Something wicked, this way coming

Spidey senses are tingling all over the place, according to folks whose experience with such matters demand that close attention be paid.

Told y’all about my dreams the past few days. They ain’t changing. Pretty much a ‘get ready, something wicked this way comes…’ kind of ‘itch’ in my brain. Now, for the doubters out there, let me explain something here… 

MANY instances where I got a ‘itch’ or a ‘bug up my ass’ as Lil Country would call it, or as Middle would say, “Big done got a hair a’crost his ass agin!” and give me shit about it, but my track record speaks for itself. 2004, went to work 15 minutes early, dodged the mortar shell with my name on it. Showed up a hour early but was still too late to get on Major Duckworth’s Blackhawk, which subsequently got shot down. Rolled down Route Irish on September 11th of 2011 to the airport, and -somehow- didn’t get blowed the fuck up by the 14 I.E.D.s that were planted directly on the stretch of road I had just driven down.

So yeah, I’ve learned to listen real hard to the voice that sez “Hey dood!” and metaphorically pokes me in my soft spot in my nugget labeled “Paranoia”. It’s kept and served me in good staid so far. Even Wifey and Sapper are on Board with my weird predictive/lucky as shit abilities.

Now, reason I’m a bit on the weird side right now? Well, besides the 3 alarm (it ain’t a 5 yet) ringing in my nugget, Last night? Well my original fecesbook was deleted, and about 4 months later, to stay ‘networked’ with ‘my guys and gals’ in from the DotMil, I created a new one. I hardly ever poast on it, mostly so’s I have PM comms to them to exchange info and email addys. And besides that I have the speed dial set up with some folks who’re on the ‘list of fuckers I want/need on my side in a Mad Max scenario’. Seems I’m not the only one with these ‘feelings’/’hunches’

No shit, 3 people yesterday…The Colonel, one of my Rakkasan Bros from 2nd Platoon, and then ANOTHER Rakk from MY platoon, all reaching out, one by phone PM, the other from FB IM. ALL asking how I’m holding up, what my ‘feeling’ was about shit right now, and yeah they know about my abilities as well…my hunches were well known back in the day…and 3 separate messages essentially saying “Hey, IF shit gets real, you’re welcome to bug out here! Bring ammo and all your shit!”
Damn…

Then today, I get a call from Ranger Jay who’s been off the radar for a few months (his ole lady ain’t a fan of me and Wifey) and then, a chick I used to date back at Campbell from back in the day who I’ve kept in close contact with…female medic. Was always ‘part of the doomer crew’ as we jokingly called ourselves back then…now it’s not so funny.
Double Damn…

What say you?
Hope I’m way the fuck off base
But prior history has shown otherwise

Yet another of those situations where I certainly hope he’s wrong, but fear he ain’t. And, as the old saying goes, “hope” ain’t a plan.

6

Echoes

This isn’t a rerun of Saigon. It’s way, way worse.

The impact of America’s failure, of the slow, tragic journey from Operation Enduring Freedom to those images today of desperate Afghans clinging to the undercarriage of the last US military airplanes to leave Afghanistan, will be dire and long-lasting. Most immediately the US has shown itself to be an untrustworthy ally. Which nation or people in need of help would align with this supposedly freedom-loving superpower that abandons its allies to their fate when the enemy comes knocking? Who now will trust the US to assist in the building of new institutions given the rotten fruits of its multi-billion-dollar, 20-year ‘nation-building’ project in Afghanistan – a calamitously weak Potemkin government that capitulated instantly when the Taliban hit the streets of Kabul?

This geopolitical disaster for the US will also strengthen the hand of its opponents, most notably China. China is already moving to consolidate its relationship with the Taliban and to assert its authoritative influence in the new Afghanistan. Islamist forces will take succour from the victory of the self-styled Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, too. Both regionally and among aspiring jihadists in the West, the victory of the Islamist side in the ‘war on terror’, the return to power of the movement that was hosting al-Qaeda when it visited its barbarism upon the infidels of New York City and Washington, DC, in 2001, will inspire confidence and action. Israel must be incredibly worried right now, knowing that Islamic extremists are again in the ascendant, and that its one-time chief supporter walks away from wars on terror.

Yeah, well, I’d say Israel will have to look after itself for the foreseeable future, as will the rest of the once-free world. We have knitting of our own to tend to at the moment, and plenty of it.

The Afghan humiliation is not only a military failure – it’s a political and moral one, too. Extraordinarily bad political decisions have been taken by the US, including its willingness to trust the Taliban and its belief that this brutal, misanthropic, misogynistic movement could be a player in the ‘international community’. Even now, Washington seems completely out of touch with events on the ground in Afghanistan. Its intelligence officers said the Taliban could take Kabul within 90 days. That was four days ago. They know nothing. One gets the impression of a confused, decaying empire looking with bamboozlement upon even those parts of the earth it rules.

“Impression”?

But above all of that, above even the political and military incoherence of the American empire, there is the corrosive cultural dynamic. This might just be the most important factor in the Afghan humiliation – the fact that the US, and the West more broadly, clearly lacks the cultural resources necessary for a clash of civilisations. This wasn’t just a territorial battle, a fight over the land of Afghanistan. It was also a cultural clash. It was a war between one side that has very strong beliefs and is more than willing to die for them, and another side that doesn’t know what it stands for anymore and would rather avoid risk and self-sacrifice if at all possible. I’ll leave you to decide which of these is the Taliban, and which the US.

This was always the West’s problem in Afghanistan: it lacked faith in the very values it claimed to be delivering to that benighted country. We will liberate women from life under the burqa, Western officials said. But isn’t it ‘Islamophobic’ to criticise the burqa, or any other Islamic practice for that matter? Our elites have insisted for years that it is. We will replace your intolerant Islamist system with a civil society fashioned by clever professors, the West promised. But isn’t it judgemental and possibly a tad racist – certainly an offence against the ideology of multiculturalism – to imply that Western democracy is superior to Islamist theocracy? As one British think-tank says, in its definition of the term ‘Islamophobia’, it is wrong to suggest that Islam is in any way ‘inferior to the West’. The West’s post-9/11 bluster was continually undermined by the West’s broader descent into moral relativism. How can you assert the civilisational authority of Western values when your entire educational and university system is devoted to questioning and demeaning Western civilisation? You cannot partake in a clash of civilisations if you loathe your own civilisation.

Anyone who thinks the Taliban did not pick up on all of this, on the Potemkin nature not only of the Afghan government but also of Western civilisation itself, is kidding themselves. The Taliban will have watched as the mighty American military became bogged down in discussions of critical race theory and the problem of ‘white rage’. They will have clocked the British army’s recruitment drive that was aimed at ‘snowflakes’ and ‘me me me millennials’ – for real – on the basis that such people have the ‘compassion’ necessary for the touchy-feely wars of the 21st century. They will know that the contemporary West is shame-faced about its history and its civilisational values and lacks ideas for how to turn its fragile youths into a fighting force, and they will understand their own life-and-death devotion to Sharia as being the opposite to all of this. They know this was a cultural clash as well as a military fight, and that they were by far the stronger side on this front.

Nailed it, clean and tight. I’ve said over and over again: Amerika v2.0 has absolutely, positively NO business involving itself in any conflict, major or minor, that can’t be resolved by pimple-faced doughboys sitting at keyboards in an air-conditioned trailer somewhere in Arizona, launching missiles from drones at high altitude. If that won’t fix it, we need to mind our own business from here on out.

The point about Amerika v2.0 being a wholly unreliable and faithless ally is an apt one, too. But as with so many of our other current woes, that hardly began this past week either.

In 1972, Church and Senator Clifford Case of New Jersey were able to push through the Senate an amendment to foreign-aid legislation that would end funding for all U.S. military operations in Southeast Asia except for withdrawal (subject to the release of all prisoners of war). Senate passage of the legislation, with the amendment, marked the first time that either chamber had passed a provision establishing a cutoff of funds for continuing the war. Though House and Senate conferees failed to reach an agreement on the measure, the support for the amendment was seen by the administration as another sign that antiwar forces were gaining strength. The McGovern-Hatfield amendment was enormously popular with the public. A January 1971 Gallup poll showed that public support for the amendment stood at 73 percent.

During the final negotiations with the Vietnamese over ending the war, culminating with the 1972 Christmas Bombings and the Paris Peace Accords in January 1973, the president knew that he only had a limited amount of time before Congress finally used the power of the purse to bring the war to an end — regardless of what the administration wanted. Indeed, to make certain that the president could not reverse course, in June 1973 Congress passed legislation that included an amendment sponsored by Church and Case to prohibit the use of more funds in Southeast Asia after August 15. Sixty-four senators voted in favor. When the House assented, its vote marked the first time that chamber had agreed to cut off funds, too.

Most importantly, Congress passed the War Powers Act in 1973 over Nixon’s veto. The legislation imposed a series of restrictions on the executive branch to ensure that the president would have to consult with the House and Senate before authorizing the troops for long periods of time.

For the remainder of the decade, congress continued to legislate its ideas about U.S. conduct in the Cold War and to restrict the authority of the executive branch. In 1975, Congress refused President Gerald Ford’s last-minute request to increase aid to South Vietnam by $300 million, just weeks before it fell to communist control. Few legislators had taken the request seriously; many conservative Republicans and hawkish Democrats agreed by then that Vietnam was lost and that the expenditure would have been a waste.

