Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

And THESE cupcakes are the people who are going to take our country from us by force?

Okay, they’ve gone way beyond merely pathetic at this point.

A Greek Life retreat at the University of Mississippi (Ole Miss) was promptly cancelled this weekend after a banana peel was found hanging in a tree.

“To be clear, many members of our community were hurt, frightened, and upset by what occurred at IMPACT,” Interim Director of Fraternity and Sorority Life Alexa Lee Arndt remarked in an email between Greek leaders, according to The Daily Mississippian. “Because of the underlying reality many students of color endure on a daily basis, the conversation manifested into a larger conversation about race relations today at the University of Mississippi.”

Yeah, an “underlying reality” that must surely include being taunted by every white person they ever encountered or heard tell of as watermelon-eating, fried-chicken-chasing ape-men—darkies who are most likely tormented more by the absence of a banana in that peel rather than the empty, discarded peel itself and whatever delusion it represents to them. I mean, I know that’s the sort of thing I always assume about them thar “people of color,” at least.


There’s only one little problem for the hypersensitive little twinkies:

Apparently, student Ryan Swanson admitted to discarding the banana peel in a tree after he was unable to locate a garbage can, and it was later spotted by Alpha Kappa Alpha President Makala McNeil, who leads one of the campuses historically black sororities.

“The overall tone was heavy. I mean, we were talking about race in Mississippi and in the Greek community so there’s a lot involved,” McNeil recalled, later adding that she and her friend were “all just sort of paranoid for a second” after spotting the banana.

After word of the banana spread throughout the retreat, leaders decided to end the event early. Arndt explained that she “felt it was imperative to provide space immediately to students affected by this incident.”

Oh, good God. Note to overly delicate, mollycoddled American Negroes like these self-absorbed children: Get over yourdamnedselves already, you fucking feeble freaks. My sarcastic and intentionally offensive riposte above aside, the truth is that white people don’t care about your neuroses; white people spend very little time even thinking about you at all, and certainly aren’t spending their every waking moment plotting ways to insult you, assault you, and freak you out over meaningless trivia. Trust me, white people are perfectly content to leave you the hell alone and let you get on with your day, as they want to be left alone to get on with theirs.

A little harsh reality: yes, there are indeed an insignificant handful of white people who DO fret themselves over their own neuroses about black people; there are also those who don’t like Asians, Jews, Hispanics, New Yorkers, Canadians, or (probably) Eskimos. These people are never going to be your brothers, no matter what you do or how hard you try.

However, I assure you most sincerely: absolutely none of the rest of us—the HUGE majority—give a shit about them, and don’t waste any time bothering ourselves about anything they might do or say. They have absolutely NO institutional power in this country; they haven’t for decades, and our national past notwithstanding (which is not significantly different in this regard than that of almost any other country or society you could name) they never will again. Their opinions matter to no one but themselves. There will always be a handful of them around, sure, and there’s not one damned thing you, I, or anybody else can do about that. I recommend you ignore them, just like the overwhelming majority of the rest of us do. They will then fade into just so much background noise. I promise you, you’ll be a whole lot happier for it, and you won’t end up making yourselves look nearly so foolish, hysterical, and weak in the future as you assuredly do right now.

And a necessary word about that darker past: the people who lived in those times (and, yes, systematically oppressed and mistreated people “of color,” along with plenty of lighter-complected sorts as well) were acting in accordance with the universally-accepted standards of the era. They also believed that leeches were a good treatment for all sorts of diseases; did not understand anything at all about bacterial and viral infection; did not have air conditioning, electricity, indoor plumbing, deodorant, or toothpaste. They had to make their own soap. If they wanted chicken for dinner, they had to chase it down and wring its neck themselves, then pluck it, dress it, and cook it, sometimes over an open fire (my own grandmother did this). They did not have access to cars, supermarkets, Wal Mart, motorized lawnmowers, the internet, or cell phones. In fact, many of them didn’t have phones at all. A now-shockingly large percentage of the women died in childbirth; many of their children didn’t survive past the age of five. Diseases that we now consider little more than a minor nuisance were life-threatening then; a toothache or common stomach bug could be a death sentence, and quite often was. The average life expectancy for them was about half what it is now.

They weren’t evil, or most of them weren’t. They were just ignorant. Just as future generations will likely feel we are now, about all kinds of things we can’t even begin to imagine.

The drudgery, difficulty, and danger they faced every minute of their daily existence was incomprehensible to us now; their acceptance of those difficulties and their determination to just get on with it ought to be instructive and inspirational to every one of us. Judging those people by our own standards, therefore, is foolish, unfair, and unhelpful. It is a mistake, and a peculiarly petty one—not least because it leads us to disdain our forebears, who can’t be fairly said to have been wrong about everything, and whose every idea should not be dismissed because of a few outdated or unenlightened ones they hadn’t quite gotten figured out yet.

The thing too many of our present-day whiny losers seem to prefer to forget, deny, or not even to know: IT’S NOT LIKE THAT ANYMORE. It truly isn’t. Things are different now. Very much so. The people whose distant and long-dead ancestors were slaves here whining as if they themselves were currently enslaved ought to:

  1. Reflect for a single fucking moment that there are plenty of countries—most of them in or near Africa, most of them run by Muslims—where chattel slavery is still accepted practice
  2. Grow a pair and give thanks they don’t live in any of those places
  3. Shut the fucking fuck up already

Alternatively, you could all go right on making yourselves look like pussified jackasses, weeping bitter, salty tears and having a psychotic break over a fucking discarded banana peel. Believe me, if some one of the handful of real white racists out there wanted to insult you, they aren’t going to be oblique or subtle about it, and there won’t be much room for any mistaken interpretations of the event. You’re going to know it, and won’t have to make any labored assumptions about what they’re doing or why they’re doing it.

Until then, let’s just all take a breath and calm down, ‘kay? We’ll deal with that if and when we come to it, and in the meantime your silly-assed assumptions about how all white people must surely feel about you have a certain whiff of, umm, racism to them, to be blunt. These little tantrums aren’t helping anybody…least of all yourselves. To tell the truth, we’re all more embarrassed for you than anything else at this point.


Miscarriage of “justice”

Trump did it! Trump did it!

The monster.

President Trump stood up for justice and for enforcement of our immigration laws when he courageously granted a pardon Friday to Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona. Despite knowing he would face criticism, the president did what was right.

Arpaio was convicted by a federal judge in July of criminal contempt after being charged with violating a court order that attempted to prevent suspected illegal immigrants from being targeted by the sheriff’s traffic patrols. The sheriff acknowledged continuing the patrols, but said that targeting was not the focus.

Hearing testimony during Arpaio’s trial, I realized that any reasonable person who was there to pass judgment on this honest law-abiding man – who gave his life to the rule of law – could never have found him guilty on the evidence presented.

However, the only one who could pass judgment on the former sheriff was U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, because Arpaio was denied his right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The judge’s verdict convicting Arpaio was a travesty of justice.

Arpaio’s critics have claimed for a long time that he is a racist and biased against Hispanics. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Under his command, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office boasted the highest percentage of Hispanic deputies, detention officers and staff in the state of Arizona. Moreover, he promoted more Hispanic officers to command positions than any other law enforcement agency in the state.

On top of this, Arpaio has two grandchildren who are of Hispanic descent. To say he is biased again his own family members is absurd. Labeling him a racist for enforcing U.S. immigration law is a tired, exhausted, left-wing strategy that fails time and time again.

Arpaio’s case has been politically motivated from the beginning, when the Obama administration’s Department of Justice filed misdemeanor charges against him a mere two weeks before the election, contributing to Arpaio’s loss in his reelection bid.

The Department of Justice typically refrains from taking legal action against an elected official so close to an election in order to avoid influencing the outcome.

So let’s tally up here:

  • Denying Arpaio his Constitutional rights by acting as if they simply don’t exist
  • Using the machinery of the Deep State against somebody duly enforcing laws they don’t like
  • Ending someone’s career for simple spite
  • Smearing and denigrating an honest American law enforcement officer for failing to coddle criminals to the degree they deem appropriate
  • And all of it in service of a lie about his supposed “racism” and “bigotry,” both patently absurd charges

Yep, that’s our very own Goosesteppin’ Left goofballs all right, up one side and down the other. Just about every box was ticked in this typical example of their relentless quest to destroy yet another decent American.

Contrary to a whole passel of hysterical psychotics, Trump was more than just within his rights as President to pardon the man; in truth, he HAD to do it, lest the entire idea of justice and the rule of law be forever dismissible as no more than a bitter joke. Good for him for standing up to the monstrous tyrants of the PC Left once again. And hats off to Sheriff Joe for standing firm under the never-ending onslaught of these despicable cretins, from their jug-eared-moron Savior on down.


Dragon swallows sun, spits it back out again, Trump to blame!

Oh, and while we’re at it, the stupid eclipse was RACIST™, by the way.

No, really.

The Atlantic’s very lengthy essay on the failure of the eclipse to occur where a sufficient number of black people reside is entitled “American Blackout.” It clocks in at a remarkable 4,544 words and does not appear to be satire.

Concerning “the Great American Eclipse,” Brooklyn Law School professor Alice Ristroph writes in the rapidly deteriorating magazine, “there live almost no black people” “along most of its path.”

The Atlantic’s longwinded law professor assures readers that “implicit bias of the solar system” is “presumably” not the cause of eclipse’s failure to affect enough black people.

“Still, an eclipse chaser is always tempted to believe that the skies are relaying a message.”

How awful it must be to cling so furiously to a belief system that makes you this miserable. And, y’know, stupid. Right out in public, no less.

“Implicit bias of the solar system.” “Presumably.” I mean, good LORD, man. You can’t help but feel a little bit sorry for the poor buffoon.


Imagine there’s no countries

It’s easy if you try. And never mind the nightmare.

What you see here is the core issue between Poland and the EU over accepting migrants into Poland. It’s not about whether Poland or the EU gets to determine how many and what type of migrant Poland must take. It’s whether anyone can set any limits at all. The UN is making clear that no country can determine who may enter its lands for settlement. All the blather in that report about human rights is just filler. The issue here is whether countries should exist and the UN is making clear they think the future is post-national.

Part of what you see with the open borders people is their belief that their unique situation can scale up to the stars. The UN is a heavily guarded playpen for the rich brats of the world’s political elite. These brats look around and see a rainbow of colors getting along like old chums. They jump from there to assuming that this can be done everywhere, not realizing the global elite can only get along when there are men with guns keeping the peace. They live in a fortified compound and they want that for everyone.

