WORLD ENDS

Women, minorities, and…transgenders hardest hit?

Though medical facilities may soon become overtaxed for everyone, the coronavirus pandemic has shed light on how transgender people’s care can be treated as “non-essential.”

Quoth the Ace:

Well I think I have all the “light” I need on this matter. Their surgeries — butcheries, really — are absolutely “non-essential” and so, through a complex process called “calling things what they are,” have been deemed “non-essential.”

I know that the idea of calling things what they are is anathema to some.

Heh. Okay, back to the original turdball of an article.

For transgender and gender non-conforming people, gender-affirming surgeries are life-altering procedures, which, for many, can greatly reduce gender dysphoria and improve their quality of life. 

Uh-huh—right up until they kill themselves, as is disproportionately their wont.

Annnnd that’ll be plenty enough of all that, I’m sure. Note that the link above is to Ace’s takedown, not to Vice’s execrable twaddle. You’re welcome.

How much longer can this train keep wrecking?

Oh dear, poor Uncle Gropey has wandered off again.



Just so’s you know, I am now about THIS close to announcing my endorsement of Gropey for Prez. The entertainment value we’ll receive from what will doubtless be a side-splittingly chaotic and inept Biden campaign and Presidency, however long it might last before he just keels over or is carted off to be tucked in an appropriate managed-care facility, simply can’t be estimated.

Can’t close

Red Bernie might just be the first Commie ever without a killer instinct.

To modify T S Eliot in “The Hollow Men” (whose theme seems not inappropriate), this is the way the world ends, not with a Bern but a whimper. As I said on Rush the morning after Super Tuesday, Senator Sanders blew the 2016 election with a single line – his crotchetty insistence to Mrs Clinton that he was “sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails”. That told Hillary that he wouldn’t go after her on the subject of her corruption and lawlessness. Which in turn told Hillary that Bernie wasn’t serious.

And so it proved.

Four years later, he was now, I said on the radio, making the same mistake again – in a pitiful Super Tuesday speech too gutless to mention Joe Biden by name. If he didn’t butch up before Michigan, he’d be over. That means not oblique references to unspecified candidates whose positions on Social Security and 2008 bailouts he disagrees with, but clobbering Biden by name on a) his decades-long corruption; and b) his more recent but increasingly obvious cognitive impairment. Only if a Democrat makes either an issue will the court eunuchs of the American media be obliged to cover it. Absent that, in the post-Iowa/New Hampshire avalanche of primaries, people vote on a vague recollection of Joe Biden from fifteen years back, when, by comparison with a Castroite crank flapping his arms around, he seemed “likeable” – or, in the dreary clichés of presidential politics, the candidate you’d enjoy sharing a beer with – even if Joe had no idea he was sharing a beer with you and was convinced he was sharing a margarita with Esther Williams and Mikhail Gorbachev.

Bernie blew it. The closest he got was tiptoeing up to the issue by noting that, while he himself was out there giving hour-long speeches, Biden’s were now down to seven minutes. If you’re paying attention, you kinda sorta know what he’s hinting at, even if trumpeting the charms of a stump speech eight times longer than your opponent isn’t the most persuasive way to sell it.

But again he needed to say it, and he didn’t. America’s Castro turns out to be not a real revolutionary, just a Vermont weekending flatlander of a revolutionary, a Ben & Jerry’s novelty ice-cream flavor of the real thing – Stalinist Swirl, Beria Blast, The Choctober Revolution, Hammer & Brickle…

What a joke.

It is that. Although I still say he’s the only one under the Democrat-Socialist Big Top with any real chance at unseating Trump, for what little that’s now worth. And I also maintain that the mere fact that we now have a bona fide Marxist running for a major-party nomination for POTUS speaks dismal, depressing volumes about where we are as a nation, regardless of how the 2020 race turns out.

Unheard of update! Brace yourselves, folks, for I am about to do something quite rare around these parts nowadays: link to and excerpt a piece from NRO.

The summer that my parents spared me a life in some soul-sucking collectivist factory—and Hungary wasn’t the worst nation in the Eastern Bloc at the time; there were no mass arrests, no gulags, just economic inertia and a tedious low-grade authoritarianism—Bernie Sanders was role-playing a Trotskyite in his class war against the Lumpenproletariat and kulaks of Burlington, Vt. 

There’s no record of the future mayor of that prosperous city ever defending the brave men and women of the Prague Spring—why would he, after all?—though he did find the time to publicly admire the Vietcong, a group responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans. Bernie would make apologizing for Communists a lifelong endeavor. You’ll forgive me if I take it personally.

Anyway, by 1969, my father, trained as a chemist but unable to find work in that field, began his new life packing bags in a warehouse while my pregnant mother assembled beads for which she was paid by the bracelet. But not for long. I doubt either of them was aware that in the United States a red-diaper baby could move to New England and become a professional revolutionary, never having to really work a day in his life. And I’m positive that the prospect of such a life would have chafed their newly adopted sensibilities. 

I’ve never met anyone who has escaped Communism—not from Cuba or China or Hungary or Ethiopia—who had any interest in living on the dole. Now, perhaps not everyone is as hard-working or as lucky as my parents—and, of course, chance plays its part in everyone’s life. But when socialists such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez mock and dismiss the notion of Americans’ “lifting themselves up by a bootstrap,” they are no longer pressing some liberal case for equality, they are embracing an un-American notion. They are trolling for victims. Victims of religion. Of industry. Of race. Of circumstance. Of history. Once socialists have convinced an entire generation they’re victims, there is no way back.

