Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Category: Immivasion

Invade the world, invite the world

“Impenetrability! That’s what I say!”

Posted on      by     

More on birthright citizenship.

The Supreme Court has stated — repeatedly! — that the “main object” of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment “was to settle the question … as to the citizenship of free negroes,” making them “citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside.”

Democrats, the entire media and House Speaker Paul Ryan seem to have forgotten the Civil War. They believe that, immediately after a war that ended slavery, Americans rose up as one and demanded that the children of illegals be granted citizenship!

Give me a scenario — just one scenario — where the post-Civil War amendments would be intended to grant citizenship to the kids of Chinese ladies flying to birthing hospitals in California, or pregnant Latin Americans sneaking across the border in the back of flatbed trucks.

Whether the children born to legal immigrants are citizens is controversial enough. But at least there’s a Supreme Court decision claiming that they are — U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark. That’s “birthright citizenship.”

It’s something else entirely to claim that an illegal alien, subject to deportation, can drop a baby and suddenly claim to be the parent of a “citizen.”

This crackpot notion was concocted by liberal zealot Justice William Brennan and slipped into a footnote as dicta in a 1982 case. “Dicta” means it was not the ruling of the court, just a random aside, with zero legal significance.

Left-wing activists seized on Brennan’s aside and browbeat everyone into believing that anchor babies are part of our great constitutional heritage, emerging straight from the pen of James Madison.

Because of course they did. When the Through-The-Looking-Glass Left uses the Constitution, it means just what they choose it to mean, neither more nor less. The question is, as always, which is to be master—that’s all.

Share

Build the dam wall!

Posted on      by     

Hate speech.

There seems no way that the caravan of 4,000–14,000 migrants approaching our southern border is going to end without blood being shed. There probably will be blood. And, while the debate over “man-made climate change” is far from over, the debate over The Wall is finally over:

The Wall finally must be built. Just as a dam serves as a last-ditch physical barrier to prevent or control a flood, The Wall now is revealed as the only logistical way to create a barrier to prevent or control a flood of Illegals. So, as an Orthodox Rabbi who must restrict certain words I use, it is not inappropriate for me to say: Build the Dam Wall already!

Let it be clear: If we let them in — and, yes, they are people with feelings and sensitivities and loves and hopes and dreams — then there will be another Caravan after it, and next time it will be a Caravan of 10-15,000 sensitive lovers and hopers and dreamers. And three months later it will be another Caravan. And then another. What $38 million cash raised and wasted in one calendar quarter could not buy for Beto O’Rourke and his Kennedyesque DUI driving record and his Kennedyesque attempt to flee from the scene, the hordes will solve: Texas really will turn bold shades of “overnight blue.” Arizona will turn blue. Alabama and Mississippi will turn blue. North Dakota and Montana and Idaho will turn blue. We will lose this country — exactly as the Democrat playbook seeks. Despite their losing the male vote, the Caucasian female vote, the married woman vote, the blue-collar union worker vote, the Democrats simply will import hordes of new voters to seize power.

It is the same Leftist strategy as their new dream of stacking the federal courts: if they cannot gain majorities fairly under the established rules, then just change the rules by stacking the numbers. The Left’s model is California. With the exception of Donald Trump, we elect Presidents who either have held prior significant elected office (e.g., United States Senators, Congressional representatives, Governors, Vice Presidents) or who have been heroic generals who won major American wars (e.g., George Washington, William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, U.S. Grant, Ike) or both (e.g., Andrew Jackson, James Garfield, Teddy Roosevelt). Not all that long ago, California gave us Sen. Richard Nixon and Gov. Ronald Reagan, whose elected offices entitled them to reach the Presidency. Today, with California’s “jungle primary” that effectively limits most statewide elections to races between two Democrats, neither Nixon nor Reagan would even be on the ballot for statewide office. So Reagan never would have become a Governor and, therefore, not a President. Great and successful California governors like George Deukmejian and Pete Wilson never would have been elected. Instead, we have a paltry polity defined by Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, and other “jungle primary” arrivals. Just consider the drek from which Californians now will choose a U.S. Senator: Dianne Feinstein or Kevin Leon (who later changed his named to “de León” to get more Spanish votes).

If the Democrats succeed in eviscerating our southern border — and that is their plan: DACA, catch-and-release, abolish ICE — they can overcome a century of their losing the support of Americans who once trusted them — blue-collar ethnic Catholics, union workers, married women, seniors. Instead, they can win just by importing tens of millions of new voters unschooled in American values, clueless as to the Constitution, knowing and caring nothing of our culture and higher purposes. Between suffering Illegals, encouraging cemetery turnout, and granting suffrage to felons, they can win back lost numbers. It is a sensible strategy.

The incoming throngs have no jobs, few marketable skills, no assets. No family or friends vouching for them or guaranteeing that they will not impose a burden on American taxpayers. They arrive expecting and receiving free schooling, publicly guaranteed taxpayer-sponsored health care and free hospital access, and every imaginable free public service. Meanwhile, the children of long-time California taxpayers find that they cannot get into University of California schools that have set aside protected seats for the undocumented. The Illegals further receive food stamps and welfare, and they even are assured that these are not “charitable hand-outs” but “entitlements”: It’s OK, you’re entitled. Meanwhile, virtually every California city is pocked with tent cities of homeless residents, with San Francisco streets reeking of urine, feces, and syringes, and with epidemic outbreaks in Los Angeles of Third World diseases like typhus. It is only natural that Illegals will align electorally with the Democrats who buy them off for a generation or two with the taxpayer-funded goodies that will flow their way.

This cannot be permitted to spread. This just has to stop.

Indeed it must. Our ace in the hole? Trump himself.

The most fascinating feature of the Trump era is the President’s uncanny ability to bilk the media into providing coverage that confirms the percipience of his political positions. Their 24/7 coverage of the migrant caravan, complete with images that couldn’t be better for his stance on illegal immigration had they been produced by the White House Press Office, is little short of an in-kind contribution to the GOP. Combined with the incredibly irresponsible Democratic open borders platform, the media are materially improving Trump’s approval numbers and reducing the chances that the Republicans will lose either house of Congress next week.

The media reflexively supply the public with countless images of people marching toward our border, breaking down barriers and fighting with Mexican police, and have no idea that they’re proving Trump right. The optics of the caravan are so bad for the open borders crowd, in fact, that even Trump-haters like Andrew Sullivan are advising the Democrats to adopt a more rational position if they want to prosper in the near future. He points out that the pervasive influence of social media worldwide allows ever more people to learn what life is like here and encourages them to head our way. He then spells out the political consequences for the Dems:

As we can see right now in front of our eyes, elections can turn on this.…Until one Democratic candidate declares that he or she will end illegal immigration, period, shift legal immigration toward those with skills, invest in the immigration bureaucracy, and enforce the borders strongly but humanely, Trump will continue to own this defining policy issue in 2020.

The Democrats have, thus far, failed to listen to such advice. Instead, they collectively call for the abolition of ICE and change the subject to fictitious Republican threats to their health care. They seem to believe that, combined with the usual whoppers about the GOP’s dark conspiracy to cut Social Security and Medicare, this will allow them to escape the illegal immigration issue. The Democrats are trying to divert voter attention from a huge problem they can see on their television screens every night by yammering about pre-existing conditions. Trump, meanwhile, is exploiting this blunder by reminding the electorate why immigration is broken.

As with their Kavanaugh debacle, the Democrat Socialists seem not to realize just what a catastrophe they’ve created for themselves here. Can there be anyone so blind as to think it coincidence that each and every one of their recent “causes” and campaigns, if brought to fruition, would do grave injury to this nation?

