Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Nothing in common

The divorce, she is a-comin’.

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

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

Hey, it’s diff’runt when they do it.

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

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

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

Only when they’re running it.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lock her up.

Lock all of them up.

From Don’s lips to God’s ears.

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

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

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

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

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

Share

Distinguishing between “Tame” and “rabid”

Aesop has a thought on my quote about “bringing the Left to heel” yesterday.

“Brought to heel” is what one does with tame dogs, not with rabid ones.

This bunch wants putting down.
Nothing less will suffice.

The Trumpening has, indeed, flushed them from cover.
All that remains is for someone to open fire.

And the way they’re still frothing at the mouth and charging hither and yon, they’re going to get exactly that, the next time they make another mad lunge towards someone with common sense and the wherewithal to do the right thing.

The rabid dog is always the one most surprised by the community consensus, when it smacks him in the skull at about 3000fps.

What I wonder most about is what’s taking so long, seeing as how they’ve been shooting at us for a while now.

As Aesop himself has said: if you’re still having to ask whether it’s time to start shooting, then it probably isn’t. But it seems more certain with every passing assault, violent protest, act of vandalism, or anti-American rhetorical hate-bomb that the demented Left is determined to erase all doubt eventually. At some point, the people who believe so strongly that the 2A safeguards us against tryanny are going to be forcibly brought to the realization that no, not all by itself it doesn’t. Sooner or later, it has to be backed up.

We should also all recognize by now that, despite our assumptions about their cowardice and pacifism, there are plenty of Leftists out there who aren’t just willing to actually commit acts of physical violence against us for the crime of disagreeing with them, but eager to.

Share

Bottom line

This is it.

Liberals want you defenseless. You know all those countless stories of good guys with guns who protect people, you know, the ones that the New York Times tells you don’t exist and not to believe your lying eyes about? Liberals would prefer those stories go, “A mother was murdered in front of her kids today” rather than, “A mother capped an ex-con with a ‘born to lose’ tatt on his forehead when he threatened her and her kids.”

That’s the consequence of the nightmare they seek to impose upon us. Liberals, who (inept gaslighting aside) really do want to take your guns, want you to be without a means of defense. And this necessarily means they are willing to accept the risk of death (yours, not theirs) that comes with being defenseless. That is, they are totally cool with you taking the risk of encountering someone who doesn’t care that guns are illegal, or who is just plain stronger than you, and who wants to hurt you or worse. In short, liberals are eager to accept the risk of you being killed in order to attain their gun-free utopia.

To analyze it a little deeper: a gun-free utopia is the necessary first step on the way to the larger, more comprehensive liberal “utopia.” Then they won’t mind building a border wall nearly as much as they pretend to now—a la Berlin.

Or, more precisely, they want a utopia where Normals are gun-free, and where the liberal elite maintains a monopoly on force. You think their security is disarming? Michael Moore chance. Plus, you citizens being disarmed strips you of your last straw veto over oppression. That disarming Americans means that you are also rendered defenseless against liberal tyranny is a feature, not a bug.

Of course it is. That “monopoly on force” business is key, and a dead giveaway. Or, to put it another way: we’ll give up our AR15s when Hillary’s and Obama’s bodyguards give up theirs.

Now, if liberals really wanted to do something to stop gun killings, they would empower the cops in the big blue cities to sweep through the gang-infested warzones of Chicago and the like and rid them of criminals. But they won’t. Because they don’t hate the guns or the gangsters. They hate you. 

They surely do. The Trumpening has at last flushed them out into the open, though, and everyone can now see what they are—and begin the long-overdue process of learning to requite their hate, in full measure and with bells on. If they’re ever to be brought to heel, that’s where it has to start.

Share

Local tapeworm pops off

Her tears of anguish are like manna from Heaven to me.

I had spent the morning sitting on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial with my 16-year-old daughter, Katherine, whose silent tears on election night in 2016 had marked the beginning of this national nightmare for me. She had insisted we drive from Charlotte to D.C. this year so that we could “protest in front of the president’s house.” We heard all of the inspiring speakers; we relished the creativity of the posters and slogans. Being among so many like-minded people was comforting. I heard one woman say, “I love being here today. It makes me feel less alone.”

I wanted to be with people who shared my anger. Because I have been so angry about Donald Trump this past year. I have been angry at my country for electing this man, angry at my neighbors who support him, angry at the wealthy who sacrificed our country and its goodness for tax breaks, angry at the coal miners who believed his promises.

So very compassionate of you to be enraged at poor working stiffs who preferred keeping their damned jobs to losing their livelihood and going on the the dole. Providing remoras like you with affordable electricity for your homes in so doing, I might add. If I had to choose between those miners being miserable and YOU being miserable…well. No difficult choice, that, six days a week and twice on Sunday.

My fury has been bottomless.

Because your side lost a friggin’ election. Gee, what a healthy, stable, well-rounded individual you must be. A sterling example for your young daughter, an inspiration to all who know you, and the life of every party you get invited to. If any.

I drink my morning coffee from a cup that says, “I hate to wake up when Donald Trump is President.”

Then make life better for all of us and stop.

After the march, Katherine and I hit the road in the late afternoon, feeling good; we had done our part to express our outrage. We were about 90 minutes south of D.C. when I heard a terrible popping sound. I assumed I had blown a tire and headed toward the nearest exit. The popping was followed by screeching — were we now driving on metal? Luckily, there was a gas station right off the exit.

Before I could do anything but park my gray Prius, a man rushed over. “I heard you coming down that road,” he said. Before I could say much he started surveying the situation. He didn’t so much offer to help us as get right to work.

It turned out that I hadn’t blown a tire; a huge piece of plastic under the front bumper had come loose, causing the screeching as it scraped along the road. After determining that he couldn’t cut the plastic off, he ran over to his car to grab some zip ties so that he could secure the piece back in place.

He did all of this so quickly that I didn’t have time to grab the prominent RESIST sticker on the side of my car, which suddenly felt needlessly alienating.

“Alienating” my red, raw ass. Admit the truth: you were scared he’d see the thing, you gutless, presumptious little shrike.

As this man lay on the ground under my car with his miracle zip ties, I asked if he thought they would hold for four more hours of driving.

You could spit on your ass and slide home for all me.

“Just ask any redneck like me what you can do with zip ties — well, zip ties and duct tape. You can solve almost any car problem. You’ll get home safe,” he said, turning to his teenage son standing nearby. “You can say that again,” his son agreed.

The whole interaction lasted 10 minutes, tops. Katherine and I made it home safely.

I think that establishes which of you is actually the better person quite nicely, doesn’t it? But then it gets even better—for certain values of “better,” I mean.

When my husband and I first moved to Charlotte eight years ago,

Ahh—yet another arrogant liberal Yankee who fled the place they ruined and are now beavering away at ruining someplace else.

I liked to tell people that our neighborhood represented the best impulses of America. In our little two-block craftsman-home development, we had people of every political persuasion from liberal to moderate Republican to tea party, and we all got along.

Oh, I just bet you all did. As long as the “moderate Republican” and tea-partier were very, very careful to hold their tongues and not light your fuse.

We held porch parties in the summer and a progressive dinner at Christmas. We put being a cohesive neighborhood above politics.

But this year, I realize, I retreated from my porch. Trump’s cruelty and mendacity demand outrage and the most vigorous resistance a nation can muster.

“Cruelty”? “Mendacity”? On Trump’s part, rather than your own? Oh, the irony is all over this one like a bad, bad rash. As for “demands,” I hereby demand that you go the fuck back to wherever you came from, you suppurating ass-canker, and stay there. Charlotte has a most regrettable surplus of your type infesting the place already, thanks.

Share

(Un)Friendly fire

One way or another, PC always ends up eating its own.

So some Indian-American comedian or other made some documentary or other about Apu and how “problematic” he is to this comedian’s delicate Indian-American identity. Among his other complaints, he objects to the fact that Apu is voiced by a white man. The Simpsons responded with a funny scene basically telling this comedian to pound sand. The cultural left, including the documentary guy, was incensed. Why? Because their bullying depends on people being scared and apologizing. Once people stop fearing them, the cultural left has no power at all. They’re just a bunch of would-be thought police.

Unfortunately, they got to Azaria. He went on TV and talked about how sad the accusations made him, and how he was willing to stop doing Apu’s voice if that was the right thing to do. I don’t blame Azaria for saying this, but I think it is absolutely awful that he did.

I have no respect for this Indian-American comedian’s complaints. He attacked the work of a far more talented man and put him in a position where he felt bad about doing great work that gives people joy. That’s a disgusting, small and ugly thing to do. To do it in the name of your race is even smaller and uglier. He should be ashamed of himself. Let him do his own original work that gives people joy instead of parasitically feeding off the work of others. I know he thinks he’s woke and “starting a conversation,” but I think he’s a pinch-hearted racist.

If we follow this guy’s logic, if only people of the “right” race are allowed do racial characters and humor, then the brilliant Denzel Washington ought to leave the Broadway stage where he’s currently performing in The Iceman Cometh and all talk of the fantastic Idris Elba doing James Bond should cease. Oh, I know, this Woke Racism is only supposed to go one way, the “right” way. But that’s nonsense. Racism is racism, whichever way it goes.

Ahh, but that’s the problem with taking Progtards seriously and trying to be civil about things, instead of telling them in no uncertain terms to go fuck themselves with an umbrella the moment they open their fat yaps, as Azaria should have done. Politely reminding them of their towering hypocrisy or pointing out the contradictions inherent in their position is of no use at all. You just steamroll ’em, spit on ’em as you pass, and keep right on going with the Hawaiian Good Luck Sign vigorously waving throughout the entire procedure. Klavan gets back on the beam in the end, though:

I think it’s time — it’s past time — that people like Azaria — all performers, writers, producers — all creators — took a lesson from Kanye West. Do your work and speak your mind without apology. The cultural left is just a small cadre of bullies. Stand up to them and their power will evaporate.

Yep, pretty much. Because the only power they have is whatever we allow them to have.

Share

Can they be stopped?

William Gensert doesn’t think so.

In seeking and executing a warrant to search the offices and home of Michael Cohen, President Trump’s longtime personal attorney, leftists have abandoned all pretense that they are not prosecuting civil war against Americans who disagree with them. They have decided that we represent an existential threat to the America they envision would exist under their tutelage. They won’t let us mind our own business, raise our children, protect our families, be productive citizens, and be left alone. That won’t do – they have plans for us. They want this war, and they will force this fight upon us.

In the scheme of things, America is a young country. Yet its brief history is replete with people who underestimated Americans. Progressives are in the process of doing that today. It is a mistake that will cost them dearly.

To succeed in fundamentally transforming the United States of America, the left must accomplish two things:

  • Impeach President Donald Trump.
  • Disarm Americans.

The left, in a national fit of pique, refuses to accept the fact that a majority of the country rejects its “new America,” as personified by its hero and god, Barack Obama. He started the transmogrification, which leftists had planned to extend and codify during the reign of Hillary Clinton. Then Donald Trump came along, and their plan fell apart, hence the necessity for the usurpation of the nation’s constitution and the will of the people.

