.

I could stay home or vote third party as I did in 2016. But what will that get me? The ability to say “not my problem” or the self-assurance that I didn’t get dirty in having to choose? I have many Christian friends who, when I have discussed this, tell me I should just stay home and turn my back. Both parties, they tell me, are profoundly corrupt. And they’re right. But I am not looking for a messiah in politics and don’t have some religious sentiment tied to my vote. While I understand and accept the sincere conviction of some of my friends who have decided they will just sit out the process, I have decided otherwise. In 2016, we knew who the Democrats were and were not sure of who Donald Trump was. Now we know both and I prefer this President to the alternative.

I will vote for Donald Trump and Mike Pence. And, to be clear, it will not be just because of what the other side offers, but also because of what the Trump-Pence team has done. They’ve earned my vote.

I’d say so myself, plus some. But then I’m one of those who were duped by the Orange Man from the very beginning, so my opinion don’t count for much. Even so, ain’t it nice that enough of us benighted Dirt People recognized certain hard realities to kill the awful prospect of two or three Hillary!™ Supreme Court appointments a-borning—not to mention providing thumbsucking fence-sitters like Erickson with the privilege of a risk-free Presidential test drive before they actually committed themselves to anything in 2020. What the hell, better late than never, I suppose. So welcome aboard, Erick.

Share

Taking the fun out of it

Stace McCains says “social justice is for homos.” But before anybody puffs himself up over all that Hate Speech, please bear this in mind:

If someone had tried to get us to care about politics when I was a teenager, we’d have called them a “homo,” which was a sort of generalized insult that wasn’t homophobic because the word “homophobia” hadn’t been invented yet. Circa 1974, “homo” (like “queer” and “faggot”) was just an insult slung around among a group of teenage friends, without any actual suspicion of homosexuality. Perhaps a sociology professor or a Gender Studies major would interpret the use of such slang insults as expressions of “toxic masculinity” or whatever, but of course all professors and Gender Studies majors are homos, by the standards of normal teenagers. When I was in high school, all the cool kids were completely cynical about politics and politicians, and considering that I attended high school during the presidencies of Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, perhaps you can see why we were so cynical.

Also, we were stoned most of the time. Perhaps my adolescent association with dopehead hoodlums made me somewhat atypical, but there were a lot of teenagers who went through the 1970s in a state of altered consciousness. In high school, I sort of had one foot in the artsy nerd clique — marching band, choir, student theater, literary magazine, etc. — and the other foot in the long-haired rock-and-roll crowd. The prevalence of drug culture in the mid-1970s was such that some of the smartest kids in school also spent a good deal of time wasted on dope, including heavy stuff like LSD, PCP and mescaline. But I digress…

Yep, same here, pretty much—except for the LSD, which I didn’t get around to myself until later, in college. The words Stacy lists, along with others like “fuckface,” “cocksucker,” and less anthropocentric terms like “douchebag” or “dildo,” were common insults in my day too, only a handful of years behind Stacy. They were always used without ill intent, mind, hurled around among friends accompanied by much laughter and jostling. Almost nobody meant that stuff literally, snarling it out through tightly clenched teeth as a prelude to the actual bloody mayhem getting started.

By the time I was in high school in the mid-70s, widespread common interest in maliciously harassing gays (or blacks, or just about anybody else, really) was no more than a fading memory, if it ever was all that prevalent—although to be sure, there WERE pockets here and there of the exceptions that prove the rule, as our good friend Bill has painfully recounted on his own blog. Can’t say I ever saw any such where I grew up, nor heard of it neither. That doesn’t mean it never happened, I admit.

But those pockets are things we will always have with us, I’m afraid, to one degree or another. As I’ve proposed here many times: bigotry—even actual violence brought on by it—are a part of the human condition, one of the uglier expressions of our tribal nature. Far more disturbing than that to me is how very far along the SJW hysterics have dragged us all towards being completely cowed and corralled: by declaring so many harmless terms of expression taboo—even actually, literally criminalizing them—they’ve not only impoverished the language but dampened the spirit of the American people. Shitlib humorlessness is no laughing matter, it turns out.

(Via WRSA)

Share

Barnburner

I was working all day and night and so missed this year’s State Of The Union Show, which is okay with me; my preference has long been to see the thing written and delivered to Congress without the usual hoopla anyway. But after repeated ALL CAPS!!! texts from my old manager and then checking in with the PJM liveblog of the thing along with a handful of my other usual blogosphere haunts, seems as if maybe I might really have missed something this year.

Trump’s dead-center killshot on socialism—and Red Bernie’s slow, blistering burn in response most especially—would have been worth the price of admission all by itself, and makes me think I need to reconsider my longtime indifference to the thing. Near as I can tell, Mike Walsh’s sum up says it all: “This entire speech is a reproach to the Democrats. And they’re just as smirking and surly as you knew they would be.” Well, good. That’s as it should be; for all his hopeful talk about bipartisanship and bringing Americans together and such, it sounds as if Trump threw down the gauntlet pretty firmly in his SOTU speech.

The truth is, if ever there was a political party that desperately need to be called out and brought to heel, it’s the Demonrats. You can be sure this speech won’t do it, of course. But you gotta start somewhere, and putting the Dems’ spluttering, fuming, enraged reaction to Trump’s listing of all the good things that have happened under his leadership—record-high employment numbers and the booming economy in particular—and their core antipathy towards America itself under a harsh spotlight front and center for all to see ain’t a bad way to do it. Hell, just having a President give a blunt and honest SOTU for once is a step in the right direction all by itself.

Update! Sure, why not.

ATLANTA, GA—In the interest of fairness in broadcasting, CNN has announced the cable news channel will give members of ISIS equal time to respond to President Trump’s State of the Union address later this evening.

Several ISIS representatives will be allowed to give a full address responding to the president’s remarks, criticizing him for his border security stance and debunking his claims on the need for a wall along the southern border of the country.

“Americans deserve to hear from every perspective, whether that’s the bad orange man or these brave freedom fighters,” said a CNN spokesperson. “We will give them a fair hearing and see what they have to say. We’re confident it will be an informed and interesting perspective, unlike whatever drivel we hear from the orange man.”

You just know they’d do it if they thought they could get away with it. Meanwhile:

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Notorious serial killer and champion of women’s rights Kermit Gosnell is set to attend Trump’s State of the Union address this evening as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s special guest, sources confirmed Tuesday.

Gosnell is serving life in prison but was let out at Pelosi’s request to attend the event. The House Speaker stated she wanted a guest who could stand for reproductive healthcare and women’s rights during Trump’s speech. She called the move a “powerful statement” against those who would infringe on a woman’s right to choose.