Congress also tackled the important national security issues of covert operations and intelligence. Hearings by Church pressured Ford into issuing an executive order that imposed restrictions on the CIA, including a ban on assassinations. Ford agreed to issue the order, rather than waiting for inevitable congressional reforms, after then–Chief of Staff Dick Cheney told him such action would protect the CIA from “irresponsible attack” and protect presidential authority. In 1978, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which required court-supervised monitoring of domestic surveillance operations by the federal government. The reforms were a response to revelations that the government had rampantly abused its power throughout the Cold War.

In sum, Congress played a very important role in building opposition to an unpopular and failed Cold War intervention. Legislators emerged as major voices of skepticism, criticism, and outright opposition to Vietnam. They checked the hawks in the administration who refused to believe the facts on the ground. Congress was ultimately pivotal to placing pressure on the Nixon administration to end a conflict that cost approximately 58,000 American lives.

Today, members from both parties would benefit by looking back at the history of Congress in the Vietnam era. 

Wouldn’t they just, though; in fact, the American people as a whole would. It’s the intentional failure of the government school system to expose the impressionable young minds in their charge to proper, truthful and complete history and civics instruction that’s the primary cause of the catastrophe we’re seeing unfold all around us now.

3
1

“Cruel and unusual”? Naaaaaah

Bring back the stocks. Among other needful things.

The coronavirus has given politicians new opportunities to project the power of government, and it has given us new opportunities to observe politicians breaking their own rules. Few things are as vile and contemptible as the hypocrisy of the ruling class.

We recall that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), during the lockdowns, had her hairdresser open up her shop for a private, maskless salon treatment. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) was photographed at Dulles airport in September without her mask, shortly before she flew out on her husband’s $50 million Gulfstream jet. John Kerry took his mask off on a plane, and he was flying commercial—first class. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) was maskless on the streets of New York City last year, where he was gratifyingly heckled by a fearless New Yorker as his entire entourage and the press corps and even the heckler were wearing their masks. Rhode Island Governor Gina Raimondo (D) wore a mask for the interview in which she tried to explain why she was seen without a mask at a bar after closing bars and telling everyone to wear a mask. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D) traveled to visit family in Florida after telling everyone to avoid nonessential travel. Austin, Texas Mayor Steve Adler (D) also told people to stay home—while on vacation in Cabo San Lucas (he apologized, and said he wouldn’t do it again, but there was this wedding he really needed to attend). And over the weekend, photos surfaced of Barack Obama’s lavish, huge, and non-socially distanced birthday celebration on Martha’s Vineyard, as the rest of the country is being threatened with a renewed mask mandate and other restrictions.

After listing several international examples of same, we come to a suggested remedy worthy of serious consideration.

All these incidents serve to remind us what an exceptionally luxurious, frivolous, out-of-touch, one-percent-of-the-one-percent life is led by the politicians who tell us to be patient with losing our businesses or being forced to stay home from work. Their hypocrisy, their abuse of political power, should be a crime. Perhaps not a capital crime. But it does deserve something beyond a fine.

Oh, I’m perfectly fine with making them capital crimes, myself; if nothing else, all possibility of recidivism would be eliminated. But hey, maybe that’s just me.

Politicians who abuse their power should be put in the stocks. Money means nothing to the super-rich and super-powerful, and they will never serve jail time. But Nancy Pelosi would long remember being forced to sit in the stocks for a day outside the hair salon she had opened just for her. Gavin Newsom might learn a thing or two from having to look up at the people who walk by him while he has his feet up outside the French Laundry.

The point of the stocks was to humiliate people—not as an end, but with the intention of reforming their behavior. In 2004, a mail thief was ordered to stand outside the San Francisco Post Office for eight hours wearing a sign that read: “I stole mail. This is my punishment.” The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this sentence, inasmuch as the humiliation served the purpose of making the culprit a better citizen.

Nothing else would be so effective or work so quickly in cutting these political big shots down to the size of ordinary people. It would force power-abusing politicians to do what they hate most—be confronted by their voters. Perhaps any politician who serves more than two terms should be put in the stocks for one day every year as a reminder of the basic loathsomeness of his profession. It might be easier than passing national term limits.

Politicians should be compelled in every respect, as much as possible, to live like ordinary, average, people. When they abuse their power, they should be treated far worse than average people, because their power and responsibility is so much greater. Politicians seem to think they deserve special treatment—and they do: Set them in the stocks. Not for long. Just for as long as it takes for them to learn their lessons.

Again: not harsh enough to suit me, not by a long yard. If “let the punishment fit the crime” is to be our standard, then full weight must be given to the innumerable lives ruined, the businesses destroyed, the human misery created, and the fortunes lost or stolen because of the actions of the career-politician class. That can only mean that leaving ’em stocked and subject to public abuse and humiliation until they’re well and truly broken, in body, mind, and spirit, is the way to go. “Learning their lessons” will never be adequate to the task; they never will, it’s completely beyond them.

Personally, I think even the stocks are insufficiently “cruel and unusual” for such despicable toads. If we truly intend to balance the scales of justice as compensation to the victims for all the harm politicians have inflicted, we should also consider bringing back, say, the Brank:

The device was a metal cage or mask that enclosed the head, often with ridiculous adornments designed to humiliate its victim. In some towns, the Brank had a bell attached to its rear only to announce the presence of the victim who was instantly mocked by the people she “endangered” through gossip.

Many variants of the Brank appeared throughout the Middle Ages, some included spikes that penetrated the victim’s flesh when she spoke.

The duration of this torture could range from a few hours, to months. In some cases, the victim was left to die with the Brank; if she ever removed it, she’d be tortured with another method and sometimes killed.

NOW we’re getting somewhere. Among the many other options which also merit looking into would be the Rack, the Breaking Wheel, the Thumbscrews, and my all-time favorite, the Judas Chair:

Also known as the Judas Chair, the Chair of Torture was a terrible device of the Middle Ages. It was used until the late 1800’s in Europe.

There are many variants of the chair. They all have one thing in common: spikes cover the back, arm-rests, seat, leg-rests and foot-rests. The number of spikes in one of these chairs ranges from 500 to 1,500.

To avoid movement, the victim’s wrists were tied to the chair or, in one version, two bars pushed the arms against arm-rests for the spikes to penetrate the flesh even further. In some versions, there were holes under the chair’s bottom where the torturer placed coal to cause severe burns while the victim still remained conscious.

This instrument’s strength lies primarily in the psychological fear caused on the victims. It was a common practice to extract a confession by forcing the victim to watch someone else be tortured with this instrument.

The time of death greatly varied ranging from a few hours to a day or more. No spike penetrated any vital organ and the wound was closed by the spike itself which delayed blood loss greatly.

Ingenius, and just the thing to instill the proper fear into the malificent buggers. One of these placed in a prominent position in both Congressional chambers, the Oval Office, and the Supreme Court could go a long way towards rectifying our problems. One in every state’s Governor’s Mansion, situated so that every last elected and appointed bureauweasel had to walk right by the thing multiple times each and every working day, would probably fix the whole mess practically overnight.

After that, restore the lost art of pistols at dawn on the Field of Honor to full legal status and we’d have ourselves a civilization worthy of the name again.

4
4

Nurse Ratched Nation

It’s a madhouse.

Right now an alliance of government, big tech, corporations, and mass media rule over the United States of America. They frame the debates, enforce the law as they see fit, and persecute their enemies while rewarding their friends.

That they defend so many crazy propositions apparently leaves them unfazed. Every day brings some new boogey-man tale about the Wuhan Virus, some new tidbit, seemingly plucked from the wind, intended to cow ordinary citizens into obedience. Our masters also want to fire health care workers who refuse the vaccine, the same workers who were last year’s pandemic heroes. And while we’re being bullied and berated, hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens, many of them carrying the Wuhan virus, pour across our borders.

Meanwhile, the woke crowd trots out theories and ideas that would have left our grandparents rolling with laugher in the aisles. If you’re a man but think you’re a woman, then you’re a woman, and vice versa. So now “men” can have periods and babies. Defunding the police will lead to less crime. All white people are inherently racists. The National Anthem and the American flag are evil as well and should be replaced. Believing Christians are by nature sexual bigots.

In the novel and the film One Flew Over The Coocoo’s Nest, we meet Nurse Ratched, who has in her care mentally ill men. By the end of the story, we realize she’s a sadist, a tyrant sicker in the head than her patients, who she enjoys tormenting, making them feel small and keeping them helpless and dependent.

Our elites are Nurse Ratched en masse. If they truly cared about our country, they would seek to bring cheer rather than gloom-and-doom. They would become happy warriors, encouraging us to move ahead as a nation, to come together as a people, and to live in harmony.

And mostly, they would shut up, go away, and leave us to live our lives as we see fit.

The good news? Nurse Ratched finds herself opposed by the rebellious Randle McMurphy, who has feigned insanity so that he might spend his prison sentence in the mental hospital instead. He tries to make the other inmates feel more like men by playing poker with them, taking them on a fishing trip, and throwing a big party in the middle of the night.

To oppose the killjoys and doomsayers of our age, we need to become Randle McMurphy. 

Good enough, and I don’t disagree, really. But it might be well to remember how everything turned out56S for McMurphy in the end: electro-shocked, lobotomized into a Biden-like stupor, and finally smothered to death with a pillow. Maybe Chief Bromden would be a better role model to emulate.

1
1

Publick Notice

So at the moment, I have about twenty tabs open on the iMac, and about ten on the phone—all of them stories I hope to get around to posting on sooner or later, although admittedly some of them have been just sitting there all lonesome and neglected for several weeks. This is due to the veritable juggernaut of worthwhile stories on momentous events bearing down on us, with more coming each and every day.

