Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

NUTS!

You folks in farther-flung corners of the world may or may not not have heard about this, but the story is getting a fairish amount of play around here.

The 18-year-old sister of Charleston, S.C., church shooter Dylan Roof was arrested Wednesday for carrying pepper spray, a knife and marijuana in her high school, authorities said.

Morgan Roof also posted on Snapchat a critique of Wednesday’s National Student Walkout protest against gun violence, the Post and Courier of Charleston, S.C., reported.

“Your [sic] walking out for the allowed time of 17min, They are letting you do this, nothing is going to change what (the expletive) you think it’s gonna do? I hope it’s a trap and y’all get shot we know it’s fixing to be nothing but black people welkin out anyway,” Roof posted, Fox 57 reported.

Jeez O PETE, man. Definitely something nasty afloat in THAT genetic cesspool.

Share

Parliamentary madhouse

The identity-politics lunatics are running the asylum.

Anyone who has ever spoken on a college campus will have felt the weariness that descends during the Q&A when audience members begin their “questions” with “As a woman…” “As a black woman…” “As a trans woman…” If Frances McDormand’s “inclusion rider” can be made to apply to something as elusive as the particular combination of talents required to bring a script to sparkling life, is it really such a stretch to imagine a House of Gays – that’s to say, a legislature predicated on appropriate representation of identity groups? After all, the left is already institutionally hostile to America’s electoral college, under which small, peripheral, recalcitrant white-privilege backwater states have a disproportionate say in the selection of a president. Instead of these obsolete, irrelevant, geographical boundaries, would it not make more sense for the Senate to reflect the balance of competing power interests in today’s America? A precise number of seats, determined by the Supreme Court, for gays, trans women, cis women, cis black women, trans Muslim women, cis illegal immigrants, etc?

Fine by me. Then we can insist on like representation for white Christian males, reserving a number of seats proportionate to OUR population percentage for us exclusively. Fair, right? Sauce for the goose and all that? If we grant the underlying premise—that gays, transgenders, blacks, women, etc cannot possibly be properly represented by anything other than one of their own—then that has to be the only reasonable conclusion, right?

Breath: not holding it. But still.

Oh, you can laugh, but it’s not so difficult to imagine a jurisdiction such as California proposing such changes to a state legislature. For example, not so long ago it was broadly accepted that the right to participate in choosing the government of your society was a privilege of allegiance to that society. Yet now Californians and many others are proposing the extension of voting rights to non-citizens – by which they mean not even lawful immigrants but persons whose very presence in the land is an act of lawbreaking that mocks the very concept of fealty. If you step back for a moment, that’s extraordinary: millions and millions of Americans who support such alien-voting proposals have abandoned, in the blink of an eye, the defining attribute of citizenship.

They’re citizens of the WORLD, dude, not anything so petty and conceptually constricting as a mere country. And certainly not any country as abominable as THIS one. FREE YOUR MIND, MAN.

For a majority of young people in particular, “free speech” is a cis het white male concept that is subordinate to identity rights. If you disagree with that proposition, you might schedule a debate on the merits of free speech at, say, King’s College, London – but the mob will break it up, throw smoke bombs, smash windows, put the security guard in hospital, and the college will take the mob’s side because you threatened their “safe space”. As I heard a decade ago in my battles with Canada’s “human rights” commissions, to officialdom it’s you freespeechers who are the problem, holding debates, talking about stuff, and thereby upping our security costs because of your needless provocation of the increasingly inarticulate varsity.

The dictatorship of the identitariat is spreading rapidly, as all bad ideas do, way beyond loony campuses. If the right to freedom of speech no longer has much purchase on society, the law of contract for the moment still prevails – so I congratulate VDare.com on extracting a five-figure sum from Hilton Hotels for screwing them over and canceling their annual Immigration Reform Conference in Arizona. Dare are opposed both to illegal immigration and the legal immigration enabled by the 1965 act. I can think of no reason why in a free society a person should not be entitled to hold such views. But, in the wake of last year’s statue-toppling frenzy, PayPal (a de facto Internet monopoly) booted out Dare, and other contractors, such as Hilton, followed suit. Some corporations do this stuff because they’re headed by social-justice ideologues who are genuine believers; others are merely jelly-spined wankers thrown into a tizzy by a couple of hostile Tweets coming over the transom. I have no idea into which category Hilton fall, but I certainly hope the “five-figure sum” was in the high five figures – and even then that isn’t really big enough to discourage this malign trend.

When identity becomes politics, free speech shrivels: governments, whether Canadian Liberals or British Tories or German Coalitions-of-all-the-no-talents, are prepared to sacrifice it, so why should twitchy, risk-averse corporate venue-renters be expected to defend it?

The really bothersome thing is something I saw mentioned someplace the other day by somebody or other: when all of these corporate shunnings, bannings, and denunciations go just one way, it becomes kinda difficult not to suspect that they’re a bit more than merely craven or “risk-averse,” fearful of the effects of bad publicity on the bottom line. As this unknown someone stated: when was the last time you remember even ONE of these little dustups resulting in a corporation announcing support for, say, the NRA? When all the chips end up on the Left side of the table every single time, it’s a safe bet the deck is stacked against the Right. The “corporate cowards” are more likely quiet fellow-travelers, if not outright Leftards themselves, Red in tooth and claw.

Which is, y’know, extremely ironic, and of right ought to lead Republicans to rethink their former reflexive support for them. Steyn goes on to lay out a hierarchy of the Identity Politics Peerage (you’ll never guess who’s currently at the top of the pecking order), which I’ll insist that you click on through to read all of.

Update! Ahh, it was Ace:

A friend noted the other day that a dating app he uses was now banning all references to guns. Another friend asked, “Have you ever seen a single corporation offer a similar Virtue Signal to the right? Has any corporation run a commercial or campaign similarly expressing solidarity with right-leaning traditionalists on any issue?”

Do any corporations attempt any kind of similar cultural courting of the right, transmitting the right’s values or at least subtly portraying them in a sympathetic light?

Unlike Corporate Crony “Conservatives,” we #WokeNormals, as Kurt Schlichter calls us, are now Woke to the fact that the corporate sector has been wholly captured by the transnational progressive left, and we — unlike the Corporate Crony “Conservatives,” won’t be doing them any further favors.

They can get their favors from the party they support in word and in deed: The Democrat Party.

And if the Democrat Party chooses to conduct a legislative heist and steal their money — to hell with them. You go to bed with a whore, you wake up with your wallet missing.

Seconded, with bells on. Let them find out just what sucking up to the Commie Left gets them.

Share

Age of Travesties

When “shock value” is the only value left.

Early in the Netflix series called Babylon Berlin, set in Germany in 1929, the police vice squad raids the studio of a pornographic film company. At first, we hear only the off-camera voice of the director speaking to “Mary,” “Joseph,” the “shepherds,” and so on—and, for a second, we infer that it is a rehearsal for a school Christmas pageant.

Then the camera, following the police officers, enters the studio to disclose the pale, naked bodies of actors engaged in an orgy in a manger—coupling in the fashion of barnyard animals, as the director calls out instructions and encouragement.

The scene is not just a travesty of the Nativity but a travesty of blasphemy itself—and, somewhere beyond that, a comment on a style of German transgressiveness so naïve and humorless and boorish and literal-minded (almost moronic) as to be…not innocent, exactly, but bovine, a little too dumb to arouse an intelligent person’s indignation. One feels disgust, but it is not directed at the religious transgression; rather, one is overwhelmed by the depressing, over-the-top stupidity of it all, the squalor. The vice squad officers, all business and a little bored, take the scene as a matter of course. These are the polluted waters of their culture. This is their swamp. (Weimar Germany was a prequel, needless to say.)

It’s possible to have a similar reaction to aspects of America in 2018.

An understatement if ever there was one.

Leading universities have turned themselves into hybrids of Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood and Mao’s Red Guards. They have become madrassas of identity politics, given over to dogmatism, indoctrination, the coddling of grievance, and the encouragement and manipulation of neurotic youthful insecurities for the purpose of consolidating political power. The effects of travesties being committed on American campuses, where the mind of the hard Left is embedded in faculties, administrations, and boards of overseers, will be felt for generations. The damage may be irreparable.

Consider the comedy of the pronouns, which is symptomatic—and hilarious, if you can stand it. In the Alice in Wonderland of academe, pronouns are deemed to be discretionary. A person may choose a unique pronoun (“ahi,” “her,” or “Gloria Swanson,” or “John Foster Dulles” —up to you, precious: we leave the choice to your iridescent narcissism).

This is a travesty of the sanctity of the person and of individual freedom. It is not social justice but vandalism of the language—self-obsession carried beyond the reach of parody. It is the sort of mischief that children do when they have no parents worthy of the name; universities make a wicked travesty of the idea of in loco parentis.

“Vandalism of the language” indeed. But in his eagerness to avoid declaring, as he puts it, “which side is responsible for what has gone wrong in our culture and politics,” Morrow passes right by the fact that this vandalism is not something done randomly or unawares—that it is part of a larger Leftist strategy to vandalize the entire culture, in a long-term quest to bring America That Was crashing down and tumbling into the arms of global Marxism at long last, and for good.

Where, after all, has nearly every nonsensical perversion of language you can think of originated if not with the Left? The sowing of confusion and doubt by distorting the very words we speak—eliminating old ones, coining new ones, and rendering long-accepted meanings of others into their exact opposite—is a tactic used by both Hitler and Stalin in their day, to great effect.

Example: “assault weapon,” a meaningless drivel-salad invented by the gun-grabber Left to link perfectly ordinary semi-automatic rifles with assault rifles for the purpose of frightening and misleading the ignorant into supporting tight restrictions and eventually a ban on them. The spurious definition of “assault weapon” is based entirely on cosmetic appearance and not function; it is pure manipulation, propaganda and nothing whatsoever more.

The most shocking aspect, though, is not that the Left did it, but that they did it so successfully. The term is now thoroughly embedded in American culture; even 2A supporters use it, in dismaying numbers. And it’s nothing but manufactured horseshit.

That’s just one example. There are others related to firearms, and way, way more just about any and everywhere else you look—far too many to be comprehensively cataloged. The Left’s reduction of so much of plain language into near-gibberish would have to be one of their greatest success stories, in truth. “Tolerance”? “Diversity”? “Dissent”? “Patriotic”? “Brave”? “Heroic”? “Rape”? “Freedom”? “Truth”? Good Lord, even the word “liberal” itself has come to mean the precise opposite of what it once did.

None of which even begins to address the forced conversion of perfectly acceptable words like “handicapped” into clumsy, insulting pabulum like “differently abled”; “heterosexual” into “cisgendered”; “Negro” into “person of color,” and so on and on. Don’t even get me started on bland, neutered tripe like “Congressperson” or “waitron” or “chairperson.” I’m suspicious of the morphing of “secretary” into “administrative assistant,” “employment office” into “human resources department,” and “boyfriend/girlfriend/wife/husband/shackjob” into “life partner,” but I can’t prove anything. Yet.

Thankfully, the Marines decided not to go with “rifleperson” or “infantryperson” in the end, after paroxysms of indignation from disgusted leathernecks who must have suddenly found themselves wondering what the hell they signed up for in the first place. The Corps end up bowing pretty deeply to political correctness, though, just not quite all the way to the ground. Yet.

