Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Annnd that’s a wrap

Stick a fork in him; he’s all done. Remember, you heard it here first.

As Senate Republicans press for a swift vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats are investigating a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh. The claim dates to the 1983-84 academic school year, when Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale University. The offices of at least four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation, and at least two have begun investigating it. Senior Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week and, in conversations with The New Yorker, expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote. The Democratic Senate offices reviewing the allegations believe that they merit further investigation. “This is another serious, credible, and disturbing allegation against Brett Kavanaugh. It should be fully investigated,” Senator Mazie Hirono, of Hawaii, said. An aide in one of the other Senate offices added, “These allegations seem credible, and we’re taking them very seriously. If established, they’re clearly disqualifying.”

Executive summary: another liberal Democrat-Socialist bint has been coaxed out of the woodwork to claim that, at a drunken dorm-room party, after someone wagged a dildo at her Kavanaugh whipped out his winky and wagged it in her face as others among the heavily-soused crew laughed and teased her with shouts of “Kiss it! Kiss it!” She admits her recollection of this heinous crime against humanity—an atrocity surpassing any Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot ever committed—is “foggy” and has “significant gaps,” which, of course it does. She also claims that, having been raised a “devout Catholic,” she “wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” which makes ME want to laugh.

No matter; Kavanaugh’s nomination will be withdrawn before the end of the week. If this new “revelation” doesn’t take him down, they’ll make more until they find the one that does. All because of a stupid, tasteless stunt he allegedly pulled as a kid four decades ago? No. Because of this:

The entire Kavanaugh episode demonstrates what modern elite women are willing to do in order to preserve the “right” to murder their unborn children on the altar of narcissism and self. May God hold them accountable.

SOMEBODY damned sure needs to.

Update! Of COURSE the “new allegations” are bullshit. So was the old one. The next one will be, too.

The unnamed former friend said of Ramirez, “This is a woman I was best friends with. We shared intimate details of our lives. And I was never told this story by her, or by anyone else. It never came up. I didn’t see it; I never heard of it happening.” Ramirez and the unnamed friend were close all through their years at Yale, and said that Kavanaugh remained part of their “larger social circle.” According to the story, this friend of Ramirez initially suggested “that Ramirez may have been politically motivated” in coming forward with the allegation.

So, we have an incident lots of people allegedly witnessed and talked about, but her best friend at the time says she was never told or heard about it, and suggested possible political motivation.

And again: doesn’t matter. Why? Here’s a hint:

Democrats will stop at nothing to stop Kavanaugh. They will destroy an innocent man if they have to. This is yet another dirty trick that should signal to the Senate GOP that the longer they wait, the more bogus accusations will be made to postpone Kavanaugh’s confirmation until after the midterm elections.

So all that really needs to happen for this whole shitshow to be short-circuited is for Senate Republicans to stand firm, staunchly defy the malevolent plotters behind all this, and show some backbone in support of…uhh…ummm…uhhhh…

Yeah. He’s done.

Share

Don’t Let’s be evil!”

Bust ’em up.

WASHINGTON — Days after the Trump administration instituted a controversial travel ban in January 2017, Google employees discussed ways they might be able to tweak the company’s search-related functions to show users how to contribute to pro-immigration organizations and contact lawmakers and government agencies, according to internal company emails.

The email traffic, reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, shows that employees proposed ways to “leverage” search functions and take steps to counter what they considered to be “islamophobic, algorithmically biased results from search terms ‘Islam,’ ‘Muslim,’ ‘Iran,’ etc.” and “prejudiced, algorithmically biased search results from search terms ‘Mexico,’ ‘Hispanic,’ ‘Latino,’ etc.”

The email chain, while sprinkled with cautionary notes about engaging in political activity, suggests employees considered ways to harness the company’s vast influence on the internet in response to the travel ban.

Daniel explains:

Not surprising.

Google has already rigged search results for certain Islamic searches without being at all subtle about it. But the explosive thing here is that it was a response to a specific government policy.

He also mentions that “Google says that these plots never went beyond proposals,” and you can believe as much or as little of that as you want to. Personally, I haven’t used their search engine in a good while now, and haven’t missed it.

Share

House of cards collapses completely

The lie continues to unravel. Not that it’s going to matter now.

CNN has learned that the committee has reached out to a longtime friend of Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser.

“I understand that you have been identified as an individual who was in attendance at a party that occurred circa 1982 described in a recent Washington Post article,” a committee staffer wrote Keyser earlier this week.

On Saturday night, her lawyer, Howard Walsh, released a statement to CNN and the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Simply put,” Walsh said, “Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”

So, let’s see, that makes—well, all of the supposed attendees at Ballsey-Fraud’s made-up party who have either denied any reprehensible behavior on Kavanaugh’s part, or have denied even attending at all.

But I repeat: Kavanaugh will not be appointed to the Supreme Court. In fact, his nomination won’t even be voted on at all. The Cuckpublicans, DiFi, and the Demonrat Socialists—in short, the Deep State entire—have won this one. The only question remaining is: what are we gonna do about it? My bet is: not a damned thing.

Via Insty, who says: “This is bullshit. Stop fooling around and take the vote.” Not gonna happen, sorry to say.

Update! Is there a bright side to the Kavanaugh defeat? Well, could be, could be.

If the recent generic ballots tell us anything, it is that the Republican establishment should stop trying to run generic Republicans as candidates. The GOP of Paul “throw-granny-off-a-cliff-and-give-her-Social-Security-check-to-the-Koch-Brothers” Ryan has never been popular, and for good reason. This is why Donald Trump, despite having ostensibly low approval ratings, is virtually unstoppable compared to his purported “allies” in Congress. Against this alleged political party with approval ratings somewhere between those of Typhoid Mary and the man who ran over your dog, and with all the instinct to fight of said dead dog, a blue wave should surprise no one.

On the surface, therefore, the potential success of the Democratic Party would seem to be a banner day for #TheResistance.

Except it won’t be. Indeed, should a blue wave arrive in November, it will be the high water mark of #TheResistance’s influence. Within the administration, and even in Congress, the very policies that could shipwreck #TheResistance on the shores of its own extremism are closer than ever to coming to pass, and what’s more, #TheResistance knows this. Indeed, the campus-style freakout on the part of Democratic Party activists in response to the baseless accusations of Christine Blasey Ford, who recently lobbed a Duke Lacrosse-level slimeball of scurrilous envy disguised as grievance at Judge Brett Kavanaugh, shows as much.

Hobble the Left: Here’s How
No serious party would latch onto the rhetoric of the most asinine #MeToo activist unless it believed that was the only way to avoid an extinction-level event. Republicans everywhere should be much more pleased with Kavanaugh’s nomination, knowing the Left views it as such a threat to their agenda.

But it isn’t just Kavanaugh. Over the past few weeks events suggest that the Trump Administration and Congress can, and will, hobble the far Left by dismantling their strongest weapons in America’s ongoing cold civil war.

Personally, I think Trump is letting a lot of crap wash over him right now just waiting to get the midterms behind him. After that, win or lose, I look for him to really bear down on the Deep State but good. I think the Kanaugh Kerfuffle is, as the author says, the last gasp of a desperate cabal. The Kavanaugh battle is over. But the war is still on. And it ain’t just the Left that needs hobbling, either.

Share

Me-too Republicans

Some things never change.

Eighty years ago, “Me Too” described Republicans eager to publicly second the policies of Franklin Roosevelt, a feeling so pervasive that the party nominated for president in 1940 a man who a few months earlier registered as a Democrat. “Me-Too Republican” generally conjured up not opportunists but an oversocialized character longing for approval from his Democratic neighbors and colleagues but clinging, perhaps out of family tradition or some other cause that also spoke to his desire to fit in, to the GOP label.

The phrase now refers to something different. But the conformity and reflexive support that characterized that Me Too endures in this #MeToo. Me Toos “me too,” too, after all.

Prominent Democratic politicians insist that decent people must believe the allegations against Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford, a woman who refuses invitations to testify under oath, whose story conflicts with that of the man she names as an eyewitness and the notes taken by her therapist, who cannot pinpoint the approximate date or precise location of the alleged assault, and whose history of supporting ActBlue and other left-wing causes indicates a possible motive to take down the president’s pick.

Her story seems suspect. But if you express something short of belief, many see you as suspect.

Okay, look, here’s the damned deal: let’s stipulate the lying liberal whore’s every assertion. There’s no compelling reason to, and certainly no evidence to back it up, but let’s go ahead and do it. So what do we have, then? A few teenagers got drunk at a party, and she ended up with one of them grabbing her tit and pawing clumsily at her clothes for a few seconds. And then…

That’s it. By her own account, NOTHING ELSE HAPPENED. He grabbed her by the tit momentarily, and that is the ABSOLUTE WORST of it.

And now she all of a sudden claims to have been traumatized by it for almost four fucking decades. Although, oddly enough, she never once mentioned it to a living soul, not until Kavanaugh’s name turned up on Romney’s list of prospective SC nominees in 2012. Kavanaugh has been vetted by the FBI six times already, and never ONCE was this non-event mentioned. Not one time.

There’s a right way and a wrong way to handle this dirty, transparent, manipulative attempt to do away with due process and the right to confront one’s accuser in open court. This would be the wrong way:

In Judge’s Defense, Republicans Shouldn’t Descend to Dems’ Level

Oh, Jesus tapdancin’ Christ. Right out of the gate, you know what’s coming. Ain’t like we haven’t seen it a blue million times already, after all.

Weaponizing a vague and unverifiable claim of sexual assault from Kavanaugh’s teenage years is a fitting capstone to what has been a truly grueling and repugnant confirmation process. The question now becomes, will Republicans respond in kind? Fearing for their grip on the Supreme Court if Kavanaugh is defeated and Democrats take control of the Senate, will they overreact and lash out at Ford? Will they attempt to discredit Ford by questioning her motives, her veracity, or even her sanity? My view is that this would be a serious error, as well unfair to Ford herself.