Add in the myriad other demands on my time and energy out in Meatspace and I was right before the point of just throwing my hands up, saying to hell with it, and closing the moldier tabs in despair when a possible palliative came to me: I could adopt a daily “Quick Hits” section à la the one Ace has going over at his joint. A way, in other words, to get these items out there for you CF Lifers to play around with without any lengthy commentary from me. I’ll need to come up with a different name for such a beastie here, I suppose—something like “Glancing Blows” or “Short Jabs” or “Rabbit Punches,” maybe.

Anyways, look for something along them lines to start showing up around here soon, once I can rassle this backlog of post-fodder into something resembling submission.

4
1

Vaxx faxx baxx maxx reaxx

Truth, outing.

Covid vaccine maker Moderna received 300,000 reports of side effects after vaccinations over a three-month period following the launch of its shot, according to an internal report from a company that helps Moderna manage the reports.

That figure is far higher than the number of side effect reports about Moderna’s vaccine publicly available in the federal system that tracks such adverse events.

The reason for the gap is not clear. Moderna may simply still be processing the reports, though the number of reports about Moderna’s vaccine in VAERS from the first half of 2021 remained almost flat this week.

Moderna and IQVIA, the company that works with Moderna to handle the reports, did not return emails for comment.

No, I imagine they didn’t at that.

A person with access to the presentation provided screenshots of the relevant slide, which clearly explains the 300,000 side effect reports were received over “a three-month span” – not since the introduction of the vaccine in December – and differentiates between them and “medical information queries.”

The slide does not make clear what three months are covered but refers to the “global launch” of the vaccine, which essentially took place in the first quarter of 2021. Whether the slide is referring to January through March or April through June, the 300,000 figure dwarfs the number of reports in VAERS for the Moderna vaccine for either period.

A query of VAERS this morning reveals roughly 110,500 adverse events reports worldwide for Spikevax completed from January through March. All but 650 were in the United States. VAERS also includes 78,000 reports completed from April through June, including 71,400 in the United States.

Those figures overstate the number of reports Moderna has provided, because they include many reports from patients, physicians, and other health-care providers, as well as those from Moderna.

The one thing we can all be quite sure of is that any “citizen” seeking to obtain any factual truth from FederalGovCo—about anything, not just this particular shit circus—had better be strong, determined, and very, very patient. He should definitely be most vigilant about watching his six, too.

(Via WRSA)

3

Spark up!

You goddamned sickly, frail-ass nonsmoker feebs are Killing Grandma.

Occasionally I train courses on using self-contained breathing apparatus for fire fighting and the like, known as SCBA or simply BA in industry. The course is a lot of fun to teach, particularly as I drill my students in a way that inspires some of them to regularly ask me what I did in the military – (NOTHING. I was never in the military but maybe I should have been. But the way the world’s going there’s probably plenty of opportunities coming up.)

One of my little joys in that course is when we get to the subject of air consumption rates. For example, if you’re unfit you will use more air than the fit guy. If you’re scared you will use more air than the relaxed guy. And if you’re throwing gas cylinders over a fence to stop them from exploding in a fire then you’ll chew through a 6 litre 300bar cylinder in about nine minutes flat. Don’t ask me how I know that.

And then I ask the question of the room – is anyone here a smoker? And there is the inevitable groan and then the smokers will raise their hands, some sheepishly, but most with a look on their face that goes something along the lines of, “we get it, you’re about to tell us that we’re doomed because we smoke, blah blah blah, we don’t care anymore.”

And that’s when I drop the bomb and inform them that smokers in general have better air consumption rates because they have habituated their lungs to use less air. Talk about a room perking up! You see the sheer joy in their faces. There’s nothing like getting a room full of tough offshore workers who smoke on your side with one sentence. Well, maybe there is but I need to get out more.

Heh. Well, these days we’re one of the very last minorities that it’s considered not just okay but positively virtuous to persecute. But here’s the really fun part.

I found various parts of this interesting but none more than one of the proposed cures for the S1 spike protein.
Nicotine. Who told you the other day that smoking is cool?

Ivermectin kills the virus, Statins prevent the S1 protein presenting Monocytes from attaching to your cells, and several drugs (including nicotine) can induce monocyte apoptosis. When the S1 presenting Non-Classical monocytes undergo apoptosis, the S1 protein is destroyed, and the nano clotting, inflammation, etc. go away. This is also why smokers have been shown to test positive for COVID symptoms 80% less than the general population, the nicotine effectively renders them immune to the effects of the S1 protein, and thus most of COVID’s symptoms.

Well, how about that then? Poor smokers have been maligned for over twenty years as the outright lepers of our so civilized societies. Now it turns out that smoking is not just a nice hit, not just a great brain stimulant and not just downright cool; it’s also positively brimming with health features.

Just one more positive that I can add to my BA course next time with the lads. Pretty soon those nasty medical companies will be begging us smokers to come back. Nah, she’ll be right, ya dropkicks. We don’t need ya. We’re smokers.

Bold mine, and completely delicious if you ask me. I seem to recollect having mentioned that 80 percent statistic here myself some months back, but don’t feel like looking around for it right now. No matter; it’s time for a smoke break, folks.

(Via WRSA)

1

What’s REALLY around the corner?

William Lind’s thought-provoking guest post at MVC’s place has a look-see, finds unpleasantness.

In the 1930s, a minor British novelist started writing a new book, which was not a novel. Instead, William Gerhardie proposed a theory of history he called “God’s Fifth Column,” which was also his book’s title. His theory was that, just at the point where everyone who was anyone agreed events would go in a certain direction, they instead headed off on a wild, wholly unpredicted tangent.

Gerhardie was inspired by the events of 1914 and their catastrophic consequences, in which we are still enmeshed. Prior to Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s ill-timed trip to Sarajevo—the head of Serbian military intelligence had multiple assassins positioned there—the elite consensus was that another great European war simply was not possible. All the powers’ economies were too intertwined. International trade was essential. Everyone’s stock market would collapse, banks would fail, there would be riots in the streets. Within Europe, the labor market was international; one German soldier taken early in the war said to his British captors, “I hope this is over soon so I can get back to my job driving a cab in Liverpool.” But war came anyway, though no one wanted it, or, afterward, could explain why it had been fought. And the Christian West died in the mud of Flanders and Galicia.

If we look at our present situation through the lens of Gerhardie’s God’s Fifth Column, what do we see? 

After a run-down of some of the uglier things lying in wait for us just around said corner, Lind concludes:

Unlike in 1914, the advent of God’s Fifth Column in our time may not be bad news for conservatives. The “inevitable” future anticipated by the elites is a hellish combination of an absurd ideology, cultural Marxism (currently disguised as “wokeness”) with Brave New World. As Lance Morrow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal,

The struggle to which Americans, of whatever race, should be paying attention is the one that has to do with freedom. It has to do with privacy, mind control, individual liberties—with totalitarian systems of surveillance and manipulation perfecting themselves in an alliance of big tech, big government, global corporations and artificial intelligence. Wokeness…fronts for the real problem of the 21st century: a sinister autocracy just around the corner.

What’s really around the corner is God’s Fifth Column, and it will knock both “wokeness” and Brave New World out of the park.

Let’s hope. After all, something has to. GFC theory looks likely enough to be what does the trick in my opinion, particularly in light of two prospective stumbling-blocks:

  1. It lines up quite smoothly with my own broken-record insistence that there is absolutely no way of knowing what shape the Coming Unpleasantness™ will take, nor what will result from it
  2. The Left, in their purblind arrogance, always, always, always leaves the Hand of the Almighty out of their considerations entirely, which has knocked the pins out from under far better and smarter people than they’ll ever be

The only sure thing is that we’ll find out soon enough.

3

“Is America Still Our Country?”

Ask a silly question.

White advocates have long worried about demographic change, mass immigration, and race differences. Of course, these remain very important, but for many, the realities of life itself have become a more immediate burden. Politicians give tax dollars directly to blacks. Monuments and statues of the white founders are vandalized or come down. Students of all races are taught contempt for whites. A 100-year-old race riot is now called a massacre of blacks even though the violence was a two-way street and may have been started by blacks. A spate of black-on-Asian attacks is called “white supremacy.” These examples are just from late May to early June 2021.

Coca-Cola tells employees to “Be Less White.” College officials claim that “all whites are racist.” Critical race theory (CRT), which teaches that whites are inherently evil and responsible for black people’s failings, is now taught in the military. Christian churches confess that they are “racist” and “too white.” Even conservative denominations support BLM.

All four of the major American sports leagues: National Football League (NFL), Major League Baseball (MLB), National Hockey League (NHL) and the National Basketball Association (NBA) fund and spread BLM propaganda. All the big tech companies promote it.

President Biden claims that “terrorism from white supremacy is the most lethal threat to the homeland today,” while BLM and antifa continue to riot and attack people. Mr. Biden proclaimed that the government would give precedence to reopening small businesses hurt by COVID-19 that are owned by blacks, Hispanics, Asians and Indians. Whites can wait and suffer.

Kristen Clarke, a black woman who heads the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, claimed blacks have “superior physical and mental abilities” compared to whites. Utah governor Spencer Cox, a conservative Republican, claims it is not racist for whites to be excluded from college scholarships.

The Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association recently wrote:

Whiteness is a condition one first acquires and then one has — a malignant, parasitic-like condition to which “white” people have a particular susceptibility…Whiteness renders its hosts’ appetites voracious, insatiable, and perverse. These deformed appetites particularly target nonwhite peoples…There is not yet a permanent cure.”