The lowering of Marine CET physical fitness requirements to accommodate female “Marine” Mass Organized Conflict Facilitator Persons who can’t hack the program is another matter. Well, actually, no, it really isn’t. It’s another surge of the same old Dismal Tide inundating sanity, reality, and common sense while undermining the effective defense of this nation. Which, hey, for a Progtard, what’s not to like?

In the interest of comity, however, could we at least all agree to stop referring to Muslims as a “race”? I know it’s a bridge way too far to expect any acknowledgment that skepticism about the wisdom of admitting hordes of them into the country with no expectation of either assimilation or allegiance—skepticism informed by knowledge of Muslim history, present-day proclivities, and clearly stated intentions—can NOT reasonably be denounced as either “Islamophobia” or “racism” with any real fairness, and don’t ask it of anyone.

While we’re on race, “Asian,” “black,” and “Hispanic” are ethnicities; not one of them is really a “race.” I still prefer “Indian” or “American Indian” to “Native American,” although I acknowledge that it’s sloppy and off-base. Plus some of the Native Americans themselves seem a bit tetchy about it, so I’m willing to go along to get along there. On the other hand, I’d love to see “African-American” shitcanned entirely. Dammit, you can be one or the other, but you can’t be both. Pick one and get on with your life. If you go around wearing African tribal garb but you were born and raised here and neither you, your parents, nor your grandparents have ever so much as vacationed in Africa, you’re a pretentious phony, or at best deeply confused. But you ain’t African. Sorry.

“Hooker” or “prostitute” into “sex worker”, “stripper” into “exotic dancer,” “porn star” into “adult film actress”? Eh, thanks, but no thanks. Not ones that rankle me greatly, mind, but I figured I’d go ahead and throw ’em out there.

When they start demanding we all refer to “Cajuns” as “linguistically-enhanced sobriety-challenged Bayou persons,” I’m getting off the damned bus. But Cajuns are more or less white, so Proggies probably won’t care much about renaming them.

All things considered, it’s a travesty, is what it is.

Share

Damning

Hoo, BOY. I never even thought of this.


GunControlNutso.png

Well, I mean, DUH. As I recollect, there was WAY more snickering and joke-cracking over it from Progressivists than there was dismay, sympathy, or outrage. From Democrat Socialist politicians, a loud silence was about the extent of it. Which backs up the adaptation of my longstanding contention about Trump once more: it’s not the guns they hate, not really. It’s not even the gun violence. It’s US.

As I said at the time: he was no nutjob, or no more so than the rest of them. There was nothing all that extraordinary about him. He was a mainstream Dem-Soc Progressivist. He just had balls enough to actually go out and do it—something a lot of them have come right out and fantasized openly about of late.

If there truly is a meaningful distinction to be made between them and the cucks/NeverTrumpTards/Vichy GOPers, that would have to be it: the GOPers don’t actually want us dead, and aren’t likely to come at us guns a-blazing…literally. Or not yet, at least.

Swiped from Aesop.

Share

Fatherless=broken

Just another Progressivist social-engineering agenda item whose implementation inflicted costs beyond calculation and misery immeasurable—creating problems rooted deeply into the fabric of American life by now, for which there is no workable solution readily apparent.

Mr. Black is correct that boys are broken. But they’re not broken as a result of being cavemen who haven’t “evolved” the way women have. They’re broken for another reason.

They are fatherless.

America’s boys are in serious trouble. As Warren Farrell’s new book, The Boy Crisis, explains, boys are experiencing a crisis of education, a crisis of mental health (as in the case of Nikolas Cruz), a crisis of purpose. And at the root of it all is fatherlessness.

Indeed, there is a direct correlation between boys who grow up with absent fathers and boys who drop out of school, who drink, who do drugs, who become delinquent and who wind up in prison.

And who kill their classmates.

“We blame guns, violence in the media, violence in video games, and poor family values. Each is a plausible player,” Farrell noted in 2013 after the Newtown, Connecticut, shooting. “But our daughters live in the same homes, with the same access to the same guns, video games, and media, and are raised with the same family values. Our daughters are not killing. Our sons are.”

Farrell’s explanation about how masculinity can be a force for good or for evil is enormously instructive. “Without dads as role models, boys’ testosterone is not well channeled. The boy experiences a sense of purposelessness, a lack of boundary enforcement, rudderlessness, and often withdraws into video games and video porn. At worst, when boys’ testosterone is not well-channeled by an involved dad, boys become among the world’s most destructive forces. When boys’ testosterone is well channeled by an involved dad, boys become among the world’s most constructive forces.”

Yeah, well, the Left is WAY too heavily invested in continuing to promote their destructive codswallop, no matter what, to ever admit to anything as uncomfortable as that.

Share

Can’t parody them anymore

You truly, truly can’t. On the other hand, why go to the trouble? They’re doing such a bang-up job of it themselves.

Pink pussyhats are being dropped from Women’s March because they ‘exclude trans women and women whose private parts are not pink’

No really, you guys. It would appear, incredible as it may seem to sane people, that these barking moonbats are in fact serious as hell about this. And that they expect to be taken seriously, by actually serious non-lunatics. Steyn, as you would no doubt expect, is having himself one hell of a good old time with it:

Three years ago I wrote:

I can’t recall ever describing The Vagina Monologues as ‘edgy’. But I did tell Joseph Brean that I was amused to see that its annual ‘V Day’ production at Mount Holyoke College has been canceled because of its ‘extremely narrow perspective on what it means to be a woman’. Hence, this Guardian headline: ‘Vagina Monologues playwright: “I never said a woman is someone with a vagina”.’ As I said to Mr Brean, the revolution devours its own: Less than 20 years after Eve Ensler ’empowered’ women by ‘reclaiming’ their vaginas, it seems a woman doesn’t need a vagina at all, and it’s totally cisgenderism to suggest you’re not a woman if you’re hung like a horse.

As is my wont, I was playing it for laughs – but, as I always say, none of the people who matter in our society are laughing. Hence, the Bathroom Wars of the subsequent years, in which the position of what used to be known to Common Law as the Reasonable Man (now presumably the Reasonable Cisman) is apparently (as I put it on Rush): What sort of woman would be offended by the sight of another woman’s penis?

Henry Ford said you could get a Model T in any color as long as it’s black, but you really can get a Volvo in any color. Whoops, sorry, I mean a vulva. In the Civil Rights era, millions marched so that Americans might be judged not by the color of their faces but by the color of their vulvas. If only the apartheid regime in South Africa had thought to issue their citizenry with vulva-colored hats. Hallelujah!

Unfortunately, the Women’s March in Pensacola is having no truck with celebrating divulvaversity, as they explained in a post helpfully labeled…

Trigger Warning and Content Warning for comments: Transphobia, Cissexism, Racism, mention of Sexual Assault, Genital Mutilation, Misogyny and Trans-Misogyny.

They’re not kidding:

The Pink P*ssy Hat reinforces the notion that woman = vagina and vagina = woman, and both of these are incorrect.

Exactly. These days it’s entirely random. You never know what you’re getting into. As I noted a couple of years back, since the two sexes became multiple genders, and “transsexuals” became “transgenders”, and “sex change” became “gender fluidity,” some 60 per cent of transgender persons now retain their original genitalia. For example, my compatriot Gabrielle Tremblay won a Canadian Screen Award for Best Supporting Actress for a film in which she showed her penis.

“Her penis”: See how easy it is to get with the program?

Steyn goes on to posit a darker side to this hilarity: namely, that the fact we’re even lending an ear to such lunatic-fringe nonsense at all signals a tremendous victory for the cultural Marxists. To wit:

The cult-Marxists have remade almost everything in society, and detaching the sex organs from the sexes is the final decisive victory: Once “the notion that woman = vagina and vagina = woman” is up for grabs, there really isn’t anything left to demolish.

A fair enough assertion, I guess, in and of itself. I suppose Steyn’s serious reflection here calls for some at least slightly serious analysis from me too, much as I do hate to interrupt the pointing and laughing to do it. So here goes.

I can’t see this “decisive victory” as anything but Pyrrhic in the long run; it can’t help but rebound against the shriekers severely, and that right soon too. Normal, ordinary Americans not in dire need of psychiatric help will go along with demented thrashing about of the “pussyhat” sort only so far. Especially when it’s accompanied by rabid denunciations of their own more traditional values and standards, coming eventually to be seen as part of an attempt to destroy them.

Which, y’know, it is. Normals have proven themselves by now to be happy enough to leave people on society’s fringes alone to sort out their own issues, as bizarre as some of those issues might be. Much as “liberal” blacks, gay men, lesbians, LGBTXQ39whatthefuckevers, “feminists,” and other melodrama queens like to posture and whine as if there had been no loosening whatsoever of various late-19th-century cultural restrictions, modern American reality is something entirely different.

Ordinary Americans, despite pockets of resistance here and there over the years, are in the main possessed of a forbearance, flexibility, and open-mindedness that speaks quite well of them indeed—especially when compared with, say, the virulent prejudice against blacks still rampant in parts of Asia, or the inflexible hostility to homosexuals or women’s rights in the Muslim world.

But our homegrown nutjobs very scrupulously avoid taking notice of any of that. They are no longer content with mere forbearance, either, having moved on instead to hurling their sundry pathologies in everybody else’s teeth and haranguing Normals with accusations of a “bigotry” and “oppression” that simply do not exist. That mulish, dull-witted, juvenile lack of perspective will only serve to curtail said forbearance with a quickness, likely to be replaced with something that will suit the freaks one whole hell of a lot less.

Amusing Irony Alert: people who lament Trump’s “boorishness” and lack of “decorum” marching around DC in broad daylight…wearing “pussyhats.”

And an aside: Call me an old-fashioned old stick-in-the-mud of an old grouchy old codger if you will. Call me unworldly, call me unsophisticated, call me a hick from the sticks, a rube. Call me delicate, or fussy, or overly fastidious and prim. Call me naive, even, although I assure you you’d be wrong on that one. I’ve been a lot of places, and I’ve seen a lot of things. I’ve skirted danger-close to being what some might consider a libertine myself, at various times and in various ways. I have, in fact, been there and done that. To a much greater extent than most, if I do say so myself.

But one thing I never once imagined seeing, not in a million years I didn’t, was a pussyhat. A hat. Shaped to resemble a pussy—explicitly, no sly subtlety or coyness in design or construction at all, leaving absolutely no room for misinterpretation. Nary a wink, nary a nudge in sight. Worn in full public view, not at a porn industry convention or a NYC Gay Pride parade, not as a tasteless joke of an off-color costume at an adult Halloween party, but in the streets of the nation’s capital. As a political statement, a petition for the redress of grievances as our hallowed Founders put it. By people who expected to be taken seriously rather than made sport of as would be due and proper, or chased off into the night by someone possessed of too much politesse to endure such a breach of etiquette without taking direct action.

Pussyhats. I mean, seriously, you guys.

I still hold that, when you think about it, this endlessly escalating tomfoolery all comes back to the same thing: the hysteric desperation these headcases feel over Trump’s election and his solid progress in keeping his bargain with the American people since he took office. The resultant anguish has driven almost the entirety of the American Left right past the edge of eccentricity or neurosis into genuine madness. The rejection of their disastrous program was a spark that ignited a shrieking, frothing overreaction which I doubt very much they can control or even moderate, no matter how destructive to their ambitions—and to themselves, personally—it will turn out to be.

It’s almost frightening to think about what the response to their coming 2018 shellacking will be. But if things continue along more or less as they have been, it’s almost certain we’re going to find out. And then we’re going to see what that gets them.