Fuck Ford, and fuck what might or might not be “fair” to her or any other such low-down, scurvy sewer rat as she. She eagerly lent herself to the sleaziest of smear campaigns for purely partisan purposes, and is manipulating the process even now with her ducking and dodging and cutesy-coy maneuvering. She’s gotten “death threats,” has she? Boo fucking hoo; so has the decent man she slimed, and his whole family too. This sort of thing is a tried-and-true Democrat Socialist tactic, and it’s more than past time it splashed back on them. If she has to spend the rest of her worthless life in hiding, I solemnly promise you I will not give a single shit.

This isn’t some noble, civilized debate we’re having here, with honorable opponents who respect the rules and can be counted on to conduct themselves with integrity and decorum. This is a war to the knife against craven guttersnipes who will stick at nothing at all to win. If you can’t get your head around that, you’re better off staying indoors with the women and children.

On the other hand, Republicans face real danger. If they were to treat Professor Ford with, the same savagery and contempt that has been inflicted on Brett Kavanaugh, there is a possibility that public sympathy for the Judge would evaporate, and the whole affair could turn into an ugly mess.

No, Republicans must be the adults in the room. They must treat Judge Kavanaugh, and his accuser, with the sort of fairness, circumspection, and respect that has eluded their Democratic colleagues throughout the process. Republican Senators thus far have shown every indication that they intend to do exactly that: they will act responsibly and judiciously, and they will show sensitivity to Professor Ford and allow her to keep her dignity. Americans will thus be left in no doubt about which party is acting in good faith.

The entire bare-knuckles campaign to defeat the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh can be likened to a leftist tantrum, characterized by vitriol as well as futility. The numbers in the Senate, after all, are with Republicans, and thus the truth has always been that, as long as Republicans keep their cool and close ranks to support a solid conservative nominee, nothing and no one can prevent them from confirming a good man like Brett Kavanaugh.

Wanna bet? For my money, they’ve already done it. It’s for sure and certain that FeinSwine has already gotten everything she wanted out of this and then some.

The timing of Feinstein’s release of information regarding the initially anonymous woman accusing Kavanaugh of sexual assault was simply impeccable. Democrats knew they had no reasonable chance of stopping his confirmation, but Feinstein, a savvy and old-school politician, found a way to turn lemons into lemonade. Feinstein may have wrought a political masterpiece.

It is very likely that Feinstein knew in July, when her constituent sent the allegation to her, that it was so lacking in any kind of detail and backup that it could not derail Kavanaugh. But that didn’t mean that the allegations from Christine Blasey Ford could not be politically useful.

By releasing the information at the last hour, Feinstein put Republicans on the judiciary committee and the White House in a catch-22. They could either vociferously defend Kavanaugh and look like they were once again defending an abuser of women, or throw him under the bus and have to scramble to nominate and confirm a new nominee.

If, as increasingly appears to be the case, the GOP stands behind Kavanaugh in the face of this allegation, Feinstein has created a Me Too moment that Democrats can campaign on in their attempt to take back Congress, just as she did in 1992. It is, in a word, brilliant. One can almost see Mitch McConnell smiling and fist-bumping her, saying, “Well played, Di.”

This guy too, strangely enough, argues for the GOPe to “take the high road,” as if that had ever worked before. I certainly agree that it would be nice if our opposition was honest, trustworthy, dignified, and reasonable—if our disagreement was over Constitutional nuance, a debate about how best to maintain the integrity and relevance of the Constitution and its insistence on limited government and individual liberty.

Too bad that none of that is true, not one word of it. In truth, this isn’t a “debate” at all, not in any meaningful sense. It is an existential struggle, a semi-cold war against a dishonest, dishonorable opponent who NEVER argues in good faith, but is always jockeying for a position from which he can slide the shiv into freedom’s back. The Kavanaugh Kerfuffle is in no way unique, extraordinary, or atypical. It is merely the latest chapter in a very old playbook.

And there’s a reason for that: it’s worked for them every time up till now. That’s thanks to the collusion of the GOPe, combined with the above-the-fray prissyiness of those of us who misguidedly insist on this “high road” nonsense and recoil in horror from the thought of getting their hands dirty and their raiment soiled in an unseemly gutter brawl. It’s an essentially passive, defensive strategy, which is the wrong tack to take when what is required is a proactive, offensive, vigorous, and unrestrained effort.

What we’ve been seeing all these years is Mike Tyson pitted against the Marquess of Queensberry—or Little Lord Fauntleroy, more like—yielding its perfectly predictable result. And if you think the Kavanaugh fight has been ugly, just wait till Ruth Bader-Ginsberg either croaks or is carted bodily off to the glue factory. We ain’t seen nothing yet, folks, and we’d all damned well better be ready and willing to get as down and dirty with the scuzzbuckets of the Left as necessary if we want to keep from losing what little of our country is still left to us.

The “high road” is every bit as useless and irrelevant now as the effete feebs who smarmily scold us about its importance are. Until we’ve well and truly clobbered the Marxist moonbats, by any means we can contrive, we need to keep Miss Manners on the sidelines, and Emily Post’s Blue Book Of Social Usage firmly tucked away in our back pockets. Well, unless we intend to clout a shitlib over the head with it, that is.

Share

On the Coming Unpleasantness

Aesop gets real on the Shit Getting Real, riffing on a VDH column which can be perused here, and sums up thus:

Will America keep dividing and soon resort to open violence, as happened in 1861? Or will Americans reunite and bind up our wounds, as we did following the upheavals of the 1930s Great Depression or after the protests of the 1960s? 

The answer lies within each of us. 

Every day we will either treat each other as fellow Americans, with far more uniting than dividing us, or we will continue on the present path that eventually ends in something like a hate-filled Iraq, Rwanda or the Balkans.

Aesop picks up the ball and runs with it:

Hanson has correctly described a binary outcome:
Either the lunacy will stop, or the country will rend itself.

Either/or.

1, or 0.

And he described it, not to put too fine a point on it, in exactly the terms put forward by Matt Bracken years since:

Bracken:
“Bosnia, times Rwanda”
Hanson:
“we will continue on the present path that eventually ends in something like a hate-filled Iraq, Rwanda or the Balkans.”

Hanson is not an instigator, he’s a historian.

He’s showing, with painful precision, that following the edge of this straight-ruler to its logical end leads to flying off a cliff into an abyss at speed, unless people see that inevitable denouement, and decide within themselves to turn away.

Again, Hanson is not suggesting anything; he’s stating with mathematical precision that either things will be done differently, or there will be a conflagration. He is mathematically correct and precise in this formulation.

Having laid out the consequences, I don’t think he’s in denial about the current state of affairs at all.

When one guy, or five guys on the ‘net say “Civil War”, it may be just Tulipomania. When everyone is starting to sound like a chorus, including Stanford historians, there is beginning to be something to it.

Hanson is telling you the product (just as Matt Bracken has).
You may be worried about plugging in the variables.
You may even have them precisely correct, but the greater point is that it’s immaterial.

When you put enough U-235 in close proximity (64kg, in point of historical fact), you achieve a predictable result.

And, as he goes on to say, ain’t nobody gonna like it. At. All. CA responds with this:

Do you honestly believe you can, let alone should, treat the Americans who intentionally and with malice/political/personal gain who destroyed your California as as “fellow Americans, with far more uniting than dividing us”?

How about the Red academics who not only kicked over the Jenga tower of limited government and the rest of Western Civ but set all against all first behind campus walls, and now in the general society? Can and should they be treated as “as fellow Americans, with far more uniting than dividing us”?

The race pimps – same question?

The first and second gen feminists – same question?

The “my wallet and powerlust before country” politicians over our lifetimes – same question?

Othet post-WW2 miscreants – same question?

Those folks are destroyers, plain and simple.

They are not my fellow Americans.

And that right there is the REAL problem. We already know just how amenable to reason they are: not in the least. Which brings us back to that Walsh material I told you earlier you’d be seeing again.

The Democrats today no longer believe in the very system in which they serve.

But our two-party system can only work if both sides are of good will, in common agreement on fundamental principles, and profess fidelity to the country as founded. In their lust for power and the “fundamental transformation” of the Republic into a leftist tyranny, the Democrats can no longer function within such a framework—just as they couldn’t in 1860-61, declaring war first on Lincoln and then on the United States of America itself. It took four long and bloody years for Ulysses S. Grant and William T. Sherman to show them the error of their ways. And even then, a Democrat murdered the president.

Today’s Republicans are, in the main, made of lesser stuff. More patsies than potentates, they roll over at the first hint of trouble; indeed, the late John McCain (R-Ariz.) made a fetish of what he called “comity,” which in his definition meant surrendering to the Left and poking his finger in the eye of the Right. His love children, Senators Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), would dearly love to inherit his mantle, but alas for the both of them, they’re self-retired short timers, and nobody cares what they think.

But Democrat memories, while long—they stretch back to Aaron Burr, Jefferson’s vice president, who shot Alexander Hamilton and founded Tammany Hall—are selective. They, like Iago, see themselves as victims, frustrated by the evil Federalists/Whigs/Republicans/conservatives from realizing their political program: free pie (in the sky) for all, but all power to themselves. It never occurs to them that, like Michael Douglas in “Falling Down,” they’re the bad guys.

Any movement of the type and magnitude capable of staving off a Civil War-type conflagration of necessity MUST come from their side, towards us. There is no nonviolent way to bridge this gulf otherwise. Having spent decades moving Left themselves, Real Americans already know well enough how that ends up: with further demands, further petulance and threats, further nervous breakdowns, and of late, further violent assaults against them. The Left has no desire to reason with anybody, or debate anybody, or meet anybody halfway. They desire—they intend—to rule. No more, no less.

There is no happy ending to all this, not that I can see. They will not stop; they will have to BE stopped. They will either win, or the real Americans they loathe and despise will. Horrible as it all is, it’s the plain truth, unless an inconceivable tide of profound awakening and enlightenment suddenly washes over them somehow. It’d be awfully nice if such a thing happened, but all the evidence so far says it is NOT the way to bet.