The signs are there that Americans are going to fight this. There is a real possibility of blood in the streets. Regular Americans are tired of the Democrat elite telling them what they must accept.

Leftists feel that they are right: America shouldn’t have a choice. In effect, people should not be allowed to vote for anyone leftists do not approve of, and they certainly do not approve of Donald Trump.

They didn’t approve of George W Bush or McCain either. But when they turned bland, middle-of-the-road milquetoast Mittens Romneycare into a RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST monster—then Paul Ryno, for that matter, pushing Granny off a cliff—the writing was on the wall for all to see. Lefty has modified Sherman’s famous quote and put it into practice: if nominated, Republicans will not be allowed to run. If elected, they will not be allowed to serve.

And since they are on the side of what is right and just, anything they do, no matter how illegal, how immoral, how outwardly and obviously unfair and biased, is justified because the arc of history bends toward justice…or some such nonsense.

There are an estimated 300 million firearms existing in America today.  And I wager that that figure is low.  I would also wager that most armed citizenry would be loath to voluntarily give up their guns – as well as being even more resistant to giving them up under duress.

So there you have it: the left wants to wage war against the most heavily armed populace ever to exist on this planet, and as weapons, leftists are going to use rhetoric and clever metaphors, mellifluously delivered, à la Barry the brilliant.  When Charlton Heston said, “They can have my gun when they pry it from my cold dead hands,” it wasn’t a threat; it was a promise.

It strains credulity that they are using every trick in the book, from opposition research in the form of the Steele dossier to Sally Yates, Bruce Ohr, Andrew McCabe, Strzok, Page, and probably Barack Obama himself, conspiring to sabotage the candidacy and later the presidency of Donald Trump, and they think there will not be a fight from a well armed populace?

Remains to be seen, I guess. I have no doubt that the Founders would have been shocked, dismayed, and angered to see what we’ve quietly surrendered already. As the bumper sticker says, they would have been shooting already. I’m sure there’s any number of doughty old-school Brits who are equally appalled at how far their once-mighty nation has sunk into the mire of ignominy and degradation, without there being any visible signs of righteous uprising there. At some point it’s just too late, and there’s no longer anything left worth the effort of trying to save.

Over here, Hillary!™ was as “moderate” a candidate as the Left will ever accept, and even at that they greatly preferred Bernie the Red—and would have gotten him too, had he not been swindled out of the nomination by the dirtiest, most brazenly corrupt political machine in American history. From here on out, any and every Republican must expect to be savaged and undermined by any and all means Progressivists can contrive, with the active connivance of the Deep State apparatus itself.

The Left probably doesn’t actually want a shooting war, not really. Rather, they don’t expect to get one, and will be surprised indeed if they do. This expectation, right or wrong, means their collective psychotic break over Trump was only the beginning; the response to their next defeat is going to be worse, much worse. Gensert’s conclusion is spot on: this will NOT end well. Not unless these screwballs suddenly discover a wisdom and restraint they’ve shown no sign whatsoever to date of possessing, it won’t.

Share

Our most powerful weapon

They eat their own, and all we have to do is sit back and let it happen. Because nobody—NOBODY—can ever be Left enough to suit the raving psychos.

Way, way back in the deepest mists of history, circa March 2015, the Starbucks Corporation rolled out an initiative they called “Race Together.” Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, concerned about the racial divide in America, instructed baristas to scribble the thought-provoking phrase “Race Together” on customers’ cups as a way to “foster discussion.” Because that’s exactly what you want when you’re waiting in line for an overpriced cup of coffee that tastes like it was filtered through a hobo’s liver. You want a lecture about what a racist you are.

After a solid week of razzing back in March 2015, Starbucks put the kibosh on the whole thing. It was a silly but well-meaning effort to do something about a problem that can’t be solved by writing words on coffee cups. So they stopped, and the baristas went back to misspelling your name on your cup, and America found other stuff to freak out about.

Until now! Look at what happened in a Starbucks in Philadelphia last week:

Two African-American guys said they were just waiting for a friend before ordering anything. The manager called the cops, and the two men were arrested.

I’m really confused about whom to believe here. The other customers claim that the two men did nothing wrong. But those other customers are… white. Am I really supposed to take the word of some white folks? You know how those people are.

So now, of course, everybody wants to #BoycottStarbucks. And they’re doing it #ByAnyMeansNecessary.

Okay, kids. I guess you gotta boycott something this week. Might as well make it Starbucks. I #BoycottStarbucks every day already, because their coffee tastes like burnt buttholes. Glad to help.

I hope this fiasco proves instructive to Howard Schultz and everybody else at Starbucks. No matter how liberal you are, no matter how hard you work to establish and maintain your #woke credentials, all it takes is one slip-up. Just one viral video, taken on one of the cameras that we all carry now, and the angry mob will descend on you. Nothing you do or say will appease them. No apology will be sufficient. You can’t grovel low enough.

I don’t much care what happens to Starbucks; as Treacher says, their coffee is awful enough even before the obigatory splash of liberal sanctimony renders it capable of inducing violent regurgitation. Too, I’m just fine with the Progressivist Purity Police turning on their slightly less extreme brethren and tearing them to bloody pieces; it’s less time they can spend on fucking with us, and sometimes mildly amusing as well. So I’m content to more or less ignore the Left’s occasional outburst of ideological cannibalism and just go on with my day.

But this hilarious picture makes the Starbucks tempest in a teapot worthy of notice:


starbucks_philadelphia_4-18-18-1.jpg

Ahh, the idiot Left and their ever-present bullhorns—indoors, no less. Looking at the poor put-upon barista’s stoic resignation to a high-volume hectoring from that bespectacled twerp makes me think that his disillusionment with Progressivist twaddle and his eventual abandonment of it in search of a saner, less self-righteous alternative just might be beginning…right…about…NOW.

Welcome to the Dark Side, bub. It’s much nicer and more relaxed over here, and when we want to indulge any propensity for making loud noises we usually do so at the shooting range, without bothering a single soul.

Share

Careful what you wish for Part the Eleventymillionth

Schichter expands on the topic of my previous post, which I figured was long enough as it was.

As I have shown before, they dream of an America where they can crush all dissent from their orthodoxy, and I’m not playing that.
 
They want to silence you too, and every other patriot. But that’s a short-sighted tactic because people who are silenced, particularly uppity Americans who take their natural rights seriously, won’t just shrug and give up. They will stew and fume at the injustice of their oppression and then they will radicalize and then, because they have been wrongfully denied access to the means of participation in the governance of their own society, they will inevitably exercise their power in the only way left to them. They will rebel. They have before. Sometimes it’s peaceful – like by electing Donald Trump. But if peaceful doesn’t work, they are going to give not being peaceful a try. That’s just human nature.

The liberal plan for civil war does not take into account how prosperous states like Texas went hard right in the 90s and show no sign of changing colors, and there is no mention of how Republicans hold more elected offices today than at any time in history. Well, as any successful general knows, when faced with unpleasant realities you ignore them and hope it all somehow works out.

Or not.

In the end, the “civil war” is going to be won, according to the warplan for Operation CARACAS REDUX, when America just sort of opts to be like Cali and elects all Democrats. Why would it do that? That part remains unclear. Part of it is because it is obvious that Democrats care so much more for the workin’ man, but apparently no one asked the workin’ men because the workin’ man voted for The Donald.  Also, people really care that the weather in a century might be slightly warmer, so there’s that. None of these are really good reasons. Their warplan seems to be, “Wish hard, and it will be so.” 

A much more realistic scenario is the country splitting apart, probably with some level of violence. That’s not a wish, though that won’t stop the liberal liars from claiming it is. Ignore what they say and watch what they do. Liberals are repudiating the entire idea of rights and democracy in favor of an ideology that embraces their own elite rule by decree. That they admit that it is impossible to reconcile our rights and our self-determination with their lust for unchallenged power is the one accurate thing in the liberal “civil war” game plan. 

They are correct when they say “[i]n this current period of American politics, at this juncture in our history, there’s no way that a bipartisan path provides the way forward.” Yep, true. They are also correct when they observe that, “America today does exhibit some of the core elements that move a society from what normally is the process of working out political differences toward the slippery slope of civil war.” Yep, also true, and it ought to scare the hell out of them.

A whole lot of heartache and strife could easily be avoided if they really were as smart as they think they are, rather than as ignorant and bullheaded as they believe us to be.

Share

California dreamin’

Actually, these nitwits aren’t ENTIRELY wrong.

The next time you call for bipartisan cooperation in America and long for Republicans and Democrats to work side by side, stop it. Remember the great lesson of California, the harbinger of America’s political future, and realize that today such bipartisan cooperation simply can’t get done.

In this current period of American politics, at this juncture in our history, there’s no way that a bipartisan path provides the way forward.

Perfectly correct so far. But being libtards, they immediately go off the rails entirely.

The way forward is on the path California blazed about 15 years ago.

Umm. Uhh, yeah. Right. Thanks and all, but, well…NO.

Continue reading “California dreamin’”

Share

Once an asshole, always an asshole

The liberal leopard never changes his spots.

In April of 2017, I published a podcast with Charles Murray, coauthor of the controversial (and endlessly misrepresented) book The Bell Curve. These are the most provocative claims in the book:

  1. Human “general intelligence” is a scientifically valid concept.
  2. IQ tests do a pretty good job of measuring it.
  3. A person’s IQ is highly predictive of his/her success in life.
  4. Mean IQ differs across populations (blacks < whites < Asians).
  5. It isn’t known to what degree differences in IQ are genetically determined, but it seems safe to say that genes play a role (and also safe to say that environment does too).

At the time Murray wrote The Bell Curve, these claims were not scientifically controversial—though taken together, they proved devastating to his reputation among nonscientists. That remains the case today. When I spoke with Murray last year, he had just been de-platformed at Middlebury College, a quarter century after his book was first published, and his host had been physically assaulted while leaving the hall. So I decided to invite him on my podcast to discuss the episode, along with the mischaracterizations of his research that gave rise to it.

Needless to say, I knew that having a friendly conversation with Murray might draw some fire my way. But that was, in part, the point. Given the viciousness with which he continues to be scapegoated—and, indeed, my own careful avoidance of him up to that moment—I felt a moral imperative to provide him some cover.

In the aftermath of our conversation, many people have sought to paint me as a racist—but few have tried quite so hard as Ezra Klein, Editor-at-Large of Vox. In response to my podcast, Klein published a disingenuous hit piece that pretended to represent the scientific consensus on human intelligence while vilifying me as, at best, Murray’s dupe. More likely, readers unfamiliar with my work came away believing that I’m a racist pseudoscientist in my own right.

After Klein published that article, and amplified its effects on social media, I reached out to him in the hope of appealing to his editorial conscience. I found none. The ethic that governs Klein’s brand of journalism appears to be: Accuse a person with a large platform of something terrible, and then monetize the resulting controversy. If he complains, invite him to respond in your magazine so that he will drive his audience your way and you can further profit from his doomed effort to undo the damage you’ve done to his reputation.