My bet? I predicted before he was even elected that there would be more assassination attempts against Trump than any president in history. After the midterms, if the shellacking I anticipate comes to pass and Left whackadoodles find themselves soundly thumped once again (UNEXPECTED!™), look for those to start in earnest, as an even more penetrating despair and hopelessness settles in deep at the ol’ Ha Ha Hotel and the more, umm, proactive inmates figure they have nothing left to lose.

Share

You will be made to…wait, WHAT, again now?

Chaos. Incoherence. Inconsistency. Add it all up and you get Progtard comedy gold.

Singer Ginuwine has sparked a heated debate on Twitter after a recent episode of Celebrity Big Brother UK. In the latest episode, Ginuwine seemingly rejected fellow housemate India Willoughby.

The controversy stems from a conversation between Willoughby and the “Pony” singer, in which she asked whether he would date a trans woman. “You would date me, yeah,” Willoughby, who is a trans woman herself, asked. “Not if you were trans,” Ginuwine replied. After Ginuwine replied that he would not date a trans woman, Willoughby attempted to plant a kiss on the singer. When her advance was rejected, Willoughby stormed off.

Mmm, s’cuse me and all, but wasn’t ZXHRR’s outrageous demand that this guy make himself available to ZXHRR for ZXHRR’s sexual use, umm, harassment? In fact, wasn’t ZXHRR’s unwanted (NO MEANS NO! EXCEPT WHEN IT DOESN’T!) lunge an actual, errrr, sexual assault? Isn’t this Ginuwine fellow, whoever the hell he is, now officially a Victim™, who must Always Be Believed? And shouldn’t Progtards everywhere be up in arms over his victimization?

No, no, I guess not. Never mind.

Now Twitter has split into two sides. One side is outraged by Ginuwine’s rejection, suggesting that his unwillingness to date trans women is transphobic and bigoted. On the other hand, some fans are rallying behind the “In Those Jeans” artist, insisting that he has a choice to date whomever he chooses. Some also suggested that Willoughby was actually harassing him.

Dude, that’s three sides. Unless, as I suspect, the ones in that last category numbered about, oh, four, and were commenting in the same spirit of mockery that I am here and therefore don’t count. One more question, though: are all the Left’s slopes as slippery as this one is proving to be?

Via Ace, who goes on to make a damned good point about where our own domestic media fits into all this tommyrot, and how Progtardia uses these horseshit Critically Vitally Important Issues ‘N Stuff as a tactic to keep the culture shifting ever Leftward.

So let’s tot it all up then: we have a Being Of Penis unequivocally rejecting a proposed sexual advance, up to and including outright assault by the Left’s own established previous standards for the term, by another Being Of Penis who wishes to be a Being Of Vagina but who everybody involved admits is not. The Being Of Vagina perpetrates the assault anyway in contravention of the clearly expressed rejection of said attack. This event cannot be acknowledged—despite its having been captured on film—by Proggies as the assault it self-evidently was, though, because…well, because reasons. Also, shut up.

I repeat: chaos. Incoherence. Complete batshit lunacy, in fact. I can’t imagine there’s a sane Normal in the Western world—be they Beings Of Penis or Vagina—who can make any sense at all of it, and whose sole wish in reaction will be anything other than to keep the whole throbbing mess just as far away from them as is humanly possible.

This, too, is how you got Trump, you idiots. Not a moment too soon, either.

Share

I just…can’t even

Sick fucks.

Do you have a kid you’re hoping to force your socio-political ideas on? Are the attention grabbing posts you make on social media about your small child’s gender confusion lacking on Facebook likes, or Tumblr reblogs? Then fret not, dear social justice warrior, because now there’s a site called “transkids” that will sell you a small prosthetic penis for your little girl to wear around.

No really, Morse isn’t kidding. If only he was. From the “About us” section of this horrid travesty of a website:

TransKids is run by Searah, who also runs a site for trans guys called ftmessentials.com. After years of helping adults find high-quality gender expression gear, she saw the need for a site and store that focused more on kids and their unique needs.

Searah hopes that all parents coming here can trust that this is a safe and affirming place, where helping your kids live fully and embodied is our only goal. 

Umm, no, not exactly. Not by a long yard, it ain’t. Back to Morse for the unvarnished truth:

Why these people believe forcing their ideas about sexuality and gender on kids whose main concern should be who will play hide and seek with them after school is anyone’s guess. In a sane world this would be considered child abuse, but for too many platforms, this is considered “tolerance” and “open mindedness.”

This isn’t open mindedness or tolerance, this is straight up child abuse. Not only are these ideological die-hards teaching their children to grow up with the idea that they were born wrong, or defective, they’re attempting to make them wear things — by force or by persuasion — to put a penis between their legs.

I don’t know why there are people out there who believe putting a penis between a little girl’s legs is somehow now acceptable in the right context. This is not acceptable. Not in any context.

Agreed, completely. I’ve said many times here that I would never advocate harassing or tormenting the tiny handful of sad, mentally ill individuals out there who are suffering from crippling delusions about their gender. But what this “Searah” person is doing is vile—criminally so, de facto if not de jure. It amounts to encouraging this pathology among impressionable children who would most likely otherwise have no interest in such questioning at all, and doing so for political purposes. If such sinister manipulation isn’t actually against any law, then it probably ought to be.

(Via VP)

Share

White privilege

I went to Privileged Identity Exploration Model re-education camp, and all I got was this lousy social justice cause.

That’s what you see in this article about Privileged Identity Exploration Model being used at universities, to help white people overcome their whiteness, so they can engage in social justice causes. It’s a lot like brainwashing, where the initiate is forced to deny reality to the point where they no longer trust their own eyes. Instead, they accept whatever the cult leader tells them. It’s also reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution, where intellectuals were forced to confess to crimes that they did not commit, because they did not exist.

It is easy to be offended by this stuff. That’s intentional. As Theodore Dalrymple observed about communist regimes, the point is to humiliate.

In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

Well, of course it does. It was promoted and put in place by the same type of people, after all, working in the same ideological cause.

Modern society is riddled with special privileges. We even have a term in the law, protected class, which is the name for groups that have special rights. The trouble is those special set-asides and carve-outs only make sense if there is the evil white man lurking around every corner. The stunning lack of evil white men has forced these people to create a mystery version, one that only exists in the imagination of the offender, after they are properly coached in the Privileged Identity Exploration Model.

I should note the Maoist flavor to all of this campus activism. It is rather stunning just how similar the social justice warriors are to the Red Guards in the Cultural Revolution. What that suggests is the non-whites launching these campaigns on campus see themselves as the victors of the culture war.

Again: no surprise there; they ARE the Red Guards, and a Cultural Revolution is what they’ve been waging for a long time now. They’ve been victors so far, but now they’re getting some serious pushback—UNEXPECTEDLY!™—at long last, which has unhinged them completely…and hilariously.

Share

Moonbat meltdown

Wow, these freaks REALLY hate the idea of letting you hold onto a bit more of your money than you did before, don’t they?



Ace has other examples of a psychotic break caused by tax cuts. This one would have to be my favorite, though:

About 10,000 Americans will die every year from lack of health coverage if the tax reform bill goes through as proposed, Larry Summers, former Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton and White House economic advisor under Barack Obama, said Monday.

Yeah, these are people who can be reasoned with, can be equably and honestly debated, are open to equitable compromise, and who might occasionally have a proposal worth considering. Funny, too, how every single thing they don’t like is going to cause quadrillions(!!!!) of deaths, but they have never yet acknowledged the hundred million or so ACTUALLY killed by their preferred system of government—preferring instead to make ludicrous fools of themselves denying it, or more despicably, sidestepping or minimizing it.

Just imagine the nightmarish ordeal of trying to explain to them the Ground Zero principle that it ain’t the government’s money to begin with if you really want to send some serious chills up your spine. And then tell me again all about how it’s either desirable or possible for us to all live peaceably within the same borders, just to double down on pointless futility.

“Unity”? Umm, thanks and all, but, well…NO.

Peripherally related update! Peripherally, yeah, but important enough to mention here.

With a bare 52-48 GOP Senate majority, and with Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee determined to even a personal score with President Trump, the Senate version of the bill that passed the House almost went down to defeat. But the Republicans held. Susan Collins of Maine fought gamely to preserve the deduction for property taxes, and she stuck with the team. Ron Johnson got what he needed. Rand Paul managed to overcome his broken-ribs situation. For a day, Jeff Flake and John McCain set aside their personal issues with President Trump.

And — incredibly importantly — it is critical for Alabama voters to grasp that not one single solitary Democrat broke ranks from Chuck Schumer to vote for the tax cut.

The Democrats cynically run ostensibly moderate-seeming candidates in Republican states like Indiana, North Dakota, Missouri, Montana, and West Virginia. Like Doug Jones who is opposing Roy Moore in Alabama, those “moderates” falsely assure voters that they are not in Chuck Schumer’s pocket, are independent thinkers, and will not betray their conservative constituents if elected and sent to Washington. Yet, without exception, they all are brazen liars. The vote on the Senate tax bill proves the lie. When push comes to shove, when every last vote counts, Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), John Tester (D-MT), and Joe Manchin (D-WV) were in Chuck Schumer’s pocket. Same with Bill Nelson (D-FL), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), and Sherrod Brown (D-OH). Not one voted for tax cuts. That is where Doug Jones will be. As the President has warned, Jones would be bad on crime, bad on defense, bad on the border, bad on judges, bad on everything. It would be like Alabama giving one of its two United States Senate seats to New York or California.

Heh. No way can I imagine THAT failing to motivate Alabamians to make sure Moore wins.

Share

The Opposite Rule

ZMan hangs a useful name on something I’ve mentioned here many a time.

Like most normal men, I’m enjoying the hell out of seeing the girls go crazy, accusing every liberal man in sight of being a predator. When it comes to the media, I’m firmly in the camp that says, “burn, baby, burn.”  When it comes to cretins like Al Franken and John Conyers, well, there is no torment that would be too monstrous for them. Of course, the Hollywood stuff is manna from heaven. The only thing that would make it better is if they actually start burning men at the stake in the Hollywood hills. That would be awesome.

As others have been enthusiastic to point out, this is almost exclusively a Progressive problem. The men being hauled off to pervert’s island are mostly the male feminist types, who used to delight in accusing normal men of bad behavior. The Fox News scandal that kicked this off is the notable exception, but that’s beginning to look like a special case as the great panic rolls forward. I’ll get back to this in a minute, but I think the Fox stuff fits into all of this, as does the Roy Moore hoax. It’s all part of the larger pattern.

What this looks like is the Left set out to accuse their rivals of the things popular on the Left. All of these Prog-men being jammed up by the girls were happy to accuse Trump of being bad for women. Meanwhile, guys like Matt Lauer were planning to build a sex dungeon at 30 Rock. Al Franken was entertaining his buddies with stories about how he wanted to drug and rape Leslie Stahl. The Opposite Rule of Liberalism says that whatever Lefty is hooting about, you can be sure he is the most guilty.

Yep. Call it projection, call it deflection, call it a strategic diversion or whatever else you like, but the Opposite Rule works well enough for me.

Share

Drop dead

Democrat Socialist abuser of women John Conyers runs for a hidey-hole.



Guess the Democrat Socialist Men Behind The Curtain decided it would be better to give this reprobate the bum’s rush off Stage Left right quick, before he does any more damage. Al “Fish Lips” Franken, too, is reportedly considering seeking “help” as a useful deflection, as are Weinstein and Spacey.

