Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

“Democratic socialism” and equality before the law

Incompatible and contradictory.

Observing the media hijinks and economic moronity of Democrat hopeful Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is prepared to increase taxation to unsustainable levels to pay for the socialist dream – “universal health care, tuition free higher education, and the 100 percent use of renewable energy, among other programs” – I could not help but reflect that infinity can be measured only by the extent of human stupidity.

Ocasio-Cortez, a lightweight even on the Bernie Sanders scale, is merely the latest in a long line of what we call today “democratic socialists” or “social justice warriors.” They are oblivious to the proven fact that socialism never works, that it has failed wherever it has been tried, that a centralized state and a command economy inevitably lead to rampant inefficiency, reduced incentive to compete and innovate, diminished production, economic stagnation, and ultimately to one or another version of the police state, whether the “velvet totalitarianism” that John Furedy speaks of or sheer brutal repression – in current terms, the Venezuela option. Socialism is the enemy not only of human flourishing and individual freedom, but, as we will note shortly, of the concept of equality before the law.

“Democratic socialism” is a contradiction in terms – or it is democratic in the same way as death is, reducing everyone to the same level. Socialism is no less a grim reaper than mortality. Similarly, “social justice” has nothing to do with the Western legacy of equality before the law. Clearly, people are not equal with respect to character, intelligence, aptitude, moral fiber, personal responsibility, and motivation, but they should be equal before the law. “Democratic socialism” ignores the complexity of human personality by reducing difference to a lowest common denominator just as “social justice” is dismissive of individual contributions to the well-being of the state. What such fantasy-laden constructs call “equality” is nothing but the dispensation of unearned privilege to the masses, culminating inexorably in the imposition of a featureless collective.

Socialism is a perversion of both equality and justice, the weaponizing of the law in the service of an unfeasible ideal and the progressivist legalization of outright theft, which can result only in the eventual destabilization of the state. It terminates in the society of Harrison Bergeron, in which everyone is equal only in the sense that everyone, apart from an echelon of exploiters, is equally poor, equally deprived, and equally miserable. This is not what Amos would have conceived as justice.

But it is what the Ocasio-Cortezes of the world – and they are legion – would in their risible ignorance inflict upon the rest of us, if we are lunatic enough to allow them. Florida candidate for governor Ron DeSantis is on the mark when he points to the utter folly of Ocasio-Cortez “running around saying, well, capitalism is going to die and…that socialism is the wave of the future. And as somebody who lives in Florida, I can tell you, we probably have more refugees from socialist countries – Cuban-Americans, Venezuelans, Nicaraguans – then just about any state…and certainly they can tell you socialism doesn’t work. It’s a failed philosophy.”

Or, to go back to the Powerline meme collection:


Fleeing-capitalism.jpg


If socialism really IS “the wave of the future,” the future is gonna really, really suck.

Update! OG blogger Stephen fisks the living hell out of a socialism-pimping Reuters propaganda piece.

First the headline, which reads: “Once oil wealthy, Venezuela’s largest state struggles to keep the lights on.”

That headline gives the impression that Venezuela has run out of oil, but nothing could be further from the truth. The country still possesses the world’s largest oil reserves, so there’s plenty of oil wealth. It’s still right there in the ground. It hasn’t gone anywhere. The problem is that Bolivarian socialism has ruined the country’s extraction industry, but you wouldn’t know that from anything in the entire story.

Here’s the second graf:

The rolling power blackouts in the state of Zulia pile more misery on Venezuelans living under a fifth year of an economic crisis that has sparked malnutrition, hyperinflation and mass emigration. OPEC member Venezuela’s once-thriving socialist economy has collapsed since the 2014 fall of oil prices.

When Hugo Chavez took over the country in 1998 and began imposing his socialist regime, oil prices were at around $18 a barrel. Twenty years later they’ve “collapsed” to… about $70, with some temporary lows around $40 or so.

That is to say, oil prices since 2014 have averaged about triple what they were in 1998. And from ’98 to 2014, oil was mostly on an upward trajectory and routinely went for well over $100. So the question isn’t how this “crisis” was caused by a “collapse” in oil prices. The question is: What the hell did Maduro and Chavez do with all the damn money?

Here we have a story detailing Venezuela’s economic collapse, and every single problem can be explained by two words: Because socialism. And yet the only time reporter Mayela Armas uses the word socialism, it’s in the context of a “once-thriving socialist economy.”

It never WAS a “once-thriving socialist economy”—because when they went socialist, the economy stopped thriving. Just like they all do, every single time. One thing Stephen gets wrong, though: he calls this propaganda “malignantly uninformed,” but it’s more like MISinformed. Or, to be more precise, dezinformatsiya.

Share

“Some racism is more equal than others”

Hound the NYT, harrass them, don’t let up for a moment. It’s doubtful that we’ll ever persuade them to give up their new house racist; she’s nothing more than a reflection of the views they already hold themselves, and we have no sway with them whatsoever. But we can at least make their—and her—lives miserable for a while, and that ain’t nothing.

As CNN’s Jim Acosta grandstanded his way out of a White House press briefing on Thursday because the administration portrays the news media in an adversarial light that he claims endangers journalists, the Times hired a woman who equates Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler. Why, other than to inspire an Operation Valkyrie, does anyone with a megaphone compare the elected president of the United States with a genocidal monster? Acosta advocates producing chants, buttons, and bumper stickers protesting the White House, apparently in an effort to persuade the public that the president is wrong to regard the press as an enemy.

Some people miss their irony.

More than a generation ago, The Media Elite reported a survey of 240 journalists at major publications showing that in the four presidential elections from 1964 to 1976 the press never voted by less than a 4-to-1 margin for the Democratic candidate. A 2014 study by Indiana University professors Lars Willnat and David Weaver indicated that the number of Republicans among full-time journalists dropped from 18 percent in 2002 to seven percent in 2013. Anecdotal evidence, such as the New York Times editorial board hiring a crackpot and CNN assigning a zealot to cover the White House, suggests that the media became more ideologically homogenous in the intervening few years.

Hypocrisy may color the media’s crusades for diversity in other fields as journalism remains a stuff-white-people-like profession. Something far worse characterizes its lockstep conformity of opinion.

Something far worse still characterizes their frantic lust to enforce that conformity of opinion on everyone else at the point of the Big Government gun.

Share

Still the same

Who gives a shit?

Since April, 1992, an international peacekeeping or monitoring force of some type has attempted to reduce the mayhem in war-wracked Somalia. Subtract 1992 from 2018: you get 26 years.

Prepare to add more. This week the UN Security Council voted to maintain the UN and African Union Somali peacekeeping operation (African Union Mission in Somalia, AMISOM) through at least 2020.

Troops from Kenya, Uganda, Burundi, Djibouti and Ethiopia man AMISOM and do the brunt of the fighting and security work in southern Somalia. AMISOM soldiers battle Al Shabaab Islamist terrorists, protect the national government in Mogadishu, the capital, and attempt to separate warring Somali clans.

Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti have immediate security interests in Somalia. Al Shabaab has struck Uganda with several terrible terror attacks. It makes sense their troops serve with AMISOM.

American special operations forces also conduct raids, drone attacks and surveillance missions against Al Shabaab.