Fortunately, my emotional detestation of collectivism comports perfectly with my intellectual detestation of Bernie’s movement. Capitalism saves the victims that socialism produces. Nothing achieved under socialism can’t be achieved under capitalism—other than perhaps inducing perfectly healthy people from a beautiful island to get on rickety homemade rafts and try to traverse the Caribbean to move to Florida. And yet, here we are. Again.

The way we treat Bernie, as a crank or well-meaning left-winger, is itself a way to normalize Marxism—“democratic socialism,” in this iteration. We would never treat any other similarly destructive ideology with the same nonchalance. For me, it’s nearly unfathomable to accept that my parents—and thousands of others who gave up their friends and families to come to this meritocratic nation—would ever have as their president a socialist who praised the Soviet Union.

Happy warriors shouldn’t take politics too personally. When it comes to Marxists, and I have no doubt Bernie is one, I make an exception. I take history too seriously not to.

When it comes to Marxists, there’s no real necessity to bother about being “happy warriors” anyway. All we need to be is warriors, period. There’ll be plenty of time to get happy after the war has been won…and precious little happiness to be had if it’s lost.

Is she HEARING her words?

Not a trace of self-awareness in the old soak.

The White House criticized Saturday morning former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s mocking comments about First Lady Melania Trump’s anti-cyberbullying “Be Best” campaign.

Clinton, appearing on Thursday’s episode of “Watch What Happens Live” in promotion of her new Hulu documentary, told host Andy Cohen that the current first lady “should look closer to home” if she’s serious about combating cyberbullying.

“She of all people should refrain from doling out relationship advice,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham told Daily Caller of the comments. “Her bitterness and envy were on full display.”

The DC’s main-page headline writer calls that response “scathing,” but it really ain’t. What it is, is true.

Clinton also criticized both President Donald Trump and Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders during her appearance and WWHL’s Live After Show.

“I think he’s hiding a bunch of things,” Clinton said of Trump. “I think he’s hiding that he’s not as wealthy as he claims to be. He has only not only not been charitable, but he now is prohibited from having a charitable foundation because he used it for personal and political reasons.”

So, not at ALL like the Clinton Foundation then.

“I think that he has probably has a lot of funding from suspect sources that would be shown in his tax returns. I think it would just be a cornucopia of information about his claims to the contrary.”

See? You SEE what I mean? Not a fucking TRACE.

Clinton has consistently criticized Sanders throughout the majority of the 2020 election cycle.

“He was a career politician.”

Okay, I am now thinking I should probably check to make sure all this didn’t come from the Bee.

“It’s all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it,” she said of her former election rival during an appearance on ABC this past week. “Change is hard, it’s not glamorous, it doesn’t fit into a soundbite and yet the people who were elected in 2018 are out there doing the people’s work.”

Gotta give the Box-Wine Battleax props for being able to keep a straight face on that one, I suppose.

“I think we ought to be more understanding and realistic on what it takes to get change in this big, complicated, pluralistic democracy of ours.”

Gee, nice word salad there, Hills. And we can all take that amorphous wad of “sincere,” “heartfelt” bafflegab to mean whatever we want it to, right?

But seriously, just what the effin’ eff would YOU know about “change” anyway, pray tell? Real change is happening all around us, and American lives are being materially improved as a result of it. Change—actual, positive change—is not a thing you and your kind wish to inspire or implement. It’s a thing you oppose, with every fiber of your being.

Let’s face it: you’re about as establishment as establishment gets these days. You maybe didn’t notice—probably sleeping off another binge, I reckon—but while you were (passed) out, the Democrat-Socialist Party passed on by with a quickness, riding hell-for-leather straight on over to the radical-Marxist camp, leaving whatever remained of you calculating “third way” stealth-socialists in a cloud of their Hard Left dust.

Yet still you persist, unswervingly convinced you’re personally entitled to power and deference and glory because…well, because you want them, dammit. You’re clueless, out of touch, transparently insincere, and an entirely unpleasant person—a true limousine liberal who has insulated yourself so thorougly from the contemptible rabble you presume to rule that you no longer have any idea what must be said, done, or promised to hoodoo them into electing you. Tragically for you, though, way too many of us know these things about you now. Meanwhile, the young ‘uns are off pursuing a collectivist chimera gone way too far beyond your comparatively milquetoast masquerade for them to have the slightest interest in the Old Ways.

So here’s the deal, toots: you’re yesterday’s news, long past your sell-by date, moldy and stale and, frankly, kinda boring. Other than an ever-dwindling posse of fading feminists from your own era still clinging to the dream of seeing one of their own become President, nobody really wants or needs you anymore. Hell, even as slick and wily an operator as your *cough cough* “husband” once was couldn’t find a way to drag your staggering, shambolic carcass across the finish line and into the White House.

Which was in 2016, mind, under which bridge much water has since passed. And please, don’t let’s be kidding ourselves that your prospects are going to miraculously brighten all of a sudden, perhaps because of your less-than-stellar tenure as SecState, or your eminently forgettable stint as a carpetbagging Senator “from” New York, shall we?