Problem is, though, these serial shitheads don’t NEED therapy. They knew perfectly well that what they were doing was wrong; they suffered no confusion whatever about that, as is evidenced by their trying to keep their grubby indecencies under wraps and well-hidden all along. No, the real problem is that they fully expected to get away with it.

And considering the usual protective circling of the liberal wagons around at least the politicians among ’em that we’re seeing, one can only conclude that their assumption of invulnerability is correct. For now, anyway. We’ll see if their brazen strategy works out as they expect it to in the long term. One thing is certain: any self-respecting woman who would even dream of voting for a member of this filthy party after these revelations is a damned fool.

Share

Is EVERY “liberal” a sick, weenie-wagging, perverted abuser of women?

Apparently so, yeah.

As the co-host of NBC’s “Today,” Matt Lauer once gave a colleague a sex toy as a present. It included an explicit note about how he wanted to use it on her, which left her mortified.

On another day, he summoned a different female employee to his office, and then dropped his pants, showing her his penis. After the employee declined to do anything, visibly shaken, he reprimanded her for not engaging in a sexual act.

He would sometimes quiz female producers about who they’d slept with, offering to trade names. And he loved to engage in a crass quiz game with men and women in the office: “f—, marry, or kill,” in which he would identify the female co-hosts that he’d most like to sleep with.

These accounts of Lauer’s behavior at NBC are the result of a two-month investigation by Variety, with dozens of interviews with current and former staffers. Variety has talked to three women who identified themselves as victims of sexual harassment by Lauer, and their stories have been corroborated by friends or colleagues that they told at the time. They have asked for now to remain unnamed, fearing professional repercussions.

On Wednesday, NBC announced that Lauer was fired from “Today.”

Couldn’t happen to a nicer asshole. Except, perhaps, this one:



I nurture an especial loathing for Keillor, who has to be pretty much the pluperfect example of the smug, sanctimonious, self-righteous, arrogant Progressivist. The greasy unctuousness that drips like hot bacon fat from his every spoken syllable has always grated on me something awful, and I look forward to seeing the fatuous pig twisting in the wind for days to come yet, as more and more accusers find their courage and crawl out from under the rock he crushed them under.

Better put some Powdermilk Biscuit flour on that, fat boy.

Update! Creep confessional.

In 1994, Keillor addressed the National Press Club and defended Bill Clinton against a battery of accusations, calling him a “soulful man” who “got himself elected without scaring people.” Keillor warned that society should try “not to make the world so fine and good that you and I can’t enjoy living in it.”

He added in his hangdog baritone: “A world in which there is no sexual harassment at all, is a world in which there will not be any flirtation. A world without thieves at all will not have entrepreneurs.” Twenty-three years later — amid a reckoning of workplace behavior that has felled politicians, TV anchors and Hollywood heavies — a viewer is left to wonder: Was Keillor being straight, or satirical?

In 1998 Keillor wrote “Wobegon Boy,” a novel about a radio host who is wrongly accused of sexual harassment and fired by his station.

On Tuesday, the day before his firing, The Washington Post published his opinion piece ridiculing the idea that Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) should resign over allegations of sexual harassment.

Calls for Franken’s head are “pure absurdity,” Keillor wrote, “and the atrocity it leads to is a code of public deadliness.”

Keillor, an avowed Democrat, last year became a weekly columnist for The Washington Post News Service and Syndicate — meaning he was a contract writer, not an employee with a desk in the newsroom. Many of his columns took mournful aim at President Trump, who “would have enjoyed the 17th century,” when “the idea of privileged sexual aggression was common in high places.”

Man, irony just doesn’t come much richer or more toothsome than that. Twist, twist, and writhe, you double-dealing blowhard. You readers can rest assured I’m going over the above-mentioned WaPo piece on Franken right now, and will be back for another savory bite of greasy long-pig soon as I’m done with it.

(Via David Bernstein)

Meh update! Surprisingly, it’s a very brief and almost perfunctory piece, although in light of what we know now it DOES have a distinct flavor of self-serving desperation lurking under the crust of overcooked wordplay. Keillor starts off with a so-so riff on the potential risks and rewards of renaming—one Francois-Marie Arouet (who went on to renown under the pen-name Voltaire) in particular—which pointless perambulation brings him staggering round at last to the meat of it, such as it is:

That name worked out well for Francois-Marie — it lent an electricity to his work. For example, his statement: “Any one who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.” We might not believe that coming from a Francois-Marie. And how considerate of him to say it in English rather than French.

The greatest absurdity of our time is You Know Whom, which goes without saying but I will anyway. What his election showed is that a considerable number of people, in order to demonstrate their frustration with the world as it is, are willing to drive their car, with their children in the back seat, over a cliff, smash the radiator, bust an axle and walk away feeling good about themselves. No other president in modern times has been held in contempt by a preponderance of people from the moment he said, “So help me, God.” The playboy blather, the smirk of privilege, the stunning contempt for factual truth — how can the country come together when the president has nothing in common with 98 percent of the rest of us?

And then there is Sen. Al Franken. He did USO tours overseas when he was in the comedy biz. He did it from deep in his heart, out of patriotism, and the show he did was broad comedy of a sort that goes back to the Middle Ages. Shakespeare used those jokes now and then, and so did Bob Hope and Joey Heatherton when they entertained the troops. If you thought that Al stood outdoors at bases in Iraq and Afghanistan and told stories about small-town life in the Midwest, you were wrong. On the flight home, in a spirit of low comedy, Al ogled Miss Tweeden and pretended to grab her and a picture was taken. Eleven years later, a talk show host in LA, she goes public, and there is talk of resignation. This is pure absurdity, and the atrocity it leads to is a code of public deadliness. No kidding.

Franken should change his name to Newman and put the USO debacle behind him and then we’ll change frankincense to Febreze. Remove the slaveholder Washington from our maps, replacing him with Wampanoag, and replace Jefferson, who slept with Sally Hemings — consensual? I doubt it — with Powhatan, and what about the FDR Drive in New York, named for a man who was unfaithful to his wife? Let’s call it RFD and let it go at that.

Man, the “everybody does it” self-justification rises off that like a bad, bad odor.

“Playboy blather” indeed, you son of a bitch; “nothing in common with 98 percent of the rest of us”—except of course YOU. You, and all of Hollywood, and your precious Democrat-Socialist swamp-dwellers, too.

And all Trump did was TALK about it, stating something everybody knows is the simple truth: that wealth and fame allow a man to get away with a lot that he wouldn’t otherwise. You and your fellow power-abusing pustules didn’t talk about it. You DID it.

You want Trump crucified for merely talking about the very things you and your precious “icons” HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN DOING ALL ALONG—and even have the big, brass balls to say so in the course of defending one of your own for doing it in this article. Worse, you all have actually been doing it while claiming to be “feminists”—priggishly lecturing us “toxic masculinity” troglodytes on our supposed “misogyny” while you have your unseen hand up some poor girl’s skirt against her will, without her consent, and to her outrage and horror.

Yeah, well, FUCK YOU, gasbag. Every last stinking, insufferable one of you. Period fucking dot. As the great Larry Brown once hilariously fantasized saying to a publisher who had rejected him: I wish I had you down here. I’d whip your ass. I’d stomp a mudhole in your ass and walk it dry.

Despicable, certainly. One can only stand in awe of their boundless gall, even as one chokes back the rising gorge over their deplorable lack of shame or decency.

Well, that, and enjoy their public humiliation while we eagerly await the next round, I mean.

Of course, the most delicious part of all remains unchanged: for all their high sanctimony before, now that all of Hollywood, most of Democrat Socialist DC, and even the world of “journalism” stands exposed, they still have, what?

Judge Roy Moore. One guy—ONE—against entire INDUSTRIES of Progressivist gropers, weenie-waggers, pervs, and pud-pullers. Let’s just run a list, which I won’t even pretend is comprehensive: Weinstein. Clinton, of course. Gore. Conyers. Franken. NPR chief editor David Sweeney. Takei. Louis CK. Keillor. Weiner. Spacey. Charlie Rose. Glenn Thrush. Halperin. James Toback. Brett Ratner. John Lasseter. Go back further than this recent tsunami, if you like, to Ted Kennedy: the Lion of the Senate, inspiration and role model, grandfather to them all.

All proud liberals—ALL. Against…what?

Judge Roy Moore. That’s it. He’s the only one. And the already-questionable allegations against him are holding less and less water by the day.

Enjoy this? Oh, you just bet your sweet ass I am. And if you’re a liberal female and are all butthurt now, perceiving my turning of that last phrase as some kind of microaggression against you, well, call a fucking cop, sweetcheeks.

Seriously, though, I must admit that I mostly agree with Keillor’s premise in his article above: I do think the stultified, juiceless world foisted on us by Progressivist political correctness—the lunatic boundaries their idea of what constitutes “sexual harassment” have drawn around us all—is neither a pleasant nor a desirable one. Would I prefer that we were all less uptight, more tolerant, more hardy and unflappable, less quick to take offense, more forgiving, more able to act like big boys and girls when it comes to such things? Sure I would.

Which doesn’t imply that I think there ain’t real, true harassment going on out there, mind. It also doesn’t mean I think it shouldn’t be swatted down vigorously and punished righteously when it’s exposed, each and every time, no matter who does it. It’s abuse of power; it’s preying on women, plain and simple, and it shouldn’t be tolerated. As a man and not a Pajama Boy pusscake, I believe protecting the women in my life from true predatory animals is one of my noblest and most compelling duties, and I have no qualms whatever about doing it. I owe my precious daughter that much, if no one else, and I swore to myself a long time ago that I would NOT fail her.

As has been said about other things, though: in a world where everything is sexual harassment, nothing is. All of the egregious behavior by the Progtard “icons” listed above rises (or sinks) to a reasonable, credible standard of harassment and abuse, and may God have mercy on the Franken or Lauer who dares do such to my little girl, because I surely won’t. On the other hand, innocent flirtation, say (unless it’s unwanted or excessive, or persists after a clear and calmly-stated request to knock it off); asking a co-worker out for drinks after work; an awkward, perhaps even drunken declaration of infatuation after a few of those drinks—ehhh, not so much, I’m thinking.

These are all things that those of us with a functioning moral compass can recognize as minor irritations at worst, certainly not just causes for hysteria, law-enforcement intervention, or psychotherapy. The critical flaw in the Progressivist approach is their usual lack of any sense of proportion, their complete inability to apply common sense to any problem or situation. That, combined with their bone-deep, reflexive penchant for seeking legislative, big-government solutions to anything and everything is why they find themselves in such deep doo-doo now. Which is no more than they deserve, the dopes.

But maybe the real long-term harm in what Progressivists have done is to make it probable that at least some bona-fide allegations of harassment or abuse won’t be taken seriously— that they end up numbing us to all such things so thoroughly as to render us uninterested in reacting appropriately to cases of real abuse. As with their shrieks of “Nazi!” at anyone who disagrees with them slightly, they may end up removing all force and impact from the term. Only time will tell on that, I guess.

For the moment, though, it’s time to enjoy another self-inflicted sucking chest wound, and to help ensure it’s as grievously and permanently injurious to them as possible. As with everything else, they’ve politicized sexual abuse, and are now being amusingly hoist once again on their own petard. This is the world they wanted; this is the world they made, and we all have to live in it. To fail to rigorously enforce their own rules against them, especially when it will do such great harm to them, is a mug’s game. It’s exactly what they expect of us right now, in truth—they’re counting on it; you can see that from the excuses they’re already so audaciously making for Franken, Lauer, and Conyers.