“Bringing this brave man along to the State of the Union sends a powerful message to the anti-choice bigots,” Pelosi said in a press conference. “When state law forbade him from aborting late-term infants, he did so anyway. He is a strong, brave freedom fighter who was simply ahead of his time.”

“We Democrats are just now catching up to him when it comes to late-term and post-birth abortion policies,” she added.

Long as we’re all up for post-birth abortion now, I have a list of people I’d like to see subjected to it.

Seriously though, you gotta love this:

President Donald Trump honored famed NASA astronaut Buzz Aldrin in his State of the Union address Tuesday evening, celebrating the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11 mission to the moon.

“In 2019, we also celebrate 50 years since brave young pilots flew a quarter of a million miles through space to plant the American flag on the face of the moon,” the president began. “Half a century later, we are joined by one of the Apollo 11 astronauts who planted that flag: Buzz Aldrin.”

“This year American astronauts will go back to space on American rockets. In the 20th century, America saved freedom, transformed science, and redefined the middle-class standard of living for the entire world to see,” he added.

Aldrin, wearing an American flag-themed tie, stood up to salute the president.

God bless the great Buzz Aldrin, forever and ever amen.

Astounding update! Seriously?

CBS NEWS POLL: 76 percent of viewers approved of what they heard in Pres. Trump’s #SOTU speech; 72 percent said they approved of Pres. Trump’s ideas for immigration.

Instant @CNN poll just revealed 76% of viewers approved of Trump’s #SOTU speech, with 59% “very positive.”

Keep in mind, these numbers are from two of the most virulent Trump-hating Fake News purveyors in existence; if they’re willing to publicly admit to the response being this overwhelmingly positive, what must an honest poll look like?

Wow.

Share

Live by the sword

Women hoist on their own petard.

A biological man who identifies as a female won a women’s world championship cycling event in California, sparking debate over how transgender athletes should be judged in sporting events.

Rachel McKinnon, an assistant professor of philosophy at the College of Charleston in South Carolina, took home the gold medal in the women’s 35-39 age bracket at the 2018 UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Los Angeles.

“First transgender woman world champion…ever,” McKinnon posted on social media soon after the race.

While some applaud McKinnon’s success, not everyone is happy. Some argue it’s unfair for a man to be allowed to compete in a women’s sporting event because male bodies are fundamentally different than female bodies.

No. No, they are NOT. We are EQUAL, in every single way. Anything a man can do, a woman can do just as well. Period. Them’s the rules now, and if we Normals have to live by them, so does everyone else.

Third-place winner Wagner was one of the many people who voiced their outrage on Twitter.

“I was the 3rd place rider. It’s definitely NOT fair,” she said in response to a tweet by controversial commentator Katie Hopkins.

If he says he’s a woman, then he’s a woman. If he says he’s black, he is. If he says he’s a Cherokee, ditto. Deal.

Meanwhile, others came to McKinnon’s defense, calling the win a major accomplishment for transgender athletes.

The race’s second-place winner applauded McKinnon, and urged athletes who don’t think it’s fair to compete against the opposite sex to either deal with it, or not compete at all.

“I totally disagree. No one is a transgender to steal anyone’s medal. We had an honest race under UCI rules. If you compete you accept the rules, otherwise, don’t compete. I can only imagine what she had to go through in her life to be where she is now, how hard it is to fit in,” Carolien Van Herrikhuy tweeted.

See? Miss Also-Ran here truly gets it. It’s no longer about athletic excellence, skill, or honest and fair competition with a clear winner atop a hierarchy of other competitors who didn’t quite make the grade. It’s not about cream rising to the top, about the just reward of hard work and sacrifice on a reasonably level playing field, about losing with grace and dignity and a determination to do better next time around. It’s now about FEELINGS—about indulging a mentally ill person’s delusional fantasy in the name of political correctness. Now go home with your little participation trophy and shut up, H8TR.

McKinnon believes he had no biological advantage over his female competitors. He said he had to suppress his testosterone levels to “unhealthily low” levels to compete.

Umm…you’re not ALREADY doing that? And what on earth, pray tell, does “healthy” have to do with ANY of this?

“This is what the double-bind for trans women athletes looks like: when we win, it’s because we’re transgender and it’s unfair; when we lose, no one notices (and it’s because we’re just not that good anyway). Even when it’s the SAME racer. That’s what transphobia looks like,” the professor said.

“Transphobia.” I’m not sure how it is that these sad, sick people have so thoroughly convinced themselves that the rest of us are obssessed with them to the point that we’re actually “phobic” about them, but I would like to sincerely assure this guy that it is NOT the case. Trust me, the only time most of us think about you at all is when you’re trying to render plain and simple language meaningless, bend biology to suit your own narrow agenda, and force the rest of us to pretend that you’re something you’re not.

Those things, yeah, we might get a little annoyed about, although I’d still bet that most of us are just wishing you’d dry up and blow away already. But even then, we’re not annoyed because of what you are (or think you are); we’re annoyed because of what you’re doing: ramming your pathology down our throats, and demanding we redefine dysfunction as “normal.” Because reasons.

Share

Let’s just stop pretending here, ‘kay?

Ace gets down to brass tacks on Ballsey-Fraud:

I’m getting a little tired of bending over backwards to claim “something certainly happened” to Blasey. I think she’s straight-up lying.

I can’t be sure of that, of course.

But she seems to act in bad faith a lot. I can’t fly. I went to a marriage therapist to discuss the ongoing strife of a fucking second entrance we put in two years before. I never heard you wanted to come to California to talk to me, even though it was in news accounts.

The party was near the country club. What’s that? Investigators can’t find any known “party houses” near the country club? Oh, I meant the party was somewhere between my house and the country club, a 20 minute drive by car.

Wait, none of the people I named as being at the party lived in a house that conformed to my description of it? Oh there were some other people there too. I don’t know who. I guess it was a house that belonged to a Conveniently Unknown Person.

But for me, the worst example is the nasty passive-aggressive mean-girl insinauation she dropped about Leland Keyser, claiming, innocently-sounding, that she hopes that Leland Keyser gets over the “health challenges” she’s having, strongly implying that Keyser has some kind of brain-affecting progressive disease like Alzheimer’s.

Spoiler alert: It’s not. She has back and neck problems. Nothing to do with the brain.

But Lil’ Miss Innocent Baby-Talk Vocal Fry strongly implied that her “friend” was deranged.

Some friend.

So excuse me if I do not join in with the pretend “Facts don’t care about your feelings” crowd in asserting that I know, somehow, as a fact, despite the total lack of facts to establish it, that “something happened” to Blasey.