Share

The monkey speaks his mind (again)

Hitting on something that has been bugging the hell out of me.

If Kavanaugh isn’t confirmed I think we are lost. Governance-by-riot will be firmly in place, and I see no way out of it. The flashes of backbone that we are seeing in the Republican leadership is gratifying, but until it is confirmed by a timely vote it will just be more of their typical obfuscation in service of the corporatist wing of the party. What makes me sick is that these very same Republicans take off the gloves when they are in tough primary races, but can’t seem to retain that killer instinct when it matters.

And another thing…why aren’t Republican operatives asking Feinstein to recuse herself from the confirmation process because they have credible evidence that the letter was actually a plant by the Chinese spy who was until lately in her employ? Yeah…it’s called tit-for-tat. And the Republicans need to be doing more of it.

Figured out what it is that annoys me about this yet? Walsh’s latest, which I’ll be excerpting more of in a separate post, provides another strong hint (my emphasis throughout):

(Kavanaugh) does indeed shift the balance of ideology on the court away from Anthony Kennedy’s whimsy toward a grounded, conservative respect for the law. And when the next liberal justice shuffles off, and Trump appoints yet another originalist justice, their slim hopes of goose-stuffing social change down the throats of the American people via judicial fiat will be gone for a very long time. And so will their self-image of being on the “right side of history.”

This week will be crucial to putting the Democrats back in their boxes. Let’s see if the GOP will take it.

We all hope they will, but if they do it will be because of the new-breed, Trump-supporting types rather than the same-old-same-old Establishment hacks. Which brings us ’round to the annoying thing: how many times have we all read the dire warnings from our side’s pundits—the best and brightest among ’em too, like Reynolds and Schlichter—about how the Democrat Socialists aren’t gonna like it much when the GOPe gets back into power and uses Dem-Soc tactics and MO’s against them? Schlichter calls it “the New Rules,” as in the Left is gonna hate ’em. People on our side talk about this in the most rapturous terms, as if the threat alone might somehow get results.

And it never, ever happens. It took everything short of hooking his flappy man-boobs up to a super-duty car battery to get Yertle McTurtle to finally use Harry Reid’s nuclear option against them, and even then it was unexpected to the point of shocking when he did it. And that is the first, last, and only example I can think of of Republicans at last turning the tables and ramming some of the Democrat-Socialists’ own shit down their throats, despite who even knows how many opportunities when it was fully justified and might have truly made a difference.

Instead, it’s always been an empty threat, and the Left has always known it. It’s the reason they’re so unhinged over Trump: he talks a tough game…and then he follows up by going out and playing hardball against them.

And he’s kicking their scrawny asses up between their shoulder blades by it too, and solidifying his already damned firm support in the bargain. Any bets on whether the Vichy GOPe will take the hint, learn the lesson, and finally start moving the ball instead of the goalposts?

Share

Damn the torpedos!

Full steam ahead.

MAD. Mutually Assured Destruction.

Fight nukes with nukes.

Put the confirmation vote back on the docket for Thursday of next week.

Have Dr. Ford testify under oath in full view up the public.

If she provides no more evidence or the Democrats make a scene and turn it into a circus.

Confirm Kavanaugh.

To let the Democrats delay this one day is a win. To let them take out Kavanaugh as a casualty in their war on Trump is a huge win. It would make Trump a lame duck with more than two years left in his first term.

If they get away with this, no Republican could ever run ever again. All the Democrats would need to do is find some former high school classmate willing to accuse a candidate of sexual misconduct half a century ago.

If that happens, we might as well start the shooting now, because we are headed for a Hitlarian or Stalinist purge, but instead of accusations of treason and execution, it is accusations of sexual misconduct and the total destruction of a person’s income and livelihood on national TV.

Ask yourself is that any worse? To one day find everything you built yourself up to be, torn down, so you end up jobless and unemployable, shamed in front of your family.

That cannot be the tactic that is allowed to win.

This cannot be the ideology that is allowed to win. They’ve gotten away with way too much already. Now it’s too late to stop them with anything less than bullets to their empty heads. That’s on us, I guess, for being too complacent and indulgent and not nearly vigilant enough, as in “the price of freedom is…”

That said, I support the above proposal unreservedly. And if Yertle McTurtle feels otherwise, he needs to get his useless ass the hell out of the way and let somebody who isn’t a backstabbing fraud take charge. This bit of mushmouth blah-blah ain’t helping:

Speaking on the Senate floor on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) lambasted his Democratic colleagues for seeing “a political advantage” in withholding the sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh until the 11th hour of his confirmation process.

True, sure. But the only way they can gain the benefit of that advantage is IF YOU HELP THEM—by sitting on your hands flapping your jaws without ever actually doing anything.

“That this process has played out with so little order and so little sensitivity lies solely at the feet of Senate Democrats, who saw a political advantage in leaking this to the press instead of vetting it through proper channels,” McConnell added.

“But this is where we are.”

So move us forward then, Vichy GOPers: schedule the vote for fucking five minutes from now, hold it come hell or high water, and support your party’s elected President by sticking together and ratifying the goddamned nomination. Let the sneakthief shitlib plotters weep and wail and bluster and threaten; they’re going to do that anyway, no matter what you do. There is absolutely NO reason to treat with them honorably, in hopes of holding some “higher ground” that means nothing, and which The Main Enemy has no interest in or regard for anyway.

The lying liberal whore’s allegations are unsupported, unverifiable, and without demonstrable merit. Gossamer-thin as they are, they’re more than adequately refuted by credible testimony from many who know the man well as to Kavanaugh’s character, which is without blemish and unimpeachable. The spurious charges are purest bullshit, a sick fairy tale cobbled together for malign purposes; they deserve to be laughed out of all debate, and should NOT be taken seriously by anyone not assisting with such a heinous plot.

To Hell with her, and to Hell too with every last Republican who still insists on play-acting as if this despicable smear campaign is anything other than what every sensible, sane person knows it to be: a desperate attempt to hang onto undeserved, illegitimate power. Period fucking dot. No such sensible and sane person should be even mildly interested in harkening to one more word out of her filthy, lying yap, nor be willing to grant her a forum in which to utter it. To do so would be folly, worse than a waste of time.

Confirm the man now, or surrender and be damned. That’s it. There’s nothing more to say.

Share

Furious…and funny

Klown Kar Koup runs over own feet.

Senator Dianne Feinstein of California conceded Tuesday that she can’t attest to the veracity of Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were in high school.

“[Ford] is a woman that has been, I think, profoundly impacted. On this…I can’t say that everything is truthful. I don’t know,” Feinstein told reporters on Capitol Hill when asked if she believed the allegation.

Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, has been maligned by her Republican colleagues for failing to disclose the sexual-harassment accusation after initially being made aware of it via a letter from Ford in July.

Asked why she did not make her Judiciary Committee colleagues aware of the allegation at the beginning of Kavanaugh’s vetting process, Feinstein hesitated before citing Ford’s desire to remain anonymous.

“I don’t know; I’ll have to look back and see,” Feinstein told reporters before entering the Senate chamber.

Oh, bullshit, you despicable liar. The whole thing was never anything at all but a political ploy intended to discredit Kavanaugh and hamstring Trump, and you know it better than anybody. But does it get better, you ask? Of course it does.



That’s Alexandra Miranda Vera Cruz De La Holla Cardinale Occasional-Cortex flipping the White Power Secret Handshake that nobody ever heard of until the Deranged Left’s ludicrous meltdown over it last week, having been thoroughly trolled by 4Chan’s co-opting of the hand sign sane people know as representing “OK” for just that purpose.

(Via Ed)

Mo’ funny update! Sung to the tune of the Ballad Of The Green Berets.

Bracken-Kavanaugh.jpeg


Courtesy of WRSA.

In the clutches of commies update! On a more serious note, also via WRSA:

Classic communism in play at the Kavanaugh confirmation. The communist organizations and the communists in government will do anything to keep the death cult alive, part of that is Planned Parenthood. They have sold the idea that if Kavanaugh is confirmed that he and Gorsuch will combine to eliminate Roe v Wade, this has led to the desperate attempt of Christine Blasey-Ford to derail the nomination through an accusation of teenage sexual misconduct.

What else can the communist left in this nation do, but make specious allegations against their enemy? Understand, it is in the communist playbook to lie. Lying to them is a tactic, not a sin. A talented liar is highly valuable. Look at the way they responded to Clinton when he lied about having sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. It wasn’t just that he lied, but the propaganda media swooned over how well he lied.

The same goes with Obama, they loved the way he looked them in the eye and lied with conviction and with the smoothness of a used car salesman. Lying well is to be aspired to. All of us rubes; the fools that we are; the hopelessly convicted believers in Christ who view lying as a sin are just easy prey. But, after all of that, if they think we believe that they are above a good lie to derail a Supreme Court nomination they are the fools.

It is not difficult to imagine Christine Blasey-Ford with all of her social justice warrior armor wrapped up in her pink hat, remembering Kavanaugh from some distant party and knowing that the proximity gives any story she chooses to make up credibility.

Actually, what she remembers a lot better is Kavanaugh’s mom ruling against Christine Lying-Whore’s parents in a foreclosure hearing she presided over as judge. But hey, I just can’t imagine any deranged Sanders-sucking commie holding a grudge for that long, can you?

If you can’t, I have a bridge in Brooklyn up for sale that I think you might be interested in. The bottom line remains: this is just another Democrat-Socialist shitshow, another Oh, We Got Him Now! moment. Like all the others before it, this one is already starting to collapse, after which it will be on to the next one.

Which makes the grovel-reflex from Benedict Arnold Republicans even more sickening than usual, including the pundit-class types who lapsed right into standard chin-pulling and handwringing over the “seriousness” of Lying-Whore’s bullshit charges mere moments after Fienswine made her dirty move. Harsanyi provides a useful reminder for the preemptive-surrender monkeys:

It’s worth remembering that these Democrat tactics aren’t only meant to sink this nomination — should they end up forcing Kavanaugh to withdraw — but also to damage the credibility of any Supreme Court featuring Trump-nominated (or, let’s be honest, Republican-nominated) justices. Democrats have been dishonestly challenging the “legitimacy” of the court throughout these hearings. They don’t want to abide by any authority that treats the Constitution seriously, because it’s often the only thing standing in the way of their coercive policies.