Why are Americans involved? Al Shabaab has ties to al-Qaida and the Islamic State. In 2006, the group managed to seize Mogadishu. 2006 pre-dates the Islamic State but Al Shabaab envisioned establishing a militant terrorist state. To be succinct, Somalia in 2006, like Afghanistan in 2001, was an anarchic nowhere apocalyptic terrorists could use to launch global attacks.

So create a highly radioactive glass-lined crater where Somalia used to be and call the job done, then. Lather, rinse, repeat with Afghanistan and any other Muslim shithole that even looks like attacking us, until the mere thought of doing such makes them involuntarily wet themselves in terror.

Yeah, I know, ain’t gonna happen. But a fella can dream, can’t he? The truth is, Somalia ain’t worth the cost of a single Blackhawk helicopter, much less the lives of those American soldiers who died in Bill Fucking Clinton’s ill-advised, bumbling, pointless, and costly UN-mandated clusterfuck there. The idea of involving ourselves there again to any more complicated or risky degree than simply nuking the site from orbit makes me very nearly ill with disgust. Somalia is their shithole; they made it what it is. So let them fix it, then…or not, as they may prefer. Whatever.

Share

Reverse evolution

Wait, Miranda Veracuz de Jolla Cardinale Occasional-Cortex was actually right once?

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the socialist congressional candidate from New York who touts honesty and authenticity as her greatest strengths, used to describe herself as a follower of Adam Smith, the so-called father of capitalism — and said that terms like “feminism” and “empowerment” were “relics from the past.”

Since then, Ocasio-Cortez has come out as an unapologetic democratic socialist, wishing to see greater taxation and expansion and creation of wide-ranging social programs such as a single-payer health care system, free education, and housing as a right.

“I think my strength is I’m honest and authentic,” she told “The Daily Show” host Trevor Noah last week. Those qualities helped her in June to beat top Democrat Joe Crowley, whose name was floated as the next speaker of the U.S. House.

But not that long ago, 28-year-old Ocasio-Cortez harbored a lot milder if not radically different views.

So, if Churchill’s (apocryphal) proposition—if you’re not a liberal at 20, you have no heart; if you’re not a conservative at 40, you have no brain—holds, it would seem that Occasional-Cortex, with her personal journey of intellectual de-evolution, has neither heart NOR brain, then.

Share

One step closer

Guess all my “careful what you wish for, libs” warnings are falling on deaf ears.

A new undercover video from James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas features Antifa “fight instructors” teaching activists how to incapacitate political enemies by violently attacking them.

“If you get a good liver or kidney shot, it’s pretty much crippling them,” the Antifa instructor said. “They’re going to be pretty much doubled over and in a lot of pain.”

The instructor also recommended breaking one of the floating ribs to cause maximum pain on a victim. “It’s hard to move after that — to catch a breath,” he added helpfully. He told the activists that once the target is incapacitated, they can either run away or “really put a beating on them” if they want to “make it personal.”

The instructor said if they don’t knock the victim out, they should punch him in the nose or poke him in the eyes.

Well, okay, there’s that. Then there’s this.

“Why do you think you need a gun?”

It’s a question I suspect we all get asked at one time or another. We often answer that we carry for our protection, to defend ourselves or others. Others reply with a snarky, “It’s not called the ‘Bill of Needs,’ now is it?” Neither person is wrong, nor are many of the other thousands of potential answers.

However, it seems that some in Antifa are telling protestors looking to counter a right-leaning rally in Portland to “bring their own guns.”

I’m not about to tell those who are going to demonstrate peacefully to leave their guns at home, either. While I don’t want to see shootings take place, I want to see innocent people injured or killed even less. All people have a right to defend themselves, and that doesn’t change because of circumstances.

If anyone should leave their guns at home, it’s the group known to start fights over ideological differences, namely Antifa.

The Proud Boys would be no more than smart to arm up, knowing as they must that they’re attempting free speech in the no-free-speech zone of Leftardia, Oregon. As such, they can expect to be hounded, harrassed, and physically assaulted, with no support or protection of any kind from law “enforcement,” who will assuredly look the other way as rally-goers are encircled and viciously beaten by large groups of masked cowards.

People on our side tend to bluster a bit about Civil War 2.0, asserting that the Left needs to be careful about pushing us too far lest they get their heads handed to them with a quickness. I’ve done it plenty myself, in fact, and am still inclined to think it so. But it might also be that such talk is closely akin to that preceding CW 1.0, when both sides assumed that one good, hard skirmish would settle the issue, with all the air rushing out of the other side’s will to fight following a solid demonstration of serious intent. Once the balloon went up for real, the one side would realize that the other was serious, stack arms, and go home.

It didn’t work out that way at all, of course; the most notable thing about the first Civil War was its bloody ferocity, the willingness of rank and file farmboys, shopkeepers, and factory hands to stand firm and slaughter each other at close quarters until none were left upright—very nearly literally—again and again, over the course of years.

Against all previous expectation, the Southern soldiers in particular fought on well past the point of no hope—exhausted, outnumbered, clothed in rags, shoeless, half-starved, weary, far from home, with rocks and clubs when their ammunition ran out. Very few of them owned slaves, or knew someone who did. A fair number of my own ancestors fought for the Confederacy, and not one of them had so much as a pot to piss in, as they used to say. Slavery was an issue far, far removed from them, with little relevence. Yet they fought anyway, doggedly and without thought of surrender.

Might it not turn out the same today? How seriously does the Left take its openly-declared assessment of us as evil, murderous, bigoted, Nazi despots out to do grievous harm to all within our greedy grasp? Can people who don’t even understand what socialism is be deluded enough to lay down their lives to defend it anyway?

All signs point to yes. On the other hand, though…

FreakFags.jpg

I dunno, I gotta say I like Team Patriot’s chances here.

Share

On the necessity of PWNING the libs

That last post reminded me to check in on Schlichter in his regular spot.

You must have a heart of stone not to giggle in delight as you watch them howl with outrage while you crank them over the flames on the Twitter rotisserie.

But owning the libs is more than just delightful. It is absolutely necessary. Why? Morale – that intangible factor, combined with fearless leadership, that means the difference between total defeat and unexpected, legendary victory: Little Round Top, Rourke’s Drift, and yeah, the upcoming midterms.

Owning the libs is a rejection of their dominance and an assertion of our own. It is a way of not only saying, “We will not submit,” but of demonstrating that refusal to others. There is a reason the motto of the infantry is “Follow me,” and not “Uh, you guys go on ahead.”

People are not led to triumph by cowards, by wimps, or by submissive weasels who take heaps of garbage and then explain away their refusal to hit back by sobbing, “We’re better than that!”

People are not better than that. They want to fight back, but for that they must have morale, and morale requires that they need to see others fight back too. And when they don’t, morale collapses, there is a rout, and the bad guys win.

Let’s be clear about who the bad guys are, because in this struggle there are good guys (us) and there are bad guys. The bad guys are the people who outright tell us that they hope to strip away our freedom of speech. They tell us they want to circumscribe our religious practices to the point at which – maybe, if we’re good little boys and girls and non-binary beings – they might let us quietly practice our faith out of sight, maybe. They are the ones who call for us to be disarmed, then also call for us to be exiled from society, hounded, battered, and even murdered. My novels People’s Republic and Indian Country paint a picture of the hellscape they want to create.