By pimping this “caravan” of American-flag-burning indigent immivaders—denouncing this country every step of the way while demanding their nonexistent “right” to cross our border illegally and start immediately leeching on Uncle Sugar for their subsistence—they’ve painted a very ugly picture showing what they’re really all about, for all Real Americans to see: destruction, disorder, and dragging this country to its knees for good.

Share

Birthright citizenship: another Trump win

Posted on      by     

I’ll just let one of Aesop’s commenters say it:

And just like that… he has Democrats insisting that we follow the Constitution.

Masterful.

Ain’t it just. It’s a joy to watch the man work.

All ears update! Tell me more about this mysterious “Constitution” thing of which you’re so suddenly fond, libtards.

That the 14th amendment — the centerpiece of the Reconstruction Amendmentspassed and ratified under the Johnson and Grant administrations, but proposed and voted in by the Radical Republicans in Congress — applies specifically and only to the newly freed slaves is clear not only from its historical context, but to its very language…

The key phrase is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The Court later ruled, in the Wong Kim Ark decision (1898), that children born to foreign diplomats, or born to enemy soldiers occupying U.S. territory, were not protected under the 14th, as they were clearly not under American jurisdiction. (Neither were American Indians, until 1924.) But then, neither are illegal alien invaders, who openly proclaim their contempt for American immigration law even as they march toward our southern border.

Further, our immigration laws were designed for lawful immigration, with some carve-outs for genuine refugees and asylum-seekers. What they were not designed to do is absorb a calculated onslaught of lawbreakers with no beneficent intent; instead, these people are very clear about their purpose: to manipulate the loopholes of the laws, force entry, earn money, and send it back home to their “countries” of origin — three of which (Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador) are among the most savage and violent places on earth. America has no domestic need for these people, and no moral obligation to admit them, especially under these circumstances. There is no war ongoing in their homelands (the violence is entirely of their own making, and cultural history) and economic “refugees” can apply through proper channels like everybody else. America is a sovereign nation, not an international charity.

Not if the Left has its way.

Unhinged update! Living rent-free in their empty heads.

The president should be given no ground on this issue. After so many years of peddling so many racist and xenophobic falsehoods—about former president Obama’s birthplace, about walls and refugees and caravans—Trump cannot be permitted to use a lie about the Constitution to advance his nationalist crusade.

If he abuses his position in an effort to undermine the protections afforded by an amendment to the Constitution that bars any abridging of the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, the president must be immediately checked and balanced by responsible members of Congress and by the courts. The response from New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood office was appropriately blunt: “The Constitution is clear. If President Trump’s pre-Election Day ploy to unconstitutionally end birthright citizenship moves forward, we will see him in court.”

If Trump persists in this lawless endeavor, he should be introduced to an essential requirement of the Constitution. Article 2, Section 4, of the founding document states that “The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Gee, wonder how the flapping, foaming fucktards at the Nation feel about the Second, now that they’ve conjured a reverence for the Constitution all of a sudden.

Shitlibs shamelessly quoting the Constitution at us—even more fantastical, insisting on a strict-constructionist interpetration of its words after all these years of “living document” horseshit, too. Did you ever think you’d live to see the day?

Just the facts update! It’s not that they don’t know anything. It’s that so much of what they know isn’t so.

The United States and Canada are the only two “developed” countries that retain unrestricted birthright citizenship laws. While many Latin American and Caribbean nations also maintain lenient naturalization laws, it is important to understand them in their historical context. Those laws came about not out of a liberal exigency to bestow citizenship onto foreigners, but rather as a mechanism of empire-building designed subdue indigenous populations by growing the number of Europeans in their midst. “The birthright laws in South America have remained due to low immigration numbers,” explains John Skrentny, a sociologist at the University of California, San Diego.

In other words, if Scots-Irish Americans began caravanning to Mexico, demanding jobs and welfare, and driving up crime rates, odds are good that Mexico would turn “nativist” and amend its constitution to decrease the liberality of their naturalization laws. Indeed, every other Western country that has experienced mass immigration has amended or repealed their naturalization laws in response.

Tony Mecia of The Weekly Standard claims that the Supreme Court’s 1898 decision in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark provides a defense of birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens, while the Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh asserts there is “little legal debate over the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Not true. Not true at all.

Nowrasteh glosses over part of the amendment that specifies about “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” and takes it to mean that “immigrants, both legal and illegal, are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States government, jurisdiction being a fancy legal word for ‘power.’ Any other interpretation would mean that the U.S. government didn’t have legal power over tourists or illegal immigrants here, a crazy notion.”

Is that crazy? The citizenship clause, adopted in 1868, was never meant to extend to those with allegiances to another nation, i.e., non-citizens. It was the Wong Kim Ark case that expanded the constitutional mandate at the end of the 19th century to confer citizenship unto the children of legal, permanent residents.

Read all of it; there’s plenty more supporting evidence, including Supreme Court precedent and quotes from the architect of the citizenship clause himself. And then there’s this:

Moreover, the claim that Trump is out to “reverse centuries of American tradition,” asserted by the likes of John Yoo and Angelica Alvarez, is bunk. As far as anyone can tell, unrestricted birthright citizenship for all children born on U.S. soil began sometime in the mid-1960s, not “centuries” ago.

An institution that does not exist cannot be undermined, nor can such a farcical practice that is younger than the president himself constitute “centuries of American tradition.”

So basically, then, it’s the usual story: everything they say is a damned perfidious lie.

Share

Problem, meet solution

Posted on      by     

The boy’s a damned genius.

You don’t fly 1000 miles away to bomb a refugee column, even if it’s 98% military-aged male invaders. If we ever do that, it gets done when they’re 20 miles away, not 1000 (and after the mid-term elections, if ever). This nonsense is just a sideshow to bigger things.

But if we decided to seize a one-mile-wide buffer 2000 miles long on their side, and invest it with troops while we build the wall, that would be reasonable.

Seizing all remittances to those countries automatically, as the fruit of illegal activity, and contributing to terrorism, would also stop this nonsense in about a heartbeat, fund the military action, and hit those countries where they live. In Mexico alone, it’s some good fraction of their yearly GDP, and if it were gone, they’d be in open revolution in about a week.

It would also cost $0 to implement Monday morning.
Demanding Congress permanently outlaw the practice to those countries would similarly be reasonable.

Telling Mexico if they want that brand new trade treaty to stand they’d better end this nonsense is also correct.
If they want to see their food prices quadruple, all they need to do is ignore us.
Once again, that’d be the cue for open revolution in Mexico.

Which would make a military buffer both prudent and necessary.
It means we could then start rounding up illegals as enemy aliens, and deport them permanently over that wall, once and for all.

27 problems solved, by Friday next, at that point, and without bombing anyone or mostly without firing a single shot.

Works for me, right down the line. Diplomad puts some more meat on dem bones:

It is a hostile act, an overtly hostile act, by the government of Mexico and those of El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. The so-called march northward is clearly funded by somebody with deep pockets and good organizational skills, and abetted by officials in those countries. The immediate victims, of course, are thousands of poor people being lied to, exploited, and put in great physical danger.  We see pictures of marchers painting swastikas on American flags and then burning them, and waving flags of Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador at the head of long columns of marchers. These people apparently so hate racist, xenophobic America, and feel so patriotic about their home countries, that they are putting their lives at risk to head for the USA and get away from their non-sh*thole countries.  

