Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Fighting words…

…or empty threats? First, the backstory:

The journalists at CBS This Morning on Tuesday laughed at a new trend by militant leftists: Dumping milkshakes on politicians they don’t like. Co-host Tony Dokoupil began with a whimsical recounting: “In the latest of a series of attacks on right-wing politicians, Brexit Party Leader Nigel Farage was doused with a milkshake yesterday. That was actually salted caramel if anyone is wondering.”

This prompted laughter from Dokoupil’s co-hosts. Continuing the jovial discussion of political violence, he added, “I’m sure it feels great. I’m sure people love the feeling. Pictures fly around the world.”

Ace responds:

You know what else might feel great?
Throwing milkshakes at CBS personnel, both when they’re doing live-shots and when they’re just walking down the street on their own private time.

The rules you make for me, you also make for yourself.

For people who bitch and complain when they’re jeered at the opposite political party’s campaign rallies, they sure take a more blithe attitude about conservatives being physically assaulted.

Well, like I said: We’ll see how great it feels when the media starts getting pelted with some harmless, fun, happytime street justice.

The sentiment expressed is perfectly true, I have no quarrel with it. Problem is that, as with the Ogabe-era blogosphere bluster about how the Democrat-Socialists were surely going to regret it when their own tactics were thrown back at them by newly-empowered Righties, it never, ever comes to pass.

Sadly enough, the only person even making an attempt at forcing the Left’s New Rules down their throats has been one Donald J Trump, President of the United States of America. And when he does, or even talks about doing it, the weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth each time from the fraudmeisters of Conservative Inc over the horror of it all is truly dismal to witness. My God, the pathetic feebs even get their panties in a bunch when he so much as hurls a few insults at them on Twitter. And THESE are the ones we think are going to finally draw a line, say enough already, and finally start dealing out some quid pro quo most righteous in return?

Note ye well, all this is a problem for more reasons than just the obvious one: that the effective suppression of all dissent is simply unacceptable. For one, the too-reliable Righty all-talk-no-action response to continually escalating violence has clearly emboldened and encouraged the Leftist enemy, rather than instilling a healthy sense of trepidation and caution in them. This accomplishes absolutely nothing beyond guaranteeing that the assaults will continue, and worsen. For another, it amounts to abdicating the field of battle and tacitly yielding to the Left’s encroachment on our liberty and our rights, granting them victories they don’t deserve and accepting self-inflicted losses we can’t afford.

Not to jump on Ace too hard for this, mind. Vengeance fantasies and daydreams about seeing justice visited upon our enemies at last are very satisfying things to ponder now and then, a harmless enough way to pass the occasional idle moment—actually, a reasonable, completely human response to intolerable provocation. But if we really want this crap to cease, the sorry truth remains: They will not stop. They will have to BE stopped. Sorry, but I’m afraid we all need to face up to the fact that it’s going to take a bit more than just talking amongst ourselves to do it.

Share

Wrong righted redux

Been waiting to see what Steyn would have to say about Trump’s pardon Mark’s friend and former employer Conrad Black.

You have the “right to a fair trial,” but U.S. prosecutors win 99 per cent of the cases that go to court — a success rate that would embarrass Kim Jong Un and Saddam Hussein. Indeed, the feds win 97 per cent without ever going near court. In 2007, on the first day of Conrad Black’s trial on the 12th floor of the Mies van der Rohe skyscraper that houses Chicago’s dozens of federal courtrooms, I went looking for somewhere to make a discreet call on my cellphone. There were people everywhere — reporters, lawyers, spouses, curious deputy attorneys dropping in from neighbouring offices, a fan of mine wanting me to autograph my Broadway book to his pal John Mahoney from “Frasier”… Eventually, I pushed open a door and found myself in an empty courtroom. So I phoned from there in complete privacy. When others attending the trial discovered the room, I went to the empty courtroom further down the corridor. And, when in turn that grew popular as a handsomely paneled telephone booth, I went to the empty courtroom upstairs, or downstairs.

So many courtrooms, and no trials. Because, when the odds of not losing are one in 100, who goes to court?

Americans who know anything about the country’s evil and depraved “justice” system grasp that central fact. It’s only rubes who say “let the process play out” or “if you haven’t done anything wrong, you’ve got nothing to fear.” For a start, by the time the process “plays out,” you’ll be broke and scavenging from dumpsters (as Trump’s fallen National Security honcho Michael Flynn learned, shortly before copping a plea). Second, from a prosecutorial point of view, “if you haven’t done anything wrong” they can still get you on misremembering to the FBI in a matter for which there’s no underlying crime (as Martha Stewart discovered), or, alternatively, on Robert Mueller’s second-favourite process crime of hanging out with too many foreigners in alleged breach of the “Foreign Agents Registration Act,” which Trump aide George Papadopoulos told me recently Mueller had threatened him with. (I met most Aussie cabinet ministers of the John Howard years, so I’m undoubtedly guilty on that front, even before you factor in dinner with Jason Kenney and a bit of chit-chat with Maxime Bernier).

It’s a corrupt system heavily reliant on blackmail. But its crude thuggish simplicity concentrates the mind, and thus everyone gets it. Which is why, when the dismantling of Conrad Black’s business empire began 16 years ago, the rich and powerful were the first to abandon him: whatever will be will be, but one thing’s for certain — Conrad’s screwed, he’s over, cut him loose now. 

This is a well-deserved crisping of America’s dysfunctional, disgraceful, warped “justice” system—as Steyn rightly says, a system evil, depraved, and corrupt to its core. Our Founding ideal of a speedy trial before an impartial jury of one’s peers has been reduced to no more than the punchline to a wholly unfunny joke; the endless prosecutorial manipulation and dirty-deal-making that has brought us to our sorry “the process is the punishment” state of affairs is but one of the factors guaranteeing that true justice will only rarely and accidentally be found within fifty miles of any courthouse in the land.

I’ve been telling both family and friends for years that our abominable system is set up so that, once they find themselves caught up in its crushing gears, it will be damned near impossible to get themselves out. Sadly, it has proved to be entirely true for more than just one of ’em. Alas, this is yet another of those issues for which I have no solution to offer—for which there may not even be a workable one at all, in fact. But one way or another, the system WILL change. It must.

Share

I have a plan…

A sudden flood of developments in the unraveling of the “Russia Collusion” diversionary hoax and Barr’s counter-investigation, of which I’m going to restrict myself to this one:

Washington attorney Joe diGenova claimed in an interview last night that the Department of Justice inspector general has determined that “the final three FISA extensions were illegally obtained,” and the first one is still being investigated.

For the past year, DOJ IG Michael Horowitz has been investigating the FBI’s 2016 surveillance activities and his report is expected later this month or in early June.

Washington power couple Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing appeared on Lou Dobbs’ Fox Business Network show Thursday night to talk about the latest turns in the “SpyGate” saga.

“The only question now is whether or not the first FISA was illegally obtained,” diGenova said.

He told Dobbs that the latest revelations in investigative reporter John Solomon’s piece at The Hill, have prompted further investigation from Horowitz’s team.

Delusional Democrat-Socialists in Congress, still trying to win the 2016 election by any possible means since they failed to via the legitimate one, are now grudgingly moving on to their next wildly desperate gambits. They’re now yammering on about Deutschebank, Trump’s tax returns, bankruptcies, and other financial minutiae. None of that ought to come as a surprise; their mad thirst for power is unslakable, and the failure to remove Trump has maddened them further still.

Glossing over all that for the nonce, though, there’s another point I want to make here. To wit: sooner or later, nauseating as it is to contemplate, Americans will elect another Democrat-Socialist as president. Kinda hard for some of to see, especially afte the Mueller implosion, but there are still plenty of us stupid enough to see it done. When they do, the Republics should—dammit, MUST—see to it that that individual endures THE EXACT SAME treatment as Trump has.

I absolutely, positively mean it: the next Democrat-Socialist president should be harrassed, investigated, accused, and pursued with precisely the same insane vigor as Trump has been. If the GOP retains control of the House at the time, the impeachment-proceeding paperwork should issue from the Juidiciary Committee no later than ten minutes after the inauguration. In any event, rhetoric threats and speculation about impeachment should be unceasing.

The election itself should be assumed to have been fraudulent, its results regarded as tainted. As it happens, Republicans should be doing this anyway, since—given the Democrat-Socialists’ established historical penchant for vote fraud and election-rigging—it’s by no means an unreasonable accusation. But even if whatever corrupt pit-viper the Democrat-Socialists nominate wins all fifty states, the Repukes ought to go ahead and make the accusation anyway…and back it up with some sort of Mueller-type panel to investigate, no matter how long that might take or how badly it might impair President Commiecrat in the performance of his sworn duties.

Conspiracy-theorizing over possible “collusion” with foreign adversaries should begin on inauguration day also, with every last little “suspicious” thread fully unraveled. The president him/her/zhe/zhim/itself should never enjoy a single peaceful hour free of allegation, innuendo, and calumny, however spurious or self-evidently absurd. He should be forced to endure examination so microscopic and minute it would make a veteran proctologist recoil in sheer horror. No stone should be left unturned. After what they’ve done not only to Trump but to his supporters—who, as we well know, are the real targets here—Republicans should damned well see to it that the last American president ever to be allowed to serve a full term reasonably unmolested left office a long, long time ago.

It won’t happen, of course. Even if the handful of Trumpublicans in government were willing to undertake the project, and I ain’t saying they are, the Vichy GOPe would make the welkin ring with their “we’re better than this,” “this is not who we are!” horsepucky, thereby short-circuiting the whole effort. But if we want obnoxious, beyond-the-pale garbage of the sort we’ve had to put up with the last two years to finally stop, giving our Democrat-Socialist enemies a hearty dose of their own medicine might well be the only way to do it. Short of stacking their stinking corpses like cordwood, that is.

Update! Levin puts a big bright line under it.

What ought to happen here is, there ought to be a grand jury impaneled. Comey should give testimony, Andrew McCabe should give testimony, James Baker should give testimony, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, the whole cabal, they all should be giving testimony. They should get a little bit of their own medicine.

We should have a criminal grand jury, and we should have either a Special Counsel or a United States Attorney take charge of this case and get to the bottom of it. Put these people under oath and let them get the Donald Trump treatment. We want all of their documents. No privileges, nothing. Drag them in and maybe drag their kids in too.

What we have here is an attack on the President and an attack on his family. Collusion, Special Counsel, contempt, obstruction, constitutional crisis – I just started writing them down, impeachment, tax returns, bank accounts, they want – they’ve already leaked some of his tax information. They accuse him of campaign violations. They accuse him being a racist and anti-Semite, mentally unfit for office.

Let me tell you what’s going on. This is a Democrat Party cabal, trying to reverse the 2016 election, trying to disenfranchise 63 million voters, mostly Republicans, independents and some Democrats, led by a Speaker of the House from San Francisco, a Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee from New York, the Chairman of the Oversight Committee from Baltimore.

And they maybe will have special counsels against them, because if they want to use Soviet tactics against Republicans, then the only way the Democrats know to stop is if Soviet tactics are used against them. That’s it.

From your lips to God’s ears, Mark. As Picard used to say: Make it so.

Share

The Tucker Revolution

Tuckernaught? Tuckpocalypse? Carlsnarok? Okay, okay, I’ll stop now.

Tucker Carlson’s cable-tv show begins identically each night. After the words “Good evening and welcome to Tucker Carlson Tonight”—always intoned and inflected exactly the same way—the host launches into an opening monologue on the news of the day, or what he thinks ought to be the news of the day.

On January 2, 2019, though, there was no news. So Carlson used the holiday lull to deliver a non-stop, 15-minute, 2,571-word evisceration of America’s ruling class—political, industrial, financial, intellectual, and cultural. Our rulers, he insisted, had failed at their ostensible tasks: to improve the health of the country and the lives of its citizens.

The show is usually leavened throughout with puckish humor. Not that night; Carlson was deadly serious. He laid at the feet of our ruling class a devastating litany of failure: the destruction of the family, skyrocketing out-of-wedlock births, the opioid crisis, rampant male unemployment, the sleazy effort to anesthetize the dispossessed with payday loans and pot, increasing financialization and techification of the economy and resultant wealth concentration, and foreign war without purpose, strategy, victory, or end.

But have our rulers really failed? Not if one understands, Carlson explained, that their real aim is to enrich themselves and maintain their power: “We are ruled by mercenaries who feel no long-term obligation to the people they rule.”

Within a day or two, the speech had gone viral. Friend and enemy alike referred to it simply as “Tucker’s Monologue.” Everyone knew instantly which was meant. To those sympathetic, here was a quasi-Trumpist rallying cry not merely for a new Right, but also for millions of apolitical Americans who feel—rightly—abandoned, even preyed upon, by the status quo. By contrast, those opposed sensed a clear danger: a message that—unlike the stale tenets of Republican-study-group, think-tank conservatism—might actually have a chance of inspiring and creating a new majority.

He’s certainly iconoclastic now. The ways in which he breaks—on his nightly show and in bestselling book, Ship of Fools—with the rightist iron triangle of Republican politicians, conservative donors, and the magazine-think tank industrial complex are legion.

Why is capital taxed at half the rate of labor, Carlson asks, and is manifestly unsatisfied by the conventional Right’s answer that “investment” is necessary for “growth and innovation.” What good are the latter, he further asks, if all their gains accrue to a narrowing upper slice while those taxed double for working (assuming they can find jobs) can’t afford to share in the supposed glories of late-stage capitalism?

Why are we still making trade deals, three decades (at least) into a manufacturing decline that has devastated entire American industries and hollowed out many of our communities, all the while enriching some of our most determined foes? Why do our politicians insist on getting us into wars we not only can’t win but for which they can’t even define victory?

Above all, why—at a population of 330 million and climbing, with as many as 22 million here illegally—do our elites refuse to do anything whatsoever to control our borders? Indeed, why do they thwart, at every turn, President Trump on this very issue and attack anyone who speaks up for any limit on immigration whatsoever?

What, specifically, changed the mind of the formerly bow-tied boy-Buckley (or as a friend put it to me, “typical conservative dorkwad”) and launched Carlson toward becoming the leading light of a new conservative movement?

