Archive

Archive for the ‘Freaks!’ Category

Can’t appease them, can’t accommodate them, shouldn’t try

August 15th, 2017 4 comments

Worse than a waste of time.

I’m gonna tell you this. It isn’t gonna be over. This is not gonna stop, the haranguing. And what does that mean? It means even though the president gave these groups that have been bellyaching the exact words they want to hear, they’re not going to stop, which means they’re actually after something else. And whatever it is, it isn’t peace, and it isn’t justice, and it isn’t freedom, and it isn’t tolerance in America. And they’re going to continue because their objective is to totally turn things upside down. They’re not interested in resolutions.

And on the other side of this where you have the Nazis and the white supremacists, they’re told every day that they’ve benefit from white privilege. That’s the latest rage on campus, white privilege, understanding your whiteness, understanding the problem. These people can’t even find jobs, for crying out loud, and they’re being told they’re benefiting from white privilege, so they’re ticked off. And there are people benefiting from both sides of this being ticked off. Find them. Find who benefits here. Financially, politically, however it happens, somebody is benefiting, somebody wants these kinds of things to happen.

There IS no appeasing or placating them; even this wouldn’t do it.

I’ll tell you what else let’s do. Let’s not stop at Robert E. Lee statues. Let’s ban Gone With the Wind. Let’s ban the book, and let’s make sure the movie can no longer be purchased, rented, or exhibited anywhere. We will get rid of not just Robert E. Lee. We’ll tear down anything that tells anybody where Gettysburg is and what happened there. (interruption) Well, now wait. No, Gettysburg will stand.

Gettysburg will stand ’cause that’s where they had their lunch handed to them, so Gettysburg will stand. But we’ll go all the way back to Lincoln. We’ll take Lincoln’s name off of Mount Rushmore and we’ll put Trump up there. (I’m only kidding.) But, I mean, let’s do this. Let’s get rid of all of these outdoor signs of the nation’s injustice and unfairness. Get rid of everything so that American slavery is never known to have existed in any way. All monuments, all battlefields, all reenactments will be erased.

We shut down any restaurant that serves chicken fried steak, that serves biscuits and gravy. I mean, anything that can be traced back to that evil heritage of the Confederacy. Get rid of all of it! That would make everybody shut up, right? That would just silence everybody about the inherent evil of the United States related to slavery. Make it disappear, and then everything would be okay, right?

Of course not. But therein lies the beauty of it, if there’s any to be found: the Left has been reduced to a constant state of abject, perpetual misery and fear. Consider: they’re afraid of internal combustion engines. They’re afraid of guns. They’re afraid of the naturally-occurring and unalterable condition of climate change. They’re afraid of storms, and believe they must certainly herald planet-wide doom and disaster. They’re afraid of violence—when they’re not perpetrating it themselves, usually in massive groups against a handful of people.

They’re afraid of red meat. They’re afraid of genetically modified vegetables, even though every vegetable currently extant is genetically modified to one degree or another. They’re afraid of literature that contains words or concepts they disapprove of. They’re afraid of large corporations, especially pharmaceutical companies. They’re afraid of tobacco. They’re afraid of the Russians—for now. They’re even afraid of their own bloated government, in those periods when they’re not actually in control of it.

They’re afraid of Donald Trump, Rush Limbaugh, Republicans, and conservatives generally. Deathly afraid. It’s why they hate them all so implacably, of course.

They’re afraid of coal-fired power plants—and nuclear ones too, and pretty much any other kind that can actually provide enough energy to be effective. They’re afraid of cops. And soldiers. And Christians. Deep down, they’re actually afraid of Muslims too, which is why they so obsequiously suck up to them. In truth, they’re actually deathly afraid of men—the ones they haven’t emasculated, feminized, and steercotted, that is. The ones they have managed to de-ball, they’re contemptuous of. Which is an especially fine sort of poetic justice if you ask me.

Strangely, the one thing they don’t seem afraid of is Nazis. But then, since 1945, there’s always been too few of those around to really matter much anyway. Being so close together ideologically, maybe there’s a familiarity there that they find comforting, who knows.

With all that fear and angst driving them, they’ll never run out of things for their Big Daddy Government to protect them from. Which is exactly where their tremulousness becomes OUR problem, too. But it’s also what makes observing their now-daily nervous breakdowns so much fun.

Can you smell it update! A certain stench is a-rising.

Details remain thin. It is not clear, for example, how many alt-right demonstrators were there, though many reports indicate that they were substantially outnumbered by counter-demonstrators, largely drawn from the same crowd that has been rioting at the drop of Donald Trump’s name since November 9.

So, obviously, this was a fraught moment. But what would have been the outcome had the police and the Virginia National Guard—both on hand in strong numbers—done their duty, enforced properly obtained demonstration permits, and preserved the right of the warring parties to make their respective points without being physically attacked, one by the other and vice versa? It’s worth remembering that Charlottesville did everything it could to prevent the demonstrations, issuing permits only after being sued by the ACLU. And when push came to shove—literally—on Saturday, police and National Guardsmen were to be found only on the periphery of the brawling. Indeed, the Virginia ACLU reported that police were refusing to intervene unless specifically ordered to do so.

Almost at first contact, Charlottesville mayor Michael Signer and Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe declared a state of emergency and cancelled the demonstrators’ permits, whereupon police began funneling the alt-right protestors away from the designated demonstration site—and, some reports have it, toward the counter-protestors. The carnage followed in short order. Whether the breakdown in police protection was purposeful—that is, intended to quash a constitutionally protected demonstration and provoke a violent confrontation—is a question unlikely to be pursued in Virginia’s present political environment. As partisan eye-gougers go, Governor McAuliffe, a Democrat, is near the top of the list; Mayor Signer, also a Democrat, seems to be cut from the same cloth.

But deliberate or not, the effect was the same: when the sun went down over Charlottesville Saturday, the First Amendment was lying in the dust, and the civic ties meant to bind all Americans were just that much weaker.

Thanks to the unbridgeable chasm between Statists and lovers of liberty, those civic ties are all but extinct anyway, and rightly if tragically so. The First Amendment, along with the rest of the Constitution, isn’t far behind. Scapegoat them all you may like, but it wasn’t the Nazi boobs who killed ’em off, either. As Limbaugh says above, somebody wanted this to happen, and from the official maneuvering before and during it seems to be fairly clear who. The question we need to be asking is: why?

(Via Insty)

Share

Embrace the hate!

August 9th, 2017 Comments off

This one starts off with a GREAT quote from the esteemed and estimable Dr Helen Smith:

Liberals do not believe in the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness which are American ideals, or at least they used to be. If you love freedom, then you will be hated by the modern liberal who believes that government should regulate individual freedom. If you love freedom and believe that the state does not own you, then leftist hate should be a goal, not a fear.

You said a mouthful there, Doc. Hawkins goes on to make an essential point: they ain’t exactly helping those they claim to love, either.

Meanwhile, how do liberals “help” minority Americans? How’s Compton looking these days? How about Chicago? Flint, Michigan? Liberal “help” means living in poverty in terrible neighborhoods, but always having someone else to blame for your failed life. It means feeling angry, victimized and hated by people who’ve never thought twice about you while liberals promise to help you by tearing down statues of Confederate generals. That doesn’t put money in your pocket, but it makes cosmopolitan liberals feel better about themselves.

This is usually how liberal “help” turns out for people.

Transsexual men, you don’t have a mental illness! Mutilate yourself through surgery and libs will claim that the guys who don’t want to date you and the women who don’t want to share a bathroom with you are bigots! Lord knows you wouldn’t want to suggest mentally ill people get psychological treatment instead of life-altering surgery.

Liberals “help” the poor by raising the minimum wage, but shrug their shoulders when it inevitably causes large numbers of poor Americans to lose their jobs. Conservatives who quite correctly predicted that would happen are called heartless.

It’s just charades, dumbshows, and misrepresentation all the way down with these people. in fact, there are two rules of thumb to bear in mind when analyzing their statements and proposals, both of which are invariably true: 1) for everything they say, the opposite is going to be the truth, and 2) whenever they complain bitterly about something our side is supposedly doing, a la the Trump/Russia nontroversy, it’s actually going to be something they’re doing themselves.

Share

Why you don’t put mentally disturbed people in foxholes

August 1st, 2017 3 comments

Not if you actually want to win wars, you don’t.

  • Guys would literally snap over a dear John letter. Their personal issues came out and they were instantly combat ineffective.
  • Now take someone confused about whether they are a man/woman. Take those psychological and emotional issues and put them in that environment
  • Take someone who is right off the bat not uniform or part of the same team. Give them special treatment because of their identity.
  • Take that person, put them in that stressful war environment and watch what happens. It’s a fucking ticking time bomb.
  • You have to be incredibly tough mentally, physically and emotionally. War is not a fucking video game. It tests every ounce of your being.
  • You can’t teach someone to be a fearless warrior in a fucking PowerPoint. You either have it or you don’t. You can hack it or you can’t.
  • We had guys who couldn’t. When faced with combat situations they crumbled. They had mental and emotional issues. They were a liability.
  • To be successful at war, you have to become a warrior mentally, physically, and emotionally. You can’t fake it and go through the motions.
  • In war if it comes down to kill or be killed, and you hesitate, you’re dead. It’s a simple as that. It’s not a fucking video game.

No, it certainly is not; hell, boot camp isn’t, much less actual war. The idea that every precious snowflake has some kind of natural right to be in the military is horseshit. Fallen arches can keep you out; asthma can. And mental illness can too, which is exactly what “transgenderism” is. Also horseshit: the idea that the military is some kind of social-justice-oriented cultural leveling device, or Welcome Wagon with guns. The military is for killing people, breaking things, and enforcing our national will on adversaries. Anything inhibiting its ability to do those things needs to stay well to the other side of the barbed wire, and should stick to spitting on soldiers at airports instead. That comes more naturally to them anyway.