The usual morons in the media are having a field day trying to blame these marches on Trump. I guess, in a way, Trump is to blame as under him the US economy rockets along and generates new jobs and rising wages for our workers, all of which serves as a magnet for the poor of the world. We should ask President Trump to stop winning for the USA, and that would, I assume, slow down the rate of marching. Right.

In other words, elect the Democrats and that will make the USA a much less attractive place to live for everybody. We could do that…or we could do what we should have done long ago: build the wall; change the immigration laws so that you can’t come here to mooch or work illegally; and punish the traffickers. By traffickers, by the way, I include the governments of Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, and the funders of these marches. Do what I long ago suggested, that until these countries begin to act as “friends,” use our military and other elements of national power to shut the border to all traffic in goods and people; suspend issuance of visas to nationals of those countries; and, of course, drastically reduce those nations’ diplomatic and consular presence in the USA. Yank us out of NAFTA, and tell those American companies who build their factories in Mexico, that doing so is a bad bet on the future. Prosecute any American individuals or organizations involved in funding, organizing, or leading these marches.

Beginning with one George Motherfucking Soros, Nazi collaborator, international financial criminal, and uber-destructive America-hater nonpareil. Deporting him to Hungary would be a suitable alternative, I guess, but a fair trial followed by a first-class hanging would indeed be better. But there’s also a problem—one you’d probably not expect, from a seemingly unlikely source:

In April of this year, Secretary of Defense James Mattis approved a memo ordering the deployment of up to 4,000 U.S. National Guardsmen to the southwestern border (provided that the governors of border states approve of the action and that the Department of Homeland Security reimburse the Department of Defense for its troubles). Yet, the DoD instituted such strict rules of engagement for the National Guardsmen that they’ve proven useless to the Border Patrol.

What’s more, the 800 active-duty troops that are being deployed to the border are not charged with providing physical support of the Border Patrol and National Guard. Instead, the Pentagon has opted to send its doctors, lawyers, and engineers. What do you think military doctors, engineers, and lawyers are going to do to turn back the human wave threatening America’s porous southwest? (Hint: they’re not going to physically turn back that caravan; they’re going to accommodate it in all likelihood!)

As I reported earlier this year, the Pentagon has already approved the Department of Homeland Security’s request to turn unused areas of large U.S. military bases along the southwestern border into tent cities. Clearly, the Pentagon has decided to engage in its own bit of policymaking, regardless of what the president has ordered — or what the American people want (and what the United States Constitution outlines).

Remember that treasonous op-ed in the New York Times written by an anonymous senior Trump Administration official detailing the effectiveness of #TheResistance from within the government to Trump?

Taken together, it is clear that the Pentagon today is simply going through the motions. It is as uncomfortable about physically protecting the U.S.-Mexico border as the Democratic Party is. Without a direct, inviolate command from the president explicitly ordering the Pentagon to take decisive actions to physically turn back the caravan, the Department of Defense will slow-walk and half-ass its response to this pending invasion — hiding behind process until the caravan has arrived, and there is no choice but to take the human mass in.

Just another indication that America’s biggest problems originate not beyond our own borders, but within ’em…which in turn means that President Trump, just as he’s said from the start, will not be able to solve them all by himself.

Share

Too extreme an idea?

Posted on      by     

Maybe. And then again, maybe not.

There has been a lot speculation about the Honduran Invasion over the past few weeks. The idea has been spread that it is an October surprise; that the invasion has been funded by powerful communists like George Soros. The theory has been that it is intended to damage Republicans either as a floating voting block intended to skew the elections coming up in November, or they are to create damaging optics for Republicans during the election cycle. But, what if it is intended to have a much more diabolical purpose, not before the election, but after it?

With the Democrats out of power, their prospect of impeaching Trump damaged, the Mueller witch hunt concluded without evidence to substantiate impeachment, their whole narrative destroyed, what purpose might the Honduran Invasion serve?

The answer to that is manifold and I am not interested in going into all of them or even many of them. My suggestion, based upon the typical Democrat (communist) response to being out of power, the recent invasion of up to 20,000 Hondurans with the sentiment expressed in the above picture, is that the real violence against Republican politicians and supporters of Donald Trump might begin. It is my contention that the Honduran Invasion is a fighting force being imported to do violence against citizens of the United States. Maybe not all of them will be used for this purpose, women and children have been integrated into the fighting forces as cover and subterfuge.

The value of Hondurans, Mexicans and El Salvadorans committing violence upon Trump supporters is the optics of racism that it provides to the communist narrative. Any retaliation against such violence can be easily depicted by a communist compliant MSM as racism, the Democrats favorite and most reliable smear tactic.

This mid-term election is important, not because voting solves all issues, it hardly solves any and creates more than it ever solved, but we are at a crucial time in our history, when it is being decided whether this nation capitulates totally to communism or begins the long, hard fight back to republicanism.

Right now, today, we are in a hot civil war, but it is not general, it is specific and centered largely around certain social issues. We are in a fight against the Deep State and exposing as much of it as can be is only possible with a Republican Party dominating Congress, not because Republicans are the answer, but because SOME Republicans are part of the answer.

The hot civil war will become more general once the Democrats are further diminished in their power.

You just THINK we’ve seen crazy from the Democrat Socialists already; as I’ve been saying all along, we ain’t seen NOTHING yet. As for TL’s idea about the Hondurans being a Democommie “fighting force,” that might seem a bit much to some. Myself, I am far, far beyond the point where I’m willing to put anything at all past the treasonous commie scum, or capable of being surprised by anything they might do.

Share

Showdown in the desert

Posted on      by     

Just do it.

President Donald Trump tweeted early Thursday morning that he will send troops and close the border if Mexico lets the latest caravan of thousands of migrants marching north reach the boundary between the two nations.

“The assault on our country at our Southern Border, including the Criminal elements and DRUGS pouring in, is far more important to me, as President, than Trade or the USMCA. Hopefully Mexico will stop this onslaught at their Northern Border. All Democrats fault for weak laws!” Trump said in the first of a series of impassioned tweets on the growing crisis.

Trump said that “in addition to stopping all payments to these countries, which seem to have almost no control over their population, I must, in the strongest of terms, ask Mexico to stop this onslaught — and if unable to do so I will call up the U.S. Military and CLOSE OUR SOUTHERN BORDER!…”

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) tweeted video Wednesday of what he described as cash being given to women and children to join the march. “Soros? US-backed NGOs? Time to investigate the source,” the congressman said.

Time to arrest “the source”—Soros, and you know it as well as I do—and give him a fair trial for treason, followed by a first-class hanging.

I expect Trump will be extremely reluctant to actually send troops to close the border for political reasons, which is at least somewhat understandable; he no doubt knows that such a move will in turn send hordes of dimwit Leftist agitators scampering down there too. Those enemy combatants will do their level best to interfere with those protecting our southern border by just about any means you could imagine and probably some any decent person couldn’t, up to and including violence.

Our soldiers will attempt to retain control of the situation through nonviolent means; the ROE for this situation will probably require it, actually. Nonetheless, the chances of one or more of the shitweasel protesters getting seriously hurt or even killed in such a dangerously fraught situation is by no means slim. Should such a thing happen, you can expect a sudden explosion of violent protests in urban areas across the country.

And then things get sporty. And very, very messy.

(Via Mark Tapscott)

Share

A time for choosing

Posted on      by     

Wise, and sobering, words.

We’re a hodgepodge of nations that’s at each other’s throats over six gorillion differences, all of which fall on one or the other side of the political divide between nationalists and globalists. Those divisions run through families and between friends. Talking with liberals is a waste of time for two reasons.