That’s just the opening of a Michael Anton review and analysis which, while lengthy, is a rockin’ good read nonetheless. Part of what makes it so enjoyable is the unvarnished glee with which Anton recounts (and skewers) the Old Guard’s sniffy condescension towards Carlson:

Within a day of Tucker’s Monologue, the “Right” rallied—not of course to denounce the decidedly unconservative trends Carlson complained about, but to attack Carlson himself. “Anyone who thinks the health of a nation can be summed up in GDP is an idiot,” Carlson had said. Right on cue, as if to trumpet their idiocy, in rushed a platoon of policy wonks to defend the sanctity of markets and explain why creative destruction should and must apply every bit as much to people, families, and societies as it did to the buggy whip industry.

Bret Stephens devoted an entire column to riffing on a Monty Python movie, as if Carlson’s meaning were such a joke no serious refutation was warranted. (Then why devote an entire column to it?) It’s worth noting that the proffered catalogue of elite beneficence—“capital financing, deregulation, access to global markets, a stable and predictable regulatory and legal environment, IRAs and 401(k)s, talented immigrants, global cities, good food, universities that are the envy of the world, record-making growth and a world in which there’s almost no chance of my children being conscripted to fight a war”—while no doubt offered with utmost sincerely, reads like self-parody.

“The Right should reject Tucker Carlson’s victimhood populism” whinged David French, who, when not exploring a presidential campaign, never misses an opportunity to moralistically lambaste those to his right.

Later, Anton merrily deals out equally resounding slaps upside the empty heads of bewildered, hapless cucks Max Boot and Bill Kristol. Like I said, it’s a long piece, but stick with it to the end. It’s a sheer delight to read, brim-full of penetrating insight, clear-eyed analysis, and a bunch of good, toothsome lines to boot.

(Via Steyn)

Share

Running scared

Oh, it’s gonna be REALLY hard not to cut ‘n’ paste all of this little gem.

How ironic that Comey who used to lecture the nation on “obstruction” and the impropriety of Trump’s editorializing about the Mueller prosecutorial team, is now attacking—or perhaps “obstructing”—the Attorney General before he has even issued a single indictment.

Comey, remember, on more than 240 occasions reportedly claimed under oath he could not remember or did not know the answers to questions from Congressional inquirers. If a private citizen tried that with the IRS, he world likely face perjury charges.

Comey has never adequately explained his role in inserting FBI informants into a presidential campaign, and the degree to which his decision might have been taken in conjunction with other intelligence agencies or with the knowledge of the then-attorney general or President Obama. The New York Times of all publications is apparently investigating the use of FBI informants to sandbag the Trump campaign—during Comey’s directorship. To my knowledge, no previous FBI director—perhaps not even J. Edgar Hoover—had unilaterally placed FBI informants into a presidential campaign during the general election.

One way of looking at John Brennan’s and James Clapper’s nonstop cable news announcements of Trump’s “treason,” the Comey-McCabe whirlwind book tours and television confessionals, the Adam Schiff furrowed-brow predictions of huge bombshells soon to go off, and the general progressive media hysteria over the last two years or so is to appreciate a transparent effort at preemptive defense.

The only remaining mystery of this entire sordid mess is how the rotten onion will be peeled away. When indictments come down, will the likes of Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson or James Baker or Bruce and Nellie Ohr be leveraged to inform on the likes of the Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and McCabe high stratum—that in turn will provide clarity about still higher officials to learn what Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Loretta Lynch, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, and Sally Yates knew and when they knew it?

Heads must roll. Let the slimey, contemptible Comey’s be but the first of a long, long list. The miserable worms are scared all right, but all the wriggling and writhing isn’t getting them anywhere:

Somebody demonstrate to me the political wizardry involved here of still trying to win the 2016 election here in the spring of 2019. What is the objective? I mean, the only thing this party is known for right now is trying to get rid of Donald Trump. And I’m telling you, for every effort they make, they are undercut by the fact that the guy who was being depended on by all of them to get rid of Trump produced a report saying that what they all thought happened didn’t.

You know, I made the point yesterday — and I see now this point you’ll remember and it’s being repeated by a lot of people. There is an unredacted version of the Mueller report up on Capitol Hill. It’s in a room where members of Congress can go read it. They can’t take it out of there. But the attorney general has made it available.

And no Democrat has yet availed himself of the opportunity to go read it. Nadler hasn’t read it. Eric Swalwell hasn’t read it. Pelosi hasn’t walked in there and read it. Only two members of Congress have read the unredacted report, and they are both Republicans.

Well, what does that tell you? They’re saying that Barr is lying to the American people. Barr is covering up. Mueller found collusion, but Barr is lying about it. He’s recharacterizing, mischaracterizing Mueller’s report. Well, the report’s up there for anybody that wants to see it as a member of Congress, to go look at it. And if there’s collusion in it, you’ll be able to find it.

The deceased Russia gambit having now begun to give off a bad odor, it’s time for a new ploy: if they can’t remove and/or destroy Trump, they’ll fall back on discrediting Barr in the interest of saving their own sorry asses.

Do not underestimate how many powerful people in Washington have something to lose from Mr. Barr’s probe. Among them: Former and current leaders of the law-enforcement and intelligence communities. The Democratic Party pooh-bahs who paid a foreign national (Mr. Steele) to collect information from Russians and deliver it to the FBI. The government officials who misused their positions to target a presidential campaign. The leakers. The media. More than reputations are at risk. Revelations could lead to lawsuits, formal disciplinary actions, lost jobs, even criminal prosecution. 

The attacks on Mr. Barr are first and foremost an effort to force him out, to prevent this information from coming to light until Democrats can retake the White House in 2020. As a fallback, the coordinated campaign works as a pre-emptive smear, diminishing the credibility of his ultimate findings by priming the public to view him as a partisan.

Yep, the worm has definitely turned for the Democrat-Socialists. In the end, though, the basic facts remain unchanged, patiently waiting to stomp them all into pulpy mush.

The Democrat Party has run afoul of the ancient nostrum that if you strike at the king, you must kill him, and the price for that mistake will soon be upon them. Because what Barr has perceived, which no one seriously doubts — and that includes those Capitol Hill Democrats who so loudly denounce the Attorney General — is the entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative was a bought-and-paid-for lie of the Clinton campaign, fed through the intelligence and law enforcement apparatus of the Obama administration to give it false legitimacy and to weaponize it against Candidate and then President Trump, and perpetuated in an attempt to destroy his presidency and effect a de facto coup d’état against the duly-elected leader of the free world.

And Barr is now the instrument of the destruction of those Obama administration and Clinton campaign operatives, who are now faced with horrors — legal, financial, and reputational — to come which may not be avoided. Investigations have begun; recriminations are coming.

And what is worse, those Democrat operatives have no respite ahead from the factual record. It will be found, from the evidence, that the FISA warrants allowing the Obama administration to spy on individuals associated with the Trump campaign were attained through deliberate falsehood and abuse of power, and it will likely be in evidence, when the investigations get to the appropriate point, that this abuse came from the highest levels of government.

Furthermore, the investigation will prove not only that the Obama administration covered up criminal activity associated with and underlying Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server to conduct government business as Secretary of State under Obama, activity not only tolerated but participated in by officials at the highest levels of government.

And nothing can stop this. Nothing, that is, but political pressure on Barr. As Strassel said, he must be demonized and discredited before the inspector general’s report and the related investigations of the Trump-Russia mess are made public and the prosecutions begin.

That’s why the Democrats on Capitol Hill are so intent on attacking Barr. He is the messenger, and he must be silenced before the message can be delivered.

So that’s it. Some two dozen Lilliputian presidential candidates, each trying to do one another in a buffoonery competition, an ineffective and feckless legislative agenda if one exists at all, and countless pointless congressional investigations aimed, we now know, more at obstructing the coming of nemesis for their own party’s sins than scoring the winning touchdown against Trump. All with the 2020 elections 18 months away and the clock ticking.

No wonder Bill Barr is now the bogeyman. He is what they fear most. He represents the reckoning to come — in front of voters and juries.

Y’know, as maddening, frustrating, and infuriating as this whole shitshow has been, in a way these are truly thrilling times politically. Sordid as so much of it is, dangerous and destructive as it may yet turn out to be, we’re witnessing real paradigm-shifting history here, folks. A reckoning is indeed coming, one way or another—one which will not only lay to rest some long-deferred disputes, but also establish once and for all just what sort of a nation we’re going to be…or if we’ll even remain a nation at all.

I started off calling him Trump the Disrupter in the early days, but could be Trump the Clarifier winds up being the name that sticks.

Share

Asked, answered

Roger Simon asks the silliest of questions:

Should Journalists Go to Jail for Spreading Russia Lies?

A: Yes. Just on the off-chance he’s being serious: HELL yes.

As a First Amendment maximalist, I am inclined to reply an automatic “no” to my own headline – should journalists go to jail for spreading Russia lies? But a penalty of some kind, indeed a serious one, should certainly be levied for misinforming the public on the most important subject of our day, which has happened repeatedly over the last few years concerning the Russia probe. And when these prevarications can be shown to have been deliberate, to have been done knowingly, difficult as that may be to prove, the line to sedition may have been crossed and there is an argument the reporters involved should face legal consequences. They should also be fired.

Unfortunately, because reporting is an occupation with no official standards like law or medicine, no professional organizations to disbar them, and because, as A. J. Liebling wrote long ago, “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one,” with media operations like CNN and NBC often encouraging those very lies, this is unlikely to happen.

Nevertheless. As Kimberly Strassel indicated in “For Fear of William Barr: The attorney general gets attacked because his probe endangers many powerful people,” heads of those who instigated the Russia probe are likely soon to roll. Shouldn’t members of the press who gave them voice be more than unindicted co-conspirators?

A: YES. These nothing-of-the-sort “journalists” weren’t reporting; they were participating, providing active, enthusiastic assistance in the most outrageous, brazen scandal in American history. High among the reasons they should be locked up for it:

Will these journalists have learned a lesson and change their habits? Not likely. For the most part, they are moral narcissists, primed to feel confident of the righteousness of their cause even when faced with countervailing reality. And in any case, to change would lead to personality disintegration, loss of friends and family and, worse, to being fired by the profiteers who run their companies. That’s the way of the media world today.

It is that. But it shouldn’t be, and Americans should no longer be willing to put up with it. The way to change things is to deal out some seriously painful consequences. Anything less must be flatly rejected by We, The People, by whatever means we must use to get that message across. Treason and sedition should be returned to their proper status as the most serious of crimes; let every Leftwit coup-plotter, in government and out, tremble at the mere contemplation of such heinous acts.

As for our degenerate Propagandist Class, a good, long stretch in the hoosegow ought to be a distant second in their list of worries, with hanging by the neck until dead comfortably in the lead. Otherwise, we will surely have to confront more of this nonsense from these charlatans, and worse, before very long.

Share

Bust ’em up, shut it down

Laura Hollis presents an idea whose time has surely come.

As long as we’re contemplating changes to the way we elect the president, or to the number of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, let’s not exclude the legislative branch from the party.

But I’m not proposing that we reform Congress. I’m arguing that we should abolish it.

At this point, why do we need it? We have plenty of independent agencies, statutes and regulations; we don’t need any more. We don’t need any more taxes. And as for confirmation of federal judges? Each state can send two state senators to do the job that the U.S. Senate has done. They surely could not behave worse than what we saw with the Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.

None of these megalomaniacs pays the slightest heed to the principle that Congress’ powers are limited. In 1791, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.”

Congress has either ceded or overstepped its constitutional authority since long ago. Would we really be worse off without a federal legislature?

Congress is a dysfunctional, staggeringly corrupt shitpit filled to the rafters with arrogant, parasitic career politicians—a breed the Founders rightly abhorred. Almost all of them have failed by every measure to live up to the hopes of the voters who sent them there. They use their position to enrich themselves at the nation’s expense; their sworn oath to uphold the Constitution is blandly made mock of six days a week, and twice on Sundays. Shut the whole comedy act down, turn the building into a museum or something, and force the deer ticks and leeches infesting the place to go out and make themselves an honest living for once in their squandered lives.

I know Hollis is probably just kidding around here, but I ain’t. Well, mostly.

Share

Can’t win playing by their rules

So stop doing it already.

Failure analysis is probably the most important component of progress in any area of human endeavor. Figuring out what went wrong, why it went wrong and then scheming how to prevent it from happening again, is how we move forward in business, science, technology and even social organization. After every election, the losing party goes through a period of self-examination in order to figure out why they lost. The old line about learning more from failure than success is true, as long as you actually learn something.

With Joe Biden launching his campaign in Charlottesville, now is a good time to examine the catastrophe of the Unite the Right rally in 2017. Now, the first thing to note that from the point of view of the Left, this was a great success. Almost two years on, it remains an emotional rallying point for all of the tribes in the fight against whiteness. It is why very old white man Joe Biden picked it for his campaign announcement. He wanted to let those tribes know that he is their man, despite his noticeable lack of vibrancy.

That is an important lesson of this event. Activism is always about rallying your side and depressing the other side. Everything else is secondary. Most of the dissident right is happy to forget about this event, while the Left has made it one of the key events in their narrative. Put the phrase “Unite the Right” into a search engine and you first get the Wikipedia page describing it as a rally by the worst people. An image search returns pics of Nazis and noble non-whites. For the Left, Charlottesville was a triumph.

That is the first lesson of the event (the Unite The Right/Charlottesville cockup—M). It was a failure. Many involved have yet to come to terms with that reality. Instead, they keep working to correct the record about what happened and who was responsible. This recent live stream by Richard Spencer is a good example. The fact that they keep thinking the facts matter says they still don’t understand what happened. To the Left, the facts are unimportant. What matters is they have martyrs and they have a bloody shirt to wave around.

Therein lies another lesson. For too many in dissident politics, this obsession with applying the blue pencil to the Left’s myth-making remains a liability. Conservatives have always fallen into this trap. While the Left is performing yet another morality tale, the Right is busy editing the script for accuracy. In politics, factual accuracy is only important if it advances the narrative. What matters, what always matters, is convincing the public that your version of reality is the most pleasing. The facts are just part of the set.

Another reason the event turned into a great piece of propaganda for the Left and a disaster for the Right is the organizers made the classic error of thinking the Left would abide by its own stated rules. This never happens, as the Left sees rules, laws and principles as conveniences that further their efforts. The laws are like the New York subway system. You get on and off as necessary. It is a means to an end, not an end in itself. For the Left, winning is always the end. They will never let the rules get in the way.