Whites — even while they are still a majority — have been dispossessed in the nation their ancestors built. And, as a look at Zimbabwe or South Africa tells us, things could get a lot worse. Should whites feel anything but contempt for the United States?

Wellll, I can’t speak for anybody but myself, unnerstand, but I can tell you which way I’m leaning more and more these days.

It is a shock to many Americans to realize that their country may have become their enemy. This must be harrowing for older whites who fought for the flag and who were taught to love their country. But it isn’t their country anymore.

Patriotism has been falling steadily over the last two decades. Whites still show higher levels than non-whites, who tend to identify instead with their race or a foreign country. But white levels are also declining, particularly among younger whites. Some of this is certainly due to being told their country is racist. But whites are also beginning to realize that the new America is anti-white. What should they feel for such a nation?

The aforementioned contempt works, for openers. But if whypeepo want to at the very least survive the escalating, eventually genocidal onslaught currently being openly promised them, implacable fury might end up being the best and most useful choice.

Whistling past the graveyard

Wherein I must take issue with something ZMan says, which I’ll put in bold.

One of the underappreciated qualities of liberal democracy is its ability to grow and develop its own opposition. In the Cold War this was not obvious as communism in the form of the Soviet Empire filled the role. Domestically, the inner party had the outer party as a fixed partner. Democrats controlled domestic policy, with some mild opposition from the Republicans. On the other hand, the Republicans controlled foreign policy with some mild dissent from the Democrats.

This partnership collapsed when the Soviet Union collapsed. A year after the voters overwhelmingly approved the appointment of former C.I.A. man George H. W. Bush as the successor to Ronald Reagan, the logic of having spooks run the country no longer made much sense. The system quickly pivoted to Saddam Hussein as a temporary fill in for the evil empire, but he was a poor replacement. In the next election the Cold War generation was replaced with the Woodstock generation.

The Clinton years were really just an interregnum. The system needed to learn how to create new enemies. We got the beginnings of the great Islamic enemy and an effort to recreate the holocaust in the Balkans. It was not until the son of the former C.I.A. man that we got the threat of international Islam as the new enemy. Fear of men on flying carpets carried the system into the Obama years. Toward the end of his second term, the search for a new enemy had started.

The crusade against the Mohammedans was the first full attempt to recreate that old magic and provide the regime with legitimacy and authority. It is why 9/11 became a solemn holiday celebrated by both sides of the regime. Even though the left-liberals opposed the right-liberals in the prosecution of the crusade, they completely accepted the origin of it and the centrality of it. Note that the last anniversary of 9/11 came and went without much ceremony. It no longer matters.

Actually, umm, no. Not just noHELL NO.

After thousands of dead and dozens of serious terrorist acts in the US alone since 9/11; tens of thousands of jihadist attacks around the world in what you might call the modern era, ongoing since the 1970s; and the ceaseless campaign of conquest and domination Muslims have waged since their twisted pseudo-religion’s inception in the 7th Century AD, the notion of any unwarranted “crusade” against Muzzrats contrived for purposes of subterfuge by the goobermint is laughably absurd. Nobody, but nobody, needs to make up a goddamned thing about the threat posed to Western Civ by jihadis; they’ve made that abundantly clear all by themselves, thanksveddymuch.

Not that the goobermint WOULDN’T do such a thing, mind. It’s just that in this particular case, they don’t have to. Steyn offers just one example that proves the point.

Kurt Westergaard and I were successive winners of the Danish Free Press Society’s Sappho Award. I was very flattered to find myself in his company, but couldn’t honestly say I deserved to be. Kurt was one of the bravest men of our time – not because he was inclined to bravery, but simply because, when it was required, he met the challenge and never backed down.

Sixteen years ago Flemming Rose of the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten decided to conduct a thought experiment in public after an author casually revealed that he couldn’t find any Danish artist willing to illustrate his book about “the Prophet Mohammed” (as the BBC now routinely styles him). So Flemming called twelve cartoonists and invited them to depict the late Prophet. Kurt Westergaard’s cartoon was the memorable one, and the one you recall as the years roll by. It was a pithy visual jest: Mohammed’s turban as a bomb with a lit fuse. See picture at top right.

“I attempted to show that terrorists get their spiritual ammunition from parts of Islam, and with this spiritual ammunition, and with dynamite and other explosives, they kill people,” Kurt told my old newspaper The National Post a few years back. “I showed this in a cartoon and what happened? They want to kill me, so I think I was right.”

Like most of the men and women I have shared a stage with in Europe this century, he was an old Sixties radical sufficiently principled to think the same kind of jokes he’d applied to church, monarchy, parliament and every other societal institution should also be applied to Islam. He never wanted to be a “free speech hero”, but gamely bore the burthen once it had been dropped on him. He certainly never wanted to be world-famous, albeit more so in Mogadishu than Manhattan and Lahore than Los Angeles. It cost him a comfortable retirement, weakened his health, and an ever more craven culture denied him the consolations of monetary exploitation. When I expressed sympathy, he laughed and said he’d do the same cartoon all over again even knowing what he was in for.

The blood lust began with a trio of imams on the make shopping the twelve cartoons (plus three cruder fakes) round the Muslim world, and leaving it to the usual Islamonutters to take it from there: In nothing flat, over two hundred people were dead – which meant that CNN & Co were obliged to cover the story. They did so by modifying Westergaard’s cartoon, with Mohammed’s face pixilated, as if he’d entered the witness protection programme. If only. In reality, it was that dwindling band of people who believe in free speech – and, indeed, free speech itself – that found itself in the witness protection programme.

And so it went on. On the fifth anniversary of the cartoons, I was being interviewed in Copenhagen by Flemming Rose and his colleagues when we were alerted that a one-legged Chechen had accidentally self-detonated in his hotel room en route to blow them up. Whenever I tell this story, the phrase “one-legged Chechen” always gets a laugh, although it is in fact no laughing matter hopping across an hotel room with a homemade bomb. But these guys are always a laughingstock, aren’t they? Until, as at Charlie Hebdo, they finally pull it off.

To the end of his life, al-Qa’eda and its affiliates had a combined eight-figure bounty on Kurt Westergaard’s head. His death, a day after his eighty-sixth birthday, prompted a few Scandinavian chums to assure me that he’d had the last laugh – that now no jihadist would ever collect those multi-millions.

Maybe. But the excitable Mohammedans aren’t really the issue; the unexcitable west is. On the home front we are remorselessly trading core liberties for a supposed quiet life and congratulating ourselves for doing so. The most lauded cartoonist in America, Garry Trudeau, took it upon himself – in prepared remarks delivered on stage – to blame the dead of Charlie Hebdo for getting themselves murdered. Trudeau’s rationale is that in mocking Islam these cartoonists are “punching down” at a disadvantaged minority – as opposed to doing what Trudeau has been doing for half-a-century and having the guts to “punch up” by attacking the, er, GOP. Only in the crapped out monodailies of the dying American media could this talentless twerp become wealthy and important.

For my own part, I would have liked Kurt Westergaard to have outlived the far inferior draughtsman Trudeau. In my initial reaction to the Motoon crisis, I channeled Nelson Eddy:

The minute there were multimillion-dollar bounties on those cartoonists’ heads, The Times of London and Le Monde and The Washington Post and all the rest should have said ‘This Thursday we’re all publishing all the cartoons. If you want to put bounties on all our heads, you better have a great credit line at the Bank of Jihad. If you want to kill us, you’ll have to kill us all. You can kill ten who are stout-hearted men but you’ll have to kill ten thousand more. We’re standing shoulder to shoulder, and bolder and bolder.’

But they didn’t do that. And as the years passed, in the leading cities of the west, even the rote pro forma defenses of free speech grew fainter and faded away. Kurt Westergaard bore a decade-and-a-half of continuous murder threats – coupled with indifference and condescension from Trudeau and other pampered eminences of his own profession – with good humor, steely determination, and no doubts about the justice of his cause. We need more like him. Rest in peace.

Seconded, most heartily. As Steyn said, we need more like him—as many as we can possibly get. If you truly think we’ve all been misled into unjustly considering Mooselimbs a deadly, and deadly-serious, enemy, you got some more thinking to do, I’m afraid.

“Who’s in denial” Part the Second

Been waiting with bated breath for the second installment of Claire Wolf’s characteristically brilliant magnum opus to drop, and finally it has.

Who’s in denial about our current cultural and political state of collapse?

Most everybody. Millions of ordinary people who think bad times are always temporary are in denial. Oligarchs and plutocrats who believe we ordinary people are eternally tractable and malleable are in denial. Intellectuals who believe increasing quantities of fashionable nonsense are in denial. Politicians and their handlers who believe they can rule by fiat without consequences are in denial. Fools who imagine “the science” is a religion and that dissent from any statement by a high priest government-approved scientist is heresy are in denial.

I’ve been in denial about the true depth of our circumstances and about how truly evil (and insane) our new totalitarians are. I venture to say every one of us is in denial about something pertinent to freedom’s future. Even the best of us have blind spots, no matter how much we pride ourselves on having clear heads and open eyes.

Anyone who doesn’t see that we’re in deep, deep trouble must be very carefully NOT looking. Yet even the most clear-headed can’t see the future.

And by “future” I don’t mean a year or 10 years or a century from now (though that, too). I mean what might happen tomorrow. Or what’s happening today that we just haven’t found out about yet.