Anyone who presumes to lead us and does not believe that we are in the right, that we are the good guys, is unfit to lead us. The bottom line is that we need to defeat the other side, and you don’t do that through moral equivalence, passivity, and submission. Non-owning is a non-starter.

Y’know, now and then I just have to sit back and marvel at how guys like Kurt manage to just keep on crankin’ out good stuff like this day after day, week after week, year after year. It’s remarkable, is what it is.

Share

“Sick, twisted racism”

They’re not even bothering to try to hide their hate anymore.

On Wednesday, the New York Times hired Sarah Jeong to join their editorial board. Shortly thereafter, Jeong’s old racist tweets emerged.

The tweets aren’t exactly ancient history. In 2014 and 2015, Jeong — senior writer at the Verge — unleashed a few Twitter tirades against people with a lighter complexion. She seems to have deleted them now, but screenshots showing the tweets (and her new Twitter bio as “soon to be editorial board @nytimes”) have surfaced on the Internet.

“Dumba** f**king white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs p**sing on fire hydrants,” Jeong tweeted in November 2014. Ouch! Not only a profanity-laced tirade, but a tirade comparing people to dogs because of the color of their skin!

“Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins,” she wondered in December 2014. Make no mistake, she suggested a whole race of people were unfit for above ground habitation due to the color of their skin.

In July 2014, Jeong admitted to taking a sick pleasure from being cruel to people based on the color of their skin. “It’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men,” she confided. This confession did not specify what Jeong did to men based on their age and the color of their skin, but she did admit taking pleasure in cruelty.

Yeah, well, in the unlikely event she ever tries something “cruel” on THIS old white man, what she’ll wind up getting isn’t going to give her any pleasure at all.

The NYT, naturally, issued a quite lame defense of their brand-spanking new hire which, who cares.

Anybody out there still feeling good about our chances of being able to live peaceably cheek-by-jowl with “people” like this? If so, could you maybe explain to me just how you figger it?

I swiped my title from a Schlichter tweet posted by Insty:



I dunno, Kurt. Trump should mention it, sure. In fact, he should wave it like a bloody flag in LibMedia’s face every time they go all ragged and weepy about A) their self-asserted integrity and lack of “bias”; B) the environment of “danger” welling up in response to their open contempt for us; C) the very idea that the “news” they present might be of the “fake” variety. But honestly, I don’t see anybody being able to make them defend anything at all; at this point, they quite obviously no longer care who sees how overflowing with insane hatred they are.

Share

Piling on

Even Klavan—no Trump guy, he—can’t resist batting the squeaky little cat toy around a bit.

New York Times Publisher A.G. Sulzberger says he told Trump his anti-press rhetoric could lead to violence. But the media’s anti-Trump rhetoric already has led to violence: public officials rat-packed and bullied, Trump supporters harassed, White House spokes-lady Sarah Sanders having to live under guard. And yet when Sanders pointed this out to Look-At-Me-I’m-Jim Acosta, Acosta stormed out of the room. Hell, if he doesn’t want to hear the truth, he could just stay home and watch CNN.

What’s also appalling is that reporters answered Sanders by reminding her of the tragic shooting of journalists in Maryland. But that had nothing to do with Trump. It was the personal grudge of a madman. Even when these knuckleheads are protesting being called Fake News, they are purveying Fake News. Remarkable.

But most remarkable is this: the media seems to take no responsibility for the anger in the country. Not once — not one time — have I seen a reporter come onscreen and say, “Hey, you know what, maybe we are biased. Maybe we haven’t listened. Maybe we have been arrogant and insulting. Maybe we do bear some responsibility for the anger against us.”

When Muslim extremists destroyed the World Trade Center, David Letterman and others among the chattering classes went on TV and wondered: “Why do they hate us?” But they can’t take the time to ask the same question about their fellow citizens. The Islamists are murdering pigs. Who cares why they hate us? These Trump supporters are just ordinary folks. If they were screaming at me, I’d do a moral inventory on myself before blaming them.

Yeah, but see, you have at least a modicum of good sense and humility, Andrew. Which makes for a pretty stark contrast with those shitbirds.

Update! Walsh also puts the boot in:

The old journalistic ladder looked something like this: a year or so on the police beat in Dubuque, followed by a stint covering the local county and perhaps federal courts for a newspaper in Portland, and then, if the reporter was able enough, a job on one of the big-city papers in New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles. Not every piece had to have a political angle; not every lede needed to include a slighting reference to the president of the United States; not every opening graf needed to mischaracterize or refute the Republican/conservative position on any given topic. In fact, attitudinizing was strictly forbidden: it was talent that mattered, not the correct opinions.

Now the White House beat has become an entry-level reporting job, in the course of which the callowest of youths, or the most airheaded among the former beauty queens, can sass the objects of their coverage, mock them, call them liars, and generally act out in public. (Yes, Jim Acosta, we’re talking about you.)

This constant irruption of mindless prattle might be amusing were it not such a terrible commentary on the state of “journalism” today. And when the tables are turned, and the public gives the reporters a taste of their own crude hostility, the media freaks out and, of course, blames Trump, falsely claiming that a little civilian pushback against a group of people who openly despise them is somehow a direct threat to the First Amendment and might even get some reporters killed. The fact that, as far as I know, there has never been a single pampered White House correspondent killed in the line of duty, not only never seems to pierce the veil of their heroic fantasies, but it also dishonors the many great reporters who actually did die for their profession, among them Mark Kellogg (who died at the Little Bighorn with Custer) and Ernie Pyle, killed at Okinawa in 1945.

There’s precious little they don’t dishonor.

Updated update! OHH, talk about piling on!


Acosta-Thompson.jpg

Courtesy of WRSA.

Share

Acosta doubles down

And steps in it again.


The truth IS prevailing, Jimmy boy. That’s what’s happening right now…and it’s driven your side right into daylight barking madness.

Pro tip: you and your faux-journalist ilk aren’t supposed to even HAVE a side, Jimbo. But you do, and we all know you do. Hannity gets the last word:


Bang fucking ZOOM.

(Via Breitbart)

Share

“Journalists and their hangers-on are doing more to encourage violence against journalists than Trump is”



And then another libmedia drooltard chimed in to support his fellow propagandist:

In a now-deleted tweet, Caputo commented on the video, saying, “If you put everyone’s mouths together in this video, you’d get a full set of teeth.”

In another deleted tweet, he responded to a tweet castigating his mockery of Trump supporters. “Oh no! I made fun of garbage people jeering at another person as they falsely accused him of lying and flipped him off. Someone fetch a fainting couch,” Caputo wrote.

“Oh no! Some real Americans called Acosta out to his face for his open contempt of them, his and his network’s dishonest fake-news “journalistic” malpractice, and his general asswipery—verbally, without resorting to actual violence like liberals do. Someone fetch him a fresh clean diaper!”

Right back atcha, asshole.

Caputo then apologized for his insulting outburst, which, who cares. Insty offers thoughts:

Two points: (1) Yes, this is what the press thinks about Trump supporters, and this now-deleted tweet was an honest reflection of that. It’s totally hypocritical for people like Acosta to clutch their pearls about Trump’s “rhetoric” given how they treat, and talk about, his supporters. And as for their fear that Trump’s “rhetoric” might lead to violence, note how they skip right over the fact that Democrat James Hodgkinson shot GOP Congressman Steve Scalise as he tried to massacre the Republican House leadership.