Conservatives have been making this mistake for as long as anyone reading this has been alive. American right-wingers always assume the Left has practical, tangible motivations and that they will abide by their own rules. After all, conservatives have practical goals and always play by the rules. You’ll notice that all of those Virginia democrats caught up in the black face scandal are still in their jobs. Even the serial attacker, Justin Fairfax, is still in his job. In the fight with the Left, there are no rules.

Precisely so—and those who insist there either are or should be RULES in a vulgar, all-out brawl have already committed themselves to fighting with both hands tied behind their backs, and should have just stayed the hell home on the sofa. They would have accomplished roughly the same thing without getting themselves all dirty, banged-up, and humiliated.

I tired long ago of the reliable old Rightblogger standby: those plaintive “if a conservative did/said/supported somedamned thing or other similar, the response would be VERY different!” post. It’s worse than a waste of time to go on and on kvetching and caviling about how loudly the Left would bitch if the shoe was ever on the other foot and how unfair it all is, because 1) none of our useless “leaders” will ever bother TRYING to shift dem shoes, and 2) the Left doesn’t give a tinker’s damn whether it’s fair or not.

Case in point: all those cautionary posts out there warning that Democrat-Socialists ought to be DEEPLY, DEEPLY CONCERNED about, say, Harry Reid’s filibuster/nuclear option maneuvering, or Ogabe’s rule-by-executive-order end-run around the Constitution, because someday—SOME DAY—Repukes would be in power and they could do the same. No, seriously, you guys, it might happen!

Except, until Trump came along, it never, ever, ever did. The Repukes had become quite comfy in their tame-opposition role, thanks, and had no intention of breaking free of the leash and responding in kind to Democrat-Socialist perfidy. It’s one reason the Cucks are so deeply offended by Trump. Why, he’s…he’s…he’s NOT PLAYING BY THE RULES! HE’S IGNORING LONG-ESTABLISHED PRECEDENT!!! Well no duh, fuckface; that’s exactly what we elected him to do.

All the fact-diddling recitatives, indignant elucidations of the Left’s boundless chutzpah and hypocrisy, and straight-up whining about the obvious and undeniable double standards in the world aren’t going to avail us a single thing, people, no matter how high-minded and elegantly phrased they might be. For the Left, this is really and truly a war, one they intend to win. And you don’t win wars by standing around harrumphing and demanding a gentlemanly regard for the rules, when your enemy already has one thumb in your eye, one hand crushing your larynx, and one knee slamming into your groin.

Update! This. Is. War.

Many among us on the right have yet to fully absorb that unpleasant fact. Many among our friends, including reporters and politicians, speak as though the leftists are reasonable, persuadable people. If only we could show them that illegal aliens really are streaming across the border; if only we could show them the horror that is abortion; if only we could show them that socialism will do to us what it did to Venezuela.

They already know that. The leaders on the Left already know that President Trump never colluded with the Russians and that he never obstructed the Mueller investigation. They already know that socialism wrecks economies. They already know that disarming law-abiding citizens will not decrease crime. And, of course, they recognize that their Green New Deal will bring about a dystopia.

So why do we try to persuade them of what they already know?

The Democrats do what they do because for them, the war is existential. They stand to lose their power. For the rest of us, unless we succeed, we stand to lose our nation.

Which makes it existential for us too. Or for our freedom, anyway.

Share

Dysfunction

To NRA or not to NRA, that is the question.

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Stop the NRA shutdown,” a “critical update” in the latest American Rifleman urges.”New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has launched an all-out crusade to destroy NRA and put us out of business forever.”

No doubt the insufferable totalitarian wannabe would like to try. But as events unfolded over the weekend, resulting for the short term with Oliver North’s ouster as association president, it appears the greatest danger comes from within.

Not that Wayne LaPierre prevailing, for now, is a “win” for membership. Nor would it be had North succeeded. This was a coup attempt by NRA’s long-term PR firm Ackerman McQueen to replace former gravy train riders with current ones. There are no clean hands here, and with the weekend battle “won” by current management, don’t expect dramatic changes in the way things are run as long as they’re in power.

That means concerns being expressed by an increasing number of woke and angry members will continue to be glossed over by Fairfax “leadership.” We’ll continue to see NRA endorsing “compromise” infringements, with carefully-crafted statements giving de facto green lights to bump stock “regulations” and “red flag” confiscations, and with just enough weasel-wording for plausible deniability damage control when things blow up. We’ll continue to see dishonest political grades and endorsements that come back and bite gun owners. We’ll continue to see deliberate indifference to holding those politicians accountable for the single greatest threat to future “legal” recognition of the right to keep and bear arms – the overwhelmingly Democrat-favoring “pathway to citizenship.”  And we’ll continue to see an organization that puts more energy into “Enforce existing Intolerable Acts” than it puts on “shall not be infringed.”

And of course, we’ll see continued appeals for money, no matter if the flacking is outsourced or increasingly done in-house. Someone’s gotta pay for the salaries and perks.

A meme that’s being increasingly parroted by the gun-grabbers as a way out is that NRA must “return to its sportsman’s roots.” Understand that this is being done by people who really do want to take your guns. Don’t think for a moment they’re saying this to be helpful, any more than Democrats urging Republicans to be more “centrist” are concerned with helping the Party regain appeal. Surrenders simply mean there will be fewer battles that the enemy (what do you think those who want to disarm you are?) will need to win.

Those calling for such a return want NRA out of politics and focused on being Fudds. They really just want to be able to pass disarmament edicts, elect gun-grabbing politicians and appoint anti-gun judges without any significant organized opposition. Curiously, although unintended by those offering such “advice,” returning to its roots is exactly what is needed.

Codrea goes on from there to make a strong historical case for the idea. Herschel, for his own part, seems pretty disgusted with ’em.

So first there is the issue of exactly how an elected board of directors along with an elected president can demand the resignation of a bureaucrat, and be rejected by said bureaucrat outright and that organization continue to function. It can’t. I assess that the NRA is a completely dysfunctional organization and has been for a long time.

Leaving aside the issue of Ackerman McQueen, and $200,000 of wardrobe purchases by LaPierre, the bylaws, people and organizational structure aren’t sufficient to rid the group of ne’er-do-wells, whether LaPierre or the cretins who are financial liabilities and parasites to the organization. A board of directors who doesn’t direct may as well quit and go home. If there are too many bad apples in the mix, then it’s appropriate for the entire group to go down in flames, suffering the personal, legal and financial loss attending their malfeasance. Membership on the board of directors means legal and fiduciary culpability, as it should on any board.

But can this situation be salvaged? Should it be salvaged? I said a few days ago that the NRA had supported the NFA, the GCA, the Hughes Amendment, the bump stock ban, and red flag laws. It’s all true. This is an incomplete list. Via David Codrea, this list adds to my own.

The real issue with the VNRA isn’t corruption or not doing enough to push rights. The problem is what the group actively does to violate rights. NFA ’34, GCA ’68, FOPA ’86. Everyone knows those. It shows how long the rot has existed.

They tried to keep HELLER from going to SCOTUS. They actively killed constitutional carry legislation in New Hampshire. They wrote an “assault weapon” ban in Ohio. They sabotaged an RKBA/free speech case in NH.

I had forgotten how many open carry fights the NRA has sabotaged, and it’s also true that the NRA didn’t want Heller going to the SCOTUS. I consider Heller only a partial win because of the wording Scalia put in there supporting gun control at the local and state level, and the weakness of it leading to McDonald, which still isn’t recognized by lower courts. But Alan Gura snatched a modicum of victory from the jaws of defeat.

The point is that in almost every case where retreat was possible, the NRA has led the way. Then oftentimes, as with Heller, they claimed credit for what small victory the SCOTUS gave us. In every exigency in life, a man must make functional judgments. Whom to marry, where to work, how much to save, with whom to be associated.

In this case, the analysis is quite simple. If an organization is working against your interests, it’s an easy decision to jettison support for said organization. It makes no sense to support people who intend harm to your liberties. If this is considered on a tactical level (retreat might be a good option now), then it is incumbent on our detractors to explain how said retreat will be reversed and good use made of it rather than sling accusations. I see a lot of hand-wringing, but I see no detractor channeling Sun Tzu. If you want to be a general, then learn to lead and learn to win.

Kinda makes one yearn for the great and glorious Charlton Heston, don’t it?



CA leaves little room for doubt as to where he stands on the NRA issue: he’s done with ’em.

The Lairds of Fairfax are Beltway critters, and have been behind every single major 2A infringement on the national level since NFA34.

Screw them all, then dump them into the Morbark.

He recommends a few alternative courses of actions to consider, too.

Share

Day of reckoning

We can but hope. The whole article is good, but it’s the unexpected twist near the end that really got me grinning:

In ancient times, when nations reached such dramatic inflection points, there were poets, authors, artists, and philosophers who formulated, explained, and preserved for posterity the meaning of events and their impact upon their societies. As I listened to Barr’s astounding testimony, I realized that America was at such an historic milestone.

Who, I mused, will step forward to explicate and place these momentous events into their proper context? Does America have a Homer or a Cicero to properly express the gratitude and exaltation of our fellow citizens at the approach of long desired and overdue justice? And then the answer suddenly came to me as my shrinking brain flashed back to the immortal words of that long ago anthem of righteous adolescent retribution, My Boyfriend’s Back, to wit:

My boyfriend’s back and you’re gonna be in trouble
(Hey-la-day-la my boyfriend’s back)
You see him comin’ better cut out on the double
(Hey-la-day-la my boyfriend’s back)

Here’s a link to The Angels’ singing My Boyfriend’s Back on the Ed Sullivan Show. Their performance is at once entertaining and seemingly prescient. As you watch them sing, imagine that they are making eye contact with James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, John Brennan, Bruce Ohr, Lisa Page, Sally Yates, Glenn Simpson, Christopher Steele, and all the rest of the conspirators. It’s pretty amusing.

To a remarkable degree, the lyrics are apt and convey the mood of all of us who have had a belly full of the deep state.

As for all of those swamp dwellers who have corrupted and degraded our government to this historical low point, let me paraphrase the best line in the song: If I were [them], I’d take a permanent vacation.

Where at? Club Fed?

Heh. As I said, we can but hope. I’m not entirely optimistic myself, and in any event much damage has already been done.

Certainly, Trump has been proven right in the most spectacular fashion imaginable. The very people who accused him of treason have been exposed as the real seditionists. The Democrats have suffered a great defeat, and to Trump’s supporters, it’s like election night all over again.

But even though Trump scored a big win, his war with the seditious faction that tried to overturn the election is far from over.

The forces that attempted to take Trump down may be wounded, but they aren’t giving up, and they still wield great power. While Trump certainly has a right to gloat, the malefactors who peddled this hoax from the glossy newsrooms are not sorry one bit—and despite calls for a reckoning, they’re probably going to get away with it.

The fact that this even happened kind of dilutes the victory. While the intelligence “community” and the media have suffered a great blow to their credibility, they nevertheless were able to inflict profound harm on the country as they pursued a partisan coup. The power they wield, and the damage they have done using it, cannot be overstated.

This hoax has seeped into the American mind. It has left the country a more mistrustful, more angry, more broken place than it was. It was all ridiculous from the start, and yet its pushers managed to impact the United States on a profound level. The damage done is proof of their unaccountable power.

This same establishment has already succeeded in frustrating Trump’s agenda from the inside. Two years into office, there has been next to no progress on the wall or ending wars in the Middle East.

Here is what should happen: Every journalist who breathlessly promoted this nonsense should be fired and publicly shamed, and the Democrats who peddled this hoax should resign. The DOJ/FBI/CIA hacks who made a killing on the networks and on their book tours should withdraw from public life in utter disgrace. Trump should declassify everything and pursue those responsible.

But they’re probably going to get away with it.

I pray that he’s wrong, but suspect that he’s right. As long as any hope remains of seeing justice done through an admittedly broken system, we must continue to push its pursuit—because the sole, dreadful alternative is a thing to be avoided if we possibly can.

Share

Punches: unpulled

Looks like the Somali Sleeper stepped in it this time, but good.

Omar-NYP.jpg

Real American Dan Crenshaw spikes the Muslim terrorist-loving bitch Ty Cobb style:


Note well that she mentions “love and commitment to our country” that “should never be in question”, and she’s absolutely right—I don’t question her love of country. It’s just that I don’t believe for a second that the USA is her country; Somalia is, and as the Koran requires, Islam will always trump even that. The woman is here illegally, by virtue of a sham marriage to her own brother. Not only should she not be in Congress, she should by all rights be deported. Yesterday would not be too soon to suit me. But by fair the most damning slam of them all against the evil bint is this one:

She dismissed thousands of people being murdered like it was an everyday occurrence when she said “some people did something.”

On 9/11/01 my son, firefighter Jimmy Riches was murdered along with close to 3,000 American citizens by Muslim terrorists.

I rushed to Engine 4 in Lower Manhattan when I heard what was happening. That’s where my son worked.

As I came over the Brooklyn Bridge, the towers had both already fallen. All the rigs at the firehouse were gone, so I knew they were all at the World Trade Center.

When I got there, I saw the death and destruction — people lying there dead and mangled.

We picked up the bodies and saw how gruesome it was. Those people died a horrible death.

We were there for 9 months picking up body parts, pieces.

We found my son’s body six months later, March 5, 2002. He was at the North Tower. We got to bury him.

People talk about closure, but that’s not closure. I’ll never get closure until my son walks through that door again.

My son died doing his job, helping others in distress. The American public said NEVER FORGET 9/11!

Now, we have people who were working down there getting sick and dying. It hasn’t ended.

There’s still 1,000 bodies that have never been recovered. It’s very sad that she could make such light of it.

Sad? Sorry to have to say so, ma’am, but I’m afraid it’s one helluva lot worse than that. It’s disgraceful, is what it is.

Worse still, it’s all on us—all of it.

The fact is, we HAVE forgotten. Omar’s galling, illegitimate presence here—dancing right past the still more abhorrent fact that SHE FUCKING GOT ELECTED TO THE US CONGRESS—is all the proof anyone should ever need of that forgetfulness. I can’t imagine anything more mortifying, reprehensible, and just plain inexcusable than that reality—a blot on the honor of every American who was alive and old enough to remember that nightmarish morning.