Since then, Klein has kept at it, and he delivered another volley today. I told him that if he continued in this way, I would publish our private email correspondence so that our readers could judge him for themselves. His latest effort has convinced me that I should make good on that promise.

Glenn used to approvingly link Klein regularly back in the old days, which I never did understand. He was then, is now, and ever shall be just another garden-variety liberal shitbag: smarmy, self-righteous, nasty, and bereft of any regard whatever for either facts or fairness. I don’t know much of anything about Harris or his views, but whatever they may be, he just got himself a schooling on Lefty’s true nature, along with the uselesness and futility of trying to debate him in good faith. He should be thankful; however rude his awakening, in truth he got off light:

It’s mildly amusing that Harris is only discovering now that the media in general, and Ezra Klein in particular, is disingenuous and utilizes character assassination as its stock tool-in-trade. Imagine what it is like for those who can be disemployed as well as discredited, Sam!

Not to mention being set upon and brutally beaten by a violent Progressivist mob. LIve and learn, Sam.

Share

Coming attraction

Boots on faces, forever.

Dear Britons, defenders of free speech. Out of my cell in Colnbrook, I want to ask you something. Be honest and raise your hands.

Who among of you has ever been in the following situation: You grab a beer after work, or you are visiting your girlfriend’s parents for the first time, or you meet other children’s parents at school — and suddenly the conversation moves to politics: radical Islam, immigration.

Who of you in this very moment was faced with the decision between speaking his mind and facing problems, or complying and staying silent?

Raise your hands and be honest.

I will not be able to see the results, but every single hand is too much. This amount of fear should not exist in a society. Speech that has social costs and severe consequences is no longer free. It has a price — and our Government and the Antifa are working everyday to raise that price.

No freedom of speech means no democracy. In front of our very eyes this country is becoming a tyranny, shutting all debates about immigration down, until demographics solves the issue by replacement.

People of the UK. I might be in a cell right now, but you all are in a cell. It’s the prison of fear and silence your government and the PC tyranny has locked you in since the days of your childhood.

I ask you, I command you, break free!

Patriots of the UK: come out of the closet. Make your dissent visible by visible acts of resistance that inspire others. I know for certain that millions in the UK think like me. Those millions should be on the street now.

We need a coming out of the silent majority, or Britain is lost. We need a free, open and honest debate about immigration, Islam and demographics, so we can sort these problems out together.

And I know that the force is still in you. With your Brexit vote you stunned the world! The will and the life of the British nation is not broken.

It would be nice to think so. But from where I sit, the situation don’t look any too good—either there, or here. This is the most important bit, at least as far as the US is concerned:

Never forget, Obama’s people were right up front about it—they said they were changing America by changing the people. In America, we have a chance now to turn that around, make the most of it! This is not the time to take a break just because Donald Trump is in the White House. They will be attempting to come back!

Come back, hell. They never went away. Yeah, I know a lot of us out there are about ready to give up hope after the omnibus budget betrayal, about which I hope to have more up here later. I share that frustration myself—putting it VERY damned mildly—and am not quite sure what the right response might be. Bracken says this:



And he may very well be right. There was plenty Trump could have done to forestall this; he should have been working on a strategy months ago. No way around it: he fucked up, and that mistake is going to cost not just him, but all of us. Like I said, more on all that later.

Meanwhile, the Left termites keep right on eating away at our already badly-chewed-up liberty, and the GOP backstabbers keep right on helping them do it. Anytime Pelousi and Schemer are smiling, bad things are happening to America That Was. And anybody listening to the things the Baby Einsteins at this weekend’s anti-Second Amendment protests were saying knows that they have exactly the same regard for the First: none whatsoever. In fact, they’re ag’in both of ’em, and all the rest of the Constitution right along with ’em. The Left has trained their Vanguard well.

Nut-cuttin’ time is coming. I begin to fear it may be a lot closer than we might think.

Share

Get in their faces!

THAT’s how you do it.

Angered by word of the disciplining of two Lacey High School students for a gun-related social media post, 200 parents, community members and other supporters of the Second Amendment on Monday let the Board of Education know they don’t want the district trampling on their rights or meddling in their home lives.

“You guys are reaching into our private life, the private life of our children,” said one parent, Lewis Fiordimondo, who has twins in pre-kindergarten and a daughter at the high school. “It’s not your place. It’s not the school’s place.”

Another dad, Frank Horvath, whose son is a senior at Lacey High, put things in blunter terms.

“It’s none of your damn business what our children do outside of school,” Horvath told the seven board members toward the end of a four-hour meeting, most of it occupied by speaker after speaker venting anger and frustration at school officials largely unable to respond due to confidentiality rules.

The unusually large turnout for Monday night’s board meeting in the high school auditorium was prompted by a five-day in-school suspension of two senior boys after one of them posted a photo of themselves with guns at a local shooting range, away from school property and not during school hours.

Of course, according to the libtards running America’s schools, EVERYTHING is their damned business. To wit:

This after the language of a district policy in the student handbook was quietly amended last week following a local uproar in the Lacey community and the threat of a lawsuit by the Association of Rifle and Pistol Clubs of New Jersey, whose lawyer, Daniel Schmutter, was at Monday’s board meeting.

Before the policy was changed, it had stated that, “any student who is reported to be in possession of a weapon of any type for any reason or purpose whether on or off school grounds,” would be subject to penalties including up to a one-year suspension.

Now, the policy omits any mention of possessing a weapon off school grounds or the length of a suspension. The revamped policy also adds a note about school buses.

Bold mine, and simply outrageous. But hey, the personal is political, and very much vice the versa. Right, Lefty?

I hate to say it; I hate to even think it, truly I do. But it looks more and more like it will come down to actual, for-real killing in order to get these tyrannical liberal-fascist busybodies off our backs and out of our lives. That’s assuming we ever do, or can, that is. What’s for sure and certain is that they’ll never go away, they’ll never give up, they’ll never rethink their presumed right to rule with an iron fist, and they’ll never admit to error in even the smallest degree.

That leaves us with Glenn’s recommendation: “Punch back twice as hard.” Heh. Indeed.

Share

Age of Travesties

When “shock value” is the only value left.

Early in the Netflix series called Babylon Berlin, set in Germany in 1929, the police vice squad raids the studio of a pornographic film company. At first, we hear only the off-camera voice of the director speaking to “Mary,” “Joseph,” the “shepherds,” and so on—and, for a second, we infer that it is a rehearsal for a school Christmas pageant.

Then the camera, following the police officers, enters the studio to disclose the pale, naked bodies of actors engaged in an orgy in a manger—coupling in the fashion of barnyard animals, as the director calls out instructions and encouragement.

The scene is not just a travesty of the Nativity but a travesty of blasphemy itself—and, somewhere beyond that, a comment on a style of German transgressiveness so naïve and humorless and boorish and literal-minded (almost moronic) as to be…not innocent, exactly, but bovine, a little too dumb to arouse an intelligent person’s indignation. One feels disgust, but it is not directed at the religious transgression; rather, one is overwhelmed by the depressing, over-the-top stupidity of it all, the squalor. The vice squad officers, all business and a little bored, take the scene as a matter of course. These are the polluted waters of their culture. This is their swamp. (Weimar Germany was a prequel, needless to say.)

It’s possible to have a similar reaction to aspects of America in 2018.

An understatement if ever there was one.

Leading universities have turned themselves into hybrids of Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood and Mao’s Red Guards. They have become madrassas of identity politics, given over to dogmatism, indoctrination, the coddling of grievance, and the encouragement and manipulation of neurotic youthful insecurities for the purpose of consolidating political power. The effects of travesties being committed on American campuses, where the mind of the hard Left is embedded in faculties, administrations, and boards of overseers, will be felt for generations. The damage may be irreparable.

Consider the comedy of the pronouns, which is symptomatic—and hilarious, if you can stand it. In the Alice in Wonderland of academe, pronouns are deemed to be discretionary. A person may choose a unique pronoun (“ahi,” “her,” or “Gloria Swanson,” or “John Foster Dulles” —up to you, precious: we leave the choice to your iridescent narcissism).

This is a travesty of the sanctity of the person and of individual freedom. It is not social justice but vandalism of the language—self-obsession carried beyond the reach of parody. It is the sort of mischief that children do when they have no parents worthy of the name; universities make a wicked travesty of the idea of in loco parentis.

“Vandalism of the language” indeed. But in his eagerness to avoid declaring, as he puts it, “which side is responsible for what has gone wrong in our culture and politics,” Morrow passes right by the fact that this vandalism is not something done randomly or unawares—that it is part of a larger Leftist strategy to vandalize the entire culture, in a long-term quest to bring America That Was crashing down and tumbling into the arms of global Marxism at long last, and for good.

Where, after all, has nearly every nonsensical perversion of language you can think of originated if not with the Left? The sowing of confusion and doubt by distorting the very words we speak—eliminating old ones, coining new ones, and rendering long-accepted meanings of others into their exact opposite—is a tactic used by both Hitler and Stalin in their day, to great effect.

Example: “assault weapon,” a meaningless drivel-salad invented by the gun-grabber Left to link perfectly ordinary semi-automatic rifles with assault rifles for the purpose of frightening and misleading the ignorant into supporting tight restrictions and eventually a ban on them. The spurious definition of “assault weapon” is based entirely on cosmetic appearance and not function; it is pure manipulation, propaganda and nothing whatsoever more.

The most shocking aspect, though, is not that the Left did it, but that they did it so successfully. The term is now thoroughly embedded in American culture; even 2A supporters use it, in dismaying numbers. And it’s nothing but manufactured horseshit.

That’s just one example. There are others related to firearms, and way, way more just about any and everywhere else you look—far too many to be comprehensively cataloged. The Left’s reduction of so much of plain language into near-gibberish would have to be one of their greatest success stories, in truth. “Tolerance”? “Diversity”? “Dissent”? “Patriotic”? “Brave”? “Heroic”? “Rape”? “Freedom”? “Truth”? Good Lord, even the word “liberal” itself has come to mean the precise opposite of what it once did.

None of which even begins to address the forced conversion of perfectly acceptable words like “handicapped” into clumsy, insulting pabulum like “differently abled”; “heterosexual” into “cisgendered”; “Negro” into “person of color,” and so on and on. Don’t even get me started on bland, neutered tripe like “Congressperson” or “waitron” or “chairperson.” I’m suspicious of the morphing of “secretary” into “administrative assistant,” “employment office” into “human resources department,” and “boyfriend/girlfriend/wife/husband/shackjob” into “life partner,” but I can’t prove anything. Yet.

Thankfully, the Marines decided not to go with “rifleperson” or “infantryperson” in the end, after paroxysms of indignation from disgusted leathernecks who must have suddenly found themselves wondering what the hell they signed up for in the first place. The Corps end up bowing pretty deeply to political correctness, though, just not quite all the way to the ground. Yet.