(2) What’s worse is, Caputo’s actually one of the better political reporters, willing to report stuff that hurts Democrats and helps Republicans without sweeping it under the rug. That’s good, but if he thinks this way, what are the rest like?

And yes, he offered a solid apology. But that doesn’t change the attitude that his original statement revealed, or the fact that it seems to be widely shared among his press colleagues.

Fuck Caputo, fuck Acosta, fuck the whole filthy lot of them. The loathing and contempt for normal Americans their ilk can’t seem to help themselves expressing is reciprocated in full measure out here. Whining and bleating about “hate” and “violence” coming from these oozing chancres is pretty rich considering their own ongoing incitement to violence—incitement which has resulted in actual, y’know, hate and violence.

538, motherfuckers. That ain’t some prissy journo-dink’s fear or fantasy; that’s an actual, hard number of verifiable media applause for acts of shitlib violence against their opposition. In one corner, we have that; in the other, we have people making Wee Jimmy Winky wet himself by yelling “CNN sucks” in his pinched little face.

One of these things is NOT like the other.

“The press is not the enemy”? Like bleeding hell it ain’t. These guys are just upset that now we know it, and they’re shit-scared of the possibility of getting some of their own splashed back on them at last.

Well, cry me a river, you lying pissant pricks. This is just the opening bell; you sniveling curs have got a lot more like it and worse coming, and you’ve earned everything you might get, plus some.

Share

Crazy, not socialist?

Embrace the healing power of “and.”

Trump’s victory tore the mask from the Democrats leaving them nothing but rage. Formerly mainstream Democrats are quick to embrace every insane lefty position from abolishing borders to supporting Hamas, not because they understand or believe in them, but because they’re “resisting” Trump.

The socialists think they’re winning. But they’re just the guys shouting things at a crazy mob. And the mob is not really for anything, it’s just enraged. It doesn’t want to build, it wants to tear down.

Tweak a normal person’s sense of outrage and they’re moved. Keep doing it a bunch of times and you can enlist them in a movement. Do it every 5 seconds and you drive them as crazy as rats in a Skinner Box. And if you want to see a sample of the Dem Skinner Box, here are a few Nancy Pelosi emails.

“A matter of life or death,” “I’m so furious I can barely write this email,” “As if it couldn’t get worse today,” EVISCERATED,” “I’m scared”, and “DOOMED”.

Peak Outrage induces feelings of frustrations, fury, helplessness and despair.

That’s why you have lefties gathering together to scream at the sky. That’s not the behavior of committed activists building a socialist future. It’s what happens when leaders drive people crazy. Everyone has emotional limits, just as they have physical limits. The madness of Germans at a Hitler rally or Russians mourning Stalin is the end result of people reaching the limits of their emotional sanity.

Madness ensues.

The ultimate beneficiaries of Peak Outrage won’t be the socialists. Crazy people who have been mainlining hate and fear for a decade aren’t really interested in nationalizing health care. They’ll cheer socialism if there’s nothing else on the table and convince themselves briefly that they care. But what they really want is someone to liberate them from their rage and helplessness by destroying the two sources of those emotions, the reviled Republicans and their own failed Democrat leaders.

They don’t want Alexadria Ocasio-Cortez. They want to be freed of their sense of helplessness.

No reason it can’t be both—especially if they believe, as they seem to, that Miranda Veracruz de la Jolla Cardinale Occasional-Cortex can be the instrument of their liberation. This part, though, is right on the button:

The left created a monster. And it thinks that it’s riding the monster. But you don’t control monsters.

That’s what makes them monsters.

The monster that the left created doesn’t believe in things. It hates them. It’s roaring with anger and pain. The Frankensteins of the left made the monster in their social media laboratory by taking away its hopes and replacing them with fears, keeping it angry and afraid until it was ready to open fire at a Republican charity baseball practice or phone in death threats to a congressman’s dog.

Socialists made the monster. As they always do. But as history shows us, monsters eat socialists. Ask the old Bolsheviks, Mao’s old pals or all the leftists shot by other leftists in the Spanish Civil War.

As always, they all assume they’ll be part of the nomenklatura in charge of things. They’ll go on thinking it, right up until they’re put up against a wall or heaved into a gulag by those who really ARE in charge of things. And that, folks, is why they’ve always been known as “useful idiots.”

Share

“Cerulean tsunami”?

Polls are bunk. They’re masturbatory amusements for people who either are obssessed with politics, or make their living off of them in one way or another.

Mark Penn, chairman of the Harris Poll and former pollster to President Clinton from 1995 to 2000, provides a description of the polling business that few pollsters or media types will find flattering. In a recent column for the Hill, he indicted the “pundit-polling-news establishment” for studiously ignoring the blindingly obvious lessons of 2016. In his estimation, the major polling firms and news organizations to whom they purport to provide objective data have made no meaningful changes in the methodology that led them to miss the seismic shift in voter attitudes that led to President Trump’s 2016 victory:

Almost two years later, very little has changed in polling and analysis at major institutions and news media. If anything, the polling has drifted even further from reality when you look at the questions being asked and, more importantly, the questions not being asked. You don’t need polls to see the America you live in. You need polls to understand the part of America you don’t know.

Penn clearly believes that the use of public opinion surveys as information-gathering tools with which to gauge the general mood and specific concerns of the voters is a dying art. They are now used primarily to reinforce the editorial line of the news organization for which they are ostensibly gathering information. If a news network or publication is opposed to the policies of President Trump, the pollsters tend to “focus on the anti-Trump storyline as though the point of the questions is to prove the validity of that coverage.” That may keep the customer satisfied, but it also means the “polling could be missing reality, again.”

And that is not good news for the Democrats. They can’t win a majority in either house of Congress based on media happy talk about public opinion polls that tell you more about who’s paying for them than what the voters are actually thinking. Which brings us to all those “news” stories about the generic ballot and the allegedly imminent blue wave. Does any of it really mean anything? Probably not. 

The only poll that counts is the one held on election day.

Glenn is always reminding us “don’t get cocky,” which is good enough advice in most any situation, I suppose. But the Democrat Socialists have absolutely nothing to offer but more of the same tired Tyranny Party agenda whose disastrous 70-year tenure has brought us: economic collapse; international humiliation; escalating threats from dangerous enemies which were met not with defiant resolve but with groveling, appeasement, and bribery; urban riots perpetrated with impunity by mouthy brats, wastrel ghetto thugs, and masked revolutionaries; strangling bureaucracy and red tape choking out individual freedom and independence; a refusal to properly exploit our natural resources in favor of promoting unworkable “renewable” energy with government money; rising taxes, spending, regulation, and government interference; invasion by hordes of illegal aliens and hostile, unassimilable jihadists; a failed government takeover of the health care system that resulted in more confusion, higher costs, and longer waits for inferior care—these and lots more (and worse) are the true planks of the Democrat Socialist platform.

That’s been their platform for years, which is bad enough in the current climate. But it’s even worse for them now; all they have to add to that litany of loserdom is their lunatic rejection of Trump and the numerous undeniable benefits his unraveling of Progtard-mandated decline, destruction, degeneracy, and anomie have already shown. I could be all wet, but all this being so—and it is—I just can’t see any “blue wave” washing up on these shores anytime soon.

Share

Draft horses of America, unite!

