Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

With great power comes great responsibility

Pay no attention to the corruption behind the Big Tech curtain.

How is it that Facebook, who refuses to dox any of the violent Antifa terrorists that use its platform, are happy to give up the personal details of the Facebook user who anonymously uploaded a slowed video of Nancy Pelosi, within minutes, to some rando journalist on the phone? (How do you even call Facebook?)

Well what if I told you a Policy Director at Facebook was Nancy Pelosi’s Chief of Staff before taking said job directing policy at Facebook? What if I told you the head of algorithm policy at Facebook worked for Hillary at The State Department? Or that the Head of Content Policy worked for the Hillary presidential campaign? What if I told you the person in charge of privacy policy at Facebook used to work for Al Franken, before he worked for Senator Bonoff, before he worked for Congressman Oberstar? Or that the Director in charge of “countering hate and extremism” at Facebook came from the Clinton Foundation? Did you know that the person at Facebook who currently “oversees programs on countering hate speech and promoting pluralism”, and “develops internal third party education and drives thought leadership on hate speech and content moderation” was one of Obama’s policy advisers at The White House?

Why does Facebook have someone whose job is to show others how to use their platform as a type of privatized government and “exert influence” over the public? And what exactly does it mean for Facebook to “exert influence” over the public?

How about YouTube? How does Laura Southern’s documentary about the border get removed from YouTube within 24 hours of posting without any reason or explanation? What if I told you a Policy Manager at YouTube, before becoming a Policy Manager at YouTube, was employed by Hillary for America and was a manager in Obama’s campaign before that? What if I told you YouTube’s Global Content Policy Lead previously worked at the DNC? Did you know the person responsible for “growing the next generation of stars” on YouTube worked in the Office of Digital Strategy at the White House under Obama? Or that the person in charge of developing the careers of YouTube creators was the Director of Video for Obama? Speaking of helping the careers of creators, did you know Vox, the company that got Steven Crowder demonetized, was one of the companies that YouTube doled out $20 million dollars to, for ‘educational videos’?

Ten people, directly connected to the progressive Democrat political machine who are now controlling our conversations online. Sounds like an important alarm, no?

What if I told you there were nearly a hundred more?

I’d be surprised there weren’t more than that to be found—and would assume that, in truth, there are. But it is chilling nonetheless. Silicon Greybeard demurs:

Does their monopoly status require they undergo more Federal regulation to ensure access? Is access a “civil right”? It really is the big argument of our day.

For those who are regular readers, or who are but haven’t picked this up from me: these are private companies invented and developed by individual citizens. They have every right to kick anyone and everyone off their platform. Further, the leftist leaning politics of Silicon Valley companies should be apparent to anyone – which means they’ll attract these Democrats. My solution is to not use Facebook or Twitter and just use YouTube and Google for the few ways I want. While I don’t particularly think YouTube access is a civil right, reframing that question by asking what if YouTube banned all blacks or all gays or all of any other group instead of conservatives seems to lead to a different conclusion.

I can’t agree. Due in part to the fortuitous timing of their appearance; their near-universal acceptance; and the near-impossibility of any real competition establishing itself at this late date, these are de facto monopolies. However, because of their politicized nature and ubiquitousness, they are far more insidious than the ones Teddy Roosevelt took the bust-up stick to way back when.

These companies wield grotesquely outsized influence and power; at this point, they’re more akin to public utilities than they are private companies. Having become formidable platforms for disseminating political opinion whose owners and employees have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to use their muscle for censorship of viewpoints they don’t like, the Big Tech/social media megaliths habitually and intentionally run afoul of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech. Allowing them to continue on as they have been isn’t merely unfair; it’s downright dangerous. In sum:

Each day we wake up and see the latest way conservative voices are being censored, shadowbanned, silently deleted, hidden from view, buried in searches, algorithmed out of existence. Whether it’s the biased search results hiding /r/The_Donald on Google and Reddit (or their questionable subscriber numbers), whether it’s banning Twitter accounts that simply track violence against Trump supporters, creating policy to allow death threats against conservatives, censoring the Declaration of Independence for hate speech, blocking a conservative Marine for literally saying the sky is blue, labeling bible verses as porn, or simply banning the top conservative voices for no reason at all, Big Tech companies absolutely are controlling our speech.

These aren’t just Democratic voters, but former employees from the DNC, from the offices of Pelosi, Hillary, Obama, Feinstein, Giffords, Schumer, Reid, Planned Parenthood, even Rachel Maddow, who are migrating en masse to gate-keeping positions in social media companies. They didn’t all learn to code, they aren’t designing the like button or working on Messenger. They are taking up residency in the policy departments across the web; shaping the conversation, pushing agendas, picking who gets featured, deciding who gets blocked, judging who gets banned for life, dictating the parameters of the algorithms we’ll never be allowed to see, and making cases for censorship – that always seem to ratchet in one direction.

Lots, lots more at the topmost Spinquark link, and damned good on ’em for their fine investigative journalism.

(Hat tip to Fuel Filter)

Share

Cost-benefit analysis

Skeptic uncorks another of his truly righteous, balls-out screeds that demands to be promoted from comments-section obscurity to more prominence here on the Big Show.

If there’s anything dumber than a Cuckservative, I have no idea what it would be. I had the misfortune of being at a small political gathering a few days back with a local cuck-radio host, who is always babbling about his ‘true conservative principles’ and how Orange Man Bad violates them. The topic at the moment was immigration, particularly third world immigration.

I advanced the opinion that the proper amount of immigration from Africa was zero. The conversation went from there:

CRH: I’m all for African immigration, as long as they come the right way.

ME: That’s because you’re a moron. (Gasps from people around me)

CRH (looking at me slyly): Well, what about Ben Carson? (NOTE, I’ve heard him do this schtick on the radio before.)

ME: What about him?

CRH: Well, what if by not having immigrants from Africa, we were eliminating potential Ben Carsons? (At this point, he thinks he’s won.)

ME: Yeah, still good with that. What do you suppose the chances are of getting a Ben Carson from Africa?

CRH: Uhhh….what?

ME: Put it another way. How many thousands of immigrants from Africa would we have to import to get just ONE Ben Carson? There are 70,000 Somalis in Minneapolis; they elected Ilhan Omar. Have you heard of any Ben Carsons emerging from that 70,000?

CRH: Well, I don’t know, but that’s not the point.

ME: It’s exactly the point. To make good decisions, we have to look at statistics and evidence, not just hoping against hope. We know that by importing 70,000 Somalis we have created a little Mogadishu, in every sense of the word, in a formerly lovely city. Those 70,000 Somalis have elected perhaps the most anti-American Congresscritter in our history, and she’ll get elected for life. How does a Ben Carson alleviate that kind of damage? In all likelihood, even if one did emerge, he’d be killed and eaten by them.

CRH: So, you’re against Somalis. Don’t you find that a little racist?

ME: Maybe it’s a lot racist. I don’t give a shit. I’m just smart enough to know that if you want a first world country, you don’t bring in third world people.

I swear, when I read “It’s exactly the point,” I very nearly stood up and cheered out loud. But I saved the best for last. It involves BBQ, and you really oughta check it out if you missed it before. Trust me, you’ll enjoy it.

Share

Whoooaaa, big fellow!

So what with the same-old-crap nature of the news after the advent of The Trumpening, combined with the pressure of eking out my meager living every day, I haven’t felt just incredibly motivated to do any posting the past several days, as y’all were no doubt aware. But then up jumps this little slice of irritation.



Now, this is all just SOP, the state of play nowadays, right? Note that nowhere in this horrible, awful, abominable, horribly horrible “racist” Tweetstorm did Trump mention A) anybody’s name, or B) anybody’s race. All he did was exactly what he’s done from the very beginning: unabashedly articulate and bring right out into the open the very thing that Real Americans have been saying and thinking for a very long time now. In fact, I’ve already said the exact same thing here myself, and more than just once too.

I’m quite confident it won’t come as anything like news to any of you here when I inform you that the Left, as is their wont, went absolutely hyper-ballistic bug-fuck nuts immediately. TEH RACISM! TEH BIGOTRY! TEH HATE! THE UNAMERICAN, THIS-IS-NOT-WHO-WE-ARE AS A NATION OF TEH IMMIGRANTS, ILLEGAL OR OTHERWISE! TEH OUTRAGE! All perfectly par for the usual course by now, part of the dismal tide of RACIST!!™ that greets every timid, half-hearted proposal that maybe we might should maybe just possibly make a start at the beginning of some kind of effort to get something resembling control over our borders, just perhaps possibly. No, the shitlib shriekers will brook no such nonsense, and them going into orbit with their Mark-1 Mod-0 howls of high dudgeon are nothing whatsoever new. Certainly, it wouldn’t be nearly enough to penetrate my blogging torpor enough to inspire a mention of it tonight.

No, what annoyed the living crap out of me was this recockulus Powerline post, lovingly linked to by one Ed Driscoll. The Cuckitude is strong with these ones, folks. Try not to let any of it splash back on you, it’ll stain most any fabric you might happen to be wearing.

A BLUNDER OF EPIC PROPORTIONS
Regular readers know that I am a fan of President Trump, and more often than not, a fan of his use of social media. But today he committed the worst unforced error of his presidency, one that we will hear about from the Democrats from now until November 2020.

Now, as John avers right away, he is by no means your garden-variety #NeverTrumpTard cretin; no David French, he, and good on him. But he’s wringing his hands over nothing here. I mean, come ON, dude; we’re going to “hear about (this) from the Democrats from now until November 2020”? Think so, do ya? In the first place: no, it’s not likely we will. In reality, this is likely just another of their everything-but-the-kitchen-sink stratagems, another wheeze from their bag of tired tricks that will be gone in about ten days, like all the others.

Moreover: if they DO decide that this is the one worth really trying to make stick, well, so the fuck what? Does anybody expect anything more from them at this point than a relentless, dogged, unceasing campaign to smear Trump, snooter him, keep him tied up in knots and preoccupied with anything and everything they can conjure up until they finally stagger across something that DOES hit home? Unfortunately, poor John’s unfounded hysteria is only just gathering steam:

The Democrats have been self-destructing, with the progressives denouncing Nancy Pelosi and other members of the party’s leadership as racists. That conflict has dominated the news, and I am sure Trump is right that Nancy Pelosi would be happy to work out travel arrangements to get rid of the Squad. But now she won’t have to. Trump’s attack on the Squad was so foolish that I would assume it to be a case of drunk-tweeting, except that the President doesn’t drink.

This is the headline in my home town paper (“Leave the US, Trump tells liberal congresswomen of color”—M), the Minneapolis Star Tribune. It will be the same in every newspaper across the country…

Again: AND? If it wasn’t that, do you seriously think it wouldn’t have been something else, and that they wouldn’t have puffed and blown quite as hard over it?

Of course not. Didja maybe notice how meticulously they crafted that headline, putting words in Trump’s mouth in order to dishonestly imply that Trump thinks every “liberal congresswomen of color” should leave the US immediately? Anybody out there believe that was either coincidence, or an honest mistake committed in good faith by the insidious Strib hacks?