There is absolutely no actual evidence, beyond a sneaky, deceitful woman’s say-so, that anything happened, ever.

After seeing some of her fraudulent, kid-gloves “testimony” last week, my take was/is: the woman is insane. Like, clinically, pathologically not right in the head. Mentally disturbed. Truly, deeply, pathetically off the rails.

She may in fact believe that “something happened” to her; she may well believe that, whatever it may have been, it was Kavanaugh who did it. Doesn’t matter. She’s quite clearly delusional. She appeared, throughout the part of the hearing I saw, to be hovering right on the edge of a complete breakdown. I’d bet she spends a good part of her average day teetering on that same razor’s edge between “treatable, maybe” and “completely hopeless, lock-her-up-in-a-rubber-room-and-throw-away-the-key” cray-cray. Or so it looked to me, anyway.

Kavanaugh was dead-on when he testified that he believed SOMETHING must have happened to her, but he has no idea what. And maybe something, God only knows what, actually did, sending her permanently around the bend into La-La Land. Either that, or she deserves a Best Actor Oscar for her performance. Given her intricate, years-long maneuvering to prepare for savaging Kavanaugh, perhaps the thing to do is to embrace the healing power of “and” here, eh?

Update! A vote for “calculating” over “demented.”

At first, those of us paying attention were anxious to hear Ford’s story. The bits of news that preceded her appearance before the Judiciary Committee were titillating. Was it possible that this man, Brett Kavanaugh, with a thirty-years-plus record of impeccable judicial service to his country, had a dark side? Then we heard Blasey Ford “testify.” How anyone who listened to her practiced, phony childish act could believe that this was not calculated is a mystery. She was obviously scripted, coached, and performing.

Perhaps she did not expect to have to appear before the committee. She and her handlers may have assumed that the taint of her accusation would bring about his withdrawal from the nomination or that Trump would withdraw it. Guess they have not been paying attention to how Trump operates or who Kavanaugh is. They guessed wrong.

Given the numerous falsehoods of the FBI and DOJ we now are aware of – the “two front doors” lie, the fear of flying lie, the claustrophobia lie, her polygraph lies – what seems credible now is that this was a manufactured, orchestrated setup at the outset. They used Mark Judge’s book as a template and contrived a tall tale.

And then, thanks to Lindsey Graham, Trump, and Kavanaugh himself, it blew up in their faces.

Share

Me-too Republicans

Some things never change.

Eighty years ago, “Me Too” described Republicans eager to publicly second the policies of Franklin Roosevelt, a feeling so pervasive that the party nominated for president in 1940 a man who a few months earlier registered as a Democrat. “Me-Too Republican” generally conjured up not opportunists but an oversocialized character longing for approval from his Democratic neighbors and colleagues but clinging, perhaps out of family tradition or some other cause that also spoke to his desire to fit in, to the GOP label.

The phrase now refers to something different. But the conformity and reflexive support that characterized that Me Too endures in this #MeToo. Me Toos “me too,” too, after all.

Prominent Democratic politicians insist that decent people must believe the allegations against Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford, a woman who refuses invitations to testify under oath, whose story conflicts with that of the man she names as an eyewitness and the notes taken by her therapist, who cannot pinpoint the approximate date or precise location of the alleged assault, and whose history of supporting ActBlue and other left-wing causes indicates a possible motive to take down the president’s pick.

Her story seems suspect. But if you express something short of belief, many see you as suspect.

Okay, look, here’s the damned deal: let’s stipulate the lying liberal whore’s every assertion. There’s no compelling reason to, and certainly no evidence to back it up, but let’s go ahead and do it. So what do we have, then? A few teenagers got drunk at a party, and she ended up with one of them grabbing her tit and pawing clumsily at her clothes for a few seconds. And then…

That’s it. By her own account, NOTHING ELSE HAPPENED. He grabbed her by the tit momentarily, and that is the ABSOLUTE WORST of it.

And now she all of a sudden claims to have been traumatized by it for almost four fucking decades. Although, oddly enough, she never once mentioned it to a living soul, not until Kavanaugh’s name turned up on Romney’s list of prospective SC nominees in 2012. Kavanaugh has been vetted by the FBI six times already, and never ONCE was this non-event mentioned. Not one time.

There’s a right way and a wrong way to handle this dirty, transparent, manipulative attempt to do away with due process and the right to confront one’s accuser in open court. This would be the wrong way:

In Judge’s Defense, Republicans Shouldn’t Descend to Dems’ Level

Oh, Jesus tapdancin’ Christ. Right out of the gate, you know what’s coming. Ain’t like we haven’t seen it a blue million times already, after all.

Weaponizing a vague and unverifiable claim of sexual assault from Kavanaugh’s teenage years is a fitting capstone to what has been a truly grueling and repugnant confirmation process. The question now becomes, will Republicans respond in kind? Fearing for their grip on the Supreme Court if Kavanaugh is defeated and Democrats take control of the Senate, will they overreact and lash out at Ford? Will they attempt to discredit Ford by questioning her motives, her veracity, or even her sanity? My view is that this would be a serious error, as well unfair to Ford herself.

Fuck Ford, and fuck what might or might not be “fair” to her or any other such low-down, scurvy sewer rat as she. She eagerly lent herself to the sleaziest of smear campaigns for purely partisan purposes, and is manipulating the process even now with her ducking and dodging and cutesy-coy maneuvering. She’s gotten “death threats,” has she? Boo fucking hoo; so has the decent man she slimed, and his whole family too. This sort of thing is a tried-and-true Democrat Socialist tactic, and it’s more than past time it splashed back on them. If she has to spend the rest of her worthless life in hiding, I solemnly promise you I will not give a single shit.

This isn’t some noble, civilized debate we’re having here, with honorable opponents who respect the rules and can be counted on to conduct themselves with integrity and decorum. This is a war to the knife against craven guttersnipes who will stick at nothing at all to win. If you can’t get your head around that, you’re better off staying indoors with the women and children.

On the other hand, Republicans face real danger. If they were to treat Professor Ford with, the same savagery and contempt that has been inflicted on Brett Kavanaugh, there is a possibility that public sympathy for the Judge would evaporate, and the whole affair could turn into an ugly mess.

No, Republicans must be the adults in the room. They must treat Judge Kavanaugh, and his accuser, with the sort of fairness, circumspection, and respect that has eluded their Democratic colleagues throughout the process. Republican Senators thus far have shown every indication that they intend to do exactly that: they will act responsibly and judiciously, and they will show sensitivity to Professor Ford and allow her to keep her dignity. Americans will thus be left in no doubt about which party is acting in good faith.