But who can blame those who yawn and go on with life? Yesterday no doubt brought some equally shocking, horrifying, or scandalous news. Tomorrow will bring more word of the ridiculous, the invasive, the totalitarian, the impossible. Some days we might get hit with two or three or four such outrages. Which one do you adopt as your cause when by tomorrow morning five more equally outrage-worthy acts will have fallen to your attention?

This is not apathy. This is not even the famous “outrage fatigue.” This is a sign of fatal decline. People know either that they can’t do a damn thing against the onrushing absurdities and evils or that they’ll try to accomplish something and be trapped forever in a game of Whack-A-Mole.

It’s chilling, as well, when you remember Voltaire: “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
I’ll update Voltaire for our times: “Those who believe absurdities and force silence upon doubters, ensure atrocities.”

Good people are famously slow to perceive real evil. Famously slow to react radically (in the original meaning of striking at the root of a problem) once they realize conventional solutions no longer avail them. Once pushed to the wall good people can be famously more dangerous than their would-be masters acknowledge. Still, we’re slow — often tragically slow. We act only after the thing we love is already lost or crumbling.

That’s particularly true when we understand that virtually everything we read or hear is a lie, a distortion, a manipulation, or a sheer display of moonbattery. We realize we’ve been disenfranchised. Self-appointed (or dubiously elected) political and cultural leaders can get away with any damn thing they please. And they’re all rushing to do their dirty deeds as fast as they can, before we can catch on to what they’re doing, let alone react. So far, this tactic seems to be working in their favor.

But then, sometimes rapid shifts toward evil or insanity work to the advantage of We the Deplorables, as well.

Okay, enough with the excerptin’. As with Part the First, Claire takes a deep dive into American history to help shape her argument, but this time out she throws some of the less-well-known and seldom-discussed aspects of that era into the mix. It’s all solid stuff, a genuine, all-caps MUST READ. Hie thee thither.

Secession Nation

The South will rise again?

Two in three Republicans in the South support SECEDING from the US while almost half of Democrats out West say the same, survey finds
A whopping two-thirds of Republicans in the South favor seceding from the United States while nearly half of Democrats in the Pacific region and almost 40 percent in the Northeast say the same, according to a new survey.

Support for secession is also considerable among independents in the Midwest and Great Lakes regions, where 43 percent say they would favor breaking away and forming their own country.

Half of independents in the South also favor secession while 43 percent of Republicans in the Rocky Mountain states share the same view.

The survey, which was conducted by Bright Line Watch, polled 2,750 respondents. The figures were published in the June 2021 edition of the Bright Line Watch Survey Wave 15 Dataset.

Overall, support for secession was highest in the South, where 44 percent said they favored breaking away from the Union.

Interesting. But then, how surprising can it really be that the descendants of the folks who already tried once to divorce themselves from what they recognized as a contra-Constitutional government might turn out to be sympathetic to the idea still, now that federal tyranny has finally blossomed fully?

It’s hardly just the South that’s fed up and wants out of an ever-more intrusive Union though, if this article is correct. Here’s the truly telling part:

In the Northeast, about one in three (34 percent) favored secession. Nearly the same percentage of respondents – 32 percent – in the Mountain region favored secession.

Thirty percent of those surveyed from the Heartland also backed the idea, while 39 percent of those in the Pacific states said they, too, supported it.

The survey from June found that there was an increase across the board in the number of Americans who supported the idea of secession.

In January, just after President Joe Biden was sworn in, Bright Line Watch conducted a similar survey asking the same question.

It found that fewer Americans in each of the five designated regions supported secession.

In the Northeast, 32 percent of voters said they supported seceding from the US. In the South, it was just 33 percent – with half of Republicans backing the idea.

In the Heartland, less than one in four supported seceding while 28 percent of those in the Mountain region said the same.
In the Pacific, just one in three Americans backed the idea of secession.

Well well well well WELL. Wonder what might’ve brought about this change in attitude among so many of us?

Whatever the case may be, perhaps Charlie Daniels (PBUH) had a touch of clairvoyance back in the 70s. Admittedly, he was talking strictly about music, but still.



2

Sink, sank, sunk

Tell me the one about “the most powerful military in the WORLD” again, Daddy. That one’s my favorite.

The other day, WRSA linked to a recent great read by Cdr Salamander, who’s probably known to Pentagon brassholes as Cdr. Cassandra, on just exactly how f**ked up the US Navy has gotten.

Before you head over to RTWT (which you should do), hydrate.

Because you’re either going to cry a river, or be vinegar-pissing mad, either of which is going to take a full tank.

He ain’t just whistling Dixie about that, either; the post opens with a jawdropping pic featuring what looks to me like a rusted-all-to-fuck-and-gone superstructure/bridge from a USN destroyer or perhaps heavy cruiser, just before the breakers turn the poor neglected thing into razor blades…and a CIWS* mount with its gun-muzzles rusted also! I swear to you, I can think of five or six former sailors and Marines in my personal circle of family and close friends who would jump at the chance to come out of retirement and deal out some old-school NCO justice to everyone responsible for such a shameful dereliction of duty.

TL;DR:

The Navy sucks ass right now, because going back to 2009 (perspicacious readers may note a specific change of administration that correlates with that timespan), all flag- and general-rank promotions were run through a filter of pre-woke communist civilian and military zampolits. Only ass-kissing toadies need apply. The current can’t-sail-can’t-shoot-can’t fly-can’t-fight genderfluid diversity Navy is how that plan worked out.

GIGO.

In short, when the only admirals the Squids promote are ass-kissing back-stabbing four-star fuck-ups, the entire Navy takes it in the neck. And. It. HAS.

You can’t even blame this on the blue-haired transgender enlisted, because the fault was letting them up the gangplank in the first place; everything else is just gravity working, plus time, and salt water. Both literal, and metaphorical.

There’s a simple cure, in about three parts. Sadly, Cdr Salmander’s once-wonderful comments seem to have gone away (we can guess why), so we offer our cure here.

Follows, Aesop’s simple three-step solution for unfucking the Navy—all of which identify and address the underlying issues correctly, would almost certainly work a treat, and which therefore have absolutely zero chance of being implemented. In sum:

Do that, and you’ll have the ass-kicking world-beating US Navy last seen about 1990, if not 1945, by Christmas. 

Re-enlistment will hit 100%, and we’ll have the fleet we paid for. And certain countries thinking they’re the New Big Dog will be in for a rude awakening.

Do it not, and we may as well de-fund the Navy, and to save further time and effort, just send everyone in the U.S. free copies of Rosetta Stone Mandarin and Cantonese.

Some may think I’m too harsh on the sister service. On the contrary, a functional Navy is vital for US interests. Speaking as a former Marine, for naval gunfire support and amphibious transport, just for openers. Let alone the basic missions of carrier force projection, maintaining freedom of the seas by the surface fleet, and control of the shipping lanes and nuclear deterrence by the Silent Service.

We currently – and going back a decade and more – have a Navy full of Squids and Shitbirds. Starting at the E-ring in the Pentagon. Those at the bottom of the totem pole are that way precisely because of those at the top, whether by active sabotage, foolish encouragement, spineless apathy, or malign neglect and dereliction of duty. Period. Complicity should become a hanging-from-the-yardarm offense.

We need, and deserve, a Navy of sailors. History teaches harsh lessons to nations who fail to provide for their own defense, and we’re dangerously close to the shoals of learning that lesson, in a Pearl Harbor sort of way. Hoping it doesn’t happen is not a good plan.

Rather more drastic measures, just shy of actual guillotines, are needed. In haste.

Oh, I dunno now, let’s not be too hasty about ruling things out here. Myself, I’m very interested in your guillotine idea, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Like I said, good, practical ideas all, with less than the proverbial snowballs chance of ever seeing the light of day in the Navy as currently constituted. What we have here is an endless Swamp circle-jerk: the necessary reform and rejuvenation of the Navy will require that its misbegotten, politicized, and self-serving higher-officer class be reformed first. That, in turn, can’t happen unless and until the civilian “leadership” is also reformed, top to bottom. And that means removing and replacing the sleazy, corrupt DC ProPol class which is ultimately responsible for the decline and decrepitude of not only the US military but the whole damned country…which reform, thanks to their accumulation of near-limitless power, can now be accomplished in but a single, radical, and distasteful way.

Link to CDR Salamander’s post, which you should also read, here, and to the report itself here.

*Close-In Weapons System, an either missile- or gun-based perimeter defense system in use on just about all of the larger USN ship classes to defend against enemy missile and/or aircraft attack. The one in Aesop’s pic looks to be the Phalanx, which is built around the venerable, trusty old Vulcan B61 20mm autocannon—a tried-and-true workhorse of a Gatling gun that was originally developed for the USAF in 1959, mounted in a multiplicity of aircraft ranging from the F4 Phantom, to the F111 Aardvark, to the F16 and -18, to the stupidly-abandoned F22 Raptor

With rust in the fucking barrels. Lord help us all.

Publick Notice

As I mentioned a few days ago, I’ve spent a right smart chunk of time the last few nights doing a little sprucing-up around this dump, most notably some pretty extensive jiggery-pokey in Ye Olde Blogrolle section. As a result there’s a whole slew of new links therein, to some excellent sites, in pretty much every Blogrolle category. I hope y’all will check these folks out as and when, and that you enjoy ’em. What with the disappointingly flaccid quiescence—in the face of truly monumental developments and escalations—on the part of more than a few of my Old Reliables, I’ve been on something of a quest to find some fresh blood to inject into my personal daily-checks list, so the New Breed types I didn’t have in my Brave bookmarks already have been added there too.