The lowering of Marine CET physical fitness requirements to accommodate female “Marine” Mass Organized Conflict Facilitator Persons who can’t hack the program is another matter. Well, actually, no, it really isn’t. It’s another surge of the same old Dismal Tide inundating sanity, reality, and common sense while undermining the effective defense of this nation. Which, hey, for a Progtard, what’s not to like?

In the interest of comity, however, could we at least all agree to stop referring to Muslims as a “race”? I know it’s a bridge way too far to expect any acknowledgment that skepticism about the wisdom of admitting hordes of them into the country with no expectation of either assimilation or allegiance—skepticism informed by knowledge of Muslim history, present-day proclivities, and clearly stated intentions—can NOT reasonably be denounced as either “Islamophobia” or “racism” with any real fairness, and don’t ask it of anyone.

While we’re on race, “Asian,” “black,” and “Hispanic” are ethnicities; not one of them is really a “race.” I still prefer “Indian” or “American Indian” to “Native American,” although I acknowledge that it’s sloppy and off-base. Plus some of the Native Americans themselves seem a bit tetchy about it, so I’m willing to go along to get along there. On the other hand, I’d love to see “African-American” shitcanned entirely. Dammit, you can be one or the other, but you can’t be both. Pick one and get on with your life. If you go around wearing African tribal garb but you were born and raised here and neither you, your parents, nor your grandparents have ever so much as vacationed in Africa, you’re a pretentious phony, or at best deeply confused. But you ain’t African. Sorry.

“Hooker” or “prostitute” into “sex worker”, “stripper” into “exotic dancer,” “porn star” into “adult film actress”? Eh, thanks, but no thanks. Not ones that rankle me greatly, mind, but I figured I’d go ahead and throw ’em out there.

When they start demanding we all refer to “Cajuns” as “linguistically-enhanced sobriety-challenged Bayou persons,” I’m getting off the damned bus. But Cajuns are more or less white, so Proggies probably won’t care much about renaming them.

All things considered, it’s a travesty, is what it is.

Share

Damning

Hoo, BOY. I never even thought of this.


GunControlNutso.png

Well, I mean, DUH. As I recollect, there was WAY more snickering and joke-cracking over it from Progressivists than there was dismay, sympathy, or outrage. From Democrat Socialist politicians, a loud silence was about the extent of it. Which backs up the adaptation of my longstanding contention about Trump once more: it’s not the guns they hate, not really. It’s not even the gun violence. It’s US.

As I said at the time: he was no nutjob, or no more so than the rest of them. There was nothing all that extraordinary about him. He was a mainstream Dem-Soc Progressivist. He just had balls enough to actually go out and do it—something a lot of them have come right out and fantasized openly about of late.

If there truly is a meaningful distinction to be made between them and the cucks/NeverTrumpTards/Vichy GOPers, that would have to be it: the GOPers don’t actually want us dead, and aren’t likely to come at us guns a-blazing…literally. Or not yet, at least.

Swiped from Aesop.

Share

Kill ’em all

I originally put this up as an update to an earlier post, then had some further thoughts I wanted to slide in there. So I’m breaking it out into its own post. Yeah, I know, it’s confusing. But what the heck.

This is what it’s REALLY all about.

After every attack, the clamor for “common sense” gun control begins by political hacks, talk show hosts and celebrities who don’t set foot outside their homes without an armed guard. None of these “common sense folks” seem to know the first thing about guns. And none of them care. 

Gun control isn’t a policy. It’s a moral panic. Like prohibition, it’s a xenophobic reaction to a different culture that shares the same country with them. Guns have come to embody a rural conservative culture in the minds of urban leftists the way that alcohol once embodied foreign immigrants to prohibition activists and the way that drugs represented urban decadence to rural America. 

It’s why the “common sense solution” talk quickly gives way to broad denunciations of a “national gun culture”, of “white privilege”, of rural folk “clinging to their bibles and guns”, of American militarism and toxic masculinity, and of all the things for which guns are merely a symbol to the leftists who hate them. 

A cultural critique is very different than a common sense solution. It isn’t guns that the left wants to ban. It’s people. It was never really about banning guns. It was always about the culture war.

Yep. Just as I’ve said repeatedly about Trump, when all is said and done we’re left in the same place: it ain’t so much Trump they hate, and pretty much the same with guns. It’s US. I mean, how could they not? We obstinately persist in committing what for them is the one truly unpardonable sin: we resist them.

At least half the country refusing to knuckle under means that the Left’s authority is less than total—a good bit less, in fact. And that just flies all over them. For one thing, this mulishness screws up their whole world-socialism project, which by definition must be global in order to succeed. In the bigger picture it amounts to a practical rejection of their claim to innate superiority, in the wake of which all sorts of cherished delusions come plunging down to earth.

Why, it is simply INTOLERABLE!

Think of how deeply it must gall them: our pig-headed stupidity causes their socialist fantasy to crash and burn, whereupon we constantly natter at them about how their ideology always fails, when its failure is caused not by any flaw in the ideology but by…YOU STUPID PEOPLE!

It’s why some of them, starting with Obama’s pal Bill Ayers, have openly declared that millions of us will probably have to be marched off to the camps and murdered in order to finally get the dodo off the ground.

I asked, “well what is going to happen to those people we can’t reeducate, that are diehard capitalists?” and the reply was that they’d have to be eliminated.

And when I pursued this further, they estimated they would have to eliminate 25 million people in these reeducation centers.

And when I say “eliminate,” I mean “kill.”

Twenty-five million people.

I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of which have graduate degrees, from Columbia and other well-known educational centers, and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people.

And they were dead serious.

I can recall at least two other such admissions during Obama’s Reign Of Error, which a cursory Duck-Duck-Go-ing doesn’t unearth. But I strongly suspect such sentiments are far from rare among the more dedicated of these Leftard fanatics; mass slaughter is baked right into the totalitarian cake, a feature, not a bug.

And why wouldn’t THAT be? Gulags, concentration camps, killing fields—all have sooner or later gone hand in hand with every attempt to establish Lefty Utopia, every single time. Attempts will be made to bring those who resist the Glorious Destiny the Left has so selflessly planned for them to “enlightenment.” But there will always be those who refuse to submit—always. Since Proggy superiority is an undeniable confirmation of a right to rule one might call Divinely established (if one was allowed to believe in God), these stubborn souls are warped, depraved, probably insane. They are by definition Enemies Of The State.

For Lefty, it isn’t such a long jump from there to the notion that these resisters are not quite human, underdeveloped throwbacks to an unenlightened era. They are not redeemable or salvageable. Forces for chaos and disruption, they represent a serious threat to harmony and order in fledgling and fragile Leftopia. They are a drag on the wings of the Noble Ideal, a potential failure point that could bring the whole construct tumbling down, to the detriment of all.

Dovetailing nicely with this diseased thinking is the dismissal of the importance of the individual, the primacy given to the Needs of the Many. It isn’t even a jump at all from there to the elimination of such troublesome, perverse lunatics; it’s a necessary step, a requirement upon which success depends absolutely. Tolerance or forbearance in dealing with destructive saboteurs such as they can only inflict great harm on the Many. It would be the closest thing to real evil their depraved ideology can ever imagine.

Yeah, I know. Ironic, that.

Share

Ask a silly the silliest question

And then answer it.

Do they really hate ordinary people that much?

Yes, they do. For liberals, the distinction between the “dumb masses” and their enlightened selves renders life meaningful. Disdain for ordinary folks is not just an ancillary trait of liberalism. It is fundamental to its nature.

At its heart, liberalism is a gnostic religion, and the essence of that religion is the believer’s faith that he possesses the means of changing the world for the better. The belief that the world must be changed requires there to be a mass of individuals whose lives are in need of change. Following this logic, it is the liberal, not those deplorables in need of change, who knows what must be changed. For liberals, there must be a mass of people in need of this knowledge for life to make sense.

Above all, liberalism is a hubristic faith. Its followers share the fatal flaw of pride in their own intellectual capacity. This is why liberalism appeals so strongly to those in the knowledge trades: teachers, journalists, writers, psychologists, and social workers. The sense of “knowing more than others” is its strongest attraction – particularly to the young, who otherwise know so little. Liberalism confers, or seems to confer, almost immediate power and authority to those who embrace it.

That’s just the opener. He goes on from there and nails it all down clean and tight, tying some at-first-blush disparate threads together into a seamless whole. This bit especially resonated with me:

At its core, liberalism can be defined in gnostic terms as the human mind’s idolizing of itself. In this sense, Obama’s famous aphorism is spot on. The liberal mind really is what the liberal mind has been waiting for.

What it seeks is not, however, goodness, or security, or higher living standards, or even better health care. What it seeks is the celebration of its own brilliance. “Smug” is a small word that perfectly captures the nature of the progressive mind.

To succeed, liberalism must acquire and retain clients in need of change. It is not in the interest of the liberal to solve problems. What the liberal needs is continually to discover new problems and hold them up as in need of solution.

Thereby not just substantiating their pretension to innate superiority, but confirming them as indispensable. Their core insecurity, juvenile and facile as it is, demands constant affirmation. Their egos, wildly inflated as they are, shatter as easily as the thinnest glass at the slightest touch of the hammer. Which, tragically for them, is exactly what reality is constantly subjecting them to. Which in turn is why they’re such miserable people, truly happy only when inflicting misery on others.

This analysis also covers why it is that they lash out so viciously, out of all proportion to the perceived provocation, whenever they’re thwarted in their designs or even so much as contradicted verbally. If you don’t believe me, try arguing—reasonably, calmly, respectfully—with a lib, on any issue at all, preferably a somewhat trivial one. The vehemence of the reaction you get will astound you. Persist, and the “discussion” will degenerate into an arm-waving, bug-eyed shouting match with a quickness no matter how hard you may work to keep things civil. Debate them into a corner from which there is no escape and the very least you can expect in response is a simmering, pouty, butthurt sulk.

As I’ve mentioned many times, being a professional musician all these years inevitably means I have many liberal friends out there in meatspace. There are certain things I just don’t talk about with most of ’em, unless I’m intentionally trying to tweak their noses a little. Even then, I’m careful to let things go only so far before I relent. Pressing it ain’t worth the bother; I already know they aren’t persuadable, and I don’t wish to sacrifice friendships I do actually value over mere politics. As the old joke goes: it wastes my time, and annoys the pig. Out of the whole crowd, I can think of exactly three (3) with which I can have serious discussions without things degenerating into a near-brawl.

Freud had ’em sussed out long ago, as it happens. And they’ve hated him ever since for it, too.

Update! Oh, THIS oughta piss ’em off for sure.

I normally shy away from this kind of activism, but at some point conservatives need to begin pushing back. To that end, here’s what I encourage:

An NRA member needs to find the most progressive bakery he can, and then request an AR-15-shaped cake for a Second Amendment celebration. Walk into the store wearing an NRA shirt and hat. Openly carry a gun if you’re legally allowed. Ask for the top of the cake to be decorated with words like “In celebration of the NRA.”

When the mortified SJW baker refuses, sue her.