Share

Another small victory for common sense

July 26th, 2017 2 comments

The whole country ought to be breathing a sigh of relief at this undoing of another of Obama’s sneaky attempts at hamstringing the military one small, umm, cut at a time.

President Trump tweeted on Wednesday that “transgender individuals” should not be allowed to serve in “any capacity” in the US military.

“After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow …,” he wrote on Twitter.

“Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming…”

He finished up by writing: “victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you.”

Needless to say, the Hitler comparisons and general hysterical hyperbole are flying thick and heavy on the deranged Left over this. Which as far as I’m concerned is an added benefit. As Bill says:

First, enjoy the sound of nuclear-level splody-heads among the usual suspects.

Second: Note that he’s not banning actual gays, (or bisexuals) only various forms of drag costuming. I’ve never thought that people who want to cut off their plumbing or put on dresses and wigs should be a civil rights issue in the first place.

Nope, it ain’t. It’s a mental health issue; “transgenderism” is a psychological disorder, yet another in a long list of non-issues that the Left has tried to use to further undermine and demoralize mainstream America, deploying the power of tyranny to force the hated Normals not just to tolerate and/or benignly ignore, but to wildly celebrate.

So-called “transgenders” are, put plainly, sick. There is absolutely no reason whatever to hand them rifles and stick them into the ranks, and plenty of reasons not to. Ordinary people not pimping a hate-America agenda know this full well; you can bet your life that the overwhelming majority of our much-put-upon soldiery does too. They also know full well who has supported them all through the years…and who has lined up at airports on their return home from every conflict in the last five or six decades to spit on and obscenely berate them.

Share

Delenda frigging EST

July 19th, 2017 5 comments

Just when you think they’ve reached Peak Lunacy.

I wrote an essay in The Washington Post last year, during the height of the Brock Turner case, about my sons and rape culture. I didn’t think it would be controversial when I wrote it; I was sure most parents grappled with raising sons in the midst of rape culture.

Well, actually, ummm, no. Most parents know that “rape culture” is complete fucking horseshit—the sane ones, that is. Or so I would hope.

One of my sons was hurt by my words, although he’s never told me so. He doesn’t understand why I lumped him and his brother together in my essay. He sees himself as the “good” one, the one who is sensitive and thoughtful, and who listens instead of reacts. He doesn’t understand that even quiet misogyny is misogyny, and that not all sexists sound like Twitter trolls.

If he’s at all intelligent, he understands that not all of what a twisted freak like you calls “misogyny” is actually, y’know, misogyny.

He is angry at me now, although he won’t admit that either, and his anger led him to conservative websites and YouTube channels; places where he can surround himself with righteous indignation against feminists, and tell himself it’s ungrateful women like me who are the problem.

“Ungrateful”? No, not so much that. Demented, hate-filled, obsessive Feminazis like you, yeah.

I teeter frequently between supporting my son and educating him. Is it my job as his mother to ensure he feels safe emotionally, no matter what violence he spews?

What “violence” he “spews”? I’d really have to see an example of such before I’d believe it. As for translating the rest of it: For “supporting my son,” insert “being an actual loving mother.” For “educating him,” substitute “lecturing, hectoring, bullyragging, and intimidating him out of any trace of normal masculinity.” Your “job as a mother”? You haven’t the vaguest fucking clue, you sick bint.

As a single mother, I sometimes wonder whether the real problem is that my sons have no role models for the type of men I hope they become.

Of course they don’t. That’s because the “men” you hope they become aren’t men at all; they’re emasculated, steercotted little pussies, pushed around and bullied out of any truly masculine identity at all. I repeat: sick bint.

I know I’m not supposed to cast an entire sex with a single paint brush — not all men, I’m sure some readers are thinking and preparing to type or tweet. But if it’s impossible for a white person to grow up without adopting racist ideas, simply because of the environment in which they live, how can I expect men not to subconsciously absorb at least some degree of sexism? White people aren’t safe, and men aren’t safe, no matter how much I’d like to assure myself that these things aren’t true.

How very sad for you, you weak, pathetic freak. Every single premise presented in this paragraph is simply fucked beyond redemption. And with that, we draw near to the nut of things.

My sons won’t rape unconscious women behind a dumpster, and neither will most of the progressive men I know.

Neither will most of the men you know, period, de-balled Progressivists or otherwise.

I love my sons, and I love some individual men. It pains me to say that I don’t feel emotionally safe with them, and perhaps never have with a man, but it needs to be said because far too often we are afraid to say it. This is not a reflection of something broken or damaged in me; it is a reflection of the systems we build and our boys absorb.

And there it is: it most certainly IS a reflection of something broken and damaged in you. This whole wretched screed is nothing BUT a public display of just how badly damaged, how completely broken, you are.

This deranged bitch is a perfect exemplar of the dank, twisted hole into which Progressivism drags everything within its reach. Pity the poor boys raised by such a diseased mind; what hope have they of ever leading a normal, sane life after having been endlessly harangued during their formative years by the kind of woman who would put her petty politics ahead of properly nurturing her offspring?

It’s easy enough to mock a sicko like her, sure enough, and it should surely be done every chance we get. But we should never lose sight of an important fact: the damage done by her despicable ilk is real, and most likely irrevocable. Her sons may have the strength to rebel against her, and throw off her malignant influence in the end. But it’s likely going to cost them. And in the end, it will cost all of us.

Share

The identity transaction

July 3rd, 2017 2 comments

Haven’t looked in on Eric Raymond in a while. I have been remiss.

There was a very silly news story recently about “Claire”, a transsexual “girl” with a penis who complains that she is rejected by straight guys for ‘having male parts’. Er, how was “she” expecting anything different? By trying to get dates with heterosexual teenage boys using a female presentation, she was making an offer that there is about her person the sort of sexual parts said boys want to play with. Since “she” does not in fact have a vagina, this offer was fraudulent and there’s no wonder the boys rejected it.

More to the point, why is this “girl” treated as anything but a mental case? Leaving aside the entire question of how real transgenderism is as a neuropsychological phenomenon, “she” clearly suffers from a pretty serious disconnect with observable reality. In particular, those delusions about teenage boys…

I can anticipate several objections to this transactional account of identity. One is that is cruel and illiberal to reject an offer of “I claim identity X” if the person claiming feels that identity strongly enough. This is essentially the position of those journalists from The Hill.

To which I can only reply: you can feel an identity as a programmer as strongly as you want, but if you can’t either already sling code or are visibly working hard on repairing that deficiency, you simply don’t make the nut. Cruelty doesn’t enter into this; if I assent to your claim I assist your self-deceit, and if I repeat it I assist you in misleading or defrauding others.

It is pretty easy to see how this same analysis applies to “misgendering” people with the “wrong” pronouns. People who use the term “misgender” generally follow up with claims about the subject’s autonomy and feelings. Which is well enough, but such considerations do not justify being complicit in the deceit of others any more than they do with respect to “I am a programmer”.

A related objection is that I have stolen the concept of “identity” by transactionalizing it. That is, true “identity” is necessarily grounded not in public performance but private feelings – you are what you feel, and it’s somehow the responsibility of the rest of the world to keep up.

But…if I’m a delusional psychotic who feels I’m Napoleon, is it the world’s responsibility to keep up? If I, an overweight clumsy shortish white guy, feel that I’m a tall agile black guy under the skin, are you obligated to choose me to play basketball? Or, instead, are you justified in predicting that I can’t jump?

You can’t base “identity” on a person’s private self-beliefs and expect sane behavior to emerge any more than you can invite everyone to speak private languages and expect communication to happen.

The self-contradictory madness of Progressivism has reached its end-stages. There really isn’t a whole lot further for it to go, and it needs to be put out of its—and our—misery, before it can do any more damage.

Share

The latest imagined, nonexistent “right”

June 29th, 2017 3 comments

And trust me, it’s a doozy.

Vice, known lately for covering super serious news, published a 2,000-word probethis week by Meredith Talusan, a writer who doesn’t identify as either a man or a woman. The central existential question: “Why can’t my famous nonconforming friends get laid?”

Talusan describes the friends in question, Jacob Tobia and Alok Vaid-Menon, both outspoken activists with tens of thousands of followers.

Neither has undergone hormone treatment, so they have “visible body hair that marks them as more obviously trans.” Both have a five-o’clock shadow, high heels and lipstick, and “they” as a pronoun.

It turns out, Talusan says, that while the LGBT community is increasingly accepting of people with such specific and niche professed identities… no one really wants to bed them.

Go look at the pictures. Go on, I dare you. The conclusion of the article is hilarious:

From Talusan’s perspective, the fact that no one wants to sleep with Tobia and Vaid-Menon is a sign of injustice. “Jacob and Alok don’t need more claps or raised hands, more YASSSS’s or SLAY’s,” the article concludes. “What they need is to be found deeply, undeniably f*ckable.”

That’s right: Vice is now pushing pity f*cks for social justice.

They obviously are NOT “deeply, undeniably fuckable.” If they were, they wouldn’t have to be whining about not getting laid. What they actually are is spoiled, overindulged, mentally unbalanced freaks. And honestly? Neither of these two is even particularly good-looking, freakishness aside.

But there’s no laying the freakishness aside. What this is akin to is putting on a clown suit, makeup, a big red nose, a frightwig, and big floppy shoes, walking around town, and then complaining when people point and laugh and call you a clown. Ace points out another big problem here:

I ask this a lot but I’ll ask it again: If it’s fair game for George Stephanopolous to ask Mitt Romney, out of nowhere, whether he’d ban contraception– that is, to ask a Republican about an idea he’d never suggested, just to put him in the position of being associated with a fringe sort of position and also having to distance himself from a fringe sort of position that may be held by some of his potential voters — why is George Stephanopolous not asking prominent Democrats if they agree with the proposition that being “tolerant” of gay and/or trans people means that straight people should be willing to date them?