You have nothing to lose but your harness…and a passel of whining, over-entitled parasites who don’t know their asses from an inner tube with wrinkles painted on it.

Congratulations, oh most insufferable of generations – against all odds and confounding the experts, you have still somehow managed to make yourselves even more annoying. Apparently, the hep new jive among your tiresome cohort is “Democratic Socialism,” resurrecting a poisonous nineteenth-century political death cult and putting a kicky new spin on it to make it palatable for the suckers. It’s the political equivalent of hipsters who insist vinyl records are superior because they didn’t grow up forced to crank their tunes on that miserable format.

The “Democratic” part is some cunning rebranding. Just stick “Democratic” in front of something awful and it’s good-to-go. “Democratic haggis”? Yummy! “Democratic herpes”? Sexy! “Democratic Nazism?” Hey, what’s the difference? National socialism, democratic socialism? It’s really just a question of who runs the camps because regardless of the particular brand of socialism, there are always camps.

Always.

No one loves socialism quite like a moron who has never experienced it firsthand. No one hates it like someone who has seen it up close. I walked around in its ruins overseas; it’s an abattoir. My wife escaped it, though her granddad didn’t – he rotted in Castro’s prisons for nearly two decades because he refused to play ball with the reds. Then he died. Oh well, gotta break a few eggs to create a paradise where somebody else pays for your college, right?

Just remember that you are an egg.

Kurt throws some very choice words at bug-eyed Mental Giant and Future Of The Democrat Socialist Party Miranda Veracruz de la Jolla Cardinale Occasional-Cortex, too. But did he say “moron” just now? Why yes, I do believe he did. And as sterling an example as she is, the word doesn’t apply only to her, either.

Democrats are less likely to know what socialism is compared to other voters but have a much more favorable opinion of it. They stop well short, however, of thinking the Democratic Party should become a national socialist party.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 28% of all Likely U.S. Voters think the national Democratic party should officially declare itself a socialist party. Fifty-three percent (53%) disagree, while 18% are undecided.

Still, 51% of Democrats have a favorable impression of socialism, with 13% who share a Very Favorable one. This compares to favorables of 21% among GOP voters and 26% among unaffiliateds, with seven percent (7%) and five percent (5%) respectively who hold a Very Favorable opinion of it.

Twenty-nine percent (29%) of Democrats, however, incorrectly believe the individual has more power than the government in a socialist system, a view held by just 12% of Republicans and seventeen percent (17%) of unaffiliated voters.

Never forget, folks, they’re smarterer than you. If you don’t believe it, just ask ’em.

Those under 40 have a much more favorable opinion of socialism than their elders do and are the strongest supporters of Democrats becoming a national socialist party. But younger voters are also the most likely to believe the individual has more power under a socialist system.

Liberals like socialism a lot more than moderates and conservatives do and are much more likely to think it empowers the individual. But conservatives are the biggest fans of Democrats becoming a socialist party.

Actually, that isn’t quite right: I don’t think any of us is particularly happy that that’s what they in fact have become. What we’re in favor of is them owning up to the sad fact at last. But then, socialists ain’t exactly known for their honesty, as Schlichter reminds us:

Socialism’s perfect record of failure, misery, and slaughter is kind of a problem for them, so they pivot and distract, playing an ideological shell game by claiming that what they really want isn’t socialism. Why, they just want to be more like Canada! This, of course, begs the question of why they call themselves “socialists” if they don’t want socialism. But Normals are woke; they prefer their freedom and abundant toilet paper. They know that the current socialist fad is a lie, because socialism is built on lies. The democratic socialists keep promising Denmark and Norway, but they always deliver Cuba and Venezuela.

Of course, as I’ve noted here before myself, Norway isn’t really quite as socialist as all that, and other Scandinavian countries are beginning to back rapidly away from the Great Third-Way Experiment that has impoverished them. But socialism aside, ideology aside, honestly representing who and what they are is what the Democrat-Socialist criminal conspiracy masquerading as a political party ought to be forced to try to win elections on:

But let’s look at this. Forget ideology for a second and let’s just look at some readily available facts. We have just come off eight years of economic stagnation. No economic growth to speak of. We have had tax increases out the wazoo in the past eight years, including all of the new taxes brought on by the government taking over health care with Obamacare. We had the president of the United States, Barack Obama, running around to places like West Virginia, Indiana, and Ohio and telling people out of work:

(impression) “It’s too bad, but your jobs are never coming back — and if someone tells you that your job will be coming back, he’s waving a magic wand, but what’s he gonna do? What’s Trump gonna do? Just wave a magic wand? You gotta get ready for the fact those jobs are not coming back.” So rather than have a president that inspired people, we have a president who tried to convince them that this was the new America: A nation in decline. We didn’t really deserve our robust past, and we needed brilliant people like him to manage this decline so that resources — which would be dwindling — could be distributed more fairly and equally to the population at large.

Okay. So we’ve come off eight years of that kind of thing, exactly what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to return to. In just a year and a half of a presidency that believes in American greatness, that believes lost jobs can be brought back — who believes that this economy can once again grow and that people’s incomes can increase, that standard of living and wealth can once again start going up. In just a year and a half it’s happened. Does this woman have the ability to look at facts on the ground? The government today…

Have you looked at the latest revenue that has been collected by taxes? It’s a record high. The government is collecting record tax revenue after Trump’s tax cuts! This also happens every time it’s tried. It’s simple math. More people are working than under Obama, and thus more people are paying taxes. So even per capita taxes may be down and the amount of money individuals are paying, it’s more than made up by all the new taxpayers that are happily working, whereas a year and a half ago they weren’t.

There are stories… I have a story in the Stack today that one of the big problems that employers have today is there just aren’t enough people to fill jobs that are open, and so employers are getting ready to scrub the idea that prior experience is necessary. They need work done! There’s more job openings than there are people to fill them right now. Now, where is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? She’s an economics graduate from Boston University. Does she have the slightest idea what’s going on now?

Of course not. She’s dumb as a box of hair; credentialed, but not educated; inarticulate, not bright, and entirely arrogant about all of it.

And she’s also the brightest star in the Democrat Socialist firmament at the moment—precisely as she should be. We all ought to fervently hope not only that she wins election, but that she remains in the spotlight as an avant garde leader of her trainwreck of a Party for as long as possible. Realistically, we can’t expect anything good from a NYC Congresscritter, but sending a dumpster fire like Occasional-Cortex to Mordor On The Potomac might work out even better anyway. The more she blibbers and stammers her arrant hard-Left horsepuckey, and the more Normals see her doing it, the better off we’re all going to be. She might just finish off the Democrat Socialist Party for good all by herself.

Share

The Muslim exemption

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

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

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

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

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

Oh. As Kathy Shaidle says:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share

A dubious luxury we can’t afford

Sooner or later, they run out of other people’s money.

Contemplating the silly pronouncements of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, self-declared socialist and surprise winner of Democratic primary in New York’s 14th congressional district, I wonder if this particular form of political stupidity requires a certain level of affluence to thrive.

Capitalism is the greatest engine for the production of wealth that the ingenuity of man has ever devised. But after it achieves a certain level of prosperity, it regularly excretes characters like Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, beneficiaries of capitalism whose contempt for its strictures is equaled only by their ignorance of its tenets.