Your schtick—the grubby megalomania; the onanistic self-regard; the (gag!) “vision,” “experience,” and “competence”—has just become embarrassing at this late date. Do us all a favor: scrape up the grace and dignity to go gently into that good night, so to speak. Feel free to knock back however many shots you may require in order to embrace a lesser destiny and just leave us the hell alone at long, long last.

Civility now not!

Hate speech and explicit threats of violence from “statesmen” Chuckles Schemer.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz called for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to face censorship for threatening Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.

Schumer is facing backlash after he issued a threat to the two justices as the high court readies itself to rule on cases relating to abortion regulation.

“I want to tell you Gorsuch, I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” Schumer, 69, said Wednesday at a rally for abortion rights. “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Schooomer naturally lied his ass off trying to walk his hateful blunder back once he was called out on it, but Cruz ain’t having any:

“That is an unambiguous threat. Now, whether it’s a threat of political retribution, or something even worse, that’s not clear. But whatever it is, it’s judicial intimidation,” Cruz said, adding that he believes the comments are unacceptable. “The Senate should seriously consider taking disciplinary steps. When you have the leader of one of the two parties going to the steps of the Supreme Court, threatening and trying to intimidate Supreme Court justices, that undermines the rule of law, it undermines the judiciary, and it’s just flat-out wrong.”

Ahh, but you’re missing something, Ted: vile Democrat-Socialist creatures such as Schemer give not a single shit about such arcane irrelevancies as the rule of law, and never have. Sefton reminds us that it’s certainly nothing new:

What’s equally sickening is the moral equivalency in claiming Schemer was merely responding to Trump’s “attacks” on the Wide-Load Wiseass Latina and Ruth Bader Meinhoff. Ridiculous on the face of it since Trump was responding to attacks on him and his response was both non-threatening as well as appropriate, given both of their open animosity and vitriol of the President and his administration. The blowing way past the red line of Schemer’s statement, at least from my recollection and knowledge of historical criticism of SCOTUS, is unprecedented but it’s not unique. You’ll recall Obama’s thinly veiled threat and rebuke of the court, specifically aimed at the time at Justice Samuel Alito at a State of the Union address and when before the last foul word left his mouth, Schemer leapt to his feet, clapping like a retarded seal.

So what’s going on here? Is this a deranged reaction to being helpless as one of the Left’s sacraments, baby-killing dressed in drag as women’s health and freedom of choice potentially smashed like the golden calf? Or is it the totality of their complete failure at taking out President Trump hitting them square in the face? Whatever is going on, the words coming not from some unhinged troll in his parent’s basement but from political and cultural (allegedly) leaders have chilling and in many cases deadly effects, as we have seen now time and time again. That said, I am no fan of Laurence Tribe but I applaud his unequivocal rebuke of Schemer, who is a longtime friend and fellow traveler, and defense of what is supposed to be an independent court that is due the deference and respect of the other branches. But it’s the same old story. The Left observes the laws, traditions and customs of America as founded only when it advances their cause, and that’s virtually never. Other times it uses the Constitution as both a shield and cudgel to defend and attack us. That is, when they’re not wiping their ass with it.

Even mild-mannered Yertle McTurtle blasted the pernicious reprobate:

THE MINORITY LEADER OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE THREATENED TWO ASSOCIATE JUSTICES OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, PERIOD. THERE’S NO OTHER WAY TO INTERPRET THAT. EVEN WORSE, THE THREAT WAS NOT CLEARLY POLITICAL OR INSTITUTIONAL. AS I’LL DISCUSS IN A MOMENT, THESE KINDS OF THREATS ARE SADLY NOTHING NEW FROM SENATE DEMOCRATS. THIS WAS MUCH BROADER, MUCH BROADER. THE DEMOCRATIC LEADER TRAVELED TO THE WORKPLACE OF THE TWO JUDGES, AND IN FRONT OF A CROWD OF ACTIVISTS, HE TOLD THOSE JUDGES YOU WILL PAY THE PRICE, RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT BUILDING. AND YOU WON’T KNOW WHAT HIT YOU, HE SAID, RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT BUILDING. IF ANY AMERICAN HAD THESE WORDS SHOUTED AT THEM FROM THE SIDEWALK OUTSIDE THEIR OFFICE, THEY WOULD HEAR THOSE THREATS AS PERSONAL. AND MOST LIKELY THEY WOULD HEAR THEM AS THREATENING OR INCITING VIOLENCE. THAT’S HOW ANY AMERICAN WOULD INTERPRET THOSE WORDS IF THEY WERE DIRECTED AT US, AND THAT’S CERTAINLY HOW THE PRESS AND LEADING DEMOCRATS WOULD HAVE CHARACTERIZED THEM IF PRESIDENT TRUMP OR ANY SENIOR REPUBLICAN HAD SAID ANYTHING REMOTELY, REMOTELY SIMILAR. WE’VE SEEN MUCH MORE HAY MADE OUT OF MUCH LESS.