The Kavanaugh hearings were already an embarrassing spectacle in which Democrats ignored the rules, processes and procedures when it suited them. Yet, if Republicans refuse to hold more open hearings now, they will be accused of ignoring sexual assault. If they do hold hearings, they will be accused of attacking a sexual assault survivor, anyway. Republicans will never be able to ask Ford anything useful, because they’re mostly white men, and white men are, I’m told, perfunctorily racist and misogynist. If Republicans bring up the fact that Ford’s allegation wasn’t reported or relayed to anyone for more than 30 years — until Kavanaugh’s name emerged as a possible Supreme Court justice — they will be accused of attacking a woman. If they point out that her therapist’s notes, the ones that Ford claims prove her charge, in some ways contradict what she is now saying, they will be portrayed as a bunch of men attacking a sexual assault survivor. When they point out that polygraph tests are unreliable and inadmissible in courts, they will be accused of berating a victim.

Republicans are simply expected to nod their heads in agreement.

Which is exactly what way too many of them got real busy doing. Myself, I’ll just let McThag do my talking for me:

Dear Democrat Senators: 
You did nothing about the numerous rape allegations and escapades associated with William Jefferson Clinton.

This means that we don’t give a shit what you think about a single allegation about Brett Kavanaugh from when he was in high school.

I’ll tell you what, Dianne, even if you produce a film of him raping someone now…

I don’t care.

You beat the “give a fuck” out of me on this issue.

Hollywood’s treatment of women beat the “give a fuck” out of me on this issue.

I used to care, but you keep telling me it’s no big deal in every word and deed.

But now that it is a pro-gun, conservative Supreme Court nominee, it’s somehow different?

Yeah, fuck off.

With fucking bells on. As Aesop says:

We could not have said so much with so little if we whittled at that block of wood all day, a fact we hereby cheerfully concede and acknowledge.

I’ll put a hearty “amen” to that sentiment.

Share

STAMPEDE!

Hard to believe, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by any of this:

Sen. Jeff Flake wants to postpone vote on Brett Kavanaugh; Update: Statement from Sen. Collins.

Bob Corker, too, is on board with this shameless nonsense. This guy has the right of it:

Screen-Shot-2018-09-16-at-20.27.32-573x600.png

If True Conservative Principle™ Quislings like Flake and co. want to ensure that no Republican SC nominee will ever again make it past the Democrat-Socialists to a seat on the Court, let them go ahead and “delay” the Kavanaugh vote because of some made-up, irrelevant, thirty-year-old horseshit spoon-fed to ’em by their master Feinstein.

Let ’em see what happens to their corrupt sham of a political party afterwards. And then let ’em burn in the fire they will have ignited via their own despicable, sleazy machinations, the slimewads. To a fucking crisp.

Outbreak of sanity update! The plain truth.

Sen. John Kennedy called the confirmation hearings for Judge Brett Kavanaugh “an intergalactic freak show” and said he was embarrassed for Congress by the accusations of sexual misconduct leveled at the Supreme Court nominee.

“So far, it’s pretty much been an intergalactic freak show,” Kennedy, R-La., told Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday.” “Most Americans are looking at this – most mainstream Americans – and they’re thinking that Congress has hit rock bottom and started to dig.”

Kennedy added: “I have been embarrassed by the whole process and, frankly, I’m – no disrespect to Senator Feinstein or to Stanford Law School – but I’m a little bit offended. I sit on Judiciary Committee. They’ve had this stuff for three months. If they were serious about it, they should’ve told us about it.”

Oh, they’re not serious about investigating the allegation. They’re not serious about getting the truth out, nor about seeing “justice” done, nor about providing succor or closure to the “victim.” They’re serious about hogtying Trump—about securing him to the Deep State leash at last. And with the aid of baglapping Uniparty-GOPe scum like Flake, they might possibly even win this one.

Share

A time for choosing

Wise, and sobering, words.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Via WRSA)

Share

They never learn

Another reach-across-the-aisle RINO stabbed in the back by her erstwhile admirers, McCain-style.

We have all seen those grisly stories in the news about people who adopt dangerous predators as pets only to be torn limb from limb by the very creatures they have cosseted for years. This is analogous to what is now happening to Susan Collins. The Maine Senator has frequently curried favor with the left by taking “principled stands” against her fellow Republicans on issues like Obamacare, and basked in the praise of progressives. Collins presumably thought this meant she was safe from the left’s innate brutishness when she took a perfectly reasonable position regarding SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Inevitably, like anyone who naïvely believes that vicious animals can be civilized by simple kindness, Senator Collins is now being mauled by the left and its mouthpieces in the media. In what should be an eye-opening lesson, one of the organizations she has bucked her own party to defend has launched an expensive ad campaign whose purpose is to bully her into voting against Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation. The Hill reports that Planned Parenthood, a direct beneficiary of Senator Collins’ steadfast refusal to support last year’s Obamacare repeal legislation, began running these ads against her on Wednesday:

Planned Parenthood Action Fund is going up with a six-figure ad buy targeting GOP Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) as the fight over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh enters a crucial stretch.… Collins is facing an onslaught of pressure to oppose the nomination.

Included in the “onslaught of pressure” has been a standard tactic employed when the Democrats loose the dogs of disinformation — harassment of her family and staff. There have been profane out-of-state voicemails left on their answering machines, thousands of coat hangers sent in the mail (presumably suggesting that Judge Kavanaugh would somehow return us to that mythical age when countless women received abortions in back alleys), protesters yelling obscenities in her front yard, and of course that old lefty standby — overt threats of violence. Senator Collins told the Wall Street Journal:

In one case — and we are going to turn this over to the police, but unfortunately, of course, the person didn’t leave a name or number — but they actually threatened to rape one of my young female staffers.

The Democrats continue to behave in an utterly irresponsible manner in the Kavanaugh confirmation process. They made jackasses of themselves during the judge’s hearings, resorted to an anonymous source to defame him, and sit by as their special interest accomplices engage in a campaign of intimidation against a Republican Senator they heretofore claimed to admire. There’s a lesson in all this for “moderate” GOP politicians and the electorate. The Democrats can’t be trusted — ever. They, and the people who finance them, are dangerous political predators who will always turn on you, sooner or later.

The only real option for dealing with such predators effectively is to either put ’em away, or put ’em down.

Share

Of COURSE they did

Everybody’s talking about this one, but really, can anybody possibly be surprised?

A video recorded by Google shortly after the 2016 presidential election reveals an atmosphere of panic and dismay amongst the tech giant’s leadership, coupled with a determination to thwart both the Trump agenda and the broader populist movement emerging around the globe.

The video is a full recording of Google’s first all-hands meeting following the 2016 election (these weekly meetings are known inside the company as “TGIF” or “Thank God It’s Friday” meetings). Sent to Breitbart News by an anonymous source, it features co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, VPs Kent Walker and Eileen Naughton, CFO Ruth Porat, and CEO Sundar Pichai. It can be watched in full above. It can and should be watched in full above in order to get the full context of the meeting and the statements made.

Disgusting? Sure. Infuriating? Yep. Alarming? Most certainly, given the reach and influence the tech monopolies have. Time to bust ’em all up. That’s what the antitrust laws are for. Ace, on a related matter, foresees a spot of bother from Conservatism Inc:

Waiting for National Review to shriek that private monopolies can do whatever they want.
Oh, here, the wait is over before it began:

That’s Kevin D. Williamson, of course, who should really Learn To Code if his only suggestion is “start your own tech-giant monopoly if you don’t like the current tech-giant monopolies who can easily squelch all start-up competitors.”

I don’t suggest reading it. It’s more of the same.

There is an implicit claim being made here — that the special laws regarding monopolies are illegitimate and should be repealed or silently repealed and just ignored until they are dead-letter.

Ultra-Corporatists like Williamson, French, and Goldberg should be made to explain their feelings on this and defend them. The whole idea of the wisdom of markets determining the proper winner of market competition assumes market competition in the first place — do these Ultra-Corporatists dispute this? Do they think that monopolies contain the seeds of their own destruction?

Even if that is the case — what do we do in a nonfunctional monopolized market for the 10-40 years while we wait for the monopoly to implode due to its own internal contradictions?

Why, we sit back and accept helplessness and defeat, consoling ourselves with our high-mindedness, our politesse, our snooty just-plain-betterness as a Truly Principled Elite, noble guardians of a sacred pile of nothing. Y’know, just like they always have.

Share

WHO’S the Nazi again, now?

Again: they didn’t call it the National SOCIALIST Workers’ Party for nothing, you know.

As Hayek stated in 1933, the year the Nazis took power: “[I]t is more than probable that the real meaning of the German revolution is that the long dreaded expansion of communism into the heart of Europe has taken place but is not recognized because the fundamental similarity of methods and ideas is hidden by the difference in phraseology and the privileged groups.”

Yet the evidence the Nazis were leftists goes well beyond the views of this one scholar. Philosophically, Nazi doctrine fit well with the other strains of socialism ripping through Europe at the time. Hitler’s first “National Workers’ Party” meeting while he was still an Army corporal featured the speech “How and by What Means is Capitalism to be Eliminated?”

The Nazi charter published a year later and coauthored by Hitler is socialist in almost every aspect. It calls for “equality of rights for the German people”; the subjugation of the individual to the state; breaking of “rent slavery”; “confiscation of war profits”; the nationalization of industry; profit-sharing in heavy industry; large-scale social security; the “communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low costs to small firms”; the “free expropriation of land for the purpose of public utility”; the abolition of “materialistic” Roman Law; nationalizing education; nationalizing the army; state regulation of the press; and strong central power in the Reich. It was also racist and anti-immigrant.