It’s remarkable how very far some of us longtime bloggers out there have shown themselves willing to bend so as to avoid serious analysis, even any mention in some cases, of certain pressing issues. As I said, that’s disappointing. I’ll neither name names nor speculate on motives now, but everyone here will no doubt have their own suspicions regarding that. As times continue to become ever more difficult and dangerous, what we might call the Crucible Effect—the separation of sheep from goats, wheat from chaff, friend from foe, as it were—will no doubt intensify. As we continue this forced-march through the Valley of the Shadow, we’re all going to be learning a lot, I think. And not just about our enemies, either.

Let ’em breathe!

So brave. So very, very brave.

Female students go topless to protest gender inequality, public indecency laws
More than 100 students participated in a “Free the Nipple” protest at University of California, San Diego this week.
Female protesters were encouraged to shed their shirts and bras to protest gender inequality and body shaming.

In an effort to fight against perceived gender inequality and body shaming, male and female students at the University of California, San Diego gathered together Wednesday afternoon—completely topless.

More than 1,000 people RSVP’d to the event via a public Facebook page for the “Free the Nipple” event. The event description touted the sit-in as a “peaceful, laid-back, and safe environment.”

“Bring your curiosity, forget your shirts, and most importantly bring your love, compassion, and support for the cause,” the event description read. “Shirts, bra, tops – optional. Show up in whatever you feel comfortable with because it should be your choice!”

Organizers of the sit-in provided snacks, body paint, and masks for any woman who wanted to conceal her identity.

Organizers also forbade students from engaging with hecklers or “opposing groups,” according to the flier.

Opposing groups? Who the hell would oppose a tig ol’ bitty-fest like this, ferchrissake?

Although I must confess, I am of two minds about this particular story. On the one hand, I have no problem whatsoever with hot babes letting ’em breathe. On the other, I have concerns about the kind of sebaceous Leftwit manatees that usually overrun this kind of event and flap their no-fun bags at unwary onlookers like myself hoping to catch some more desirable sorts turning ’em loose in public. Hey, if I wanted to see tits that droop like fried eggs hung from a nail, as Joan Rivers once hilariously put it, I woulda brought my damned hammer along. Seems to me that this next doesn’t bode all that well:

Anni Ma, a UCSD alumna and organizer of the event, said in a video—which contains some nudity—that some think that women shouldn’t go topless because it could be dangerous for females or give men an opportunity to take advantage of women.

“And I’m, like, those are all, like, very valid reasons and that’s why women try to protect themselves, you know, because there are really dangerous people out in the world—it’s not cool—but then I’m like, that shouldn’t be illegal though,” Ma said. “This should be my choice to do what I want to do.”

Ma said in the video that “a group of sorority girls” judged her for going topless in public in the cold.

“Dude, this country makes me like so confused,” Ma said. “Our society is all, like, hopped up on, like, sex on TV, sex on billboards, sex, sex, sex, sex, and then in our private life, oh, don’t do that, that’s disgusting.”

Oof. Dude, like, I’m all like, y’know, wow, are you gonna show us any, like, titties or what? Cuz, like, I ain’t, like, y’know, got all day here, right?

Christ on a crutch.

Oh, and yes, I tried to watch the vid, because of course I did. Unfortunately, the blasted thing took too long to load, and being a raggedy and increasingly irritable old man nowadays I find I don’t care about video boobage—regardless of what kind of whiny nuisance sports it—nearly as much as I once may have. So I moved on, although I did leave the tab open. Who knows, maybe I’ll have something nice to wake up to in the morning.

Alas, despite an encouraging trend, it seems that all might not be sweetness and light in Ta-Ta Land.

The no-bra movement is taking over 2021 fashion — and it’s leaving many women behind
All I wanted was a cute sundress to help celebrate the end of a miserable pandemic winter. As someone who’s been trying to reduce my clothing consumption and move away from fast fashion as much as possible, it had been a while since I’d purchased a staple summer dress that made me feel flirty and feminine. But I was in the mood to treat myself, so I opened the Aritzia website and started to scroll.

To my dismay, the experience wasn’t nearly as pleasant as I had expected. After just a few minutes of looking through the website and seeing dress after dress with an open back, spaghetti straps or excessively low-cut style, I found myself repeatedly wondering, “How the hell am I supposed to wear a bra under that?”

And then it hit me. I thought back to conversations I’d seen on Twitter, articles I’d read from major outlets and styles I’d seen on the streets of Toronto, and I quickly realized my shopping struggles weren’t just a fluke: they were the result of a rising braless movement born out of the pandemic.

Sure enough, a quick search of the term “braless movement” reveals a host of recent articles from major publications like The New York Times and Vogue, and more declaring that “2020 could be the end of the line for the bra.”

One can only hope.

While I’m all for those who feel empowered by this change, as a busty woman who feels most comfortable wearing a bra (usually a wireless one, let’s be honest), I couldn’t help but feel excluded and frankly, inadequate to see countless outlets declare that bras should be banished and to watch bralessness trickle into 2021 fashion trends.

Going braless has rarely felt like an option for me. I went through puberty at a young age and developed breasts before most of my friends, and I have always felt most comfortable when the girls are supported rather than left on their own to succumb to the effects of gravity. Letting them hang free would attract attention not to mention the back pain that would come from carrying around their weight without help. 

Now, I wouldn’t want anyone to think that my full-throated endorsement of the braless trend is in any way meant as a dismissal of the back-pain issue. As a dedicated, lifelong proponent of seeing as much exposed and/or free-swinging breastal real estate as is humanly possible—BUT, at the same time, as a man whose beloved late wife was an honest double-D her own astonishingly fine self—I must acknowledge that this is a very real, umm, sore spot for a lot of women.

Nonetheless, I remain staunchly all for the mass unleashing of dem puppies, just as fast as it can be made to happen. Sorry, ladies, I just can’t help it. I might be old, but I ain’t THAT old. The depressing irony here is, of course, that it’s the gals sporting the full shirtfulls that your average eagle-eyed cis-het boobie enthusiast most hopes will forego the over the shoulder boulder holders. Life just ain’t fair, dammit.

Yes, there are pitchers attached to the above article, although most of them are of underendowed chiquitas, regrettably. Not that I care all that much either way, mind; as my old buddy Pfouts always said, all they really gotta be is tits and I’ll stand up and cheer lustily for ’em.

When I reached the close of that last piece, I was gratified to find a link to another one, which naturally I clicked on over to with a quickness.

On Wednesday, the 56-year-old supermodel shared a video of herself standing under a beautiful waterfall while wearing a string blue bikini that showed off her toned abs. The camera then pans up to show the towering cliff and returns to Porizkova who is all smiles as the water runs through her hair. In her caption, she explained the story behind how she came across the waterfall.

Fans flooded the comments in awe of both the stunning model and waterfall.

“This is so beautiful. Glad you found your way out of the jungle! This country is so awesome. Thanks for sharing a glimpse of it,” a fan wrote.

“Forever young,” someone said.

“You look incredible!!” another person added.

Know what? That she does. That, she damned sure does. But you don’t have to take my word for it.


What, you thought I WASN’T gonna embed the vidya? Not a chance, friend.

After that one, there was a link to yet another titty-related story about Gillian Anderson’s recent vow that she would “never wear a bra again,” which would have made me happy as some clams ten-fifteen years back when she still looked amazing. Now…not so much, to be up-front about it. Gillian says, “I’m sorry, but I don’t care if my breasts reach my belly button.” Unfortunately, from what I’ve seen of her lately they may very well have already, which I’m pretty danged sorry about myself.

The ground-level view

If you’ve noticed that what the people Salena Zito calls “our cultural narrative-makers” are reporting is quite often at odds with your own daily meatspace reality, particularly life as she is lived in small-town and rural America, well, it ain’t just your imagination. Since this is a relatively short piece and there’s no way to do it justice with some niggardly copy ‘n’ pastery, I’m just gonna repost the whole thing, with my apologies to Ms Zito and the good folks at American Greatness for the misappropriation. It’s an important story she’s telling, I think, and deserves to be brought before as wide an audience as possible.

Seeing America from the Ground
OTTAWA, Ohio—This is not a story about politics. Instead, it is a story about America and how sometimes, you can discover something new when you try to absorb the country’s character one mile at a time and when you take in a place on its own terms and not simply the terms of wherever you came from.

A couple of weeks ago, a native Long Islander who has called New York City his home for half a dozen years took his first trip to the Midwest for a news assignment to discuss what he found different about the way of life out here.

He flew to both Chicago and Detroit to learn about this foreign land.

The social media criticism of the resulting story was swift and brutal. The piece wasn’t any worse than the typical story flyover country folk read about themselves. But the oddest thing was that he tried to find the “Midwest” solely in the big cities of Chicago and Detroit. The true measure of the Midwest begins somewhere near the Pennsylvania state line.

Had he driven the 21 hours and 18 minutes it would take on the back roads between New York City and Chicago, he would have had one heck of a story to write about the country and the Midwest.

Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania, is a beautiful town surrounded by the mountains of Pisgah Ridge and is dotted with architectural styles that range from Federalist, Greek Revival, Romanesque Revival, and Queen Anne to Richardsonian Romanesque. How the former town of Mauch Chunk was renamed for the Native American sports legend is, in microcosm, the story of this town: the ingenuity of civic leaders who deeply care about preserving a place in a changing world.