At the risk of beginning to sound repetitious: THIS IS WHO THEY ARE, THIS IS WHAT THEY DO. They lie, they manipulate, they scheme, they play their game of jiggery-pokery with the truth until it’s completely unrecognizable. Trump did not one thing more than what he’s done all along: he stated an obvious but purportedly off-limits truth bluntly, without hesitation, shame, or regret. Far from being any kind of foolish “blunder” on his part, that sort of thing is exactly why Real Americans elevated him to the Presidency over the entire clown car of shambolic, hapless GOPe perennial also-rans in the first place.

We WANT him to say things like this. We NEED him to say things like this. We DEMAND it of him, in fact. It is precisely moments like these that help to paper over the inevitable disappointment and frustration with him here and there, shoring up his base of support. It is just as Limbaugh often says: this is what fighting back looks like, people. If you find it puzzling or discomfitting, well, it’s probably because it’s been so very damned long since you’ve seen it. Fighting back aggressively against shitlib swine—rising from the long-accustomed defensive crouch to take the offensive on our behalf—has become an unfamiliar, alien thing to Real Americans by now.

Happily, as John finds himself ever more deeply mired in the slough of despond, Steve Hayward steps in to offer a measure of clarity and calm, if only a somewhat lukewarm one:

I concur in part, and dissent in part (as they say at the Supreme Court). I agree with John that this is a case where Trump should have followed the old adage, “When your enemy is destroying himself, get out of the way.”

Not if you see a way to speed them along.

But Trump’s animal instincts come into play here. With a wedge opening up between the Democratic Party leadership and the noisy Four Freshmen reps (and I can guarantee that AOC is the least popular member of the House Democratic caucus), Trump has now forced Pelosi and every other Democrat to come to their defense, elevating their profile further and cementing them as the authoritative face of the Democratic Party. What’s the downside of that?

Ain’t none. And you can be assured he knew just what he was doing, too.

And if you read Trump’s language carefully (and the absence of typos and other typical Trump flourishes like CAPITAL LETTERS and “sad” make me wonder if Stephen Miller wrote them), it is like his clumsy Charlottesville remarks, taken out of context and twisted. Trump’s subtle target here is multiculturalism and “diversity”—the tacit premise of the left that America should be guilty and abject before the supposedly “oppressed” nations of what we used to call the Third World. Trump goes way too far as usual, but his bit about “come back and show us how” is actually a good argument. Once again, Trump may know what he is doing. What is it the old left liked to say? “Heighten the contradictions!”

Actually, Trump’s Charlottesville remarks weren’t “clumsy” at all; they were carefully excised from their proper context, distorted, and lied about so as to create something the toxic shitweasels of the shameless Left could use to their advantage. And they’re still being used that way, and will go right on being so used, as long as the Housebroken Right can be counted on to play along. Any among us who doesn’t expect such from the Left by now is mentally deficient, a pure simpleton.

I still wish Trump would lose his phone. But the over-reaction to this is utterly predictable.

Of course it was. Then, after letting this froth and boil for a week to ten days, it’ll be on to the next contrived Democrat-Socialist tempest in a teapot. Lather, rinse, repeat; count on it, the cycle is as reliable as an atomic clock. Or has anybody seen that nuthatch habitué, whats’ername, that Trump supposedly “raped” at Bloomingdales or Neiman-Marcus or someplace, around? Any ideas where the Democrat-Socialists’ favorite big-donor pedorapist, Jeffrey Epstein, might have suddenly taken himself off to? Say, whatever happened to that nice Alva Johnson lady anyway, she seemed like a decent sort?

What Trump has done here, is doing, is the very thing the Vichy GOPe’s Coup Cucks Clowns always refused to: he’s staying on the offensive, taking the fight to his enemies by any and all means he can think up. That’s just in his nature, bless his cantankerous heart. It’s yet another reason why I remain solidly in his camp, and most likely will for the duration. For now, I’ll let the last word on this brouhaha be Sefton’s; I anticipate having plenty more to say myself shortly, perhaps enough to break it out into a new post.

I don’t think I need tell you the reaction this received from the casting couches to the faculty lounges to the Lido Deck of The Kristol Ship of Fools, but my reaction is “fuckin’ A.” Amazing how despite being painted as irredeemably racist, sexist, bigoted, misogynistic, homophobic, Islamophobic, oppressive to non-whites and illegitimately founded, millions of people from all over the world (and possibly the M-79 star system) risk their lives, their children’s lives and other children’s lives to get here. Why is that Kaepernick? Why is that Rapinoe? Shouldn’t you and your ilk be doing everything you possibly can to dissuade people from coming here? No, of course not, because you and everyone like you lack even two brain cells to rub together to ignite even a spark of a clue as to what the reality is. Many people see the miracle that is this nation from the misery and squalor of the third world shit-holes they seek to escape, while far too many others sadly are being enticed here as a means to overwhelm and collapse us from within, while filling up the voter rolls of the Democrat Party and depressing the wages and even displacing the American worker so the Koch/CoC whores can squeeze one last penny out of the strained cloaca of the golden goose before it disappears in a bloody mass of feathers and fat.

From a tactical standpoint, this is once again Trump being brilliant. He has forced the Democrat-Left Media Complex to choose sides, and by defending Nancy Palsi from being labeled as a racist, he’s put her in the uncomfortable position of having to agree with him in order to defend herself from the charge. No doubt her enemies are going to have a field day with that while spewing even more insanity to turn off even more voters.

Fuckin’ A, buddy, right down the line. Really, y’all, a “blunder of epic proportions”? Only for the sinking Cruise Ship Cuck crew, too staid, dainty, and clueless even now to bother noticing the water slopping over the gunwales—much less save themselves by grabbing a bucket and bailing.

Share

The fix is in all right

Bill picks up yesterday’s “Chicken shit-chicken salad” post and runs with it.

UPDATE:  Mike quotes Cerno:

Turning chicken shit into chicken salad…that still tastes like shit – Cold Fury

Cherchez le Cerno update! Might this fat, juicy worm have a barbed hook hidden in it?

No doubt. But maybe not the worm Cerno is worried about.

A daughter of avowed Trump enemy James Comey is one of the prosecutors. The judge is a BJ Clinton appointee who should recuse himself, but likely won’t. If he doesn’t, it will be a massive tell.

What’s the hook?

A plea deal, in which Epstein makes a statement to the effect that Trump made use of his underage slave-girls for the purpose of sex, as well as an exoneration of BJ Cliinton, in exchange for an extremely lenient sentence.

That’s your conspiracy theory of the day, and it worries me more than a little bit. It’s not as if we haven’t seen massive amounts of lawfare and perjury used in attempted smears of Trump already. Nobody who is paying attention would think my scenario is entirely farfetched.

Agreed, completely. Farfetched? Au contrere, mon frere; it’s obvious, and inarguable. There is no length to which they will not go, no low to which they will not stoop, to advance their agenda. Which, for the moment, is mostly haranguing, harrassing, and hogtying Trump.

Share

Arming up

All that “we have all the guns” braggadocio? Gonna need to rethink that one, I’m afraid.

Well, unfortunately I’m here to tell you that isn’t true: the hard left knows full well the role guns play in the political process, and they’re currently arming up and training.

I’ve been keeping tabs on this trend, and the other day I ran across a rather alarming piece in the New Republic…

Alarming it most certainly is, and I suggest you go read all of it. Given the Left’s long history of violence and oppression, nobody should be assuming that they’ll all just roll over and give up at the first sign of resistance this time around. Some of them are soft, pampered, callow youths, sure. But make no mistake: some of them are hard-core, serious, dedicated revolutionaries, true modern-day Bolsheviks who fully and firmly intend to see each and every freedom-loving American either in a gulag, or dead. Bill offers a sobering reminder that all this is hardly anything new:

This is something I’ve worried about for a very long time.

Most people today are too young to have any working knowledge/memory of the hard left of the 1960s, especially if they didn’t participate in that movement.

I’m old enough, and I did participate.

Here’s what I remember:

Slogans: Up against the wall, motherfuckers! Shoot the liberals first! Mao: Power comes out of the barrel of a gun!
When the Black Panthers become revolutionary darlings, they didn’t equip themselves with pamphlets, bullhorns, and papier mache puppets. They carried rifles, shotguns, and pistols.

So, where are the guys in this article likely getting their knowledge, information, and training in the fine art of bearing arms?

From Uncle Sam, of course.

Clueless lefty pussies assume that if you join the military, you are a fascist conservative. But even a moment’s though will tell you that any large group – the US military is a very large group – will not be perfectly homogeneous. And if you are a budding revolutionary, why wouldn’t you spend a couple of years on Uncle’s dime learning to be an effective, dangerous revolutionary?

Don’t kid yourself. More than a few 18 year olds have done exactly that. (We all know that 18 year olds are all very, very conservative, right?)

A few years back, I remember reports that gangbangers were joining the military for exactly that purpose.  The reports were soft-pedaled and eventually faded away, but it seemed perfectly logical to me.  I mean, if you want go  be trained by experts in the fine art of armed urban warfare, get your training legally, and have it paid for by the military you expect to have to fight, how else would you do it?

Our side doesn’t have all of the guns, or all of the knowledge. The left is, I would suspect, still, relatively speaking, extremely weak in terms of all out armed civil war. But it is not helpless, and people who do make that assumption are both ignorant and stupid.

And when the bill comes due, the price tag on such assumptions is damned steep. Before our first Civil War, most people both North and South believed it would take but one hard skirmish to send the opposition packing, thereby securing an easy, relatively bloodless victory for themselves. Instead, they found themselves mired in a desperate, five-year-long calamity, one of the bloodiest, most destructive conflicts in history. Their blithe assumptions of a cakewalk are now generally derided as the purblind foolishness they always were.

But all too many of us today are inexplicably disregarding our own history to walk the primrose path all over again. It’s my belief that, as horrific a cataclysm as Civil War v1.0 was, Civil War v2.0 will be even more nightmarish, and will drag on for far longer, too. It is probably unavoidable by now; it might even be considered necessary, the only means left to us of resolving the otherwise irreconcilable conflict between totaliarian collectivism and those who just want to be left alone to live as freely as they possibly may.

Nonetheless, it remains a truly awful prospect—all of us will lose much, and probably most will lose absolutely everything. Entire regions could well be thrown back into a pre-Industrial Revolution type of lifestyle. The comfort and convenience every American has come to regard as his birthright, just the natural order of things, will be gone forever, replaced by a state of nature more akin to Hobbes’s brutal vision than, say, Hugh Hefner’s. It is a thing to be contemplated not with eagerness and anticipation, but with dread.

Share

Shut ’em down, lock ’em up

One way to deal with Pantifa fascists.

To date, federal officials have not classified Antifa a domestic terror group despite endless photographs, eyewitness accounts and video evidence supporting the designation.