Another aspect to this is simply spite. Ruling elites have always, at some level, been at odds with those over whom they rule. The “burden of leadership” means giving up time and energy to the maintenance of order and the perpetuation of society. It’s only natural to resent it a little. What we have today is a ruling elite that hates the majority of the people, namely the white people. Notice the UN is not making open borders arguments for Africa or China. Open borders only applies to white countries, never anywhere else.

Yeah, well, I’m sure we can all think of a few pretty good reasons for that easily enough. But noticing them would be racist, and speaking of them aloud would be criminal. Or will be shortly.

Christopher Caldwell famously pointed out that “One moves swiftly and imperceptibly from a world in which affirmative action can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too weak to a world in which it can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too strong.” The same thing is happening with whites in their own lands. At first, the number of non-whites was too small to make a strong case against immigration. Now, the numbers are too large to do anything about it. The West is about to be over run.

Parts of it—namely Western Europe—have already BEEN overrun, and it’s far too late to do anything about it except learn to live with it, to docilely “absorb” regular atrocities committed by the intractable savages in their midst as routine. The US is well on its way down the same path; it remains to be seen if the will can be mustered to even slow it—much less halt or reverse it—in defiance of a smothering avalanche of Progressivist propaganda and protest. But even if they succeed, ironically enough, things aren’t likely to work out quite like the Tranzi globalists imagine. As always, they fail to take human nature into account:

Of course, the question sensible whites ask is how exactly the borderless world is going to function. The West exists because whites buy into the system. As America careens into a dystopian nightmare where feral mobs pull down the symbols of the nation, how much longer will those Constitution loving, patriotic Americans, who keep the country running, buy into the system? In Europe, hardly anyone is willing to fight for their country when asked by pollsters. Why would they? Their countries no longer exist.

In a borderless world, why would anyone have any loyalty to anyone or anything outside their tribe? How could there even be a state? In theory, the custodial state solves this by having corporations police the people, but as we see with the high tech firms, tribalism begins to rot them out from the inside. The cost of propping up cash furnaces like Twitter eventually becomes too much to bear, even for the true believers. Large scale social institutions can only exist in a world of large scale social trust.

The cucks can mew about identity politics, but tribalism is the inevitable politics of multiculturalism. In fact, in a multi-ethnic, multicultural world, there can only be identity politics. Everyone is forced to root for their own team exclusively.

The New World Order was unsustainable, and is now blowing up in the faces of its architects, to the horrendous detriment of its subjects. The UN couldn’t run a circle-jerk in a Tijuana whorehouse; it’s somewhat suitable as a meeting ground and discussion forum among independent nations, but not at all as an omnipotent governing body charged with directing the entirety of human affairs as the Tranzis dream of, because such is not only undesirable but impossible.

If there’s one thing we in the US should have learned by now, it’s the long-neglected adage of our Founders that a smaller, restricted government kept close to the governed and accessible by them works best for everyone…except for the rapacious, thieving despots who wish not to govern, but to rule. We abandoned that essential truth. Failing to renew our commitment to it will cost us dearly, and sooner rather than later too.


Let’s take down all the things!

The source of the problem: this right here.

I visited Mount Rushmore in the summer of 2015, and it’s nothing like Abe Lincoln squatting on his (recently vandalized) throne or George Washington’s phallus towering over everything in DC. Instead, Rushmore is a testament to the human ability to conquer nature in our own image. Standing in front of it conjured feelings of both wonder and disgust in me. Obviously, Washington and Thomas Jefferson were remarkable individuals who helped usurp British rule in America and, eventually, establish a new empire. But they also enslaved their fellow man, committing special kinds of inhumane acts that should never be confined to footnotes. Unfortunately, that is exactly how those troublesome truths are treated when you face the awesome grandeur of Rushmore, a monument so incredible it obscures the multifaceted nature of these old dudes, transmogrifying them from individuals with a capacity both for greatness and evil into pure American deities.

Another news flash for this whining dolt: the world is an imperfect place, filled with imperfect people. So by all means, let’s dwell on the bad over the good, and make sure everyone is as miserable as pig-ignorant twats like this bitter little boy. We should also make sure that we judge another era by the standards of our own. That’s definitely a formula for real progress and happiness.

In case you’re wondering, I don’t think Barack Obama should be lionized with some sort of larger-than-life monument, either. While he is a man who embodies so many of the dreams I had for this nation as a child, he has also committed acts I absolutely abhor. His embrace of aerial drone strikes, especially in nations like Somalia, was extremely disheartening for both their attendant civilian casualties and the shaky legal framework in which they were committed. His expansion of surveillance programs that sprawled under George W. Bush could theoretically now be used by the Trump administration to stymie movements like Black Lives Matter, which is comprised of people actually doing work to make this nation more equitable.

Yeah, right—by looting, burning, pillaging, and assaulting innocent bystanders and passersby. And every bit of it based on the goddamnable lie of Ferguson and the fairy tale of the “Gentle Giant”—you remember, the vicious thug who tried to murder a cop after robbing a bodega and thankfully got his worthless ass shot instead.

It’s hard to be critical of a system when that system becomes an article of faith, filled with myths (the cherry tree), deities (Founding Fathers), and notions of salvation (the City on a Hill).

It’s a damned sight harder when one side—the neo-Marxist side, completely and irretrievably immersed in its arrogance-in-ignorance—dispenses entirely with the quaint old notion of freedom of speech for all and decides to arrogate to itself alone the right to express its beliefs openly, and to enforce despotism and intolerance under threat of mindless violence.

Trump and his white supremacist cohorts believe the reverence some Americans have for these statues is simply respect for history, and that tearing them down is tantamount to ripping pages out of a textbook.

And he’s right. That’s exactly what it is, fuckface, and there’s a reason why it’s the first thing simple-minded commie twats like you do…right before they seize the guns. Which, y’know, try it, shithead. Just come and fucking take them. Any time you feel up to it.

But monuments built by the state are not history—they manifestations of power. They don’t tell you who, what, why, or how something happened. Instead, they just inform you who’s in control. This is even true with the Confederate statues, even though the South lost the war.

Um…uhhh…oh, to hell with it. It makes as much as anything else dropping from this ignoramus’s piehole, really.

With the president of the United States basically justifying neo-Nazism, it seems unthinkable that we will ever see a day when there is a serious push to blow up Rushmore and other monuments like it. But if that moment ever arrives, I suspect I’d be onboard.

Uh huh. And when you do, we’ll be ready for you…locked, loaded, and drawing a painstaking bead. Careful what you wish for there, punk.

But hey, maybe there’s something to all this hateful drivel after all. Maybe he does in fact have a point about our monuments, our treasured history. So yeah, let’s do it; let’s tear down every last statue and monument in the country. But I mean all of them. Let’s do away with the Martin Luther King memorials, too, in Atlanta, DC, and elsewhere. Let’s rename every last Martin Luther King Blvd in dangerous ghettos across the nation and change them all back to whatever they were.

While we’re at it, let’s also ban all those Che T-shirts you see idiots like this guy sporting, and make possessing one a crime punishable by some serious jail time. Likewise, anything and everything commemorating Rosa Parks, Lenin, Stalin, FDR, and anybody else we can think of. Let’s declare expressing any political opinion at all a “hate crime,” one carrying some stiff punishment with it. If we’re gonna do this, we ain’t gonna do it halfway.

But actually, no, I have a better proposal, and unlike the previous bit, I am absolutely serious about this one. I mean, blacks are fourteen percent of the population, and that includes the decent folks along with wastes of flesh like this guy. Why on earth would the huge majority in this country agree to deny itself the monuments that remind us all of who we were, of our shared history, warts and all, and let a bunch of self-righteous dullards render our public spaces into the kind of grey, dismal, uninspiring and oppressive prisons found all over the old Soviet Union? Why on earth would we ever agree to roll over and let worthless douchebags like this have their way with us?

So I suggest we instead offer whining, half-bright little oxygen thieves like this guy a choice: if you’re black, and you still insist on clinging to a destructive and delusional fantasy of victimhood, re-fighting the long-ended war that freed your forebears from slavery—a condition neither you nor anybody you know nor anybody you ever met nor any relative in living memory ever experienced for even one second, but which still exists today in many parts of the world, including your precious “Motherland,” you stupid fuck—you get a one-way ticket to the African shitpit of your choice, courtesy of the US taxpayer. If you decline that dubious privilege, you agree to shut your fucking mouth about all the supposed “sins”—real, imagined, or made up—of this country.

No need to thank us, halfwit. Just take your winning ticket and get the fuck out. Don’t let the door hit you in the etc, you ungrateful little bitch. Get thee gone, and blight our nation no more. And may you have joy of your choice.

We could do the same with Lefty excrescences generally, come to think of it. Give ’em all the opportunity to emigrate to the socialist hellhole of their choice: Venezuela, Cuba, China, wherever. The one non-negotiable condition: you don’t get to come back here. Ever. Not for any reason. No do-overs, no second chances. You hate capitalism and want to live in a “worker’s paradise,” do you? Fine; take on off, there are plenty to choose from. Go, and leave real Americans alone.

Yes, the taxpayers will pay for it, and cheerfully, I suspect. We’ll even make it a ticket for a first-class fare; being rid of these sniveling parasites for good would be a bargain at any price.

Anybody still think it’s possible to reason with people like this? That it’s even desirable? Or that we have any real obligation to try?

if so, may I ask why, exactly?

(Via Ed)


The grave-robbing Left

Fucking worthless lunatics.

A group of protesters who want the body of an alleged Ku Klux Klan leader removed from their city have broken the soil over the grave.

The campaigners claim it has taken officials in Memphis, Tennessee, too long to exhume Nathan Bedford Forrest – who was a lieutenant general in the Confederate States Army.

They also want the statue of the soldier on a horse on the burial site to be removed. The rebel cavalryman, who died in 1877, has been buried in the city’s Health Sciences Park since 1904.

You want another Civil War, assholes? This is how you get one. Of course and as usual, they’re complete morons with no knowledge of actual, y’know, history. Therefore, Forrest’s post-war reconciliation speech—one among several—sailed right over their empty heads:

Ladies and Gentlemen I accept the flowers as a memento of reconciliation between the white and colored races of the southern states. I accept it more particularly as it comes from a colored lady, for if there is any one on God’s earth who loves the ladies I believe it is myself. (Immense applause and laughter.) This day is a day that is proud to me, having occupied the position that I did for the past twelve years, and been misunderstood by your race. This is the first opportunity I have had during that time to say that I am your friend. I am here a representative of the southern people, one more slandered and maligned than any man in the nation.