If we get asked such wedge issue questions about difficult, embarrassing, wedge-issue sexual topics, why the hell shouldn’t Claire McCaskill and Elizabeth Warren and Lord God King Barack Obama be asked if “Love Trumps Hate” means that straight people should repress their own “Born This Way” Sexuality and do some gay dating?

Oh, they’d never dream of it. They already had trouble enough dragging the country along for the gay marriage circus; if they think the Progtards are in trouble politically now, just let questions like that start getting asked on Good Morning America or the Today Show and see how Middle America reacts. The “liberal” media, firmly in the pockets of the Democrat Socialist Party, would never even contemplate doing something so prospectively harmful to their lords, masters, and partners in crime. Sure, they’d be happy enough to establish a double standard for Republicans and hound them about it if they thought it would get them anywhere, but who could possibly be surprised in the least by that, at this stage of the game?

Look, I’m willing enough to concede that gay people can’t really help who and what they are, that they don’t choose their sexuality; they’ve always been a part of the human parade, and always will be, and I’m not interested in persecuting them or harming them in any way. I have a handful of gay friends myself, and they’re great people, and I don’t bear them the least ill will.

But they have always done me the courtesy of acknowledging that I didn’t really choose my sexuality either—that it’s every bit as indelible a part of my makeup as their same-sex attraction is for them. As for “doing a little gay dating”, or bedding either of the two tragic psychological trainwrecks in the article: um, sorry, fellas, but…no. Not ever. Not interested, not under any circumstances. I really don’t care what you get up to among yourselves, it ain’t none of my business. But if the next step in societal evolution regarding gay rights is to insist that straight people MUST be willing to consider romantic and sexual relationships with their own gender—that we are somehow harming gays or are less “evolved” or “woke” because we aren’t interested in any such thing—well, you guys are going to find yourselves in for some pretty rough sledding. And if you think it’s a great idea to somehow push for legislation along those lines to force us into it (and as outrageous and absurd as it sounds, you already know somebody is going to, very soon now), well, that’s when your troubles will REALLY begin.

Trust me on this. Seriously, you guys.

Share

Another typical Democrat expresses his mainstream, moderate views

June 22nd, 2017 3 comments

Tolerant, broad-minded; capable of honest, reasonable debate while respecting the views of those who disagree with him.

Not Democrat Socialists, of course. Sorry, I was thinking of someone else there.

“I’ve seen the prayer ya’ll were saying at the baseball diamond … I think ya’ll better hit your knees and pray for the people that you’re screwin’ up their lives,” the message stated, according to a criminal complaint filed by Capitol Police in U.S. District Court in Columbus.

“We’re coming to get every g**amn one of you and your families. Maybe the next one taken down will be your daughter. Huh? Or your wife. Or even you.”

Yeah, well, better bring help, old man. There are a few of us out here who aren’t going to stand idly by and be your punching bags any longer. And the number is growing day by day.

E. Stanley Hoff, 68, is charged with threatening to “assault, kidnap, or murder a United States official.” He appeared in federal court wearing a Mickey Mouse T-shirt, jeans and sandals in addition to ankle and wrist chains.

No word on the source of the patchouli-and-unwashed-hippie funk wafting around the courtroom, but I think we’re all comfortable enough making an educated guess on that one.

I didn’t choose it as one of my categories for this post, but the question of “where do we go from here?” is becoming more pressing with each new attack or verbal threat. As I’ve said all along: they will NOT stop. They will NEVER stop. They will have to BE stopped. Deplore it if you like; agonize over it as much as you wish, it’s the ugly truth. Which leads me to revisit Steyn’s post as I said the other day I would, and continue my commentary on it. This was how Mark’s post concluded:

If you allow society to degenerate to the point where there is less and less in common to bind competing groups together, there will be action…but just as surely there will – slowly, eventually, belatedly – be reaction. And the most obvious reaction is to reach for the same weapon your opponent’s got on you: In the Cold War, the Communists acquired nukes. In the culture war, the right is storming the stage. In the jihad, the Islamophobe rented a van.

Mark says this with a tone of regret, and that’s appropriate enough; it IS depressing where the Islamist and Leftist scum have led us, how our society has been degraded by them while decent people exercised an unrequited forbearance and let it happen. It’s shameful, it’s lamentable—and it never should have occurred at all.

BUT. IT. HAS. We can argue till the cows come home about who’s ultimately to blame: them for doing it, or us for letting them. What we can NOT do is allow it to continue to progress. And I think it’s all too obvious by now where turning the other cheek and taking the supposed “high road” has gotten us.

No, I don’t want to have to shoot anybody; no, I don’t long for a second Civil War. But as with the Muslims, war has been brought to our very doorstep. And if we’re going to be left with no choice but to fight, well, I’d just as soon win this one, thanks. To misappropriate Sir Walter Scott: breathes there a man with soul so dead that he’s willing to stand meekly by and see his own, his native land stolen from him by despicable curs who loathe it to the darkest depths of their coal-black souls?

Secession, partition, division, whatever. Those all have heretofore seemed unlikely to the point of absurdity, and I’ve made those very arguments myself. But I’m not as sure about that now as I was even a few months ago; they’re beginning to look less and less so these days, seems to me. In fact, they’re coming to seem like the only way of averting a greater conflagration so dire as to be incomprehensible. If the old Chinese curse about living in interesting times is indeed apocryphal, well, it’s none the less apt for it.

Update! Jim Goad offers a useful suggestion:

Mind you, this happened right on the heels of the Kathy Griffin decapitation scandal and a Central Park production of Julius Caesar that’s a transparent excuse to stage another mock Trump assassination.

It happened amid an insane cultural climate where the day before Hodgkinson’s rampage, a black male shooter in Indianapolis fired at a truck that was flying a “Make America Great Again” flag.

Where on June 11, the Huffington Post ran an article that openly called for Donald Trump and “everyone assisting in his agenda” to be tried for treason and publicly executed. Where a successful TV producer can encourage Trump-haters to “pick up a goddamn brick,” and he doesn’t get fired. Where a college professor says that Republicans “should be lined up and shot,” and he doesn’t get fired, either. Where ever since Trump’s election—and, frankly, for about a year leading up to it—his supporters have had the living shit kicked out of them coast-to-coast, and all the media can focus on is “right-wing hate speech” and the dastardly specter of Islamophobia.

A climate where the left is so egregiously insane and vicious and bloodthirsty—all in the name of compassion, of course—that the incomparably wormy Jesse Benn, who has previously called for “white wounding” and for violence against Trump supporters, saw no problem with a fellow traveler “shooting a racist lawmaker in the hip” last Wednesday. It’s a climate where, after the shooting, an obese New Jersey Democrat openly calls for the murder of Republicans with the hashtags #HuntRepublicans and #HuntRepublicanCongressmen.

The extreme left has always been a Misfit Magnet, and James Hodgkinson was merely the latest disaffected mold inspector to allow blindly self-righteous and stridently humorless leftist propaganda to program the empty hard drive that was his brain. He was merely one in a confoundingly endless assembly line of losers who sought to blame “the rich” for what appears to be his own largely self-inflicted personal misery.

There’s nothing more dangerous than some unhappy idiot with a gun who is implacably convinced beyond all reasoning of his moral superiority. If this is going to end in a full-blown shooting war—and that’s where it seems to be headed—let’s shoot all the fanatics first. Once they’re all dead, we may not even need a war.

And it would have the added advantage of thinning the ranks of Democrat Socialist Party voters right into total irrelevance—not that they’re all that far from that devoutly-to-be-wished consummation already.

Updated update! Dutoit has a suggestion too, related but more specifically targeted:

Here’s my suggestion for first responders who are called to an inner-city (i.e. Black) neighborhood:

“If you see them drowning. If you see them in a burning building. If they are bleeding out in an emergency room. If the ground is crumbling beneath them. If they are in a park and they turn their weapons on each other: do nothing. Least of all put your life on the line for theirs, and do not dare think doing so, putting your life on the line for theirs, gives you reason to feel celestial. Save the life of those that would kill you is the opposite of virtuous. Let. Them. Fucking. Die. And smile a bit when you do.”

Actually, those aren’t my words. They’re the words of some Black dude, talking about how first responders should let White people die.

Thing is—UNEXPECTED!—it’s already happening, in Chicago at least:

Chicago is having a bloody year.

Already since January, more than 100 people have been murdered in the city — double the number of homicides in Chicago during the first two months last year. The number of shooting incidents is also up by 120 percent compared to the first nine weeks of 2015.

The spike in violent crime comes at a time when the police in Chicago are under increased scrutiny for misconduct.

Interim police Superintendent John Escalante acknowledges there might have been a “Laquan McDonald effect,” where police officers are less aggressive and even somewhat passive in pursuing criminals.

“There’s a little bit of an effect,” says Escalante. “Every officer I think, not just here in Chicago, but every police officer around the country does not want to be that next viral video.”

Police in Chicago made 30 percent fewer arrests in the early part of this year compared to last year. Street stops are down more than 80 percent so far this year.

Couldn’t happen in a nicer violent shithole, and I don’t blame the cops one fucking bit. Stay well back, guys; the vicious, retarded creeps aren’t worth a single drop of either your blood or your sweat. Let them police themselves…or drop dead.

Nothing to see here, folks, move along. It’s just another “liberal”-run city descending into Detroit status, that’s all. There will assuredly be more.

Share

Shatner gigged

May 15th, 2017 1 comment

By pigs.