During a protest of conservative speaker Ben Shapiro last year on the University of California’s Berkeley campus, Antifa members reportedly destroyed campus property, set fire to trash cans, beat up college Republicans and forced students to shelter in place. (Campus police stood by doing nothing.) The school settled the case, paying organizers nearly $100,000.

It’s difficult to understand why the group hasn’t received a terror designation.

In 2001, the left-wing environmental group Earth Liberation Front was designated a domestic terror organization. The group claimed credit for setting fire to new condominiums in San Diego in 2003, because it opposed new construction. They scrawled the initials “ELF” on the walls before they set fire to the units.
The left-wing terror group also torched SUVs at car dealerships in Southern California and burned down what they called “McMansions,” or large homes, in states including Washington. Unlike Antifa’s actions in Portland, no one was actually injured in ELF’s fires.

The Weather Underground is another group classified as a domestic terror organization. Like Antifa, the cabal of violent youth sought to effect political change with thuggery. But unlike Antifa, the Weather Underground never seriously injured anyone. They planted a couple dozen bombs to impact law enforcement and elected leaders, but no one was ever hit by a bomb in the way that Antifa hit Ngo. It seems that Antifa ought to at least enjoy parity with the Weather Underground.

Another FBI-designated terror group, Fuerzas Armadas de Liberacion(FALN), was responsible for terrorizing New Yorkers in a political effort to gain independence for Puerto Rico. The 1970s militant group held Marxist-Leninist political views and sought to turn Puerto Rico into a communist province. The group took credit for bombings that killed four people. In 1999, as one of his final acts in office, President Clinton granted clemency to 16 of the terror group’s members.

If a domestic terror designation was enough for these groups — some of which never injured anyone — Antifa ought to get the classification. Antifa has injured people at their protests and events.

“Antifa is an organization that actively promotes and engages in violence, and its members have been allowed to continually attack and injure scores of people for political purposes. That is the very definition of terrorism,” said Lt. Randy Sutton (ret.), a 33-year police veteran and founder of The Wounded Blue organization. “It is time to treat them as what they are: a domestic terror organization.”

Surely is. Get busy, get it done, and take ’em all the way down. If not, there’s another way I can think of to deal with ’em that would cool their jets even quicker. Very simple, very easy: a citizen initiative to start sniping the little oxygen thieves. One shot, one kill from a nearby rooftop, every time the punks begin to gather in public. I predict it would take but few of them witnessing their broheims bleed out into the gutter, gut-shot from an unknown direction, before the rest of them quietly put those masks and black clothing back in the drawer for good, seeing as how individually they’re mostly spoiled, pasty-faced little queefs living in Mommy’s basement. Any remaining hardcores missed or ignored by Team America can then be summarily rounded up and sent away to Supermax after the organizational collapse, for a long, hard stretch of being bent over a toilet and gang-buggered by their new owners.

Share

Democrat-Socialists: all about the chaos

Anarchy with an agenda.

On an episode of The Candace Owens Show that aired this past May, Owens had as her guest Dennis Prager. While I agreed with most of the points made by both Ms. Owens and Mr. Prager, one item struck me as an example of superficial analysis. They declared that the primary objective of the Left is “chaos.” In an immediate sense, this seems true; the so-called “progressive left” does appear to be deliberately sowing chaos in America today.

However, I submit that the Left’s “chaos” is an intermediate objective, the means to an end. They have a well defined endgame.  The Communist Bloc countries were a lot of things, but they were generally not chaotic.

What is the agenda of the Left, if it is not simply chaos?

Leftists rationalize what they are doing as being in the service of what will ultimately be a Star Trek–like “United Earth,” a one-world community ruled by the bureaucrats of the U.N., where there will be no more war, all resources will be shared, all conflicts will be “managed,” and the “masses” will be doled out whatever the elites decree the latter “needs” in return for World Peace Forevermore. In real day-to-day terms, this enables an unaccountable, parasitic globalist elite class to decide what is best for everybody. Ultimately, the progressive left elites of the West are busy selling out their own countries in order to appease the other major actors on the world stage, especially China and political Islam, to get the latter to cooperate in this globalist fantasy.

In reality, China; political Islam; and the other major independent political actor, Russia, will merely pocket the concessions of the West and continue to pursue their particular interests, in traditional great power fashion, at the West’s expense. The corrupt Western elites who have sold their souls for this paradigm don’t really care, as they fundamentally do not believe that what the West represents is worth fighting for. In short, what these corrupt globalist Western elites are engaged in is a highly rationalized form of treason.  

Writ large, what the self-styled “progressive left” is selling amounts to a modern version of feudalism, in which a self-appointed elite, whose status is maintained by the promotion of a self-serving “progressive,” neo-Marxist dogma, is anointed to tell the rest of us peasants how we must live our lives, not unlike the Divine Right of Kings. The Rest of Us will be compelled to create wealth for them, as they enjoy an opulent existence without earning it; the likes of Obama, Hillary, Macron, Merkel, etc., couldn’t produce something genuinely useful if their lives depended on it. In their world, over-educated uselessness becomes a virtue, as they are simply “above” having to produce anything. It certainly beats actual work.
 
That is what the Left wants. It isn’t chaos. It is integration into global feudalism.

Perfectly correct, to the last detail, and there should be no surprise in any of it, for any of us. From the very dawning of the Progressive era and its adherents’ call for iron-fisted, top-down rule by “expert,” t’was ever thus—and ever t’will be. The Left’s methods have been slightly tweaked when deemed necessary and expedient, but their intentions and ambitions have never changed, and they won’t.

Share

Fake news is real

After seeing these truly horrendous, stomach-turning photos of the nightmarish conditions endured by detained refugees at the southern border, I have to just come right out and say it: this is intolerable, and inhuman, and Trump should be held accountable for…for his…for…that is to say…ummm…

Oops.

The Hill, among other lying liars, is fobbing these and a shit-bucket more photos off as current—and all Trump’s fault, natch. More from the AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Since the government acknowledged last month that the Trump administration had lost track of nearly 1,500 immigrant children, the debate over what that means and who is to blame has roiled Twitter. A look at the partisan claims and a reality check behind the latest immigration fight:

THE 2014 PHOTOS
—“Speechless. This is not who we are as a nation.” — Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa, former Los Angeles mayor now running for governor, referring in a tweet Sunday to photos showing young-looking immigrants in steel cages.

—“This is happening right now, and the only debate that matters is how we force our government to get these kids back to their families as fast as humanly possible.” — Jon Favreau, who was speechwriter for President Barack Obama, referring Sunday to the same photos.

THE FACTS: The photos, taken by The Associated Press, were from 2014, during the Obama administration, but were presented by liberal activists as if they showed the effects of Trump’s immigration policy now. Villaraigosa, Favreau and some others deleted their tweets when the mistake was pointed out.

Because of course they did. Hey, if the Tweet is gone it never happened, right, guys? Ace responds:

“Mistake.”

I noticed no one was deplatformed for promoting fake news, conspiracy theories, and invading privacy by posting pictures of the migrants.

Yeah, funny that. Funny, also, how every last one of these Enemedia “mistakes” only ever cut the one way. Why, one might almost get the impression that they’re not “mistakes” at all, but something more along the lines of being a strategy. Almost.

Y’know, I really must confess that—just once in a now-and-then—there are days when I truly cannot WAIT for the shooting to start.

Share

Collateral damage

The needle scalpel and the damage done.

Even before the obvious signs of maleness, Tom’s laughter disappeared from our lives. Overnight, it seemed, he stopped smiling. He no longer took pleasure in anything. He looked ill. He complained of fatigue, stomach ailments and dizziness. He lost his appetite and began to lose weight. But my sincere attempts to sympathise with him alternated with bewilderment and rage over the close, secret relationships he’d apparently formed with women confidantes, over his insistence that his urgent need to express his femininity outweighed every other concern.

“I have a medical condition,” he insisted. “A fatal condition that’s going to kill me unless I get treatment.”

“Who decides the treatment?” I asked.

“I do!”

He didn’t seem the same. He didn’t act the same. His values seemed to change along with his personality.
“What if you knew that doing this would destroy one or all of the children?” I asked him. Ice cold, the man I had once thought a wonderful father replied, “I would do it anyway.”

When I eventually got round to reading other women’s accounts – that is, the accounts of women who stayed with their transsexual husbands – they said about their partners what my husband said about himself: he’s still the same person inside. “Where inside?” I wanted to shout.

This argument reached an absurd zenith on the day he declared, “You only loved me for my gender!”

“Yes,” I said sarcastically. “Since nobody else had that gender, I had no choice but to love you.”

Such moments packed a breathtaking array of meaning and emotion. All at once there was the pathos of witnessing a middle-aged man – the husband I loved and had admired – taking pleasure in gazing at the woman he evidently saw when he looked at himself in the mirror. His satisfaction with himself. His in-my-face “I’m going to do this and you have no choice but to accept it” attitude towards me. The painful fact that such moments represented his departure from our marriage and from the person he had been, and that I was forced to watch that departure not once but over and over again. The terrible feeling of intrusion into my space, my privacy. Like a rebellious teenager, he wanted me to know: you aren’t the only woman around here any more. He wanted me to know: absolutely nothing will be left to you. My basket had become a public receptacle marked All Women’s Things Go Here. Like womanhood itself, it was no longer my domain.

Tom found a circle of women to sympathise with, encourage and dress him. Once, he left his laptop open to a message from one of them that read, “Your wife has to accept losing you.” He reported that another had urged him to “Do it all quickly!”

From his cheerleaders I learned that in the new political correctness, female solidarity is out. A man in a dress is in. Among women who consider themselves feminists, a man who declares himself a transsexual trumps another woman any day. One of Tom’s supporters would eventually sum up this perspective most explicitly: “He’s a transsexual. Anything he does is what he needs to do.”

These career women told Tom, and some would later tell me, that my wifely role was to support my man and to get my children on board with the project. My responsibility was to Tom. Tom’s responsibility was to Tom. In the Valley of the Politically Correct, being a transsexual means never having to say you’re sorry.

In the shitlib victimhood hierarchy, transgenders are at the very summit. For now, anyway, until the Furries (or something even more bizarre) start getting a little more PR traction. Rod Dreher calls a spade a spade:

The wife is Christine Benvenuto; here is a link to the memoir she wrote about this experience, from which the above essay was taken. Her ex-husband Jay now lives as Joy Ladin, and is celebrated as a brave pioneer.

This Pride Month, our media never tell us the stories of people like Christine Benvenuto and her children — those whose lives were shattered by men like Jay Ladin, following their dream. They are the collateral damage on the way to Utopia. Jay Ladin ought to be ashamed of himself for what he did to his wife and children, but of course he — a professor at Yeshiva — moves from strength to strength in this family-hating culture of ours.

What is so interesting to me about this story is the way Ladin changed almost overnight from being a normal person to being a selfish monster after he came out as trans. I saw a similar (though not remotely as consequential) change in a guy I had been good friends with in college — until he came out as gay.

Mind you, what N. did to me was not remotely on the same level as what Jay/Joy Ladin did to his wife and children. But it is at the far end of a spectrum.