I will say to you and to the colored race that men who bore arms and followed the flag of the Confederacy are, with very few exceptions, your friends. I have an opportunity of saying what I have always felt – that I am your friend, for my interests are your interests, and your interests are my interests. We were born on the same soil, breathe the same air, and live in the same land. Why, then, can we not live as brothers? I will say that when the war broke out I felt it my duty to stand by my people. When the time came I did the best I could, and I don’t believe I flickered. I came here with the jeers of some white people, who think that I am doing wrong. I believe that I can exert some influence, and do much to assist the people in strengthening fraternal relations, and shall do all in my power to bring about peace. It has always been my motto to elevate every man- to depress none. (Applause.) I want to elevate you to take positions in law offices, in stores, on farms, and wherever you are capable of going.

I have not said anything about politics today. I don’t propose to say anything about politics. You have a right to elect whom you please; vote for the man you think best, and I think, when that is done, that you and I are freemen. Do as you consider right and honest in electing men for office. I did not come here to make you a long speech, although invited to do so by you. I am not much of a speaker, and my business prevented me from preparing myself. I came to meet you as friends, and welcome you to the white people. I want you to come nearer to us. When I can serve you I will do so. We have but one flag, one country; let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment. Use your best judgement in selecting men for office and vote as you think right.

Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict. I have been in the heat of battle when colored men, asked me to protect them. I have placed myself between them and the bullets of my men, and told them they should be kept unharmed. Go to work, be industrious, live honestly and act truly, and when you are oppressed I’ll come to your relief. I thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for this opportunity you have afforded me to be with you, and to assure you that I am with you in heart and in hand.” (Prolonged applause.)

According to legend, which may or may not be apocryphal, Forrest then affectionately kissed the black woman who had handed him the flowers on the cheek, and scandalized the entire nation in so doing. His post-war commitment to reconciliation, brotherhood, and unity was apparently genuine, and he was joined in those sentiments by many of his fellow Confederate officers.

None of which matters one bit, of course, and will make absolutely no difference in the muttonheaded excuse for “thinking” prevalent amongst such benighted cretins as these graverobbers. It is a waste of time to even attempt to debate within the century-old crypt they desecrated. They want to re-fight the Civil War, re-open long-healed wounds? Let them enjoy the bitter harvest of their blank stupidity, then; let them suffer horribly and die in pain, according to their own ignorant desires. Let them reap the whirlwind; let them pay in blood for their willful ignorance.

So be it.

Inserted update! Only just noticed that the above story is from 2015. So I guess we have an actual starting date now for when the Race-Baitin’ Left lost its collective(ist) mind.

(Via Stephen)

Update! Where will it end? I’ve already told y’all, it will NEVER end.

ROSE: (whispering) Thomas Jefferson had slaves.

SHARPTON: Had slaves, and children with the slaves.

ROSE: Exactly. Should they take down the Jefferson Memorial?

SHARPTON: I think that people need to understand when people that were in enslaved and robbed of even the right to marry — and had forced sex with their slave masters — this is personal. This is not some kind of removed discussion from us. Our families were victims of this. Public monuments are supported by public funds. You’re asking me to subsidize the insult of my family.

ROSE: Then I repeat: Thomas Jefferson had slaves.

SHARPTON: And I repeat that the public should not be paying to uphold somebody who has had that kind of background.

Rush knows as well as the rest of us that there’s more to this than just a few monuments:

Thomas Jefferson was one of the founders of this country, and you see what this really is about here? This is about not just delegitimizing Donald Trump, and it’s not just about getting rid of him. These people are on a tear to delegitimize this entire country, as part of their effort to transform it and — dare I say — overthrow it however they might try to make that happen. But it is absurd — and during all of this, what I notice is that people on our side of the aisle, we kind of chuckle. “Ha-ha-ha. Listen to Reverend Sharpton, he’s off on another wild tangent.”

And nobody stands up and responds to this stuff in any kind of way in the public square that defends it. And it’s as though if we let the kids have their say and get it out of their system, it will eventually go away. I think we have learned that this isn’t gonna go away. These are people that cannot be mollified. These people are gonna have to be defeated, folks. And I think that’s what a lot of people don’t have the stomach for. I mean, the idea of tearing down the Jefferson Memorial?

There’s no point in responding to it. There’s no point in explaining it. They will not stop. They will have to BE stopped. And that’s going to mean bloodshed. I don’t see any rational way of denying it at this point.


Bitch bitch bitch

This marks the first time in a long while that I’ve linked to or even looked at a piece from the NeverTrump-crazed fever swamp at NRO. But what the hell, it’s a good one.

Will the horror never end? Can Newark ever catch a break? The questions are implied in a New York Times piece this week headlined with a lament from one city resident that Whole Foods, which opened its Newark branch in late winter, is “not for us.” Newark’s population is only one-fourth white, and it seems obvious that the sentiment being expressed here, as well as the use of the word “gentrification,” are what in other contexts might be called “racial dog whistles.”

The Times frets that it’s a “tense moment” and that development is happening “unevenly” in Newark, that only certain neighborhoods have benefited so far. No doubt this is correct. You might think a paper based in New York would be aware of another city where development occurred in an uneven pattern. The Upper West Side gentrified in the 1980s, Times Square in the mid 1990s, the Lower East Side in the late 1990s, Williamsburg and Greenpoint, Brooklyn, in the 2000s. Harlem and Bedford-Stuyvesant are gentrifying as we speak. It takes a while to renovate a city.

Whole Foods is plainly worried that in Newark the shiitake might hit the fan. Its Newark page is an amusing plea to be welcomed into the community and a promise to prove its goodwill by handing out large checks. It emphasizes that it “will offer funding between $5,000 and $15,000 to each selected organization…in all five wards of Newark,” moving on to tell shoppers that it offers “Detroit style pizza” and hot dogs and then returning to note one more time that “We believe in the importance of giving back to our Newark community! We donate regularly to local nonprofits and schools to better serve our neighborhood and local causes.” Please don’t hate us for doing business in your city.

Whole Foods is wise to open up the checkbook of outreach given the deep suspicion that accompanies improvement in America’s less affluent cities. Let’s recap the slate of urban worries on the left. “Food deserts,” meaning a lack of availability of fresh food (or a lack of market demand for it), are bad. The opening of a gigantic store dedicated to selling healthy comestibles and produce, though, is also bad.

Such thoughts are not restricted to the fringe. Ta-Nehisi Coates, perhaps the most revered thinker on black life in America, advances them in his National Book Award winning memoir-cum-manifesto Between the World and Me. When white people started moving into his neighborhood, he felt this way: “I saw white parents pushing double-wide strollers down gentrifying Harlem boulevards in T-shirts and jogging shorts…their sons commanded entire sidewalks with their tricycles. The galaxy belonged to them, and as terror was communicated to our children, I saw mastery communicated to theirs.” Spike Lee compared the gentrification of Fort Greene, Brooklyn, where he grew up, to genocide after someone called the police to complain about his musician father playing late at night. Cornel West equated gentrification with “land-grabbing” and “power-grabbing,” and in an interview with AlterNet he denounced Harlem as “49 percent vanilla” as white people have moved in to “leave precious and poor working people dangling with very little for a place to go.” In his very next comment, he deplored the large number of abandoned buildings in places like Philadelphia as a result of “neoliberal hegemony.”

What a nightmare it must be to be a “liberal,” what with all this misery over a damned grocery store opening in the blighted hell of Newark. Of course, it must be admitted that the poverty-stricken Negro wards of the State doing most of the complaining in the NYT’s piece aren’t entirely wrong, either: they won’t be able to afford to shop there; it isn’t likely that many of them will be qualified to get jobs there, assuming any interest on their part in the first place, which assumption would probably be a stretch. And yes, it will herald the coming of a mass of white hipster douchebags, who will displace at least some of them from their squalid ghettos and force them to seek government-subsidized housing elsewhere, which they will then proceed to destroy as usual.

On the other hand, they’ll have plenty of hapless, defenseless white folks to prey on, instead of having to content themselves with robbing, stabbing, and shooting each other. Those wealthy gentrifiers will be worth robbing too, and will have access to better-quality recreational drugs, so the overall standard of living will thereby be raised.

But what’s perhaps most pathetic about the whole thing is Whole Foods’ piteous groveling as demonstrated above, trying to win not just the approval of their caterwauling, whiny customers but a measure of forbearance from the eternally resentful and potentially violent ghetto denizens as well. Necessary, of course, and they’re wise to do it; it shows they understand the bitchy mindset of their customer base all too well, and are, shall we say, “woke” to the threat a shithole like Newark breeds like a swamp does mosquitos.

I’m sympathetic to Whole Foods more than anybody here, I guess; certainly I’m sympathetic to the employees of the Newark store, who will be mugged, carjacked, and murdered after leaving work pretty routinely. But all in all, I’d have to say they all deserve each other, the NYT included.

(Via Glenn)


Black identity

Ain’t none.

Blackness in America is a laundry list of grievances against whites and a list of things that blacks reject about society. It has little to say about what it means to be black, independent of whites. Much like the contours of a black hole, we can only know black identity by knowing the surrounding white identity. Wherever white culture ends, that’s where black identity begins. In America, being black means not being white.

This negative identity has been particularly toxic to black Americans, because a negative identity binds the worst with the best. The greatest exponents of black culture are those who are the most degenerate. Hip-hop culture is a perfect example. It celebrates the worst instincts of black people. Any black who points this out is pilloried for acting white. The result is a never ending race to the cultural bottom, dragging the rest of the black population down with it. Even Obama was forced to respect the gutter culture of hip-hop.

This anti-identity is why blacks demand to live near whites.

Well, sure—that, and their own neighborhoods tend to be dirty, dangerous, tumbledown shitholes that nobody really wants to live in. The larger issue, though, isn’t necessarily race per se; it’s that they long ago let the Left define them, infantilize them, establish the boundaries of their own supposed best interests, and assert its crippling caretaker role over them…and now show little interest in removing the malign Progressivist influence from their lives despite its obviously disastrous end state.

As Hawkins says below: they yoked themselves en masse to Leftard “help.” The results have been entirely predictable.


Voodoo racism

As I keep saying: the Left’s problem isn’t with us. It’s with reality.

Over the past three months in San Francisco (and throughout the entire Bay Area), roving gangs of teens have been robbing and terrorizing passengers on the BART subway trains. Last week, the BART board of directors announced that it is refusing to turn over surveillance video of the attacks because, as the thugs involved are black, releasing the videos would create “racism,” which would lead to terrible consequences for the black community.