Margaret Thatcher famously observed that the problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money. Ocasio-Cortez hasn’t grasped that yet. Thus she has campaigned for tuition-free universities and the forgiveness of all student loan debt in the United States, the price tag for which is well in excess of $1 trillion. She wants the United States to abandon fossil fuels and somehow (physics is not her forte) run the electric grid entirely on wind and solar power. Naturally, she advocates a single-payer health care system and wants to abolish the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

The implementation of any one of these proposals would seriously hurt US prosperity. Taken all together they would push the country far down the road towards penury, the inevitable result of socialism.

Calls for socialism recur like plagues of locusts every several years, most virulently, it seems, not when the economy is suffering but when it is booming.

That’s because socialism is parasitic in nature, unable to exist for long without the affluence provided by capitalism to feed on. Look at Europe, leeching off of America’s providing for its defense since WW2, for Exhibit A. The howls of fearful outrage over Trump DESTROYING NATO OMGOMGOMGELEVENTY!!! via his insistence that the freeloaders begin ponying up their share of the tab would be Exhibit B.

Meanwhile, the Democrat Socialist Party would like you to know that no, as a matter of fact they AREN’T socialist, despite their decades-old demands for pretty much everything Occasional-Cortex burped up above:

Both Rep. Maxine Waters and Sen. Elizabeth Warren got pressed on the issue this week by CNBC’s John Harwood, and both denied the “S” label.

“The Democratic Party is not a socialist party,” Waters said. But then she followed that up by saying of socialist Bernie Sanders, “I consider him basically a Democrat.”

Far-left Sen. Warren felt the need to make it clear that “I am a capitalist. Come on. I believe in markets.”

For now, Democrats don’t want to admit what their party has turned into, because the “socialist” brand isn’t very popular.

But look at what it now stands for.

The Democratic base went head over heels for socialist Bernie Sanders in 2016, to the point where he nearly stole the nomination from Hillary Clinton — who said she struggled with her own party because they thought of her as a “capitalist.”

Democrats have by and large embraced a “Medicare for all” health plan that would outlaw private insurance and is to the left of every other health system in the world, except maybe Cuba.

Many of the 2020 presidential hopefuls are on board with “government-guaranteed jobs,” an idea last seen in the Soviet Union’s constitution.

And, as if that weren’t enough, Democratic Party Chairman Tom Perez called socialist Ocasio-Cortez “the future of our party.”

We don’t doubt that many Democrats are sincere in their belief that they are sensible centrists. And there’s no doubt that some still are.

Name three. More to the point: name three that would have any hope at all of successfully competing for their criminal-conspiracy of a political party’s nomination for President, or who weren’t effectively drummed out of said Party long ago.

Now let’s see: it walks like a duck, it swims like a duck, it quacks like a duck. But it says it’s not a duck. So who you gonna believe, the Democrat Socialists or your own lyin’ eyes?

Share

Ridicule, not reason

Time to take off the gloves, as the man says.

Having spent more than 40 years in the incubators of today’s leftist nonsense, universities, I am skeptical about the power of reasoned argument among today’s ill-educated students. Most of their teachers, like most progressives, are pretty much immune to reason, evidence, and coherent argument, little of which makes it into their courses. As the old gag goes, arguing with a leftist is like playing chess with a pigeon: It knocks over the pieces, craps on the board, then struts around like it won the game. Reasoned argument cuts no ice when confronted with the irrational caprices and gratifying passions of human beings.

The history of modernity is crammed with other examples of the futility of reasoned persuasion and argument in the face of the passionate beliefs spawned by modern political religions. Actually, “cults” is a better word, for most religions accept a transcendent reality, while a cult is a human creation. And what is more cult-like than the level of irrationality we have witnessed since Donald Trump won the election? It does not bespeak a coherent, well-reasoned dissent, but the hysterical anger of those whose passionate beliefs and justifying ideologies have been attacked. And since for the left “the personal is the political,” challenging their beliefs is a challenge not just to their ideals, but to their very being, a wound to their identity, to what makes them the kind of superior person they imagine themselves to be. In the absence of faith in the transcendent, these ideologies that promise the better world of social justice also provide, as baptism once did, the sign of one’s salvation.

We also have to remember that the beliefs, ideas, and fake history embraced by the progressive cult have been drilled into students from kindergarten to university, and reinforced in popular and highbrow culture alike. They now comprise the unthinking default belief system one never questions, any more than one questions the heliocentric planetary system. And if some heretic does question them, the faithful will unite in condemning and ostracizing him, the way cults like Scientology do. Like Popper’s young Nazi, they don’t want to debate and reason together and search for the truth. They want to shut you up. 

Of course they do. You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into in the first place.

Telling conservatives that they should go forth and “persuade” leftist to change their minds is a fool’s errand. Arguments didn’t keep Socrates from being executed by an Athenian jury, and conservatives are unlikely to change many minds among evangelical progressives. In the rough and tumble of the democratic public square, scorn, satire, and humiliation are often more effective than well-reasoned arguments.

And if poking serious fun fails, there’s always the good ol’ reliable swift belt in the mouth to fall back on.

Share

Lesson: ignored

Wasn’t properly taught, nor driven home.

California Rep. Maxine Waters said that Americans should be “out in the streets screaming” about President Trump in a Wednesday interview.

Waters told CNBC’s John Harwood, “I think [Trump’s] dangerous.”

“I don’t know why people take it. I think Americans should be out in the streets screaming to the top of their voice. Do something. Make something happen,” she continued.

During the interview, she also said, “[Trump is] one of the most deplorable people I’ve ever encountered in my life.”

These comments come after Waters encouraged the harassment of Trump cabinet members in June.

Looks like the Oathkeepers, with their half-hearted, aborted “protest” at her office instead of her home, screwed the pooch sure enough. Malone again: “If you open the ball with these people you must be prepared to go all the way. Because they won’t give up the fight until one of you is dead.” And yes, it should be noted that in one case we’re talking about gangsters, crooks, and violent criminals, while in the other we’re talking about…Al Capone.

(Via Ace)

Share

Civil War, then and now

One of these things will not be like the other.

Such gallantry seems unthinkable today, when members of the Trump administration are hounded from restaurants and theatres, and Confederate officers like John Lea, if they are remembered at all, are considered precursors of the German National Socialists, and their once famous and respected commanders like Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Jeb Stuart have their statues toppled and banished from public squares, their names stripped from public schools, and their memories spat upon and disgraced.

The difference between the America of today and the America of what seems like just yesterday is that we once had a common culture. As recently as 1990, Ken Burns could make a Civil War documentary for PBS and let historian Shelby Foote wax eloquent on the martial prowess of Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest —  something that now would likely get them both tarred, feathered, and Twitter-banned.

Yes, there were big differences between North and South a century and a half ago. The South was a slave-holding, free-trading, libertarian-leaning, conservative Christian, agricultural, aristocratic Sparta, while the North was a commercial, industrial, protectionist, Transcendentalist, social gospel, democratic Athens. But they held far more in common than separated them — beginning with the fact that, as Lincoln observed, “Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God.”

One need only compare the Confederate Constitution to the United States Constitution to see that the former bears a striking resemblance to the latter. And far from being a national socialist charter, the Confederate Constitution puts even more restraints on federal power and limits the president to one six-year term.

Thereby proving that the South wasn’t wrong about everything.