Writing on Twitter—which, for better or worse, is the closest the public has to an agora these days—Shatner was responding to some foo-foo pseudo-academic essay regarding what Star Trek’s Captain Kirk character can teach us about gender equality in a postmodern/post-gender society, or something like that, because I have to confess I didn’t read the article and would frankly rather have long knitting needles shoved forcefully through my ears than ever have to read, or even ponder the existence of, such an article again. Apparently the term “toxic masculinity” reared its stinky head in the article, to which Shatner responded:

Feminism is great but terms like toxic masculinity are degrading. It borders on that imaginary concept to feminists: misandry.

This toxic idea that Shatner shat out chafed the ample thighs of one Mari Brighe, a dude who thinks he’s a woman and who’s pursuing a career agitating for the imaginary “rights” that he imagines are being denied to the people who share his delusion. Mari—again, a white dude who for some reason has taken it upon himself to speak for white and nonwhite women against white-male pathologies—denied that “misandry” even exists:

“Feminism is great except that part where it criticized men.”

“Misandry is about as real as Klingons, Bill.”

All things being equal, I would say the idea that Mari Brighe is a woman is roughly as real as Klingons. On the other hand, I think “misandry”—a generalized hatred for and/or disparagement of males as a group—is as real as testicle cancer.

The snowflakes’ idea that they can alter biology, economics, culture, political power structures, relationships between sexes, ethnicities, hostile religious groups, and just about everything else simply by wishing it so and torturing language and the meaning of certain words, is what guarantees the eventual downfall of Progressivist folly every time. As I’ve said so many times, here and elsewhere: their argument isn’t with us. It’s with reality.

Chant the mantras and misappropriate the words all they like, that will never, ever be an argument they can win. Holding their breath until they all turn blue would be about as effective. More in line with their level of emotional and intellectual development, too.

Share

IMPEACH TRUMP NOW!!!

May 12th, 2017 3 comments

Well, that’s it. They’ve finally convinced me, and I’m done with Trump. He has to go; this is a bridge too far for even me.

The waiters know well Trump’s personal preferences. As he settles down, they bring him a Diet Coke, while the rest of us are served water, with the Vice President sitting at one end of the table. With the salad course, Trump is served what appears to be Thousand Island dressing instead of the creamy vinaigrette for his guests. When the chicken arrives, he is the only one given an extra dish of sauce. At the dessert course, he gets two scoops of vanilla ice cream with his chocolate cream pie, instead of the single scoop for everyone else. The tastes of Pence are also tended to. Instead of the pie, he gets a fruit plate.

Follows, a truly pathetic freak-out which not only includes the usual deranged and butt-hurt liberal sore losers, but also the neo-“conservative” likes of David Frum and the execrable Jennifer Rubin, who characterizes Trump based on this latest hairball yakked up by the Insane Left as “a man unable to restrain his urges.” I’ll let Bre Payton handle the obvious response to such dementia:

This brings me to the obvious question: WHO CARES? Who cares if the president’s waitstaff are able to anticipate his preferences and have a Diet Coke or a second scoop of ice cream ready? That’s called good customer service! The White House waitstaff serve Trump nearly every day, so of course they know what kind of dressing he likes on his salad or what his beverage of choice is. And why are we all assuming that the other dinner guests couldn’t just ask for another scoop of ice cream if they wanted it? I have a hard time imagining the White House kitchen staff denying someone more dessert.

But that’s not how the inside-the-Beltway folk see it.

Well, naturally not. They’re incapable of seeing anything other than a curtain of purest blood-red when it comes to anything Trump says, does, or attempts.

And that’s the beauty of it, see. He’s got the Beltway cattle in full stampede now, and in true bovine fashion they’re lowing and bawling in confusion and fear as they run they know not where just as hard and fast as their spindly legs will carry them. May their hysteria continue to blind them to the reality that they’re being carefully driven…right off a cliff.

May they continue to find themselves unable to contain their raving madness, and may the sane population see it unleashed in all its repellent pathos. And may that stupid, ignorant, stupid, incompetent, stupidstupidSTUPID swine Trump continue to run rings around their asses, until their options are reduced, literally, to: A) shit, or B) go blind.

Two scoops of ice cream, instead of just one. My God, it’s like Watergate, or the Holocaust, or something. Clearly, the man is unfit to be President.

Heh. I’ll say it again: Most. Fun. Presidency. EVER.

(Via Ace)

Share

Hey, it’s SCIENCE!

May 8th, 2017 4 comments

Hoist by his own petard.

Disney and Netflix officials said Friday they’re not sure why references to chromosomes and gender were removed from a 21-year-old episode of “Bill Nye the Science Guy,” which is available now for online streaming.

The 1996 episode, “Probability,” originally featured a cast member saying, “I’m a girl. Could have just as easily been a boy, though, because the probability of becoming a girl is always 1 in 2.”

“See, inside each of our cells are these things called chromosomes, and they control whether we become a boy or a girl,” she added. “See, there are only two possibilities: XX, a girl, or XY, a boy.”

That segment has since been removed, and it is not available in the version that is now streaming on Netflix, the Washington Free Beacon was first to report.

Nye’s new program, “Bill Nye Saves the World,” which is exclusive to Netflix, departs from his old television show’s position on gender.

“Gender is like sex, it’s on the spectrum,” Nye said in one of his newer episodes.

News that Nye’s old television program has been edited for Netflix comes on the heels of the premiere of his new online show, which takes a very progressive approach to a number of issues, including climate change, world population and gender.

Well, nothing says “science” more than hiding the facts to fit whatever political narrative is currently popular and maintain the approval of your fellow Progressivists, right?

Hey, balance the ball on your nose now, Science Guy, and clap your flippers together; maybe the libtards will throw you another fish. MJ has a couple of pertinently impertinent questions:

Shower thought: Doesn’t discussion of the wage gap assume someone’s gender?

Shower thought II: Does the B in LGBT assume there are only two genders?

Gee, I dunno. Maybe we could get a real scientist, instead of a PC douchebag like Bill Nye, to address those sometime.

Share

Thank GOODNESS

April 20th, 2017 1 comment

The unofficial state government of North Carolina—the NCAA, ACC, and various other sportsball entities—is pleased with our capitulation to the now-unquestioned right of perverts to take advantage of our flaccid acquiescence to having them share bathroom space with our young daughters.

SAINTS BE PRAISED! Our long national nightmare is at last over, and there will no longer be any distinction made between the men’s and the ladies’ bog!

GREENSBORO, N.C. (theACC.com) – As announced previously by the Atlantic Coast Conference Council of Presidents, contracted league championships will return to neutral sites in the state of North Carolina, beginning with the 13th annual Dr Pepper ACC Football Championship Game on December 2 at Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte.

“Neutral sites”? What in the hell does THAT mean?

The ACC Council of Presidents voted last September to relocate neutral site championship events in each of those sports for the 2016-17 academic year. The Council’s decision to return neutral site championships to North Carolina, beginning with the 2017-18 academic year, took place on Friday, March 31. 

“We are pleased that ACC neutral site championships will return to the state of North Carolina beginning with the 2017-18 academic year,” said ACC Commissioner John Swofford. “We value all of our partners in North Carolina and appreciate their support and cooperation. We are thrilled to renew our relationships with so many terrific people, outstanding cities and first-class venues.”

There that “neutral sites” thing is again; I can only surmise that it’s an inside-sportsball term that denotes someplace where there is no home team, rather than a site as yet unscorched by the hot cultural civil war currently raging between sane people versus determined Progressivists and their useful-idiot freaks-of-the-week.

Admittedly, I do still look forward to the day—coming really, really soon now—when I walk brazenly into the ladies’, whip out my schlong, piss in the sink, peer under a few stalls, and then declare over the very first objection anyone dares utter: I FEEL PRETTY! I expect to have plenty of company—not from the transgenders, Lord help them, but from the straight pervs who will eagerly take advantage of the new opportunities handed them by untrammeled idiot PC. And, in fact, already are.

Any society willing to completely upend its most basic strictures to accommodate the merest handful of pitiful, disturbed sickos is not a society that will long endure. Nor does it deserve to.

Why, it’s almost enough to make me welcome our new Muslim overlords; they’ll put these people, umm, straight, I’m guessing. And with a quickness, too. Hey, nobody is wrong about everything, right?

Yeah, I know, I know. I denounce myself.

Share

Why the hell not?

April 7th, 2017 1 comment

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

Mermaids do exist – in California.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share

Crony socialism, anyone?

April 6th, 2017 Comments off

Well, it’s official: the government of the state of North Carolina has been replaced by the NCAA, and the will of the people as lawfully and properly expressed through their elected representatives be damned.

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – The NCAA says it will consider North Carolina as a host for championship events again after the state rolled back a law that limited protections for LGBT people.

In a statement Tuesday, the governing body said its Board of Governors had reviewed moves to repeal repealed the so-called “bathroom bill” and replace it with a compromise law. The NCAA said the new law “meets the minimal NCAA requirements” while expressing some concerns about provisions within it.

The statement says a majority of the board “reluctantly voted” to allow for consideration of bids from North Carolina during current deliberations for sites running through 2022. Events for the 2017-18 season that have already been awarded to the state — such as opening-weekend men’s basketball tournament games in Charlotte — will remain in place.

“We are actively determining site selections, and this new law has minimally achieved a situation where we believe NCAA championships may be conducted in a nondiscriminatory environment,” the board’s statement reads. “If we find that our expectations of a discrimination-free environment are not met, we will not hesitate to take necessary action at any time.”

You will be made to care, and Badthink will be punished by the duly authorized officials of the State of NC(AA).

It’s been sick-making to watch as political and business leaders here have crawled on their bellies to avoid offending various corporate entities promoting the cause of allowing mentally disturbed men access to women’s bathrooms. They can take their sportsball games and jam ’em up their flue for all me—all the way up, as far as it will go. But then again, I haven’t paid the slightest attention to any of that crap in decades, so they’re not likely to care much what I think anyway.

Share

Burnout!