Now, to anyone with a decently functioning brain, that heaping plate of nonsense is impossible to digest. If the general public has a fear of black crime, it’s because of black crime, not footage of black crime. I mean, that’s obvious, right? How fucking elementary can something be? Because of the board’s refusal to release the surveillance videos, the marauding hoodlums will most likely not be caught (or they will not be caught as quickly as they would have been if people were given the opportunity to, you know, identify them from the footage). They’ll commit more crimes, thus leading to more people having “negative experiences” with black BART riders, thus leading to more suspicion directed at all young black men on the trains. By helping the criminals avoid capture, BART will only make things worse for law-abiding blacks who ride the subway. So why is BART acting in such an illogical and self-defeating manner? To answer that question, one has to view “racism” through the eyes of a leftist. Leftists see racism as an evil spirit—an otherworldly entity, conjured by whites and made manifest on an earthly plane, a “duppy” that, once brought into existence, flies around the world inflicting harm on black people, like a curse. Should the BART footage be released, it would summon demons, “racisms” that, once manifested, would sow destruction in the black community, causing crime sprees, absentee fatherhood, unemployment, drug use, and school truancy.

Anti-racism, as it’s practiced by modern leftists, is a massive faith-based superstition. And as anyone who’s ever tried to argue with the superstitious knows, you can’t talk sense to someone in the fevered throes of irrationality. Remember “Niggerhead rock”? Back in the 1980s, the family of former Texas governor Rick Perry leased a parcel of land for hunting. On the land, placed there decades before the Perrys ever arrived, was a rock with the word “Niggerhead” written on it. Perry had the ugly epithet painted over, and he turned the rock upside down. End of story, right? Not so fast. During Perry’s 2011 presidential bid, The New York Times declared that painting over the word was not good enough—the rock should have been destroyed. The word had rendered the rock evil, and only reducing it to gravel would free the land from its spell. Of course, imagine if the stone had been marked with a pentagram, or the words “hail Satan,” and Perry, a Christian, had destroyed it because the words or symbols had made the stone malevolent. He would have been ridiculed as a superstitious fool by the same leftists who proclaimed that the “nigger” rock was possessed by wickedness and in need of physical obliteration.

It should be pointed out that a lot of anti-racism voodoo practitioners are white. A few days ago, as I watched the cop-cam footage of talentless irritant Shia LaBeouf’s drunken meltdown, I thought to myself, here’s a prime example of a leftist voodoo priest who thought his magic had made him immortal. LaBeouf screechingly challenged the cop who arrested him, How dare you arrest me, I’m a white man! I can’t be touched! My take on it is, LaBeouf, a far-left social-justice nutcase, has been preaching about “white privilege” for so long, he’s come to believe it’s a real thing. When his superstitious beliefs were proven wrong by cold hard reality, he couldn’t handle it. LaBeouf didn’t just lose it because he was going to jail; he went batshit because his magic amulet didn’t protect him from persecution the way it was supposed to. Literature is filled with stories of witch doctors who become so convinced that their magic is real, they begin to believe they are protected from all harm. The repulsive little weasel in the back of that cop car is a man suffering a crisis of faith. We also saw this a few months ago after the arrest of SJW crusader “Reality Winner,” who stands accused of stealing classified documents from the NSA. Immediately after being tossed into a cell, Winner told her sister not to worry—her privilege as a pretty white woman would soon get her released.

It didn’t. As with the villain at the end of Polanski’s The Ninth Gate, the “magical protection” turned out to be completely illusory.

Anti-racism voodoo hurts everyone, from the black community to those at risk from the crime that emanates from the black community to the voodoo priests themselves, who eventually go mad as they lose themselves in their fantasy world of demons and magic.

Is there a cure for those who believe in “racisms”? Well, logic hasn’t worked.

Nor should we expect it ever to. It’s never worked with (or on) the Left yet. Seems like fending off logic, reason, and rationality is the only thing their “magic” does work on.


“Mean and shriveled”

The Left, in a nutshell.

These aren’t oil-patch newsletters or cookery magazines that find themselves sideswiped after carelessly dabbling in an issue that’s of no particular relevance to them and decide to cut their losses before it leads to advertiser boycotts and falling stock prices. Both magazines pride themselves in being dedicated to the craft of writing and were addressing the central question of what it is a writer is free to write about. To me the only answer to that is: Everything. To Messrs Kay and Niedzviecki’s bosses the answer is something far more mean and shriveled.

As the bestselling novelist Lionel Shriver put it when I interviewed her on this subject a couple of months back:

I have so little time for the concept of cultural appropriation, meaning that, as it applies to my occupation, you don’t have the right to assume that you know what it’s like to be someone other than yourself. Which is what fiction writers do.

Exactly so. As I said to Lionel:

Rudyard Kipling can write Indian and English characters, and Salman Rushdie can write Indian and English characters, and may the best man win.

But even to have to point that out is a defeat: As we agreed, the minute you have to state something so butt-numbingly obvious as that Shakespeare wasn’t a Prince of Denmark or a Moor of Venice, you’ve lost. We’ve all lost. We’re in a mad world, where it seems entirely normal for literary magazines to rule on what fictional characters a novelist is permitted to conceive.

As it happens, there’s one almighty cultural appropriation going on right now. Indeed, it’s a heist. The United Kingdom has become the acid-attack capital of the world. Female genital mutilation is practiced in “medical” clinics from Michigan to Melbourne. The taharrush has spread to Cologne and other Central European cities. Ritual beheading has come to French Catholic churches and upstate New York. And if you protest, “Look, I totally deplore all this cultural appropriation. I think it’s outrageous that Britain and America and Australia and Europe are culturally appropriating acid attacks and FGM and beheading and honor killings”, you’re told, “No, no. That’s diversity. It’s vibrant. What’s not to enjoy? It’s a beautiful mélange – just like this new Homeland Security proposal to ban laptops from cabin baggage on translatlantic flights, because a western cultural artifact is being appropriated and weaponized in the cause of eastern jihadism. What a rich cultural co-mingling…”

Jonathan Kay thinks I’m a bit boorish and vulgar when I go on about such things. So I was hoping someone would maybe write a novel or make a film about it.

But that novel can never be written – because, under Writers’ Union of Canada logic, only a Muslim could write it. Because in a vibrant diverse world, the one place that can’t be diverse and vibrant is a work of art.

There’s no internal consistency, no logic, no philosophical principle here. Only – as two Canadian editors learned last week – the brute power of a totalitarian left ever more inimical to the only diversity that matters: diversity of thought, diversity of expression.

Thereby demonstrating once again, as if any further examples were needed: they aren’t liberal, in any traditionally accepted sense of the term. They long ago hijacked that word for their own nefarious purposes; no part of its original meaning or dignity applies to them in any conceivable way, which is why they stole it. They’re fucking fascists. Cut and dried, plain and simple, full stop, end of story.

The best part, though, is how this so perfectly highlights the question posed by the cognitive dissonance weighing down Progressivism like an anchor: where, exactly, does “diversity” end, and “cultural appropriation” begin? The handful among them capable of rational thought, possessed of the tiniest shred of integrity, should answer: “Right down the middle of those precious urban ethnic restaurants I’m so fond of—and from which I of right ought to be banned.” Just for starters.

None of us should be holding our breath waiting for them to think it through.



Okay, I can’t even. I just…can’t even.

Trayvon Martin’s getting a college degree.

The slain Florida teenager — killed by George Zimmerman five years ago — will be awarded a posthumous bachelor’s degree in aeronautical science from Florida Memorial University.

Martin’s parents, Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin, will accept the degree on his behalf during the school’s spring commencement on May 13. Fulton is an alumnus of the school, a historically black university in Miami Gardens.

The aeronautics degree is in “honor of the steps he took during his young life toward becoming a pilot,” the school said in a Facebook post. Florida Memorial’s Department of Aviation and Safety has a designated Cessna pilot training center, and the school also houses the Trayvon Martin Foundation.

Florida Memorial wanted to award the degree to Martin now because, if he had lived and attended the college, he would have been graduating this year, said school President Roslyn Clark Artis.

If he had lived…and attended the college. And paid attention in class, and completed his assigned coursework, and not mugged random white people along the way, and spent most of his time getting high and robbing random victims, and generally being the useless violent thug he was.

On her Twitter page, Fulton thanked the university for honoring her son. She said he became interested in aviation after attending summer camps at Florida Memorial.

“He was so excited,” she told CNN. “But he couldn’t decide whether we wanted to fly planes or fix them.” Martin took aviation courses in high school, as well as a few flying lessons.

Well, hey, bless his little heart. Maybe if he’d actually followed up and pursued that, he might have ended up as something other than a parasitical drain on society who got his just deserts when he made the mistake of picking on someone prepared to defend himself instead of laying down and begging for mercy like Martin expected.

Martin was shot and killed in February 2012 by Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida. Zimmerman had called 911 to report a suspicious person in his neighborhood and later got into a fight with the 17-year-old. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense.

“Got into a fight.” Umm, no. Zimmerman was viciously assaulted by Martin, who WAS a suspicious person, and successfully defended himself after being jumped and having his head smashed into the pavement repeatedly by this predator. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense…because it’s true. That is exactly what he did. Just like you would have, just like I would have, just like any sensible, self-respecting person would have if it happened to us.

But hey, we mustn’t let inconvenient truths get in the way of a good narrative, right? Poor, poor little Trayvon, an innocent child whose dreams reached to the stars themselves, but who saw those beautiful dreams snuffed out by a vicious, hateful, bigoted White Hispanic who murdered him for no reason, no reason at all.

Just who do these malignant assholes think they’re fooling with this transparent horseshit, anyway? Certainly not anybody who’s ever suffered the misfortune of having to live in a neighborhood populated by the likes of Trayvon Martin, that’s for sure.

(Via Sundance)


Why the hell not?

I’m pretty sure I could guess who she would’ve voted for last time around.

Mermaids do exist – in California.

A woman with webbed toes identified herself as a mermaid named Joanna after she was found mostly naked and walking along a dark road in the middle of the night in Fresno County.

The young brunette was wearing only a black sports bra and had wet hair when cops found her near Millterton Road and Brighton Crest Drive in Friant around 3:15 a.m. Tuesday, the Fresno Bee reported.

She told cops she was a mermaid who’d just been in the water. But she answered “I don’t know” to most of their questions.

“There are some strange things that happen up here,” said neighbor Karon Renwick. “We’re in the mountains.”

Well, one thing is clear anyway: we must ensure that she, and all other mermaids, has free and open access to whatever bathroom facilities they all feel most comfortable with.

Via Glenn, who quips: “That’s where you usually look for mermaids, the mountains.” Heh. Indeed.™


Stick, stones, and etc

Speak not, lest ye be cast out.

The other day, I heard someone use the word “kike” in public. I can’t remember when I last heard someone use the word in conversation. My grandfather would use it, along with WOP, Spic, Mic, Jew, Polack and other colorful euphemisms. That was just the way men of his generation spoke to one another. One of his old friends was Italian and he called him a “Guinea bastard” so often it may as well have been his given name. In turn, his buddies would call him a commie, a rook, a pinko, etc.