Several years ago, after many years of having done some sort of annual 9/11 remake of the CF main page to commemorate the attacks, I stopped even mentioning the anniversary at all. Somewhere along the line I realized, in morbid horror and shock, that we had indeed forgotten; that, in our blithering PC stupidity, we had not only stubbornly refused to learn the lessons of the attacks, we lacked even the guts or honesty to name the real motivation behind them—a moral failure that still plagues us to this very day. Our contemptible abdication of nerve and integrity is demonstrated with each new charade of official befuddlement as to motive from law enforcement, political “leadership,” and Enemedia following yet another murderous Muslim attack someplace.

We The Peepul also dishonored our dead and ourselves when we sat still for the Ogabe junta’s alacritous and semi-clandestine resettlement of hordes of phony Muslim “refugees” in communities throughout heartland America, allowing the (ahem) “fundamental transformation” of the very fabric of American society without complaint or demur. In the end, we have to shamefacedly confess that we got saddled with the likes of Omar for no reason other than our own tremulous complacency. Which means that Omar and her loathsome ilk are here to stay, and will henceforth have to be dealt with on their own terms and not ours. Worse yet, that we deserve them.

All American update! More righteous rage from the Post.

Some people did something? Wow. What a way to describe the heinous surprise attack on America that claimed 3,000 lives.

Especially when Omar’s focus was Muslim rights: That made it all the more vital to note that the terrorists acted in the name of Islam — as self-described “jihadists” in a war against America, Israel and the West. To call them merely “some people” is to deny a cancer festering in the world Muslim community.

Allow me to rephrase that last, in the interest of precision and accuracy: Islam is a cancer festering in the world community. If Muslim terrorists would stick exclusively to slaughtering each other in the privacy of their own shithole nations, nobody would give much of a shit about them. It’s mainly the Koran-mandated effort to wage jihad on infidels throughout the world that the rest of us have a problem with.

She went further: “Many people expect our community to feel like it needs to hide every time something happens.” Again, by “something happens,” she means (but won’t say) “when Muslims commit acts of terror.”

No one expects Muslims to “hide” after an attack by Islamist terrorists. No group should be blamed for the deeds of a few of its members. But defeating terrorism requires facing the facts of who’s behind it and why.

And “facing the facts” requires that we recognize that it’s far, far more than just “a few” Muslims who support global jihad…even right here in the States.

Instead, Omar claimed Muslims are being “terrorized” by the nation’s response to 9/11.

By the way: CAIR wasn’t founded post-9/11, but in 1994. And the feds later named it an unindicted co-conspirator in a plot to steer US funds to the terror group Hamas.

Yet Omar upped the obscure-the-facts ante Wednesday, declaring criticism of her “some people did something” line to be “incitement,” on the grounds that she has received death threats.

Huh? She’d rightly be outraged if anyone minimized those threats as merely “some words from some people.”

Omar’s cavalier brushing off of the murder of thousands of innocents on 9/11 should shock all Americans, Muslims included.

Yep. And it ought to open their blind eyes as well, and thoroughly piss them off. Unfortunately, the vile woman got some needed support from an unsurprising source.

At the end of yet another controversy-filled day, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) sat down with Stephen Colbert on The Late Show and tried to show the world she’s not actually as scary as Fox News wants you to think she is.

Contrary to this liberal muttonhead, I very much doubt that many of us find Omar “scary.” We find her offensive, noxious, and intolerable.

When you have people on Fox News question whether I am actually American or I put ‘America first,’ I expect my colleagues to also say, ‘That’s not OK’ and call that out,” she continued, referring to comments earlier Wednesday morning from Fox & Friends host Brian Kilmeade. To those who question her loyalty to America, Omar said, “I took an oath to uphold the Constitution. I am as American as everyone else is.”

You are no such thing. You’re an America-hating adherent to a pseudo-religion that openly demands our destruction and subjugation. Your insensitive, outrageously offensive remarks damned well ought to lead people to be skeptical about your loyalties, along with your assumed “right” to be here at all. You came to this country illegally, under false pretenses. You ought to be sent back to Somalia, permanently and with a quickness.

One recent comment that got Omar in trouble was when she referred to Trump adviser Stephen Miller as a “white nationalist.” That made Colbert aware of the double standard she referred to when he thought to himself, “Haven’t I said that?”

“You see this outrage when I speak the truth,” Omar said in response. “Everybody else’s truth is allowed, but my truth can never be.”

“Your truth” is false, therefore there is no obligation to honor it, indulge it, or tolerate it on anyone’s part. Fuck you, go home, drop dead.

Share

The Great Unraveling

The wheels are coming off the bus, so you can look for the space underneath it to get more and more crowded (emphasis mine throughout—M).

The recently released transcript of George Papadopoulos’s congressional testimony reveals a significant fact: Papadopoulos’s introduction to Joseph Mifsud—the source of the “Russia has Hillary’s emails” tip that purportedly prompted the FBI to launch an investigation into the Trump campaign—was arranged mere days after Papadopoulos announced he was joining the Trump campaign.

Saturday evening, Papadopoulos rocked Twitter with claims that “a woman in London, who was the FBI’s legal attaché in the U.K.” encouraged him “to meet Joseph Mifsud in Rome in March 2016.” These new revelations raise fresh concerns that, with the approval of the FBI, foreign governments were meddling in the 2016 election.

Mifsud has long been suspected of holding the key to efforts to target the Trump campaign. But Papadopoulos’s testimony and his tweet now implicate the amorphous London Centre for International Law Practice and the FBI in the plot to put Papadopoulos in contact with Mifsud. From there, Mifsud had but to groom Papadopoulos with promises of Russia connections that would allow him to shine in his new role as a foreign policy advisor to Trump.

It worked, and Mifsud’s supposed tip about the Russian hacking provided the FBI the pretext necessary to launch a full investigation into the Trump campaign for supposedly colluding with Russia.

This all raises lots of questions, chief among them this one: What did Obama know, and when did he know it? But don’t for a moment imagine that Papadopolous was the only one who had a baited Trump trap placed in his path.

For one, a series of stories that appeared in the press in early 2017 heavily implied Lokhova was a Russian agent who tried to suborn Michael Flynn at a dinner hosted at Cambridge on Feb. 28, 2014. Flynn served at the time as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

A year after those stories appeared, The Daily Caller News Foundation reported Halper cozied to three Trump campaign advisers, Carter Page, Sam Clovis and George Papadopoulos. In May 2018, Halper was revealed as a longtime CIA and FBI informant, a revelation that led President Donald Trump to accuse the FBI of planting a spy in his campaign. The Republican coined the term “Spygate” to describe the alleged scandal.

And Trump was right, too. The Deep State apparat attempted to entrap Trump, with the ultimate goal of, first, rigging the 2016 election, then forcing him out of office under false pretenses after that had failed.

“ALLEGED scandal”? My lily white ass. This is nothing less than the biggest, the most heinous and damaging scandal in American history. Too-powerful Superstate bureaucracies have been exposed as thoroughly compromised by bone-deep corruption and malfeasance, from top to bottom. The entire American system—Congress, the Executive branch under Emperor Ogabe, the federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies, and the so-called “mainstream” media—has wilfully and wantonly stripped itself of any credible claim to trustworthiness or Constitutional legitimacy, perhaps never to regain it.

Every American should consider all of this absolutely intolerable. We now know that our system is rotten, and that we are being misgoverned by a Ruling Class of amoral mediocrities who are patently unfit for the positions they abuse. No matter what you might think of Trump—as a man, as a husband, as a celebrity, or as President—you should be both infuriated…and alarmed.

Both via Ace, who has more yet.

Share

Misbehavior, miscalculation, misfire

What the Mueller witch hunt was really all about.

It wasn’t about who Trump was — it was all about what Trump promised. It was about the survivability of the swamp.

From the very start, the Obama presidency focused on crushing conservative thought and detaching the country from the Constitution. Undermining the 2nd Amendment with Fast and Furious, forcing Americans to purchase a product they didn’t want with ObamaCare and preventing conservatives from forming support networks by unleashing the power of the IRS against them. His policies greatly increased the number of Americans on food stamps and doubled the national debt to $20 trillion. And for this, the propaganda media labeled him the greatest president ever because, in their anti-American world, he was. So it was no surprise that Obama sided with America’s sworn enemies by brokering the disastrous one-sided Iran Deal and assisting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

The swamp had to make sure the American people never found out about the little and big names behind the hundreds of crimes committed in order to advance Obama’s and the media’s anti-American agenda.
  
And as president, Hillary would do just that. She would make sure the changes made by the Obama administration in dismantling American values would continue, and the illegal tactics used would remain buried. For this accommodation, Hillary would now be able to accelerate the unabated flow of cash from all corners of the globe into the Clinton Foundation coffers.

It was a sweet deal, but it all ended the moment when Trump hit 270 electoral votes. And as we know, Hell froze over, pigs began to fly, and Trump entered the Oval Office, and for the first time in their political careers, Obama, Clinton, and members of the swamp contemplated the real possibility of prosecution.

And since that reality could never be allowed to happen, it was all hands on deck and the start of the unthinkable — an actual political coup attempt against the President of The United States that included the most massive hoax investigation ever perpetrated on the American people. 

The fly in the ointment, and the one factor not considered by the swamp intelligentsia, was the makeup of the person of Trump. For one, the conspirators never imagined a person could withstand a two-year barrage of 24/7 fake negative news coverage along with a slew of “America be damned,” political obstructions via Congress. They never figured that a person like Trump existed. A man with the stamina of someone 40 years younger, who brought to Washington the assets he acquired as a businessman in the rough and tumble city of New York as well as the command of the TV audience he gained by his many years as a television host.

On March 22, 2019, the bottom fell out of the last vestiges of the coverup as Mueller handed his report absent any proof of Trump/Russian collusion to new Attorney General William Barr. But only part of the most insidious abuse of power in Americas’ history had been dealt with.

It won’t be dealt with completely until the conspirators are in prison for their seditious crimes…which itself is letting them off light, if you ask me.

Share

One nation, indivisible

Brass tacks and harsh realities.

Let’s stop pretending. Let’s stop accepting the ruling class’s lies. And let’s stop lying to ourselves. America has changed. There used to be one standard, one set of laws, one set of rules. Now, there are two.

The one set of rules for normal people is designed to jam us up, to keep us down, to ensure that the power of the powerful never gets challenged.

And the one set of rules for the elite can be summed up like this: There are no rules.

Why do you think our elite is so eager to pass new laws and regulations? Is it because normal people like you and me are running wild in the streets? No, of course not. They don’t want to regulate political campaigns to make sure elections are fair. They want to regulate them so they will always win and we never will again. They don’t want a Green New Deal because they care about the weather in 2219, but because they want to take our power and our money for themselves. They don’t want to ban our guns because we’re dangerous to other Americans but because, armed and ready to defend our rights, we’re dangerous to their power.

Do you, even for a second, think any of the rules, regulations, statutes or laws they propose are even going to be applied to them? Do you see the DOJ ever indicting some liberal Dem or some pliable submissivecon for “campaign finance violations?” We know the answer to that because Hillary is wandering around the woods, with a goblet of screw-top Chardonnay glass in her withered paw, free as a bird.

This injustice is poison to our country. This injustice is what makes republics fall apart, when the worthless ruling class pushes its contempt in the people’s collective face so hard and for so long that the population finally screams “The hell with this!”

It can’t continue. It won’t continue.

It SHOULDN’T continue. And if it’s allowed to much longer, then we should all just shut the fuck up and learn to enjoy this sorry state of affairs, because it’s exactly what we deserve. Via Ross, more on our disgraceful two-tier (in)justice system:

It was obvious from the first that Hillary Clinton, via Fusion GPS, was the creative force behind the Russian collusion hoax. The euphemism “dossier” could not disguise what was soon revealed to be a concoction of opposition research lies. Worse, Clinton’s accusations were produced in collusion with Russian agents—“dossier” author and former British spy Christopher Steele relied on old contacts in Moscow to relay unverifiable gossip—in order to discredit the outcome of a presidential election.

As for holding President Obama and his administration responsible for their many criminal actions? I don’t know why journalists write columns raising this possibility when they know it will never happen.

It doesn’t matter who is attorney general when the Justice Department remains packed with Obama loyalists. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s slow-walking of Trump appointments for two years has kept the deep state in power. Justice from that quarter seems unlikely. But those aren’t the most important barriers to justice. There will be no special investigator into the Russia hoax.

Talking about uncovering the miscreants behind the hoax is good for clicks and polling. Doing something? Years of further investigations likely would alienate milquetoast suburban moms and the vast majority of blacks. It is not smart politics. Trump needs to peel off some of those voters, and going after Clinton and Obama would be counterproductive to his reelection hopes.

A few high-profile, lower level agents may feel some heat, but not the top dogs. I doubt if the investigation would rise to the level of former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, or former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. All three would get us close to President Obama. No one is going after Obama, ever.

Over and over, Trump’s voters have been told the next investigator would be an honest cop, like Gary Cooper in “High Noon.” This time, Clinton and Obama’s criminal shenanigans would be called to account. Don’t make me laugh.

I hope she’s wrong, but fear she’s right. Lots more to this piece; read it, if you have the stomach for it.

Share

Yer doin’ it wrong

Zman gets specific on why populist reform movements always seem to fail.

A common theme to all of these failed opposition movements is the decision to engage in the established political system. Once they connect to the system, the system releases a virus that either assimilates the new group, turning it into a feature of the system, or kills off the threat. The former case is a universal in life. When the king recognizes a threat to his rule, the first move is to buy off the threat. Offering him a position in the system, in exchange for him adding his legitimacy to the king and his ruling order.

The latter is the one that is most puzzling, as it suggests legitimate opposition lacks the right antibodies to function in a modern liberal democracy. A recent example in America was the alt-right. When it was a humorous on-line enterprise, operating outside the political system, it was effective at introducing paleocon ideas into the flow of social media. Those memes making sport of ruling class piety were highly effective. The alt-right operated like a highly diffuse guerrilla movement, using mockery and satire to undermine order.

Then Richard Spencer started imagining himself as the leader of a vanguard and started to stage protests and go on speaking tours. The shift from underground guerrilla movement to above ground political activism was a disaster. Quickly, Spencer became David Duke 2.0, which gave the Left cover to send in their street mobs. Woke capital joined in and the entire dissident scene was subjected to an ongoing pogrom that persists to this day. The alt-right exploded and has followed the Tea Party into the dustbin.