To be clear, I am not claiming that this is how all LGBT people behave! In fact, one of the friends during that time who comforted me in my shock and anger at N.’s betrayals was (is) a lesbian who was just as appalled as I was by what N. had done. My point is simply that some people, when they switch sexual or gender identities, stop seeing and feeling responsible to other people, except to regard them as obstacles to giving them what they want. It’s as if they become possessed by a malicious spirit. I don’t understand it. But I recognize it, and I recognize that we live in a culture now that celebrates and rewards this malicious narcissism, and that regards the tragedy suffered by people like Christine Benvenuto and the Ladin children as politically inconvenient, therefore disposable.

Just part of the larger Progressivist program to destroy whatever remnants are left of the traditional family; as such, the wreckage and pain are a feature, not a bug. Monstrous and despicable as he sure as hell is, even Ladin himself might be seen as part of that collateral damage, in a way.

(Via Insty)

Share

Just another psychotic freak

Wow, that sure didn’t take long.

Trump rape accuser E. Jean Carroll continued on Thursday to make a series of bizarre statements surrounding her allegation that she was raped in the 1990s by President Donald Trump, telling The New York Times in an interview that she has “not been raped.”

“Every woman gets to choose her word. Every woman gets to choose how she describes it. This is my way of saying it. This is my word. My word is ‘fight.’ My word is not the victim word. I have not been raped,” Carroll said. “Something has not been done to me. I fought, that’s the thing.”

Thus doth another lame-ass Democrat-Socialist attempt to nail Trump to the cross via patently false rape accusation lobbed by a straight-up-deranged lunatic die the death they all do: not with a bang, IYKWIMAITYD, but a whimper.

There is no way in hell any serious individual could take this woman’s ravings seriously. If nothing else, a quick look at a photo of this week’s harpy juxtaposed with one of our lovely and gracious First Lady Melania should put THAT folderol right to bed. Why on God’s green Earth would a man like Trump—virile, successful, sought-after, every gold-digger’s dream—waste a moment even glancing in the general direction of a ragged, 50-something old troll like Carroll, when he could spare himself a shit-ton of unneccessary and unwanted hassle by the simple expedient of just going home…to a wife who happens to be one of the most gorgeous women in the world?

For that matter,Trump could buy himself a comely, virginal young wench from Thailand every day of the week for the rest of his life, if he so desired, and pay for ’em all out of pocket change too. But noooo; instead, we’re supposed to just credulously swallow that he’d much rather go hump some fugly old nutball against her will in a Bergdorf-Goodman changing room—presumably without even having a bag to put over her head handy—accepting legal ramifications most dire among many other unpleasant potential consequences thereby.

This, mind you, after the Democrat-Socialists have tried the exact same fucking gambit about forty-leven times already, only to see each and every one fall flat on its face. The only difference this time is just how remarkably fast this latest trial balloon deflated on them.

Taking this ludicrous accusation at its face value, then (absolutely nothing), what are we left with at the end of the day? Just this: the Democrat-Socialists, exactly like their film-maker confreres in Hollywood, are now officially and demonstrably bereft of new, original ideas. As I keep telling ya: They. Got. Nothing. The endless sequels, remakes, and do-overs are growing stale, to sane people at least.

Another thing that might be worth pondering: how callous, how cruel, how just plain damned heartless are these people that they’re willing to keep taking advantage of, even abusing, so many sad, mentally-ill wretches for political purposes like this, anyway? How many more of these women are the Democrat-Socialists going to dig up, drag through the meatgrinder of public scrutiny, exposure, and disgrace, only to toss aside when any political usefulness has expired?

There really oughta be a law.

Share

PIgs take flight

Julie Kelly praises AOC. No, seriously, you guys.

The crisis at the southern U.S. border proves at least one thing to be true: Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is more honest than Senator Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and his fellow anti-Trump Republicans.

Ocasio-Cortez, to her credit, has never tried to fool the American people or her constituency by suggesting she wants anything less than open borders. Lawmakers on the Left, including the roster of Democratic presidential candidates, have made it clear we must accept an unlimited influx of refugees from Central America. The treatment of migrant children, they tell us, is a national disgrace and an international scourge. Border patrol agents are criminals but the tens of thousands of Central American citizens illegally entering our country each month are not, they insist. Overflowing intake facilities are compared to Nazi concentration camps, and Donald Trump is Adolf Hitler.

I don’t know about you, but I’ll take that sort of unabashed honesty—no matter how insane, dangerous, and historically illiterate it is—over the deceptive and duplicitous machinations of alleged “conservatives” like Romney. To her credit, AOC doesn’t pretend to be someone she’s not—staged and dated photo-op notwithstanding. Give me a truthful authoritarian over a phony conservative any day. At least we know who we’re dealing with.

The poseurs on the so-called Right have contributed more to the current immigration crisis than anyone on the Left, and for that, they should forever be banished from any position of power in the Republican Party.

How the hell you gonna do THAT, pray tell? Those frauds are the Republican Party, a huge majority of it. But let’s get back to pounding on Mittens, shall we?

Romney, a well-known flip-flopper, ran as an immigration hawk in 2012. He was for a border wall before he was against it. When he posed as the “severely conservative” Republican candidate for president, Romney supported a vague deportation plan for 11 million illegals, the hiring of more border agents and imposing obstacles for illegals to access education and employment opportunities. He blasted President Obama’s failed policies. “We will stop the flow of illegal immigration into this country, I’m convinced of that,” he assured us in January 2012.

Exactly seven years later, in his consolation-prize role as Utah’s junior senator, Romney votedwith Democrats against stopping the flow of illegals, and instead opted to block progress on a border wall he once insisted we needed. In March, Romney joined 11 other Republican senators to halt Trump’s emergency declaration about the U.S.-Mexican border. Calling it only an “humanitarian crisis,” Romney blathered about constitutional boundaries and the rule of law as his excuse for thwarting Trump’s perfectly legal exercise of executive power.

Kelly moves on from that enjoyable evisceration to light into National Review, sniffy Sad Sacks French and Goldberg, and the Koup Kucks Klowns en masse, closing it all out with nothing but the truth.

Share

“SCIENCE” IS BAFFLED!

A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

Psychologists Can’t Figure Out Why Hardly Anyone Wants To Date A Trans Person

A real headscratcher for sure. But I think I have the answer already. Two, actually.One: they aren’t nearly as confused about their own sexuality as transgender types are, and two: as a wise old uncle of mine told me years ago, although I confess to having ignored his sage advice on WAY too many occasions over the years: never stick your dick in crazy, son.

A recent Journal of Social and Personal Relationships study found that nearly 90 percent of survey respondents are not interested in dating transgender people. In a Psychology Today article on the study, coauthor Karen Blair implies these findings demonstrate significant discrimination—or at least an unwillingness to be inclusive—in dating.

However, instead of pointing out the obvious truth that biological cues are foundational for sexual and romantic attraction, the author goes to great lengths to convey sympathy for the exclusion of transgenders in the dating field as if it’s merely a social justice issue. This is yet another avenue progressives are using to encourage others to deny biological reality and normalize abnormal behaviors.

And thus does the Bughouse Left warp and abuse science yet again for political purposes.

Blair explains how important finding love is to happiness. Hardly anyone would disagree with her there. Then she goes on to say, “If very few people are willing to date trans people, what does this mean for their health and well-being? If trans and non-binary people lack access to one of the most stable sources of social support, this could explain some of the existing health disparities within trans communities.”

Ass-backwards and wrong again. The “health disparities” exist because they’re transgender—part and parcel of what was once, in a less stultifyingly PC age, correctly called “gender dysphoria.” I don’t know if you’d call this putting the cart before the horse, reversing cause and effect, or just what. Transgenders aren’t mentally disordered because straights aren’t interested in dating them; they’re transgender because they’re mentally disordered. Their dysfunction is not a result of some supposedly unfair, irrational “prejudice” against them. Nice try, though, at finding a way to scold straights for causing problems they bear no blame whatsoever for. Jesse Singal unloads on ’em, closing the following Tweet pair with the line of the day:


It’s all about normalization of the abnormal, except for the part of it that’s all about clubbing Normals into not just tolerance but enthusiastic endorsement:

So thus begins the pressure for straight people to have sex with same-sex people.

Strange that it’s a hate crime to suggest that gay people should try to be straight, but it’s now a pet project of the left to pressure straight people to be gay.

Apparently this will help the 0.1% of the population that is trans.

You know what would help the 97% of the population that is straight and normal as far as sexual identification? If the oddly-sexed people would just act straight and normally-sexed, so we wouldn’t have these bizarre flare-ups of rage and entitlement.

But we’ve decided that, as regards sexual minority, it’s wrong to pressure them into being different than they are just in order to spare the rest of society some discomfort and awkwardness.

Why does this rule not extend in the opposite direction? Why are people with more bog-standard sexualities not permitted to be just as God made them — Born This Way, you know — without being hassled about it?

Why does the obligation to Live and Let Live only run in one direction?

BTW: Why don’t trans people just date trans people?

Oh, right: Because they have an innate attraction to people of a specific sex.

So, they’re permitted to be sexually attracted to whoever they’re sexually attracted to, but the rest of us will just have to brainwash ourselves into having a different sexuality. We’ll have to have sex with people we don’t want to have sex with to show that we’re not “transphobic.”

I assure you that, at least in my case, they’re going to find themselves VERY disappointed in the results their effort is gonna yield, and do not give a tinker’s damn about being accused of any kind of “phobia” these flailing fucktards like, be it trans-, Islamo-, or anydamnedthing else they might come up with. Excepting pedophilia, necrophilia, and animal abuse, I’ve always been content to live and let live when it comes to whatever kink, perversion, or oddity adults might get up to. I’m willing to extend them the courtesy implicit in Eddie Murphy’s line from one of his concert flicks: “I think you should be with whoever makes you come the hardest.”

But if they’re not going to extend me the reciprocal courtesy of keeping that shit at home, indoors, and out of my fucking face, all that can change…with a quickness.

Share

Dumpster fire

You win some, you lose some. Yes, even Trump.

This week’s big leak about a major Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation was orchestrated by acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan in an effort to sabotage the raids before they were scheduled to take place, according to three current and two former senior administration officials.

In a move he said was to placate Democrats, President Trump announced on Saturday that the nationwide immigration enforcement operation planned to start Sunday — aimed at migrant families who illegally remain in the country despite being denied asylum — was called off to give lawmakers two weeks to work on a plan to fix legal “loopholes” he said have enticed migrants to come to the U.S.

However, all five officials who spoke with the Washington Examiner confirmed McAleenan’s decision to go rogue and stymie the operation was what prompted the White House to call off the 10-city operation.

“That’s law enforcement sensitive information. You just don’t reveal that,” the second official said. “It gets people hyped up. It gets the NGOs activated, and then anyone wearing a jacket with the ICE name on it is really chastised. Cities are coming out saying, ‘Here’s how you can protect yourself against it.’”

That same official said the “worst” consequence of the leak, especially if it was directed by the department’s leader, was how it endangered personnel.