Got a good buddy around these parts named Gennaro, who pretty much everybody knows as “Wop.” He’s an easygoing, confident, and friendly guy who takes it all in good humor, just a little gentle ribbing among friends. Which is exactly how it’s intended; everybody likes the guy, nobody means any insult at all by it. He’s one of the more beloved of our many damned-Yankee transplants, and if anybody thought for a minute they were hurting or insulting him, they’d cut it out.

The hand-wringers all swear that we are reliving Weimar Germany and Trump is the 12th invisible Hitler the prophecies foretold. The inevitable result is the Cossacks galloping through the streets of Jewish neighborhoods. Maybe so, but I’m skeptical. Trump seems to get along well with the Tribe and he seems to love his Jewish grandchildren. He has quite a few Jewish advisers and business partners. Maybe they are not making Hitlers like they used to, but my hunch is he is not Hitler and we are not Weimar Germany.

Eh, I think it’s more that they’re not making Americans like they used to. Too many of us have been reduced to quivering, trembling heaps of jelly-like protoplasm, too sensitive to even go outside the house without some sort of Nanny-state supervision, scared to death of their own shadows, ready to collapse into paroxysms of grief-stricken despair at the slightest hint of offense, insensitivity, or disregard. A society that feels any need at all for “safe spaces” for anybody but the clinically disturbed bears no resemblance at all to the loose aggregation of sturdy, rugged, independent, risk-taking pioneers we once were. And is probably just about at the end of its miserable run, too. And deserves to be.

Still, the special position for Jews in American may be changing. It’s impossible not to notice that the roster of people leading the opposition to Trump reads like a Manhattan law firm. It’s also hard to not notice that people with a precious metal in their name are wildly over-represented in America’s ruling elite. It’s fair to say that Jews in America are the new WASP’s, a narrow ethnic group that dominates the ruling classes. Instead of Pemberton and Prescott in the overstuffed leather chairs, it’s Goldstein and Silverberg.

As a result, it will become increasingly acceptable to make sport of the Jews, just as it was acceptable to make fun of the WASP’s in the prior century.

Actually, I kind of doubt that. It will remain acceptable among the same group that figures it so now, not because it IS acceptable but because they no longer give a shit what squeamish PC liberal shitstains think about what they say or do. Liberal definitions of victim groups never change; like their ideology itself, they’re static and inflexible. It’s why I frequently refer to them around here as “perpetual victims”; if the huge majority of blacks in America suddenly became rich and successful, libtards would still be whining about the poor, oppressed, put-upon handful who so richly deserve every bit of help we can get for them, and every bit of forbearance we can muster.

No, the real change is in the new willingness of those not securely fenced behind Progressivism’s Iron PC Curtain to speak their minds plainly, to violate the heretofore accepted norms of liberal goodthink and just come right out and say certain things. Excepting the vanishingly small minority of true bigots who aren’t worth bothering about anyway, those people aren’t interested in being mean or hateful to anybody, or in saying objectively cruel things for spite.

But neither are they any longer willing to keep on glossing over reality, or to censor themselves to suit some dainty little college professor’s whim or feed his megalomania. If a minority group that is no more than fourteen percent of the population is responsible for upwards of eighty percent of crimes in blighted urban areas, well, they just might decide to haul off and refer to those malefactors as “niggers” once in a while. You can be sure that those same people most likely have black friends, neighbors, or co-workers whom they like and respect too. There’s a distinction to be made there, and it ain’t too fine for them to be capable of making it.

As Chris Rock said a long time ago, in one of his more famous routines: “I looove black people. I HATE niggers.” Of course, being a liberal himself, he later disavowed that statement, claiming that he only said it to draw attention and notoriety. But whether he’s able to see it or not himself, there is some truth in what he said.

It must be said, though, that “Jew” has never been the sort of stinging epithet that “nigger” can certainly be. Although I also must admit to having told a Jewish joke or two in my day. But maybe that’s just old, racist, bigoted, hate-filled Southern redneck me, I dunno.

Personally, I don’t have any problem at all with Jews or their disproportionate success; I have a problem with Leftists. Why so many Jewish people seem to embrace the misbegotten failure of an ideology that is Progressivism I’m sure I don’t know. Particularly given the bizarre Leftard affinity for Muslims who openly espouse genocide of the Jews and the destruction of Israel, it’s a real puzzler. But expecting Leftists to make sense is a mug’s game. I’d say that Jewish Leftists are and will always be way more Leftist than they are truly Jewish. The statistics on the proportion of liberal American Jews who describe themselves as either devout or even religiously observant would seem to bear that out.

But here’s where it all really gets intriguing:

There’s something else to consider. There are a decent number of Jews in the Dissident Right, supporting Trump and often sympathetic to the alt-right. For example, the news site Breitbart is run by Joel Pollak, an Orthodox Jew. Mickey Kaus has been on the forefront of the patriotic immigration issue. It’s entirely possible that American Jews will come to view multiculturalism and open borders as suicidal, because they are bad for the Jews. Israel, after all, is pretty much the opposite of what the American Left advocates.

It’s fair to say that the America now passing into history was one built by the northern WASP elite, that emerged after the Civil War. These were the men who got rich in the Industrial Revolution. They built a country in their image. They wanted to conquer the world and they did. The people in charge now, in the technological age, will remake America into whatever they believe will suit their purposes. The Tribal States of America will reflect their interests, their cultural prejudices and their view of what’s best for the people in charge of the country.

It’s trite, but it’s true: the only constant is change. Let’s hope we may yet avoid the apocryphal Chinese-curse version of “interesting times.”



It ain’t strength.

“Diversity is Our Strength.” Really? Are Japan and China weak and miserable because they are not diverse? The historical record would beg to differ. “Homogeneity is Their Strength”?

That aside, I have noted before (here and here, for example) that many if not most of the so-called Syrian refugees, the current progressive plat d’jour, are neither Syrian nor refugees. They are not particularly persecuted any more than anybody else unfortunate enough to live in a Muslim majority country. Let us not forget that the bulk of Islam’s victims consists of Muslims, the same ones who come to our countries to instill the same sort of barbaric Islamic regime and practices they supposedly “flee.” I tire of comparisons of these “refugees” with Anne Frank and the millions of other Jews who fell to the Nazis. Prior to and during WWII, we did not take in Nazi “refugees.” We did not take in the people vowing to destroy us. The US also didn’t take many Jewish refugees either because, if you remember, the Democrats held power, and the Democratic party is the historic repository of racism and anti-Semitism in American politics. The Nazis of today are the Muslims pouring into Europe. The Anne Franks of today are the Christian, Baha’i, and Yazidi minorities living in the hell created by Islam. That same Islam, by the way, long ago eliminated the Jews from the Muslim world. I also would note that Islam drove the Hindus, the Buddhists, and the Sikhs out of Pakistan, but we have no UN programs or refugee camps for them. We have no Hollywood celebrity calling for justice for them.

The progressives seek to destroy our culture, and replace it with…what exactly? The progs can’t or won’t say, but we can certainly get a glimpse of what’s to come if they succeed. Has “diversity” of the progressive kind made Europe a stronger and a better place to live? I think that hundreds of victims of Islam in Paris, Nice, Brussels, London, etc., might have an interesting answer to that. I note that thanks to the strength derived from diversity, Swedish police now advise Swedish women not to go out alone after dark and to dress modestly so as not offend the “refugees” who might just have to rape and murder these women for cultural reasons. If “diversity” is so good, why not encourage it in the Muslim world? Let’s build churches in Mecca! How about that? Why not more diversity in Nigeria? Perhaps Mexico should diversify its demographics by taking in hundreds of thousands of “refugees” from the Middle East and Africa, and not funneling them northward? The same progs who worry about cultural contamination by missionaries of an isolated tribe in the Amazonian forest have no problem turning vast swathes of our cities into “no go” zones ruled by the practitioners of Sharia and the other blessings of the Religion of Peace.

The unholy alliance between Progressivists and Islam would seem to be utterly baffling and inexplicable, until you realize one thing: they hate America far, far more than they’ll ever love anything. It’s their first principle, their Prime Directive. Think of it as a particularly grotesque demonstration of the old saw “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” and it begins to make sense.

Well, for certain definitions of “sense.”


They lie

Unceasingly, and without remorse or shame.

From illegal aliens who have committed crimes, to all immigrants, to “people of color” generally: the circle of Trump’s victims widens by orders of magnitude in de Blasio’s fantasy of total persecution. Even to ask a question about whether illegal aliens should be regarded in the same way as legal immigrants betrays an “ideological bent”; on the other hand, it is perfectly straightforward to read a legal challenge to sanctuary cities as all-out race war.

The mayor’s expansive definition of victimhood was echoed this weekend by Governor Cuomo, who repeated the Left’s favorite cliché: “I am a Muslim. I am a Jew. I am Black. I am gay. I am a woman seeking to control her body.” This quasi-heroic affirmation of identity with the oppressed fringes of society, powered by anaphora, collapses into intersectional absurdity, and ultimately becomes the lowest form of political pandering, underscored by the repetition of the word “I.”

Last Friday, Trump announced that he would extend and expand the visa restrictions that Obama established in the 2015 Terrorist Travel Prevention Act, impose a 90-day moratorium on travel from seven countries with links to organized terror, and put a halt to the Syrian-refugee resettlement program. These policies fulfill campaign promises and have been clearly stated as temporary measures in order to make sure that migrants are being accurately screened.

Despite applying to a small fraction of the world’s billion-plus Muslims, the policy was quickly labeled a “Muslim ban.” Mayor de Blasio went on television and repeated the canard that the executive order specifically excludes Muslims from entry to the country; when called on this falsehood by Jake Tapper, the mayor responded with clause-heavy babble: “I would be careful on that. The notion that there’s not a pattern of exception for individuals, that the only indication suggests bluntly non-Muslims, should be very, very worrisome here.” The mayor went on to say that, in his view, illegal aliens who are convicted of drunk driving should be protected by New York City, providing that they didn’t run anyone over.

Hundreds of protesters, organized in New York by the immigrant-rights organization Make the Road, flocked to JFK airport—where several dozen foreign nationals in transit were detained—and demanded their immediate release. Thousands more protesters assembled Sunday at Battery Park in lower Manhattan, where they chanted “No Ban, No Wall,” a pithy expression of disdain for the principle of border controls, or borders generally. 

Senator Charles Schumer, standing in front of a handmade sign reading “Fascism is for Fascists,” announced that 42 people in transit stuck at JFK would be released. Then, falling into the rhetorical tic of infinite liberation, the senator declaimed, “So we’ve made progress for forty-two. We’ve got to make progress for thousands, and tens of thousands, and hundreds of thousands more.”