Decades ago, Sam Francis observed that the Buckley brand of conservatism was bound to fail, because it sought to engage in politics on Progressive terms. By engaging in conventional politics, Buckley was legitimizing not only the rules of the game, but the roles for the participants as created by the Left. Since the Left controlled the institutions, they would always set the rules so they would win and the Buckleyites would lose. That is, of course, exactly how things unfolded. Conservatism was a failure.

Something similar happened with the Tea Party, the alt-right and now the Gilets Jaunes in France. By trying to play by the rules, they legitimize that which they claim to oppose, at least at a meta-political level. It also removes from them the one weapon all outsider movements possess. That is the willingness to break the rules. The flipping over of tables inside the temple is how these movements gain attention and attract followers. To then be seen putting the tables back and sitting behind them robs the movement of energy.

Something else seems to be at work. These movements all suffered from poor leadership and poor organization. The first Tea Party folks were honest, energetic, but wildly naive about the reality of political organization. The alt-right figures that rose up in 2015 were good at getting attention, but incapable of building organizations. Richard Spencer is media savvy, but you would not put him in charge of anything. The Gilets Jaunes appears to also lack capable leadership, which is why they have been taken over by the Left.

What this suggests is that any legitimate opposition must first insulate itself from the political system. Its guerrilla phase cannot be where they start, but where the end, in order to function as a subversive subculture in opposition to the prevailing order. The Vietcong and the Khmer Rouge did not fully come out of the shadows until the prevailing order was collapsing. It was at that point they rushed into fill the void. If there is to be a legitimate opposition in the West, it is going to operate in the shadows.

He’s definitely onto something here. These systems are static, inflexible, and way too firmly entrenched to be amenable to real change. That in turn renders any notion of “reform” null and void, a naive pipe dream. It can’t come as much of a surprise, then, that “working within the system” is futile, a waste of time.

Share

“Deep State dumpster fire”

Try as I might, I just couldn’t find a way to improve on Steyn’s title.

For two years, the prefatory “Russia” has been intended to give the word “investigation” more heft, to make it seem as if there was something more than let’s-get-Trump-on-anything. But even the unlimited resources of a wretchedly corrupt federal justice system couldn’t keep that going without something more than Michael Cohen’s taxi medallions (only in America) and a few Russian troll farms, one of whom has amusingly decided to push back in court against Mueller and his showboating cronies.

Other than that, there are, as I said almost two years ago, no Russians in the Russia investigation – and what foreign “interference” with the 2016 election there was from Russia seems to have been amateur and minimal, unless you count MI6 spook Christopher Steele working his Moscow Rolodex on behalf of Hillary Clinton and her Deep State allies. There was, however, extensive domestic interference with the election, in that at the behest of the sitting administration the most powerful figures in the permanent bureaucracy set to work on a sophisticated surveillance operation against its political opposition: “Republics” in the Americas have been invariably prefaced by the qualifier “banana”; it just took Washington a little longer to sign up.

If you’ve ever been in the most piddling nothing civil suit in the District of Columbia, you’ll know how quickly the paperwork piles up. Here a mere thirty-three pages of thinly sourced gossip was enough to support a three-year multi-gazillion-dollar investigation that destroyed the real lives of real people.

Mark goes on to quote from several of his own past posts, including this one, which I excerpted myself when it first appeared:

Let me start with an immigrant’s observation: My sweetly naïve understanding of an ‘independent counsel’ is that he should be ‘independent’. For example, even in the presently desiccated condition of the Commonwealth, it’s generally understood that, when you’ve got a problem and you want someone independent to investigate it, “independent” means outsider…

There isn’t even the figleaf of ‘independence’ when you appoint a career swamp-dweller like Robert Mueller, a man who has relationships with every player in Washington going back decades. The parade of hacks infesting the cable shows to inform us solemnly that they’ve known Mueller for years and he’s the very apotheosis of a straight shooter is, in fact, the strongest evidence of why he should never have been appointed: he’s the insiders’ insider. When Mueller decided to stage his pre-dawn swoop on Paul Manafort’s bedroom, for example, he was raiding the home of a longtime client of his own law firm, WilmerHale…

My advice is that, whenever lifelong swampers assure us of the integrity of any individual, assume ‘straight arrow’ is Beltway-speak for ‘slimey duplicitous permanent-state operator’ and you can’t go wrong.

Thus, the FBI has 35,000 employees. But oddly enough the same indispensable guy, Peter Strzok, gets assigned to run the Hillary investigation, and then the Trump investigation, and – surprise! – is immediately appointed by Mueller to the “Russia” investigation. And the straight-arrow eagle scouts immediately start throwing the book at everyone for the crime of misremembering to the FBI.

But even supposed rock-ribbed “constitutional conservatives” make no serious challenge to the iniquities of this “process crime” – “process” in this case being a coy euphemism for an utterly disgusting federal criminal justice system in which prosecutors win 97 per cent of their cases without ever bringing them to court. So Michael Flynn is broke and ruined, while the corruptocrats Comey and McCabe are working the talk-show sofas plugging their books.

And, notwithstanding Mueller closing up shop, the most disturbing questions remain: Forget the Russian trolls and Macedonian content farmers; this is a story not of foreign subversion of the election, but of domestic subversion of the election, by powerful figures able to reach out and entrap its marks at Cambridge conferences and London wine bars. In old-school banana republics, the coup happens quickly: “The rebels have seized control of the radio station,” as the BBC’s Africa bureaus used to announce every fortnight through the Sixties, and next thing you know this week’s president-for-life is being carried out by the handles. But in America everything’s more protracted and expensive. That, however, should not blind us to what happened: a cabal of Deep State bigwigs reverse-engineered a foreign cover for their own interference in self-government by the people.

Towards the end, he revisits one of those wonderful, stop-in-your-tracks-and-marvel lines that make Steyn Steyn:

If Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, the “Russia investigation” is a nullity wrapped in an absence inside a void, now shimmering in the black hole of the billable hours of fifteen lawyers and the expense accounts of a hundred FBI agents.

Tasty as that is, it’s no more than we’ve come to expect from one of the most talented, sure-handed writers of our time. His closer? “If there are no consequences to that, it will happen again.” My money is on the latter; Diplomad, too, sounds a cautionary note:

It appears that Mueller has recommended no further indictments. Many on the right have taken that to mean Trump’s vindicated, that the left must throw in the towel. Victory!

I urge a little more caution. The left seeks to undermine this presidency, destroy Trump and his family, and completely discredit anybody who has supported him, regardless of what that does to the country. That determination remains a constant.

Furthermore, none of us has seen the report, or knows how Mueller will phrase his conclusions/recommendations. Will he say, as he should, that he undertook a massive waste of time, for which we spent nearly $26 million, and tore apart the country for nothing? I doubt that very much. He might say, that well, he has no ability to go further with the investigation for this or that reason, and recommends handing off portions of it to other prosecutors. He might also go full reptile and state that there was collusion but it does not rise to the level of prosecution, or any number of variations on that theme.

I don’t see the effort at destruction, of canceling the 2016 election results, coming to an end.

Nope. If, as I expect, there aren’t serious consequences swiftly visited on at least some of the perpetrators of this traitorous outrage, Steyn’s predicted reruns of this shitshow—probably even worse ones, actually—will be guaranteed. This was indeed nothing short of a brazen attempt at a palace coup: a conspiracy first to rig an election, then to nullify the result when that failed, launched from within the highest levels of the government itself. Token slaps on a few low-level-scapegoat wrists will NOT cut it here. No way.

Surehand update! Surber notices a little something:

Our beloved president, Donald John Trump, showed his very sane genius on Twitter today.

He didn’t tweet.

He let the Bungling Bob Mueller report sit atop the Drudge Report without a retort because the Mueller’s witch hunt has torpedoed his critics.

Why would the president suddenly want to make the news about him?

Thomas Lifson counsels patience:

President Trump has the power to declassify the FISA warrant applications. As I have repeatedly written, he is the master of the concept of a story arc in reality television. We have now seen the dramatic peak of the first narrative; that Trump was a treasonous collaborator with Vladimir Putin to sabotage the democratic process. As every dramatist knows, audiences love surprises and reversals of fortune. President Trump wants this drama to conclude in time for voters to have a satisfying conclusion in mind when they start to vote next year. My guess is that he will time declassification and disclosure for maximum effect.

Trump knows that even if the smarter Democrats realize it’s time to prevent further losses, the much larger faction of rabid Trump-haters — people like Adam Schiff — can’t help themselves and will continue to keep trying to find something to justify all their foolish claims and efforts. They will only prove to the persuadable voters that they are obsessive and unreasonable. Instead of accomplishing anything through Democrat control of the House, they will just make noise, vent their frustration, and continue to stir up trouble where there is none.

Still to be explored by an official investigation is the rampant “unmasking” of people in the Trump campaign surveilled by the NSA — spying on the rival party’s campaign. Then the creation of the futile search of the special counsel by potentially felonious activity of the sitting FBI director. Then the lying to the FISA Court.

Conservative Trump-supporters have been chafing for about two years, angry that investigation of the real scandal hasn’t been forthcoming. Slowly, slowly, they are going to get their satisfaction, well timed for maximum impact November 2020.

From his lips to God’s ears. Back to Surber:

It is now Mueller Time in American politics.

Pelosi and the Never Trumpers got exactly what they asked for: a special prosecutor.

And then they got exactly what they deserve: humiliation.

Barack Hussein Obama failed to give President Donald John Trump the same peaceful transition of power that President George Walker Bush gave Obama.

But now Obama and his acolytes as well as the Never Trumpers look exactly like the fools they are.

They acted disgracefully and without honor. They demanded a witch hunt.

Well they got one.

Now Americans laugh at them. The failure to indict tainted them and raised President Trump’s esteem in the public eye.

A bright person would change subjects.

Which means they will double down and keep talking about the report until it finally dawns on them how dumb that is.

Ahh, but that assumes they’re bright enough to EVER realize such a thing.



Share

Slowly, then all at once

The long, slow slide into once-great nation status begins with the military.

We’re hanging our whole maritime strategy in the Pacific Ocean around a few of these big, super-expensive iron airfields. If a carrier battle group(a carrier rolls with a posse like an old school rapper) gets within aircraft flight range of an enemy, then the enemy will have a bad day. So, what’s the super-obvious counter to our carrier strategy? Well, how about a bunch of relatively cheap missiles with a longer range than the carrier’s aircraft? And – surprise – what are the Chinese doing? Building a bunch of hypersonic and ballistic anti-ship missiles to pummel our flattops long before the F-35s and F-18s can reach the Chinese mainland. We know this because the Chinese are telling us they intend to do it, with the intent of neutering our combat power and breaking our will to fight by causing thousands of casualties in one fell swoop.

The vulnerability of our carriers is no surprise; the Navy has been warned about it for years. There are a number of ideas out there to address the issue, but the Navy resists. One good one is to replace the limited numbers of (again) super-expensive, short-range manned aircraft with a bunch more long range drones. Except that means the Naval aviation community would have to admit the Top Gun era is in the past, and that’s too hard. So they buy a bunch of pricy, shiny manned fighters that can’t get the job done.

Another mistake is over-prioritizing quality over quantity, which is the same mistake the Nazis made with their tanks. The Wehrmacht had the greatest tanks in the world – all top notch. Really good tanks. Tank-to-tank, they were the best – the dreaded Tiger had an 11.5-to-1 kill ratio. The Americans and Russians had merely decent tanks, just multiples more of them. Quantity has a quality all its own. Right now, America has something like 280 ships. We’ll have about 326 by 2023. That’s to cover the entire world. We had 6,768 ships when WWII ended in August 1945

This is inexcusable, but it is being excused. The focus of our military has shifted from victory to satisfying the whims of politicians. Here’s a troubling thought – if you go to one of the service branches’ War Colleges and poll the faculty and students about America’s greatest strategic threat, as many as 50% of the respondents will tell you it is “climate change.” That’s not an exaggeration. Our military is supposed to be dealing with the Chinese military and its brain trust is obsessing about the weather in 100 years.

The Chinese are going to continue dumping exponentially more carbon than America into the air and preparing to take us down while we focus on this kind of frivolous nonsense. Did you know the Chinese are pillaging our tech here in America, while our intelligence community’s incompetence led to our spy networks in China being rolled up? Probably not – these are one-day stories because the elite in DC and the media are busy trying to push the guy who won the last election out of office.

Here’s how the Chinese win. First, they take out our satellites. You know the GPS location service on your phone? Satellites, which are easy to hit. Say “bye-bye” to much of the ability of our precision weapons to find their targets. Also up for destruction are the communications satellites we rely on to coordinate our operations. And then there is the Chinese cyberattack, not only on our military systems but on systems here at home that control civilian power, water and other logistics. A U.S military with no comms and no computers is essentially the Post Office with worse service. An America with a ruined internet is Somalia.

Then they hit our land bases on Guam, Okinawa and elsewhere with a blizzard of missiles, knocking them out and annihilating our aircraft on the ground. Maybe we could respond with B-2s flying from the continental United States. We have 19 whole combat-capable aircraft, assuming a 100% operational readiness rate, which is just not a thing. We might even take out a few missile batteries on the Chinese coast. We won’t know the difference though. As for our carriers, if they come to play, they are likely going to get sunk, and if they stay out of the fight, they are merely useless – assuming quiet diesel subs do not find and sink them.

This is not a surprise. We play wargames against the Chinese all the time, and we lose.

The world’s “lone superpower” has absolutely NO business sending the putative “strongest military in the world” into combat against anybody until it can, first, somehow muster the will to win in its people, and second, clearly define what victory might consist of. Until such time, we’re doing nothing more than offering up the nation’s blood and treasure to provide our heavily-politicized flag-rank officer corps with a convenient playground to futz about in…which fecklessness will surely get our asses kicked up between our shoulderblades. In war most especially, if we ain’t in it to win it, we shouldn’t oughta be in it at all.

Share

Long Island to NYC: drop dead!

Francis expands on yesterday’s NYC secession post.

I would be very grateful for such a secession even though I’m stuck on Long Island, which would be joined willy-nilly to the far-Left downstate region. First, it would compel downstaters to pull their heads out of their asses and confront what the political elite of this state has done to us. But second and far more important, it would emphasize to politicians everywhere that subjugation can be resisted – that a sufficient number of freedom-minded persons can and will eventually liberate themselves, regardless of the price.