One, appeals to higher values and self-interest are foreign language to libs. There is no communication because we live in different worlds, like black-square and white-square bishops on the chessboard: proximate but never connecting. Namely, the Right follows Truth, the Left follows Power.

Two, it’s bad Game to try to woo them back to sanity. All it does is stroke their ego, validating liberals’ schema that they have the power, ergo moral and intellectual high ground. It’s better to freeze them out and be curt even in nonpolitical contact to flip the abuse-supplication script that they’ve become too comfortable with over the past decades of cuckservatism.

But if someone who’s on the fence approaches you in good faith, know that our differences can be worked out as long as we agree on the fundamental question. Which is:

Do you believe that immigration to this country should be increased, or reversed?

There is no splitting the difference, no middle ground. The arrow of destiny can only go in one or the other direction.

Now go look at his pictorial representation of what the choices boil down to, which is both hilarious and—like I said—sobering.

(Via WRSA)

Share

The real, the bad, and the scary

Posted on      by     

Steyn on Fukuyama.

“The fears that mass migration has stoked about cultural change” is a coy way of sidling up to the way I put it in America Alone – that culture trumps economics. Pakistanis came to Yorkshire because the mills needed workers. The mills closed anyway, but the workers stayed, and built their mosques and madrassahs. Today, as I mentioned on Tucker’s show a few weeks back, automation (and predictions that it will eliminate 30 per cent of all jobs) ends any economic rationale for mass immigration. That leaves little else to justify it except virtue-signaling. Which is more than enough, judging by the hysteria that greets anybody who seriously questions demographically transformative immigration policies. Fukuyama isn’t quite ready to concede the cultural point to Huntington, and attempts instead to sidestep it…

He has half a point here. Yes, many young western Muslims, the children and grandchildren of comparatively assimilated immigrants, choose a global Islamic “identity” for themselves. Likewise, many secular westerners choose one of the exciting and ever multiplying array of sexual “identities”. But it seems to me that both these phenomena are at least partly responses to the assault we have waged on our own culture and civilization this past half-century. Who wants to identify with a culture that reviles its own past, that blames itself for everything, that demolishes its statuary and denounces its greatest figures and insists that, while multiculturalism posits the equal value of all cultures, if you have to pick a villain pick the culture that built the modern world? In the void of modern western identity, people look elsewhere: Some find the new one-size-fits-all Islam, others find “intersexuality”.

In the end, however, one of these is real, and the other isn’t. And in those societies where the one butts up against the other (Denmark, say) the one that is real will one day steamroller the other. 

The one that considers its culture worth bothering to defend will always win, however ass-backwards, primitive, and immiserating it may be in every conceivable way. In any clash between ruthless savagery and enervated, effete, weak-kneed modernity, the way to bet couldn’t be more obvious.

Share

What it’s all about

Posted on      by     

The election is about a lot more than just this, of course. But that doesn’t mean Kurt’s latest blast of righteous rage and indignation is wrong.

If you’re cool with Americans being butchered by illegal aliens, this November you should vote Democrat. They’re certainly cool with Americans being butchered by illegal aliens. Oh, in theory they would probably prefer that the foreigners sneaking into our country in defiance of the laws we American citizens made through our elected representatives would stop butchering Americans. They don’t particularly want your kids to be butchered. They just want uncontrolled illegal immigration more than your kids’ safety. So, they’ve made a choice to be the party of illegal immigration. And the resulting body count is a price Democrats are willing to pay to replace an electorate of Normal Americans who refuse to obey.

The Democrats are the party of No Borders, of Abolish ICE, and of murdered Americans. You cannot howl and shriek in support of X yet deny that you accept the foreseeable, demonstrated consequences of X.

Now we know Mollie Tibbetts was murdered by an illegal alien. Add her name to the butcher’s bill. And who was shocked? Who said, “Gosh, that’s surprising!” Who said, “Whoa, I don’t believe it!”

No one. Because it happens all the time. Her life, like the lives of so many others, was snuffed out because our elite made a conscious choice to risk our lives to satisfy its own interests. She was just more collateral damage. We better decide in November where we stand, because a Democrat majority means this bloodbath continues.

Your daughter, shot dead in front of you on a wharf. Your son, knifed by gang members. Your daughter, murdered and dumped in an Iowa cornfield. That’s what you get if you elect Democrats, because that’s what their open borders policies enable.

But our elite can live with that. They will live with that behind their communities’ gates, where their only experience with illegal immigration is their friendly, cheap nanny and industrious, cut-rate gardener. A few lives of people the elite will never meet is a small price to pay for a massive new Democrat constituency. And they’ll happily pay it.

Am I being unfair?

Is saying this outrageous?

Go to hell.

PREACH IT, BROTHER.

We’re sick of American citizens paying checks written in blood by a Democrat Party that absolutely refuses to allow our government to do the two most basic jobs of any government – securing our country’s borders and protecting our citizenry.

Our citizenry, not foreigners. They have no right to be here. None. Those that are here stay here by our grace and at our pleasure. We are American citizens – and that includes my legal immigrant wife. This is our country. We rule, not an unaccountable elite that wants to import a more pliable electorate and a more pliable serf class to do the jobs Americans don’t want to do because the Chamber of Commerce types don’t want to pay them fairly.

No more Americans should die because of our worthless elite’s greed.

Oh, I don’t know about that; I think a LOT more Americans should die over it, actually—our worthless elites, to be specific. But to be fair, they’re not really Americans in any way that matters.

I missed posting on an earlier Schlichter screed this week, so let’s fix that now, shall we?

John Brennan, that hack, and his elite pals are supposed to get the special privilege of keeping (their security clearance). Why? As a professional courtesy. See, security clearances are things you pass out as favors or rewards, I guess, at least among the elite. Courtesy among them, nothing for you, though. You aren’t special. You’re just some guy serving his country and not turning it into a profit center on the outside. Like a sucker.

Security clearances get pulled routinely when the holder no longer needs access because the fewer people with access, the safer the info is – pretty basic stuff. But hey, we’ll take the chance on classified info spilling if it means elite jerks can get to bask in the warm light of being In The Know. It’s not like any of our betters ever got caught up in classified info shenanigans. Not Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit. Not that Towering Doofus James Comey. Not David Petreaus. And not his mistress.

Oh, wait – all of them totally did. But, of course, these elite malefactors are all in jail, because you or I would be if we did what they did. Aren’t they?

Oh, right. They aren’t. They’re special. More professional courtesy. More special rules for special people.

If we had a real media and not the world’s most pompous Democrat transcription service, the CIA’s blown Chinese spy ring disaster would be front page news but hey, Omarosa! In any case, the only consulting anyone should do with the members of this class of unmitigated failures whose incompetence brought us 9/11, Iraq, Libya, ISIS, and a future where we would all be wise to learn Mandarin, is to ask their opinion and then do the opposite – Costanza style.

Let’s look at our elite’s track record of success. Don’t worry – it won’t take long. We’re still chasing bandits in Afghanistan after nearly 17 years, the Navy can’t stop running into other people’s boats, and our best and brightest in the FBI are texting each other like teens while they try to undo the election. They can’t be bothered with things like, I don’t know, following up on warnings about psychotic freaks who get online and announce their plan to shoot up schools. Oh, and remember the 2008 economic collapse? I’m thinking you weren’t the one making bad bets with billions of dollars that brought it all tumbling down. By the way, guess how many people the feds tossed in the pokey for the 2008 meltdown that cost you and me a trillion bucks? One. Uno. A single dude.