Despicable? Of course. Seditious? Indubitably. An outright criminal demonstration of just how far the unaccountable minions of the Deep State are willing to go to protect their prerogatives and power? Without question.

Surprising? Hardly. And of all the people likely to find themselves blindsided by such a scummy, slimy maneuver, is it unreasonable to assume one Donald J Trump might be one of the last? Not on your life.

Houston, we have a problem. A BIG one.

What do you think of Donald Trump appointing Kevin McAleenan as acting Secretary of Homeland Security?
He seems qualified, though It’s unsure where his political loyalties are. I’m concerned because he is an “Obama Holdover” who was well regarded by Lord Obama himself and recent CNN reports about him are not hate filled which scares me. The man could be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I think Trump was not as brutal as he should have been coming in to completely toss out any Obama holdovers and the results are internal opposition, extraordinary leaking, and loyalty only until a book deal can be made.

Regardless, it appears these moves have been in the works with Trump for weeks and McAleenan after all of that time he was appointed as “Acting “ Secretary which suggests he is not likely the first choice in a permanent replacement.

Of all the reasons one might be disappointed or disillusioned with Trump, his evident failure to recognize the threat to his agenda posed by these Obama stay-behinds is Numero Uno with a bullet as far as I’m concerned. And this is only the latest example, of WAY too many. I’ll let Liz Shield say it for me:

When are these leakers going to be hunted down and punished? Anyone who is leaking information from the White House needs to be discovered and punished severely. It’s dangerous to have unelected bureaucrats deciding to influence policy by trying to embarrass the administration. It’s Trump’s fault that he hasn’t smoked out these activists and fired them or put them in an office with nothing other than a crossword puzzle and a pencil. You can’t fire these dirtbags because of the ridiculous union “job protection” rules, but you can add civil service reform to the top of the list of issues Trump should have addressed on day one.

Come on, man. Trump has picked the worst people to work in the administration and the clowns he hasn’t picked were picked by the establishment Republican industry who are not on board with his agenda. What a dumpster fire.

Out of all the campaign promises he hasn’t for various reasons—some his fault, some beyond his control—managed to make good on, who woulda ever thunk Trump’s failure to “hire the best people” would have turned out to be the most consequential?

Trump better get a handle on this and start stomping some cockroaches toot fucking sweet, lest he suddenly find his house completely overrun and beyond salvage.

Share

Gibson has his say

No, I ain’t talking guitars now, but bakeries.

A business is only as strong as its reputation.

For more than 130 years, this principle served my family well. We own and operate Gibson’s Bakery in the City of Oberlin, Ohio — home to Oberlin College. Over that time, we have worked hard to build a reputation on our homemade baked goods, candy and ice cream, and on our commitment to our community.

Started by my great grandfather in 1885, the bakery has always been a source of pride for our family. For decades I’ve worked alongside my father, Allyn W. Gibson, known around Oberlin as “Grandpa Gibson.” At 90, he still comes to work nearly every day, where I’m joined by my son, and my 11-year-old grandson on the weekends.

On Nov. 9, 2016, a student attempted to shoplift two bottles of wine from our store. Unfortunately, theft is all too common at Gibson’s Bakery. Like many small businesses in Oberlin, our employees have caught plenty of shoplifters over the years — many of them students.

Police arrested the student. But the next day, hundreds of people gathered in protest. From bullhorns they called for a boycott. The sidewalk and park across the street from our store were filled with protesters holding signs labeling us racists and white supremacists. The arrest, they said, was the result of racial profiling. The narrative was set and there was no combating it.

Despite the lack of any evidence, our family was accused of a long history of racism and discrimination. Oberlin College officials ordered the suspension of the more than 100-year business relationship with our bakery, and our customers dwindled. We were officially on trial — not in a courtroom, but in the court of public opinion. And we were losing.

As time went on, the truth began to emerge. The shoplifter confessed to his crime and said the arrest wasn’t racially motivated. But Oberlin College refused to help set the record straight by issuing a public statement that our family is not racist and does not have a history of racial profiling or discrimination.

The damage had been done. And the truth seemed irrelevant. In a small city like Oberlin, having the largest business and employer against you is more than enough to seal your fate.

Running out of options, we decided to pursue a lawsuit against Oberlin College. Two regional law firms agreed to take our case.

As the extended legal battle dragged on, many asked why I didn’t just quit. Wouldn’t it be easier to close up shop and move on?

In the end, the words of my father inspired me to continue the fight. He said, “In my life, I’ve done everything I could to treat all people with dignity and respect. And now, nearing the end of my life, I’m going to die being labeled as a racist.”

Gibson closes with the hope that Oberlin’s Little Hitlers will learn something from this, take stock, and abandon the evil of SJW ideology. But as Bill Jacobson says, that hope is already being proven vain:

There is no evidence that Oberlin is ready to “take stock and correct course,” as Editorial Board of the Pittburgh Post-Gazette suggested it do to avoid going the way of Antioch College. As we have written, Oberlin College is doubling and tripling down on portraying itself as the victim, blaming as it has in past incidents, the media.

Then the full weight of the judgment should be rammed right down their throats until they choke to death on it. And if being forced to pay just restitution to the innocent people whose lives they intentionally ruined closes Oberlin college for good, well, tough shit. Full stop, end of story, no tears shed, world’s smallest violin.

Share

Just another inconvenient truth

Eugenics and abortion: indivisible planks in the Progressivist platform.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas took a stick to the moral sanctum of women’s abortion rights when he wrote a legal opinion in May that tied abortion to eugenics, the ideology and activity aimed at eliminating supposedly unwanted inherited characteristics in human beings. In return, progressive historians and pundits are calling Thomas’ integrity into question by claiming that eugenics, unlike abortion rights, is all about the evils of state control over private individual decisions. Eugenics, however, is really about hatred of the human condition and the utopian perfection of the species according to elite preferences. Distorting our society’s picture of eugenics in the 21st century is a dangerous tactic that progressives will soon regret.

In the Washington Post, progressive author Paul Lombardo declared that “I’ve been studying this stuff for 40 years, and I’ve never been able to find a leader of the eugenics movement that came out and said they supported abortion.” This is fake history compounded by false testimony. It only takes a few minutes on Google to find examples of historical documents (hereand here) that contradict any dissociation of abortion from eugenics. If Lombardo and his fellow progressive historians do not know that Alan Guttmacher, heir to Margaret Sanger’s leadership of Planned Parenthood, was previously a vice president of the American Eugenics Society (as Thomas explained once again in a First Thingsrebuttal), or that Population Council and Pioneer Fund founder Frederick Osbornwrote that “birth control and abortion are turning out to be great eugenic advances of our time,” then perhaps the professional label of historian should be reserved for more knowledgeable scholars.

The greater scandal is the attempt by Stern and others to paint eugenics as a merely state-led effort securely left in the past. This minimizes the core point of eugenics, which is not to empower the state, but to use any means necessary for eliminating inherited characteristics that are unwanted. It ignores the vast cultural impact of “fitter families” contests at early 20th century popular events, the intellectual impact of college eugenics courses for 20,000 students in 1928 alone, and the enthusiastic involvement of physicians in Nazi euthanasia programs as well as American infanticide, dramatized in the wildly popular film The Black Stork.

At its core, eugenics is really all about hatred: hatred of limitations imposed by the natural body and mind, hatred of a God who allows the human condition of suffering and shame, and hatred of any person who has the audacity to live with the unwanted afflictions. The stomach-burning resentment of frustrated persons can undermine an entire civilization and drive a utopian, secular goal of species perfection.

The whole point of Progressivism from its very beginning was to create Utopia by recreating humanity according to its own ideals: not merely to govern, nor even to rule, but to play God. Their misguided faith in their own innate superiority and fitness to assume their self-appointed roles as earthly Deities required absolute power and unquestioning obedience from their inferiors. Human “perfectability” through eugenics was the strategy, abortion the tactic. For them now to claim, as a matter of political expedience, that the one never had anything much to do with the other is risible. Even the most cursory review of PP founder Margaret Sanger’s ugly ravings will put paid to that lie.

But Progressivists have never cared one whit about whether a thing is true or not; then as now, they care only that it works. For them, the end justifies any and all means; lying about abortion’s prominent role in their plans for the rest of us is in no way objectionable, nor does it present them with any moral quandaries. Progressivism, like eugenics, is indeed about hatred. But even more than that, it is about arrogance, about tyranny—and, ultimately, about evil. And if you think this next is unrelated, you better think again, bub.

Longevity in power has produced in the Deep State the attitude characteristic of masters: the conviction that they alone are entitled to rule, and that no one may legitimately stand against them. That’s how the Deep State came to be the implacable enemy we face today.

It might seem that the Deep State, by its nature, would be apolitical, concerned solely with its own power and perquisites. However, the progressive ideology, inculcated in the bureaucracies from their inception by the presidents who oversaw their creation, causes the Deep State to be aligned with the Democrat Party. As we know, that ideology promotes unopposable power in the State. This is a condition the Democrats approve. They hope to use it to maintain their party’s grip on high office.

The conviction underlying the Democrats’ promotion of Trump Derangement is what interests me most. They believe that they and only they are entitled to rule, and so are unwilling to tolerate any opposing force. That Trump, a political outsider, should have unseated them was bad enough. That he’s overturning all political precedent by keeping his campaign promises is salt in the wound. That by doing so he’s given the lie to all their propaganda about “globalism,” “transnationalism,” “the era of limits,” and “the new normal” might prove fatal to them.

The masters of the Deep State see the current situation as a win-or-die dilemma. They believe their survival requires that Trump be brought down, in as garish and dramatic a fashion as possible – and they could well be right.

The Democrats’ luminaries are wholly in accord with this aim. They see Trump as their mortal enemy. Simply by doing what he’s proposed to do, he could doom them to an obscurity like unto that of the Whigs. So they’ll keep the TDS carnival rotating until they’ve all been unseated. Unfortunately, given the power of incumbency, especially in states such as California, Illinois, and New York, that could take three decades or more.

Get what I mean about related? Once you see how seamlessly the various pieces of the Progressivist puzzle connect, there’s just no unseeing it.

Share

Plugs gets plugged

Looks like the Democrat-Socialists have figured out that Gropey Joe has no more chance at the presidency now than he did the other seventeen times he tried.

Look at everything our fake news media chose not to tell us in 2008 when Biden was running for vice president — and don’t forget we are talking about the same fake news media that sent legions of fake journalists to Alaska to find out which library books Biden’s rival, then-Gov. Sarah Palin, checked out.

Only now are we learning that in 1975 Biden said his party needed a “liberal George Wallace,” that he believed segregation was a good thing as a “matter of black pride,” and that he voted to restore the American citizenship of confederate president Jefferson Davis.

Did you know that as recently as 1988, Biden praised a Democrat segregationist as a  “man of character and courage?”

All of this is coming to light now for only one reason: the media were not interested in 2008 because in 2008 the media were only interested in protecting Barack Obama.