PERHAPS OUR COLLEAGUE THINKS THIS IS ABSURD. PERHAPS HE WOULD LIKE THE MOST GENEROUS POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION THAT HE GOT CARRIED AWAY AND DIDN’T MEAN WHAT HE SAID. BUT IF HE DIDN’T EVEN ADMIT TO SAYING WHAT HE SAID, WE CERTAINLY CANNOT KNOW WHAT HE MEANT. AT THE VERY BEST, HIS COMMENTS WERE ASTONISHINGLY, ASTONISHINGLY RECKLESS AND SUPPLEMENTAL IRRESPONSIBLE, AND CLEARLY, AS THE CHIEF JUSTICE STATED IN A RARE AND EXTRAORDINARY REBUKE, THEY WERE, QUOTE, DANGEROUS, END QUOTE. BECAUSE NO MATTER THE INTENTION, WORDS CARRYING THE APPARENT THREAT OF VIOLENCE CAN HAVE HORRIFIC UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

IN THE MOST RECENT YEAR ON RECORD, MADAM PRESIDENT, THE UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE TRACKED THOUSANDS OF THREATS AND INAPPROPRIATE COMMUTATIONS AGAINST THE JUDICIARY. THOUSANDS OF THREATS AGAINST THE JUDICIARY. LESS THAN THREE YEARS AGO, OF COURSE, AN UNHINGED AND UNSTABLE LEFT-WING ACTIVIST ATTEMPTED A MASS MURDER OF CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS AT A BASEBALL FIELD RIGHT ACROSS THE RIVER.

A SENATE LEADER APPEARING TO THREATEN OR INCITE VIOLENCE ON THE STEPS OF THE SUPREME COURT COULD LITERALLY BE A MATTER OF DEADLY SERIOUSNESS. SO I FULLY ANTICIPATE OUR COLLEAGUE WOULD QUICKLY WITHDRAW HIS COMMENTS AND APOLOGIZE. THAT’S WHAT EVEN RELIABLY LIBERAL LEGAL EXPERTS LIKE LAURENCE TRIBE AND NEIL KAGEL HAVE PUBLICLY URGED. INSTEAD, OUR COLLEAGUE DOUBLED DOWN, DOUBLED DOWN. HE TRIED TO GASLIGHT THE ENTIRE COUNTRY AND STATED THAT HE WAS ACTUALLY THREATENING FELLOW SENATORS, AS THOUGH THAT WOULD BE MUCH BETTER. BUT THAT’S SUFFICIENT.

AND THEN A FEW HOURS LATER, THE DEMOCRATIC LEADER TRIPLED DOWN. INSTEAD OF TAKING CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS’ SOBER STATEMENT TO HEART, HE LASHED OUT AGAIN AND TRIED TO IMPLY THE CHIEF JUSTICE WAS BIASED, BIASED FOR DOING HIS JOB AND DEFENDING THE COURT. LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN. HE TRIPLED DOWN AND HE LASHED OUT YET AGAIN…

Because of course he did. Question now is: will he get away with it, as he so clearly assumes? As so many other bloodthirsty, lawless Leftists already have?

Official censure is the mildest reprimand Chuckie Crazy Eyes ought to get. As a dangerously unhinged lunatic, he has clearly forgotten he’s a member of what was originally conceived as the more sober, reflective, and judicious branch of Congress. The crooked, power-drunk son of a bitch ought to be forcibly removed from the office he’s besmirched and degraded for so many long years—perp-walked out rockin’ a pair of those fancy chrome bracelets, with a burly, stone-faced US Marshall on each flank to prod him along.

Delusions and conceits, shattered

This is such a thoroughly refreshing change from the usual blibbering lunacy force-fed to us at every turn, I’m just gonna have to excerpt at quite some length.

In a powerful commentary in the Feb. 3 edition of The Wall Street Journal, biologists Colin Wright and Emma Hilton explain that, scientifically, there are only two sexes, male and female, and there is no sex “spectrum.” They also stress that “biologists and medical professionals” must stop being politically correct and “stand up for the empirical reality of biological sex.”

With the phenomenon of some men saying they “identify” as women and some women saying they “identify” as men, or any “gender identity” combination therein, “we see a dangerous and anti-scientific trend toward the outright denial of biological sex,” state the biologists Wright and Hilton. 

This notion that there is a sex “spectrum,” where people can choose “to identify as male or female,” regardless of their anatomy, is irrational and has “no basis in reality,” say the biologists. “It is false at every conceivable scale of resolution.”

As they explain, “In humans, as in most animals or plants, an organism’s biological sex corresponds to one of two distinct types of reproductive anatomy that develop for the production of small or large sex cells—sperm and eggs, respectively—and associated biological functions in sexual reproduction.”

“In humans, reproductive anatomy is unambiguously male or female at birth more than 99.98% of the time,” they write. “The evolutionary function of these two anatomies is to aid in reproduction via the fusion of sperm and ova.”

“No third type of sex cell exists in humans, and therefore there is no sex “spectrum” or additional sexes beyond male and female,” state the biologists. “Sex is binary.”

Furthermore, “the existence of only two sexes does not mean sex is never ambiguous,” write Hilton and Wright.  “But intersex individuals are extremely rare, and they are neither a third sex nor proof that sex is a ‘spectrum’ or a ‘social construct.'”

The fact that it IS such a refreshing change—that such a self-evident truth even needs to be said at all; worse, that openly doing so in today’s stultified atmosphere feels like an act of heroic daring—is a dismal marker of how successful the Marxist campaign to disrupt and weaken American culture via undermining our understanding of reality itself has been.

Cautionary note to any shitlib who has wandered in here by mistake and now might want to argue that these guys are just your typical Reich-wing fascist H8RRRZ!! pimping the usual revanchist falsehoods, with nary a tolerant liberal bone in their bodies: better think again. I’ll kindly boldface the dispositive parts to make it easier for ya. You can thank me later.