The great seal of the Confederacy bears the image of George Washington, many of whose relatives served with the Confederacy, including Lieutenant James B. Washington, a West Point classmate of Custer’s (the two had a famous picture taken together — Washington was a prisoner of war — a few weeks before Lea’s wedding).

North and South venerated the Founders. They shared the same language, the same religion, and, in large part, the same general stock. Most of all, they shared what Jeff Sessions was recently rebuked for calling an “Anglo-American heritage” of liberty under law, stretching from the mists of medieval England — even before Magna Carta — to our own Bill of Rights.

Today, however, our divisions are so deep and fundamental that Americans cannot even agree on what marriage is or what a man or a woman is (which is pretty darn fundamental).

The lunatic self-righteousness of the Left (and yes, I’m afraid one must point fingers here), where disagreement is bigotry to be prohibited by law or even condemned and prosecuted as treason, is a consuming, destructive fire that will not be easily quenched, and cannot be reached by cool waters of rational argument.

Crocker gamely—and yes, gallantly—offers a few suggestions for forestalling the coming conflagration. I wish I could say I still held out much hope for such a solution. But with every passing day yielding its outrageous insult to all decency from the Bughouse Left, each surpassing the last in vileness and provocation, that hope fades, to be replaced with the dismal realization that real tragedy is all but inevitable now.

Share

How far WON’T they go?

Walsh answers VDH’s question, as mentioned here earlier.

My colleague Victor Davis Hanson raised the question in these pages the other day: “Just how far will the Left go?” in its attempt to overthrow the government of Donald J. Trump? With his customary precision, Hanson laid out the catalog of enormities committed by the Left in its pursuit of Trump and of conservatives in general, among them the fatuous investigation led by Mr. Straight Arrow himself, the demonization of Trump-as-Hitler, their frustration over losing the 2016 election (which they thought would cement their hostile takeover of the American Republic) and their inability to mask their true anti-American natures any longer.

So let me provide an answer: As far as they can, for as long as it takes.

If a political movement is willing effectively to abolish the country’s borders (but keep bleeding its productive class in order to fund its welfare/patronage system), what does that tell you about its ultimate aspirations? The American Left (a subsidiary of the International Left) has as its goal the “fundamental transformation” of the United States from a free-market capitalist, at least nominally Christian country of mostly European descent into something resembling the old Soviet Union, a place where “from each according to his ability” gleefully embraces the buggering of the taxpaying class in order to give “to each according to his needs.”

And so it goes. Each day brings a new outrage, a development enthusiastically promulgated by a brain-dead media that thinks a headline must contain the words “sparks outrage” or “comes under fire,” to be newsworthy. The foxes of anger and resentment have been set among the hens of political cohesion, and every day the squawking grows louder—as it will until that day comes when there are no more hens left to lay the eggs.

The key to understanding the Left is that it cannot stop. Once it has set itself on a path to power, it must have all the power. Once it has created a social program, it must run that program into the ground. Once it has identified an enemy, that enemy must be destroyed, no matter what the cost to itself. Like a shark, the Left must always keep moving—forward! And the end result is always the same.

How far will they go? All the way. “By any means necessary” is their slogan for a reason. They mean it.

The question we really ought to be asking is directed at ourselves: how far are WE willing to go to stop them? It’s Malone’s question all over again: “What are you prepared to do?” “Everything within the law.” “And THEN what are you prepared to do?”

Share

Gettin’ sporty

Nobody is more sensible on this topic than Aesop:

No one sane on our side (and everyone isn’t, sadly) wants armed open conflict, or is sanguine about it, least of all this author. Having been there first hand, the guy least enthusiastic about jingoistic saber-rattling is the guy riding the landing ship towards the beach. But ultimately, that’s a bilateral deal, and the Left isn’t even that sane. They don’t just want it and fantasize about it frequently and publicly, they brag and gloat about unleashing it. Our side understands that sort of posturing as a precursor to it actually breaking out, because we, unlike they, understand human nature and the behavior of flawed human beings.

As one of my drill instructors cautioned my group: “I see a baby, I’ma throw a grenade at dat baby. If da baby blow up twice, da baby was booby-trapped.

It was hilarious, and totally contrary to the letter and spirit of the Marquess of Queensbury Rules concept of “The Laws Of Land Warfare” amidst a rather grim period of basic training, but the lesson that sometimes even babies can be lethal, and what happens after that is just tough nails, was nonetheless one of the grimmest reality impressed upon us about the truth of war: you get the conflict you get, not the one you imagine, and then you do what has to be done to survive and win it.

Our would-be, now disdained and mostly discarded “leadership” of milquetoasts is the reason the Left is such a problem in the first place, and also the reason Trump is the president now. Had they manfully opposed utter socialist nonsense when it was far cheaper and easier to do so, they would not now find themselves in the role of political appendix, and about to be removed like a wayward and infected organ.

It is in the nature of wildfires to get away from people, and a cultural society-wide civil (it will, in truth, be anything but) war of absolute survival will not stay a well-tended backyard trash fire, but sparks will fly, winds will swirl, and pretty soon, the whole damned forest will be gloriously and fearfully ablaze, and the only thing that controls it then will be what’s left to burn, and when a merciful heaven sends a rainstorm.

Nothing less.

Wrap your heads around that.

People thinking in terms of a limited conflict, or any sort of happy, civilized divorce and secession, are whistling past the graveyard, and about as bright as those who talked about waging “limited” nuclear warfare. I’m here to tell you they’re stupidly misinformed at best, and deranged at worst.

Poll the city fathers of Carthage, Jerusalem, Atlanta, Warsaw, Nanking, Hiroshima, Saigon, and Fallujah about the idea of “limited” conflagrations.

You might think that after Lexington, Bull Run, 1914, Dunkirk, Pearl Harbor, and countless other ball-openers, folks would learn that conflict at the civilizational survival level isn’t “one quick volley, a whiff of grapeshot, and then glory”, with brandy and cigars afterwards in the drawing room, nor are the “troops home by Christmas”. Ever.

Once it opens, people in that sort of struggle will not fight until they can’t, but rather until you can’t. And usually because your bloody charred remnants can no longer pull themselves together to attempt another blow.

I’ve tried to get these same sentiments across many times here, and never did half as well as he just did; you definitely want to read all of it. The salient point:




The Left won’t stop; they’ll have to BE stopped. Nobody should be at all happy about that.

Share

Cut ’em off

Seriously, there’s even a discussion to be had here?

So the reason we permit these guys to keep their security clearances is actually twofold:

1. To keep them legal to accept classified information, in case the president needs to call them out of retirement to advise him on a national security matter.

With Comey and McCabe proven leakers, with Brennan looking like he arranged the Comey briefing just to leak it, and calling Trump a traitor every week, etc., I would say the likelihood that Trump will call up on these Genius Experts’ Expert Genius to be about the likelihood that Kate Upton will pay me thirty million dollars to sit on my face.

2. Frankly, as way to pay them continuing non-pecuniary benefits in their retirement, because anyone with a security clearance will be paid more money than those without one in the fields where such a thing is valuable, e.g., defense industries, information security, etc.

I don’t see why Trump would feel obliged to put money into their pockets by extending to them a benefit he is not required to extend to them.

So there are two reasons to keep these people cleared for classified reason — one which could maybe, allegedly benefit the country, but which will never happen, due to the fact that these people belong to the Deep State which has been trying to get Trump blocked from taking office and now that he is president, removed from it.