Secession is a frightening word to politicians and their hangers-on. The late Joseph Sobran noted that it really means freedom. For the upstate region to separate from the cancer that is New York City would be to free upstaters from the political dominance the Big Apple has exerted over them for many decades. New York City’s many pathologies would no longer burden the upstate region. Neither would the many intrusive and irrational laws the city’s liberal population has forced on the state. And let’s not get started about New York’s taxation, which is driving young Americans out of the state at a record rate.

I think it as good as guaranteed that the New York political elite will fight any organized drive for a separation into two states. Politicians generally aren’t stupid, regardless of how often they may posture stupidly before a camera. They grasp that power requires subjects, and the more the better. The national political elite will fight a secession drive equally fiercely, as it would provide conservatively inclined Americans with more votes in the Electoral College. 

The rebellion of the South occurred to preserve slavery against the North-based abolitionist movement and to escape the protective tariffs that favored Northern manufactured goods over cheaper imports. A state of affairs much like that which bedevils New York brought about the secession of the Confederate states.

In composing a tract such as this, it’s absurdly necessary to say explicitly that this is not an argument for slavery or the Confederacy’s desire to preserve it. Rather, it’s an illustration of the sectionalist tensions and enmities that result when one region imposes its interests on another through the law. Quite similar tensions and enmities afflict New York State. The only imaginable solution, given the thoroughgoing corruption of the state’s political class and the unbelievable arrogance of the urban liberals who support them, is secession.

Should that solution be thwarted, the tensions and enmities will grow. I don’t want to find out what the consequences will be by experiencing them. Far better than we part while an amicable parting is still possible. But don’t expect to hear that from Andrew Cuomo or any of the Democrats who dominate the councils in Albany and New York City.

Well, of course not. The Powers That Be greatly enjoy the Power They Have, and fully intend to retain their iron grip on it. That power is tightly bound up in the status quo: it is its source, its sustenance, and its security. Permanent professional politicians—whether presently in office, seeking election, or sucking and slurping around government’s swampy periphery like blowflies—will go to any length to see that it remains undisturbed. The Electoral College bit admittedly hadn’t even occurred to me, but as Fran says, it provides a compelling motivation indeed for our putative elites to defend their cherished status quo to the very last breath.

Share

Constitution Shmonstitution

A rueful reminiscence from Wilder.

When I was in grade school the teachers spoke of the Constitution with reverence. As second graders, we listened as the teacher told the story of how it was written and the freedoms it guaranteed us and the responsibilities that it demanded of us. My grade school teachers were all married women, and they loved America. It was a small town, and the teachers had grown up in the area. Some of them had taught their own children and their own grandchildren in the same school where the chalkboard dust, lead paint dust, water from lead-soldered pipes, and asbestos floor tiles soaked into my skin daily. Even the early reader books were taped together with yellowing cellophane tape at the bindings, and most of the books had been printed decades before. I got to See Spot Run like legions of boys before me, running my fingers over the same dog-eared pages that had been read for years, young mouths quietly sounding out the words.

And these boys before me, who had sat in the same desks, drew beginning math on the same blackboards, pulling chalk from the same worn, wooden tray that I did, got paddled in the same principal’s office that I did. They had traveled the world to strange places that their teachers never named when they opened the geography books during the time they spent in second grade. These were places with foreign names like Guadalcanal. Bastogne. Chosin Reservoir. Da Nang.

One of these boys in particular, a blonde haired young Ranger, was barely eighteen when he was shot climbing the cliffs at Pointe Du Hoc on the sixth of June, 1944. His sister was a friend of my father. As a young boy that Ranger sat in that same room, learning the same math decades before I was born. He sat in that same classroom just a few short years before he was buried in Normandy in late spring at the age of 18. No member of his family could afford to visit his grave until over fifty years had passed and his sister walked to his grave and touched its cold marble stone and ran her fingers over his name. Despite that, the young Ranger isn’t lonely – he is surrounded by 9,387 of his comrades who died during the invasion of France.

The school was torn down some time ago – I don’t know when. A bond issue was finally passed, and a new school was built. There aren’t many more students than when I went there, but there are new classrooms. These new schools are gleaming with whiteboards and new furniture and new books, and from the pictures you can see that the kids look a lot like the kids from when I went there; but the connection with 100 years of history went when the building was torn down.

Change is inevitable, but the one thing that my teachers taught us was that the Constitution was a rock, something special, something that every American had shared for hundreds of years. It was important, and it protected us, and protected our freedom.

I believed that, the way the boys that live forever on Pointe du Hoc did.

Today, however, the population of the United States is at least 14% foreign born, but I’d bet that number undercounts illegal aliens.  Second generation Americans, people born here of immigrants, account for at least 10% of the population. A quarter of the population of this country simply has no connection to anything American. 10% were born here, but were raised in a household that had little to no connection to anything American.

These residents also don’t have teachers that teach that the United States is good, that the Constitution is a meaningful document – times have changed and that just isn’t the “woke” take. They don’t get any of this from their family, either. Their family simply doesn’t know anything about freedom and the Constitution in most cases, and probably wouldn’t care if they did. It’s a document that foreigners put together – it is not part of their history at all.

If we have politicians that actively create divisions between Americans with a heritage of limited government and an increasing number of people for whom the history of the United States means nothing, the Constitution won’t mean anything. It will be a speed bump for those who have no connection to it and who have no love of it. The Constitution in the hands of those who hate the limitations it puts on them will, in the long run, provide no safety at all as it is interpreted away, as the press revolts against it, and as the newly imported electorate ignores it.

And what meaning will the blonde Ranger of Pointe du Hoc have then?

Not a whole lot different from what he has now, I’d say. It’s more a matter of which group of us we’re talking about; those of us who have cherished the meaning and memory of that Ranger right along still do, and will forever. Problem is, there’s a large and growing cohort that not only does not cherish that meaning, but has either abandoned the memory or never acquired it in the first place. A bigger problem is that not all of said cohort—probably not even most—are immigrants, unassimilated or otherwise. But there’s a bigger problem still.

In the comments John says, “I’m not trying to make people comfortable with nostalgia – I’m trying to show what we’ve lost.” We’ve lost quite a lot, and stand to lose more yet. The Pointe du Hoc Ranger will be forgotten, as surely as will the lessons he once taught, the example he once provided, and the inspiration and pride he instilled. Partly, that’s just the relentless tide of history clearing the sand of footprints, as it inexorably does—a fact better accepted than lamented or railed against, probably.

But not everything has to be forgotten; not everything should be. And then there are those things whose memory must at any cost be preserved, because the price of allowing them to fade is nothing less than our own extinction. Not for nothing did John begin this excellent post in an old schoolhouse, I think. Because it’s there where our enforced loss of memory and meaning begins, and the cultural amnesia and indoctrination occurring in those classrooms is the biggest problem of them all. Only by addressing that issue will our memory problem be put fully right, if ever it is. Only then can we say we’ve given that valiant Ranger and his comrades their due, our eternal debt to them sufficiently serviced, and their rightful place in our hearts and minds restored.

Share

The Democracy question

Ruling the mob via bread and circus.

It is a worthwhile question to consider when watching the Brexit drama unfold over the next two weeks. The official version of this process is the British people had a referendum and they voted to leave the EU. The law put March 31, 2019 as the deadline for leaving and Parliament had until that date to work out a deal with the EU. If there was no deal, then Britain unconditionally leaves the EU. A deal to leave slowly and gently, however, would need to pass through Parliament. That was the orderly process laid out for Brexit.

As of this writing, the government of Theresa May has tried several times to get the deal she struck with the EU through parliament. The deal is an insult to the intelligence of the average British subject, so it has failed to get through parliament. The deal she cut is to leave the EU in name only. Britain would continue to allow Brussels to dictate terms on things like regulation, trade and most especially immigration policy. Those rooting for democracy have to be appalled by the craven cynicism of this ploy.

The Commons Speaker, which is like the head parliamentarian, ruled that Theresa May cannot submit her deal for a vote again, unless it is substantially altered, which is an impossibility at this point. That would mean Britain is headed for a hard Brexit at the end of this month. It would also mean that a responsible democratic government would now be moving to inform and prepare the public for that eventuality. Instead, the government is scheming with the EU to delay everything so they can have a second referendum.

Americans are familiar with this gag. Back in the dark days when marriage was linked to biological reality, left-wing agitators would get homosexual marriage initiatives onto state ballots. These initiatives would fail, but the agitators would get them on the ballot again the next election. The Left sees democracy as a bus. Once it takes you to your desired stop, you get off. That means they demand people keep voting on their issues until the people get the correct result. Once that happens, no more democracy.

This is the scheme the “Remainers”  have always had in their back pocket. It’s why they have been happy to drag out this process for years, right to the deadline. This week, they will argue that the country is not prepared to meet the legal deadline, so there has to be a delay in the process. Of course, the point of the delay is to then get a second vote setup for later in the year. If that vote goes their way, that’s it. If they lose again, then the whole process begins anew as they scheme to undermine the results.

Again: the one thing to keep foremost in mind about Brexit is the same as with Trump’s Big Beautiful Wall: ain’t gonna be none. The Power, here and there, has no intention of ever allowing such things to come to pass. Though they’d prefer to remain hidden behind the curtains quietly keeping the Great And Powerful Oz Show in Ordnung, they’ll step out and flex their real muscle if and when they must.

Unfortunately, such overt action to put the peasantry back in its proper place will eventually create problems for The Power, as folks slowly come to realize that their votes mean nothing, that self-government is a disgraceful sham. Then Da Peepul do one of two things: they either give up completely with a shrug, or they get pissed right the fuck off. With the docile, stump-broke Brits, it’s a depressingly easy guess which way they’re most likely to jump. On this side of the pond the question is still open, if only just barely.

Share

“Soft beatings inevitably turn hard”

A calm voice in a turbulent time.

In March of 2016, during the heat of the Republican primary contest, Josh Marshall, the tetchy founder of Talking Points Memo, offered an ominous augury about the raucous Trump campaign. “Someone will die,” he thundered, giving, at the time, the umpteenth warning about the violent effects of the real estate magnate’s aggressive rhetoric. “It may sound like hyperbole. But this is the kind of climate of agitation and violence where someone will end up getting severely injured or killed. I do not say that lightly,” Marshall warned his loyal audience.

I’ve thought about the piece a lot since Trump’s unlikely election and the Democrats’ slow descent into madness. Every new instance of liberal-concocted violence brings it back to mind, like a nagging reminder. Whether it’s James Hodgkinson’s attempted killing spree, Trump supporters accosted in public, or even hoaxed hate crimes, Marshall’s prediction might appear prescient, albeit in a backwards way.

In “No Hate Left Behind,” Thomas Edsall cites a study from political scientists Nathan Kalmoe and Lilliana Mason on the growing ease at which Americans are willing to employ violence against their partisan opponents. “Just over 42 percent of the people in each party view the opposition as ‘downright evil,’” Edsall despairs, unaware that one of his byline colleagues once suggested “good people can’t be Republicans.” The data only gets worse from there. When asked if their favored party loses the 2020 presidential election, “18.3 percent of Democrats and 13.8 percent of Republicans said violence would be justified on a scale ranging from ‘a little’ to ‘a lot.’”

Then there’s the question of ontological moral status. The researchers found that “nearly one out of five Republicans and Democrats agree with the statement that their political adversaries ‘lack the traits to be considered fully human — they behave like animals.’”

Ahh, there’s that increasingly annoying false-moral-equivalence again. And false it is.

Consider: one side endorses murdering newly-born infants as “a woman’s right to choose”; one…doesn’t. One side commits actual acts of violence as punishment for expressing a dissenting opinion, even for merely wearing a certain hat in public. The other…doesn’t. One side holds rage-fueled rallies and protests which leave mountains of rubbish, ruined landscaping, broken windows, even bags of human feces and/or urine in their aftermath. The other holds mannerly, entirely (not “mostly”) peaceable events at which no one but themselves need fear assault, and thoroughly polices up its mess afterwards.

One side primarily inhabits decaying urban areas enlivened by crackheads, hookers, vagrants, and raving madmen; sidewalks festooned with piles of human shit; and miscellaneous other signposts of sophistication, superior intelligence, and gracious living. The other prefers clean, quiet, well-tended suburbs or more remote country homes, also clean and well-tended. In those areas, any shambolic wino stumbling groggily onto someone’s nicely-manicured lawn to pinch an open-air loaf will find himself remanded into police custody with a quickness, with three hots and a cot the only compensation for the “injustice” visited upon him. Hell, when somebody’s dog shits on the lawn it’s usually cleaned up right away.

No, one of these things is NOT like the other. I’ll leave it to you guys to discuss which is the more civilized and which is more closely comparable to “behaving like animals.” It seems pretty danged obvious to me, but YMMV. Then comes the calmer perspective:

Saying there’s too much hatred in America’s air is like saying there’s too much salt in the ocean. The country was founded on partisan bickering, which occasionally turned violent. It’s narrow-minded to suggest we’re at a more perilous time in our history than, say, the Civil War or even the frequent riots of the ‘60s and ‘70s or the Galleanist bombings of 1919. The last guy who tried to wage a national bombing campaign only sent duds from his bumper-sticker-laden creeper van.

Aside from hyperventilating Hollywood types, who get an outsized amount of media coverage, and the discursive rantings on Facebook, we’re not quite at the point where neighbors turn on neighbors, kids turn on parents, brothers turn on brothers, all in a bloody free-for-all. Go to a supermarket on any given day and you’ll see all types of Americans quietly going about their business. Few people let the fear of mass shootings or terrorist attacks disrupt their plans. We have yet to see roving gangs of marauders targeting MAGA-hat wearers or Beto devotees.

America doesn’t have an anger problem so much as it has an anger-management problem. We’re a naturally het-up people. Sometimes that leaks out into scrums of fisticuffs. But, a lot of frustration that drives these physical altercations comes from a double standard. Those who go unpunished for aggression aren’t going to see the light and make peace with their ideological adversaries. One side gets a clear pass when it comes to acting on its frustrations, and it’s not the side Jussie Smollett tried to blame for his botched publicity stunt. When leftists haul off and slug conservatives, the media-driven outcry is not nearly the same as when the inverse occurs.