According to Wright and Hilton,  denying the “reality of biological sex” in favor of subjective “gender identity” raises “serious human-rights concerns for vulnerable groups including women, homosexuals and children.”

Women have fought hard for sex-based legal protections. Female-only spaces are necessary due to the pervasive threat of male violence and sexual assault. Separate sporting categories are also necessary to ensure that women and girls don’t have to face competitors who have acquired the irreversible performance-enhancing effects conferred by male puberty. The different reproductive roles of males and females require laws to safeguard women from discrimination in the workplace and elsewhere. The falsehood that sex is rooted in subjective identity instead of objective biology renders all these sex-based rights impossible to enforce.

Denying biological sex also “erases homosexuality” since “same-sex attraction is meaningless without the distinction between the sexes.”

Many activists now define homosexuality as attraction to the “same gender identity” rather than the same sex. This view is at odds with the scientific understanding of human sexuality. Lesbians have been denounced as “bigots” for expressing a reluctance to date men who identify as women. The successful normalization of homosexuality could be undermined by miring it in an untenable ideology.

See what I mean? Scientists whose views include a willingness to condemn the self-serving irrationality spewed by strident “transgender” lunatics openly…yet in the next breath mechanically regurgitate tired liberal shibboleths asserting that the threat of “male violence and sexual assault” is “pervasive,” rather than an aberration affecting only a statistical handful of psychologically disordered and dysfunctional men, tendencies which are condemned by the overwhelming majority; who offer unquestioning support for purported “sex-based rights” that are actually special privileges and status—ie, a pernicious form of sexual discrimination based on prejudiced assumptions; and who fret over the possibility of calling into question the “successful normalization of homosexuality,” which they obviously take to be an unassailable boon to society, rather than the bestowing of yet more special privileges and accomodations they have slowly evolved into; such views are NOT indications of any sort of “Reich-wing” extremism, mmmmkay?

Which just means that biological reality remains difficult for even liberal-leaning scientists to deny, or a couple of them anyway. Nice to know that even now, political correctness only carries some of us so far along the path to inanity and tail-biting irrationality.

God Emperor versus the Small People

S’cuse me if this sounds a little hyperbolic to you, but: a bravura SOTU performance by, hands down, the greatest President in American history.

I know, I know: the word ‘humble’ and the name ‘Trump’ sit uneasily in the same sentence. But read or listen to his State of the Union speeches. Trump proudly retails his achievements. But he also humbly affirms the reality that he is working for and that is much larger than any individual.

The State of the Union address this year was full of touching moments. For me, one of the most touching was the president calling out the great talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who just Monday announced to the world that he had been diagnosed with advanced lung cancer. The president first said that Rush would be receiving the nation’s highest civilian honor — the Presidential medal of Freedom; he then had his wife Melania present the honor on the spot, cinching the pendant around the teary commentator’s neck for all to see.

Donald Trump wasn’t a reality TV host for nothing. He understands drama. So not only did Rush get his Medal of Freedom, but a woman with two young children, whose husband was away in Afghanistan on his fourth deployment, suddenly, unexpectedly got her husband back. The Commander in Chief had ordered the solider returned from Afghanistan. At the agreed upon moment, he came striding down the aisle to embrace his wife and children. Ilhan Omar, who came to the event to represent ‘resistance’ against an ‘illegitimate’ president, just sat there.

Once again, the Democrats were falling over themselves to exhibit their rudeness. On one side of the chamber, people stood up and sat down more often than congregants at a Catholic Mass. Most of the Democrats, however, sat stonily in their seats, snickering or staring at the floor while others around them cheered. Rep. Ayanna Pressley issued a snarling tweet explaining why she would give the State of the Union Address a miss. So did Rep. Maxine Waters. So of course did Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. They and many others proudly displayed their lack of common courtesy and rudimentary civil behavior in order to grandstand and wallow in unrequited feelings of hatred and unstoppable pettiness.

There was, of course, a surreal element to the proceedings. For the last several months, the president has been subject to farcical, wholly partisan impeachment proceedings, in outrageous violation of everything the Framers intended in outlining that awesome safeguard. Donald Trump did not utter the word impeachment during his long speech. Nor did he allude to his Lilliputian tormentors. Wednesday, February 5, 2020, is the day that the Senate votes to acquit the president. Nancy Pelosi said that, no matter what happens, the ‘stain’ of impeachment would always be attached to the name of Donald Trump, a malignant ‘asterisk’ declaring his essential failure. I think that she is right that the history books will feature an asterisk about impeachment. But I predict that it will call attention not to Donald Trump’s bad behavior but to the craven, nakedly partisan efforts of an embittered minority to overturn the results of the 2016 election and forestall the outcome of the 2020 election.

And it will be Pelosi and the Seven Dwarves themselves who will forever carry the indelible stain of their Shampeachment folly, not Trump.

One of (the) most difficult things to achieve is an accurate estimation of one’s age while living through it. The many claims of everyday life, to say nothing of the static of received opinion, makes an unclouded assessment exceedingly difficult. Just so, it is difficult for us, I think, to form a just estimation of Donald Trump. His style is often so foreign to our idea of what a president should be. But not always.  A couple of years ago, when President Trump gave his great speech on foreign policy and national identity in Warsaw, I conjectured that his model was Pericles of Athens. Some people made fun of me for that — ‘comparing Donald Trump to Pericles? Are you kidding me?’ In truth I did not so much compare Trump to Pericles as suggest that Thucydides had provided a model in his account of the Pericles’s Funeral Oration in the first year of the Peloponnesian War.