Here is the first black president hooking up with a vice president enamored with segregation and segregationists and the media buried it all — and did so while attacking Obama’s rivals (Palin, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Donald Trump — who have no history of BFF’n segregationists) as racists.

But now, NOW, now that the media want a far-left extremist to win the 2020 Democrat nomination, now that they want Mean Little Mayor Pete Buttigieg or Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren, now that the media have decided no more old, white guy presidents, they are all over Biden’s racist past.

In other words…

Eleven year later, we are just now entering day four of the media vetting Joe Biden.

Odd, innit? And this latest reveal is hardly the only thing they’re throwing at poor ol’ Gropey Joe.

So I was really intrigued with this ABC hit piece. We played the sound bites of it yesterday. They just ran a hit piece on Biden that you don’t see the media run against Democrats, hardly ever. And it hit all the points, the things that you know about Biden and Ukraine, Biden and China, Biden and his son — Biden and his son divorcing his wife and marrying his brother’s widow, his cocaine problem, getting kicked out Navy.

You know all that because we’ve told you about it. But people that read the Drive-By Media have no idea until yesterday — and ABC hit everything. The same day the New York Post Page Six went deep, deep, deep into the problems with Joe Biden’s son Hunter and cocaine and the strange business deals with the ChiComs and Ukraine. You just don’t see this, and I made the observation yesterday that I don’t think it’s journalism. This was not journalism. This was full-fledged political activism.

I’m thinking this is happening because the New York Times is not yet ready to run this stuff. The Washington Post is not yet ready to run this stuff. But somebody within the Democrat Party wants Biden gone, and they’re trying to maneuver the Drive-Bys into helping them get rid of him. When this kind of stuff starts… You know, it could be that, as I speculated yesterday, ABC did this just to do it, and they did it early enough where people could forget it and it wouldn’t hurt Plugs, and then they could say later on (sputtering), “Hey, we’re fair.

“We — we — we did a hard-hitting piece on Biden and his kid.” But with this today and then the New York Post Page Six with another one today — these two things on top of it — I think the bottom line here is that Biden is finished but doesn’t know it. And he may know it, by the way. He just hasn’t fallen over yet. But it’s coming. Whoever this is… It could be elements of the Obama Regime. It could be the Democrat National Committee. It could be a Democrat strategerist somewhere. It could be a Democrat consultant somewhere, could be people inside his own campaign.

Yep, he’s toast. See ya in the funny papers, Gropester.

Share

Demographics is NOT destiny?

It’s never wise to contradict Steyn, in my opinion. But this guy makes an encouraging case.

A special election is scheduled for September 10 in North Carolina’s 3rd Congressional District to replace former incumbent Walter Jones, the long-serving Republican who died earlier this year. The district is solidly Republican. Jones earned twice as many votes as his Democratic challenger in nearly every election since he first took office in 1995.

But the district is interesting for another reason, one that every Republican strategist in America should study. It is one of 47 congressional districts in the United States where, in the 2018 midterm elections, a majority of nonwhite voters were projected to vote Republican.

The following map, prepared by elections analyst Geoffrey Skelly at FiveThirtyEight, shows the congressional districts (red) where, if no one but nonwhite people voted, Republican candidates would still be likely to win.

It’s hard to overstate the significance of these 47 congressional districts. They belie the smug certainty on the part of Democratic politicians and strategists across the United States who equate the demographic transformation of America with an inevitable and unbreakable Democratic majority.

Take mass nonwhite immigration, higher birth rates for nonwhites, mix in identity politics and leftist, race-centric indoctrination against “white privilege,” and voila, America becomes a one-party state.

Or does it?

Interesting proposition for sure. I can neither agree nor disagree, honestly; Steyn’s old “demography is destiny” line is aimed more specifically at the disastrous mass influx of unassimilable Muslims into a Western culture they despise anyway, as is his related truism that “the future belongs to those who show up for it.”

But might it be possible, at least, that the Democrat-Socialist hail-Mary campaign to replace the American electorate with Mexican and Central American illegals might turn out to be futile? Has Trump shifted all the normal paradigms so significantly that this hoary old assumption, like so many others, also no longer holds?

Share

Senator Tom Cotton wins the Innarnets!

Economic power as weapon.

There’s a troubling trend among giant corporations using this wealth and power to force liberal dogma on an unwilling people. As liberal activists have lost control of the judiciary, they’ve turned to a different hub of power to impose their views on the rest of the country. This time it’s private power, located in a few mega-cities on the coasts.

And that’s not an exaggeration. The overwhelming majority of companies that lashed out against the pro-life movement in that New York Times ad are headquartered on the coasts, hoping to rule the rest of us like colonies in the hinterlands. More than three-quarters are headquartered in New York or California alone. More than a dozen are foreign companies. Yet those same companies presume to tell all of America what we should think.

And for some reason, this outrage only seems to go in one direction. As states like Arkansas have passed pro-life laws, other states have sadly gone down a different path, stripping unborn children of recognition and protection under the law. States like New York, Illinois, and Vermont recently passed laws declaring abortion a “fundamental right,” accessible until moments before birth for practically any reason as long as you have a doctor’s note.
We’ve already begun to see the consequences of these laws, which strain so mightily to defy and deny the humanity of the unborn. In New York City, prosecutors recently dropped a charge of abortion against a man who brutally stabbed to death his girlfriend and her unborn child. They dropped that charge because the pro-abortion law that had just passed the legislature in Albany removed all criminal penalties for killing an unborn child. According to the laws of New York State, that woman’s child never existed.

Pro-abortion laws passed in New York, Illinois, Vermont, and elsewhere truly deserve the label “radical.” So why isn’t the national media covering these radical laws with the intensity they’ve reserved for states like Georgia? Where are the indignant CEOs who profess to care so much for their female employees? Nowhere to be found, because their outrage is very selective. They don’t speak for the majority of Americans, much less for women. Instead, they’re actively trying to force a pro-abortion agenda on an unwilling public.

These companies want to wield a veto power over the democratic debate and decisions of Arkansans and citizens across our country. They want to force the latest social fashions of the coasts on small towns they would never visit in a million years. They want us to betray our deeply held beliefs about life and death, in favor of a specious account of “equality.” If there’s one thing the New York Times ad got right, it’s that “the future of equality hangs in the balance” when it comes to abortion. But their idea of equality doesn’t include everyone: it omits and degrades unborn babies as expendable, lesser than, even “bad for business.” That’s a strange kind of equality, if you ask me.

Nailed it, clean and tight. Humble thanks to Ace for so generously providing that transcription for us, bless his coal-black heart. His own remarks, wherein he moots the idea of shareholder lawsuits against the CEOs of these WOKE! corporations, are as always worth a look:

Now, most such suits are over stuff like corporate charity but those suits don’t work because of the very malleable concept of “goodwill.” If a corporation thinks that donating to Planned Parenthood buys it more goodwill, it’s within the corporate charter (as increasing goodwill is always or almost always permitted as a basic function of business).

HOWEVER, moves that alienate half the country, threaten states, BOYCOTT entire states, etc., do not increase goodwill. They decrease it.

Also, I’m 99% sure they don’t run polls about this stuff to determine if such a move would increase goodwill or not. I think I know that because I know a guy who does consulting and was asked about this sort of issue, asked by the CEO of a MAJOR, MAJOR corporation for advice (because he thought all the liberal marketing department people and mid-level managers were just telling them their Get Trump opinion, not necessarily reflective of popular opinion).

How major a corporation? Well, one of the blue chips.

Anyway, he started to do a study, and so began looking for previous studies on this sort of issue for a background and template for his own study.

His findings? THERE HAS NEVER BEEN AN ACTUAL STUDY OR POLL DONE ON A CORPORATE POLITICAL POSITIONING MOVE. N-E-V-E-R.

His was the first.

Corporations just make these decisions based on the personal political preferences of the officers and board, and their vague “feels.”

True enough, but my guess is even that ain’t the whole story. These corporations—many of them headquartered in urban liberal citadels like NYC—are not ony acting in accord with their executives’ personal political leanings, but are also responding to the loud, shrill demands of Proggie activists—who have more than adequately demonstrated their willingness to launch protests cum riots at the very doorstep of those corporate HQs, complete with threats, human chains blocking main entrances, plus the usual assorted piss-and-shit-flinging, sabotage, and senseless, random violence.

The Left has long been the squeaky wheel, and the squeaky wheel gets the grease. And when that greasing is in harmony with corporate leadership’s own political preferences anyway—and when they also know that conservatives/Normals/whatever are unlikely in the extreme to make things as uncomfortable for them as they already know the Left will—well, just what would be the downside for the CEOs here?

It always boils down to the same old thing in the end, doesn’t it? The comfortably-numb Right, accustomed through long habit of passively accepting defeat after defeat, must find a way to rile itself up enough to start directly confronting the Left—ALL of the Left, from individual political-street-theater performers right up to corporate malefactors who must be forced to make a choice as to whether their business is, y’know, the business they’re in, or politics. Until that happens, the Right must resign itself to being antagonized, harrassed, attacked, and ignored.

Share

Gotta love it

I especially like the subhed here: “Barr’s bloodhounds are sniffing up Langley’s skirts.” His lips. God’s ears.

Last Wednesday the intelligence community launched its first attack on Attorney General William Barr’s investigation into its illegal acts and abuses of power during the 2016 election. In a New York Times article entitled “Justice Department Seeks to Question CIA in its Own Russia Investigation,” the IC makes clear its fear of the results of Barr’s investigation of their spy operation on candidate Trump in 2016 that continued through his early presidency.

John Durham, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut, is running the investigation under Barr’s direction. From the Times report, we can easily deduce the fact that those who ran the spy op — including CIA Director Gina Haspel — are running scared from the Durham investigation.

The reason the CIA’s “analytical work” is being subjected to a federal prosecutor’s scrutiny is that there is a lot of evidence of criminal conduct by the CIA and FBI. That’s one of the fundamental differences between the Barr/Durham investigation and the Mueller investigation into the imaginary conspiracy between candidate Trump and his campaign and the Russians.

Mueller & Co. had no evidence that a crime had been committed before their investigation began. (Or after, for that matter.) The Mueller investigation was, as I’ve noted elsewhere, consistent with the method used by Stalin’s secret police chief Lavrenti Beria: show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.

In the Barr/Durham investigation, it’s pretty damned clear that in their abuse of power under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act the FBI, and possibly the CIA, made false statements to the FISA court, under oath, to justify surveillance warrants on Carter Page and others. Those false statements — sworn affidavits in support of the FISA warrants — are, at least, violations of 18 U.S. Code Section 1001 which bars such false statements. Those are real crimes, not imaginary ones. Whatever other crimes are discovered while investigating them will come out as well.

Yet another one you folks are going to want to savor every last word of.

Share

How you steal an election get a civil war

It didn’t need to be true. It just needed to work.

After the initial results of the election in November surprised the Clinton campaign, the Russia collusion hoax became the means by which Democrats would attempt to nullify votes by flipping the Electoral College electors. The effort climaxed in the days between December 9 and December 17, 2016. America came within a hair’s breadth of the 2016 presidential election being overturned through a collaboration of the Clinton campaign, the media, and like-minded public officials.