It wasn’t only theoretical. Hitler repeatedly praised Marx privately, stating he had “learned a great deal from Marxism.” The trouble with the Weimar Republic, he said, was that its politicians “had never even read Marx.” He also stated his differences with communists were that they were intellectual types passing out pamphlets, whereas “I have put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun.”

It wasn’t just privately that Hitler’s fealty for Marx surfaced. In “Mein Kampf,” he states that without his racial insights National Socialism “would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground.” Nor did Hitler eschew this sentiment once reaching power. As late as 1941, with the war in bloom, he stated “basically National Socialism and Marxism are the same” in a speech published by the Royal Institute of International Affairs.

Nazi propaganda minister and resident intellectual Joseph Goebbels wrote in his diary that the Nazis would install “real socialism” after Russia’s defeat in the East. And Hitler favorite Albert Speer, the Nazi armaments minister whose memoir became an international bestseller, wrote that Hitler viewed Joseph Stalin as a kindred spirit, ensuring his prisoner of war son received good treatment, and even talked of keeping Stalin in power in a puppet government after Germany’s eventual triumph. His views on Great Britain’s Winston Churchill and the United States’s Franklin Delano Roosevelt were decidedly less kind.

Lots more here—LOTS—all of it completely damning for the Lyin’ Left. But the hanging of Hitler around Righty necks was no accident. This history recited in the article exposes that dismally-successful ploy as the manipulative, self-serving horseshit it always was.

The ironic thing is, the Left still embraces Naziism’s parent ideology while glossing over the millions of deaths attributable to it—way more than Hitler’s tally, and still counting. Stalin alone makes Hitler look like a piker, and that leaves out the plethora of other blood-soaked commie dictators. Just another example of the Left’s highly, umm, discriminating morality, I guess.

Share

Religious awakening

Man, I have been just DYING to get to this one the last couple of days.

So now we know what ‘the resistance’ really is. It’s the establishment. It’s the old political order. It’s that late 20th-century political set, those out-of-touch managerial elites, who still cannot believe the electorate rejected them. That is the take-home message of the bizarre political spectacle that was the burial of John McCain, where this neocon in life has been transformed into a resistance leader in death: that while the anti-Trump movement might doll itself up as rebellious, and even borrow its name from those who resisted fascism in Europe in the mid 20th-century, in truth it is primarily about restoring the apparently cool, expert-driven rule of the old elites over what is viewed as the chaos of the populist Trump / Brexit era.

The response to McCain’s death has bordered on the surreal. The strangest aspect has been the self-conscious rebranding of McCain as a searing rebel. In death, this key establishment figure in the Republican Party, this military officer, senator, presidential candidate and enthusiastic backer of the exercise of US military power overseas, has been reimagined as a plucky battler for all that is good against a wicked, overbearing political machine. ‘John McCain’s funeral was the biggest resistance meeting yet’, said a headline in the New Yorker, alongside a photo of George W Bush, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and soldiers from the US Army, the most powerful military machine on Earth. This is ‘the resistance’ now: the former holders of extraordinary power, the invaders of foreign nations, the Washington establishment.

The religious allusions, the talk of vengeance against Trump, the misremembering of McCain’s life so that it becomes a moral exemplar against the alleged crimes of Trumpism, exposes the infantile moralism of the so-called resistance. Albert Burneko, assessing some of the madder McCain commentary, says there is now a ‘condition’ that he calls ‘Resistance Brain’, where people display an ‘urge to grab and cling on to anything that seems, even a little bit, like it might be the thing that Finally Defeats Donald Trump’. Even if the thing they’re grabbing on to is actually a bad thing. Like a seemingly endless FBI investigation into the elected presidency. Or George W Bush, whose moral rehabilitation on the back of Anti-Trumpism has been extraordinary. Or neoconservatism: this was the scourge of liberal activists a decade ago, yet now its architects are praised because they subscribe to the religion of Anti-Trumpism. Being against Trump washes away all sins.

I’m not overly familiar with O’Neill’s past work, and don’t know his stance on the Trumpening. But this is a damned brilliant piece, so into Ye Olde Blogrolle he goes on the strength of it.

Share

Clueless

Can he really be this stupid, this insular, this out of touch with obvious reality? Really?

Seriously?!?

NBC News’s Chuck Todd wrote an op-ed in The Atlantic titled “It’s Time for the Press to Stop Complaining – and to Start Fighting Back.” Much of it wasn’t about the urgency for journalists to defend their work, as the headline suggests; it was mostly focused on how Roger Ailes and Fox News are to blame for growing American animosity towards the news media.

Todd starts by explaining there’s a “new kind of campaign,” a campaign meant to destroy the legitimacy of the American news media.” He quickly pivots to prominent figures in conservative media, accusing Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, and Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Tucker Carlson of attaining wealth and power by “exploiting the fears of older white people.”

However, he admits that President Donald Trump “didn’t start this fire” of people hating the mainstream media. That honor, according to Todd, belongs to Fox News founder Ailes. The “Meet The Press” host gave Ailes the title of “the godfather of the Trump presidency.”

“Take the word balanced. It sounded harmless enough. But how does one balance facts?” Todd asks.

Seems easy enough to me, Chuckles: you report ’em, and keep your opinions about ’em to yourself. But hey, I’m not a trained, professional “journalist.”

“A reporting-driven news organization might promise to be accurate, or honest, or comprehensive, or to report stories for an underserved community. But Ailes wasn’t building a reporting-driven news organization. The promise to be ‘balanced’ was a coded pledge to offer alternative explanations, putting commentary ahead of reporting; it was an attack on the integrity of the rest of the media. Fox intended to build its brand the same way Ailes had built the brands of political candidates: by making the public hate the other choice more.”

Nobody needs to worry about any outside campaigns to “destroy the legitimacy of the American news media”; the American news media, to include one Chuck Todd, did that all by themselves, thanks. Sexton takes Todd’s self-serving drivel apart:

Meanwhile, you have one of the allegedly down-the-middle reporters at CNN comparing Antifa, a group the U.S. government has warned is a domestic terror threat, to soldiers landing at Normandy and telling us “all punches are not equal.” But hey, no need to concern ourselves with a lack of balance at any network besides Fox News. In fact, my even bringing this up as an example of media bias is probably just more whataboutism that Chuck Todd would prefer everyone ignore.

Here’s the truth. The people who make up the media lean overwhelmingly to the left and are spectacularly bad at recognizing their own biases. That’s why conservatives are forever forced into the position of trying to point out that the media’s laser focus on the bad behavior of one set of partisans (those on the right) is not the complete story. There is another side to the story which often gets less attention because it doesn’t grab people like Chuck Todd as equally significant or important.

That’s why, just as an aside, you so often see the “GOP seizes on…” headlines. That’s a signal that people on the right are worked up about something which the media doesn’t think is a problem and therefore can only cover at all if they make it a story about the GOP’s odd (or perhaps dishonest) behavior.

The examples, statistics, and patterns confirming not just “some” but overwhelming liberal bias—damned near universal liberal bias—in the “mainstream” media are simply too voluminous to bother listing in this post; plenty of them have been discussed here over the years, but nowhere near all. To hear no less a libmedia leading light than Chuck Todd attempting to pooh-pooh it goes well beyond straining credulity; you almost have to feel sorry for the man. Almost. Back to Wulfsohn for our closer.

At least MSNBC doesn’t attempt to portray itself as fair and objective, unlike CNN. All you have to do is ask Todd what pro-Trump pundits are on NBC’s payroll. The answer: there aren’t any. You’ll find plenty of Never Trumpers, but you won’t find any Republican who will defend this president. To CNN’s credit, they actually do have pro-Trump commentators, albeit ones often greatly outnumbered by Trump haters.

On a side note, Todd has a lot of gall to question the journalistic standards of Fox News right as his own network is being accused of killing the Harvey Weinstein sexual assault story. In fact, on the night Todd’s piece was published, Ronan Farrow accused his former employer of blocking him from further reporting. So while he craps on a competing network, his own network’s credibility is being burned to the ground.

What Todd resents the most about Fox News is the fact they’re the first to highlight media bias and profit from it. They’ve dominated in ratings for almost 20 years. A huge audience is sick and tired of being informed about current events with a liberal slant. Fox News became the anecdote (uhh, antidote, maybe—M), the counterweight to the rest of the mainstream media, who shield Democrats and demonize Republicans.

Todd is either clueless or lying, I’m not sure which. Either way, he’s preposterous…and pathetic.

Share

Reality bites

Weasel, weaseling.

In a segment on NPR’s “On Point” Friday, a fellow guest compared me to an Adolf Hitler supporter because I said something positive about President Trump’s tenure in office. Yes, seriously.

After I said some of Trump’s norm-breaking actions are good — namely his call for civil service reform and attempts to curtail some agencies’ powers and regulations — Norman Eisen, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and, ironically, co-founder of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said my support of Trump reminded him of the people who have supported authoritarian, mass-murdering regimes.

Our conversation begins around the 31-minute mark, here,where you can listen to what I said about President Trump that prompted this characterization from Eisen:

When Bre was speaking…I couldn’t help but think of those who greeted, don’t take offense, please, Bre, but those who greeted the other tyrants of the past 100 years. Whether they were of the left, like Lenin and Stalin, or the right, like Hitler — not saying Trump is Hitler, making those same claims about the evil that needed to be swept away and the change that needed to happen.

My favorite part of this is that he told me not to be offended right before he compared me to enthusiastic Nazis or Joseph Stalin supporters. He also says he’s “not saying Trump is Hitler,” then proceeds to make precisely that comparison. While Eisen is saying this, you can hear the host, David Folkenflik, try but fail to stop him. It’s like watching — or in this case, listening to — a car crash in slow motion.

I am writing this to draw attention to the tone from some of Trump’s critics. To them, everything merits a comparison to Hitler, and to make the “mistake” of saying a positive thing about President Trump — even when that positive thing is sandwiched between skeptical comments about him — is labeled as tantamount to helping the Nazis construct concentration camps. That’s so detached from reality and people who cannot see that should have no credibility.