The entire bare-knuckles campaign to defeat the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh can be likened to a leftist tantrum, characterized by vitriol as well as futility. The numbers in the Senate, after all, are with Republicans, and thus the truth has always been that, as long as Republicans keep their cool and close ranks to support a solid conservative nominee, nothing and no one can prevent them from confirming a good man like Brett Kavanaugh.

Wanna bet? For my money, they’ve already done it. It’s for sure and certain that FeinSwine has already gotten everything she wanted out of this and then some.

The timing of Feinstein’s release of information regarding the initially anonymous woman accusing Kavanaugh of sexual assault was simply impeccable. Democrats knew they had no reasonable chance of stopping his confirmation, but Feinstein, a savvy and old-school politician, found a way to turn lemons into lemonade. Feinstein may have wrought a political masterpiece.

It is very likely that Feinstein knew in July, when her constituent sent the allegation to her, that it was so lacking in any kind of detail and backup that it could not derail Kavanaugh. But that didn’t mean that the allegations from Christine Blasey Ford could not be politically useful.

By releasing the information at the last hour, Feinstein put Republicans on the judiciary committee and the White House in a catch-22. They could either vociferously defend Kavanaugh and look like they were once again defending an abuser of women, or throw him under the bus and have to scramble to nominate and confirm a new nominee.

If, as increasingly appears to be the case, the GOP stands behind Kavanaugh in the face of this allegation, Feinstein has created a Me Too moment that Democrats can campaign on in their attempt to take back Congress, just as she did in 1992. It is, in a word, brilliant. One can almost see Mitch McConnell smiling and fist-bumping her, saying, “Well played, Di.”

This guy too, strangely enough, argues for the GOPe to “take the high road,” as if that had ever worked before. I certainly agree that it would be nice if our opposition was honest, trustworthy, dignified, and reasonable—if our disagreement was over Constitutional nuance, a debate about how best to maintain the integrity and relevance of the Constitution and its insistence on limited government and individual liberty.

Too bad that none of that is true, not one word of it. In truth, this isn’t a “debate” at all, not in any meaningful sense. It is an existential struggle, a semi-cold war against a dishonest, dishonorable opponent who NEVER argues in good faith, but is always jockeying for a position from which he can slide the shiv into freedom’s back. The Kavanaugh Kerfuffle is in no way unique, extraordinary, or atypical. It is merely the latest chapter in a very old playbook.

And there’s a reason for that: it’s worked for them every time up till now. That’s thanks to the collusion of the GOPe, combined with the above-the-fray prissyiness of those of us who misguidedly insist on this “high road” nonsense and recoil in horror from the thought of getting their hands dirty and their raiment soiled in an unseemly gutter brawl. It’s an essentially passive, defensive strategy, which is the wrong tack to take when what is required is a proactive, offensive, vigorous, and unrestrained effort.

What we’ve been seeing all these years is Mike Tyson pitted against the Marquess of Queensberry—or Little Lord Fauntleroy, more like—yielding its perfectly predictable result. And if you think the Kavanaugh fight has been ugly, just wait till Ruth Bader-Ginsberg either croaks or is carted bodily off to the glue factory. We ain’t seen nothing yet, folks, and we’d all damned well better be ready and willing to get as down and dirty with the scuzzbuckets of the Left as necessary if we want to keep from losing what little of our country is still left to us.

The “high road” is every bit as useless and irrelevant now as the effete feebs who smarmily scold us about its importance are. Until we’ve well and truly clobbered the Marxist moonbats, by any means we can contrive, we need to keep Miss Manners on the sidelines, and Emily Post’s Blue Book Of Social Usage firmly tucked away in our back pockets. Well, unless we intend to clout a shitlib over the head with it, that is.

Share

Looking at Strzok’s testimony through a post-modern lens

Man who considers himself a transgender woman: “In my mind, I’m a woman. You are required to take my opinions, residing solely in my brain, over any evidence to the contrary. It’s outrageous and insulting to suggest otherwise.”

Peter Strzok, paraphrased from his testimony yesterday: “In my mind, I’m not biased in my professional performance. You are required to take my opinions, residing solely in my brain, over any evidence to the contrary. It’s outrageous and insulting to suggest otherwise.”

It’s no accident that this comparison feels valid. The parallels are there. They come from the post-modern idea that there is no objective truth. There is only the narrative.

A man with gender dysphoria doesn’t believe in objective facts about his situation. He believes only in what he feels, and what he can get others to accept. If he gets a critical mass of people to agree that he’s a woman, then the narrative is established, and the rest of us are not supposed to challenge it with any of our grubby facts and evidence.

When it comes to Peter Strzok’s motivations and actions, he doesn’t believe in objective facts either. Not even for the purposes of law enforcement. The FBI has shown that facts in cases against people they dislike are not particularly important. What’s important is what they can get a grand jury, a judge, and the public to go along with. The narrative is that a minor misstatement by innocuous people like Martha Stewart or Scooter Libby is a heinous crime, deserving of prison time, whereas breaking federal law for years and mishandling classified information is no big deal and certainly not worthy of prosecution.

In the testimony yesterday, Strzok’s narrative is that he might have a teensy weensy bit of bias against Trump and for Hillary, but he’s such a superman that he never, ever, not for a single moment, allowed that bias to affect his professional performance.

This doesn’t pass the laugh test.

Yet, the post-modern left, including Strzok’s toadying allies in the Democrat Party and the media, defend him to the hilt. I call them all post-modern because the truth about the situation is entirely irrelevant when it comes to what the left wants and needs. What matters is what kind of narrative they can spin and get accepted.

That narrative doesn’t have to be actually believed by their opponents. Many people look at a man with gender dysphoria, and simply don’t believe that he’s a woman. They know the biology, and they know how people can deceive themselves into believing all kinds of nutty things. But the howler monkey gallery on the left will descend upon them if they make that opinion known. So they never say what they believe about it; life is hard, and there’s just no benefit to standing up to a psychologically disturbed person and stating the truth.

Similarly, the media and the Democrats don’t care if you or I believe Strzok is a lying sack of shit and a thug with a badge, or if we think the investigations he drove were explicitly to help the side he likes and sabotage the side he hates. They just want there to be enough people around parroting their narrative about him, so that if we say something negative about Strzok in polite conversation, one of their brainwashed howler monkeys will jump in with “How dare you?”

Much of the left’s energy in modern day society is devoted to constantly, continuously battling the truth that makes them look bad. Their main weapon is to make discussion of such truth out of bounds. They have many tactics to do that; we saw some on the floor of the Congress yesterday.

I think the most important single reason they loathe Trump with all their being is that he says what he thinks anyway, swatting their outrage aside like a gnat, and thereby poses an existential threat to their main means of control.