Not one of which we’re obligated to rescue from the collapse and neverending strife of their own horrid, primitive nations; not one of which has any right at all to enter our country unless the citizens of this country decide to grant it to them; not one of which has any legitimate claim at all on any of us, for anything other than maybe some mild “Oh, isn’t that too bad” tongue-clucking and generalized sympathy over their sorry circumstances, many of which are self-inflicted anyway—at most.

If Senator Schmuck thinks we’ve “got to” do anything at all about these people, other than defend our borders against their unwanted and illegal incursion, let him open his own home to them and “liberate” as many of them as he likes by taking them in and providing for them himself. So odd that not one of these open-borders idiots ever seems willing to step up and do that. Lead by example, Progtards; live your supposed morals, instead of just flapping your gums and patting yourselves on the back for them.


Teach your children

This seditious, murderous freak is doing just that, apparently. Which oughta scare the hell out of you.

During an anti-Trump protest in Seattle this weekend, an activist associated with the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement took to the megaphone to voice her support for, among other things, “killing people,” and “killing the White House.”

While she said that, another protester can be heard saying, “Burn it!”

She also says, “White people, give your fucking money, your fucking house, your fucking property, we need it fucking all,” as another protester responds “reparations!”

“Fuck white supremacy, fuck the U.S. empire, fuck your imperialist ass lives. That shit gotta go.”

No, bitch, it’s you who’s gotta go. And go you will. President Trump, with ironclad support from the rest of us, will see to it.

At 1:50 in the video clip, she goes, “And we need to start killing people. First off, we need to start killing the White House. The White House must die. The White House, your fucking White House, your fucking Presidents, they must go! Fuck the White House.”

“Pay the fuck up, pay the fuck up. It ain’t just your fucking time, its your fucking money, and now your fucking life is devoted to social change,” she said.

Oh, that last is certainly right enough. But it ain’t gonna be any kind of “social change” this brain-dead piece of shit will enjoy. Here’s the real payoff, though:

According to the channel that uploaded the clip to YouTube, the activist saying these things is a teacher.

But of course. Per Jim Hoft, she’s a preschool teacher at that. She ought to be immediately fired, stripped of any credentials or licenses she may have so that she may never come within a thousand yards of any schoolhouse environment again, and righteously shunned in any other way decent people can conceive of. She’s unfit for adult society, much less that of young children.

But by all means, keep running that fat yap, Progtard. Let all the world see what you really are, once the micro-thin layer of civilization is scraped off of your filthy, cowardly ass—you, and all the others like you. Your anti-American, totalitarian political party won’t even be able to field a candidate within the next ten years, much less hope to win an election of any sort.

(Via Bill and PJVid)


All you need is love lies

If you’re a Progtard living in the alt-reality fantasy universe, that is.

The media’s contempt for Trump’s use of the phrase “carnage” to describe the rising violence in the inner city is particularly ludicrous. The press has slavishly amplified the Black Lives Matter claim that we are living through an epidemic of racist police shootings of black men. A New York Times editorial from July 2016 was titled “When Will the Killing Stop?” That same month, President Barack Obama asserted that black mothers and fathers were right to fear that their child will be killed by a cop — remarkably, he made this claim during the memorial service for five Dallas police officers gunned down by a Black Lives Matter–inspired assassin.

So if Trump is so contemptibly misguided in his description of the rising street violence over the last two years as “carnage,” how does that criminal violence compare with the supposed epidemic of cop killings of black men? In 2015, the last year for which we have official national data, more than 6,000 black males, according to the FBI, were killed by criminals, themselves overwhelmingly black. That is 900 more black males killed in 2015 than in the year before, but the number of black victims was undoubtedly higher even than that, since an additional 2,000 homicide victims were reported to the FBI without a racial identity. Black males make up about half of the nation’s homicide victims, so they presumably make up a similar share of racially unclassified homicide victims.

According to several uncontradicted non-governmental estimates, homicides continued rising throughout 2016, thanks to what I have called the “Ferguson effect”: officers backing off proactive policing in minority neighborhoods, under the relentless charge of racism, and the resulting increase in violent crime.

The year 2016, therefore, probably also saw well over 6,000 black males murdered on the streets. By contrast, the nation’s police fatally shot 16 “unarmed” black males and 20 “unarmed” white males in 2016, according to the Washington Post’s database of police killings. I have put “unarmed” in quotes because the Post’s classification of “unarmed” victims rarely conveys the violence that the suspect directed at the shooting officer. But even when we take the “unarmed” classification at face value, those 16 fatal police shootings of unarmed black men represent no more than 0.2 percent of all black male lives lost to homicide in 2016. If police shootings of allegedly unarmed black males represent a national epidemic of bloodshed, then what should we call the gunning down of over 375 times that number of black men by criminals? “Carnage” seems like a pretty good descriptor.

It’s the ONLY descriptor, for those actually interested in the truth—which most definitely would NOT include Progressivist drooltards. As always, lies and unreality are the only arrows in their quiver. Well, that, and the hysterical shrieking.


I get spam!

From…wait for it…(Only) Black (Criminal) Lives Matter.

No, really.


I’d sooner see your mouths sewn shut than see you violent, America-hating racists invoke the name of MLK—who, despite being a flawed man like the rest of us, was on the whole a decent American and didn’t share much if anything with you guys in terms of either viewpoint or tactics.


Like Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., Black America has an opportunity to speak truth to power.

Like King knew, you always did have. All you haters had to do was leave out the cop-killing, rioting, looting, and reflexive hatred of white people. And of course the lying, which is the foundation of your entire misbegotten movement. Just another thing you and King don’t have in common. Heather MacDonald, as usual, has that covered:

Black Lives Matter ideology is just a more in-your-face manifestation of the Coatesian conceit that blacks are living in a system determined to destroy them. The Chicago Black Lives Matter chapter embraces the motto “Stop killing us,” aimed at the Chicago Police Department. It chants: “CPD, KKK: How many children did you kill today?” (The answer is: Virtually none. Last year, over 3,400 people in Chicago were shot, overwhelmingly black. Victims included 24 children 12 years of age or younger. The Chicago cops shot 25 people, virtually all armed and dangerous, or .6 percent of the total.)

Radley Balko rushed to tweet out that the Chicago kidnapping is not a trend because since 2001, 80–85 percent of white murder victims were killed by whites. True, but the percentage of blacks killed by blacks is higher. From 1980 to 2008,93 percent of black victims were killed by blacks. White-on-black homicides are much rarer than black-on-white homicides. The vast bulk of interracial violence is committed by blacks. In 2012, blacks committed 560,600 acts of violence against whites, and whites committed 99,403 acts of violence against blacks, according to data from the National Crime Victimization Survey provided to the author…

She has plenty more, naturally, which you readers can all peruse at your leisure. But back to the BLM bullshit:

President-elect Donald Trump made campaign promises in an attempt to win us over. Talk is cheap. Politicians promises mean nothing. We’ve heard it all for decades. If President-elect Trump is serious about helping the black community, he first has to hear from us face to face.

If Trump (or anyone else) is serious about helping blacks—or more importantly, doing something to prevent the manufactured racial tension in this country from boiling over into a hot war—he would do well to avoid you like the plague, and not listen to any of the lies you routinely puke up.

We will march to Trump Tower on Saturday, Jan. 14th to demand a meeting with President-elect Donald Trump. We are not coming for a photo-op or for beer diplomacy. The topics of conversation is the life or death of too many in our community, the livelihoods of the forgotten.

President-elect Trump will you stand face to face with us, hear us out? Believe me, we are ready to go toe to toe with your administration for the next four years if you don’t.

You’re gonna do that anyway, and we all know it. It doesn’t matter in the least what Trump might say or do; your refusal to look the facts in the face when it comes to black crime and justified police shootings of worthless, amoral thugs is proof enough of that. You might fool liberals suffering from the usual guilt complex, but no one else.

The Black Lives Caucus is an organization based on building a Black Voting Bloc. We are a nonprofit organization composed of activist, concerned citizens and high school students that are demanding accountability. We pledge no allegiance to any politicians or political parties. The Black Vote will be open to all candidates. This movement started with the I Ain’t Voting Until Black Lives Matter campaign which divorced blacks from the Democratic Party. It has evolved to an effort to build the Power of the Black Vote.

Well, if you well and truly did divorce yourselves from the Democrat Socialist Party, it was at least one smart move you made. The only one, so far as I can tell, but maybe it just might indicate that there’s some cause for hope in the longer term.

Our inaugural march on Saturday, January 14th will honor Martin Luther King, Jr. and oppose Donald Trump. We have Marchers marching from all 5 boroughs to Trump Tower. We are intentionally marching in New York City and not in Washington DC, because here is where we change the course of American politics.

You’re 13 percent of the population, responsible for more than 80 percent of the crime. Lots of luck with that.

Many black leaders and organizations claim to represent our interest, but they stand in unity with politicians who fail to represent the interest of Black Communities.

You keep talking about “the interest of Black Communities” without ever once specifying what those interests are. Will your interests be served by the removal of all white cops—or all cops, period—from your godawful, war-zone “communities”? Because at this point, there are plenty of us who would be more than willing to contemplate exactly that, and see just how that works out for you. Better than having more innocent cops killed by your snipers, or injured in your riots.

Is it in your interests to let the criminals preying on the decent black folk in your “communities” waltz away from their criminal predation scot-free? Turn ’em all loose, Bruce? Cry havoc, and let the slip the dogs of uncivilized barbarism to run riot through the few decent blocks left?

And when you’ve burned out all the businesses there and are whining about “jobs,” what then? Gonna go on bitching about “urban food deserts” when the last grocery store goes under because of all the looting, shoplifting, and strong-arm robbery? Gonna plant yourself a rooftop garden and grow your own food to feed yourselves with? Or are going to whine for more welfare dependency for the “underprivileged”?

I doubt very much that you have any clue at all what your interests truly are. Judging from the evidence of both your statements and your actions, you identify your “interests” with all the accuracy and wisdom of any 16 year old suburban brat. And the results of indulging your interpretation of your “interests” will be every bit as disastrous, if not way more so.

In honor of MLK’s week of service we are beginning our mission. We have sent over one hundred high school students into the streets of NYC to recruit and register voters. We are also phone banking to reach 25,000 voters over the next seven days. We will teach our people how to think and vote for themselves.

That would probably be the most constructive thing anybody ever did for you, or ever could. If only it were anywhere near true, or likely.

But all the hate, all the inexcusable violence, all the excuse-making for primitive criminals, all the racial unrest being fomented by A) worthless ghetto layabouts looking for handouts, B) stupid liberal college kids who don’t know when they’re being made fools of, and C) slimy politicians looking to promote a seriously sinister agenda—does have an end-state. I’ll let Jim Goad drop you a hint:

Americans know who Dylann Roof is but not Omar Thornton. They remember Rodney King but not Reginald Denny. They’re familiar with the murder of Emmett Till—which happened in 1955—but not the much more gruesome murders of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom, which happened in 2007.