So what is and what is not allowed to be said in public about the president without being called a Nazi? I said I wish Trump could tweet less and focus his lib-owning powers on regulatory rollbacks and taking down the administrative state. To Eisen, for some reason, that sounded like support for Nazis. One of us needs a reality check, and it’s not me.

Wouldn’t help any. Again: their argument isn’t with us. It’s with reality. They more of it they get, the harder they run from it, fingers stuffed deeply in ears every step of the way.

What amuses me here is Eisen’s gutless, cowardly attempt at having his cake and eating it too. By trying to forestall or at least deflect any righteous, wholly justified anger at these outrageous slanders (“Don’t take offense,” I’m not saying Trump’s a Nazi,” immediately before doing precisely that), Eisen establishes himself as King Of The Fucking Pussies.

Wear the crown proudly, Poindexter. It all leads me to ask yet again: how in the ever-lovin’ blue-eyed world did we ever allow such mincing nincompoops to steal our country from us?

Share

True lies

Fake News, like the Deep State, is real. Just the way they all scream and flail frenziedly about denying it ought to be proof enough for anybody.

This week we may be seeing fake news merge with mass hysteria to set off a panic among the Cloud People. First we have fiction writer Bob Woodward out with his latest collection of ghost stories. Woodward is the guy who used former CIA director Bill Casey as a source, while Casey was in a coma. That’s right, he claimed to have spoken to a man while he was in a coma. His Watergate writing was similarly full of fabrications. There is a great book on that topic and all else related to Watergate called Silent Coup.

Anyway, Woodward has a book out on Trump in which he strokes every single fear and hatred of the NeverTrump loons. Totally a coincidence, no doubt. Perhaps sensing it was too obvious or hoping to piggyback on the release, the New York Times has an op-ed up that is supposedly written by a White House insider. Reading the thing, it feels as if it was written by a couple of clever college boys pulling a prank. The only thing missing from it is a picture of Sam Hyde. Judging from the reaction, even liberals suspect it is fake.

Of course, all of this is a coordinated effort by the mass media to damage Trump in the run up to the midterm elections. We know this is a coordinated effort because they did their organizing in public view. Someone needs to explain to the media that conspiracies work best when  done in private. Someone should also tell the media that the point is to scare the public, not scare yourselves. All of these whoppers they are producing read like the stuff pink pussy hat wearing gals tell one another after too many gulps of chardonnay.

All of this is amusing, but it is also revealing. On a daily basis the mass media tells us that there is no reason for the Dirt People to bother voting this fall. The blue wave is coming in November and the House will soon be stuffed with exotic brown people, sporting funny names and a long list of grievances against whitey. Yet, they are in a full panic, carrying on as if they expect the opposite. The grotesque theater that was the McCain funeral is another example that suggests these people feel the heat of the setting sun.

If they do somehow succeed in taking The People’s President down, they’re gonna get themselves badly burned.

Share

Fabricating stories, omitting facts

Bust up the social (justice) media monopoly.

It began days earlier with a story I wrote for The New York Post about President Trump’s followers continuing to support him after Michael Cohen’s guilty plea and Paul Manafort’s conviction. Facebook took that story down from my Facebook page, and others who re-posted it soon found it removed from their pages as well. With the story marked as “spam,” or not meeting “community standards,” I tweeted, then wrote about the experience.

That’s when things got worse. Within hours, an anonymous troll with an account created only a few days earlier went on the attack. The thread tossed false accusations that I withheld information from the book I co-authored this year. The troll and his followers alleged that some Trump supporters who struggled with their decision in the 2016 election and were profiled in the book are actually elected Republican officials who (in the trolls’ opinion) could not possibly have struggled with that decision.

First, that wasn’t true. Half the thesis of the book I co-wrote with Brad Todd, “The Great Revolt: Inside the Populist Coalition Reshaping American Politics,” is that Trump’s polarizing style causes many Republicans to fit uneasily, if at all, into his coalition. Many people in the book were profiled explicitly because they are Republicans, not in spite of it.

Within minutes, the initial Twitter attack was retweeted by other anonymous trolls and online bullies who have attacked my writing before — some continuously since I first reported in the summer of 2016 that this political shift was happening. They demanded that the publications for which I write, including The Post, the Washington Examiner and Crown Publishing, address their allegations or fire me.

The idea that I owed anonymous trolls on Twitter an explanation for the straw-man argument they invented is utterly laughable. But soon enough two things happen. First, they swarm—these brave souls who like to anonymously harass women online prefer to do so in numbers. Second, partisan journalists looking for a scalp join in, which lends it credibility.

Soon the pile-on makes using Twitter miserable.

And then the pile-on becomes literal—physical.

That’s the highly esteemed and estimable Salena Zito, one of America’s two real journalist, to whom I have only one word: Gab, baby.

Okay, okay, that’s two words. Still.

Share

The magnitude of our cultural division

A bridge way too far.

If we can admit that warfare encompasses high intensity fighting (like tanks and bombers), then we need to take a look at the low intensity, too. This “Low Intensity Conflict” includes violence, but it also features other forms of warfare that we are, without a doubt, seeing today.

In fact, we are seeing every single indicator of a low intensity conflict right now, and that’s the basis for my reasoning that a domestic conflict has already started. (Overviews of the reasoning are here and here.)

I have no crystal ball and I can’t tell you exactly how bad it will get or when it will end, but I am confident in two things:

  1. It’s already started.
  2. It will get worse before it’s solved, if a solution can be found.

As I saw suggested by a comment-section wag somewhere or other the other day: the Civil War already started. But so far, only one side is fighting.

Update! There is no compromise or nonviolent solution possible. There is only victory, or defeat. Schlichter does the math proving why socialism does not work, has never worked, and cannot work.

Let’s take the richest man ever was, Jeff Bezos. He’s got a net worth of at least $150 billion. It not in actual dollars, though, unless he has the world’s biggest mattress. It’s mostly in Amazon stock. We’ll just leave aside the inconvenient issue of what would happen to Amazon’s stock value if it were “seized” and nationalized and just assume he’s got a big pit full of dollar bills. We take all that and split it among the 330 million Americans and everyone gets…$454.55. Congrats. Everyone gets one payment on their 2015 Toyota Camry. That is, unless we’re decreeing that all consumer loans are forgiven, which is probably on the socialists’ to-so list and would mean many fewer consumer loans going forward, but again I digress.

Divvying up the cash seems…unhelpful. How about we put all the money toward government spending? That would never be dropping it down a rathole because the government is awesome. Let’s see, the 2019 U.S. budget is $4.407 trillion – with a “T” – so all of Bezos Bucks would be about 3.4% of that. Yes, all of Bezos’s money would run the federal government for 12.4 days.

So, after about two weeks we’re going to need some more cash. There appear to be about 560 billionaires in the U.S. They all have less than Jolly Jeff – everyone has less than him – but let’s count each one as having $5 billion to simplify things. That’s $2.8 trillion. A lot of dough. But even assuming the entirety of their assets could be converted to cash, you could fund the government at present levels for … 232 days. That’s at present spending levels, without all the bells and whistles and free college and doctors and kale smoothie-makers everyone will get from Uncle Santa.

Remember, under socialism we aren’t minting any new billionaires, so where do we go for the money once the low-hanging billionaire fruit is picked clean? Millionaires!

A 2017 report says there are probably 10.8 millionaires in what would be the People’s Republic of America: “In 2016, there were 9.4 million individuals with net worth between $1 million and $5 million, 1.3 million individuals with net worth between $5 million and $25 million, and 156,000 households with more than $25 million in net worth, the report says.”

Now we’re hitting regular folks. If you have a house in Los Angeles or Washington, welcome to millionairehood! Or a small business – lots of us are rich on paper. Well, what’s ours is…theirs. The fact is our socialist pals are going to have to reach way down below the 1% to find enough stuff to redistribute so that everyone can have everything they want (but not enough to work for) while robots mop out the toilets.

They want your stuff. The stuff you spent years working for, saving for, sacrificing for. All gone, to someone else, because some neck-bearded Gender Studies grad decided he and not you should choose what happens to your property. All that effort, all those years you spent gainfully employed, being responsible, working while other folks played? 

Too bad. 

The socialists seem to assume that there’s not going to be any pushback from all these millions of Normal Americans who are going to fund this latest socialist experiment (Remember, this time, under these geniuses, socialism will totally work – it’s due for a win!). We’ll sort of shrug and just give up our stuff, and our freedom, to a bunch of 20-something adolescents because…the 20-something adolescents really want us to.

Nah.

Hate to be always sounding the discordant note and all here, but the sad fact is socialism already has its talons deep in the thews, sinews, and viscera of American society. Worse still, too many Americans who don’t consider themselves “socialist” at all like it that way, and won’t part with their Free Shit happily, or easily. That blase acceptance of Socialism-Lite still won’t make the thing work any better than it ever has, of course. Which just means Civil War 2.0 will be twice as bitter and destructive, whether it finally ratchets on up from low-intensity conflict or not.

Share

Deep State steps in it

They will never, EVER stop.

The New York Times’s just published an anonymous op-ed from a “senior official” in the Trump administration. This self-righteous combination of clichéd anti-Trump tropes and arrogant moral preening puts the QED on the proof of the NeverTrumpers’ moral idiocy.

The stalest complaints involve Trump’s personality and style, although the only difference between Trump and, say, Lyndon Johnson is that Johnson with the help of the media knew that most of his vulgarisms and epithets would never be made public until he left office. And he wasn’t monitored 24/7 by a barrage of reports and images from internet news and blogs, hundreds of cable channels, and social media.

As for crudity and vulgarity, if you insurgent White House employees want vulgarity, just look around you. We are saturated with a culture of vulgarity, self-promotion, and crude sexualization. At least Trump hasn’t besmirched the White House with Clinton-style sexual antics, or like Obama brought foul-mouthed rappers who celebrate the murder of judges to socialize in the White House. But to Anonymous, the worst of Trump’s affronts is that he, with the help of deplorable uppity citizens, has “allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.” This charge bespeaks an ignorance of the Constitution and its founders’ understanding of human nature. Given the variety and volume of colliding “passions and interests,” “civility” was a luxury. More important was protecting political freedom by preventing factions from joining forces to increase their power.