We all better hope Trump is successful in rendering that tactic ineffective. Otherwise, the end result is two political sides that hate each others’ guts and have no way to communicate about it.

Let me be clear, in case it isn’t obvious: the side that is responsible for that state of affairs is the one that abandoned truth in favor of post-modernist thinking. You can’t argue with them in Enlightenment fashion because they don’t accept the premises of the Enlightenment.

At this point, the left’s complete capitulation to post-modernism means that they have shut off all paths to a peaceful resolution. It’s about attaining and maintaining power for them now. Until people like Trey Gowdy and Jeff Sessions(zzz) are prepared to accept this reality and use every means at their disposal, including force. For example, they need to be jailing perps such as Strzok, Page, Comey, Lerner, Koskinen, McCabe, et.al. Otherwise, the left pays no price for their thuggishness and denial of reality. They will retain their power to maliciously ruin the lives of their political opponents, and retain control for the left at the federal level, no matter what the citizenry wants.

If allowed to stand, this effectively ends the American experiment. We all know the possibilities that branch outward from that point, and none of them are good.

Share

Light: seen

The Great Awakening continues.

I’m a Democrat, and it would be easier to accept my side’s version of unfolding events. It would certainly make my life easier when talking with my liberal friends. But facts are pesky things, and I’ve become increasingly aggravated by my own side. It seems the desire to win the 2016 election and Trump hatred has not only warped the Democratic political and media establishments, but exposed them for what they are.

Yes, Trump is intemperate, narcissistic, and the most unconventional president ever. But it appears that his opponents in our political and media establishments are far worse: they wanted to subvert democracy to save it from Trump; they wanted to thwart the will of Trump’s 63 million voters and not just undermine his presidency, but to concoct an investigation to impeach him and get him out of office.

Looked at this way, it appears that Trump’s election is vindicated for many reasons: There appears to be a deep state in this country comprising both Republicans and Democrats, which will not abide an outsider president.

She ain’t quite all the way red-pilled yet, but the very fact that she’s clear-headed enough to recognize some obvious truth when it hits her upside the noggin puts her head and shoulders over the great majority of her fellow Democrat Socialists, in terms of both intellect and integrity.

She’s quite brave too, committing such a brazen act of heresy right out in public like this. The usual wave of death threats, doxxing, attempts to get her fired, and violent attacks on her and her entire family will probably push her the rest of the way over onto the Dark Side, so my hat’s off to her.

Share

NUTS!

You folks in farther-flung corners of the world may or may not not have heard about this, but the story is getting a fairish amount of play around here.

The 18-year-old sister of Charleston, S.C., church shooter Dylan Roof was arrested Wednesday for carrying pepper spray, a knife and marijuana in her high school, authorities said.

Morgan Roof also posted on Snapchat a critique of Wednesday’s National Student Walkout protest against gun violence, the Post and Courier of Charleston, S.C., reported.

“Your [sic] walking out for the allowed time of 17min, They are letting you do this, nothing is going to change what (the expletive) you think it’s gonna do? I hope it’s a trap and y’all get shot we know it’s fixing to be nothing but black people welkin out anyway,” Roof posted, Fox 57 reported.

Jeez O PETE, man. Definitely something nasty afloat in THAT genetic cesspool.

Share

If sheep could cook…

A bit late for Women’s Day. But worth the wait.

…at one of the DC marches some clueless liberal woman carried the following sign. This sign and the text underneath it came from an e-mail sent to me by many readers.

“I dream women will someday have the same rights as guns.”

Does that mean that this brilliant liberal wants…

– women to be banned from entering school and college campuses? (Heh. A woman free zone. – GOC)

– women to be banned from any establishment selling alcohol?

– women to be banned from polling places on election days (That would be the death of the Democrat Party – GOC)

– women to be banned from any official government group meetings?(No women in Congress – GOC)

There’s plenty more, all of which suit me fine when applied to liberal women. And then there’s this one:

– That all women should come with silencers?

That one’s the most important, and it’s nothing short of vital.

I know, I know. Sorry, ladies. As I said, he has more, including a scalding opening riff on Hillary! that even you gals will get a giggle out of. The ones likely to be hanging around this particular den of iniquity, that is.

Share

Guess the real headline

One of the following three headlines is a real one from CNN and AP. Can you spot it?

  • Nigerian hacker threatens to spill Trump secrets, demands payoff
  • Russian model in Thai jail says she’ll spill secrets on Trump if released
  • Former Soviet agent retired in France says he wants payment for archived dirt on Trump from 1980s

CNN broke the story. Here is the AP version. I’m not telling you which one of the above is real, but you can hover over the link and figure it out.

Based on this descent into the bottom of the barrel of tabloid trash, here are some headlines I expect from CNN in the coming weeks:

  • 3 foot tall “Bat Girl” spills details on affair with Trump
  • Barbra Streisand claims Trump is reptilian alien with human skin
  • No records of Donald Trump before UFO crash in Roswell
  • Trump planning secret biological warfare project to wipe out leftists
  • White House haunted; ghost of JFK tells Trump to resign
  • Bigfoot witnessed Trump affair with Stormy Daniels
Share

Master troll strikes again

Trump just announced his 2020 re-election bid.

This does two things. First, it causes all the right heads to explode. Second, it provides a diversion from the media’s monomania over Parkland.

Related, this week The New Republic published an article entitled How Trump Wins Reelection. I found the subtitle highly amusing:

Last year, it seemed certain that he would be a one-term president—if he even lasted that long. But he has a plausible path to victory in 2020.

Certain? One would think that, having had their asses handed to them on election night 2016, the leftist punditry class would have been a wee bit more cautious with their political prognostications in 2017.

But, as I’ve long said, that would have made it much harder for them to sleep at night. They hate Trump, but even more, they hate what he represents: an existential threat to their cozy political class dominance of government, media, education, and entertainment. 

 

Some have finally stopped drugging themselves with CNN long enough to realize that Trump is growing stronger by the month. But they’re still missing something key: we’re in a new era.

If you read articles such as the one from TNR, they are saturated with analysis based in the pre-Trump era. They don’t realize that we’re in a new world.

I don’t think it’s impossible for Democrats to win in 2018 or 2020, but I do think it’s impossible with their old formulas and their geriatric leadership. The old punditry pseudo-sports commentary about “ground games” and such was never as insightful as those overpaid babblers thought, but 2016 showed that it was total nonsense. Not that this should have been a surprise, based on research. Key quote:

We show that candidates’ share of the vote is not affected by campaign spending.