Thinking back on it now, however, I suspect that I was too stingy with my praise. In my view, Trump’s major speeches — and tonight’s was no exception — will go as among the most eloquent and important in the nation’s history, just as his stupendous, world-changing achievements will be hailed as the fulcrum upon which the nation began to turn its back on the agenda of dependency that has hobbled this country at least since LBJ’s malevolent ‘Great Society’ programs created a permanent underclass and a parasitic bureaucracy to nurture it and feed upon it.

The president’s speech tonight was nothing less than magnificent. Notwithstanding the gnat-like creatures that swarm about him, he has continued to accomplish great things for America. ‘This nation is our canvas,’ he said in his peroration, ‘and this country is our masterpiece. We look at tomorrow and see unlimited frontiers just waiting to be explored. Our brightest discoveries are not yet known. Our most thrilling stories are not yet told. Our grandest journeys are not yet made. The American Age, the American Epic, the American Adventure, has only just begun!’

Adam Schiff was unavailable for comment.

No matter; the pop-eyed, hydrocephalic, sniveling little pussy has never uttered a single syllable worth bothering to listen to anyway. His place in American history, along with his shameless, putrescent colleagues, is assured. It is not one any decent or honorable person would care to occupy.

As Kimball says above, the Limbaugh moment was probably the most poignant, the most moving of a night chock-full of them. Rush was clearly overwhelmed and gratified to be so honored. But Limbaugh’s time in the SOTU spotlight was about more than just him alone. Not to slight Rush in any way whatsoever, of course; as the single man most responsible for the rebirth of American conservatism, for his efforts on behalf of several worthy charitable organizations and the US military specifically, he has earned the highest of accolades many times over.

No, Rush’s hour of grace was bigger, more significant than merely that. Because the simple truth is, the MoF and other such awards and recognitions had been besmirched and sadly diminished by Trump’s vile predecessor, who much preferred to spend his time denigrating America and convincing the rest of us of the essential rightness of its deserved lapse into decay and despair. Who cares, really, about getting an award from a “leader” whose sole interest is in “managing the decline,” whose primary concern is not reversing but accelerating it? What pride can be taken from honors received from the dishonorable, from accolades bestowed by scoundrels, losers, and creeps? Just add patriotism, pride, and the restoration of their previous value to the ever-lengthening list of things Trump has Made Great Again.

For anyone who missed it, I simply must include Trump’s tribute to Limbaugh here:




I confess, I puddled up a little myself watching last night. It was but one of many remarkable moments from Trump’s SOTU. But alas, now we must address the other, uglier side of the coin, though: the disgusting, craven, childish behavior of the hateful brats in the Disloyal Opposition.

As a lead-in to that unpleasantness, another fine moment was this one:

President Donald Trump honored one of the last surviving Tuskegee Airmen at his State of the Union address on Tuesday night.

Charles McGee who is 100-years-old, flew more than 135 combat missions during World War II, attacking targets in Italy and helping support the rescue of 1,000 prisoners of war in Romania.

Mr Trump signed a bill promoting Charles McGee from Colonel to Brigadier General and earlier on Tuesday pinned the stars onto his shoulders during a private ceremony at the Oval Office in the White House. 

More:

Trump pointed to Iain Lanphier, a 13-year-old from Arizona studying at an aviation academy, as a potential recruit for the new Space Force.

“As Iain says, ‘most people look up at space, I want to look down on the world,’” Trump said as he gestured toward the eighth grader.

Sitting next to Lanphier was his great-grandfather, Charles McGee, one of the last surviving Tuskegee Airmen — the first group of African-American fighter pilots, who served in World War II.

Whereupon McGee, looking quite spiffy and squared-away in dress blues complete with full salad-bar, smiled at Trump and snapped off a sharp and proper salute to the CinC, bless his heart. Like the SOTU entire, it was heartwarming. Inspiring. Uplifting.

Incredibly, though, EVEN THIS the goddamnable Democrat-Socialist scum couldn’t bring themselves to applaud. Obviously, they would far rather indulge their own bitter, selfish rage than step back from their partisan game-playing to bestow a moment’s common decency upon a courageous, noble American veteran and his admirable young descendant. They owe—this entire nation owes—one hell of a lot more than a mere modicum of respect to such a one as McGee, more than the most piffling encouragement to a young man dreaming such heady dreams. But the despicable toe-rags couldn’t even trouble themselves to THAT pathetic extent.

Such a display of generosity and humility lies well beyond the pitiful reach of our Democrat-Socialist “leaders.” Francis says it:

To call their attitudes and behavior sour and spiteful is to give them very faint coloration. Every shot of the assembly shows the Democrats resolutely refusing even to smile at the many excellent developments of which President Trump could boast. The sight of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ripping up the copy of the speech, which the president is required by courtesy if not by law to give her, was the jewel in their sour-mouthed, sour-faced crown. It was the plainest of demonstrations that Trump’s success — America’s success — is anathema to them.

Admitting to error is no one’s favorite pastime. It’s particularly galling to politicians. The Democrats have many errors – if errors they were in truth – to answer for. Having Donald Trump, whom they revile personally as well as ideologically, enumerate them to their faces was the bitterest medicine a politician can be fed.