The videotaped evidence of the Chicago kidnapping/torture reveals beyond a whisper of a doubt that the perps were, if not exactly “kids,” extremely stupid. Droolingly stupid. So stupid it seems miraculous that they even knew how to use Facebook for long enough to incriminate themselves. They appear to be possibly even dumber than the bricks that were apparently smashed into their heads and made them this dumb in the first place.

But how dumb was Austin Hillbourn to idolize a black thug who clearly didn’t idolize him? How severely naïve was he to get in the stolen van that night? Kids make stupid decisions, and on New Year’s Eve at that McDonald’s in the Chicago burbs, Austin Hillbourn made the dumbest decision of his life.

Fear has its place. A little bit of fear would have served Austin Hillbourn well. Perhaps his childlike acceptance of someone who wished him harm was part of his mental condition.

But what’s clear is that his attackers had no fear. And that may be part of a much bigger problem—the fact that no one seems afraid of white people anymore.

True enough, I guess. But that can always change, and if you keep slandering, murdering, and preying on us, it very likely will.

The truth is, the overwhelming majority of white people simply can’t be bothered with hating black people. Almost all of us get along just fine with the black people in our lives, and we all have at least a few in our lives on a daily basis: as friends, neighbors, co-workers, business partners, whatever. The KKK/white supremacists/Nazis you people keep bitching about are such a tiny fraction of the population as to be truly infinitesimal in number, and have no impact or relevance whatsoever on anything at all. The only ones they matter a whit to are agitators and rabble rousing race pimps, and the parasitic media who sensationalize them.

But when Donald Trump is a RACIST!—when every single Republican or conservative or non-proto-Marxist white person is routinely denounced as the second coming of Hitler, evil incarnate—well, frankly, we’re getting more than just a little bit sick of all that. And we’re not willing to just sit back and take much more of it. Not anymore. That free ride is well past its final station, and is about to be turned around and headed back the other way.

As I keep saying: 13 percent of the population—any population—should be very damned careful about wishing for a race war (much less actively trying to provoke one), lest they wind up getting their wish.


Cry wolf!

And let slip the, uhh, dogs of, ummm….oh hell, never mind.

This, I think, is the first level of crying wolf. What if, one day, there is a candidate who hates black people so much that he doesn’t go on a campaign stop to a traditionally black church in Detroit, talk about all of the contributions black people have made to America, promise to fight for black people, and say that his campaign is about opposing racism in all its forms? What if there’s a candidate who does something more like, say, go to a KKK meeting and say that black people are inferior and only whites are real Americans?

We might want to use words like “openly racist” or “openly white supremacist” to describe him. And at that point, nobody will listen, because we wasted “openly white supremacist” on the guy who tweets pictures of himself eating a taco on Cinco de Mayo while saying “I love Hispanics!”

The KKK is really small. They could all stay in the same hotel with a bunch of free rooms left over. Or put another way: the entire membership of the KKK is less than the daily readership of this blog.

If you Google “trump KKK”, you get 14.8 million results. I know that Google’s list of results numbers isn’t very accurate. Yet even if they’re inflating the numbers by 1000x, and there were only about 14,000 news articles about the supposed Trump-KKK connection this election, there are still two to three articles about a Trump-KKK connection for every single Klansman in the world.

I don’t see any sign that there are other official white supremacy movements that are larger than the Klan, or even enough other small ones to substantially raise the estimate of people involved. David Duke called a big pan-white-supremacist meeting in New Orleans in 2005, and despite getting groups from across North America and Europe he was only able to muster 300 attendees (by comparison, NAACP conventions routinely get 10,000).

My guess is that the number of organized white supremacists in the country is in the very low five digits.

So the mainstream narrative is that Trump is okay with alienating minorities (= 118 million people), whites who abhor racism and would never vote for a racist (if even 20% of whites, = 40 million people), most of the media, most business, and most foreign countries – in order to win the support of about 50,000 poorly organized and generally dysfunctional people, many of whom are too young to vote anyway.

Caring about who the KKK or the alt-right supports is a lot like caring about who Satanists support. It’s not something you would do if you wanted to understand real political forces. It’s only something you would do if you want to connect an opposing candidate to the most outrageous caricature of evil you can find on short notice.

Annnnd bingo: Occam’s razor, plain logic, and observed history all indicate that we have a winner. And all the shrieking, crying, and hysteria over an election that didn’t go their way—along with establishment media attempts to delegitimize the incoming President and render him incapable of governing—is where those wolf-dogs of war come in (via Ironbear):

You have every right we can think of to PEACEABLY assemble to wear your ignorant signs demonstrating your illiteracy as much as you like. Men and women better than you can ever aspire to be have given their lives to protect that right and you won’t find a single one among our brotherhood trying to limit that right, because that’s what we’re all about.

What you DON’T have the right to is to commit crimes against others because they have differing opinions from you, but you don’t seem to worry about that and your Chocolate Führer doesn’t seem too eager to remind you. Then again, he IS “literally Hitler”, to use your own illiterate term, so we’re not surprised.

You SHOULD worry.

Because we can kill every last motherfucking one of you in less time than it would take for the majority of us to finish reading the front page of the newspaper while taking a shit.

Ah, but think of all the wonderful things we’d lose, such as…well…like, say…

Okay, I admit, the only downside I can think of is that somebody would have to clean up the mess.

Update! The proper response: FUCK. YOU.

As a 46 year old white male, I’d like to give my perspective for the various liberals and leftists who comment here (and I’m truly glad you are here).

By your definition, I’m a racist, and I just don’t care anymore. I don’t believe I’m actually a racist, but you’re going to label me that way anyway, so I’ll just accept it. I’m a racist based on your definition. Fine. I won’t argue, I’ll just acknowledge you are right. I’m guilty of racism. Frankly, I’ve given up trying to prove you’re wrong. Hell, you’ll call me a racist for thinking algebra should be taught in school, and gifted programs should be kept even if they “lack diversity.”

And so now, if I can be so bold, here’s my response: “So what? I get it. I’m a racist. Do you have anything else to say? Now that you’ve defined me as a racist, should I just disappear? Should I just admit that you are right, and come around to your way of thinking? What, exactly, do you want me to do? Because I still think about the issues affecting this country in the exact same way.”

Someone above mentioned the Willie Horton ad. Such a racist ad. Here is the name of Willie Horton’s first victim: Joseph Fournier. Mr. Fournier was 17 years old when Horton stabbed him to death. Horton then stuffed Fournier into a trash can, where he bled out from his wounds. After Gov. Dukakis granted Horton a furlough from prison, Horton raped a woman twice, in front of her fiance (who he beat up and knifed). Do liberals care about Mr. Fournier, or his family? Do they care about the woman and her fiance that were traumatized? I don’t see any evidence that they do. You know what they care about? You know what will make them angry? If I use the word “thug” to describe Mr. Horton. Well that’s just not acceptable in polite society. It’s a racist code-word.

My question for all you dear liberals and progressives: Is there a way people like myself can talk about Willie Horton honestly without being accused of racism? Would there have been any way for Bush Sr.’s campaign to discuss the issue of weekend furloughs, and their innocent victims, without being written off as racist? “There goes the GOP again, stirring up white voters.” The Horton ad is considered prima facie evidence that Republicans are racists. But what about Mr. Fournier? How many Democrats know his name?

Dear Liberals, Democrats, progressives, leftists: Your use of the word “racist” doesn’t work anymore. We get it. You’re superior. You’re enlightened and we’re not. You care about diversity and we don’t. We only listen to dog whistles. We have given up trying to talk you out of your presumptions, or trying to earn your approval. We no longer consider it worth our while to reassure you that we’re not “that kind” of Republican.

But the fact is, we’re not as stupid as you think we are, and we see right through you. And if there’s one thing Trump has done, he’s given us some backbone to make our voices heard. Of course, that means “expressions of racism” will increase. (OMG!) And every child who behaves like a bully will be blamed on Trump. The fact is, we just won’t care about your freak-outs. Go ahead and caterwaul. You lost, and you deserved to lose.

I cast my vote for Trump reluctantly. Now, I couldn’t be prouder.

Now go ahead and double down again, idiots. Scream even louder, get in our faces and punch back even harder. See what it gets ya. I promise you won’t like it. Because despite your being too stupid and self-absorbed to notice, our punching-bag days are OVER. We are now “fully woke,” and have decided to emancipate ourselves at last.

You want a fight? Well, now you got yourselves one. Careful what you wish for, fascist douchebags, lest it get a lot worse.


Run ’em over

Glenn had the right of it all along, of course. But here are the legal technicalities.

Once a person being blockaded has been placed in reasonable fear of an imminent deadly force attack, then that person would be legally entitled to use deadly force in self-defense, including the use of their vehicle to “run them down” and neutralize the unlawful deadly force threat.

The question then is what would be required to generate a fear of imminent deadly force that would be deemed reasonable by police, prosecutors, judges, and juries.

Certainly if the protestors attempt, or reasonably appear to attempt, to forcibly enter the blockaded vehicles, this would constitute reasonable grounds to fear an imminent deadly force attack. Such conduct would include the smashing of windows or attempts to force open doors. The same applies to attempts to set vehicles on fire, or to flip vehicles over.

Note that a defender need not necessarily wait until the protestors have turned violent against his particular vehicle. If they have begun threatening or using deadly force against other blockaded vehicles it is reasonable to infer that your own vehicle is likely to be next — you are, after all, legally entitled to defend yourself not just against the danger already occurring to you but also against the danger that is about to occur, that is imminent.

I caution, however, that you can’t just speculate that some danger about to occur, you must be making a reasonable inference from actual evidence (e.g., observations) around you. “For all I knew they were about to start setting cars on fire,” is not enough, that’s mere speculation. “I saw someone approach with a Molotov cocktail,” or “I saw other vehicles ablaze” is, in contrast, evidence from which one can reasonably infer an imminent threat.

As a parting thought, there is nothing to prevent a legislature from defining the disorderly blockading of a public way as an act against which deadly defensive force can be used, such as by creating a legal presumption under such circumstances of a reasonable fear of death or grave bodily harm. The large majority of states have already created such legal presumptions justifying the use of deadly defensive force in other contexts — particularly in the context of an intruder in the home.

Personally, as a purely practical matter I’ll always pick being judged by twelve over being carried by six; YMMV, natch. But isn’t it something that we now have to take such considerations into account in the third-world shithole that liberal-fascist Amerika is all too fast becoming? We’re a long, long way from America That Was, folks, and getting further from it with every passing day. All of which serves to highlight the crucial distinction to be made between progress and Progressivism.