Then, at the Ohio-Pennsylvania border, by some measures the official threshold of the Midwest, he would have found himself in Ashtabula, Ohio. There, he could have begun his education as to how the Great Lakes Midwest has struggled and adapted to the tides of progress and technology that have stripped it from its robust industrial past as a major port city and railroad hub.

Deep poverty, crime, and despair, associated with the collapsed inner-city neighborhoods of Chicago and Detroit, would have greeted him in a different form had he driven down Lincoln Highway and found himself in Ford Heights, Illinois. Once a blue-collar, middle-class black suburb, Ford Heights has died so hard, it has been consistently the poorest suburb in America since the beginning of this century.

It’s also one of the most dangerous places in the state. The violent crime rate is so high, it is unimaginable to not be a victim of crime if you live here.

I remember the first time I came through this town nearly a decade ago and found a makeshift altar on the side of an abandoned gas station lined with bottles of hard liquor, candles, a wilted red rose and the word “love” spelled out with decals. I wept for all of the loss that happened here. A visitor here, with his or her eyes open, learns quickly that deindustrialization is colorblind in sowing despair.

For the majority of my career as a journalist, I have had the opportunity to report on this country from the vantage point of taking the back roads to get from point A to point B for whatever assignment I was given.

I found early in my career in covering politics that parachuting into a city for an event or an interview or a rally or an election gave me little understanding of what was happening in the region. Yet if I made my way there, taking the back roads, I was able to see how things were changing—for better or worse.

When I stopped to talk to people, I learned early on that listening was much more important than talking and that my duty was not to report their stories from my perspective or experiences but instead from theirs.

The story of America isn’t exclusively the story that comes from the perspective of larger cities. Unfortunately, it often appears that way because those are the bases of our cultural narrative-makers: news organizations, institutions, academia, think tanks, major-league sports, and entertainment.

They are so disconnected from most places that it would astound them if they took the time to get on the road and ask them how they feel about the issues of the day. They don’t want their police departments defunded. They want their bridges and roads fixed and their water to be clean. They don’t want critical race theory jammed down their children’s throats. They are horrified at how political the military has become and are worried about the long-lasting impact of the crisis at the border.

They are good neighbors. They love God and aren’t ashamed to show it as much as they like pickles in their beer and ranch dressing on everything.

Whether you take a ride for half an hour, half a day, an entire week, or even a month, there is more good than not out here in this country, despite what you may read in the New York Times or the Washington Post; it cannot be seen or smelt or heard or felt with a mask on in an airplane. It can be experienced if you take the time.

As the saying goes, you can’t report on a country you’ve never been to yourself. Zito, bless her heart, has long been doing the job MFM “journalists” just won’t do. Kudos to her for that.

Back in my road-dog days, there was an outfit from Chicago called Three Blue Teardrops. They were briefly label-mates of ours; we played with ’em a bunch, stayed at their house a few times when we were playing Chi-town, and got to be very good friends with the guys. Hell, we even covered some of their songs, one of them being this ‘un:



Another 3BT tune we did:



According to 3BT’s singer/guitarist Dave Sisson, they were once being hollered at during a show to play that one, and Dave flatly refused to do it. When I asked him why he’d done that, since the song had always been one of their most reliable late-night house-bringer-downers, he told me he considered our version so good as to be the very last word on it, and that he now thought of “Long Hard Night” as a Belmont Playboys song. I was flabbergasted by that one.

Now, the reason I bring the Teardrops up at all is that when they were out on the road, they always went with what I considered an ingenius approach: routing and timing everything to allow for taking those side-roads and byways Zito talks about above, rather than the frantic, get-there-quick-as-you-can interstate dash much more common among harried, hungover road warriors. Whenever our paths would cross, Dave and his crew would wax rhapsodic about having visited the Cadillac Ranch in Texas, or seeing the World’s Biggest Ball of Twine, or what have you. They NEVER took the interstate. For the Teardrops, see, touring wasn’t only about doing shows, making money, selling CDs, or getting your music in front of as many disparate audiences as you could. It was also about enjoying the ride—about experiencing as much of Real America as they could squeeze in, between gigs.

That had never occurred to me before Dave told me about their way of doing things, and after he did I was kinda envious. For instance, the BPs drove within shouting distance of Gettysburg I don’t even know how many times…but never did we have enough time to make a stop and tour the battlefield, which every one of us in that van would LOVED to have done. Hell, my brother even drove up there on his own hook once to do the tour. But I’ve never been, and almost certainly never will now.

Three Blue Teardrops had it right, as does Zito. The true American story can’t be found on TeeWee, the internet, or the interstate highways. It’s out there still, but you gotta take the backroads to get there.

1

Pay heed or die

Some serious sagacity from one of contemporary America’s most perspicacious, sober, and capable writers: Claire Wolf.

Over the years, when people have asked me, “Is it time yet, Claire?” my response has always been something like this: It may be moral to ‘shoot the bastards’ who kill freedom, but this isn’t the time. It doesn’t make tactical or strategic sense. Violence now will only make things much, much worse.

That’s still my strong conviction. To any members of the Deep State trolling the ‘Net desperately searching for those elusive “domestic terrorists” they’re so determined to locate invent: I’m a useless target for you. I don’t advocate violence except in self-defense and I dread seeing anybody, especially freedomistas, start a shooting war.

My hope is, as always, that a bloated, overreaching government will ultimately undermine itself and fall non-violently, as the Soviet Union did. It already seems well on its way.

But lately I’ve been asking myself if perhaps I’m in denial about the depth and urgency — and the possibilities — of our situation.

—-

I’ve been reading the book Comrade X sent me, American Insurgents, American Patriots by T.H. Breen. It focuses on the way ordinary citizens drove the colonies toward revolution, ultimately forcing the more famous leaders to step up and lead.

A large part of it so far concerns the Intolerable Acts and public outrage over them.

Many histories of the Revolution, IIRC, trace a steady growth of resistance from the Stamp Act through the Townshend Acts through the Boston Massacre through the Boston Tea Party through the Intolerable Acts to Lexington and Concord and on to the Declaration of Independence. Maybe so, but Breen positions the Intolerable Acts as the straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back. What Britain accurately but inadequately called the Coercive Acts turned ordinary, respectable farmers, lawyers, craftsmen, and housewives from angry — but loyal! — British colonists into an outraged force of active, uncompromising, and sometimes ruthless American insurgents.

One thing that struck me as I read was that both sides labored under delusions in the months leading up to the passage of the Acts in the spring of 1774. After the Boston Tea Party on December 16, 1773, American colonists, especially in Massachusetts, held their breath. They knew punishment would come, but not what form it would take. Because most information about British politics arrived in the form of imported and re-posted newspaper articles, colonists believed the British people were sympathetic to their cause and therefore that punishment would be limited and probably focused only on the guilty.

That was their delusion. Or one of them. They also held a long-cherished a belief that they were the legal, intellectual, and moral equal of any Englishmen, and that their fellow Englishmen saw them in the same light as they saw themselves.

They didn’t realize how implacably — if ineptly — British power brokers were against them. They didn’t realize that much of the English public, and especially the elite, looked down on them as being barely steps above the “savages” they lived among. They were, in short, viewed as the “deplorables,” “bitter clingers,” and “neanderthals” of their day.

While colonists waited and held high hopes, the government of King George III and Lord North decided to crush Boston by closing its harbor and place all of proud, self-governing Massachusetts under the direct supervision of agents of the crown. Listening only to their own self-interested contacts, parliament, lords, and king concluded that a) the ignorant rabble of Boston could be easily starved into submission and that b) nobody outside of Boston would step up in defense.

British authorities assumed the citizens of rural Massachusetts would blame Boston troublemakers, not the British government, for any problems that befell them as a result of the Coercive Acts (which the short-sighted British never considered might be intolerable, because subjects would be forced at gunpoint to tolerate them). Furthermore, and fatally, they assumed residents of the other 12 forever-squabbling colonies would regard the whole mess as a local New England matter and wouldn’t defend their neighbors or, heaven forbid, any general principles of liberty.

Those were their delusions.

While the colonists quickly realized how wrongly they’d judged the British government, the British government never did quite get A Clue about how it had misjudged the colonists.

From the moment the Intolerable Acts were brought across the Atlantic, the colonists were roused into such radical action that British authority was virtually demolished outside of cities, at least in New England. From late spring 1774 to April 19, 1775, resistance was fierce, spreading, and increasingly organized. Yet even once the shooting war began on that fateful spring day, some British officials and loyalists were shocked, truly shocked, that mere colonists had the temerity to shoot at British soldiers. (I saw statements in evidence of this stunned cluelessness at Minuteman National Park during my visit.)

British authorities and functionaries had been warned. They had been subjected to years of mostly polite resistance, followed by a year of decidedly impolite resistance. Yet many simply couldn’t believe it when Americans not only stood their ground against the greatest army in the world, but crouched behind stone walls and emerged from boulder-strewn hillsides to wage a new kind of — unsporting! unfair! — warfare against their smug, conventional, and “superior” masters.

Both sides began in denial. One side rapidly shook off denial and acted accordingly. The other — hidebound in its conventionality, its authority, and its certainty of rightness — couldn’t get over its delusions.

—-

Ours is very unlike the situation of our colonial forebears. They knew each other. They were neighbors, fellow parishioners, fellow militiamen, fellow small-town residents, sharers of mutual interests. They hugely outnumbered their would-be rulers, who had to cross an ocean to impose their will. They shared pride in self-government, in self-sufficiency (yet also in their economic contributions to the British homeland), in their historic rights. They aimed to be beholden to nobody. They eschewed debt. They would have found government handouts repellent, if they thought of them at all.