Josh Marshall inadvertently revealed as much by focusing on Trump’s coarse language and not the left’s own lack of self-control. Yes, someone has died as a casualty of a twisted political ideology. But the threat of a mass breakout in violence remains overstated. How we act in person is different than what we say on Twitter or to a pollster. One-on-one conversation can ease years of Facebook-fueled tension in just minutes. As Great Britain’s P.G. Wodehouse once admitted during the Blitz, “when I’m about to feel belligerent about some country I meet a decent sort of chap” who causes him to lose “any fighting feelings or thoughts.”

That can all change, of course.

It can at that. We’ll know soon enough which way things go.

Share

The score

Tucker knows it.

This is what an authoritarian society looks like. It’s a place where the group in charge will tolerate no criticism at all. That’s what we’re becoming.

It was only a matter of time before they came for Fox News. Of the top dozen news networks in the United States, only Fox has an alternative view. The other channels speak with one voice. They are united on every issue, every time. They’re in almost perfect sync with the priorities of the Democratic Party.

Fox News stands apart. The opinion shows on this channel have another perspective. You might consider that valuable diversity, something different in a sea of sameness. The left does not think that. They would like Fox News shut down tomorrow. The other news channels agree. They would like that too. They are trying to do it now.

Carlson then goes on to lift the rock that crawly things like Media Matters and the SPLC wriggle around under, exposing their slimy machinations to some cleansing sunlight, before getting down to the real nut-cutting:

Even worse, you’re subsidizing it, without knowing it. Both the SPLC and Media Matters are, amazingly, tax-exempt organizations. In its original tax application to the IRS, Media Matters claimed that the American news media were dominated by a pro-Christian bias and that they were needed to balance it. Despite the obvious absurdity of this claim, the group received non-profit status. It has been violating the terms of that status ever since.

During the Obama administration, Media Matters held weekly strategy discussions with the White House about how to hurt its political enemies. Media Matters kept an “enemies list” of Republicans to destroy, including Steve King of Iowa. This is a violation of federal tax law. Tax-exempt non-profits can’t function as an arm of a political party. Media Matters clearly does.

According to a piece in the liberal magazine The New Republic, Media Matters changed its mission during the 2016 Democratic primaries to campaign for Hillary Clinton. We were “running defense for Clinton,” one Media Matters staffer said. “Defending Hillary from every blogger in their mother’s basement.” In a leaked 2015 memo from inside Clinton’s campaign, staff discussed cooperating with Media Matters to attack Republicans and accuse the press of biased coverage.

In an email from January 5, 2016, Hillary’s staff discussed working with Media Matters to counter a Vanity Fair article on Huma Abedin. “We have Media Matters and core surrogates lined up, which we can expand on tomorrow,” the email read.

This isn’t just unethical. It’s illegal. Under IRS regulations, 501(c)(3), non-profits are totally prohibited from participating in the campaigns of political candidates. Media Matters broke the law. The group has never been punished. It retains its tax-exempt status.

That means you and every other taxpayer are subsidizing attacks on their own First Amendment. Why is this? How can this be happening? Someone should call the IRS and find out.

Probably so, yeah. Then again, who among us wants to volunteer for enduring an IRS audit-proctoscopy for the next fifty years in retaliation for it? Because that’s exactly what you’d get, and we all know it. The Lefty/Deep State web is seamless, sticky, and hard to escape. And FederalGovCo Shelob is waiting…and always hungry.

Carlson’s closing suggestion isn’t a bad one on the face of it. But it’s based on a naive premise of government responsiveness to the will of its subjects that is no longer anywhere in evidence. Sorrowfully, it is becoming more and more apparent that this condition will NOT be changed, except by force. So this is where we are:

They’ve gone after Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, etc. You name the person on the right, this army of flying monkeys has been unleashed on them, multiple times.

Each time they are unleashed, damage is done. But no price is extracted for that damage. Conservatives never return the favor of dragging old quotes or actions into the light, they almost uniformly refuse to call for boycotts. They prefer to “take the high road.” What good is the high road if it leads to defeat? Moral victories are just a polite way to justify losing.

Liberals collect scalps, conservatives collect moral victories. This isn’t a battle for local dog catcher, it’s a fight for the future of the country; it’s time for the right to fight back the way they’re being attacked. Mutually assured destruction is the only way to stop these fascists in their tracks.

It can’t be a shotgun approach of refusing to watch CNN, no one watches CNN now. We have to pick our target carefully – one show, on one network, with one host who lies and smears people for thinking differently. That can be any of them, honestly, but everyone has to be on the same page.

Find the donors to the groups leading these charges and stop patronizing them, and let them know that’s what you’re doing.

It doesn’t matter if it makes you uncomfortable or if you think there should be more speech, not less. They’re coming for you sooner or later, no matter how high your horse. If you won’t fight back when someone on your side is under assault, why would anyone bother to fight back for you?

Tucker likely wouldn’t like this, but I don’t seek other people’s permission for my thoughts. These leftists have to be destroyed because they aren’t going to stop, and they don’t face consequences for their anti-American actions. Simply pointing out how bad they are is not enough; they don’t care, they know what they are. It’s time to learn from the success of President Trump and hit back twice as hard. Liberals have to be made to take their own medicine, it’s their own fault it’s a suppository.

Right enough as far as he takes it, but he doesn’t take it anywhere near far enough. Boycotts and the like aren’t going to impede the Left at all, nor give them a moment’s pause. Hell, the way they’re already chasing us out of their restaurants, refusing our custom in their shops, and banning us from their online establishments, it’s plain they don’t want our business anyway. CNN would prefer we NOT watch them, and they’re already sinking like a stone with an anvil tied to it anyway.

No, when we speak of “fighting” the Left, it’s plain that it will soon enough mean FIGHTING them—literally, and for keeps. I like William Gensert’s approach somewhat better; it’s a bit grittier, stouter, and more realistic, although ultimately it will fall short too:

Democrats know Donald Trump will win in 2020 and are planning to cheat to deny him victory. These new socialists are importing a new electorate through open borders and have proposed legislation to allow illegals the vote. They stole seats in the midterms using ballot harvesting and miraculously appearing boxes of “uncounted” Democrat ballots and will do the same in 2020.

The midterms were a trial run for 2020. The left is organized and prepared.

To have any chance, we must behave the way the left behaves, and that means we should take a page from the Democratic playbook. 

In 2008, there were members of the New Black Panthers stationed outside voting locations. The right needs to do the same, and have people in place to document everything. Challenge them at the polls; challenge them outside the polls; challenge them every time we see them cheat; challenge every single vote if need be. Sue them in court over every irregularity, otherwise, they’re going to deny enough ballots, harvest enough votes, or find enough in trunks of cars to win. We will need to fight for a fair 2020 election, or they will steal it.

We have allowed the Democrats using Antifa, Black Lives Matters, and SJWs dominion over the public square. We need similar tactics; there are far more of us than them, and in a battle against an army of pajama boys, we have the edge.

And we must be assertive not only vocally but physically. A group of men preventing Antifa/BLM/SJWs from pummeling dissenters will be on CNN 24/7 — they will provide the platform because they will not be able to resist portraying the right as the aggressors. So of course, we need to travel in groups and record everything. Think what the left would have done to Nicholas Sandman had there not been video exposing their lies.

Most importantly, we must never attack first; we are not them. Nietzsche said, “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.” Never strike first, but certainly strike last; we don’t start, we finish.

Well and good, I guess, for some of us. But that sniffy “we are not them” business is part of our problem—it’s a weakness, a confession that no, we are NOT willing to do whatever it damned well takes to defeat the Left. When winning means going the last mile, to the most desperate extreme without fear or hesitation, we are not them sounds a lot like we’re going to fold instead. The Left sees that admission for what it is—a cop-out, a flinch, a loser’s weak excuse—and uses it against us.

Yes, I do get that the Enemedia can be counted on to vigorously exploit any opportunity we grant them to vilify us each and every time we can truthfully be accused of throwing the first punch, presenting us to their drooltard audience as “the bad guys.” So what? You think they aren’t doing that already, when it’s a baldfaced lie?

Anybody remember just who was declared the Bad Guy in Charlottesville, perchance? Hint: it wasn’t the AntiFa fascists who initiated the fracas. Nor was it the cops who stood aside and let them run riot, probably under orders from the governor. Afterward, when Trump dared to issue a statement reasonably if not quite accurately assigning blame to both sides, he immediately found himself tossed into the Bad Guy penalty box over it too, and is still catching crap for it so’s nobody makes any mistakes. As Gensert himself says:

The battle in the media is lost. We will never get fair and balanced coverage.

And he’s right about that. So why on earth would we gift them with what amounts to a tactical advantage by agreeing that the first blow will always be delivered by them, against us? Can anybody out there think of even one successful general who thought ceding the initiative to his opponent was a sure path to victory, and fought his battles accordingly?

But even if we can prevent them from stealing the election, it won’t be over. This is a battle for the soul of the nation, and they are not only trying to win elections, they seek to “fundamentally transform the United States of America” into the next socialist utopia. They are pursuing us at every opportunity because for them to win they must get rid of us.

One need only look at their policies to see what is coming. Do we want to live in a world of unlimited abortion, before, during, and after birth? Should our children live in a nation without cars, planes, meat, and affordable electricity? Do we want our grandchildren to live in a world where a president has so corrupted executive agencies under his command they try to first steal an election and then depose his successor in a coup attempt based on lies bought and paid for by the likes of Hillary Clinton? Are we willing to let Democrats give illegals the same rights and benefits as citizens? Will we allow them to force those not directly responsible to pay reparations to those who didn’t directly suffer? Can we live in a country that has taken away our 2nd Amendment and 1st Amendment rights?

Obvious questions, none of which are any longer the least bit germane or compelling. We already KNOW the answers to all of them, thanks. We also know the Left gives not a single shit what we think, and will keep right on keepin’ on regardless. So the only question to be asked at this very late date is: what are we willing to do to stop them? Over to Aesop for our closer:

While we agree with the observations, we must dispute the theme.

No, it’s not “here now”.

Because they aren’t killing you on the streets, neither singly nor in batches, nor are you doing that to them.

Yet.

And that, plainly, is the only way you’ll know when we are “there now”.

But we aren’t far from it, though as yet it hides somewhere out amidst the fog. 
Which is clearly the Fog Of War.

It’s visible, but it hasn’t yet rolled in, save in small wisps.
Know what it and its arrival portends, and make the most of the time left you, however much or little that may yet be.

Neither will the aftermath be the long twilight distrust you imagine.
When the civil conflict you imagine arises, it will be a war of survival, and extinction, and there will be but one victor left standing afterwards. There will be no Marshall Plan, no Appomattox kindness and conciliatory welcome of separated brothers.

This will be Rome vs. Carthage, for all time.

One side only shall leave the field triumphant, the other side shall cease to exist for all time.
So it must be, and so it shall.

One doesn’t make peace with a cancer.

Nope. You don’t have to like it. Hell, you shouldn’t like it, not at all. But unless some unlooked-for, against-all-odds outbreak of sanity, clarity, and moderation suddenly washes over the Left entire, what you might or mightn’t like isn’t going to enter into things.

If this truly is “a battle for the soul of the nation”—and it surely is—we need to do a lot more than just “take a page from the Democratic playbook,” which is maybe a good start but still basically reactive. Much as I do like the idea of cramming Proggy’s own tactics right down his throat until he chokes on them, it won’t suffice to finish him off unless the aforementioned outbreak of sanity and forebearance miraculously appears. Instead, we need to seize the initiative, to go on offense instead of defense. Which will require tossing ALL the old playbooks, theirs and ours, and coming up with a new one.

The Left needs to know beyond all doubt that there is no extreme to which we won’t go, no line we will not cross, to get their grubby mitts off of us—that we will never allow them to force us into submission without a real and bloody fight. Until they’re convinced of that, the battle will continue, and will escalate. But first, we’re going to have to convince ourselves.

Share

Alliances and obligations

Damn them damn pesky (((JOOOOZ!!!))) anyhow.

Ms. Omar has been rather free with remarks about how Jews are too fond of money, use their money for disproportionate influence in our politics, have dual loyalties and in some cases dual American and Israeli citizenship, and so on.

As I noted in the February 15th podcast, this is Third-Rail stuff, like talking openly about black crime rates. Also like that other Third Rail (which I guess is then a fourth rail … whatever), there’s some truth behind what she says—truth rooted in group differences.

Ashkenazi Jews have high average intelligence, so they do disproportionately well in free societies like ours. I don’t know that they are any more fond of money than the rest of us—I’m pretty fond of the stuff myself—but they make more of it per capita because of their success. And yes, U.S. foreign policy is tilted towards Israel more than it would be if none of that was the case.

This is one of those zones, along with global warming and the vaccination controversy, that I don’t venture into much. In part that’s because, like those other zones, it’s inhabited by way too many shrieking monomaniacs of one faction or another. Mostly, though, I just don’t think it’s a big deal.

Sure, we’re partial to Israel, perhaps more than we should be; but we don’t have a war guarantee with them, as we do with South Korea or our twenty-eight allies in NATO.

If Russia attacks Estonia, we are treaty-bound to go to war with Russia, a major nuclear power. If North Korea attacks South Korea, we’re back at war with the Norks, a minornuclear power.

If Egypt attacks Israel I assume we’d take Israel’s side, with diplomatic and material support, but we’re not under any obligation to do so, and it’s highly unlikely we’d send an expeditionary force. I would certainly be against sending one.

If I’m going to lose sleep over foreign commitments, I’m going to lose it over these crazy, absurd, outdated treaty obligations we have to come to the defense of countries that are rich and populous enough to defend themselves, either alone or in local alliances.

The thrust of our foreign policy should be to press the Europeans, the Koreans, the Japanese, and the rest to be as militarily self-reliant as the Israelis are.

Amen. The usual suspects howled bloody murder when Trump proposed killing off the outdated and now-pointless NATO, but I was all for it myself, and thought such a move long overdue. By clinging to a post-war mutual-defense agreement originally intended to provide a counter to an enemy now expired its own self, we encouraged the lotus-eaters of Europe to sit comfortably back and reap the rewards of having the US tote the note for their defense, focusing on pampering themselves with welfare superstates, implementing 30 hour work weeks, and such-like decadence instead of equably sharing the military-expenditure burden.

And now look what THAT bought us.

The article goes on from the excerpt above to cover some fairly far-flung ground; it’s by the eminently sensible, astute, and even-handed John Derbyshire, so you’ll surely want to read the rest of it.