(Via Weirddave)


More “national conversation on race”

Fred offers some in the aftermath of the latest round of “mostly peaceful” riots. Those who always bleat loudest in demanding it won’t like it. This is what we are now pleased to refer to as “normal.”

The rioters grow in imagination. This time they tried to throw a photographer into a fire. There was stealing, of course. They steal in response to anything they don’t like. What they can’t lift, they break.

And they attack whites. It doesn’t matter to them who did what to whom. An African cop in an African city with an African police chief shoots an African criminal, and the rioters attack whites. In Milwaukee a black cop shot a black criminal and the tribesmen called for burning white suburbs. We seeing an episodic, one-sided—so far—race war. We will not admit it as then we would have to do something about it, and we do not know what.

The problem is not racist police. It is racist blacks. Whites are not burning the businesses of blacks. White people are not sacking the stores of blacks. White people are not calling for the burning of black suburbs. White people do not play the Knockout game.

We are blaming the victims.

And we are encouraging disaster. Blacks, a large proportion of them anyway, live in the expectation, and fact, of racial immunity. They are a special, protected category. The slightest offense to them causes the media to erupt, yet nothing they do seems to carry much penalty. Anyone who refers to blacks as niggers will likely lose his job and pension and become unemployable. It doesn’t work in the other direction. When a black man  calls for the gang-rape of a white woman (Sarah Palin), specifically by “burliest black men,” nothing happens to him. Feminists do not make so much as a peep.

It is a great mystery why the least productive thirteen percent of the country, the most dependent on welfare, the most criminal, should be permitted to steal, burn, rape, and beat those who behave in accordance with civilized standards. To shout “kill Whitey” while buying groceries with an EBT card, to expect to be taken care of, to get welfare and affirmative action while attacking the caretakers, does not suggest a crushing burden of mental acuity.

The bedrock problem, which most know but none dare speak, is that blacks cannot, or assuredly do not, perform at the level of whites. Exceptions, yes, but the exceptions are exceptions. They never have performed, not in Africa, not in Haiti or Jamaica, not in Detroit. It is a frightful truth, but a truth. They know it. We know it. Liberals know it. Conservatives know it. No amount of pretending can change it. No amount of rabid ideological egalitarianism, of holding our breath and turning blue, will produce different results.

Now what?

A grim question indeed. Fred’s concluding words are pretty discomfiting too—as discomfiting as the raw truth contained therein is inescapable.

Liberals would have it that all this is the just consequence of a historic racism, unique to America and Americans—white Americans exclusively, mind. They’re wrong about that. It’s the just consequence of five decades of nearly-unfettered liberalism, which has hollowed out an entire culture, made it doubt its own power, success, and righteousness, and heaped unearned guilt over its head by the bucketload.

The fruit from the tree of liberalism tastes bitter indeed. There’s a reason for that: it’s toxic. What else but pure ideological poison could have so sickened and all but killed off what was once the most successful, most progressive culture (in the truest sense of both words) in world history?

Update! Daniel spells it right the fuck out, loud and clear:

Keith Lamont Scott was scum.

He had been convicted of assault with a deadly weapon in two different states and convicted of assault in three states. He had been hit with “assault with intent to kill” charges in the 90s. His record of virtue included “assault on a child under 12” and “assault on a female.”

Scott’s wife had taken out a restraining order against him and warned that he was dangerous because he carried a gun.

The media spin; “Family and neighbors call Scott a quiet ‘family man.’”

Nothing says “quiet” like “assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill” and nothing says “family man” like assaulting women and children.

Keith Lamont Scott, the latest martyr of Black Lives Matter and its media propaganda corps, was shot while waving a gun around. He had spent 7 years in jail for “aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.”

This vicious monster’s career of crime ended when he was shot by Brentley Vinson, an African-American police officer, protecting himself from the latest rampage by this “quiet family man.”

Brentley Vinson is everything that Scott isn’t. The son of a police officer, Brentley dreamed of following in his father’s footsteps. He used to organize his football team’s bible studies and mentored younger players. Former teammates describe him as a “great guy” with “good morals.” His former coach calls him a “natural leader” and says that, “We need more Brent Vinsons… in our communities.”

Except that Obama, Black Lives Matter, the media, the NAACP and everyone else going after this bright and decent African-American officer has decided that what we really need are more Keith Lamont Scotts.

What Obama, BLM, and the rest of this rogue’s gallery of race-hustling Leftard swine are missing is the growing realization slowly dawning on more and more of us: that what we really, truly don’t need, above any and everything else, is more of them.


How to avoid getting shot by the cops

Seems simple enough to me. But then, I’m not a rioting, looting #(Only)Black(Criminal)LivesMatter thug.

Break out your pencils, gentle readers, it’s time for a pop quiz. What do Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, Walter Scott, Laquan McDonald, and Paul O’Neal have in common? Yes, they are all black men who died under controversial circumstances at the hands of the police, but you get only partial credit if your answer was limited to those facts. To get full credit, you must have included the point that they all would be alive today had they merely followed the lawful directions of the police officers who were trying to arrest or detain them.

Whatever the misdeeds of any of the police officers involved in these incidents, it remains a fact that even in those instances where the officers were charged with crimes, the officers had legal cause to detain the men who later died in the encounters. It was the decisions made by those men that set the fatal chain of events in motion. Yes, police officers are obligated to follow the law, but so is everyone else. When the police catch you dirty, the only wise choice – and the only legal one – is to put your hands up and do as you’re told. If Terence Crutcher and Keith Scott had done that, just like all the others mentioned above, instead of being martyrs to a discredited movement, they’d be unknown but alive today.

That’s about the size of it, yeah. You can whine about having to knuckle under to “fascist” cops all you like, but when the rubber meets the road, you’re gonna be a lot better off to stop when they say stop, freeze when they say freeze, and just generally do what they tell you when they tell you to do it, especially if you’re in a dicey neighborhood caught fair and square doing something you know you shouldn’t be. It might be “fair” or it mightn’t, but it’s certainly the way it is. And if you’re too stupid to know that, you just might end up getting shot. And shouldn’t be counting on a whole lot of sympathy from me when you do.

It all serves to remind me of this great and eternally relevant poster:

Or, if you like, my own version, from a post a while back. Careful what you wish for, libtards—lest you get it, both barrels, right full in the face.


The transformation of the neo-cons

Into neo-liberals.

The implication is that discussing immigration is off-limits, because to do so risks being just as bad as those imaginary bigots that haunt our past. We can debate how much we bomb the Muslims, but we cannot have a public debate about how many foreigners we allow to settle in our country. Incinerating half a million Arabs over the last twenty years is perfectly fine, but hurting the feelings of would-be migrants from Mexico would make us worse than Hitler. It’s as if Americans don’t have a right to define what it means to be an American.

At the same time, neocons are forever prattling on about how America is not a blood and soil country. Instead it is a propositional nation. In other words, all you have to do is sign onto the bargain for what it means to be an American and you are an American. That sounds good, until they follow that with the argument that Americans don’t get a say in what it means to be an American. The proposition, according to guys like Jacoby, is that they get to use Americans as cannon fodder for waging pointless wars of choice and they also get to replace those Americans with foreigners of their choice.

You can be forgiven for thinking that guys like Jacoby really don’t like Americans very much. When he is not comparing us to blood thirsty, xenophobic murderers, he’s insisting we lack the moral authority to have a say in how the country is run. That’s what passes for conservatism these days. It is a laundry list of complaints about the American people. When they are not rooting for the death of working class whites, they are twisting themselves into pretzels in an effort to prove they are nothing like the savage Dirt People carrying Trump through the election.

It is a good reminder that neo-conservatism was always a Progressive heresy and never had roots in Anglo-Saxon conservatism. Modern Progressivism has curdled into a list of hatreds, offering nothing but an increasingly dark vision of society. The neocons are following the same path. Guys like Jeff Jacoby can only tell you what they are not, and increasingly that sounds like “not American.” To be a neocon today is to do little more than spew venom at normal Americans for not supporting wars of choice and unlimited immigration.

Ah well, the UN will straighten it all out for us once it takes over and becomes a true global government, with Obama as Secretary General.

And if that idea didn’t make you either shudder or throw up in your mouth a little, you’re probably a neo-libcon yourself.


All you’ll ever need to know about the Charlotte riots

Is right here, captured in a single picture.

“A book,” my ass. Click on the link Sundance provides for the backstory, if need be. But the bottom line remains: #BlackLiesMurder is based entirely—ENTIRELY—on falsehoods, from Ferguson right up through last night. It’s a fine example of how the Left operates, from top to bottom, start to finish.

The amusing thing to me is how careful local news has been to call the rioters “protesters,” which presents a few questions for them: what exactly did the truckers who were stopped, threatened, intimidated, and looted on I-85 night before last have to do with police shootings, pray tell? What did those drivers passing by near downtown last night who had bricks, traffic cones, and other debris heaved off of overpasses at their cars do wrong that their lives should be put in jeopardy by these animals? A more revealing question might be: why do these riots always seem to take place near a Wal Mart, which then ends up looted as if THEY had anything to do with anything?

Screw these vermin. Any sympathy I had for them and their cause—and there was some initially—is now long gone. I’ll take a few bad cops over unhinged, vicious savages any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.


Truth hurts

Oh, Sailer is gonna catch hell for this.

Granted, a century of endlessly replicated social science studies have found that, on average, blacks are in truth both less intelligent and less lawful than whites.

So, the survey data show that Trump supporters are somewhat less ignorant of the past 100 years of social science than are Clinton acolytes. A serious question would be: How much trouble is this country in when even Trump voters are unaware or unwilling to be honest about fundamental social realities?

But instead, the pundits leaped to condemn the fact that Trump supporters are slightly less stupid on average than Hillary supporters.

Federal data are hatestats.

“Deplorable” is a dysphemism for “honest.”

Thus, on Monday, the media became obsessed with forcing Mike Pence to officially “deplore” David Duke, who was last elected to office during the 1980s.

Duke is irrelevant, except that, following the death of Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), he is the last surviving former Ku Klux Klan official that anybody has ever heard of. With Haven Monahan being, despite the media’s extraordinary efforts, unfortunately unavailable, the aging Duke has to stand in as the KKKrazy Glue that holds the Democratic Coalition of the Fringes together.

Trump has caught on that Hillary is, as Freud would say, projecting, accusing Trump of the exact emotions she is acting upon. On Monday, Trump reproached her for heading a “campaign of hate,” of “running a hate-filled and negative campaign.”

This election has turned into the Waterloo of the War on Noticing.

Or the War on Objective Reality, more like.




"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


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 - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments


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