Hell with that. They’re your juices, libtards. Stew in ’em, till you’re fucking well done.

We’re gonna need more popcorn, looks like.

Share

Welcome back!

To the Senate, that is, for the Democrat Socialist Party’s new Lion Of The Senate, diligently following in the soiled footsteps of the old one. One can only imagine how thrilled the victims of his unwanted attentions are to see that this noble servant is back to Doing The People’s Business all over any helpless female in arm’s reach without suffering any real punishment for his perverted assaults whatsoever. Call it justice, liberal-fascist style.

Clearly, though, the New Lion Of The Senate has learned much from national exposure of his warped proclivities:

If you had asked me two weeks ago, would any woman come forward with an allegation like this, I would have said no. So I cannot speculate. This has been a shock and it has been extremely humbling. I am embarrassed. I feel ashamed. What I’m going to do is I’m going to start my job and go back to work. I am going to work as hard as I can for the people of Minnesota and start that right now. Thank you all. Thank you.

And with that terse slap in the face for his victims, the oozing pustule walked off in the sure knowledge that this scandal will now be buried and forgotten by his friends in the liberal media establishment. They, too, are just doing their jobs: protecting Democrat Socialists by any means they can contrive.

As another invulnerable liberal icon once so hubristically scoffed: guilty as hell. Free as a bird.

Share

Rotten tree bears toxic fruit

Defining degeneracy down. Or, looked at another way, raising the bar to truly nauseating heights.

Would you be inclined to buy makeup because a 10-year-old boy is showing you how to create a look on Instagram? If we’re talking about Jack Bennett of @makeuupbyjack, then the answer could well be a resounding yes.

Oh, I assure you it most certainly could NOT. It does raise a whole lot of other questions (such as whether this poor confused young man’s overindulgent parents ought to be locked up, for one), but the only real answer it provides is whether this kid has serious mental-health issues or not, and whether he’ll be tormented by them his whole life long. But I suspect there was never much doubt about those answers anyway.

Since convincing his mother to start his account in May, young Mr. Bennett, who lives in Berkshire, England, has amassed 331,000 followers and attracted the attention of brands like MAC and NYX, which have offered products to create looks. Refinery29 has celebrated him as the next big thing in makeup.

He is the latest evidence of a seismic power shift in the beauty industry, which has thrust social media influencers to the top of the pecking order. Refreshingly, they come in all shapes, sizes, ages and, more recently, genders. Hailed by Marie Claire as the “beauty boys of Instagram,” the early male pioneers, like Patrick Simondac (@PatrickStarrr), Jeffree Star(@jeffreestar) and Manny Gutierrez, (@MannyMua733), have transcended niche to become juggernauts with millions of followers. And their aesthetic is decidedly new: neither old-school-rocker makeup nor drag queen.

“When I first started on Instagram six years ago, the only stuff that existed was guy-liner,” Mr. Starrr said. “It was Fall Out Boy, and it was not glamorous. There wasn’t anything close to applying false lashes. I wanted to feel pretty and beautiful without being a drag queen.”

Well, sorry, kid, but despite the cheerleading from the cultural boll-weevils at the NYT—who wish only to undercut the whole idea of masculinity by promoting gender confusion and dysfunction, and are merely using your natural early-stage groping for identity to promote a sinister agenda—you’ve failed at that.

What makes the Lefty propagandists indulging and manipulating the trials of youth to advance their larger goal of manipulating the greater society as well as humanity itself so despicable in this instance is the damage they’re doing to the boys. Instead of providing them with proper guidance and role models that could ease their passage to a healthy, realistic, and more productive place in society, the kids in this article are going to suffer their whole lives from this Lefty ploy in one way or another. The villains wreaking this havoc—starting with the writer of this article, and the NYT itself—should hope most fervently that karma ain’t a real thing. Or, y’know, Hell.

Mike Walsh lays his finger on another issue:

At the same time the MSM tosses around the word “pedophila” without the slightest idea what its definition actually is, the Newspaper of Record goes and runs a celebratory story like this: just have a look at the picture at the link of a ten-year-old boy. This is not only the sexualizing of children, it’s the homosexualizing of them, which is of course the point, given the Times‘s passionate and enthusiastic advocacy of all things gay.

The gay marriage battle, as many said at the time, was just the first step down a path that would lead into many cultural blind alleys. That now-quaint notion was airily dismissed at the time as absurd exaggerations from extremist bigots overcome by hysteria and hate. Those “extremists” wished not to oppress anyone or do them harm, but to preserve institutions and traditions that have served humanity quite well for a VERY long time, and sparked the most rapid advancement, the most true progress, in all of human history.

A small irony: the remarkable rapidity of that progress, juxtaposed with the breakneck speed of the changes in attitudes being wrought even now by the Left’s machinations seeking to pervert or undo it. Imagine gay marriage as anything but a completely mainstream and non-controversial proposition now; imagine lighting up a cigarette in a bar freely and without approbation or arrest; imagine repealing Obamacare…and not replacing it with any government-run system.

You probably can’t. I’d bet anything your teen or twenty-something kid can’t.

As with feminism and the status of American blacks among many other issues, the NYT’s and Leftymedia’s pro-gay advocacy has dragged us way beyond righting some wrongs, addressing some legitimate grievances, and liberating a marginal minority who, yes, had been treated unfairly in the past, sometimes horribly so. This is now something else entirely: it’s an attempt at the overthrow of an entire culture, replacing it not with some marvelous Utopia but with chaos and confusion.

But you don’t have to take my word for it; the loathsome hippies gave the game away long ago:

Everyone knows that Charles Manson inspired those murders. None of that is being forgotten in reports of his death.

But what also shouldn’t be forgotten was how the murders inspired Bernardine Dohrn, the ’60s militant Marxist who spearheaded the Weather Underground.

That surreal, cruel moment came at the appropriately titled “War Council” held in Flint, Michigan on December 27, 1969, two days after Christmas. It was attended by some 400 student radicals from the SDS-Weathermen cabal, who promoted this political-ideological-sexual gathering as a collective “Wargasm.” For the lovely ’60s hippies, it would be (as usual) a night of radical politics, unrestrained sex, and violence.

Among the ringleaders was the late John Jacobs, who had coined a fitting slogan for the evening and for the entire movement: “We’re against everything that’s good and decent.” That became obvious when the indecent Bernardine Dohrn grabbed the microphone. “We’re about being crazy motherf—ers,” Dohrn shouted, “and scaring the sh-t out of honky America!”

Mark Rudd, the SDS leader who shut down Columbia University a year earlier, in the spring of 1968, translated this message for the wider world: “The message was that we sh-t on all your conventional values, you murderers of black revolutionaries and Vietnamese babies. There were no limits to our politics of transgression.”

A line had been crossed that night in Flint — the first steps into a dark world. From the high altar of Rev. Dohrn’s four-finger salute flowed domestic terror cells, gunpowder, bomb-making units. A “new decade now dawned,” recalled Rudd, as “the New Red Army marched out from Flint, exhilarated and terrified.” Its members would spend the next decade literally plotting the violent overthrow of the United States of America, which (quoting their hero, Che Guevara) they declared “the Great Enemy of Mankind.”

They planned attacks, planted bombs, and engaged in murder, all along fleeing the federal authorities as fugitives on the FBI’s “Most Wanted” list. Ayers would change his name from town to town, chillingly visiting dead cemeteries where he borrowed the names of deceased babies from tombstones as his macabre aliases.

Lest you kid yourself that this is all some quaint old ancient history with no relevance for us in the modern era, better think again:

Dohrn and Ayers, of course, were back in the news again in 2008, when their friendship with an aspiring Illinois politician named Barack Obama was raised. A chilling symbolic moment in Obama’s rise was the political blessing he received in the living room of Bill and Bernardine in their Hyde Park home in 1995.

In fact, Obama and Bill Ayers actually did a number of things together in Chicago. They jointly served as board members at the Woods Fund in Chicago; they worked on “school reform” through the Chicago Annenberg Challenge; they served on a juvenile-justice panel (organized by Michelle Obama); they appeared together as speakers or panel participants at Chicago events; they had many mutual associations, including with disturbing figures like Rashid Khalidi; they acknowledged one another in books and reviews and even endorsement of their books; they had a relationship as neighbors (three blocks apart); plus numerous other reported associations. (I detail these and many additional connections, with copious endnotes, in my book 2010 book, Dupes.) In 2001, the same period when Ayers openly lamented that he had not done enough damage to the Pentagon, Ayers donated $200 to Obama’s reelection campaign for the Illinois Senate, which Obama happily accepted and was never called upon to repudiate. The relationship was professional and personal. Some have speculated that Barack met his wife Michelle at the Sidley & Austin law firm where Bernardine Dohrn worked.

But, hey, who’s counting — eh?

Who indeed. Which is probably the most dismaying part of all.

This does work well as a reminder that nobody should be telling themselves Leftists are going to be easy pickings when the liberty-minded finally do rise up to throw off the yoke of their oppression, or that their professed abhorrence of violence extends far enough to cover anyone who disagrees with them or dares to try to resist them. Some of that might apply in varying degrees to some or perhaps even most of them. But there has always been a hard core of the Left that is thuggish, vicious, cannot be reasoned with, and is quite enthusiastic about doing violence to their opposition. And they are probably far greater in number than many of us imagine.

Oh, and don’t be kidding yourself with the comforting assumption that our side has all the guns, either. We have most of them, true, and probably will for a good while yet. But empty talk of who has what never yet stopped even one piece of contra-Constitutional act of legislative tyranny, nor any Obama pen-and-phone power grabs, either. And the Left is beginning to arm up.

On the other hand, the hard Left will also be bringing effeminate, passive neurotics like the children in the article up top gradually into their ranks too. They’ll be dull-witted, sheep-like, and incapable of functioning or taking initiative outside of a strictly-regimented environment thanks to their government schooling. They’ll be awkward with tools, unable to cope when something malfunctions or breaks down, and prone to breaking down themselves into helplessly paralyzed fits of weeping at the slightest misadventure or unexpected complication. All of which will serve to weaken the Left just as much as it will (or has) America itself.

Another instance of stinging irony, and of their grandiose plans blowing up in their faces because of having actually been brought to a fuller fruition than they at first imagined—but which WE easily foresaw, and warned against all along. Hey, who says there ain’t any justice in the world, anyway? Why, sometimes, it’s so rich and moving as to be almost eerily poetic.

Share

“Drain the swamp” won’t even BEGIN to cover it

Codevilla weighs in on GrabAssGate.

During my eight years on the Senate staff, sex was a currency for renting rungs on ladders to power. Uninvolved and with a hygroscopic shoulder, I listened to accounts of the trade, in which some one-third of senators, male senior staff, and corresponding numbers of females seemed to be involved. I write “trade,” because not once did I hear of anyone forcing his attention. Given what seemed an endless supply of the willing, anyone who might feel compelled to do that would have been a loser otherwise unfit for survival in that demanding environment.

This, I wager, is not so different from others’ experiences in Washington. Senior female staffers were far more open than secretaries in describing their conquests of places up the ladder, especially of senators. There was some reticence only in talking about “relationships” with such as John Tower (R-Texas) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.) because they were the easiest, and had so many. The prize, of course, was Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.)—rooster over a veritable hen house that was, almost literally, a “chick magnet.” Access to power, or status, or the appearance thereof was on one side, sex on the other. Innocence was the one quality entirely absent on all sides.