I’m surprised there’s even one, considering that 1) Lois Lerner is still drawing a pension, and perjurer Koskinen remains a free man; 2) Eric Holder and his jug-eared moron of a former boss have faced no legal reckoning whatever for the Fast and Furious gun-running scam which resulted in hundreds of deaths, and they never will; 3) Loretta Lynch can expect no repercussions from her brazenly unethical “secret” tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton for the purpose of passing information on the scurrilously phony “investigation” of his wife’s illegal insecure server; 4) International financial criminal and Nazi collaborator George Soros has paid for neither those crimes nor his current incitement to riot, violence, and sedition via his paid rent-a-mobs and the violent anarchist revolutionaries he finances; 5) Oh, who the hell am I kidding, the list from the Obama junta alone is endless, so why bother repeating ’em all?

The very idea of referring to these swine as “elites” is beginning to frost my nuts a bit, frankly. What we’re actually talking about are:

  • Professional politicians, who are in reality no more than con artists, cheap grifters, liars, thieves, usurpers, serial sexual predators, drunks, perverts, and in some cases, outright murderers; those that shouldn’t oughta be in prison already oughta be summarily executed
  • Career bureaucrats, who are in reality feckless stumblebums too stupid or shiftless to hold a real job; petty tyrants deriving almost-sexual pleasure from indulging a sick tendency to abuse and torment far better men and women than they;
  • Thumbsuckers, rumpswabs, and butt-boys, entry-level apple-polishers who got their jobs not through ability and integrity but by kissing the right asses, and hope to work their way to the higher rungs of the Deep State ladder by more of the same
  • Federal law-enforcement and intelligence-service personnel—need I say more?

Elite? Not one of these assclowns could be trusted to walk your dog. They’re the lowest, most contemptible people America can produce, a barely-human bunch of retards, reprobates, and also-rans. They’re mouthbreathers, knuckledraggers, bullies, and out-and-out thugs; the ushers of any small-town church would think twice before passing them the collection plate on Sunday, should any one of them ever attend services for any other than purely political purposes, a la Barry Oshitstain.

Elite my ass; they’re the scum of the earth, every last man-Jack of them. Once it became a haven for our worst and dimmest, there was no way Mordor On The Potomac and the government that festers there was ever going to turn out any way other than it has.

Share

Chutzpah

Posted on      by     

My God, the BALLS on this woman.

On CNN Wednesday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was asked to comment on the heartbreaking case of Mollie Tibbetts, the Iowa teenager who was allegedly murdered by an illegal immigrant.

Rather than simply offer condolences to the Tibbetts family, Warren said they “have to remember” that it’s important for the country to focus on “real problems” like helping illegal immigrants. She then launched into a rote political diatribe lamenting the treatment of illegal aliens at the Mexican border.

Mollie Tibbetts has been separated from her mama forever because an illegal immigrant brutally murdered her. Unfortunately for Warren, there are no Democrat talking points to help her with that sad reality.

Yeah, sure, but how’s that going to help with beating us all over the head with the Democrat Socialist agenda?

Solway was right in the piece I excerpted below: they’re positively Luciferian. All they’re missing is the horns, tail, and cloven hooves. The sulfur stench they’ve definitely got covered, though; it wafts around freely every time they open their filthy yaps.

Update! Ace notes the Kermit Gosnell Strategy in full effect with the libmedia scum on this. Which in its turn brings us ’round to this: “And They Wonder Why We’re Angry.” If we weren’t, we’d be every bit as morally derelict, depraved, and despicable as they are.

Share

Trump vindicated again

Posted on      by     

SO, howzabout that horrible Trump and his unconscionable, racist, bigoted Muslim travel ban, eh? Why, the very idea that we should be wary of Muslims at all is offensive to its very…uhhh…ummm…

Never mind.

The father of a missing 3-year-old who was arrested at a New Mexico compound linked to “extremist Muslims” last week was training children to commit school shootings, court documents filed on Wednesday revealed.

Prosecutors allege Siraj Ibn Wahhaj, 39, was conducting weapons training on the compound, where 11 children were found hungry and living in squalor. They asked Wahhaj, who appeared in court on Wednesday, be held without bail.

Wahhaj is the son of a Brooklyn imam, also named Siraj Wahhaj, who was named by prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the New York Post reported.

The story goes on to get even more disgusting from there, if you can believe it.

Update! As always, the motive of these killers remains a complete mystery. Thankfully, though, CNN and AllahPress are doing the right thing to guard against our famous American Islamophobia, lest some poor innocent Mooselimb become the latest of the thousands to suffer a violent attack. Ace reports:

CNN and AP are now censoring the story to exclude the sheriff’s report that the compound is one of extremist Muslim belief.

Of course they are.

Share

Guilty of being white

Posted on      by     

They hate you. They really, really hate you.

The Democratic coalition is always on the verge of flying apart in fratricidal enmity. At the moment, for example, the media is stoking black rage toward white women, whom The New York Times is repeatedly calling by the racist slur “Becky,” for summoning the police when they feel unsafe.

The one thing the Democrats’ confederacy of the dissimilar can share is hatred of whites, or, to be precise, cisgender straight white men.

This is why the press keeps pushing endless hate hoaxes. Shameful antiwhite racist libels are the KKKrazy Glue that holds together the Democratic coalition.

To Vox readers, importing a new electorate of foreign ringers is how they intend to grind their enemies, their fellow American citizens, into the dust beneath their political chariot wheels, so it’s best not to notice what they’ve chosen to inflict upon their nation.

After all, that white Americans are slowly waking up to the fact that they don’t really want to get pushed around by newcomers just for being white merely proves that whites deserve their fate.

Klein eventually seems to endorse the stratagem offered by his favorite researcher, Jennifer Richeson: The media should lie harder to white people.

Richeson believes it would be wise for demographers to stop using terms like “majority-minority America”—after all, whites will still be a plurality, and what good can come of framing America’s trajectory in a way that leaves the single largest group feeling maximally threatened? It sounds like “a force of nonwhite people who are coming and they are working as a coalition to overturn white people and whiteness,” Richeson said, laughing. “That’s a problem!”

But for the Democrats, of course, that’s not a problem; that’s the plan.

My post title up there is swiped from an old Minor Threat song:

I’m sorry
For something that I didn’t do
Lynched somebody
But I don’t know who
You blame me for slavery
A hundred years before I was born


DAMN, but I still love that band. Anyways, and along these same lines, Thales names his Idiot Of The Week:

Self-loathing white people are some of the most disturbing people to have ever drawn breath. Drama queens might be the best way to describe them, for they obsess endlessly about things they haven’t done, they elevate petty problems to the world stage and bury major ones behind a veneer of political correctness. A white kid wearing dreadlocks is the end of the world. But recognizing that ISIS lobs gay people off of buildings for amusement is probably racism (even though, paradoxically, Islam is not a race). Sanctimony is their religion, Social Justice their crusade, and endless self-hatred their spiritual diet.

Here’s a window into the insane mind of one of these cretins: White People Have No Culture. And it cries out in the darkness of colossal ignorance for a proper fisking.

For a moment, I almost felt sorry for the author. While I generally feel quite secure in the knowledge of where I come from, who I am, and the history and culture of my ancestors, she clearly does not feel this. I could discuss this topic for hours. Today’s modern urbanite “cosmopolitans” have only the most superficial understanding of culture and history. The author knows that her knowledge of “indigenous” culture and history is woefully lacking, but she doesn’t stop to consider the possibility that her understanding of European cultures and history is similarly lacking. Imagine standing beneath the Hagia Sophia and saying “white people have no culture.” Imagine walking into the Pantheon in Rome and suggesting that white people have no understanding of their history.