In doing so, you may run up against the argument that being a gun owner isn’t an identity. Hogwash! If you feel like being a gun owner and an NRA member is central to your identity, no one has the right to deny you that identity.

Instead of trying to fight progressives’ absurdities with logic and common sense, maybe it’s time to start turning the absurdity back onto progressives.

I’ve long advocated turning Alinsky back on ’em, Rule 4 in particular: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” Damned skippy. In so doing, one would also be in compliance with Rule 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” If such an unthinkable atrocity didn’t speedily reduce Progtards to spluttering, hysterical incoherence once word of it got around, I don’t know what would. There’d probably be nationwide urban rioting over it, I’d bet. Such side-splitting developments would actually make tuning in to the MSM nightly news shows worthwhile.

Share

Fatherless=broken

Just another Progressivist social-engineering agenda item whose implementation inflicted costs beyond calculation and misery immeasurable—creating problems rooted deeply into the fabric of American life by now, for which there is no workable solution readily apparent.

Mr. Black is correct that boys are broken. But they’re not broken as a result of being cavemen who haven’t “evolved” the way women have. They’re broken for another reason.

They are fatherless.

America’s boys are in serious trouble. As Warren Farrell’s new book, The Boy Crisis, explains, boys are experiencing a crisis of education, a crisis of mental health (as in the case of Nikolas Cruz), a crisis of purpose. And at the root of it all is fatherlessness.

Indeed, there is a direct correlation between boys who grow up with absent fathers and boys who drop out of school, who drink, who do drugs, who become delinquent and who wind up in prison.

And who kill their classmates.

“We blame guns, violence in the media, violence in video games, and poor family values. Each is a plausible player,” Farrell noted in 2013 after the Newtown, Connecticut, shooting. “But our daughters live in the same homes, with the same access to the same guns, video games, and media, and are raised with the same family values. Our daughters are not killing. Our sons are.”

Farrell’s explanation about how masculinity can be a force for good or for evil is enormously instructive. “Without dads as role models, boys’ testosterone is not well channeled. The boy experiences a sense of purposelessness, a lack of boundary enforcement, rudderlessness, and often withdraws into video games and video porn. At worst, when boys’ testosterone is not well-channeled by an involved dad, boys become among the world’s most destructive forces. When boys’ testosterone is well channeled by an involved dad, boys become among the world’s most constructive forces.”

Yeah, well, the Left is WAY too heavily invested in continuing to promote their destructive codswallop, no matter what, to ever admit to anything as uncomfortable as that.

Share

Civil war

You probably already saw it, but no way can I go one step further without mentioning this brilliant piece by Greenfield.

Guns are how a civil war ends. Politics is how it begins.

How do civil wars happen?

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.

That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

You can hate the other party. You can think they’re the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election. When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don’t win, what you want is a dictatorship.

Your very own dictatorship.

The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to the left, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it’s inherently illegitimate.

The attacks on Trump show that elections don’t matter to the left.

Republicans can win an election, but they have a major flaw. They’re not leftists.

That’s what the leftist dictatorship looks like.

The left lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats.

Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can’t scratch his own back without his say so, that’s the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country.

The left’s system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

If it’s in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. His power is unlimited.

He’s a dictator.

But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can’t do anything. He isn’t even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented.

A Democrat in the White House has “discretion” to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn’t even have the “discretion” to reverse him.

That’s how the game is played. That’s how our country is run.

Lengthy as that excerpt is, it’s a mere fraction of the whole. If you haven’t already, trust me: you really, really want to read all of this one. I’ve long held Daniel in the highest esteem as one of the very best thinkers and writers we have out there, but he’s really outdone himself with this piece. Aesop follows up with a great one of his own:

According to the specialists employed with your tax dollars in how to defend or subvert a given political system, there are some 17 levels of preparation involved before you get to “sporty”.

Slitting throats and blowing shit up are at Level 16.

You, and anyone you’ve ever heard of, are no farther developed than Level 3.

Cogitate on that.

This wisdom is excerpted cheerfully from a little book on doctrinal subversion that many of you have heard of, and some of you have studied, in a hands-on sort of way.

It’s known colloquially as The Bible, and officially as FM 3-05.201 Special Forces Unconventional Warfare Operations, April 2003.

You should look it up.

In fact, you should probably download that pdf, print it out, and spend some goodly time dedicated to absorbing the wisdom therein, both for the intellectual exercise, and because there may be a practical exam at some point.

But despite any interest in leveling up, you’re not ready for that, I’m not ready for that, nobody you know of is ready for that, and the proof is right there above, before your lying eyes. The fourteen layers of foundation missing between now and then are what everyone who imagines otherwise is missing.

That lack is the sort of thing that gets you nonsense like Bunker Hill, Harper’s Ferry, and the First Battle Of Bull Run.

He goes on to offer some practical suggestions:

The beauty is, there’s some miniscule chance to affect things, even yet. Not by purely voting at the bastards, certainly, 

but every thumb you can put on the scale – and in the Left’s eyes, both figuratively and literally, when opportunity presents itself – before things degrade to open conflict is to your advantage. Undermine the hell out of anything you can on the Leftard side, especially while it’s easy and cheap, let alone not something that’ll get your head in a noose, right? It’s helpful, it’s a zero-sum (every one of them you convert, or simply demoralize, is one less you have to fight), and hell, it’s FUN.

Learn lessons from history: starve the beast. The US Cavalry was purely ancillary with our Indian problem in securing the frontier. The business-end was the hunting out of the buffalo. You could look it up. So if you find the Leftards’ buffalo herds, and turn them into rugs and burgers, you’ll have a much more harmonious outcome.

By the by, there may never be any Great Cataclysm. Or, it may not happen in your entire lifetime. But how long and how gradual the slide into oblivion is may very well depend on how vigorously you kick them in the teeth as the trolls of collectivism and anarchy try to climb over the walls.

Life thus far hasn’t been about shooting anyone in this country, by and large for nearly two centuries. But there have always been one helluva lot of hippies out there. And heaven knows, they aren’t going to punch themselves.

Heh. Nope, not likely. He offers more practical, tactical solutions here, winding up thusly:

Give the Left the finger, every day, in your own head, and then slip them the wiener of pushback where it hurts, and without any lube. Embarrass them in public, and rub their noses in it, until they’re bloody with your efforts. It’s the only way a bully is broken and defanged.

THAT is your mission, every day, forever. Beat ’em like a rented mule.

Not pussing out. Not running and hiding. Not yet.

Start bailing out the boat, instead of stocking the liferaft and jumping inside, waiting for the ship to sink. (And you @$$holes drilling holes in the bottom can guess what’s coming to you, sooner or later.)

You have the Second Amendment to protect the First. The more you unload with the First Amendment, the less likely it is you’ll need recourse to do so with the Second.

The Left lost the election. Then they’ve thrown everything they could at Trump the past year, and he’s crushed them. And laughs and mocks at their pathetic attempts.

Whether we’re talking Vince Lombardi or George Patton, the strategy is the same:

you use attacks from the air to create opportunities on the ground.

President Trump has done the air strikes.

Has he ever. The Left is in dire straits indeed, reduced to beclowning themselves by sitting on their hands like sulky children during Trump’s blockbuster SOTU speech—flatly opposed to the very idea of making America great again, bitter and dismayed at the prospect of the nation getting back on its feet, prosperous and strong. That shit might play in their handful of sinking urban shitholes, but it ain’t gonna win them any votes in the rest of the country. Quite the opposite, in fact.

What we have here is End Stage Progressivism, the natural denouement of their muttonheaded policies, duplicity, arrogance, and megalomania. They’re caught in a trap of their own devising, and the resultant collapse is a delight to behold. It’s no more than they deserve, and it couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of assholes.

Share

Can’t parody them anymore

You truly, truly can’t. On the other hand, why go to the trouble? They’re doing such a bang-up job of it themselves.

Pink pussyhats are being dropped from Women’s March because they ‘exclude trans women and women whose private parts are not pink’

No really, you guys. It would appear, incredible as it may seem to sane people, that these barking moonbats are in fact serious as hell about this. And that they expect to be taken seriously, by actually serious non-lunatics. Steyn, as you would no doubt expect, is having himself one hell of a good old time with it:

Three years ago I wrote:

I can’t recall ever describing The Vagina Monologues as ‘edgy’. But I did tell Joseph Brean that I was amused to see that its annual ‘V Day’ production at Mount Holyoke College has been canceled because of its ‘extremely narrow perspective on what it means to be a woman’. Hence, this Guardian headline: ‘Vagina Monologues playwright: “I never said a woman is someone with a vagina”.’ As I said to Mr Brean, the revolution devours its own: Less than 20 years after Eve Ensler ’empowered’ women by ‘reclaiming’ their vaginas, it seems a woman doesn’t need a vagina at all, and it’s totally cisgenderism to suggest you’re not a woman if you’re hung like a horse.

As is my wont, I was playing it for laughs – but, as I always say, none of the people who matter in our society are laughing. Hence, the Bathroom Wars of the subsequent years, in which the position of what used to be known to Common Law as the Reasonable Man (now presumably the Reasonable Cisman) is apparently (as I put it on Rush): What sort of woman would be offended by the sight of another woman’s penis?

Henry Ford said you could get a Model T in any color as long as it’s black, but you really can get a Volvo in any color. Whoops, sorry, I mean a vulva. In the Civil Rights era, millions marched so that Americans might be judged not by the color of their faces but by the color of their vulvas. If only the apartheid regime in South Africa had thought to issue their citizenry with vulva-colored hats. Hallelujah!

Unfortunately, the Women’s March in Pensacola is having no truck with celebrating divulvaversity, as they explained in a post helpfully labeled…

Trigger Warning and Content Warning for comments: Transphobia, Cissexism, Racism, mention of Sexual Assault, Genital Mutilation, Misogyny and Trans-Misogyny.

They’re not kidding:

The Pink P*ssy Hat reinforces the notion that woman = vagina and vagina = woman, and both of these are incorrect.

Exactly. These days it’s entirely random. You never know what you’re getting into. As I noted a couple of years back, since the two sexes became multiple genders, and “transsexuals” became “transgenders”, and “sex change” became “gender fluidity,” some 60 per cent of transgender persons now retain their original genitalia. For example, my compatriot Gabrielle Tremblay won a Canadian Screen Award for Best Supporting Actress for a film in which she showed her penis.

“Her penis”: See how easy it is to get with the program?

Steyn goes on to posit a darker side to this hilarity: namely, that the fact we’re even lending an ear to such lunatic-fringe nonsense at all signals a tremendous victory for the cultural Marxists. To wit:

The cult-Marxists have remade almost everything in society, and detaching the sex organs from the sexes is the final decisive victory: Once “the notion that woman = vagina and vagina = woman” is up for grabs, there really isn’t anything left to demolish.

A fair enough assertion, I guess, in and of itself. I suppose Steyn’s serious reflection here calls for some at least slightly serious analysis from me too, much as I do hate to interrupt the pointing and laughing to do it. So here goes.