But it was time the Democrats were compelled to face their own record. Not that they’d ever admit that those failures were actually theirs, of course. It was all “Republican obstructionism” or “lack of cooperation from the private sector.” And the public was entitled to see the refutation of it in living color.

As I was thumbing around the radio dial this morning, I tuned into the local talk station for a sec, where I heard the show’s host (no idea who that is; the car radio is usually welded to the local classical-music outlet, but they were playing some excruciating modern Mondo-Weirdo crapola at the time, which will send me diving for the switcher every time) wonder how “any reasonable person could POSSIBLY vote for a Democrat” after last night’s disgraceful tantrum. The thing he’s missing is this: no REASONABLE person would.

By all rights, Trump’s lustrous SOTU triumph should have hammered the final nail into the Demonrat’s coffin, finishing them off as a national Party for all time. It’s stupefying to realize that it won’t; there are still those blighted urban Red zones in play, and the delusional or credulous or just plain stupid voters will low like the witless cattle they are and lumber on off to vote for whatever dog’s breakfast of a candidate the D-S’s manage to puke up for 2020. Assuming they can figure out how to correctly rig a caucus or primary in time to nominate one, which after their Iowa debacle might be doubtful.

Unless he’s captured on video strangling puppies and setting kittens afire on the White House steps before election day, Trump will win a crushing reelection victory over them. But sooner or later, one way or another, they’ll be back. It’s a damned shame, and speaks quite poorly of a significant portion of the American electorate. But…well, there it is.

Update! Full text and video of Trump’s brilliant speech is up here.

They hate us! They really, really hate us!

That’s okay, we hate them right back.

A significant new book by Andrew Marantz, a staff writer at the New Yorker, has reinvigorated the gatekeepers’ efforts to censor the internet. Antisocial: Online Extremists, Techno-Utopians, and the Hijacking of the American Conversation is an account of our ongoing democratic revolution, a historical moment that brings into relief two realizations for Marantz: (1) conservative influencers are now able to out-compete legacy media outlets, and (2) it was this that lead to the election of Donald J. Trump. “[T]hey helped propel their man to the presidency,” he writes.

For Marantz, these two realizations justify all-out censorship of the internet. But his extremism comes as little surprise when you recognize that, from start to finish, Marantz’s argument is grounded in his contempt for the intellectual and moral capacities of ordinary Americans.

At one point in the book, Marantz recalls an encounter with a friend who saw little problem with politically compromising clickbait: “Look, we happen to live in a free country. People can click on terrible links if that’s how they want to spend their time.”

“I made counterarguments,” Marantz writes. “Those terrible links influence what people think, how people behave, who people vote for.” He means, of course, that we can’t trust citizens to choose their own sources of information. So it’s not enough for Marantz to lay the blame for Trumpism on an intellectual deficit; he also blames the “techno-utopians” who fed their terrible information consumption habits.

According to Marantz, a techno-utopian believes that the American people are wise and moral enough to make those distinctions for themselves. They can thus be trusted with an open internet. They have faith that truth and virtue will eventually win out in the open marketplace of ideas. They think that “getting rid of informational gatekeepers” is a victory for democracy. Recall that Reddit’s motto was once “freedom from the press.” Techno-Utopians want to use technology to “democratize [and] give the power to the people.” They might even believe that “the freedom to share opinions online was akin to a human right.” Note the implicit assumption here: that the popularity of some political content is some indication of its moral or intellectual value.

Marantz’s book is a frontal attack on all these beliefs.

Of course it is. He’s a weedy, wormy little twerp whose bloated ego isn’t strong enough to tote the load of his crushing inadequacy. His bilious contempt for the bovine lackwits who refuse to duly acknowledge his self-proclaimed superiority is based mainly on pure envy, as is so often the case. The whole mess of soggy neurosis drives him to reject the very idea of human freedom itself, along with the existence of any “rights” a godlike being such as himself is bound to respect. The stupid, blundering sheep must be herded, for their own good; who better than an enlightened über-shepherd like himself to lead them along the proper path?

This miserable worm is nothing less than the living embodiment of Progressivist ideology and attitudes, on both the micro- and macro-levels. The obnoxiousness; the shameless, completely unjustifiable arrogance; the narcissism; the grandiose self-dramatization; the unshakable belief in the neccessity of a wiser, more capable “elite” class to supervise and manage the affairs of a hapless sub-order dependent on their guidance—this is a pretty good summary of the original mission statement of early-20th-Century Progressivism. Latter-day Progressivists have trimmed these roots only slightly by dropping their progenitors’ open embrace of eugenics as a means of culling the undesirables from the flock, deciding it might be best for all concerned if nobody brings that embarrassing little chapter up anymore, thanks.

The title of Marantz’s book is where the sad irony really lives and breathes. It isn’t any “hijacking of the American conversation” that so frustrates and enrages him; it’s having the ignorant serfs speaking up without permission he finds so damned galling. Unapproved views are now being freely expressed, rather than all and sundry listening in enraptured silence to his exalted pontification, as he so much prefers. Oh, there’s a conversation going on all right, but he’s not invited. Nothing has been “hijacked,” but a few things have been left behind. People like Marantz have nothing new to say, nothing to contribute but more of the same-old same-old. Is it any wonder that fewer and fewer of us seem interested in hearing their tired, century-old lecture recited all over again, only louder and more spitefully this time?