Powerful stuff, as is his closer.

Share

Citizenship: a responsibility, not a right

Posted on      by     

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That’s about the size of it, yeah.

Share

The Muslim exemption

Posted on      by     

Are you living in a Muslim-enslaved country? If your answer is “no,” just how sure are you about that?

It’s the scene every Friday at the cafeteria of Valley Park Middle School in Toronto. That’s not a private academy, it’s a public school funded by taxpayers. And yet, oddly enough, what’s going on is a prayer service – oh, relax, it’s not Anglican or anything improper like that; it’s Muslim Friday prayers, and the Toronto District School Board says don’t worry, it’s just for convenience: They put the cafeteria at the local imams’ disposal because otherwise the kids would have to troop off to the local mosque and then they’d be late for Lesbian History class or whatever subject is scheduled for Friday afternoon.

The picture is taken from the back of the cafeteria. In the distance are the boys. They’re male, so they get to sit up front at prayers. Behind them are the girls. They’re female, so they have to sit behind the boys because they’re second-class citizens – not in the whole of Canada, not formally, not yet, but in the cafeteria of a middle school run by the Toronto District School Board they most certainly are.

And the third row? The ones with their backs to us in the foreground of the picture? Well, let the Star’s caption writer explain:

At Valley Park Middle School, Muslim students participate in the Friday prayer service. Menstruating girls, at the very back, do not take part.

Oh. As Kathy Shaidle says:

Yep, that’s part of the caption of the Toronto Star photo.

Yes, the country is Canada and the year is 2011.

Just so. Not some exotic photojournalism essay from an upcountry village in Krappistan. But a typical Friday at a middle school in the largest city in Canada. I forget which brand of tampon used to advertise itself with the pitch “Now with new [whatever] you can go horse-riding, water-ski-ing, ballet dancing, whatever you want to do”, but perhaps they can just add the tag: “But not participate in Friday prayers at an Ontario public school.”

Some Canadians will look at this picture and react as Miss Shaidle did, or Tasha Kheiriddin in The National Post:

Is this the Middle Ages? Have I stumbled into a time warp, where “unclean” women must be prevented from “defiling” other persons? It’s bad enough that the girls at Valley Park have to enter the cafeteria from the back, while the boys enter from the front, but does the entire school have the right to know they are menstruating?

But a lot of Canadians will glance at the picture and think, “Aw, diversity, ain’t it a beautiful thing?” – no different from the Sikh Mountie in Prince William’s escort. And even if they read the caption and get to the bit about a Toronto public school separating menstruating girls from the rest of the student body and feel their multiculti pieties wobbling just a bit, they can no longer quite articulate on what basis they’re supposed to object to it. Indeed, thanks to the likes of Ontario “Human Rights” Commission chief commissar Barbara Hall, the very words in which they might object to it have been all but criminalized.

Islam understands the reality of Commissar Hall’s “social justice”: You give ’em an inch, and they’ll take the rest. Following a 1988 cease-and-desist court judgment against the Lord’s Prayer in public school, the Ontario Education Act forbids “any person to conduct religious exercises or to provide instruction that includes religious indoctrination in a particular religion or religious belief in a school.” That seems clear enough. If somebody at Valley Park stood up in the cafeteria and started in with “Our Father, which art in Heaven”, the full weight of the School Board would come crashing down on them. Fortunately, Valley Park is 80-90 per cent Muslim, so there are no takers for the Lord’s Prayer. And, when it comes to the prayers they do want to say, the local Islamic enforcers go ahead secure in the knowledge that the diversity pansies aren’t going to do a thing about it.

Which is why eventually the sane people are going to rise up against those pansies and overthrow their pussy-ass PC tyranny. Trouble is, by the time they do, it’s going to be too late…if it ain’t already, that is.

Share

“A nation of immigrants”?

Posted on      by     

Nope.

The “nation of immigrants” trope is relatively new in American history, appearing not until the late 19th century. Its first appearance in print was most likely The Daily State Journal of Alexandria, Virginia, in 1874. In praising a state bill that encouraged European immigration, the editors wrote: “We are a nation of immigrants and immigrants’ children.” In 1938, Franklin Delano Roosevelt said to the Daughters of the American Revolution: “Remember, remember always, that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants and revolutionists.” John F. Kennedy would later use the term as the title of a book, written as part of an Anti-Defamation League series, so it is undoubtedly objective, quality scholarship.

But in 1874, as in 1938, and even in 1958 when JFK’s book was written, America was not a nation of immigrants. The women Roosevelt was addressing were not the daughters of immigrants but rather the descendants of settlers—those Americans who founded the society that immigrants in 1874 came to be a part of.

Concerning immigration patterns, from 1820 through 1924, 34 million new arrivals entered the United States, mostly from Europe. Throughout this period, intermittent waves of immigration were punctuated by pauses and lulls. These respites provided immigrants time to Americanize. By contrast, from 1965 through 2000, 24 million new arrivals entered the United States, mostly from Latin America and Asia, and with few if any pauses between waves. In just 35 years, America experienced nearly as much immigration as it did over a century. Nevertheless, from 1820 through 2000, the foreign-born averaged just over 10 percent of the total American population.

To claim that America is a “nation of immigrants” is to stretch a truth—that America historically has experienced intermittent waves of immigration—into a total falsehood, that America is a nation of immigrants. For the truth of the first thing to equal the truth of the other, every nation that experiences immigration may just as well be considered a “nation of immigrants.” Germans have lived along the Rhine since before Christ, yet Germany has also been swarmed by foreigners from the Middle East and North Africa. Is Germany, therefore, a nation of immigrants? A resounding nein is the answer we are hearing from Germans.

Before America was a nation, it had to be settled and founded. As Michael Anton reiterated in response to New York Times columnist Bret Stephens: America is a nation of settlers, not a nation of immigrants. In that, Anton is echoing Samuel Huntington, who showed that America is a society of settlers. Those settlers in the 17th and 18th centuries—more than anyone else after—had the most profound and lasting impact on American culture, institutions, historical development, and identity. American began in the 1600s—not 1874—and what followed in the 1770s and 1780s was rooted in the founded society of those settlers.

Settlers, Anton explains, travel from an existing society into the wilderness to build a society ex nihilo. Settlers travel in groups that either implicitly or explicitly agree to a social compact. Settlers, unlike immigrants, go abroad with the intention of creating a new community away from the mother country. Immigrants, on the other hand, travel from one existing society to another, either as individuals or as families, and are motivated by different reasons; and not always good ones. Immigrants come later to be part of the society already built by settlers, who, as Higham wrote, establish the polity, language, customs, and habits of the society immigrants seek to join and in joining must embrace and adopt.

Justice Louis Brandeis would later echo Jay, declaring that the immigrant is Americanized when he “adopts the clothes, the manners, and the customs generally prevailing here…substitutes for his mother tongue the English language,” ensures that “his interests and affections have become deeply rooted here,” and comes “into complete harmony with our ideals and aspirations.” Only when the immigrant has done this will he have “the national consciousness of an American.”

Remember, Brandeis was a Progressive leading light back then. In light of the above statement, the raving madmen of our present-day Loonie Left wouldn’t for a moment consider him an acceptable SC nominee now. But then, if Trump nominated Che Guevara to the Court the NYT, WaPo, and all the rest would doubtless denounce even him as a “right-wing extremist,” too.