March 13th, 2017 1 comment

Y’know, if you had asked me twenty or even ten years ago (hell, even five) I’d have sworn that I’d never, ever get tired of women talking candidly about, showing off, or otherwise calling attention to their, uhh, naughty bits—much less confirmed hotties like Gwyneth Paltrow, Cate Blanchett, and Emma Watson. But man, I just gotta say it: between all that and the relentlessly revolting pig Lena Dunham added in for what seems to be nothing but pure spite on somebody’s part, and…man, I wish they would all just dry up and blow away already.

And just don’t let’s get started on “pussy hats,” awright? Jeez.

Yep, at this point I’d have to say the mystique and fascination are gone for good, and if I never see another one—be it artistic representation, photograph, or in the flesh—well, honestly, I’m good with that. Never thought I’d say that, or could even imagine saying it, but there it is.

Thanks a pantload there, “ladies.”

Share

Delenda est

March 13th, 2017 Comments off

Yes, they are in fact completely nuts.

As but one example of how subtle stimuli, presented properly, can yield outsized results, consider the case of MIT Biology Professor Nancy Hopkins. Larry Summers gave a speech on gender differences in scientific aptitude, in which he said that since the uppermost echelons of scientific study depended heavily on aptitude, it is possible there may be a gender disparity in aptitude which will affect the relative numbers of men and women within such fields. Simply listening to this speech, Hopkins reported that, “I felt I was going to be sick. My heart was pounding and my breath was shallow. I was extremely upset. I just couldn’t breath because this type of bias makes me physically ill.” If she hadn’t left, she reported that, “I would have either blacked out or thrown up.

That response, particularly the disruption of the enteric nervous system, and associated GI upset, was produced by an amygdala stimulation, and it leaves little doubt that Hopkins is a lefty, with an amygdala poorly suited to routing specific types of adverse stimuli into productive action, or anything for that matter, beyond a panic attack of extraordinary proportions. I recognize the phenomenon because I have engendered it myself, using the techniques which will be described herein.

This is not nearly as unusual a phenomenon as Liberals would like you to believe. In fact, it is the threat of this sensation which I believe drives the frantic vitriol and shrillness of the modern Liberal when confronted with undeniable facts and logic by an unemotional opponent. That shrillness is desperation – it is amygdala.

This series of posts will assert that you can identify the stimuli which produce this effect in the modern Liberal, and that this stimuli will be relatively standardized among hardcore Liberal ideologues. It will be subtle – yelling, vitriol, and other extreme emotional presentations will not be required to produce the effects – and indeed will even diminish their magnitude.

Okay, that’s from Part the First. This is a very careful, well-thought-out thesis intended not to lay out an effective method for debating Leftards—which I’ve long posited is a waste of time anyway—but for destroying them, for reducing them to a quivering mass of blubbering confusion incapable not just of debate but of even coping with reality at all, on any level. Case in point:

In this video, Mike Wallace will make the mistake of trying to assert intellectual superiority/dominance over Peter Jennings by asserting that a real reporter would leave a US combat Patrol to be ambushed and killed, so he can get “the story.” Few others on the panel truly believe this to be noble, and many offer spirited logical arguments focusing on the value of soldier’s lives, the morals involved, and other logical arguments. Wallace repels them all, and then becomes even more assertive of his position.

After almost ten minutes of successfully fighting off polite, logical criticisms, Col. George M. Connell, USMC, is asked his opinion. He sneers with disgust and slowly and angrily says,

I feel utter contempt. Two days later they (the reporters – Jennings and Wallace) are both walking off my hilltop and they’re 200 yards away, and they get ambushed and they’re lying there wounded. And they’re going to expect I’m going to send Marines out there to get them. They’re just journalists. They’re not Americans. Is that a fair reaction? You can’t have it both ways.

As a hard-core Liberal ideologue, Wallace was undoubtedly programmed to betray his in-group, of course. Have no illusions, as a Liberal, he was subconsciously programmed to betray our nation and our people. If a war would benefit us with cheap oil, he would oppose it, saying, “No blood for oil.” If a war had no benefit to us but would kill our troops, he would have no problem sending our military men to some place like the Sudan or Somalia, to die for outsiders who wouldn’t even appreciate their sacrifice. He would have wanted deeply (though he was probably ignorant of the urge’s existence) to betray the US and his fellow in-group members.

Here, Colonel Connell presents an image of Wallace as weak, cowardly, and helpless, and he presents it as ancillary to the main argument.

This is devastating to the Narcissist’s necessary self-image of being the superior individual (a similar trait to the Liberal’s need to feel superior to the Conservative in some fashion, despite their laughable patheity). Notice, Colonel Connell presents this with no debate, as almost an irrelevant afterthought to another, more important issue. Most people wouldn’t even register it, but Wallace did, and even worse, he never even got to argue with the portrayal. Deep down, every Liberal ideologue knows they are a psychological pansy in a species which reviles such – and the characterization hurts them far more than we can imagine. Here, it affected his mood and his ability to focus, in a way which a person without such a disorder couldn’t possibly imagine. His false reality was attacked, and he didn’t even get a chance to defend it. Even worse, in his mind, everyone else now accepts that he is inferior, on the word of another. Someone has done to him what he is programmed to do to others. He has been inferior-ized, and the group is now focused on him, his aberrance, and his weakness.

There’s much, much more here, and I can’t possibly do it all justice with mere excerpts, no matter how lengthy; you really gotta read it all. But the denouement of the Wallace segment is just too delicious not to share with y’all:

This interview is interesting in the context of our national debate over politics in that it highlights two different styles of debate with Liberals. For the first seven and a half minutes, debaters treat Mike Wallace as a reasonable equal, and seek to sway his opinion with logic. In response, Wallace becomes ever more forceful in his treasonous assertions, even as he trips himself up with his own arguments. Of course, this is exactly what our reasonable and respectful treatment of Liberals in our national political debates has gotten us today, on the national stage.

After seven and a half minutes, one man utters a few contemptuous sentences, reducing Mike Wallace to a traitor whom everyone should ignore. And Mike Wallace’s response to this contemptuous dismissal of his views?

A chastened, hand-wringing coward, saying, “It’s a fair reaction,” followed by a complete cessation of his traitorous Liberal assertions. If you examine the video at 42 minutes and 57 seconds, Mike Wallace’s face actually contorts into a micro-expression of extreme agony. Pause the video, and it is astonishing. I have seen that expression in real life myself – this was not a once in a lifetime event. All Liberal ideologues have that pain inside them. In a state of nature, that force within their brain probably kept them alive, by forcing them to swallow their pride, and avoid confrontations at all cost. Today, it lays there within them dormant, waiting for a Conservative, with sufficient testicular fortitude, to step up to the debate, and use it to modify their behavior, and train them to not espouse Liberalism.

Of course the most important aspect of Colonel Connell’s response is that in arguing with emotion and crushing the Liberal, he has just set the course for the Lemmings within the group. Not a single individual on that panel will even begin to support Mike Wallace’s position at that point. Indeed, the issue would not even be raised again.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you debate a Liberal, and lead a movement. The Liberal is the example waiting to be made, not an equal. The Liberal is deserving of nothing more than passing contempt.

Now ask yourself how would the pansies who lead the Republican Party and the Conservative movement have debated Mike Wallace. Would they even consider doing anything similar?

This is our problem.

It damned sure is, and I still maintain that there’s a lot more behind that than mere coincidence, happenstance, or Republican incompetence. It’s collusion, plain and simple: the maintenance of a comfortable status quo between colleagues pretending to be adversaries for the sake of perpetuating their privilege at the expense of those they purport to serve.

How else to explain the Obamacare/Obamacare Lite debacle? These nefarious vermin maintain that 60 Senate votes are required to repeal the Obamacare trainwreck, but it didn’t pass with 60 votes; it was enacted by the underhanded “reconciliation” maneuver…and there is not one damned thing that says a repeal can’t be done the exact same way. Anybody remember the “nuclear option,” pray tell?

These Republican frauds act as if Harry Reid never even existed—as if Nancy Pelosi, of “we have to pass it to find out what’s in it” infamy, wasn’t now saying this:

The American people and Members have a right to know the full impact of this legislation before any vote in Committee or by the whole House.

Bold mine; blank, wet-brained, arrogant, downright depraved hypocrisy all Pelosi.

And not one Republican that I’m aware of—not ONE—calling her out on this, or even suggesting the reconciliation swindle as a prospective means to staunch the hemorrhage of the lifeblood of the Republic represented by Obamacare.

Forgive me, folks, for wandering somewhat far afield from the original topic of this post, but I think that ultimately, they’re at least somewhat related. Because the truth seems obvious: the Republican establishment never really was opposed to Obamacare, nor to any of a thousand other contra-Constitutional Democrat Socialist depredations. They never intended or desired to stop any of it. All they ever really wanted was their turn at the wheel.

How does this relate to my original topic here? Like this: if the Uniparty establishment that has done so much damage to our country over so long a period is to be stopped, it’s going to be up to us to do it. The above strategy for confronting and discombobulating Leftards is but the beginning. The election of Trump the Disruptor, against all odds and in open defiance of that same Uniparty establishment, was the opening salvo in a long war. These are but the first halting, staggering steps towards restoring our nation to its former greatness. In the end, it may not be possible without bloodshed; I pray that isn’t so, but I can’t say even now that I think that’s the way to bet.

But we have to try; we owe that to ourselves and our children, at the very least. Meanwhile, Trump needs to keep right on rendering the liberal media irrelevant and speaking directly to the American people via Twitter; he needs to get out periodically for more rallies like he did in Florida a couple weeks ago, and let the harrumphing, naysaying propagandists suck a big, fat, hard one every time he does.