I can’t see this “decisive victory” as anything but Pyrrhic in the long run; it can’t help but rebound against the shriekers severely, and that right soon too. Normal, ordinary Americans not in dire need of psychiatric help will go along with demented thrashing about of the “pussyhat” sort only so far. Especially when it’s accompanied by rabid denunciations of their own more traditional values and standards, coming eventually to be seen as part of an attempt to destroy them.

Which, y’know, it is. Normals have proven themselves by now to be happy enough to leave people on society’s fringes alone to sort out their own issues, as bizarre as some of those issues might be. Much as “liberal” blacks, gay men, lesbians, LGBTXQ39whatthefuckevers, “feminists,” and other melodrama queens like to posture and whine as if there had been no loosening whatsoever of various late-19th-century cultural restrictions, modern American reality is something entirely different.

Ordinary Americans, despite pockets of resistance here and there over the years, are in the main possessed of a forbearance, flexibility, and open-mindedness that speaks quite well of them indeed—especially when compared with, say, the virulent prejudice against blacks still rampant in parts of Asia, or the inflexible hostility to homosexuals or women’s rights in the Muslim world.

But our homegrown nutjobs very scrupulously avoid taking notice of any of that. They are no longer content with mere forbearance, either, having moved on instead to hurling their sundry pathologies in everybody else’s teeth and haranguing Normals with accusations of a “bigotry” and “oppression” that simply do not exist. That mulish, dull-witted, juvenile lack of perspective will only serve to curtail said forbearance with a quickness, likely to be replaced with something that will suit the freaks one whole hell of a lot less.

Amusing Irony Alert: people who lament Trump’s “boorishness” and lack of “decorum” marching around DC in broad daylight…wearing “pussyhats.”

And an aside: Call me an old-fashioned old stick-in-the-mud of an old grouchy old codger if you will. Call me unworldly, call me unsophisticated, call me a hick from the sticks, a rube. Call me delicate, or fussy, or overly fastidious and prim. Call me naive, even, although I assure you you’d be wrong on that one. I’ve been a lot of places, and I’ve seen a lot of things. I’ve skirted danger-close to being what some might consider a libertine myself, at various times and in various ways. I have, in fact, been there and done that. To a much greater extent than most, if I do say so myself.

But one thing I never once imagined seeing, not in a million years I didn’t, was a pussyhat. A hat. Shaped to resemble a pussy—explicitly, no sly subtlety or coyness in design or construction at all, leaving absolutely no room for misinterpretation. Nary a wink, nary a nudge in sight. Worn in full public view, not at a porn industry convention or a NYC Gay Pride parade, not as a tasteless joke of an off-color costume at an adult Halloween party, but in the streets of the nation’s capital. As a political statement, a petition for the redress of grievances as our hallowed Founders put it. By people who expected to be taken seriously rather than made sport of as would be due and proper, or chased off into the night by someone possessed of too much politesse to endure such a breach of etiquette without taking direct action.

Pussyhats. I mean, seriously, you guys.

I still hold that, when you think about it, this endlessly escalating tomfoolery all comes back to the same thing: the hysteric desperation these headcases feel over Trump’s election and his solid progress in keeping his bargain with the American people since he took office. The resultant anguish has driven almost the entirety of the American Left right past the edge of eccentricity or neurosis into genuine madness. The rejection of their disastrous program was a spark that ignited a shrieking, frothing overreaction which I doubt very much they can control or even moderate, no matter how destructive to their ambitions—and to themselves, personally—it will turn out to be.

It’s almost frightening to think about what the response to their coming 2018 shellacking will be. But if things continue along more or less as they have been, it’s almost certain we’re going to find out. And then we’re going to see what that gets them.

My bet? I predicted before he was even elected that there would be more assassination attempts against Trump than any president in history. After the midterms, if the shellacking I anticipate comes to pass and Left whackadoodles find themselves soundly thumped once again (UNEXPECTED!™), look for those to start in earnest, as an even more penetrating despair and hopelessness settles in deep at the ol’ Ha Ha Hotel and the more, umm, proactive inmates figure they have nothing left to lose.

Share

Science: yer doin’ it wrong

Science without doubt isn’t science at all.

Let’s consider for a moment, your very best efforts to have me fired.

You’ve called me an “ultra-right wing conservative,” who is both “anti-education,” and “science-doubting.” Interestingly, you offer no proof. Odd, for a lover of science. So I challenge you to do so now. Please provide some evidence that I am in fact the person you’ve described. And by evidence, I don’t mean a sentence taken out of context, or a meme that appeared in your newsfeed, or a photo of me standing next to a politician or a talk-show host you don’t like. I mean actual proof of what you claim I am.

Also, please bear in mind that questioning the cost of a college degree does not make me “anti-education.” Questioning the existence of dark-matter does not make me a “dark-matter denier.” And questioning the wisdom of a universal $15 minimum wage doesn’t make me an “ultra-right wing conservative.” As for Morgan Freeman, I agree. He’s a terrific narrator, and a worthy replacement. But remember, Morgan played God on the big screen. Twice. Moreover, he has publicly claimed to be a “believer.” (gasp!) Should this disqualify him from narrating a series that contradicts the Bible at every turn? If not, why not?

Anyway, Rebecca, my beef with your post comes down to this – if you go to my boss and ask her to fire me because you can’t stand the sound of my voice, I get it. Narrators with unpleasant voices should probably look for other work anyway, and if enough people share your view, no hard feelings – I’ll make room for Morgan. But if you’re trying to get me fired simply because you don’t like my worldview, well then, I’m going to fight back. Partly because I like my job, and partly because you’re wrong about your assumptions, but mostly because your tactics typify a toxic blend of laziness and group-think that are all too common today – a hot mess of hashtags and intolerance that deepen the chasm currently dividing our country.

Re-read your own post, and think about your actual position. You’ve publicly asked a network to fire the narrator of a hit show because you might not share his personal beliefs. Don’t you think that’s kind of…extraordinary? Not only are you unwilling to engage with someone you disagree with – you can’t even enjoy a show you claim to love if you suspect the narrator might not share your view of the world! Do you know how insular that makes you sound? How fragile?

I just visited your page, and read your own description of you. It was revealing. It says, “I stand my ground. I fear no one & nothing. I have & will fight for what’s right.”

Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t think the ground you’re standing on is worth defending. If you truly fear “no one & nothing,” it’s not because you’re brave; it’s because you’re unwilling to expose yourself to ideas that frighten you. And while I can see that you like to fight for what you think is “right” (in this case, getting people fired that you disagree with,) one could easily say the same thing about any other misguided, garden-variety bully.

In other words, Rebecca, I don’t think you give a damn about science. If I’m wrong, prove it.

As you may have guessed, that’s the estimable Mike Rowe eviscerating a nitwit who wrote his bosses demanding he be fired because she doesn’t like political views she assumes he holds. Attempting to destroy a dissident’s ability to make a living—along with camping out on his lawn or porch en masse and screaming threats of violence at him and his family both day and night—has become a standard operational tactic with liberal-fascists, of course, one of the most acutely despicable of their many Gestapo-like transgressions against basic decency and tolerance.

But Rowe isn’t having any of it, and he manages to dispose of the twit not only deftly and completely, but calmly and even politely as well. She responds to him almost right away with the expected libtard incoherence and near-illiteracy, either failing or refusing to meet Mike’s challenge to provide an intelligent argument supporting her specious, spittle-flecked accusations in the typical libtard style we’ve all come to know and loathe.

Mike’s equable, reasoned approach isn’t my style anymore, for better or worse, although as incredible as it may seem it was in the early years of this site. No, I ain’t kidding, I promise. I had a good handful of liberal regulars here, in fact, several of whom I actually liked personally and enjoyed intellectually jousting with. Those debates back then were always civil and respectful, without any of the rancor that we’ve latterly been dragged into.*

But Lefty burned away all my patience a long time ago, and I no longer have the slightest inclination to either debate or attempt to persuade him, preferring instead to flamethrower the flesh off his bones and then scatter a little dirt over the whole smoking ruin just to keep the odor down. But I can respect Rowe for his forbearance and willingness to engage with them just the same. I can’t honestly say I believe there’s any real use in it—which, when I think about it, is kind of depressing. Rowe’s sincere, good-hearted belief in Lefty still retaining some humanity and decency in spite of voluminous evidence to the contrary speaks well indeed of his own basic decency, and probably makes him a better man than I.

Oh yeah, and from her picture she’s every bit the corpulent, grotesque bull-dagger caricature you’d assume, as ugly as she is stupid and vicious—charmless, petty, spiteful, repellently unattractive in every way imaginable. So there, dammit.

*NOTE: If the idea of a reasonable, sane, intelligent liberal seems inconceivable to you (as well it might, given the shrieking brats, violent Marxist extremists, and gibbering pathological headcases we’re inundated with these days), you guys should look up a fellow named Marc Danziger, a serious motorcyclist and staunch 2A guy that I became quite good friends with in the Olden Thymes. He blogged back at the very dawn of the blogosphere under the handle “Armed Liberal.” Sadly, I’ve lost touch with him over the years, but he was a great guy, and I miss him. Don’t know if any of his original writings survive out there, but it’d be nice to think they did, if only as a reminder of a better, more civilized age, now lost forever as our hold on respectful if passionate disagreement loosens and we slowly descend into madness, hatred, and outright physical conflict.

Share

Off with her head!

Sheila Jackson Lee is an asshole.

The Democrat has developed a reputation for making life hell for any clerk, stewardess, or pilot unwilling or unable to make her three-and-a-half-hour flight anything less than glamorous. She takes advantage of federal travel perks to book multiple flights (only to cancel at the last minute and at no charge). She demands an upgrade to premier seats. She expects, in her words, “to be treated like a queen.”

Never a Henry the Eighth around when you really need one.

Sometimes it gets ugly. For instance, when one peasant of a flight attendant failed to serve the food Jackson Lee requested, the congresswoman went wild. “Don’t you know who I am?” she reportedly shrieked. “I’m Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. Where is my seafood meal? I know it was ordered!”

That inflight incident was in 1998, and Jackson Lee has only increased in seniority since. She sits on the Committee on Homeland Security and she serves as the ranking member of the subcommittee on transportation security, no doubt, giving her even more sway over the airlines and even more of a reason to feel entitled.

She has no reason whatsoever to feel entitled except for her status as a pig-ignorant, arrogant minion of an overgrown and too-powerful government. Without that insidious prop, as I always say, she’d be cleaning hotel rooms or manning a drive-thru window somewhere, which would be a much better fit for her level of intelligence and ability (ahem). Although her foul temperament means she’d be incompetent at that too.

Read the rest, and be cheered by the fact that at long last we have a President attempting to do something about the Deep State that empowers and emboldens nasty little excrescences like Lee.

Share

White privilege

I went to Privileged Identity Exploration Model re-education camp, and all I got was this lousy social justice cause.

That’s what you see in this article about Privileged Identity Exploration Model being used at universities, to help white people overcome their whiteness, so they can engage in social justice causes. It’s a lot like brainwashing, where the initiate is forced to deny reality to the point where they no longer trust their own eyes. Instead, they accept whatever the cult leader tells them. It’s also reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution, where intellectuals were forced to confess to crimes that they did not commit, because they did not exist.