That’s progress, see.

Share

The end of immivasion?

Posted on      by     

Europe wakes up. Well, parts of it anyway.

In the greatest concerted propaganda exercise in history, newspapers, television outlets, and the internet in both America and Europe are filled with pictures of crying children separated from their “parents” (maybe), and Africans bobbing helplessly on dinghies in the Mediterranean — as if some great natural disaster had occurred.

It has. Under the buzzword cloak of “migration” — a word especially chosen to remind Americans of their legal immigrant forebears, and Europeans of their collective lack of “diversity” — is a relentless assault on national sovereignty and political borders. It’s cudgeled by “racism” and blessed by “tolerance” in order to achieve the Left’s goal of One Worldism in its purest form — a cultural-Marxist endeavor to improve the self-esteem of the Third World by bringing the industrialized, civilized First World down to its nasty, brutish level. In the meantime, they mean to swamp the legitimate immigration and asylum systems of both continents, render them helpless, and break them. Structures that had been put in place to deal with individuals, or with persecuted groups of people, have suddenly been targeted as the soft underbelly of Western compassion — the Cloward-Pivenstrategy writ large.

In Europe, Angela Merkel’s disastrous decision three years ago to allow (beg for, really) more than a million Muslim “migrants” into her country has put the Old Continent’s postwar certainties to the test, and has pitted its secular liberalism and social-welfare system against a group of largely inimical cultural aliens, whose “faith” has been challenging once-Christian Europe for more than a millennium, and which now sees a way to accomplish by infiltration what it never quite could by force of arms. Only in Eastern Europe, with its long experience of Islamic occupation and, more recently, Soviet communist occupation, was there a realization from the start the future of Europe depended on keeping Muslims on their side of their bloody borders. Otherwise, there will be no Europe.

Walsh quotes from an examination of the slowly-turning tide, which I won’t bother linking myself because it’s locked up behind a paywall:

Merkel may, by now, regret standing for re-election last year. There was a suspicion that she only did so to put things right in Euroland and ensure the history books would commend her open-door policy towards refugees. If so, that was a catastrophic misjudgment. The tide has now turned on migration — in Germany and across Europe. Those making the case for an open Europe are haunted and chastised. They are losing elections. Italy’s new coalition of left- and right-wing populists is a fiesta of political contradictions, but they share one simple goal: to stop the migration population from growing. They have little sympathy for Merkel and feel no obligation to offer help in her hour of need. As far as the Italians can work out, the verdict is in: Merkel was wrong and she’s lost.

Until recently, it was assumed that Merkel would last until the next German elections in three years’ time. Now, many are betting that she won’t even make it through the summer. Merkel asks for patience, but the CSU can’t afford to be sanguine given that it represents Bavaria, where frustration with her migration policy is at its greatest. Merkel says that Seehofer’s plans to turn back any migrant who has claimed asylum elsewhere in Europe would hurt EU solidarity. But Seehofer says he is certainly acting in solidarity, with Italy and Austria. There are now two kinds of European solidarity now: the Merkel type and the Kurz type.

To survive, Merkel must find a way to reconcile the two, but she is perhaps the only leader in Europe who thinks that is still possible. The last few years have underlined the growing importance many voters place on the nation state and its borders.

Back to Walsh for our closer:

What this entire saga on both sides of the Atlantic illustrates so vividly is the Left’s simultaneous contempt for the rule of law and its pettifogging insistence on “due process” for people who would have absolutely no entitlement to it had they remained in their home countries, as well as its reliance on emotionalism, real or faked, to subvert the territorial and population integrity of the U.S. and the European nation-states. At the first sign of pushback, they cry “racism,” which has long been their all-purpose rejoinder to anyone bold enough to mock their selfish moralism.

Then again, for the Left, “racism” is anything they want it to mean, even when — as with the “Muslim ban” — it has nothing to do with race. But that’s the Left for you, always projecting their own fearful racial stereotypes on others: mention the word “Muslim” and they immediately see a swarthy, sinister Arab in a burnoose, instead of a cultured Persian or a jet-setting member of the Ismaili sect, such as the Aga Khan.

But the times they are a-changing. 

They’d damned sure better be. I still maintain that it’s far too late for Europe, and very nearly so here. Trump crashed the liberal/globalist party in the very nick of time, and if America proves not to be beyond salvage, it’ll be due entirely to that fortuitous arrival.

Share

“CRY ME ANOTHER RIVER OF SALTY TEARS, YOU INFANTILE FREAKS”

Posted on      by     

Heartiste—who, thanks to the most damnable of oversights, was not in Ye Olde Blogrolle until a few minutes ago—lets fly.

So many leftoid crocodile tears shed for bawlin’ beanlets dragged by their parents thousands of miles away from their homelands, while not a single tear spared for poor White kids who live a few towns over. Tears for the former are grace and empathy personified, while tears for the latter are gauche. That’s how moral enlightenment looks once refracted through the twisted shitlib mind.

“How dare you?” shrieks the anchorshitlib in high dudgeon when her Void-Cunt Conformism Test is defied by a wompin’ White man whose sympathies are more realistically and sincerely situated closer to home. “These poor (brown) children are being separated from their parents! IT’S A NATIONAL DISGRACE,” she screams through red face and eyes bulging with fire and brimstone. To which the only needed response is, “lol suk a dik, you leftoids are off your rockers. ‘Tender age’ kids are separated every day from their parents…it’s called elementary school!”

Yellow journalism isn’t the right term for what’s going on today with the media, which is much worse than mere sensationalism. The media is now into passing off lies and suppressing truths to whip up fervor among their remnant shitlib followers in the hopes of inciting either an impeachment or an assassination of Trump. It’s that bad.

Manufactured emotionalism is the Chaimstream Media’s sole purpose now. Truth? Objectivity? Journalistic ethics? Sanity? Toss it in the bin, because the only thing that matters is winding up a bunch of hysterical cat ladies, urban sluts, and soyboys over the phony plight of foreign invaders who use their kids as “get into the US free” props. The media’s mottos can be condensed to “Anything to Get Trump” and “No Lie Too Big”.

But a funny thing happened (again) during this combo platter two minutes hate + two minutes sanctimony: the central figure — the core conceit — of the shitlib narrative collapsed, and made a farce of what was already a sham.

The Great Bawlin’ Beanlet Hoax of 2018 was always about Trump and what he and his followers represent: a disturbing lack of faith in the value of histrionic anti-White moralism. It was, yet again, a theatrical piece of agitprop around which shitlibs could coalesce into an uptalking choir of smarmy self-righteousness revealing an increasingly fragile superiority complex over those deplorable Whites who don’t commute to work via bike lane. Every modren day madness roiling the Hajnalsphere is just another front in the IntraWhite War.

With that much rich buttery goodness already, need I even suggest that you go read the rest of it? Apologies to Chateau Heartiste for the delayed entry into both my blogroll and bookmarks, by the way.

(Via WRSA)

Oopsie update! Oh, we REALLY got him now!

Yes, it’s true that after a few days of media hysteria over the “crisis” on the border, which reflects a situation not all that dissimilar to the way things have been down there for two decades other than the fact the behavior by the illegals is worse than it’s ever been, Trump signed an executive order aimed at getting the issue off the front page. And yes, that executive order was a step down from a policy which, given time, probably would have deterred the wave of illegals coming to the border. But the Rasmussen poll shows that this was at best a Tet Offensive by the Democrats — not a substantive victory.