Most of all, we need to keep right on letting the Uniparty know that, warts and all, imperfections and all, We the People support him. Doesn’t mean we can’t call him out and press him when he’s wrong; doesn’t mean we have to agree wholeheartedly with every single thing he says or does. But in my view, he’s done pretty damned well in these early days, and I’ll still take ten of him to any number of business-as-usual professional politicians you’d care to name.

I expect that somewhere in the Stygian depths, his pockmarked visage limned by the red glow of fire and brimstone, the eternally dysfunctional asshole Mike Wallace is groaning in agony as he watches our President try to alter our course. And that makes me happy. I want more in the long term, of course; we all do. But for now, I’ll take it. And so should you.

Share

Delenda est

March 13th, 2017 1 comment

Yes, they are in fact completely nuts.

As but one example of how subtle stimuli, presented properly, can yield outsized results, consider the case of MIT Biology Professor Nancy Hopkins. Larry Summers gave a speech on gender differences in scientific aptitude, in which he said that since the uppermost echelons of scientific study depended heavily on aptitude, it is possible there may be a gender disparity in aptitude which will affect the relative numbers of men and women within such fields. Simply listening to this speech, Hopkins reported that, “I felt I was going to be sick. My heart was pounding and my breath was shallow. I was extremely upset. I just couldn’t breath because this type of bias makes me physically ill.” If she hadn’t left, she reported that, “I would have either blacked out or thrown up.

That response, particularly the disruption of the enteric nervous system, and associated GI upset, was produced by an amygdala stimulation, and it leaves little doubt that Hopkins is a lefty, with an amygdala poorly suited to routing specific types of adverse stimuli into productive action, or anything for that matter, beyond a panic attack of extraordinary proportions. I recognize the phenomenon because I have engendered it myself, using the techniques which will be described herein.

This is not nearly as unusual a phenomenon as Liberals would like you to believe. In fact, it is the threat of this sensation which I believe drives the frantic vitriol and shrillness of the modern Liberal when confronted with undeniable facts and logic by an unemotional opponent. That shrillness is desperation – it is amygdala.

This series of posts will assert that you can identify the stimuli which produce this effect in the modern Liberal, and that this stimuli will be relatively standardized among hardcore Liberal ideologues. It will be subtle – yelling, vitriol, and other extreme emotional presentations will not be required to produce the effects – and indeed will even diminish their magnitude.

Okay, that’s from Part the First. This is a very careful, well-thought-out thesis intended not to lay out an effective method for debating Leftards—which I’ve long posited is a waste of time anyway—but for destroying them, for reducing them to a quivering mass of blubbering confusion incapable not just of debate but of even coping with reality at all, on any level. Case in point:

In this video, Mike Wallace will make the mistake of trying to assert intellectual superiority/dominance over Peter Jennings by asserting that a real reporter would leave a US combat Patrol to be ambushed and killed, so he can get “the story.” Few others on the panel truly believe this to be noble, and many offer spirited logical arguments focusing on the value of soldier’s lives, the morals involved, and other logical arguments. Wallace repels them all, and then becomes even more assertive of his position.

After almost ten minutes of successfully fighting off polite, logical criticisms, Col. George M. Connell, USMC, is asked his opinion. He sneers with disgust and slowly and angrily says,

I feel utter contempt. Two days later they (the reporters – Jennings and Wallace) are both walking off my hilltop and they’re 200 yards away, and they get ambushed and they’re lying there wounded. And they’re going to expect I’m going to send Marines out there to get them. They’re just journalists. They’re not Americans. Is that a fair reaction? You can’t have it both ways.

As a hard-core Liberal ideologue, Wallace was undoubtedly programmed to betray his in-group, of course. Have no illusions, as a Liberal, he was subconsciously programmed to betray our nation and our people. If a war would benefit us with cheap oil, he would oppose it, saying, “No blood for oil.” If a war had no benefit to us but would kill our troops, he would have no problem sending our military men to some place like the Sudan or Somalia, to die for outsiders who wouldn’t even appreciate their sacrifice. He would have wanted deeply (though he was probably ignorant of the urge’s existence) to betray the US and his fellow in-group members.

Here, Colonel Connell presents an image of Wallace as weak, cowardly, and helpless, and he presents it as ancillary to the main argument.

This is devastating to the Narcissist’s necessary self-image of being the superior individual (a similar trait to the Liberal’s need to feel superior to the Conservative in some fashion, despite their laughable patheity). Notice, Colonel Connell presents this with no debate, as almost an irrelevant afterthought to another, more important issue. Most people wouldn’t even register it, but Wallace did, and even worse, he never even got to argue with the portrayal. Deep down, every Liberal ideologue knows they are a psychological pansy in a species which reviles such – and the characterization hurts them far more than we can imagine. Here, it affected his mood and his ability to focus, in a way which a person without such a disorder couldn’t possibly imagine. His false reality was attacked, and he didn’t even get a chance to defend it. Even worse, in his mind, everyone else now accepts that he is inferior, on the word of another. Someone has done to him what he is programmed to do to others. He has been inferior-ized, and the group is now focused on him, his aberrance, and his weakness.

There’s much, much more here, and I can’t possibly do it all justice with mere excerpts, no matter how lengthy; you really gotta read it all. But the denouement of the Wallace segment is just too delicious not to share with y’all:

This interview is interesting in the context of our national debate over politics in that it highlights two different styles of debate with Liberals. For the first seven and a half minutes, debaters treat Mike Wallace as a reasonable equal, and seek to sway his opinion with logic. In response, Wallace becomes ever more forceful in his treasonous assertions, even as he trips himself up with his own arguments. Of course, this is exactly what our reasonable and respectful treatment of Liberals in our national political debates has gotten us today, on the national stage.

After seven and a half minutes, one man utters a few contemptuous sentences, reducing Mike Wallace to a traitor whom everyone should ignore. And Mike Wallace’s response to this contemptuous dismissal of his views?

A chastened, hand-wringing coward, saying, “It’s a fair reaction,” followed by a complete cessation of his traitorous Liberal assertions. If you examine the video at 42 minutes and 57 seconds, Mike Wallace’s face actually contorts into a micro-expression of extreme agony. Pause the video, and it is astonishing. I have seen that expression in real life myself – this was not a once in a lifetime event. All Liberal ideologues have that pain inside them. In a state of nature, that force within their brain probably kept them alive, by forcing them to swallow their pride, and avoid confrontations at all cost. Today, it lays there within them dormant, waiting for a Conservative, with sufficient testicular fortitude, to step up to the debate, and use it to modify their behavior, and train them to not espouse Liberalism.

Of course the most important aspect of Colonel Connell’s response is that in arguing with emotion and crushing the Liberal, he has just set the course for the Lemmings within the group. Not a single individual on that panel will even begin to support Mike Wallace’s position at that point. Indeed, the issue would not even be raised again.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you debate a Liberal, and lead a movement. The Liberal is the example waiting to be made, not an equal. The Liberal is deserving of nothing more than passing contempt.

Now ask yourself how would the pansies who lead the Republican Party and the Conservative movement have debated Mike Wallace. Would they even consider doing anything similar?

This is our problem.

It damned sure is, and I still maintain that there’s a lot more behind that than mere coincidence, happenstance, or Republican incompetence. It’s collusion, plain and simple: the maintenance of a comfortable status quo between colleagues pretending to be adversaries for the sake of perpetuating their privilege at the expense of those they purport to serve.

How else to explain the Obamacare/Obamacare Lite debacle? These nefarious vermin maintain that 60 Senate votes are required to repeal the Obamacare trainwreck, but it didn’t pass with 60 votes; it was enacted by the underhanded “reconciliation” maneuver…and there is not one damned thing that says a repeal can’t be done the exact same way. Anybody remember the “nuclear option,” pray tell?

These Republican frauds act as if Harry Reid never even existed—as if Nancy Pelosi, of “we have to pass it to find out what’s in it” infamy, wasn’t now saying this:

The American people and Members have a right to know the full impact of this legislation before any vote in Committee or by the whole House.

Bold mine; blank, wet-brained, arrogant, downright depraved hypocrisy all Pelosi.

And not one Republican that I’m aware of—not ONE—calling her out on this, or even suggesting the reconciliation swindle as a prospective means to staunch the hemorrhage of the lifeblood of the Republic represented by Obamacare.

Forgive me, folks, for wandering somewhat far afield from the original topic of this post, but I think that ultimately, they’re at least somewhat related. Because the truth seems obvious: the Republican establishment never really was opposed to Obamacare, nor to any of a thousand other contra-Constitutional Democrat Socialist depredations. They never intended or desired to stop any of it. All they ever really wanted was their turn at the wheel.

How does this relate to my original topic here? Like this: if the Uniparty establishment that has done so much damage to our country over so long a period is to be stopped, it’s going to be up to us to do it. The above strategy for confronting and discombobulating Leftards is but the beginning. The election of Trump the Disruptor, against all odds and in open defiance of that same Uniparty establishment, was the opening salvo in a long war. These are but the first halting, staggering steps towards restoring our nation to its former greatness. In the end, it may not be possible without bloodshed; I pray that isn’t so, but I can’t say even now that I think that’s the way to bet.

But we have to try; we owe that to ourselves and our children, at the very least. Meanwhile, Trump needs to keep right on rendering the liberal media irrelevant and speaking directly to the American people via Twitter; he needs to get out periodically for more rallies like he did in Florida a couple weeks ago, and let the harrumphing, naysaying propagandists suck a big, fat, hard one every time he does.

Most of all, we need to keep right on letting the Uniparty know that, warts and all, imperfections and all, We the People support him. Doesn’t mean we can’t call him out and press him when he’s wrong; doesn’t mean we have to agree wholeheartedly with every single thing he says or does. But in my view, he’s done pretty damned well in these early days, and I’ll still take ten of him to any number of business-as-usual professional politicians you’d care to name.