It is easy to be offended by this stuff. That’s intentional. As Theodore Dalrymple observed about communist regimes, the point is to humiliate.

In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

Well, of course it does. It was promoted and put in place by the same type of people, after all, working in the same ideological cause.

Modern society is riddled with special privileges. We even have a term in the law, protected class, which is the name for groups that have special rights. The trouble is those special set-asides and carve-outs only make sense if there is the evil white man lurking around every corner. The stunning lack of evil white men has forced these people to create a mystery version, one that only exists in the imagination of the offender, after they are properly coached in the Privileged Identity Exploration Model.

I should note the Maoist flavor to all of this campus activism. It is rather stunning just how similar the social justice warriors are to the Red Guards in the Cultural Revolution. What that suggests is the non-whites launching these campaigns on campus see themselves as the victors of the culture war.

Again: no surprise there; they ARE the Red Guards, and a Cultural Revolution is what they’ve been waging for a long time now. They’ve been victors so far, but now they’re getting some serious pushback—UNEXPECTEDLY!™—at long last, which has unhinged them completely…and hilariously.

Share

Pressure

More on Jerusalem, the rightful capital of the Jewish state of Israel.

Trump’s move applied pressure to the PLO’s Palestinian Authority in exactly the way that the left had wanted pressure to be applied to Israel. He did to the PLO, what Obama had been doing to Israel by covertly backing the PA’s statehood moves.

The double standard is that pressuring Israel in this way is deemed a very good thing because the Jews are somehow the obstacles to peace. While pressuring the PLO is a terrible thing because that will destroy the cause of peace.

Why is pressuring Israel a good thing and pressuring Islamic terrorists a bad thing?

That’s the bias that needs addressing.

Because the Left looooves them some Moslem savages and loathes the only functioning, civilized democracy in the Middle East, that’s why.

Update! Of course, the Deep State is still gonna Deep State:

The United States still will not formally recognize Jerusalem as being located in Israel on official documents, maps, and passports, despite President Donald Trump’s announcement earlier this week that America is formally recognizing the holy city as Israel’s capital, according to State Department officials who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon about the matter.

Despite Trump’s declaration, which was formally codified on Wednesday into U.S. policy, the State Department is taking a more nuanced position on the matter, drawing some ire in Congress among pro-Israel lawmakers who accuse the State Department of undermining Trump’s efforts.

State Department officials this week had difficulty stating as fact that Jerusalem is located within Israel, instead trying to parse the issue as still subject to diplomatic negotiations.

It’s a two-fer for them: they get to make an empty, futile gesture towards thwarting Trump, and they also get to thumb their noses at Israel into the bargain. And being Progtards and all, they don’t care in the least how their self-defeating foolishness makes them look:

State Department officials who spoke to the Free Beacon about the situation said that while it supports Trump’s declaration that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, it is not yet at the point where it will list Jerusalem as part of Israel on passports, maps, and official documents. This means that official documents, such as passports, will not, at this point, list “Jerusalem, Israel” as a place that exists.

As always, their argument really isn’t with Trump or any other sane, sensible person. Their argument is with reality.

Updated update! Oh, THIS is gonna leave a mark.

As the chicken-hearted, yellow-bellied, lily-livered, gutless and spineless leaders of Western Civilization from Western Europe to New Zealand now shake and tremble in the face of a simple truth that they all know — that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel — we may expect to hear the meme interminably day-and-night, until the next television or movie icon’s pants fall, that “This decision now threatens the Middle East ‘Peace Process.’” For the last fifty years, someone in a European capital and in the U.S. State Department has uttered that sentence at least once weekly. If Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston divorce, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Megyn Kelly ever gets ratings on NBC, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Hillary Clinton admits that she knowingly spoliated those emails and that they had nothing to do with yoga, yogurt, or Chelsea’s wedding, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Netflix raises its prices again, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie divorce, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Eli Manning does not start for the New York Giants, or if Colin Kaepernick does start anywhere, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Bill Clinton admits that he raped Juanita Broaddrick, it will endanger the Middle East peace process.

So, while other experts debate the meme, let us share a secret: There is no Middle East “peace process” and there has not been a “Middle East peace process” for decades. It is a sham

Couldn’t have said it better myself. More inconvenient truth:

Arafat and his cronies, chief among them Mahmoud Abbas, the current Palestinian Authority dictator who now is entering the thirteenth year of his four-year elected term in office, never wanted a final agreement that would recognize the permanent existence of a non-Muslim, Jewish-majority country in the Middle East. There never was a “Middle East Peace Process.” Rather, it was a “Piece Process”: Fool one American President to get us a piece of the Sinai, the next to get us a piece of the Golan Heights, the next to get a piece of Gaza. There never was a “Peace Process” — and, if one simply pauses to contemplate the reality of the terrain and the demography, the painful conclusion is that a “Two-State Solution” is best when not contemplated. Consider:

Before June 1967, an Arab Muslim polity (Egypt) held Gaza, an Arab Muslim polity (Syria) held the Golan Heights, and an Arab Muslim polity (Jordan) held Judea and Samaria (misnomered the “West Bank”). Yet in 1964, three years before June 1967, the Arab world created the “Palestine Liberation Organization” (PLO). Which “Palestine” did that “organization” set about to “liberate” in 1964? Not Gaza, Golan, and Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”). Jordanian Olympic athletes were not attacked for “occupying the West Bank.” Nor were Egyptian school children for “occupying Gaza.” Nor Syrian civilians for “occupying the Golan.” Rather, all PLO terror attacks, from the PLO’s 1964 founding through June 1967, aimed within pre-June 1967 IsraelThat is what the PLO was organized to liberate: the “Palestine” that is Israel. Not Gaza, Golan, nor Judea and Samaria.

Bingo. If the “Palestinians” were anything other than implacably opposed to the idea of peaceful coexistence with Israel, they could’ve had it long, long ago. Instead, they cling to the same old dream they always have cherished: the destruction of Israel, and the genocide of the Jews. It’s the same dream they were promised by their Arab “brethren,” none of whom are in the least amenable to offering up a chunk of their own ample land for a “Palestinian” state, when the modern state of Israel was established. Fischer is correct: there is no “peace process.” It’s a sham, a subterfuge, and a very, very bad joke, and it has never been—nor will it ever be—anything more.

Share

There they go again

Now the Lyin’ Left is hoping to hang Charles Manson around the Right’s neck.

At VICE magazine—which at the moment appears to be on the verge of about 100,000 sexual harassment lawsuits, give or take a few—we are told that Manson was a “virulent racist” and that “If Charles Manson were alive and literate, he would be writing for Breitbart.”

The Huffington Post refers to the Manson Family as a “Far-Right…Cult.” It further alleges that both Charlie Manson and leaders of the modern Alt-Right such as Richard Spencer were ultimately seeking power, as if no one on the left ever cloaks their unquenchable thirst for power beneath bullshit phrases such as “equality” and “justice.”

Even in India they’re trying to shackle Manson to Donald Trump and the Alt-Right. An essay in The Hindu aggressively denies that Manson was in any way a product—and especially not the reductio ad absurdum—of the 1960s counterculture:

Manson had a well-documented hatred of Jewish people, African-Americans and women. Rather than the liberal counterculture movement of the 1960s, his bigoted philosophy bears a disturbing resemblance in some respects with the far-right or alt-right brand of neo-fascism that has mushroomed in certain pockets of U.S. politics recently.

Writing for Raw Story, 85-year-old hippie icon Paul Krassner blames imprisonment and Scientology—Manson for many years claimed to be a Scientologist—rather than the 60s counterculture for molding Manson’s psychology: “Manson was never really a hippie,” he writes.

Oh, really?

Would anyone care to explain the fact that the Manson Family first took root in San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury district during 1967’s “Summer of Love”? What about all the orgies and long hair and LSD? Care to account for the communal living and dumpster-diving? How about the Manson Family’s rock-star aspirations and the fact that the Beach Boys covered one of Charlie’s songs? What about their vocal opposition to the Vietnam War, to “the establishment,” to “capitalist filth,” and all the inflamed rhetoric about “pigs”? What about the fact that Richard Nixon openly hated Charles Manson and vice-versa? How about Manson girl Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme’s failed 1975 assassination attempt on Nixon’s successor, Gerald Ford?

What about when John Lennon approvingly noted that Manson “took children in when nobody else would” and claimed that “I just think a lot of the things he says are true”? How about the fact that folksinger Phil Ochs and Jerry Rubin visited Manson in jail? How do you explain Bernadine Dohrn of the far-left murderous terrorist group Weather Underground—and later cosponsor of Barack Obama’s fledgling political career—describing the LaBianca murders in the following psychotically exultant terms?

First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach. Wild! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.

To claim that Charles Manson had nothing to do with the 1960s counterculture is like saying that the 100+ million killed under communist regimes had nothing to do with real communism.

Pretty much, yep. Which isn’t to say that Manson’s own political beliefs (if any) were Leftist, mind. As with so many of these mass-murdering nuts, his political leanings—to the extent he had any at all; if he ever stated them in any great depth I’m not aware of it—were a chaotic, nonsensical melange of disparate and even contradictory bits of this and that. Manson’s primary motivation was never politics at all, but his demented obsession with sparking a race war (Goad has further examination of that, and proposes a much more mundane and pragmatic alternative idea behind the Tate/LaBianca murders). Bottom line:

Manson was indeed a product of the 1960s, but more than anything he was the product of a teenaged alcoholic mother/prostitute and the doomed path such a bedraggled spawning set him on. By the time of the Tate/LaBianca murders, Manson had already spent half of his life in correctional facilities of one sort or another. And if he developed negative attitudes toward blacks, it likely had far less to do with reading George Lincoln Rockwell and far more to do with being forced to interact with blacks behind bars during his formative years. He was not nearly as naive about race as so many who’d condemn him for being a “racist” are.

MLK was murdered a year before the Manson Family murders. Riots had sprung up all across the USA. As a street hustler and lifetime con, Manson had the survival instincts that so very few pampered modern leftist scribes will ever have. If he foresaw an inevitable race war in America, maybe he was nothing more than a hillbilly Bob Dylan and saw it blowin’ in the wind.

If Manson was truly prophetic about anything, though, it was why whites would lose a theoretical race war. According to Manson, when blacks came seeking blood vengeance, whites would be too hopelessly split between those with self-preservation instincts—those who are now defamed as “racists”—and the uptight, sheltered squares who thought it would be “racist” not to let black people start killing them en masse.

None of which will dissuade the contemptible, self-loathing Progtards from trying to make political hay out of him themselves, naturally. In fact, if the Manson Family murders had happened last week, they’d probably be trying to gin up a way to call for another gun ban in the wake of it, and blaming Trump and Fox News for the whole thing. Which only means they’re damned near as loony, incoherent, and manipulative as Manson was.

Share

Is EVERY “liberal” a sick, weenie-wagging, perverted abuser of women?