In the basic bargain, the female proposes. The power holder has the prerogative to say “no,” or just to do nothing. By a lesser token, wealthy men need not offer cash to have female attention showered on them. Money is silver currency. Power is gold. A few, occasionally, get impatient and grab. But taking egregious behavior as the norm of the relationship between power and sex willfully disregards reality. Banish the grabbing, and the fundamental reality remains unchanged.

Which is one reason why, as I’ve said, my sympathy for most of these “victims” is limited, to say the least. Of course, that’s excluding any truly innocent women who have in fact been raped. But I have serious doubts as to them being anything but a tiny minority, more or less the exception that proves the rule.

What this all still looks like to me is a Uniparty scheme to get at Trump via Moore which has blown up in the plotters’ faces. Now the Democrat Socialists, always the Uniparty branch harboring far more degenerates than the Repubs could ever get away with, are in the unaccustomed position of being hoist on their own petard, of being embarrassed by having the chasm between what they profess and what they do brought right out in the open.

And it reminds me again of the futility of campaigns to “get money out of politics.” As long as we’re saddled with a government as overgrown, powerful, and intrusive as this one, it will never happen. Both sex and money will continue to be the means by which people will attempt to purchase influence or favors from any entity so entangled with every facet of our lives—even if that favor is only to be left alone.

A properly limited federal government operating within Constitutional constraints simply wouldn’t have as much to sell, and therefore wouldn’t inspire nearly as much corruption. Not none, of course. But nothing like the impenetrable and almost incomprehensible web of sleaze and degeneracy woven about Mordor on the Potomac now.

The Clintons and the Weinsteins, yesterday’s ruling class paragons, are useful foils. When, inadvertently, photos implicate a member of the current ruling class leadership, such as Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.) in beastly behavior, ruling class colleagues and media give him a pass (“he apologized!”) and use his case unfavorably to contrast the real enemies—always on the Right: President Donald Trump and Alabama U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore. “They are disqualified from office because they haven’t even admitted their guilt!”

In short, penalties for breaches of any item of political correctness are and will remain what they have been in the past, without exception: thinly veiled excuses to harm whoever stands in the way of the ruling class’s members.

The conclusion Codevilla reaches might not be at all what you’d expect; I confess to having been quite taken aback by it myself. But he’s far too smart and perceptive, and has been right far too many times already, for me to even think of betting against him before giving it some serious thought. If he has the right of it, the rot goes far deeper than even I in my cynicism ever imagined…and will be damned near impossible to root out without just burning the whole damned place to the ground and starting over.

Share

War on women

There’s a phrase for it: hoist on their own petard.

Mike Pence has been derided by liberals for his “open door” rule, refusing ever to meet alone with a woman other than his wife, but the wisdom of his policy is revealed every time we see a new headline about the wicked behavior of men like Harvey Weinstein, Brett Rattner, Al Franken, Glenn Thrush, Louis C.K., James Toback, Kevin Spacey, Charlie Rose, Michael Oreskes, John Lasseter, Mark Halperin, on and on and on.

There is no doubt that the Sexual Harassment Apocalypse will also destroy some Republicans — new allegations against Roy Moore seem to emerge every day — but on balance, these exposures mainly involve liberal men in politics, journalism and Hollywood. This is deeply ironic, of course, because Democrats campaigned in 2012 on the claim that there was a Republican “War on Women,” Hillary Clinton made feminist “empowerment” a major theme of her campaign in 2016, and it was only because Hillary lost that we have now entered this climate where feminists are willing to pour gasoline all over the machinery of male Democrat power, strike a match and burn it to the ground.

You can thank the 63 million Trump voters for this “empowerment.”

True. You can be damned sure that we’d never have heard a peep about any of this if they had somehow contrived to drag Sick Hillary!™ over the finish line. And that’s by far the least of many bullets we dodged because of their humiliating failure. Just one more thing to give thanks for today.

Bad people do bad things, and it is not really surprising that Harvey Weinstein is a monster.

Now these monsters are being hunted down by their former feminist “allies,” and all the power and money in the world cannot save them.

Karma is a bitch, they say. And what a deeply ironic bitch she is.

Indeed she is. Ruthless, too, and no respecter of either persons or their power status.

(Via Insty)

Share

“Basically the Democrat Party is a Duke lacrosse team that actually did it”

Okay, I know I said this whole sordid, tawdry mess was waaay up over the shark with the Ron Jeremy accusations. And I wasn’t wrong, really.

But…Charlie Rose? Charlie friggin’ Rose? Seriously?

Okay, I gotta admit that I did NOT expect that one; this business hasn’t just jumped the shark, it’s hovering overhead, thumbing its nose and blowing raspberries at him. I also gotta admit that I’m with Ace on this particular bit:

Again with the walking around naked.

Honestly, I had no idea this was such a thing.

Me neither. Elsewhere Ace kind of seems to miss one, though:

This is the standard liberal line, from Matthew Dowd to FoxNews “analyst” AB Stoddard: Al Franken admitted what he did.

No, he didn’t. Tweeden had photographic proof he groped her; he “admitted” that, which could not be denied. There was a fucking picture of him caught red-handed, as it were.

He refuses to admit the even more egregious part of her allegation, that he forcibly tongue kissed her.

Because there’s no proof on that one.

Just her claim.

Which counts as proof against Roy Moore, but not against Al Franken, for some reason I can’t even guess at.

Oh, that’s the easiest one of all, and I suspect Ace knows it as well as I do: because Franken is a fully-paid-up member of Team Commie, and Moore is not.

And that’s it. That’s all it takes. In order to get away with anything, absolutely anything at all, and be excused for it by the Left, all you have to do is be on their side politically. If you are, nothing that you do, absolutely nothing at all, will induce them to throw you under the bus, at least until you’re no longer useful to them. You can violate any and every “principle” they claim to hold most dear as egregiously as you can contrive to, and…nothing. They will find a way not just to sweep it under the rug, but will actually make complete fools of themselves trying to find some way—any way—to blame it on the Republican Demon Du Jour.

That’s one of the traps you set for yourself when “the personal is political,” see. Schlichter explains:

The Democrats used to be able to exploit the fact that GOP voters actually have morals. But then the tyranny of the new rules arose and their ploy stopped working. Gloria Allred dragged out a bunch of accusers to try and get us to abandon Trump in 2016, and all she got was a “Meh.” People saw the math didn’t work.

“You are morally obligated to dump this guy based on the shaky contentions of a bunch of people a rabid liberal partisan who makes money off such accusations produced, and you must therefore vote for the woman who spent the last thirty years trashing the abused women her husband left weeping in his wake. Because patriarchy.”

Nope. No more. Republicans refused to allow their morals to be weaponized against them again, and it confounded the libs. That meant they had to rely on their candidate and their policy positions and, well, that went poorly.

See, that’s the problem with hypocrisy. It’s not merely that the idea that, “If you do it you lose, and if we do it, we still get to win,” is so galling, though it is. It’s that it can actually change the rules. The rule used to be that accused sexual abusers can’t be politicians. That stopped being the rule when the Democrats Move(d) On. So when they tried to invoke the rule in 2016, they found it was uninvokeable.

This is how you got Roy Moore, who should have arranged to be in a federal corruption trial right (now) because then no one in the Senate would be demanding that he drop out. Alabama voters might very well choose the guy who dated babies over the one who wants to kill them, and if Moore wins, a good part of the reason will be, “The hell with you liberals.”

Certainly true, and in a lot more places than just Alabama, too. But as I said yesterday, they don’t care that they’re contorting themselves into pretzel shapes and contradicting themselves on an hourly basis right out in public trying to make this work out in their favor; they have not the most trifling concern for reason, consistency, integrity, or decency. And why should they? They’ll never have the vaguest clue how many of us out there are laughing ourselves silly or shaking our heads in bemused disgust at them over this degenerate lunacy, and they don’t care what we might think or say anyway. The NYT, WaPo, MSABCNNBC, and the rest of the Old Media spirit squad are all diligently presenting their manic floundering as perfectly reasonable and sane, and that’s all they’re ever going to see or care about.

And the Vichy GOPe is helping as best they can. They’re all working as one to try to keep up the skeer on Moore, even as each accusation against him crumbles into dust one by one by one, and maintaining that the real perverted sex criminal is one Donald J Trump, who MUST BE IMPEACHED IMMEDIATELY because he told the truth about how some women react to wealth and fame once. Also, he said “pussy,” which is a hate crime worse than lynching unless you’re a rap artist, a militant bull-dagger wearing one for a hat, or Bill Clinton on the golf course. It all comes down to the same thing—and “principles” don’t even enter into it.

They’re never gonna admit what they did was immoral. They’re never gonna admit that what they did was a miscalculation. Because everything they do is because they intend to do it. They do not have moral lapses. You would have to have morality in the first place to have a moral lapse. They do not have moral lapses.

They are not nice people. They are not tolerant people. They are none of the things that they have told you you have to be. They’re none of the compassionate, understanding, open-minded people willing to give people a break. That’s not who they are. They are willing to pounce and destroy anybody that they want to take out with the slightest provocation, the bare minimum of reason.

You know, F. Scott Fitzgerald said the rich really are different. They’re not like you and me. Maybe. But I’ll tell you who isn’t like you and me, and that’s these leftist liberals and communists. They are not like you and me. And it is a mistake to assume you can rationally persuade them, talk to them, or whatever, like you would talk to anybody else that you feel comfortable talking to. They hate you. They’re predisposed to hate you, and there’s nothing that can change that, especially if they don’t know who they are.

If all they know about you is whether or not you’re a conservative or Republican, then that’s all it takes. In their minds, they don’t make mistakes of behavior, of right and wrong. They make mistakes of calculation. They’ll make political calculation mistakes, but not behavioral or virtuous, those kinds of mistakes. Nah-nah-nah-nah. They’re not capable of those kind of mistakes, ’cause they are what is. In their minds, they are what’s normal. You and I are the odd people that need the men in the white coats in the little yellow bus picking us up from school every day and taking us to parts unknown. And they never stop any of that. That is their lives.

They get up, they spend a day, and they go to sleep calculating, plotting, thinking, they dream of it, it is their lives. Your life, this stuff (is) not primary or even secondary. Maybe tertiary. You have other things going on in your life. You actually try to live your life. This is everything to them, acquiring the power, maintaining the power, and then, most importantly, using the power against us, their enemies.

Annnnd bingo. Right there it is. No more, no less.

Which is why I think what we have to be focused on is not just defeating them, certainly not debating or attempting to convince them, but crushing them into the fucking dust. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be making our case logically right along, of course. But Aesop knows what the point of that really is, and what we accomplish by it:

To imagine (Klavan is) seriously expecting that the Left will suddenly break suction, pull their heads out, and start acting like rational human beings is to ignore the body of Klavan’s work to date.

His work is masterful black comedy, for its own sake, and his remonstrations to the Left are in the same vein as lecturing a puppy before applying the rolled up newspaper: one doesn’t do it because they expect the pooch will suddenly stand upright on its hind legs, hang its head, and profess sorrow, remorse, and an earnest aspiration to behave better, delivered in the Queen’s English.

They do it to observe the proprieties before the Sword (or in this example, the Rolled-Up Newspaper) of Justice falls, and delivers the Smackdown of Justified Wrath on the guilty party.