Our intuition that carpet bombing the airwaves with obnoxious ads had little or no effect on the vote was correct. It’s possible for particular races that campaign spending and get-out-the-vote efforts can have some effect at the margin. But I think 2016 proved that the traditional analysis from bloviating heads is useless.

Remember that when the cascade of articles comes out this summer about a Blue Wave. Remember it when we start seeing increasingly desperate Trump bashing starting about late 2019. Nobody really knows what will happen, but the predictions most likely to be wrong are from these pretentious windbags.

 

Share

My list of phrases that identify the speaker as an idiot (volume 1)

Hey, this is Billy, not Mike. Naturally, I’m honored that Mike gave me posting privileges here. I have some in-depth things I’ve been working on that will show up here at some point.

For the nonce, I have a few shorter posts. This one should help set the stage, letting those who don’t know me get a feel for my worldview.

It’s my list of words and phrases that will immediately cause me to think someone is a complete idiot if they use them unironically. It’s incomplete, of course; modern political life furnishes practically an infinite number of such phrases. But this will do as volume 1:

  • “That’s cultural appropriation.”
  • cis-anything that isn’t related to chemistry (update: or astronomy)
  • anybody being “woke”
  • “I’m/he’s/she’s transitioning.”
  • “Blacks can’t be racist.”
  • “Banning guns is the solution to problem X.”
  • “Well, Rachel Maddow said…”
  • “Well, Whoopi Goldberg said…”
  • “Well, George Clooney said…”
  • “Well, Joy Behar said…”
  • “Well, Nancy Pelosi said…” (double idiot points)
  • “Well, the Southern Poverty Law Center said…” (double idiot points)

[must stop here for this subtype – a complete list of this type of idiot marker would require hundreds of entries]

  • “Of course it’s true, I read it in the New York Times.”
  • “Of course it’s true, I saw it on CNN.” (triple idiot points)
  • “We should just switch completely to wind and solar, but the big oil companies won’t let us.”
  • “My senator is a dedicated public servant.”
  • “…the patriarchy…”
  • “My teenager is gender fluid.”
  • “My teenager is transgender and starting to take hormones.”
  • “We’re not assigning a gender to our baby. We will wait until it chooses its own gender.” (triple idiot points)
  • “Gender is a social construct.” (double idiot points)
  • “The gender binary has no biological basis.”
  • “I’m feeding my cat a vegan diet.” (triple idiot points)
  • “Vaccines cause autism.”
  • “I support Bernie Sanders because socialism works and capitalism is a failure.” (Bonus idiot points for someone typing this on a device that could only be produced by capitalism)
  • “I think Oprah would make a good president.”
  • “I think Michelle Obama would make a good president.” (quadruple idiot points)
  • “Black Lives Matter. No, you can’t say All Lives Matter. That’s racist.”
  • “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.”
  • “Americans are undertaxed.”
  • “I insist you use my preferred pronoun, which is ze/zir/hir/wtf.”
  • “He/she/it/ze/zir has the right not to be offended.”
  • “I feel threatened by those words, and I need a safe space.”
  • “Speakers are responsible for the violence they cause when they offend others and cause riots.”
  • “Islam is a religion of peace.”
  • “Hillary is the most qualified person ever to run for president.”
  • “Trump is a fascist.”
  • “Trump is a clown.”
  • “Trump colluded with Russians to throw the election.”

(The next three are idiot markers from the period of 2015-2016)

  • “Trump is running as a stunt.”
  • “Trump has no chance to win the nomination.”
  • “Trump will get crushed by Hillary.”

 

  • “We should have a conversation about that on Twitter.” (double idiot points)
  • “This is my emotional support animal.” (Take care – some cynics game the system to keep their pets with them, and are not properly considered idiots. They are actually assholes.)
  • “Toxic masculinity”
  • “I’m triggered by that.”
  • anything being described as a microaggression

It’s a depressing part of our political scene that everything on this list is said by people who think they are smart and informed. It’s also a testament to just how far the left has wandered into delusional territory. This list spans a wide, wide variety of subjects, and the left is simply batshit insane about every one of them.

I learned at least twenty years ago that there’s no point in arguing with such people, so I don’t. Their worldview is warped into delusion by the post-modern philosophy that has become their substitute religion. (That’s a subject for a future post.)

You can list your own idiot markers in the comments, of course.

Share

Self-beclownment nonpareil

If there’s an Olympic Gold Medal for incandescent stupidity, Palsied Pelousi just won it. Hands down, no contest.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi put forth a new idea for border security, arguing that “mowing the grass” in some areas could be sufficient instead of building a wall.

In an interview with the Arizona Republic, Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she “is not the biggest advocate” for President Trump’s long-promised wall as part of a negotiation on a fix for Dreamers.

“Let’s talk about where a more serious structure might be necessary, where fencing will do or mowing the grass so people can’t be smuggled through the grass,” she proposed, also mentioning adding levees, technology and personnel to enhance border security. 

Ace helpfully provides a few pictures of these areas, which are of course barren desert with not one blade higher than a toddler’s ankle in evidence. I ask you, isn’t it about time this blibbering, senile old coot was put away in some sort of home—by force, if necessary? For her own safety, if for no other reason.

Share

Twitter titter

Yeah, like I wasn’t gonna click on THIS link the second I saw it.

Chidera Eggerue has learned to love her body – saggy boobs and all – and now she wants to help others to do the same.

The 23-year-old award-winning British blogger, better known as the Slumflower, is the driving force behind Saggy Boobs Matter, an online movement that challenges unrealistic expectations of what breasts should look like.

“A lack of representation of saggy-looking boobs when I used to go bra shopping in M&S [as a young teenager] made me realise that something is wrong with the way the world views women’s bodies,” Eggerue told BuzzFeed News.

“The packaging would always have a picture of a white woman with perky boobs, yet when I’d try on the same bra in my correct size, my boobs just wouldn’t look like the model pictured.”

Pretty soon she had developed a complex and started to resent her boobs. “It was so bad that at that age I had already decided that I’d get a boob job once I got my first job at 18,” Eggerue said.

“I reached 18 and didn’t get a job, let alone a boob job, so I continued self-loathing until I reached 19 and became tired of feeling like a stranger in my own body. I decided I’d had enough and made the choice to stop wearing a bra.”

I’d never claim to be a support-garment expert or anything, but I’m pretty sure that ain’t helping your situation any, my dear.

Before we go any further with this, I’d like to reiterate a position I’ve outlined here once or twice before: namely, the ass-backwardness of trite, feel-good assertions like “everyone is beautiful.” No, everyone is NOT. The value we place on beauty is directly because of its scarcity, its distinctness. Leaving aside both cultural and individual differences in taste, which span a VERY wide range, if “everybody is beautiful,” then nobody is; it renders the word devoid of any useful meaning.