Apparently so, yeah.

As the co-host of NBC’s “Today,” Matt Lauer once gave a colleague a sex toy as a present. It included an explicit note about how he wanted to use it on her, which left her mortified.

On another day, he summoned a different female employee to his office, and then dropped his pants, showing her his penis. After the employee declined to do anything, visibly shaken, he reprimanded her for not engaging in a sexual act.

He would sometimes quiz female producers about who they’d slept with, offering to trade names. And he loved to engage in a crass quiz game with men and women in the office: “f—, marry, or kill,” in which he would identify the female co-hosts that he’d most like to sleep with.

These accounts of Lauer’s behavior at NBC are the result of a two-month investigation by Variety, with dozens of interviews with current and former staffers. Variety has talked to three women who identified themselves as victims of sexual harassment by Lauer, and their stories have been corroborated by friends or colleagues that they told at the time. They have asked for now to remain unnamed, fearing professional repercussions.

On Wednesday, NBC announced that Lauer was fired from “Today.”

Couldn’t happen to a nicer asshole. Except, perhaps, this one:



I nurture an especial loathing for Keillor, who has to be pretty much the pluperfect example of the smug, sanctimonious, self-righteous, arrogant Progressivist. The greasy unctuousness that drips like hot bacon fat from his every spoken syllable has always grated on me something awful, and I look forward to seeing the fatuous pig twisting in the wind for days to come yet, as more and more accusers find their courage and crawl out from under the rock he crushed them under.

Better put some Powdermilk Biscuit flour on that, fat boy.

Update! Creep confessional.

In 1994, Keillor addressed the National Press Club and defended Bill Clinton against a battery of accusations, calling him a “soulful man” who “got himself elected without scaring people.” Keillor warned that society should try “not to make the world so fine and good that you and I can’t enjoy living in it.”

He added in his hangdog baritone: “A world in which there is no sexual harassment at all, is a world in which there will not be any flirtation. A world without thieves at all will not have entrepreneurs.” Twenty-three years later — amid a reckoning of workplace behavior that has felled politicians, TV anchors and Hollywood heavies — a viewer is left to wonder: Was Keillor being straight, or satirical?

In 1998 Keillor wrote “Wobegon Boy,” a novel about a radio host who is wrongly accused of sexual harassment and fired by his station.

On Tuesday, the day before his firing, The Washington Post published his opinion piece ridiculing the idea that Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) should resign over allegations of sexual harassment.

Calls for Franken’s head are “pure absurdity,” Keillor wrote, “and the atrocity it leads to is a code of public deadliness.”

Keillor, an avowed Democrat, last year became a weekly columnist for The Washington Post News Service and Syndicate — meaning he was a contract writer, not an employee with a desk in the newsroom. Many of his columns took mournful aim at President Trump, who “would have enjoyed the 17th century,” when “the idea of privileged sexual aggression was common in high places.”

Man, irony just doesn’t come much richer or more toothsome than that. Twist, twist, and writhe, you double-dealing blowhard. You readers can rest assured I’m going over the above-mentioned WaPo piece on Franken right now, and will be back for another savory bite of greasy long-pig soon as I’m done with it.

(Via David Bernstein)

Meh update! Surprisingly, it’s a very brief and almost perfunctory piece, although in light of what we know now it DOES have a distinct flavor of self-serving desperation lurking under the crust of overcooked wordplay. Keillor starts off with a so-so riff on the potential risks and rewards of renaming—one Francois-Marie Arouet (who went on to renown under the pen-name Voltaire) in particular—which pointless perambulation brings him staggering round at last to the meat of it, such as it is:

That name worked out well for Francois-Marie — it lent an electricity to his work. For example, his statement: “Any one who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.” We might not believe that coming from a Francois-Marie. And how considerate of him to say it in English rather than French.

The greatest absurdity of our time is You Know Whom, which goes without saying but I will anyway. What his election showed is that a considerable number of people, in order to demonstrate their frustration with the world as it is, are willing to drive their car, with their children in the back seat, over a cliff, smash the radiator, bust an axle and walk away feeling good about themselves. No other president in modern times has been held in contempt by a preponderance of people from the moment he said, “So help me, God.” The playboy blather, the smirk of privilege, the stunning contempt for factual truth — how can the country come together when the president has nothing in common with 98 percent of the rest of us?

And then there is Sen. Al Franken. He did USO tours overseas when he was in the comedy biz. He did it from deep in his heart, out of patriotism, and the show he did was broad comedy of a sort that goes back to the Middle Ages. Shakespeare used those jokes now and then, and so did Bob Hope and Joey Heatherton when they entertained the troops. If you thought that Al stood outdoors at bases in Iraq and Afghanistan and told stories about small-town life in the Midwest, you were wrong. On the flight home, in a spirit of low comedy, Al ogled Miss Tweeden and pretended to grab her and a picture was taken. Eleven years later, a talk show host in LA, she goes public, and there is talk of resignation. This is pure absurdity, and the atrocity it leads to is a code of public deadliness. No kidding.

Franken should change his name to Newman and put the USO debacle behind him and then we’ll change frankincense to Febreze. Remove the slaveholder Washington from our maps, replacing him with Wampanoag, and replace Jefferson, who slept with Sally Hemings — consensual? I doubt it — with Powhatan, and what about the FDR Drive in New York, named for a man who was unfaithful to his wife? Let’s call it RFD and let it go at that.

Man, the “everybody does it” self-justification rises off that like a bad, bad odor.

“Playboy blather” indeed, you son of a bitch; “nothing in common with 98 percent of the rest of us”—except of course YOU. You, and all of Hollywood, and your precious Democrat-Socialist swamp-dwellers, too.

And all Trump did was TALK about it, stating something everybody knows is the simple truth: that wealth and fame allow a man to get away with a lot that he wouldn’t otherwise. You and your fellow power-abusing pustules didn’t talk about it. You DID it.

You want Trump crucified for merely talking about the very things you and your precious “icons” HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN DOING ALL ALONG—and even have the big, brass balls to say so in the course of defending one of your own for doing it in this article. Worse, you all have actually been doing it while claiming to be “feminists”—priggishly lecturing us “toxic masculinity” troglodytes on our supposed “misogyny” while you have your unseen hand up some poor girl’s skirt against her will, without her consent, and to her outrage and horror.

Yeah, well, FUCK YOU, gasbag. Every last stinking, insufferable one of you. Period fucking dot. As the great Larry Brown once hilariously fantasized saying to a publisher who had rejected him: I wish I had you down here. I’d whip your ass. I’d stomp a mudhole in your ass and walk it dry.

Despicable, certainly. One can only stand in awe of their boundless gall, even as one chokes back the rising gorge over their deplorable lack of shame or decency.

Well, that, and enjoy their public humiliation while we eagerly await the next round, I mean.

Of course, the most delicious part of all remains unchanged: for all their high sanctimony before, now that all of Hollywood, most of Democrat Socialist DC, and even the world of “journalism” stands exposed, they still have, what?

Judge Roy Moore. One guy—ONE—against entire INDUSTRIES of Progressivist gropers, weenie-waggers, pervs, and pud-pullers. Let’s just run a list, which I won’t even pretend is comprehensive: Weinstein. Clinton, of course. Gore. Conyers. Franken. NPR chief editor David Sweeney. Takei. Louis CK. Keillor. Weiner. Spacey. Charlie Rose. Glenn Thrush. Halperin. James Toback. Brett Ratner. John Lasseter. Go back further than this recent tsunami, if you like, to Ted Kennedy: the Lion of the Senate, inspiration and role model, grandfather to them all.

All proud liberals—ALL. Against…what?

Judge Roy Moore. That’s it. He’s the only one. And the already-questionable allegations against him are holding less and less water by the day.

Enjoy this? Oh, you just bet your sweet ass I am. And if you’re a liberal female and are all butthurt now, perceiving my turning of that last phrase as some kind of microaggression against you, well, call a fucking cop, sweetcheeks.

Seriously, though, I must admit that I mostly agree with Keillor’s premise in his article above: I do think the stultified, juiceless world foisted on us by Progressivist political correctness—the lunatic boundaries their idea of what constitutes “sexual harassment” have drawn around us all—is neither a pleasant nor a desirable one. Would I prefer that we were all less uptight, more tolerant, more hardy and unflappable, less quick to take offense, more forgiving, more able to act like big boys and girls when it comes to such things? Sure I would.

Which doesn’t imply that I think there ain’t real, true harassment going on out there, mind. It also doesn’t mean I think it shouldn’t be swatted down vigorously and punished righteously when it’s exposed, each and every time, no matter who does it. It’s abuse of power; it’s preying on women, plain and simple, and it shouldn’t be tolerated. As a man and not a Pajama Boy pusscake, I believe protecting the women in my life from true predatory animals is one of my noblest and most compelling duties, and I have no qualms whatever about doing it. I owe my precious daughter that much, if no one else, and I swore to myself a long time ago that I would NOT fail her.

As has been said about other things, though: in a world where everything is sexual harassment, nothing is. All of the egregious behavior by the Progtard “icons” listed above rises (or sinks) to a reasonable, credible standard of harassment and abuse, and may God have mercy on the Franken or Lauer who dares do such to my little girl, because I surely won’t. On the other hand, innocent flirtation, say (unless it’s unwanted or excessive, or persists after a clear and calmly-stated request to knock it off); asking a co-worker out for drinks after work; an awkward, perhaps even drunken declaration of infatuation after a few of those drinks—ehhh, not so much, I’m thinking.

These are all things that those of us with a functioning moral compass can recognize as minor irritations at worst, certainly not just causes for hysteria, law-enforcement intervention, or psychotherapy. The critical flaw in the Progressivist approach is their usual lack of any sense of proportion, their complete inability to apply common sense to any problem or situation. That, combined with their bone-deep, reflexive penchant for seeking legislative, big-government solutions to anything and everything is why they find themselves in such deep doo-doo now. Which is no more than they deserve, the dopes.

But maybe the real long-term harm in what Progressivists have done is to make it probable that at least some bona-fide allegations of harassment or abuse won’t be taken seriously— that they end up numbing us to all such things so thoroughly as to render us uninterested in reacting appropriately to cases of real abuse. As with their shrieks of “Nazi!” at anyone who disagrees with them slightly, they may end up removing all force and impact from the term. Only time will tell on that, I guess.

For the moment, though, it’s time to enjoy another self-inflicted sucking chest wound, and to help ensure it’s as grievously and permanently injurious to them as possible. As with everything else, they’ve politicized sexual abuse, and are now being amusingly hoist once again on their own petard. This is the world they wanted; this is the world they made, and we all have to live in it. To fail to rigorously enforce their own rules against them, especially when it will do such great harm to them, is a mug’s game. It’s exactly what they expect of us right now, in truth—they’re counting on it; you can see that from the excuses they’re already so audaciously making for Franken, Lauer, and Conyers.

Hell with that. They’re your juices, libtards. Stew in ’em, till you’re fucking well done.

We’re gonna need more popcorn, looks like.

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