Share

Giving up the ghost

Looks like the Democrat-Socialist effort to separate Trump from his base of support is beginning to bear fruit, as folks disappointed with his lack of progress on core issues begin to announce they’re all done with him, while others begin to feel their faith in his ability to wrest change from a calcified superstate ebbing.

Sadly, some of their gripes have merit: Trump’s baffling staffing choices; his misplaced faith in the essential soundness of our broken system; his hesitation and backpedaling on withdrawal from Syria; his recent inexplicable reversal on immigration; his failure to go balls to the wall on any of his primary agenda items—all are beginning to wear on at least some of his supporters. Even Vox Day, as staunch as he’s been, is speculating on the prospect of failure and proposing a possible alternative candidate for 2020:

If the God-Emperor cannot, or simply will not, build Americans their promised wall, drain the swamp, stop the foreign invasions, repatriate the post-1965 immigrants, or put America first, then perhaps Americans need to turn to a leader who is actually capable of leading his nation on its behalf…

His audacious alternative? Well, see…ummm…it’s, like…well, uhhh…

Russian President Vladimir Putin congratulated Russian women for everything they do in life, like taking care of the home and staying beautiful. He made the remarks to a group of Russian female policewomen on International Women’s Day, which was celebrated throughout the Soviet Union.

“You manage everything at work and at home, whilst staying beautiful, bright, and charming,” Putin said, adding that “It is hard to imagine the history and development of our country without the contribution of the great Russian women.”

“What does a young woman need to maintain her figure? Three things: a workout machine, a masseuse and a suitor,” Putin told the police officers….

“Our women’s ability to achieve success is remarkable. You manage to cope with everything at work and take care of the family. Your love unites, encourages, supports, consoles makes us feel warm,” reported Russian state news agency TASS on Putin’s official comments.

“You are destined to go the whole way of creating new life – the miracle of childbirth. This great happiness of motherhood and child-rearing transfigures this world, fills it with kindness, gentleness and sympathy and asserts the traditional values that have always made Russia strong,” Putin said.

Heh. What the hell, I’m down with it. With traditionalist views like that and the guts to come right out and nakedly espouse ’em, we could do worse. All kidding around aside, though, Vox knows our real problem:

Don’t get me wrong. President Trump remains the best available option for the USA. He has exceeded expectations and is one of the best Presidents the country has ever had. But unfortunately, it appears he was too little, too late. And as I warned from the start, there was very little chance that a civic nationalist would be up to the challenge posed by the realities and social rifts of a waning multiethnic, multireligious empire.

Pretty much what I said all along too. I expected Trump was going to do things I wouldn’t like. I also considered the notion that he could somehow magically reverse 60 years of decline and bureaucratic mission-creep overnight, in the face of virulent opposition from both wings of the Uniparty status-quo establishment, to be little short of ridiculous. So I can’t say I’m overly frustrated with him just yet; it’s all gone pretty much the way I figured it would, although I do find the above-mentioned immigration flip-flop in particular disturbing. But for anybody still holding out any hope at all for positive change short of open revolution and bloodshed, Trump remains the only game in town: he’s still the only guy even talking about most of these things, let alone making any honest attempt at, y’know, actually doing them.

Which doesn’t alter the likelihood that we’ll get violent revolution anyway, mind, no matter what Trump or anybody else does. The Deep State is neither reformable nor removable by political means. The long-running Uniparty distraction and masquerade has about run its tired, shabby, circular course. The Left’s genocidal intentions for us have now been openly declared. Things are falling apart; the center cannot hold. Robert Gore tots it all up:

As the middle class watches the America it once knew and cherished collapse, and comes to understand why, it realizes its head is on the chopping block. A bright middle-schooler can see that the Green New Deal will bring the economy to a shuddering stop and plunge many who have managed to escape so far into poverty. Yet the Democrats’ leading lights rush to praise the imaginary raiment of would-be empress Ocasio-Cortez.

The middle class has always aspired to better things—the American dream. Talk of 70 percent or higher tax rates and wealth taxes capitalizes on hatred of the rich, it’s open season. Why work and sacrifice to get rich if the government gets it all? Take away middle class dreams and you may well be taking away the last thing that keeps them paying their taxes, observing the law, supporting the troops and police, in short, everything that from the vantage point of the ruling class, “keeps them in line.”

What began as a gentle squeeze a century ago has become python-like constriction. Government has drained economic vitality and shuttered opportunity as the once politically stable, prosperous, and optimistic middle class dwindles. A few still reach the upper echelon, but most are consigned to creeping poverty, blunting the economic consequences with credit and the personal consequences with cannabis, alcohol, opioids, pornography, and promiscuity. It’s only going to get worse as debt grows, massive unfunded medical and pension liabilities come due, taxes rise, economies shrink, and promises are broken.

The ruling class has backed the middle class into a corner. Shoving them into poverty and vanquishing their dreams amounts to an unprecedented and dangerous experiment. Aristocratic arrogance, condescension, exclusivity, and isolation add to the combustibility. Yet they remain steadfastly oblivious to the rising anger and the risks. They don’t even recognize the danger of billing the governments they control (or the global one they want to create) as the solution to all problems. Who’s going to get the blame when things fall apart?

Love Trump or hate him, any decent, sane American simply must continue to hold out hope for him to succeed against all odds. The alternative—unpredictable, uncontrollable, irreversible, horrible—just doesn’t bear thinking about.

Share

Gettin’ sporty

Coming Unpleasantness is…unpleasant.

In recent months I’ve made frequent reference to military historian Michael Vlahos, who, as another regular guest on Mr. Batchelor’s nightly show, has been discussing the possibility of civil war in America. One of the points he’s made often is that it’s hard to say, except in retrospect, when civil wars actually begin; before the armies take the field there are years, or often decades, of deepening strife in which comity disintegrates and the two sides learn to hate and dehumanize one another. When, for example, did America’s civil war of the nineteenth century really begin? At Fort Sumter? Or was that merely the moment that a civil war already in progress for decades burst into flame? In hindsight, it’s clear that the bitter antipathy between North and South was already beyond all hope of reconciliation long before the shooting started. The evidence is plain enough: Bleeding Kansas, the John Brown atrocities, the caning of Charles Sumner, the Congressional brawl of 1858 — or even the Graves-Cilley duel, which happened all the way back in 1838, and became a rallying point for an already darkening North-South antagonism.

So: has our new civil war already begun?

I’d say so, yeah. It’s my belief that any Point Beyond Which Etc has been passed, probably longer ago than many might imagine. Certainly the brazen lawlessness of the Obama junta could be said to have amounted to a Rubicon of sorts; the metastasizing unbending fanaticism and batshit lunacy of the fascist Left after Trump’s election, along with the now-obvious malevolence of the Deep State, makes where we now stand plain enough to any with eyes to see. Thus:

How did we come to such a pass? For those of us on the Right side of this gaping chasm, the answer is clear: the ground under our own feet hasn’t shifted much at all, while everything to our Left has torn away at an accelerating pace. Cultural and political opinions that were shared, without controversy, by almost every American just a few years ago — opinions still held by half of the nation’s people — are now “right-wing extremism”, and their public expression denounced and suppressed as “hate speech”. Saying a thing that once was obvious to everyone can now cost you your reputation, your livelihood, and in many parts of the West today, your freedom.

We know how close we are to the edge, to the dissolution of civilized order into chaos and tyranny. We can feel in our bones the implacable hatred of our would-be commissars for everything we believe is good and right and true — along with a growing understanding that their hatred doesn’t stop at our traditions and beliefs. As long as we live and breathe, we are a threat. If the blood-soaked history of the twentieth century can teach us anything at all, it should teach us that it will not be enough to see us displaced and destroyed. They will want us dead and gone.

One of the milestones along the road to civil war is the normalization of violence as a rational response to a dehumanized enemy, followed soon after by an eagerness for general conflict.

Oh, rilly. You don’t say.

This eagerness arises first in the breasts of those seeking radical change, who see violence as justified by the righteousness of their cause, and who are usually young and excitable people who have a much better sense of how to destroy what exists than to build and preserve a system that, however flawed, actually works. (This also reflects that the Right, almost by definition, moves toward order, while the Left is always entropic.) But the Right is eminently capable of reactive, or even proactive, violence when confronted by an existential threat to order, and is every bit as liable to the “othering” and dehumanization of its enemies in preparation for war.

There is, then, a spiral of mutual threat and provocation in the run-up to war, along the course of which a people can go from general comity and commonality, to political or cultural division, to rancorous debate, to increasingly bitter struggle for political power, to “othering” and dehumanization, to normalized violence, to bloodthirsty eagerness for war, to general armed conflict. We are already well into the latter stages, and even on the Right I see martial enthusiasm increasing: the hatred of the enemy, the idea that we are now so far beyond reconciliation that there is going to be a fight, and that we might as well get on with it (especially as we are the ones who will most likely win).

If you ask me, the Right’s “hatred of the enemy” is not merely understandable; it is justified. In fact, I’ll go ya one further: it is necessary, a matter of survival. No, we don’t want a Civil War v2.0, or anything resembling one. All we ever wanted was for them to leave us the fuck alone. But the Left long ago took that option off the table, and we were NOT consulted about it.

Those of us on the Right tend to be a lot better educated when it comes to history than our enemies. We know already what will be the inevitable upshot of their ascension to total power over us: gulags, killing fields, death camps. Holocausts. Holodomors. Great Leaps Forward. That sort of thing.

They’ve become unabashed about threatening us directly and unequivocally, about declaring without the least reticence that they want us dead. So regret and deplore it all we might, we’re still left with only just the two choices here: bow our heads and take whatever they decide to deal out, or…this:

They are going to have to be not just beaten back, but utterly destroyed. All memory of them wiped from human reckoning. Not just their army destroyed, but their women killed, and their babies’ heads smashed on rocks, and all those who cheered them on eliminated to the last man. Their livestock slaughtered, their temples of error pulled down until one stone lies not upon another, and their fields sown with salt, that nothing will ever grow there again. Like Carthage after the Third Punic War, which policy ensured for all time that there never came a Fourth Punic War.

And their calling cards are the same ones throughout history.
They want to shut you up.
They want to disarm you.
And then, free of your arguments and your arms, they want to kill you.

That’s why they now openly proclaim the outright plan to strip the clear acknowledgements of the First and Second Amendments, and muse before God and everybody how joyful and pleasant it would be to come and round you up, and kill you.

Take such thoughts and such people exactly at their word.

Some historically-minded wonder what it would have been like if only someone had strangled Hitler in his crib. It would never happen, for the same reasons you aren’t doing it now. You have half a Congress full of would-be führersgruppenführers, and gauleiters, openly telling you what they want, and will do given the slightest chance, and yet nobody’s fired so much as a single shot. And likely, nobody will. They wait until the columns march into whatever suffices for Poland these days before they’ll recognize they let things go too far, and only pay attention too late. Pray the response is not too little.

As Aesop elsewhere says, they think they want this. But there’s a slight problem: they know not what they do. And as always the case, the absolute worst thing that could ever happen—to Leftards and to everybody else—is for them to get it. You average white male American is a very peaceable and forgiving sort. He’ll endure whole backhoes full of shit being dumped over his head with little in the way of retribution beyond angry complaint…right up until the moment he won’t. Force him to admit that, as Aesop says, it’s necessary for him to take his enemies at their word, that his way of life, his family, his home, his very life itself is threatened, he will buckle down with a quickness.

And then? A few historical reminders might be useful at this point: Hiroshima. Nagasaki. Tokyo. Dresden.

Those last two should be particularly noted. White Male Americans were so absolutely, positively determined to defeat utterly their last batch of existential foes that we actually came up with the idea of the fuel-air bomb—a bomb so vicious and evil that it works by quite literally sucking all the oxygen from the surrounding area to feed itself. Whereupon the enemy is confronted with two highly unpleasant options of his own: he can burn to death, or he can suffocate. Oh, all right, all right; he can also be crushed under the rubble of buildings leveled by the initial blast wave, too. Or torn to shreds by said blast wave his own self, should he be in its path.

By the way: did I mention that we hit Dresden with this hell-weapon more than once?

In four raids between 13 and 15 February 1945, 722 heavy bombers of the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and 527 of the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) dropped more than 3,900 tons of high-explosive bombs and incendiary devices on the city. The bombing and the resulting firestorm destroyed over 1,600 acres (6.5 km2) of the city centre. An estimated 22,700 to 25,000 people were killed, although larger casualty figures have been claimed. Three more USAAF air raids followed, two occurring on 2 March aimed at the city’s railway marshalling yard and one smaller raid on 17 April aimed at industrial areas.

The attack on Dresden quickly became controversial, which is subject to popular debate into the 21st century. Immediate German propaganda claims following the attacks and post-war discussions on whether the attacks were justified have led to the bombing becoming one of the moral causes célèbres of the war. A 1953 United States Air Force report defended the operation as the justified bombing of a strategic target, which they noted was a major rail transport and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the German war effort. Several researchers claim not all of the communications infrastructure, such as the bridges, were targeted, nor were the extensive industrial areas outside the city center. Critics of the bombing have claimed that Dresden was a cultural landmark of little or no strategic significance, and that the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the military gains. Some in the German far-right refer to the bombing as a mass murder calling it “Dresden’s Holocaust of bombs”. According to other critics, given the number of civilian casualties and a claimed paucity of strategic targets, Dresden’s destruction was unjustifiable and should be called a war crime. They claim the city could have been spared, like Rome, Paris, and Kyoto, though both British and American militaries defended the bombing as necessary.

Large variations in the claimed death toll have fuelled the controversy. In March 1945, the German government ordered its press to publish a falsified casualty figure of 200,000 for the Dresden raids, and death toll estimates as high as 500,000 have been given. The city authorities at the time estimated up to 25,000 victims, a figure that subsequent investigations supported, including a 2010 study commissioned by the city council.

So to recap, then: the German authorities have only in the last decade been able to finalize the official body count from these truly nightmarish attacks…which were launched against a city of no real strategic or military importance at all. Because we WANTED TO, that’s why. The Germans are still complaining about the inhuman ferocity of them, and they ain’t entirely wrong. Our response? Meh; don’t start no shit, won’t be no shit. Start some shit, God have mercy on you. Because WE sure won’t.

I’ve said it a bunch of times already, even though I have no expectation at all that any such thing will be happen. But Proggy REALLY needs to think all this through.

Share

Categories

Archives

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

"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

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