The second is just a nice thing you do for your friends, to keep paying them off for services rendered, but they are not Trump’s friends and the services they have rendered are a conspiracy to enact a coup against the duly elected president of the United States.

On the other hand, there is the risk of permitting them to retain their security clearances.

Given that there is absolutely no benefit to the country — none at all, zero — of letting them keep their clearances, the downsides risks stand all alone, with no upside potential to offset them.

Draining The Swamp of neccessity means clearing out the Obama stay-behinds and Deep State shitweasels infesting the place, and clearing them out for good. Seditious swine like Brennan and Clapper in particular are a GREAT place to start. Ace winds it up:

As there is no national security upside to letting these leakers and liars keep their security clearances and continue “monetizing” them — as Trump correctly said — and quite a bit of national security downside to letting them keep them, it’s time to terminate the clearances.

It most certainly is—time, and way past time. Cut ’em off and send ’em packing. Let the shitlibs cry a raging torrent; they’re going to anyway, of course.

Share

“IS THE MEDIA THE ‘ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE’?”

Ask a silly question.

Is the media really the enemy of the American people? Let’s tackle the question objectively.

Enemies hate you and want to destroy you. Do the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, CBS, and the whole alphabet soup of organizations with corporate headquarters in major cities really want to destroy the people who watch their programs, buy their papers and serve them soup after hours?

It seems implausible. But so did the Communists of the Khmer Rouge shooting everyone who wore glasses. Or North Korea’s multi-generational concentration camps, Nazi Germany diverting crucial resources from the war effort to kill Jews, or Venezuela shipping oil to Cuba while its people starve.

Plausibility is a poor measure of what fanatical ideologues might do. Let’s start with what they do, do.

By all means, let’s.

Rap Sheet: ***529*** Acts of Media-Approved Violence and Harassment Against Trump Supporters

Note that the title above has been updated since I first opened the article a few days ago; the count was at 203 then. I left the tab open intending to mention it here when I got a chance; when the page auto-reloaded just now, the toll was up to…what you see above.

Enemy of the people? You bet your ass they are, in every way that matters. Back to Daniel for further explication:

The media’s first allegiance is to the left. Not to America. Its people are not Americans. They’re leftists. The politics of the left are geared at replacing Americans with leftists through a combination of indoctrination, demographic replacement, economic warfare and voter suppression.

Destroying the American people would be an act worthy of an “enemy of the people”.

The media is offended by being referred to as the “enemy of the people”. But does it believe that the American people have the right to exist and maintain their existence? And if so, on what terms?

Unacceptable ones, that’s what: subjugation, silence, oppression, and servitude. Just like in every other socialist hellhole.

The liberal media is as committed an enemy of the American people—of America itself—as is possible to imagine, and Trump is right to say so. Far from being appalled or alarmed by it, his calling them out openly is one of the reasons normal Americans love him—yet another facet of his incredible success shitlibs just don’t get, and never will. Back to Nolte again for the closer:

…remember that if any one of these things happened to a Democrat, the media would use the story to blot out the sun for weeks. Remember how crazy the media went over a nobody rodeo clown who wore an Obama mask, a GOP staffer who criticized Obama’s daughters? And yet, hundreds of Trump supporters are harassed and brutalized and the media only dutifully report them, if at all. That is because the media are desperate to normalize and justify violence and harassment against Trump and his supporters.

And while the media openly encourage this violence against us, the media also campaign to disarm us, to take away our Second Amendment right to defend ourselves.

Funny, that. Must be one of them coinkydinks or something.

Share

Back off—or don’t

What an asshole.

Some say it wasn’t “civil” of me to approach Pruitt at lunch and that it’s a sign of dark times ahead for our political climate. But these arguments are not genuine: The bogus “civility” argument has arisen because conservatives are losing on the content of the arguments.

Actually, Precious, you feel it necessary to harass and “confront” government officials trying to have a meal in peace with their families because YOUR side lost on “the contents of the arguments” a long fucking time ago—also, because you whiny shitlibs lost an election and lack the steel to face up to your rejection by normal Americans. As for times getting “dark,” just wait til we start returning the favor by “getting in your faces and punching back twice as hard”—very damned literally.

“Dark times”? I promise you, you ain’t seen NOTHING yet. But you’re going to.

Focusing on where, when, or how a concerned citizen speaks up is what a person does when they don’t have an adequate response to the concerns being voiced.

Or when they’re just sicked and tired of being constantly fucked with by stupid, nervy jackasses.

I’m not saying everyone should be disrupting politicians in restaurants. But I am saying that putting pressure on our government is vital, and we all need to do our part.

Sure—and there are ways to do that already, while still maintaining respect for dissenting opinions and without prioritizing your own self-righteous sense of absolute infallibility and superiority. Why, they’re written right into the Constitution and everything. Too bad you spent the last 70 years trashing it.

I expect I’ll be getting plenty of mileage henceforth out of Cromwell’s great quote: I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. Addendum from real Americans addressed to confrontational, violent Progtards: “…before we get fed up enough with your bullshit to just start shooting your asses on sight.” Which is not so much a threat, really; it’s fair warning. Very likely the only one you moonbats are going to get.

But hey, I’m being unfair here. I mean, we all remember how our side reacted to Obama’s eight-year reign of error by publicly harassing shitlibs wherever we found them, attacking them physically, shooting their government officials at softball practice, and…uh…ummm…well, that is to say…

Yeah. As we all know, none of that actually happened. And that just might’ve been our biggest mistake. But it’s not as if there’s any expiration date on correcting it.

Share

Civility now

After starting off as something of a NeverTrumper early in the MAGA festivities, Mike Walsh gets it—completely, unflinchingly, and without apology.

We’ve tried civility, and we know from bitter experience it doesn’t work. There is no pacifying the Left, no accommodating it, no buying it off with a bit of appeasement here and there. They’re not in the political fray to play, they’re in it to win it. They’re not fiddling around the edges of the American experiment, they’re throwing everything critical theory has at us, questioning every institution and founding principle, and finding all of them worthy of destruction. If we react with anything less than a full-throated defense of both Western and American civilization, we’re going to lose.

Anyway, you fight the battle with the weapons you have, including those of the other side. And it wasn’t us who broke the peace that roughly obtained from World War II to the assassination (by a Communist) of John F. Kennedy. In the latest phase of a long war, the Unholy Left went to battle against America in the summer of 1968 and hasn’t stopped fighting since. They hated Nixon, they hated Reagan, they hated G. W. Bush and now, boy do they hate Donald J. Trump. From the moment it dawned on them on election night that Trump was going to win, they have gone to the mattresses, seeking to undermine the validity of the election and bring down the president of the United States. If you won’t fight to protect your country, what will you fight to do? If the answer is “nothing,” then to heck with you.

This passivity in the face of constant provocation is what our enemies are counting on. They want you cowed, thinking that any pushback is illegitimate. They want you to think that you’re the bad guy in this morality play. That’s why their pet media frames every confrontation as “far-right” groups vs. “anti-fascist” protesters, pushed beyond the limits of their well-known tolerance to take matters into their own violent hands. You are hateful, intolerant, racist and brimming with more phobias than Freud ever dreamed possible. You deserve every bad thing that’s coming to you.

The time for pushback is now.

It most certainly is—before they get the gulags cranking again. And the ovens.

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