The CIA made the first move. On December 9, the CIA leaked an accusation that Russia “interfered in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency.” On December 12, 2016, just one week before the electors were to cast the final votes for president, a group of mostly Clinton-supporting electors sent a letter in which they demanded a “briefing” from the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. The letter appears to have been informed by the notorious Steele dossier commissioned by the Clinton campaign and other partisan misinformation. The letter cited an account of Roger Stone’s communication with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange (which was false) and asserted that Stone knew about the hacked emails before they were released (which was also false).

The letter also cited unspecified contact between unspecified Trump aides and those associated with the alleged Russian election interference. This likely is a reference to the Steele allegation that Cohen traveled to Prague to pay-off Russian hackers (which was also false). Or it may have been a reference to the Steele dossier’s claim that former campaign manager Paul Manafort coordinated communication between the Russian government and the Trump campaign (also false). The letter further claimed that Carter Page met with the Putin aide in charge of the Russian intelligence on the U.S. election. That appears to refer to a meeting between Carter Page and Igor Divyekin (which didn’t happen).

Clearly somebody dripped Steele’s poison into the ears of compliant electors to build peer pressure against the Trump electors.

But somebody blinked. On December 16, 2016, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a press release acknowledging the request to brief the electors but declining the invitation to conduct it. The communique made an oblique reference to the classified nature of the underlying information. But this classification could have been lifted by presidential decree in a matter of minutes.

The real reason the electors were not so briefed might have been that insiders had already spotted critical flaws in Steele’s allegations. For example, an astute State Department official, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec, tipped-off the FBI that Steele incorrectly claimed the payments for the Russian interference were made through the Russian Consulate in Miami (a consulate that does not exist). Also, the FBI travelled to Prague in October of 2016 to run-down a promising arrest of a Russian hacker. It’s likely that they also used the trip to look into reports by Steele that Michael Cohen traveled to Prague months earlier to pay Russian hackers.

We now know that the Prague hacker had nothing to do with the 2016 election and that Cohen did not travel to Prague in 2016. Both Kavalec and senior Justice Department attorney Bruce Ohrwarned the FBI that Steele had transparently political motives. Ohr also knew from his own Russian source that the claim that Manafort coordinated with the Russians was “preposterous.” The briefing the electors would have received was just a regurgitation of the lies commissioned by the Clinton campaign.

Viewed in the context of the 2016 election, the present-day effort to end the Electoral College is not about amending the Constitution but about softening-up the playing field for the next post-election campaign to flip electors. By running up vote totals in states like California, Democrats can claim a moral victory in the popular vote to justify an attack on the Electoral College’s constitutional result. In this way, padded vote totals in blue states can be combined with “troubling intelligence” reports by insiders in the deep state to make the next play to overturn an “unacceptable” election result.

They came one hell of a lot closer to pulling it off than most people realize. Don’t you think for one second that their failure this time around means these slimewads won’t dare to try again, either. The only real hope of preventing the next attempt—and the next, and the next, and the next—is to see to it that the perps go to prison and don’t come out any way other than feet-first, recumbent, and at room-temperature.

Share

Needles: pegged

Say it like you mean it, baby.

Last week, Charlottesville, Virginia Mayor Nikuyah Walker proposed ending recognition of Thomas Jefferson’s birthday as an official city holiday. Instead, she wants the city to celebrate the emancipation of local slaves a month earlier, as “Liberation and Freedom Day.” The proposal will be brought before the city council at either its June 17 or July 1 meeting, reports The Daily Progress, a local newspaper.

Charlottesville is the home to the University of Virginia, one of the United States’s premiere research and educational institutions, which Jefferson personally designed, founded, and led after serving as the U.S. president. It is Jefferson who wrote the words that became a promissory note of freedom for all people and that this nation cashed in its own blood. It is he who helped design a nation that has secured the most freedom for the most people in all of human history. All this means nothing, say today’s rageaholic iconoclasts, because he held slaves.

Followed to its logical conclusions, this line of thinking bans the idea of greatness itself. It subsumes all good actions to any possibly connected evil actions. It insists that the most defining feature of any person is his sins. And it pretends that simply by virtue of understanding that slavery is wrong, we who live today in the West are perfectly holy, and may freely and smugly condemn every single person who has ever gone before us, and brush away every insight and achievement of human history.

Not one of these overindoctrinated underachievers who want to rid our society of all heroes is fit to shine Thomas Jefferson’s boots. They couldn’t create a nation out of scratch if they tried. They couldn’t in a million years dedicate their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to establishing a country that would be among the first in world history end slavery through a near-suicidal deluge of its own blood, in a dedication to the words and the institutions Jefferson helped create: dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, and seeing that their government treats them so, at the cost of a higher percentage of deaths than it cost this nation to liberate the entire globe from Adolf Hitler.

So, while Jefferson is too dead to defend himself and the benefactors of his great ingenuities too maleducated by the government of his co-creation to give him the respect he deserves, these envious, cowardly, accomplish-nothings spit on his legacy. The very freedom these people use to dig up and roast his dead corpse they would not have without him. They use the priceless treasure he bought with his life for them like a piece of toilet paper on which to wipe their fetid excrescence.

Seconded, by every last cell in my body. With this boiling-hot screed, Joy Pullman has surely penned one for the ages. Sing it with me one mo’ time ag’in:

Share

“Why Are the Western Middle Classes So Angry?”

Because reasons.

What is going on with the unending Brexit drama, the aftershocks of Donald Trump’s election and the “yellow vests” protests in France? What drives the growing estrangement of southern and eastern Europe from the European Union establishment? What fuels the anti-EU themes of recent European elections and the stunning recent Australian re-election of conservatives?

Put simply, the middle classes are revolting against Western managerial elites. The latter group includes professional politicians, entrenched bureaucrats, condescending academics, corporate phonies and propagandistic journalists.

Elites masked their hypocrisy by virtue-signaling their disdain for the supposedly xenophobic, racist or nativist middle classes. Yet the non-elite have experienced firsthand the impact on social programs, schools and safety from sudden, massive and often illegal immigration from Latin America, the Middle East, Africa and Asia into their communities.

As for trade, few still believe in “free” trade when it remains so unfair. Why didn’t elites extend to China their same tough-love lectures about global warming, or about breaking the rules of trade, copyrights and patents?

The middle classes became nauseated by the constant elite trashing of their culture, history and traditions, including the tearing down of statues, the Trotskyizing of past heroes, the renaming of public buildings and streets, and, for some, the tired and empty whining about “white privilege.”

If Western nations were really so bad, and so flawed at their founding, why were millions of non-Westerners risking their lives to reach Western soil?

How was it that elites themselves had made so much money, had gained so much influence, and had enjoyed such material bounty and leisure from such a supposedly toxic system—benefits that they were unwilling to give up despite their tired moralizing about selfishness and privilege?

It’s long past time for folks to realize that it’s better to be pissed off than pissed on. And with the advent of Trump the Disrupter and his peeling back the lid on the can of greasy grubworms that have misruled us for lo, these many years, it’s finally beginning to happen. But if one wants to seriously delve into the reasons why anger has boosted Real Americans into apoplectic orbit, look no further than the outrageous hypocrisy of double-dealing blowflies like Adam Schitt.

Democratic California Rep. Adam Schiff appears to have reversed his position on the ethics of using “stolen” information against political foes.

“It’s not OK to use materials they stole from your opponent, or to make it part of your campaign strategy,” Schiff tweeted on Sunday.

Schiff was responding to a Sunday morning interview during which Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani argued that, while he would have advised against it, “There’s nothing wrong with taking information from Russians.”

But when “the Russians” contacted Schiff in 2017, offering him information that they promised would prove compromising to President Donald Trump, he had a very different reaction.

Two Russian comedians, known as Vocan and Lexus, placed a prank call to Schiff pretending to be Andriy Parubiy, the chairman of the Ukrainian Parliament. They claimed to have recordings proving that Russian President Vladimir Putin, in an effort to force Trump to relax sanctions, was blackmailing the president with photographs of him and a model named Olga Buzova.

Schiff responded by asking, “What’s the nature of the kompromat?”

After being told that there were naked photos of Trump and the Russian model, Schiff instructed members of his staff to follow up — which they did, attempting to set up a meeting with Parubiy in order to move forward.

Because of course they did. After all, it’s diff’runt when Democrat-Socialists do it. Right, Schiff-for-brains?

Vocan and Lexus provided a copy of that email to The Daily Mail, at which point Schiff and his staffers claimed that they had known it was a hoax all along.

Uh huh. SURE you did, you suppurating pustule.

Y’know, I fret now and then over the horror that Civil War v2.0 will indubitably bring down on us. Then I read about some outlandish shit like the above, and suddenly a small, dark part of me just can’t wait for the ball to drop—when it will become open season, no bag limit on oxygen thieves like Schitt and his loathsome ilk.

New category, in honor of Schitt and pals: Kill ’em all, let God sort ’em out.

Share

School daze

A forgotten past will bury the ignorant.

Many of us do not know that senators were originally chosen by the state legislatures—and this change was made not that long ago. In 1913, around the beginning of the Progressive Era, the 17th Amendment to the Constitution tossed aside this critical feature of the Framers’ design, replacing it with the direct election of senators we have today.

The Founders would certainly have opposed the 17th Amendment because they would have understood that it would throw the system they gave us completely out of balance, as it, in fact, has done. It was perhaps the single change that would do the most to undo what the Founders had accomplished by means of the Constitution.

Hrrmmm; “…around the beginning of the Progressive Era,” you say? Must be a coincidence.

The Senate was once a barrier to the passage of federal laws infringing on the powers reserved to state governments, but the Senate has abandoned that responsibility under the incentives of the new system of election. Because the state governments no longer have a powerful standing body representing their interests within the federal government, the power of the federal government has rapidly grown at the expense of the states. State governments increasingly are relegated to functioning as administrative units of today’s gargantuan central government.

The Founders would say we no longer have a federal system, that the 17th Amendment in effect overthrew the 10th Amendment. Here is the 10th: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The 10th has become a dead letter. Instead of retaining many of their powers and responsibilities as the Framers intended, the states are more and more entangled in administering federal programs and in carrying out federal mandates. These mandates are often not even funded by the federal government; the costs of unfunded mandates fall on the states.

The many new departments of the federal government that have accumulated in Washington, D.C. during the Progressive Era in which you and I now live, such as Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, and the Department of Education, involve themselves in, and even direct, functions the Framers left to the states.

Direct election of U.S. senators undermined this critically important protection of liberty. The erosion of Americans’ individual liberty that has resulted is no doubt the most important consequence of the change. Many of our troubles today are self-inflicted, the result of us forgetting how the Founders’ system was designed to work and the unwise changes we have made because of our forgetting.