Demented pedophile transvestite, aflame with testosterone-drenched ‘roid rage, clouts reporter upside his haid

Wax my goddamned BALLS, bitchez.

Jonathan Yaniv, the trans activist who goes by “Jessica” and became famous for suing beauticians who would not wax his male genitalia, is making headlines again. Yaniv is on trial for two weapons charges for owning a stun gun and brandishing it on YouTube. Stun guns are illegal in Canada. On Monday, Keean Bexte with Rebel News was covering the trial when Yaniv, on exiting the courthouse, charged at him. Bexte says Yaniv punched him in the head. The camera footage seems to back that up.

A commenter pointed out that Yaniv was mysterious without the famous scooter he normally rides around on claiming he is disabled. He doesn’t appear to be disabled as he is attacking Bexte. Normally when Yaniv attacks reporters he does it with his cane or while on a scooter.

My, how very womanly of you, Jonathan. The assaultee offered Jonny-boy a respectful tip o’ the cap for throwing a pretty hefty punch, adding “I need an Advil!” Maybe not all that big a surprise, I suppose, given Yaniv’s weight class and deep, seething hostility.

You read it here first, folks: sometime over the next year, this violent degenerate attempts suicide. And most likely fails. Not all that precarious a limb to crawl out onto, I admit. But still.

Predictable as the sunrise

In an otherwise good piece, Roger Kimball whiffs bigly on one important thing:

The disaster of Flight 752 took place in the context of the liquidation of the terrorist mass-murderer Qasem Soleimani last week by the United States on the order of President Donald Trump. But that courageous and far-seeing act itself took place in the context of Iran’s decades-long assault on American and, more broadly, on Western institutions that promote a culture of tolerance and religious freedom.

The fact that many U.S. news outlets and Democratic politicians instantly coalesced around Soleimani as a “revered” military leader tells us what great inroads Stockholm Syndrome has made among American elites. 

Sorry, Rog, it does no such thing. What it actually tells us is just how low those treasonous blackguards are willing to stoop to attach themselves to true, real-world evil if they think they might somehow grub some cheap political points from it; how reflexively they will always side with America’s enemies, no matter what; how deeply, deeply desperate they are to somehow hold onto power and position by attacking Trump; and how there can be no more fitting, just, or accurate a condemnation of them than to simply name them as traitors, the unabashed enemies of this country.

Last week, Donald Trump eliminated one of Iran’s most potent emissaries of death and destruction. All the beautiful people huddled together and wailed that Trump had just “destabilized” the Middle East (had it been stable beforehand?), that his “unilateral” action was illegal, counterproductive, immature, that, ultimately, he may have started World War III.

That was then. Now it looks as though he may have sparked the great unraveling of theocratic totalitarian control in Iran. And this just in: the Iranians apparently have just arrested the British ambassador. Arrested. In civilized countries, if there is an issue with a diplomat, one expels him. In civilized countries. But this is the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Someday, the world will stand back and applaud Trump for his canny and farseeing statesmanship. I do not assert that that recognition is coming any time soon. But come it will.

Most likely, yeah. But not from the Treasoncrats and Enemedia—not unless and until they can use Trump as a weapon for dishonestly smearing some future candidate as the new Second Coming Of Literally Hitler, they won’t.

Update! Schlichter calls ’em out.

You spent the last three years babbling like idiots about “traitors” and “treachery.” Well, head docs call that “projection.” You are siding with the enemy in a war against the United States. And yeah, Iran has been at war with the United States for 40 years, ever since your peanut-farming, half-wit fellow Dem handed over the keys to the country to a bunch of Seventh Century Pennywises. The least you could do is show a little respect to the people trying to clean up your party’s mess.

Your party’s latest triumph is blaming Donald Trump because these drooling morons shot down a passenger airliner the night they launched missiles at our American soldiers. What the hell is wrong with you? Are you sick? Are you stupid? Are you huffing that funny powder you found in Hunter Biden’s medicine cabinet? What would ever have possessed you to start making excuses for people trying to kill Americans?

It’s nothing new for them. After all, it was, what, like two days after 9/11 before they all started preachifying in their oh-so-superior way that we had that coming too? They can’t help themselves; it’s who they are, it’s what they do. They’ve been this way for far too long already, and couldn’t stop now if they tried. Go ahead and ask the scorpion not to sting the frog while you’re at it, you’ll end up with the same result.

When you’ve lost Boy George…

Even yesteryear’s cutting-edge weirdos can see how absurd they’ve become.

Karma Chameleon singer Boy George is stirring the pot on Twitter by declaring transgender pronoun culture to be “as ridiculous as it gets!”

The English pop star had initially tweeted, “Leave your pronoun’s (sic) at the door!” to his roughly 468,000 followers, with no further explanation as to the context. When one of his fans tweeted back, “As much as I love you, that does sound quite ridiculous,” George responded, “You must refer to me as ‘Napoleon’ and that’s as ridiculous as it gets!” referring to the trend among trans people demanding that people call them by their “preferred gender pronouns.”

A pretty good yardstick for calculating how far around the bend the Loony Left has gone in recent years, I’d call it.

Comments policy

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

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

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

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

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

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

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

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

Shameless begging

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:

Fuck you

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Rss feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

Contact


mike at this URL dot com

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

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

Copyright © 2020