Anyone with a brain knows, of course, that the issue was only on the front page due to the necessity of finding something — anything — that would displace the earth-shaking Inspector General’s report from its rightful place there. The IG report is the most newsworthy item in American current events in the past five years, if not far longer — not just because of the governmental corruption depicted in its 500 pages but because of the whitewash the conclusions of the report entail. Queried about that disconnect — the mountain of evidence of bias and corruption in the body of the report and its nonetheless weak executive summary — Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz refused to disagree with much of anything his House and Senate interlocutors in hearings this week presented him with.

The inference to be drawn from this is obvious — if we get to see the original draft of Horowitz’s report, we’ll likely find that its conclusions are in line with those of the Jim Jordans, Trey Gowdys, and Lindsey Grahams of the world, but when that report was reviewed by muckety-mucks within DOJ they were watered down to Horowitz’s dismay.

Maybe. Either way, what’s in the report makes Watergate look like a two-bit burglary. And we know there is more coming, because Horowitz is set to deliver another report, this one on the Russia investigation, soon.

Wonder what the Democrats and their stenographers in the legacy media will come up with to displace that news. Asteroids? Tidal waves? The return of Zuul?

All we can know for sure is that 1) there WILL be something, and 2) it will be even more bugfuck-nuts than the last attempt, as their abject failures continue to pile up and push them ever closer to the abyss of literal psychopathy. Those who aren’t there already, that is.

Share

Insurrection

Posted on      by     

It’s in Portland, so who the fuck cares.

“Occupy” protesters have been camping outside an ICE office in Portland, Oregon, leading the facility to temporarily shut down.  The occupiers say that they won’t leave until the Trump administration revokes its “zero tolerance” immigration policy.

Operations at the facility have been suspended until “security concerns have been addressed,” ICE said in a statement. Antifa news aggregator “It’s Going Down” crowed in a celebratory post that the occupiers had evicted ICE.

A member of Occupy ICE PDX said, “We were able to shut down this facility. Although they say it is temporary, it will not be temporary. It’s another testament to what can happen when…regular people stop waiting for politicians and get together and actively make the change that they want to see in their community.”

On Friday, someone climbed a flagpole and removed the American flag in front of the ICE building.

Of course they did.

They replaced it with a “Refugees Welcome” flag.

Why bother with that, when you flakes, fruits, nuts, and freaks could have just gotten right down to brass tacks by replacing Old Glory with your beloved hammer and sickle? As per usual, Leftard thugs are stealing, harrassing innocent passersby, wrecking small businesses, and disrupting traffic with their lawless tantrum:

One business had some outdoor items taken Thursday night but they were found in the camp and returned.

“We had visitors who were not comfortable as we started to walk back from a restaurant to our building, so we went back to the restaurant and called Uber,” one person told KOIN 6 News.

Another said, “The other day one of the protesters jumped out in front of my car as I was going home blocking most of the street.”

That’s known as a “target of opportunity” where I come from. Shoulda floored it, better luck next time. This next is the main reason I posted this, though:

One protester said the occupiers are starting to get harassed too.

“Someone just came by and sprayed us with poop,” she said. “That’s just mean.”

Aww, poor baby; her own shit is being thrown back at her—both figuratively and literally, now—and she’s all butthurt over it.

Trust me: you ain’t even BEGUN to see “mean” yet, snowflake. But you’re going to. As Schlichter always says: you idiots are gonna hate the New Rules.

Just remember: all of this, every last bit of it—the hysteria, insanity, and childish acting-out; the Mueller coup attempt; the neverending urban unrest, disorder, and violent “protests”; the relentless propaganda assault from Leftymedia; the harrassment of normal Americans everywhere—is taking place strictly because Hillary!™ lost, and her vile supporters refuse to accept the results of a legitimate election. They expected to retain absolute control forever; they got an unexpected comeuppance thanks to the Trump Uprising, and they can’t cope with it. That really is all there is to it.

They’re as pathetic as they are contemptible.

Share

The toughest question of all

Posted on      by     

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share

All you need to know about them

Posted on      by     

They shriek about Trump’s perfectly apt and highly popular “fake news” diatribes, then go ahead and prove him correct over and over again. I won’t bother excerpting; Ace covers quite a lot of ground succinctly and well, thanks. For my own part, I’ll just highlight this perfectly stunning bit of gall:

TIME defended its cover and its reporting Friday, essentially claiming the facts are irrelevant because of the propaganda value of the piece. The photo and story “capture the stakes of this moment,” the editor in chief told reporter Hadas Gold.

Bold mine. In other words: they’re lying, they know they’re lying, and they don’t care. They think it serves the overriding goal of damaging Trump, deceiving their audience, and shaming normal Americans into accepting open (ie, no) borders. For the Left, truth has always run a very distant second to the Agenda, and it always will.

Be sure to click on the Federalist link to see Time’s despicable cover, a full-strength example of propaganda their spiritual forebear and role model Joseph Goebbels could only envy and admire were he still around to see it.

No honor. No integrity. No principles. No ethics. Yeah, we can trust these people to debate fairly, in good faith, and with respect for dissenting points of view. All we need do is be “civil” with them and they’ll surely respond in kind. Right, cucks?

Update! More from Daniel:

Even amid the torrent of fake news propaganda about the migrant crisis (“see small children cowering in Trump’s cages”, “listen to the sound of the children Trump took away from their parents” and “This little girl is probably crying because of Trump”), an occasional act of journalism takes place. Just not by the mainstream media.

It’s been true for a long while now.

Journalism update! One of those rare and unexpected acts of journalism Daniel was talking about, from a steady, consistent, and reliable source: Heather MacDonald.

So it was a ruse. The hysteria over the separation of illegal-alien asylum-seekers from their children (or their purported children) was in large part pretextual. The real target of rage was the Trump administration’s policy of prosecuting all illegal border-crossers for the federal misdemeanor of illegal entry.

Heather does her usual solid investigative job, exposing the bigger Progressivist picture with unflinching clarity thusly:

This principle is at work in the ongoing attacks on the criminal-justice system as well: the overrepresentation of blacks in prison is attributed to allegedly racist actors and institutions, not to lawbreaking by the criminals. Non-legal forms of distress are also covered by the no-agency rule. If single mothers experience elevated rates of poverty, the fault lies with a heartless welfare system, not with their decision to conceive a child out-of-wedlock. The father, of course, is as good as nonexistent, in the eyes of the single-mother welfare lobby. If teen mothers are stressed out, the problem lies in the absence of daycare centers in high schools.

The “progressive” solution to these dilemmas is to confer an immediate benefit on the alleged victim that will alleviate the problem in the short term, perverse incentives be damned. Illegal aliens with children must be exempt from immigration rules. The likelihood that such a policy will encourage more illegal aliens to come is out of sight, out of mind (if not covertly viewed as an affirmative good). If having more out-of-wedlock children puts a strain on a single mother’s welfare check and food stamps, then the government should increase the allotment to reflect the additional births. If that single mother and her children show up at a shelter claiming homelessness, give them an apartment. If such free housing encourages more single mothers to flood the shelter system, contract for more apartments.

Read it all. MacDonald, as does Sharryl Atkisson, reminds us of the importance of REAL journalism with her work, providing a damning contrast with the insidiously dangerous hackery of the MFM’s liberal propagandists to boot. That contrast would shame them unbearably, were they capable of any such thing.

Hilarious update! A way better version of the Time cover.

Share

Categories

Archives

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

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



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

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

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

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

All original content © Mike Hendrix