This ignorance is no more coincidental than the insidious 17th; it was painstakingly wrought according to a plan spelled out by a whole Progressivist pantheon of treacherous villains like Alinsky, Gramsci, and Marcuse, among many others. The doom it foreshadows is a feature, not a bug. And don’t think for a minute they’re done yet, either.

Tragically, because of our forgetting, we may be on the verge of making another mistake like the one Americans made in 1913. There is a powerful movement afoot to get rid of the Electoral College, an essential constitutional safeguard of American liberty.

As you know, each state is allotted as many electoral votes as it has senators and members of the House of Representatives. To become president of the United States, one must win election state by state. Eliminating the Electoral College and electing the president by direct vote, as the progressives are determined to do, would transform the office. Its occupant would in effect become the president of the Big Cities of America, and the last vestiges of autonomy guaranteed to the individual states by the Constitution’s electoral system would be swept away.

One more time: NOT by accident, NOT coincidence. Doubt that? Don’t.

The near sole purpose of present-day academia is indoctrination. This is a fairly bold thesis, but the evidence is in its favor.

A “bold thesis”? Really? It’s nothing more nor less than established, incontrovertible fact, seems to me, but YMMV. Onwards.

The increasingly progressive leftist agenda is sweeping through academia and conservatives are passively watching it happen.

The main indoctrination stories you hear are those of radical professors on college campuses, outlandish majors created to forward social justice movements, and, on occasion, a political outburst by a high school teacher.

Although these issues need addressing, by far the biggest – and the one that should scare everyone the most – is the silent indoctrination.

Indoctrination is no longer dependent upon the political beliefs of teachers. We are now past that. Course material is blatant political propaganda. Not just the course material for gender studies and similar. The core curricula of grade school through college.

I completed my first two years of high school at Oxbridge Academy, a private school in south Florida. My last two years at were at Laurel Springs, an online private school. This gave me a whole new perspective on bias in academia.

Although I had teachers and access to tutors, I seldom interacted with either. I thought removing interaction with an individual would reduce if not eradicate bias.

I was very, very wrong.

The removal of an instructor allowed me to see just how biased course materials are. And the discussion boards with fellow students showed me just how unaware of this others were. Unless you are involved with politics to a degree, it can be easy to miss politically motivated material.

The lack of political education in combination with the demand that students trust their textbooks as reliable sources allows the left to silently indoctrinate students.

She includes some truly appalling examples from actual textbooks that ought to be deeply shocking—but aren’t. Not anymore. Which is in itself a big problem. Bottom line:

Conservatives once laughed at radical campus politics, imagining that upon impact with the “real world,” blue-haired social justice warrior activists would have to grow up and confront the hard realities of the capitalist marketplace. Instead, what’s becoming increasingly clear is that academic leftism is metastasizing off-campus, spreading into some of the world’s largest corporations as well as institutions of culture, with graduated millennial employees as its carriers.

While the right wrestles with how to deal with big technology companies’ hostility to conservative voices on their platforms, the source of that enmity goes mostly unremarked upon: Google’s highly credentialed workforce has roughly the personal politics of a faculty lounge. Regrettably, universities don’t live up to the Las Vegas adage–what begins on campus definitely does not stay there. It spills over into every aspect of our broader culture, from complaints about actors not precisely matching the intersectionality profile of the characters they portray, to the leftward tilt of America’s corporations.

Say it with me: NOT coincidence. NOT by accident. They’re working a plan…and the plan is working.

Share

Shut ’em up, shut ’em down

ALL the way down.

The jury just rendered its verdict on punitive damages in the Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin College case.

Daniel McGraw, our reporter in the courtroom, reports that in addition to the $11.2 million compensatory damages awarded last Friday, the jury awarded a total of $33 million in punitive damages, which will probably be reduced by the court to $22 million because of the state law cap at twice compensatory (it’s not an absolute cap, but probably will apply here). That brings the total damages to $33 million. We will have the breakdown soon. The jury also awarded attorney’s fees, to be determined by the judge.

The Gibsons suffered a typical SJW Alpha-strike assault for “racism” after nabbing a couple of scumbag black Oberling students for shoplifting. The persecution campaign, intended from the start to destroy a family-owned bakery in business since 1885, was spearheaded by Oberlin College and its head, an odious, frumpy, disheveled bag of lard yclept Meredith Raimondo. After losing the case, Oberlin immediately began whining that awarding proper damages to the victims of their vicious, relentless persecution would put the school out of business for good, and I hope to God it does just that. It’s like this:

Some of the defenders of Oberlin College have claimed that the Gibsons’ were just in it for punishment on this case, and never tried to settle. That could not be further from the truth. According to Lee Plakas, lead attorney for the Gibsons’, a letter was sent before the case was filed in Nov. of 2017 asking for at least some talks on settlement and no answer was sent back (this reporter has seen it).

In early 2018, according to Plakas, two days of talks with a mediator were done, but nothing close to a settlement was achieved. In fact, the talks were initiated by the Gibson’s and “We were ready, willing and able to not have this case go to trial, but Oberlin College and their insurance company seemed to have no interest in settling this case,” Plakas said.

“As they have done throughout this case, they thought that they were above everyone else, and that the rules and working to settle such an egregious case of defaming a good family like the Gibsons’ was beneath them,” he added.

In his closer, Plakas added another stiff shot of 100-proof truth.

Why is the country watching you. Because the country agrees that what happened to the Gibsons should not happen to anyone, but could happen to everyone.

Could…and has, to far too many of us. Letting Oberlin skate would have sent a strong, clear message; this verdict and award does too—the right one.

The above report comes to us from LI’s own William Jacobson, who has done yeoman’s work on this from the start and offered a pretty pungent statement himself:

Oberlin College tried to sacrifice a beloved 5th-generation bakery, its owners, and its employees, at the altar of political correctness in order to appease the campus ‘social justice warfare’ mob. The jury sent a clear message that the truth matters, and so do the reputations and lives of people targeted by false accusations, particularly when those false accusations are spread by powerful institutions. Throughout the trial the Oberlin College defense was tone-deaf and demeaning towards the bakery and its owners, calling the bakery nearly worthless. The jury sent a message that all lives matter, including the lives of ordinary working people who did nothing wrong other than stop people from stealing.

Can’t win a war without fighting back; thankfully the Gibsons, finding themselves forced into a war they never asked for, didn’t want, and in no way deserved, fought back hard. They gave all of us a big win by doing so. As I always say: when liberal tears are flowing, it’s great news for America. Hearty congrats to the good guys, all of ’em. And to the losers: Learn to code, bitches.

Share

Dead cities

Kiled by the Wrecker Left.

For one thing, so much of the president’s admittedly rough-hewn language has been purposely distorted and taken out of context by a news media desperate to prove every Republican racist. It’s an open question, therefore, whether it’s Trump or CNN who is at fault for the bad ambience around here.

No it isn’t. It’s Klavan still bitterly clinging to his fading NeverTrumpism, so I’ll let him slide this time. Nonetheless, CNN is lying, so the fault is entirely theirs. “Rough-hewn language” and flat-out, purposeful dishonesty are quite different things, neither congruent nor comparable. One is impolite, the other is…well, lying.

But laying that aside, West is essentially saying that Trump’s indifference to left-wing academic standards of racial sensitivity is more important than what he has actually accomplished for actual human beings.

Typical Leftard: his interest isn’t in accomplishing a damned thing for actual human beings; his interest is in controlling them.

Congressman Al Green of Texas says the same: “The president can be impeached for his racism and his bigotry.”

No, he can’t, neither of those things being either a high crime or misdemeanor, you muttonhead.

“Unfortunately, however, he is a beneficial bigot. Meaning he benefits a good many people and I, unfortunately, have to tell you I’m so saddened when I see people who have built their reputations fighting bigotry allowing this to persist to the extent that it has.”

Reminder regarding the boldfaced passage: The Democrat-Socialists are opposed to this. Which is way more “saddening” than whatever this backasswards doofus is wetting his panties over.

Run that around in your aching head a moment. The president is a “beneficial bigot” because his policies help “a good many people.” Is that the same as his being a not-bigot who simply doesn’t kowtow to the politically correct speech codes the left has imposed on us to keep us from criticizing their awful policies?

Because if you want to get a load of some non-beneficial non-bigotry all you have to do is visit one of America’s left-wing cities. “Rats at the police station, filth on L.A. streets — scenes from the collapse of a city that’s lost control,” reads a headline in the Los Angeles Times. The filth has gotten so bad in my town, officials are worried about the spread of flea-borne typhus and rodent-carried bubonic plague — that’s the Black Death that once wiped out a third of Europe, just so you know.

The local news station in Seattle — where left-wing governance has brought about the same sorry Angelino state of affairs — is running an hour-long documentary called “Is Seattle Dying?” and yes, it is. Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco likewise. And in Chicago, after a single weekend in which over 50 people were shot, Jussie Smollett is now the only person in the city who hasn’t been attacked.

Heh. See, that last line is why I’m willing to cut Klavan some slack now and then.

The left spends an awful lot of energy trying to get conservatives to shut up. Political correctness, deplatforming, demonetizing, blacklisting, outrage mobs, boycotts — all dedicated to making sure that they alone get to do the talking.

But you know what? The right doesn’t even need words to make the point anymore. Just go to the Democrat-governed cities. Look out the window. Walk the streets.

Everything the left talks about is meaningless. Everything they touch turns to crap.

Sure enough. All the more reason, then, to make damned sure they ain’t allowed to touch anything important, valuable, or breakable. Schlichter gets down to the case in California:

California has morphed from paradise into a garbage state run by garbage people for their own garbage benefit and amusement. The “garbage” part is literal – once the Sierra Nevada mountains symbolized the state; now, towering heaps of trash and human waste do. Welcome to what the Democrats want for all of America. Just watch your step. Literally.

If it were not for the climate, something the liberals in charge of my state have nothing to do with as much as they think they do, it would likely be a nearly empty desert once again. But the sun shines, the beach beckons and the palm trees sway over a population of morons who keep electing proggy fascists to run the place. Which they are doing, right into the ground.

Where once people flocked to make their dreams come true, you now pay multiples more for a U-Haul heading out than heading in. The great California middle class, made up of the Normal people whose hard work and ingenuity made it the Golden State (even though Hollywood types got the publicity), is fleeing to places where they can afford to live, and where the government doesn’t hate them. 

LA, SF, Detroit, NYC, Chicago: what the Democrat-Socialists have done for those nightmare urban blightscapes, they can do for your town too—and unless you stop them, they most certainly will. As Kurt says:

California will continue to circle the drain, and barring revolution – a real one, with all the attendant bad stuff for the ruling class – there’s no coming out of it. They’re dining on zebras in the Caracas zoo and yet the socialist revolution marches on. California is no different; it’s just a decade behind the Venezuelan vanguard.

It’s doomed. And what’s important to understand is that the liberal elite wants the same thing for the rest of America. To our ruling class, California is not a cautionary example. It’s the goal for our whole country.

Are you going to let that happen? 

A better way of putting it might be: how far are you willing to go to stop them?

Share

CF Comments Policy Statement

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit. Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't.

Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

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

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

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

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

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

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



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