The catalogue of Trump’s shortcomings are stale, subjective epithets from nearly two-years of Trump-hating screeds, without any awareness that in terms of actions, progressives like Barack Obama have been much worse. For example, the brave anonymous resister says Trump’s behavior is “detrimental to the health of our republic.” Exactly how have excessive Tweeting, braggadocio, or insults of rivals done more damage to the Constitution’s separation of powers than Obama’s politicizing of the IRS, the EPA, two AGs, the Department of Education, the FBI, and the DOJ?

Anonymous also claims Trump “has attacked” the ideals “long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people.” Name one specific action that proves Trump has done any of these things. Even his moves on tariffs––which have not yet played out–– are supported by many economists, who also agree that the U.S. is being played for a chump by many countries. As for “free minds” and “free people,” such bombast is despicable considering the attacks on personal and political freedom that Democrats have institutionalized in universities, the media, and popular culture through cultural Marxist ideas like political correctness. How has Trump’s “enemy of the people” epithet materially damaged press freedom in this country compared to the decades of the mainstream media functioning as the Dems private public relations firm? All we hear is the press screaming night and day that they are being silenced.

Personally, I’d be happy to see a lot more of the “dictator” they scream about from Trump at this point. If he suddenly started tossing Deep State enemies into dungeons in job lots, that would be fine by me, although I admit it’s unlikely in the extreme. But there is one way less draconian move he could make—one that should have been done a long, long time ago. To wit:

EVERY LAST OBAMA HOLDOVER IN THE ENTIRE US GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY.

Make that: MUST be removed. Let the jackals howl; they’re going to anyway, no matter what. Now we get to the meat of the matter, though.

Perhaps the worst claim is that Trump is “anti-Democratic.” Here’s hutzpah worthy of the kid who murdered his parents then threw himself on the mercy of the court because he’s an orphan. Let’s see, a president legally elected according to the Constitution, subject to voter accountability through regularly scheduled elections, hemmed in by two independent branches of government, is called “anti-Democratic” by an unelected, unaccountable, self-selected gang of disgruntled employees without the guts to give up their fat paychecks and insider status by going public and making themselves accountable to the voters, and answering publicly the questions and counter-arguments of those who disagree with them.

And it gets meatier, beatier, bigger, and bouncier from there. I taxed “fair use” heavily by excerpting so much of it; do read the rest.

Anonymice update! Walsh weighs in:

Not for the first time, what’s going on in Washington brings to mind not the late Roman Empire, but the early one—the Julian line that began with Caesar, passed through Augustus and Tiberius, and then degenerated into the reigns of Caligula, Claudius, and ended with Nero. As the Republic morphed into the Empire, the Senate receded in importance, as did the twin consuls, annually elected. Powerful women—the mothers, wives, and mistresses of the emperors—wielded great power. And yet, in the end, nearly all died unnatural deaths, assassinated (all but Augustus, in fact), murdered, executed, or forced to suicide. To spare you reading Gibbon in his magnificent entirety: the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was written in the stars, right from the start, just as Shakespeare said.

The Left and its allies in the media would have us think—as this op-ed is clearly meant to do—that Trump is some combination of Claudius and Nero, a mad king barely restrained by his courtiers. “Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back,” the unknown author writes. “Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis.”

I have no idea whether any of this is true. It is possible that Trump is as changeable as they say, and that his worst impulses are held in check by the wise men around him. More likely, however, is that Trump remains surrounded by those who want to see him fail, out of pique; if he’s an emperor, he’s beleaguered rather than omnipotent, with spies lurking behind every arras, shivs at the ready.

Certainly, the success of the administration’s initiatives, from the booming economy to the moments of clarity it has brought to rogue enemies and feckless allies from North Korea to Germany, is indisputable, no matter what you think of Trump. I would further venture to say that those who support the president do not do so because they are enamored of him, or think of him as a god-king, or Cheeto Jesus, but rather because they agree with his policies and like their results.

But to a wide swath of #TheResistance, this is both incredible and unacceptable. Trump offends them so personally and so deeply that they cannot constrain their bitterness, their jealousy, and their anger. The old guard, Baby Boomer media, almost to a man, despises him for his insouciant rejection of the “norms” with which they grew up. Indeed, one of the things that most infuriates them is his resolute refusal to play the part of Richard Nixon, which is why they have recently deployed the ghosts of Watergate Past, including not only “Woodstein” but even superannuated bit players like John Dean, as repellant a weasel today as he was in the 1970s.

They all are, and the NeverTrumpTards of Conservative Inc perhaps the most repellent of the whole nest. But—given the NYT’s proven penchant for making up Fake News out of whole cloth, along with the too-convenient timing vis a vis the release of Woodward’s latest fabrication—I very much doubt this particular Deep State shitweasel even really exists, frankly.

Not that it matters one little whit. The skullduggery of the Deep Staters won’t sway Trump’s supporters at all; the more they plot and scheme against him, the more they confirm both his and our suspicions about them, and the hotter our scorching hatred of them burns.

Share

Going, going…GONE

As Ed says: get woke, go broke.

Lexington, Virginia, is struggling to recover its image as a welcoming community after one of its restaurants famously refused to serve White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. The whole town faced a backlash after The Red Hen, a restaurant in downtown Lexington, refused to serve Sanders and her family, forcing them to into the street last June.

Stephanie Wilkinson, the owner of The Red Hen, reportedly followed the Sanders party across the street and organized a protest, “yelling and screaming at them from outside the restaurant and creating this scene,” according to former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, even though Sanders had left the party.

The ugly incident prompted President Trump to lash out at The Red Hen on Twitter, calling it “filthy” and “dirty.”

Over two months later tourism in the small town is still reportedly suffering.

The Roanoke Times reported on Sunday that the regional tourism board has been forced to use emergency funds to boost its digital marketing campaign. Officials said the funds were needed because “the region is in desperate need of positive coverage.”

I can think of one sure-fire way to accomplish that quite quickly: run that goddamned liberal-fascist hen out of town on a rail. Film it, put it on YouTube, and announce that the town is again open for business, its restaurants no longer politicized. That ought to do it.

Share

Peer pressure

Looks like another victory for the Left in their struggle to destroy normality.

“Rapid-onset gender dysphoria” among teens and young adults may be a social contagion linked with having friends who identify as LGBT, an identity politics peer culture, and an increase in internet use, finds a study out this month from a Brown University professor. The study was quickly yanked from Brown’s news releases after a transgender activist feeding frenzy, and the journal it was published in is reconsidering the publication. There is a parent and researcher-driven petition to stand behind the publication of the first study to look in detail at rapid-onset gender dysphoria.

The petition includes the following graph about gender referrals in the United Kingdom. Anecdotal and news reports, as well as the rapid recent growth in transgender treatment centers, indicates a similar phenomenon inside the United States.

“[T]he parental reports in this study offer important and much-needed preliminary information about a cohort of adolescents, mostly girls, who with no prior history of dysphoria, are requesting irreversible medical interventions, including the potential to impair fertility and future sexual function,” says the petition. “In any other group of children, these grave consequences would be seen as human rights violations unless there was significant and overwhelming evidence these procedures would be beneficial long-term.”

Actually, there’s “significant and overwhelming evidence” of the opposite, starting with the incredibly high suicide rates for the tiny handful of poor mentally-ill people who truly are gender dysphoric.

“The spirit of free inquiry and scholarly debate is central to academic excellence,” said the statement from Bess Marcus, the dean of Brown’s School of Public Health. “At the same time, we believe firmly that it is also incumbent on public health researchers to listen to multiple perspectives and to recognize and articulate the limitations of their work.”

Except on topics like climate change, on which “the science is settled” and therefore must never again be debated.

The reason trans activists went nuts is that the study reinforces what plenty of parents, public health experts, and doctors have been saying: Transgenderism looks a lot like a dangerous fad. It’s telling that their response was to demand suppressing the results. It’s also telling that Brown chose to prioritize the unreasonable demands of a tiny minority above the potential well-being of children and the process of scientific inquiry.

Because the potential well-being of children and the process of scientific inquiry aren’t useful in advancing the liberal agenda. Read the rest; as Pullman says, it’s telling, to say the very least. Which is why the Leftists at Brown are suppressing it, natch.

Share

Cheap talk

This has been bothering me for a while now.

I am nowhere near as confident as Kurt Schlichter that the right wing could trounce the left wing in battle. We can’t even unite to keep Alex Jones on Facebook. It is true that conservatives have more guns and are probably better street fighters. But conservatives also cave in large numbers even when their most sacred cows are in danger – such as the First Amendment or Christian principles. The two latter issues sit at the core of academic bias and debates on sexuality, respectively. I have the war wounds from both battles and can attest to the repeating scenario: conservatives talk and talk about what they believe and how bad the left is. Then they give up (in) droves when it comes time to fight.

They also talk a lot about how their 2A rights are an infallible guarantee that the Left can never really win in their perennial quest to establish tyranny…and just you never mind the 20 or 30 thousand restrictions on guns on the books already; the more like them surely to come, eroding our rights bit by little bit; and the simple fact that as long as those guns stay disassembled and securely locked up in a state-mandated gun safe, they’re of no use at all in defending anything, and guarantee nothing.

We may fantasize that conservatives constitute a massive invincible army against the left. None of this will help us if nobody is willing to show up for the fight. The midterm elections this fall could easily hand the Democrats a commanding lead in both the Senate and the House. We have no real reason to expect that conservatives will gather in large numbers to monitor the voting process for fraud. The fall surprises full of slander, innuendo, and social media mobbing will follow the pattern we saw in the Roy Moore election, with National Review writers like David French slamming Republican candidates and commentators like Matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro playing it safe by virtue-signaling if ominous accusations, no matter how unproven or unlikely, gain traction with the general public.