In short, you don’t do it for Fido, you do it for you. This is why you’re not just a brutal thug beating a dumb animal, and it’s also why you don’t shoot the dog. (Or the Left.)

At least until they graduate from being asses, to being outright terrorists, at which point lopping heads off is all well and good, as Klavan would assent to in a heartbeat.

I wouldn’t shoot a dog for peeing on a fire hydrant, and I wouldn’t shoot a Leftist for being an ignorant braying jackass. In both cases, it’s what they do.

But when either one graduates from transgressing polite behavior, to threatening life and limb, they need to be put down.

They’re pushing nearer and nearer to that point every day, with riots and violent attacks against us all around the country over the past year. It’s regrettable, of course, and I don’t know many folks on our side who are really happy about it. But there doesn’t really seem to be any way to get them to see the light and finally back off. Sooner or later, people will get tired of being punching bags for roving bands of vicious, cowardly goons who intend to dispense once and for all with the last tattered shreds of a Constitution they’ve been pissing over for decades and enslave them under a Marxist tyranny, and are no longer the least bit reticent about saying so right up front.

They will not stop. They will have to BE stopped. And all I can think to say to that is: so be it.

So hey, might as well enjoy a good laugh over their perv problem in the meantime, right?

Share

Circling the wagons

Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

There have been media people claiming, “Franken was really not groping! Come on! Everybody can see. That was a setup photo. That was a fake grope.” That’s MSNBC. MSNBC has parsed the grope.

Also over at MSNBC they have actually resorted to impugning the character of Leeann Tweeden. There are whispers, if you know where to go and you know where to watch, you know where to look and what to read, there are people who are saying, “Well, you know what? She’s posed nude. She’s been to the Playboy mansion. This woman’s not this virtuoso out there. She’s got a sordid past. You can’t blame Franken.”

That’s actually been on the air at MSNBC. She went to the Playboy mansion, she’s posed nude, she’s a model, you know, she purposely tries to titillate guys this way. You can’t blame Franken, you can’t blame Franken, what do you think he’s supposed to do, they’re alone over on there in the USO tour? This is a defense that I’m hearing, and — wait for it — “Hey, he was a comedian then, not a senator.” Really? What difference does that make? What possible difference does it make that he was a comedian and not a senator?

Because he’s a Democrat Socialist senator, that’s what. And that’s all the distinction they need to excuse him.

So was Louis C.K. So were half these other clowns in Hollywood that have been caught up in this. What the hell difference does that make he was a comedian then and not a senator? I haven’t heard anybody say that Roy Moore was a local assistant district attorney then. The only thing I’ve heard somebody say is that Roy Moore was a Democrat then. And that was me. And the Drive-By Media had a conniption fit over it.

I later learned that there were some stuffed shirts in conservative media that had a big problem with that. Snerdley brought it to my attention. I was stunned. Some holier-than-thou conservative people thought that I was trying to mount a defense of Roy Moore by pointing out that he was a Democrat when it happened. Yeah, they were saying sexual abuse, this kind of thing is not partisan. Give me a break!

All of this is partisan. Every bit of this is. It’s partisan in terms of Democrat-Republican. It’s partisan in terms of insider-outsider. It’s partisan in terms of establishment ruling class and plebes. What the hell, this isn’t partisan? Every bit of this, it’s all partisan. Everything has become partisan because everything’s become politicized.

…I pointed out something that was factually true. He was a Democrat back then. Oh, something else that’s factually true. Nobody cared what he was doing back then. Nobody cared what he was doing a month ago. Nobody cared two months ago what he was doing back then, when he was a Democrat.

Yeah, well, they didn’t have an election to steal back then, and a Senate majority to try to regain. They recently threw the Clintons under the bus not because they’ve had some sort of moral epiphany, not because times and values have changed and their consciousness elevated in consequence, but strictly because the Clintons are no longer of any use to them—nothing more, nothing less. Fish Lips Franken, on the other hand, is, at least in some people’s estimation:

They’re gonna try to save him. That’s what calling for an ethics investigation’s all about. You talk about stringing it out. But right here it is. August 25th, Newsweek magazine: “Can Anyone Beat Donald Trump in 2020? Al Franken Could be a Challenger — He may be good enough, smart enough and possibly popular enough to run for president in 2020, but U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.) may need to be prodded to challenge Donald Trump and fight off other Democrats.”

So this story basically says that Franken is the great secret weapon the Democrats have but that nobody knows it ’cause Franken would have to be talked into running. Now, if you don’t think this tells you that these people are in deep doo-doo. If they really have people at the higher levels of their apparatus thinking Franken is — and I know what some of you are saying. “Yeah, well, some people said that about Trump too.” (laughing)

Anyway, that’s not the point. The point is that there are some in the Democrat hierarchy who think so, which will go a long way toward deciding just how Franken is dealt with. A lot of people thought Franken would have been forced or asked to resign by now. There were some who thought that Chuck You Schumer and these guys would get in gear because, look, they’ve charted their course to get Trump, and they’re going after Roy Moore as a prelude to getting Trump, and if they at all appear to be tolerating somebody in their own ranks who engaged in this and there’s a photo to go along with it and it’s gonna really make their quest tougher.

Not in their estimation it won’t. You must remember: they don’t give a shit what real Americans think about all this. Nor do they care about how it all looks to the rest of us, about their rank hypocrisy being so completely laid bare. They certainly don’t care about the victims of these liberal pervs, any more than they did about Juanita Broaddrick or Kathleen Willey or Paula Jones or any of the myriad others victimized by The Creep™.

They care about one thing, exclusively and forever: power. Their blithe dismissal of Fish Lips Franken’s transgression against what is in other circumstances an inviolable liberal shibboleth is shocking, but not surprising. They are as cynical a passel of megalomaniacs as it’s possible to imagine; as Treacher so memorably said of Obama, they’ll say anything they think will get them through the next five minutes. They’ll happily contradict themselves ten times before lunch on any given day, and then turn on a dime and do it all again in the afternoon.

Consider, if you’ll forgive the slight digression: I heard someone on NPR earlier referring to the Obamacare mandate penalty as a “fine.” One assumes he did this without blushing, although for any decent person possessed of a shred of integrity it would be hard to imagine how. This, after his side insisted when it served their purposes that it was a “tax”; I suspect that formulation was written into many a liberal-media stylebook back then. John Roberts will forever be held in contempt by honest Americans for allowing the Left this deceit, and personally bears a large portion of the blame for the damage thereby done.

The only thing more puzzling than the decision itself was the legal justification Roberts offered in his opinion. According to Roberts, the reason the individual mandate is permissible is because the federal government has the authority to tax and the so-called Obamacare “fine” is actually a tax.

Virtually no legal scholars, academics, or political pundits predicted SCOTUS would come to this conclusion, and critics of the decision quickly pointed out that the ruling effectively gives the federal government the authority to force Americans to engage in or refrain from any activities the government sees fit as long as the failure to comply results in a “tax,” as opposed to a “fine,” “fee,” or some other form of punishment.

It did not matter that the lawyers representing the federal government never made this claim themselves or that the Obama administration had consistently referred to the so-called “tax” as a “fine” on numerous occasions. It was perhaps the most bizarre rationale for an expansion of government power ever conceived by a Supreme Court justice writing an influential opinion, and the damage from the decision has not yet been fully realized.

Roberts was and is either a fool, an incompetent, a backstabber, or some combination thereof. His inexplicable warping of the language in the service of a profound betrayal of the Constitution he took an oath to uphold ought to bring him an infamy that long outlasts his miserable life.

So yeah, of course they’re going to let Franken skate if they can possibly find a way to do it. And they’ll do it while continuing to excoriate Moore, and by extension Trump, who is the ultimate target here anyway. It’s all part of their Great Game. Hypocrisy, while certainly accurate enough, is far too mild a word, and is inadequate to express the scope of their profound iniquity.

The truly encouraging thing is that, as the scales fall from more and more people’s eyes as they have been the past couple of years, the odds of their getting away with it this time are much narrower than they’ve been accustomed to in the past—and with each successive gambit, those odds will continue to get worse. The more people see of them, the uglier the Left looks. And the greater the number of people with eyes finally opened, the less chance they have of winning…anything, at all, ever.

Share

One-way freakery

Well, THIS could sure explain a lot.

During last Tuesday’s minor off-year elections, a glorious total of “eight openly transgender candidates” swept to victory, squashing the hopes and stomping on the necks of transphobic bigots nationwide, who really need to either repent or curl up and die already.

While this is all undoubtedly cause for celebration, for joyously sniffing amyl nitrite and having unprotected felching parties far beneath manholes in urban sewers across this nation, are you noticing a pattern here? Yes, I am, too—all six of these winners were born men—or, if you prefer to sound like a crazy person, had the male gender assigned to them at birth—and decided one day through magical thinking and varying degrees of medical intervention that they were women.

Eight trannies elected to office in one night? That’s good. Only two of them now identify as men? That’s bad—especially if one wants to pretend that gender is fluid. If one even dares to notice a firm statistical pattern that the roaring majority of trannies are men who claim they’re women, one risks subverting the entire Tranny Gospel. If, as the case seems to be nearly everywhere worldwide, the overwhelming majority of people who desire to change their sex are men who seek refuge in womanhood, this might suggest that our current cultural climate offers very few perks for men and plenty for women.

Unfortunately for the egalitarian-minded and those who wish to believe that the current transgender craze is anything more than a reaction to a culture that demonizes maleness, Japan stands as a sole exception to the global one-way tranny stampede, which overwhelmingly involves men proclaiming that they’re women.

Studies in Europe from the 1980s and 1990s found that when it comes to declaring you’re not the “gender you were assigned at birth,” men chose to become women at anywhere from 2.3 to 4 times the clip that women chose to become men. A study in England from the 1970s found that men chose to be women three times as often as women decided to be men.

Even more overwhelmingly lopsided is this Wikipedia page on “Transgender and transsexual politicians.” Of 45 international tranny pols listed, only two were born women. The rest were born men.

I strongly suspect that the current tranny mania which infects and clogs up so much of our popular discussion does not represent some new, bold, post-gender frontier in human development. If it did, the genders would be swapping genitals at an almost equal rate. But since it’s almost entirely male-to-female, I sense it’s nothing more than a cultural reaction to the fact that in the current climate, there’s almost nothing good about being a man.

Y’know, bizarre as it might seem at first blush, I think he just might be onto something here. Makes one wonder a bit what those comparative numbers might have looked like back when the manly virtues were admired, and men were treated with respect rather than revulsion—before the word “masculinity” was always paired with “toxic” or some other epithet.

(Via Steyn)

Share

Well, there’s no unseeing THIS

Um. Uhh. Errr, uhh…

Ugh.

Ever since the tiny elites who cluster together in tiny swaths of America’s coasts appointed themselves the moral arbiters of an entire nation that they deem to be teeming with inbred Christofascist moral lepers who deserve to be tortured and mocked into extinction, it has been our sincerest wish to see these sheltered pervs unmasked as the corrupt and predatory hypocrites we always knew they were.

For generations now we’ve been forced to endure endlessly pious chest-thumping and relentlessly condescending lectures from HIV-positive waste cases who, if they had a scrap of decency, would have publicly immolated themselves on a glowing funeral pyre made of melted crack pipes.

At the moment the entertainment industry is cannibalizing itself as a result of the sort of entitled arrogance that comes from not realizing that the endless witch hunts whose flames they’ve fanned for decades would eventually burn them at the stake, too.