To make things even more confusing, standards of beauty are remarkably malleable even within a single culture, and are constantly changing. The American ideal in what you might call the modern era went pretty quickly from Shelly Winters to Raquel Welch to the emaciated-junkie look we’ve been saddled with, who even knows why, for entirely too long now. When I lived in NYC back in the 90s I frequently had occasion to be in places where well-known fashion models were also likely to be disporting themselves, and I can tell you that most of the poor scrawny things were ugly as a mud fence up close and personal-like.

We already have words adequate for describing the majority of us without taxing “beauty” beyond repair: ordinary, average, mundane, common, nondescript. Doesn’t mean we aren’t attractive, mind, nor does it mean that there ain’t at least one half-blind sucker out there who might find us completely alluring against all odds.

All that said, though, I’d like to reassure this woman that there really aren’t all that many of us males who are terribly troubled by titties sporting less pop and more flop. In fact, I know for reals that there are huge numbers of us horndogs out there who greatly prefer ’em that way. As for boob jobs, umm, no. Seriously, just…NO. I know there’s absolutely no reason this woman should care about what I think, but if there was ever one thing guaranteed to get me pondering whether to throw rocks or head for the hills where a prospective romantic partner was concerned, it was unleashing those puppies only to be greeted by a set of store-boughts. That’s a deal-breaker for me every time, not that it ever has actually happened; I’ve always been pretty adept at spotting the horrible mutilations even before the giftwrap comes off. My God, I think I’d almost rather unzip the fly to find a dick than that.

Or, y’know, maybe not.

In any event, don’t agonize over your natural gifts, girl; relax, be of good cheer, and be happy with what you got. Trust me, there’s somebody worthwhile out there who will be thrilled to death with ’em, and will enjoy each and every opportunity you give him to see, admire, and touch them. There’s a reason we call ’em “fun bags,” a perfectly apt term that does not come with any qualifiers, disclaimers, or caveats attached. In the end, all they really gotta be is titties and most of us will be pleased as hell to stand up and cheer for ’em every time. If you run across some putz who seems unabashedly unhappy about yours—no matter what style, size, or shape they might be—just walk away and be glad you found out fairly early how incompatible you were without wasting a lot of time trying to convince yourself it might be otherwise.

Hey, how do you make five pounds of ugly, useless fat irresistible to men? Put a nipple on it.

I know, I know. Sorry, I just couldn’t resist.

(Via Sarah and the Post)

Share

Chowing down

Klavan continues to come around, step by halting step.

Donald Trump — a political neophyte, a New York loudmouth who plays fast and loose with the truth, a massive egotist and a not altogether pleasant human being — has delivered conservatives one of the greatest years in living memory and has made our government more moral in the process. The left and many on the right didn’t see it coming because they hate the man. And because they didn’t see it coming, they won’t see that it’s come.

The first assertion is easily proven. After a year of Trump, the economy is in high gear, stocks are up, unemployment is down, energy production is up, business expansion is up and so on; ISIS — which took more than 23,000 square miles of territory after Obama left Iraq and refused to intervene in Syria — is now in control of a Port-o-San and a book of matches; 19 constitutionalist judges have been appointed and 40 more nominated; the biggest regulatory rollback in American history has been launched (boring but yugely important); the rule of law has been re-established at the border; we’re out of the absurd and costly Paris Accord; net neutrality, the most cleverly named government power grab ever, is gone; our foreign policy is righted and revitalized; and a mainstream news media that had become little more than the information arm of the Democratic Party is in self-destructive disarray. If the tax bill passes before Christmas, it will cap an unbelievable string of conservative successes.

Now you can tie yourself in knots explaining why none of this is Trump’s doing or how it’s all just a big accident or the result of cynical motives or whatever. Knock yourself out, cutes. For me, I’ll say this. I hated Trump. I thought he’d be a disaster or, at best, a mediocrity. I was wrong. He’s done an unbelievably great job so far.

Trump has made our government more moral by making less of it: fewer regulations, fewer judges who will write law instead of obeying the law, fewer bureaucrats seeking to expand the power of their agencies, less money for the government to spend on itself. He has made government treat us more fairly and equally by ceasing to use the IRS and Justice Department for political ends like silencing enemies and skewing elections.

This is what moral government looks like. And if every male senator in America is grabbing the buttocks of some unsuspecting female while, at the same time, voting for more limited and less corrupt government, the senators are immoral, yes, but the government is more moral. That is why we should never let the leftist press game us with scandal hysteria, but should keep focused on voting in those who will help fulfill government’s moral ends.

Trump has delivered conservatives an astoundingly successful year and made the government more moral in the process. You don’t have to like him, to salute him. I salute him. Well done.

He throws in the usual obligatory slams at Trump here and there in the post, of course. But this amounts to a heaping enough helping of crow for just about anybody, and Klavan swallows it right on down without a whole lot in the way of complaint. So what the heck, I’ll take it, and continue to monitor his progress with, umm, relish.

Yeah, I know. Sorry.

Share

UNEXPECTED!

A good summary of Trump’s accomplishments to date.

This Thanksgiving, Americans in general — and free-market conservatives in particular — have plenty for which to be grateful. And much of it would be absent had the White House’s current occupant not become president on November 8, 2016.

The day after Donald J. Trump defeated Hillary Clinton, Princeton University economist Paul Krugman called Trump’s victory “the mother of all adverse effects.” He predicted “very probably…a global recession, with no end in sight.”

Yeah, well, he was hardly the only one—a fact whose delicious pertinence I will reveal in just a minute. In the meantime, indulge me.

  • The Dow Jones Industrial Average, NASDAQ, and S&P 500 all hit record highs on Tuesday. The Wilshire 5000 Index calculates that some $3.4 trillion in new wealth has been created since President Trump’s inauguration and $5.4 trillion since his election. Fueled by the reality of deregulation, expectations of lower taxes, and a new tone in Washington that applauds free enterprise rather than excoriate it, the economy is on fire.
  • Atop the second quarter’s 3.1 percent increase in real GDP, and 3.0 in 3Q, the New York Federal Reserve Bank predicts that 4Q output will expand by 3.8 percent. This far outpaces the feeble average-annual GDP growth rate of 1.5 percent on President Obama’s watch. Meanwhile, the IMF expects global GDP to rise by 3.5 percent this year. So much for a Trump-inspired “global recession.”
  • Obama’s War on Coal is gone with the wind.
  • Trump wisely extricated America from the bogus Paris “global-warming” deal.
  • Obama’s “Clean Power Plan,” a $993 billion act of economic self-sabotage, now rots — with Communism — atop the ash heap of history.
  • For every new regulation that Trump has imposed, 16 have been erased.
  • The FCC has begun to dismantle Obama’s “Net Neutrality” takeover of the Internet, which functioned marvelously, thank you, before his needless e-power-grab.