Prudence calls for us to rally our troops to fight smear campaigns rigorously and to monitor the elections for voting fraud. But let’s not dream unrealistic dreams. If the Democrats win both houses of Congress, we should brace ourselves for the following probabilities:

Trump Will Be Impeached but Probably Not Removed from Office

The Obama years spoiled the left. With amazing speed, they developed an adolescent sense of entitlement, convinced themselves that their own propaganda is “fact,” and believed they would never lose control of the government, culture, schools, churches, military, intelligence, and media. While the left hates Trump with particular ferocity, any figure associated with the left’s loss of total national power would have provoked a knee-jerk temper tantrum.

Under no conceivable scenario will the left control the House without impeaching Trump. They hate him with the heat of a thousand suns and defy all appeals to fairness and logic. The trial in the House will consume the country, bog Trump in red tape, and stall the swamp-draining reforms until the presidential election in 2020. It will probably be impossible to get 67 senators to vote to remove Trump, but the impeachment in the House will be enough to throw most of Trump’s housecleaning efforts into disarray.

In an impeachment situation, many conservatives will betray us and jump on whatever charges the left manages to articulate against Trump. Too many on our side lack the willpower to resist coordinated message across major news outlets.

And even more aren’t really “on our side” at all, but are in barely-clandestine league with the enemy.

Lopez has a real bug up his ass about gays and rattles on about “conversion therapy” a fair bit, which, fine, whatevs; it’s an issue I don’t find all that compelling, frankly, but YMMV. His closing turn is way more consequential if you ask me:

Conservatives Will Complain and Roll Over and Do Nothing

I am sorry this prediction is so dire, but we have seen little in recent history to indicate any other outcome if Democrats take the House and Senate.

The point is, we have to hold both houses of Congress, which means we have to get moving immediately. As I told my Christian friends recently, “yes, God is on the throne. But we still have to get off our couches and do something.”

Well, hey, it’s always been my understanding that He only helps those who help themselves, right?

(Via Ol’ Remus)

Share

Hard Left turn

Have they been radicalized…or just unmasked?

From the wee hours of the morning on November 9, 2016, as they grappled with the sting of President-Elect Donald Trump triumphing over the anointed Queen of the Swamp, Democrats have been radicalizing by the minute.

Objective Americans have witnessed the transformation of JFK-style classical liberals into Marxist protégés even the namesake himself would be proud to call his pupils, not to mention the hostile takeover of the Democratic Party by the “three home-owning multi-millionaire,” Bernie Sanders, and “I’m not an expert on American-Israeli policy, but let me comment on it anyway” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

The Democratic Party is soon to be more aptly referenced as the Democratic Socialist Party.

Way ahead of ya there, bub.

If Democrats really opposed the radicalization of their own party, they would fight it, but the quiet truth is that they welcome it.

It doesn’t take a sociopolitical expert to follow the signs to the ultimately destructive end that the Democrats’ extremist positions and policies will have on our nation in both the short and long terms. The real question is why.

Why would Democrats radicalize to the point that they run the risk of destroying the very nation that gives them refuge and prosperity? The answer is simple: desperation. The American people have largely woken up to the long con of the left, forcing radicalized Democrats to the realization that on the battlefield of ideas, they lose, and they lose big.

Democrats recognize that if they lose on the battlefield of ideas, they can win only through the smoky cloud of chaos and division, wherein Americans are pitted against each other like  gladiators in the Colosseum. To this end, the left has been strategically dismantling the bedrock institutions that have made America the freest, most prosperous nation the world has ever known.

Actually, the answer is even simpler than he thinks, and it isn’t “desperation”; radicalization long predated that, and they don’t really care about the “battlefield of ideas” at all. They have no interest in making reasoned arguments supporting their silly-assed dorm-room-bull-session ideals; they don’t care about persuading their opponents or anybody else. Instead, they want CONTROL. They intend to disallow debate, to disabuse those opponents of any presumption to a right to dissent.

The division, the chaos, the dismantling of institutions: these are nothing whatsoever new either, nor are they errors introduced out of desperation. They’re the program—the means to attaining a desired end, which end is the iron-fisted total control I just mentioned. They’re the tactics by which they hope to achieve the strategic goal of tyranny.

The radicalization of the Democrat-Socialists and the broader Left didn’t begin with Trump’s win, and desperation wasn’t the seed of it. It happened long, long ago; desperation merely brought it to the surface for all to see, and drove them to paroxysms of madness after having thought themselves so close to realizing their nefarious goal. It’s all just another reason to be thankful for Trump’s timely rise, and his pugnacious eagerness to do battle with them.

Share

America-hating shitlibs strike again

Hollywood is perfectly happy to bowdlerize their own output, so long as it advances the PC narrative.

The new Neil Armstrong film, First Man, got a boffo premiere at the prestigious Venice Film Festival, with rave reviews for the movie and its Canadian star, Ryan Gosling.

But if you go to the film looking for an interesting interpretation of history, don’t expect any American flag waving. In fact, one of the most iconic moments in history is missing. When Armstrong planted an American flag on the Moon, it acknowledged that while we went to the Moon for “all mankind,” getting there was a singular American achievement of astonishing proportions.

So why no Stars and Stripes?

Oh, I think we all know that well enough by now.

“First Man” is getting rave reviews at the Venice Film Festival, but critics noted the unpatriotically sanitized flick is missing something important, and Gosling explained he worked with French-Canadian director Damien Chazelle and the Armstrong family to decide on its key moments.

“I think this was widely regarded in the end as a human achievement (and) that’s how we chose to view it,” he said.  “I also think Neil was extremely humble, as were many of these astronauts, and time and time again he deferred the focus from himself to the 400,000 people who made the mission possible.”

A Navy fighter jock, test pilot, and astronaut, a “humble guy”? Not likely, chump. He might’ve been a polite guy, an unassuming guy, a considerate guy even. But I’ve known quite a few of them over the years myself, and I can tell you for sure that “humble guys” don’t excel in the business Armstrong was in. In fact, they don’t even enter it in the first place; arrogance—egotism, even—is pretty much a prerequisite, akin to a watch repairman’s steady hand and clear vision, a doctor’s empathy, or a veterinarian’s fondness for animals. As for that “human achievement” horseshit:

Was this really a “human achievement”? Sure, it was. So let’s send a bill to every country in the world to help pay the $200 billion we spent getting there ($25 billion in 1967 dollars).

American corporations designed the system that took us to the Moon. American workers built it. The American taxpayer paid for it. And Americans flew the damn bird. It is historically inaccurate and terribly, terribly unfair not to recognize the one nation that achieved the impossible dream of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth.

Ahh, but see, recognizing that is the very thing that frosts their nuts, and is why they have to rewrite history to avoid acknowledging it.

NASA strapped Armstrong and his fellow flyboys into a tiny, claustrophobic little capsule on top of what is basically an enormous (the equivalent of 36 stories tall) three-stage bomb, pointed it in the general direction of the Moon based on calculations done with slide rules, wished them good luck and bon voyage, and lit the fuse under their asses. When Armstrong dropped the lander on Luna, he had something 15 seconds of fuel left, having overflown the planned landing area because of unexpected boulders. They fucking did something that no other nation on the planet ever even dreamed of doing, and came back home safe and sound.

And now NASA is reduced to “Muslim outreach.” Meanwhile, our own domestic film industry thinks it’s a fine idea to just give away a purely and uniquely American glory to be spread around to all and sundry, for the wholly fucked-up reason that they hate their own country and just…just…just can’t even.

If this shit-flick propaganda movie doesn’t bomb to an absolutely record-setting proportion, if it makes a single dime for the twerps behind this disgusting insult to truth and history, then there is NO justice in this world.

If they weren’t going to tell the story straight, they shoulda left it alone altogether. Then again, I guess we should all just be grateful the Hollyweirdos didn’t remake him into a black female transgender lesbian dwarf or something.

Stolen glory update! Chuck Yeager responds:



Via Glenn. Reynolds, I mean, not John.

Humble pie update! Okay, I may have to grant “humble guy” after all. But with a big, fat caveat that renders the admission moot.

In 1988, while working at the Reagan White House, I was afforded the rare opportunity to sit down one-on-one with Armstrong in the White House and it was, and is, one of the highest honors of my life. I was conducting interviews at the time for my first book, “Footprints – The 12 Men who walked on the Moon Reflect on their Flights, their Lives, and the Future.”

Gosling is correct about one thing for sure. Armstrong was beyond humble. Weeks after our interview, he called me to ask that I not use it. He told me how very sorry he was to ask, but that upon further reflection, he was not comfortable talking about himself and did not want anyone to get the impression that the mission was about him.

I agreed immediately with his request.

While greatly disappointed – we ended up scrambling and using existing public quotes for the book – I was deeply impressed at how truly humble Armstrong was and how important it was to him that others receive the credit he believed they deserved.

On that subject, Gosling was only half correct when he speculated that: “…I don’t think that Neil viewed himself as an American hero.”

While Armstrong never viewed himself as a “hero,” he was incredibly proud to be an American. An American, who before becoming a test pilot and the first human on the moon, was a highly decorated naval aviator who flew 78 combat missions during the Korean War.

With regard to the slight against the United States and of the American flag being left out of “First Man,” Gosling jokes: “I’m Canadian, so might have cognitive bias.”

As someone who has more relatives in Canada than the U.S. – my family making its way from Nova Scotia to Boston decades ago – I would say his bias has nothing to do with Canada and everything to do with being liberal.

When I spoke with Armstrong back in 1988, he – along with all 11 other men who walked on the moon that I spoke with – very clearly saw the moon landing as an American achievement and was in fact, quite proud to plant the American flag in recognition of the American blood, sweat, and tears which helped get him and Buzz Aldrin to the surface.

Of course he did, and was—and damned well should have been, as should we all. No shame in that, nor is there any insult or derogation to anyone else implied. It’s just simple fact, which no amount of shitlib historical revision can change. As always, their argument isn’t really with us; it’s with reality.

(Via Ed)

Share

Categories

Archives

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

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



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

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

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

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

All original content © Mike Hendrix