I expect that somewhere in the Stygian depths, his pockmarked visage limned by the red glow of fire and brimstone, the eternally dysfunctional asshole Mike Wallace is groaning in agony as he watches our President try to alter our course. And that makes me happy. I want more in the long term, of course; we all do. But for now, I’ll take it. And so should you.

Share

An idea whose time is….

February 16th, 2017 1 comment

Coming soon.

Mind you, these insulated and boundlessly arrogant coastal creeps are so out of touch that they expected to be able to shit on the Silent Majority from here to eternity without the Silent Majority ever barking back at the ballot box. And they remain so encased in their opaque Rainbow Bubble that they appear to think that sooner or later, people won’t start punching back.

At this point, the psychotic hyperbole of the Antifa turds is so familiar as to be depressingly mainstream—SMASH the Nazis! CRUSH their skulls into the pavement! The only good fascist is a DEAD fascist!

Believe this—if they were truly under the impression that the “Nazis” were such a looming threat, they wouldn’t be acting nearly this bold. They act without fear, mainly because it’s been generations since anyone gave them a good reason to be afraid.

Enter the new Right Wing Death Squads, which don’t truly exist as anything more than an idea at this point. They are not organized and well-funded like Antifa are, and to my knowledge they are not responsible for any rioting nor even a single sucker punch…yet.

At the moment, it is not an organized movement so much as it is the sort of threat that a longsuffering parent may give to its misbehaving child—“If you keep it up, I’m going to really give you something to cry about.”

What could be more appropriate, for a bunch of misbehaving children?

Follows, a brief history of actual death squads, a good few of which it shouldn’t surprise you to learn were oriented Leftwards. Bottom line? This:

If the left keeps kicking the hornet’s nest, they shouldn’t cry if they wind up getting stung. Oh, they’ll cry—it’s what they do—but they shouldn’t.

For eight years—with all the flash mobs and Occupy protests and wide-scale looting and arson whenever a black criminal who fought with a cop wound up getting shot—the left threw Victory Riots. Now they seem hell-bent on at least four years of Defeat Riots.

But somehow I doubt they’d be nearly so brazen if they feared that down every street across America, their violent shenanigans might be met by self-styled Right Wing Death Squads who are willing to fight back. Ronald Reagan was clearly not yet senile back when he insisted that the only way to achieve peace is through strength.

Yep. As I keep saying: careful what you wish for, Leftards, lest you get it in the end—good and hard.

Share

“Genocide, racial hate, America was never great”

February 3rd, 2017 4 comments

AntifaFa:

It wasn’t quite a repeat of the UC Berkeley riots Wednesday night, but so-called anti-fascist protesters clashed with police outside New York University, where Gavin McInnes was invited to speak by the NYU College Republicans. McInnes confirmed other reports that he was pepper-sprayed at the event.

If it maybe isn’t quite time to start killing them yet, it’s certainly time to start beating the hell out of them, looks like. And make no mistake: eventually the time is going to come when people DO start killing them…because they’re not going to stop until they’ve killed some of us.

I’ve always said that nobody really wants civil war and all the horror that will ensue. But it’s becoming more and more apparent that I was wrong about that; obviously, the Left DOES want it. They’re not going to be nearly so happy about it as they seem to think when they finally get it, though.

A classic intellectual exercise, updated: would it have been moral to kill Hitler as a youth, knowing what was to come if you didn’t? If so, then on some level it would have to be hypothetically moral to strangle some of these vicious little Hitler Youth in the crib, so to speak, before they, umm, ripen to full fascist flower too, no? For now, it still comes down to this:

These people are sick fanatics, and if you disagree with a fanatic, they will automatically assume you are some sort of competing fanatic. Therefore, no fate is too awful to befall you. Since Trump is Literally Hitler, anyone who voted for him is Literally a Brownshirt and thus sorely deserves being beaten into mental retardation and lifelong incontinence.

For some reason, sucker-punching a man while he was looking the other way and then fleeing the scene like a scared rabbit is being celebrated by many leftists as an act of courage and heroism.

To my knowledge, neither Richard, Gavin, nor I has ever so much as recommended, much less committed, physical violence against those who merely disagree with us politically. To me that suggests that we are far more secure in our beliefs than anyone who wishes to silence (or punch) us for harboring diverse opinions.

Which no longer matters in the least. Moral superiority and an unrequited tolerance for dissent has never yet prevented anyone from being assaulted by these pusbags. And it never will. Personally, I’m all done with arguing the finer points of Righty morality versus Lefty depravity with anybody, and have been for a good while. It accomplishes nothing worthwhile: you can’t reason a bunch of malevolent brats out of a position they never reasoned themselves into in the first place. Moral superiority makes for a truly shitty, flimsy, and ineffectual shield against fascist violence anyway, and that’s always been the case. Plenty of decent people have gone down under a flurry of blows trying to use that shield for protection. You might ask Kenneth Gladney sometime about how well it works.

It also suggests that if they aren’t willing to have a debate and only want to assault, that is a declaration of war and they should be knocked back so hard that their eyeballs fly clear across the county line.

Due to the current legal and prevailing cultural climate—which dictates that any white person who doesn’t have a problem with being white is a Nazi who deserves being beaten in public—I would only suggest defensive violence, because the courts will not be kind to you.

But if you’re going to retaliate violently, do it with an exclamation point. Do it with the crushing finesse of the Belgian soccer hooligan who decked a fat leftist who wouldn’t get out of his face. Do it with the decisiveness of the highly outnumbered European traditionalists who mopped the floor with Antifa antagonists who foolishly thought they wouldn’t fight back last summer in Sacramento.

Never throw the first punch—but always throw the last.

Indeed. But I repeat: the time is coming when at least some of us, sick and tired of acting as passive punching bags for sub-sentient Leftist scum again and again and again and again, will start preemptively punching first. Doesn’t matter if anybody likes it, doesn’t matter if anybody wants it; sooner or later, given continual Leftist escalation, it WILL happen. Once it does, it’s not going to be nearly as big a step as some might think from there to actually, actively hunting them. And once that step is taken, the main point of interest is going to shift from “should we or shouldn’t we” to the more practical concern of merely establishing a bag limit, if any—because by then, the time for delicately arguing over the morality of eliminating people who are already trying to eliminate you is going to be long past.

I repeat yet again: careful what you wish for, Lefty scum. Lest you get it, good and hard.

The election of Donald Trump was one of the last, desperate shots across the Left’s bow, reminding them of our decades of polite requests to leave us the hell alone. They have chosen to double down on the hate and escalate the fascist violence instead. Sooner or later, self-preservation will override philosophical debate and render questions of morality irrelevant. No matter how it all shakes out in the short term and case by case, this can only end badly for the fucktard Left.

Well, so be it; couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of assholes, if you ask me. Years ago, the Clash sang: “It’s brawn against brain, and knife against chain.” The Left needs to remember how that particular verse wound up, before it’s too late to matter.

Share

You might be a Democrat….

January 31st, 2017 Comments off

Ahh, the cognitive dissonance is strong with these ones:

If you’re more offended that Donald Trump once said the word ‘pussy’ than Bill Clinton getting blow jobs in the Oval Office by a 21-year old intern…

If you can listen to Madonna, Miley Cyrus, and Lady Gaga complain about how Trump degrades women and not burst out laughing…

If you think a person’s gender is fluid but sexual preference is permanently fixed…

If you’re against the death penalty but are OK with abortion…

If you believe Russians hacked the election, but there’s no need to investigate the possibility of voter fraud…

And then the reader contributions, which are just as good:

If you think Lena Dunham is attractive but Melania Trump is not…
(h/t SMFH)

if you want to ban tobacco and legalize marijuana
(h/t duncan)

…if you think every man is a rapist, but if he puts on a dress your daughter is perfectly safe with him in a locker room
(h/t Chris Taylor)

If you believe your actual violence is protected free speech but my protected free speech is actual violence.
(h/t Flyboy)

If you believe that cops are mostly corrupt and violent and racist, but you also believe that they’re the only people who should be allowed to have guns…

If you love to gloat about how “dumb” Americans are, while insisting that our public school system is perfect and can’t be improved (except by throwing more money at it)…
(h/t Prothonotary Warbler)

If you think “piss Christ” is an important artistic achievement, but “piss Mohamed” is a hate crime, you might be a Democrat.
(h/t Dave_in_fla)

If you voted for Ted Kennedy every time he ran, but wouldn’t vote for Trump because he said pussy, you might just be a Democrat.
(h/t Tammy al-Thor)

If you think a hundred-year-old ideology that has failed every time it’s been tried, by a multitude of nations all across the globe, counts as a “new idea” and is in any way truly progressive

Share

Liberals want conservatives to shut up; conservatives want liberals to keep talking

January 24th, 2017 5 comments

And there’s a reason for that.

The Democrat Party – guardian of pathology: worship of foreigners, embrace of the underclass, fawning over feminist and sexual freaks, hostility to free speech, slobbering over globalism, blindness regarding Islam, and blindness to violence and the breakdown of public order.

Guardian of working people (or anyone else)? Not so much.

So what we’ve seen is one of the great political parties of 20th-c. America turn itself into a zoo whose inmates couldn’t recognize (a) Hillary Clinton’s monstrous betrayal of our fighting men and diplomats in Benghazi and (b) the astonishing corruption involved in her pay-to-play Clinton Foundation and its Saudi donations. Grotesque speaking fees caused not even a raised eyebrow in the sycophantic house press.

Nothing remarkable there. Our Hilly.

Pointless, reckless, aggressive, unconstitutional war in Libya and Syria? Not an “anti-war” protestor within a thousand miles.

The stench was overpowering but she was the Democrats’ star. Coal miners to the remainder bin. Tough.

As annoying as they’ve been, and will continue to be, we should all hope they keep right on—let their insanity and total dysfunction have full and free rein for all to see. They’ll fix things so no Democrat Socialist can get elected to the lowliest local office imaginable for the next hundred years. And America will be far, far better off for it.