Unlike moderns, the insurgent colonists had more spies operating within British ranks than the British ever managed to insert into their ranks. Before the shooting began, they faced a limited number of British government officials in their midst and were able to intimidate and unseat them with sheer force of numbers that seem incredible to us, looking back on the sizes of the towns and villages of the day. They knew who the ardent loyalists and traitors in their midst were and were able to keep an eye on them as crises heated up.

We have no such advantages. We have the disadvantages of being under an extreme authoritarian — now wannabe totalitarian — government that is not only thick in our midst, but which oppresses with overwhelming numbers, with bevvies of armed agents from random agencies, and with unthinkable surveillance and control capabilities. And this coercive monstrosity is abetted by a populace that it has largely custom-schooled, propagandized, and above all bought off with virtually limitless supplies of funny money. This is a populace highly disinclined to bite the hand that feeds.

Anybody who imagines they can rise up and “shoot the bastards” now and gain the widespread public support any insurgency needs to succeed is delusional.

Yet…sometimes the “wrong” time to rise up turns by fate into the exact right time to rise up. And its hard to tell when the wrong time is truly, disastrously wrong and simply brings more oppression and when the wrong time is ripe to become right.

Out of so many lessons from the history of our Founding that Real Americans would benefit from studying closely, Claire has just spelled out the most vital one of all. We ignore it, and the others, at our mortal peril.

(Via WRSA)

You’ll LOVE him when he’s annoyed

Our pestilential victim classes have Francis waxing…annoyed.

Perhaps we should go in the other direction: toward individual aspects of nuisance that can be identified and fought on the micro level. Everyone has a few he’s particularly un-fond of. Just now, at the top of my list is a huge (150 lb.) Newfoundland puppy named Joy who sheds continuously and frequently demands that I put one or both of my hands in her mouth. Unfortunately, she’s too cute to remain annoyed with for very long.

But slightly above the level of Joy we have the great American Panoply of Victims. Great God in heaven, how I despise people who seek attention, fortune, and privileges by claiming to be victims of this or that. Yet these days they seem to be everywhere.

Women: “victims” of a bio-social arrangement that has led to them being protected, cared for, even pampered by the male half of Mankind. (Shut up about the word Mankind, bitch; you can use whatever words you prefer at your next hen party.) Meanwhile, men do all the dirty, unpleasant, and life-threatening jobs while you whine about being “oppressed” by the “patriarchy.”

Negroes: “victims” of a society that has bent itself into a pretzel – not one of those Philadelphia-style straight pretzel sticks; the twisty ones – striving to improve the economic, political, and social conditions of the melanin-oversupplied. “Structural racism,” you say? Damned right – structured in your favor, DeShawn and LaShondra. You’ve tested our patience to the limit. Go just a little further, why dontcha?

Homosexuals: “victims” of a society that has awarded them above-average incomes, high places in the arts and entertainment fields, and innumerable perches from which to claim – simultaneously! – that “we’re born that way” and “we’re proud to be ‘gay.’” All the while evangelizing to young boys that “you’ve got to try it before saying you don’t like it.” One more “Gay Pride” parade that features nudity and public sex acts, and I might just unpack the Barrett M82 and the emergency package of Oreo Double-Stufs®. There’s this really nice clock tower I’ve been meaning to climb…

Muslims: Viktor Orban, where are you when we need you?

I could go on. Be grateful that I’ve stopped here.

Grateful? The hell you say. Frankly, I’d rather you hadn’t, but can readily understand why you would need to. No sense putting oneself at risk of a stroke or fit of apoplexy, after all. They ain’t worth it.

I could add a few more to Fran’s list, and maybe I will at some point. But it strikes me that—excepting the Mooselimbs, who are a big ol’ basket of primordial, full-strength Hopeless—the aforementioned groups all have something in common, as would any candidates I might come up with to expand the list. This commonality also happens to be the selfsame trait that makes them so witheringly tiresome: they’re all liberals, Leftists, whatthehellever you prefer to call them. As I’ve often insisted regarding Da Joooze, the real problem with these head lice isn’t so much their gender, their ethnicity, or their sexual orientation; it’s the gawddamned Leftism.

Which unsavory trait, unsurprisingly, is also what drives them to make human afflictions of themselves, instead of just leaving everybody else alone and tending to their own knitting like decent, civilized non-Leftists usually do. Just fix the Leftism, and viola! We can all get back to living together in relative comity again, and won’t be nearly so miserable.

3
1

Great Recession redux

Arthur Sido says it ain’t gonna reset itself, y’know.

Something I return to again and again is that most of our fellow Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike, view politics in a deeply skewed manner. Most garden variety liberals think that Big Business is bad and we need more government to restrain it. Most NormieCons think Big Government is bad and we need more free markets to prosper. What neither side gets is that Big Business and Big Government are the same damn thing. Big Government loves Big Business because Big Business enriches politicians. Big Business loves Big Government because the dot gov types help Big Business to be more profitable. The last thing Big Business wants are free markets. They want state controlled markets that give them advantages in return for political donations. At Executive Board meetings for the National Housing Conference, non-profit types and corporate shills sit side by side and figure out ways to loot the American tax payer.

We are told that initiatives like using Freddie and Fannie to “help” low income Americans is a matter of “justice” and “equity”. The article twice mentions the “the racial wealth gap” as if giving blacks mortgages they can’t or won’t repay will make them wealthier. How exactly does it increase wealth to have blacks and mestizos getting mortgages that they end up defaulting on, thus making their poor credit even worse? Encouraging them to be responsible with credit? That would help. This won’t do anything to help them and in most respects will make things worse. 

What it will do is vastly improve the profit of the major banks and mortgage lenders who will make shitty loans and then dump them onto Freddie and Fannie, and ultimately the American tax payer. In return, these banks and businesses will shower contributions on the politicians who made this windfall possible. As I pointed out before in Everyone Else Should Pay For My Poor Decision Making!, the top leaders in both parties tend to have a lot of campaign cash coming from the financial services sector. If you think that banks and investment firms are giving Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell alike millions in campaign contributions without a firm understanding that no matter which party is in power, the banks are protected, then you are kidding yourself. 

You can see the end result of this from where we stand today. It doesn’t take a crystal ball, just a modicum of awareness. Lots and lots of crappy mortgages being issued to people who can’t handle them. Many or most of those will go into default and the tax-payers will be on the hook, which will be wrapped up into more make-believe money. Of course since “low-income” is often code for “not White”, there will be Congressional hearings and legislation to bail out these good folk who got in over their heads through no fault of their own. More money will flow to help keep them in their homes, magical bullshit money printed up out of thin air. 

With a finite supply of homes and skyrocketing lumber prices making new home construction very expensive, we will have a bunch of new buyers in the marketplace looking to purchase homes. This increases demand and that will in turn cause prices to rise even faster. Next will come pressure to intervene in the home construction business to encourage faster construction. We already saw that in the quote from the article: “…expanding investment that supports the construction of multifamily rental properties”. “Investment” in this case is a fancy way of saying “tax breaks and government subsidies to build apartments and housing”. Groups like the National Association Of Home Builders will certainly support making “investments” as well as making it easier for people to get mortgages. That is where the real power moves are happening. Biden eating ice cream or empty blustering from politicians on C-SPAN? That is meaningless. Where things are really getting done are behind the scenes with regulators, congressional committee staff and lobbyists jockeying for position at the Fed Gov trough, all trying to stick their snouts in the sweet, sweet magical money flow. 

Getting screwed in the deal? Us. Housing prices skyrocketing, inflation spiking. Housing is a huge part of the economy. Not everyone has an iPhone but just about everyone has to have a place to live. 

This is all part of the plan. To enact the Great Reset, things have to be a widespread dumpster fire. People living in a decent society aren’t going to live in the pod. What better way to throw a society into chaos than to mess with the housing market that impacts everyone? Not to mention inflation being another tool for the Powers That Be to accelerate the Great Reset, there will be more on that later. 

While sane people look at this move, which not only seeks to replicate the disaster of the Great Recession but to double down, and wonder what the hell they are thinking, it is critical to understand that torpedoing the economy is not an unforeseen effect, it is the whole point.

Annnnd bingo. In fact, that’s true of so many things happening to and around us these days it’s hard to keep track of them all. But if you still think these nefarious shitweasels aren’t working a Plan here, you need to think again.

Recent Comments

Comments policy

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit. Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't. Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

Shameless begging

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:

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

"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." — Daniel Webster

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.” – Frank Zappa

“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.” - John Adams

"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton

"I predict that the Bush administration will be seen by freedom-wishing Americans a generation or two hence as the hinge on the cell door locking up our freedom. When my children are my age, they will not be free in any recognizably traditional American meaning of the word. I’d tell them to emigrate, but there’s nowhere left to go. I am left with nauseating near-conviction that I am a member of the last generation in the history of the world that is minimally truly free." - Donald Surber

"The only way to live free is to live unobserved." - Etienne de la Boiete

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid." — Dwight D. Eisenhower

"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

"There is no better way to stamp your power on people than through the dead hand of bureaucracy. You cannot reason with paperwork." - David Black, from Turn Left For Gibraltar

"The limits of tyranny are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." - Frederick Douglass

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

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.” - Ronald Reagan

"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

Best of the best

Neutral territory

Alternatives to shitlib social media:

Fuck you

Kill one for mommy today! Click to embiggen

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

Contact


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

Copyright © 2021