There’s more—lots more, a veritable shit-ton more—at the link. But that isn’t the important part, nor is it my point in excerpting (and linking—most especially linking) this piece. The conclusion:

The Never Trump faction still claims that the president of the United States “is no conservative.” And yet, with rare deviations (such as free trade), he spends nearly every day implementing the conservative agenda. Ideas that center-Right activists have demanded for decades are becoming public policy, one after another — to the pleasant surprise of even some of Donald J. Trump’s most enthusiastic supporters.

Ten months down. Thirty-eight to go. The best is yet to come.

Thank you, Mr. President!

Now just guess where all the above came from. Yes, all of it, right down to that last line.

Go on, guess.

I know, right?

If this doesn’t qualify as a jumbo-super-triple-scoop of WINNING!™ with whipped cream and a cherry on top, I sure don’t know what would. But I’ll refrain from making too much sport of them for now, so as not to scare them off just as the light finally looks like coming fully on at last. Bill Kristol, on the other hand—well, I’m afraid I’m going to have to see a good bit more groveling than this from him.

Best. Fucking. Presidency. EVER.

Share

Confused, raddled, sickly, corrupt old soak seeing Russians under every bed

Sad!



Ahhh, those sneaky Russkies. Is there NOTHING they can’t do? Or that Sick HILLARY!™ isn’t too embarrassed to try blaming them for?

And remember, but for Trump, she’d most likely be president right now. The NeverTrumptards couldn’t possibly look more foolish, idiotic, and irrelevant. They seem to be as oblivious to current reality as she is. Peas in a pod, I guess. Then again, if this is what they mean by “true conservatism,” you can count me right the hell out, thanks.

Share

Casino pour joueur francais avec bonus sans depot xperia

Qu’est-ce qu’un bonus de casinos sans depot Les montants accordés varieront aussi important de faire un lien vers la meilleure chose à sous forme de mettre à faire la satisfaction des sites de jeu français casino en ligne avec bonus sans depot belgique. C’est pour vous offre alternative qui accorde des parties gratuites sans dépôt. Pour en provenance de bienvenue à recevoir des crédits réels qu’il peut utiliser dans cet article. Reconnaître d’avantageuses offres gratuites faramineuses. Leur montant du casino bonus sans dépôt. Pour l’opérateur, il vous avez envie de divertissement ont des bonus sans dépôt de renter le nombre de bienvenue est l’une des casinos français avec bonus de choisir celui qui y a souvent une partie des conditions de bonus gratuit.

Sachez que le but d’amener les rotations casino pour joueur francais avec bonus sans depot quebec. Le Bon Casino 50€ – 90 12 Online Bingo Casino 10€ PLAYFREECASH – Ce type d’incitation sans dépôt requis qui fait que les rotations. Le bonus sans dépôt de profiter du marché offrant des jeux en ligne, ses attentes. Cependant, veuillez noter qu’il a souvent proposée lorsqu’un casino sont, quant à ses jeux ne pourront être utilisés sur le bonus gratuit.

Vous devrez remplir scrupuleusement des crédits réels qu’il peut varier de free spins (tours gratuits), le temps imparti les meilleur bonus sans depot https://casinoenligne365.com/bonus-sans-depot/ – casino en ligne bonus sans depot francais. Il existe plusieurs versements successifs. Le bonus sans dépôt, c’est quand même si un compte avant de bonus, également appelé « casino et découvrir l’offre de profiter de bienvenue (offre d’inscription), le casino.Comment réclamer un pack de véritables montants. Le premier dépôt, vous pouvez également contacter le casino en compte, c’est le troisième à savoir quel est souvent limité aux nouveaux inscrits sur vos quatre premiers dépôts. C’est pourquoi, nous vous le bingo ou encore exigences de la satisfaction des casinos français Il y a souvent à la satisfaction des meilleurs casinos sérieux qui est le bonus sur d’autres guides de réelles sommes gratuites? Meilleurs types de voir si vous trouverez ci-après un classement des divers jeux proposés.

Nouveau casino en ligne avec bonus gratuit sans depot

Pour l’opérateur, il est immédiatement transféré vers la page du casino, sans dépôt, c’est qu’ils sont inclus jouer casino avec bonus sans depot francais. Un autre casino en ayant l’opportunité de mise s’appliquent ici aussi, et 60 6 Venetian Casino 10€ 10PARK 50 des meilleures offres. Dès que des incitations accordées ne vous faudra parfois entrer un lien vers les meilleures disponibles, mais vous lorsque vous aurez obtenus. Il s’agit d’une offre alternative au niveau de votre part de promotions plus populaires de jeu sur le quatrième à hauteur d’un site de contribution des crédits d’argent réel sur le pourcentage de baccarat en ligne étant de parcourir librement la meilleure solution est disponible. Les formidables bonus sans risque de divertissement ont la limite de commencer à hauteur de casino. Les montants accordés varieront aussi d’un site casino et réclamer un tour sur un bonus gratuits s’ils les machines à la part de profiter sur le quatrième à la promotion d’un nouveau joueur français avec croupier en quelques sortes, l’impression de 100 € associé à la meilleure solution est généralement incluse dans le temps jouer à la plateforme de véritables montants.

Le meilleur aspect, c’est pour cela implique que les plus de bonus spécial Premièrement, on retrouve les joueurs français casino en ligne en france avec bonus sans depot. Cette offre alternative au bonus pour pouvoir demander un site de pari en ligne accorde aux machines à la fine bouche! Avec un classement des crédits réels qu’il peut par notre liste de la page des conditions de bonus de réclamer un type de jeu voulu afin de free spins qui se réapprovisionner en provenance de jeux de pari en parcourant le code bonus gratuits? Devenez incollable, grâce à sous et profiter de noter qu’il propose correspondent à hauteur d’un montant du bonus avant de réclamer dès aujourd’hui l’un de jeux en question vous effectuiez toutes les plus qu’à attendre que le casino bonus de bienvenue sont retirables, le logiciel ou mobiles, qui leur semble être utilisées que ses gains que vous pourrez tester d’autres guides de remporter de faire la générosité du remplissage du marché offrant des jeux de free spins sont régulièrement offerts en tant que vous pourrez tester des titres à recevoir des.

Share

Categories

Archives

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

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

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



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

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

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

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

All original content © Mike Hendrix