Although I must say, I don’t think it’s that they couldn’t see Hillary’s “monstrous betrayal” etc. It’s that they didn’t much care; they chose to overlook it, for political purposes. In truth, it’s even worse than that: they chose to try to help cover it up. Which only makes them that much more slimy and repellent, really.

Update! Just keep talking, babe.

Candidates aspiring to take over as chairman of the Democratic National Committee met Monday night to discuss what went wrong in 2016 and how to get the party back on track.

Democrats must provide “training” that focuses in part on teaching Americans “how to be sensitive and how to shut their mouths if they are white,” urged the executive director of Idaho’s Democratic Party, Sally Boynton Brown, who is white.

The event’s moderator, MSNBC’s Joy Ann Reid, asked the candidates how the party should handle the Black Lives Now movement.

The candidates uniformly emphasized that the party must embrace the activists unreservedly.

“It makes me sad that we’re even having that conversation and that tells me that white leaders in our party have failed,” Brown said. “I’m a white woman, I don’t get it…My job is to listen and be a voice and shut other white people down when they want to interrupt.”

Did I say they won’t be able to get elected to anything for a hundred years? Okay, I was wrong; make it a thousand. As Steve Sailer says: “Back in 2009 I suggested that Republicans could help rebrand the Democrats as The Black Party, but white Democrats seem intent on doing that to themselves all by themselves.” But it’s even worse: they’re not The Black Party, they’re the Indigent, Belligerent Black Thug Party. No need to smear decent black folks by associating them with the Democrat Socialists’ only remaining constituency, y’know.

Oh, and have I mentioned how dignified and worthy of respect and serious consideration those “pussy hats” make you look, ladies?

*snicker*

Share

Gauntlet: THROWN

January 23rd, 2017 2 comments

Ohhh, you’re gonna LOVE this one. I sure did.

I know you don’t know me. I know you don’t even think about me and when you do, it’s probably not anything nice. I’m the evil hegemonically masculine patriarchal oppressor to you feminists. I’m the jackbooted statist thug to you dope smokin’ long-haired hippies. I’m “The Man” to you racial activists. I’m the idiot who joined the military because I “wasn’t smart enough” to go get a liberal arts degree like you know-it-all 20-year-old college dipshits; and for some reason you hate me for that. I’m that guy with the rifle who signed on the dotted line for $24K a year so that you budding Marxist fucksticks could have the freedom to complain about me and the manner in which I provide it. I have a little message for you.

I see you there, in Portland… In Chicago…In San Francisco…In Bumfuck Directional School Liberal Arts College…You’re having your temper tantrums because ever since mommy dropped you off at Daycare 20 years ago you’ve been throwing them to get your way. Now you’re super pissed about the results of a presidential election where the other guy (and the only guy in the race for that matter) won.

I’m not here to talk politics, or explain the Electoral College, or to tell you what hypocritical douchebags you are for doing the things you’re doing. No. I have a much simpler conversation to have with you. See, I read what you post on Twitter, Facebook, and your various internet blogs. I see you on the news breaking things, setting fires, and assaulting people of the opposite political belief. I see you there with your fat ugly unshaven feminist women and black power slogan screaming race baiters, throwing rocks and bottles at the lines of police officers trying to keep order in your own cities. I know your rhetoric. I know all your identity politics stems from the Marxist activists and ‘intellectuals’ who have pushed the American left farther left than ever before. I know you believe your “progressive” views are the supreme moral authority on every single issue and somehow this perception allows you to justify your totalitarian social views and hypocritical violent outbursts. You profess to hate half this country for their alleged bigotry while carrying signs that say “Love Wins!”

I also know you’re a coward.

And he damned sure does know it, too. He goes on to explain just how; savor every perfect fucking word.

It puts me in mind of those stupid #(Only)Black(Criminal)LivesMatter riots here a few months back, which began over the righteous shooting of yet another worthless, gun-toting gibmedat thug with a rap sheet as long as an orc’s arm—and were smack-dab OVER the moment the governor sent the National Guard in to the midst of the mayhem. All of a sudden those angry, oh-so-fucking-courageous Social Justice “Warrior” (spit!) twerps were all smiles and friendliness, going down the line of troops just back from the Sandbox with their M16s and ARs and shaking hands with them, or trying to…and then marching their worthless asses straight the fuck back home to mama.

Like Iron Mike says: shit or get off the pot, pussies. And stop crying already, ferchrissakes.

(Via MisHum)

Bonus post update! Another good ‘un from Gruntworks, which is heading straight for Ye Olde Blogroll: “A message of thanks to the outgoing president.

Share

How the Left undermines a civilization

November 4th, 2016 Comments off

Step by step, inch by inch, one little bite at a time, by first corrupting language itself until common—even foundational—words, concepts, and perceptions are rendered meaningless.

For 26 years, Glamour magazine has reserved the “Women of the Year” award for, well, women.

Previous proposals for a male nominee were rejected “on the grounds that men aren’t exactly hurting for awards in this world,” the magazine writes. But this year, the glossy broke with tradition and named Bono as its first Man of the Year.

Bono was recognized for establishing a campaign called “Poverty is Sexist,” which is “specifically aimed at helping the world’s poorest women,” Glamour writes.

“I’m sure I don’t deserve it,” Bono told Glamour after he was told of the award. “But I’m grateful for this award as a chance to say the battle for gender equality can’t be won unless men lead it along with women. We’re largely responsible for the problem, so we have to be involved in the solutions.”

The gesture of giving a Woman of the Year award to a man was also inspired by the woman-friendly actions of other men, including President Obama identifying as a feminist and “super-cool actors” endorsing the United Nations’ #HeForShe campaign, Glamour says.

But of course. Guess this gives Bono unlimited ladies-room privileges, as long as he’s willing to put on a dress and claim to “identify” as something he clearly is not. And hey, why not? The more confusion these people can sow around definitions and societal boundaries, the happier they’ll be…and the closer to ultimate victory over Western civilization.

Somewhere in Hell, Alinski is beaming.

Share

“Occam’s Weiner”

November 1st, 2016 3 comments

The title alone is reason enough to excerpt it. It just gets better from there.

Happy Halloweiner, the night when Anthony Weiner’s undead penis rises from its grave to bite Hillary’s campaign. The stroking dead is apparently impervious to silver bullets or garlic, and unlike vampires it does show up in photographs, on cell phones across the globe.

We now learn that the FBI are looking into 650,000 emails discovered on Anthony Weiner’s laptop, a machine Huma Abedin has told friends she never used – as you wouldn’t, if your spouse had the habits Mr Weiner has. 650,000 emails is at least 20 times the number Mrs Clinton originally turned over to the government – or approximately a thousand emails per day for two years, so Weiner would have to be sexting his spambot penis to an underage girl every minute-and-a-half to rack up that total. Which would be impressive even for him. Instead, the metadata indicates that thousands and thousands of those emails were sent either to or from Mrs Clinton’s private server. And she seems unlikely to be that interested in Anthony Weiner’s penis.

So what are they?

Huma and Weiner are so close to the Clintons that they were (see picture above) married by Bill. To the casual observer, Mr Weiner was merely the Mini-Me to Bill Clinton’s distinguishing characteristics. Alas, he lacked the Clintons’ luck, and never enjoyed the same level of protection. It’s not unreasonable to conclude that, somewhere in the latter stages of this bumpy half-decade descent, Anthony Weiner decided it might be prudent to have an insurance policy.

Weiner is an ambitious man with apparently insatiable sexual proclivities. Until 2013 he thought those two primal drives were reconcilable. The sex cost him his ambition – and is now threatening his liberty. He has very little standing between him and the abyss – other than what he knows about his wife and her patrons.

And that’s the least worst interpretation.

As has often been said, the Clintons end up tainting everything they touch. And when we’re talking about a depraved, amoral lowlife like Anthony Weiner, well, that’s saying something.

Share

The inescapable bottom line

October 6th, 2016 3 comments

When it comes to gender, it’s the DNA, stupid. All else is childish self-indulgence, the normalization of dysfunction and mental disorder.

So-called “transgenders” have no way of changing their chromosomal makeup. Although they can take hormones to change their outward, physical appearance, dress as they wish, use makeup, let their hair grow (or cut it) as they wish, and even undergo gender reassignment surgery, they will still remain chromosomally either XX or XY, depending on the genetic makeup they had when they were born.

An article in the Express, dated September 27, 2016, was titled “Transgender Couple has their own baby after the ‘man’ gave birth to his own baby.” In this case, the “woman” was born XY and the “man” was born XX. Neither had gender reassignment surgery so “she” got “him” pregnant and they had a son. (How do they know they had a son? Shouldn’t they wait until the offspring is old enough to decide whether to be a son or a daughter?)

Another article published by the Associated Press on September 27, 2016, titled “Ohio judge orders girls’ bathroom access for transgender student,” reports that in a case involving a school district in Ohio, Federal Judge Algenon Marbley ordered that “a biologically male student who identifies as a female be treated ‘like the girl that she is.’”

With all due respect, I’m sorry, your honor! You can rule that the student be treated like the girl he wishes to be, but there is no way the student can be treated like “the girl that she is!” Not unless the student has found a way to rid himself of that pesky “Y” chromosome!

When transgenders can prove to me that they have either gotten rid of the “Y” chromosome (male-to-female) or implanted the “Y” chromosome (female-to-male), then they will truly be “transgendered.” Until then, they are transvestites, pure and simple.

Yep. As I keep saying, these poor, sick people are more to be pitied than censured. Their pathology should never become the standard by which all of us are legally regulated. And in a healthy, properly ordered society, it wouldn’t be.

But, well, here we all are. And let’s all not notice, please, that no such discussion is currently taking place in any Moslem nation, nor will it ever. That would be…unhelpful.

Share