For this week at least, our greatest pleasure comes in seeing comedian Louis C.K.—the lumpy and physically appalling “conscience of the comedy scene”—unmasked as a fat bald twerp who gets his jollies from masturbating to completion in front of horrified female coworkers.

I repeat: ugh. Also, ick.

Rumors of C.K.’s masturbatory proclivities have circulated for years but were mostly swept under the rug, because the entertainment industry loves few things more than a comedian who can sell out Madison Square Garden while getting everyone to laugh about white degradation and displacement.

However, that pimple finally popped last week when The New York Times ran an article in which five women—only one of them anonymous—accused the physiognomically disadvantaged comic of whipping it out and jerking it while they either watched in stunned horror or listened on the phone with extreme discomfort. During one encounter in a motel room, two accusers say his penis spat forth a quarter-billion ugly little Louis C.K. tadpoles all over his ample belly as they watched in horror.

I always liked Louis C.K. I mean, sure, he’s a garden-variety showbiz liberal and all, but he’s funny, and he seemed like a sincerely committed father who loved his kids—not that this means he doesn’t, of course. He never came off like someone I would have instantly assumed to be afflicted with the same diseased proclivities as the usual round of Hollywood pervs, freaks, and creeps, I’ll say that much. Oh well, so much for all that. By way of (very) minor mitigation, though, there IS this:

Rather than deflecting and denying like so many others, Louis admitted that the accusations were accurate.

Three groans and a half-hearted hat tip to him for owning up right away, I guess. It has the advantage of being both the right thing to do and the smart thing to do; giving the media scandal-vampires the chance to keep the squalid circus staggering along as they bay for blood in proportion to the increasing flaccidity of each successive denial and retraction only prolongs the agony—for all of us, most especially those of us who would just as soon these twisted horndogs keep their kinks to themselves.

And with this latest roll in the Hollywood hogwallow, let’s all hope that the recent spate of distasteful TMI will soon be drawing to a most welcome close. I for one have heard more than I really needed to about all of these people by now; as I said the other day, I don’t find any of it surprising in the least, and I fervently hope that there aren’t going to be any stomach-churning public “scandals” involving, say, Roseanne Barr or Ernest Borgnine forthcoming.

Or, may merciful God forbid, Sandra Bernhard (shudder).

Share

Unleashing the power of NO

Or, as I prefer to phrase it, the power of “go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut, asshole-eyes.

I don’t care what the SJWs say, think, or do. When they demand that I conform to their dictates, I’ve got a counter-offer.

How about I do exactly what I want and you stand there and suck it up?

See, these idiots have no power if we just laugh at them and say “No.” That’s all it takes to stop all this stupidity cold. What are they going to do? Force us to conform? Unlikely – most of them couldn’t even do a push-up, especially the ones that identify as male. No, they seek to impose a Dictatorship of the Scoldatariat, clinging to power not through bayonets but by constant braying and badgering.

It’s so simple to resist them – we just have to start giggling and saying, “Yeah, no, I’m not going to do that. Take your literally shaking self on a long walk off a short pier.”

Why some people don’t just tell these morons where to get off is baffling.

After all, they’re full of it. You just need to understand that these people don’t care about other cultures – if they loved other cultures so much their sole experience with other cultures would not be accusing their immigrant housekeepers of stealing the silverware.

It’s a pose, a scam, an okie-doke. They want you to shrug and comply. Their strategy is to whine, complain, and annoy you until you become accustomed to obeying. They want to exhaust you with a never-ending litany of accusations of breaking the unending supply of new rules you didn’t know existed before you broke them.

This endless series of new rules is supposed to keep you off-balance and constantly vulnerable to their correction and guidance. You will never, ever be right – there’s always some new infraction for which you must submit to further restrictions of your right to self-governance. And the rules don’t make sense. Remember how you thought it was important for girls to be empowered by play where they model themselves after strong girl characters like Moana? Wrong! You’ve failed again, because in attempting to comply with their gender dictates (and make no mistake – SJWs have just as firm ideas of gender roles as normal people, except their ideas are terrible) you will inevitably run afoul of some other dictate. It’s intersectional all right, like an intersection with no traffic lights where you’re going to end up in a wreck one way or the other.

You can’t win, so why do some people play this game instead of telling these buffoons where to get off?

Because they hope—a singularly vain hope, it is—that eventually, the miserable fucktards will go bother somebody else, and the Normal being harangued can go back to just, well, being normal…thereby avoiding a meaningless, fruitless confrontation with a worthless slice of detritus who was never going to be persuaded to realize the moronic error of his/her/its ways by mere logic anyway.

Unfortunately, misery loving company as it does, said weedy fucktards won’t just dry up and blow away. They just keep popping up again and again, zombielike—their success, as demonstrated by Normal acquiescence, only serving to encouraging them to come back for more and ever bigger bites of our freedom and right to be left the hell alone.

As ever: they will NOT stop. They will have to BE stopped. A good first step towards stopping them might well be to start doing as Schlichter suggests and bluntly inform them, in terms that do not allow for any possible misinterpretation, that you will NOT be paying the slightest attention to their juvenile shrieking, that you hold them in no small contempt, and that their “concerns” are more properly a matter for psychotherapy than they are a legitimate basis for public policy.

Then tell them to eat shit and die gagging on it, and walk away laughing.

Share

Cherchez la feminist

Is there anything they can’t fuck up and destroy?

A Boise State University professor’s recent essay exploring the intellectual history of the meaning of gender has roiled the campus, with claims by administration officials that the article represents “the root of genocide.”

Of course it does. I mean, with “liberal” screechmonkeys, what doesn’t?

Scott Yenor, a professor of political science, wrote the essay for the Heritage Foundation website; it traces the development of contemporary transgender theory to the seminal early-feminist work The Second Sex, by Simone de Beauvoir. Yenor demonstrates that a key premise of transgender discourse—the disassociation of biological sex from gender identity—is rooted in Beauvoir’s effort to show that femininity is not a biological fact but is imposed by society. He traces the development of this idea through first- and second-wave feminist thought, culminating in today’s radical claims that small children should be allowed to choose their gender identity and even receive hormone therapy, and that everyone should be free to use the bathroom or locker room that suits his or her identity.

Yenor’s essay is an intellectual history, not a diatribe. He concludes that the objective of transgender theory is to stop treating “gender dysphoria” in children as “a pathological syndrome requiring counseling and preventive parenting.” Rather, its “ultimate goal is public recognition of queer theory’s view of the human landscape”—an aim that leads to a fundamental conflict. In demanding that children be free to choose their gender, transgender activists would condemn as child abuse parental actions that fail to respect their child’s gender selection. Ontario’s Minister of Children and Youth Services Michael Coteau took such a position earlier this year.

In response to Yenor’s scholarly inquiry, Boise State officials reacted in a fashion now familiar on campuses nationwide.

You can easily guess what follows: “fascist,” “Nazi,” “Hitler,” “hate speech,” “violation of rights,” and on and on and on. I didn’t see any quotes referring to the Klan, but I’m sure there were some.

Hope this guy’s got tenure, because if he doesn’t, you can safely assume his career as an academic—hell, his very ability to make a living for himself and his family in any fashion at all, or to live peaceably in his own home—is now officially over. The spirit of free inquiry, honest good-faith debate, and the right to speak one’s mind openly remains what it always has been for these animals: anathema, and the respect for it nonexistent.

“Unity”? With the likes of them? No, thanks. Not now, not ever.

Update! Speaking of “unity.”

One of the stranger things about our public discourse the last couple of decades is the constant call for unity. The black hats on the political stage are always described as divisive or polarizing. The white hats are the “uniters”, bringing people together. Whenever something happens, like a disaster or shooting, the news is full of stories about how the community is united in response. Usually this means some sort of ceremony with candles and the local leaders officiating a ritual intended to show unity.

Of course, the fetish for unity is a Progressive thing. Often it takes comical turns, like when public opinion is running hard against some Progressive cause. Then the public is described as “divided over the issue.” A suitable bad guy is found and scorn is heaped on him by the media for his divisiveness. On the other hand, when opinion is slightly in favor of the Progressives, then we hear that the public is nearly unanimous in their support. This is followed by calls of unity, which means the opposition should surrender.

The classic example of this was homosexual marriage. State after state held referendums on the issue. for 30 some odds times the public voted against it. After every defeat, the media reported that a divided electorate narrowly opposed gay marriage. Then the one time it passes, a deluge of press claiming a tidal wave of support in favor of homosexual marriage. It was so convincing, the Supreme Court decided that voting was too much a bother and unilaterally declared gay marriage a sacrament.

Unity was not always a fetish for our rulers. In my youth, I had to sit and listen to civics lectures from Boomer instructors about the glories of raucous democracy. The whole point of democracy was for the people to have a civilized argument in order to gain a majority around a position. The change seems to have happened in the Clinton years. Anyone who opposed the Clintons was accused of dividing the public. As is true of so many of the problems in the current crisis, the roots of this unity fetish are in the Ozarks.

A free people cannot even coexist with those who wish to subjugate and enslave them…which renders any notion of “unity” not just spurious, but highly undesirable at best. As Zman says, it’s nothing more than a subterfuge promoted by people harboring nefarious designs on our liberty and right to self-determination. Which leads me to repeat: you can keep your damned “unity,” thanks. No market for it over here.

Nucking futs update! And then there’s the merely hilarious:

Kellogg’s will be redesigning Corn Pops cereal boxes after a complaint about racially insensitive art on the packaging.

The Battle Creek, Mich.-based cereal and snack maker said on Twitter Wednesday it will replace the cover drawing of cartoon characters shaped like corn kernels populating a shopping mall. The corn pop characters are shown shopping, playing in an arcade or frolicked in a fountain. One skateboards down an escalator.

What struck Saladin Ahmed was that a single brown corn pop was working as a janitor operating a floor waxer. Ahmed, current writer of Marvel Comics’ Black Bolt series and author of 2012 fantasy novel Throne of the Crescent Moon, took to Twitter on Tuesday to ask, “Why is literally the only brown corn pop on the whole cereal box the janitor? this is teaching kids racism.”

He added in a subsequent post: “yes its a tiny thing, but when you see your kid staring at this over breakfast and realize millions of other kids are doing the same…”

…you expect your kid to ignore it as the wholly meaningless, inoffensive thing it is and get on with your life. And if you should spy his little lip all a-quiver with misguided dismay over this wholly innocuous bit of nothing, you explain to him that there is no shame whatsoever in being a janitor; it’s honest work, and is a perfectly respectable and honorable way for anyone, black, white, brown, or other, to earn himself a living. No reasonable person ought to infer any insult at all in depicting anyone as a janitor, much less a cartoon character that, y’know, doesn’t actually fucking exist.

That’s what you’d do if you’re a responsible parent interested in raising your son right, anyway, and helping him become a mature, rational adult capable of making his way in a civilized society, rather than a pitiful, dysfunctional bag of stale piss frightened of his own shadow and taking offense at every trivial statement or action he might have the misfortune to witness and be traumatized by. Which kind of parent this guy clearly isn’t, being instead the kind of hysterical douchebag who would waste any portion of his time to register complaint about a bunch of cartoon cereal pops—which, I remind you, do not actually fucking exist—being RACIST!™

Kellogg’s knuckled under and groveled appropriately, of course:

Kellogg’s responded to Ahmed on the social media network about five hours later that “Kellogg is committed to diversity & inclusion. We did not intend to offend – we apologize. The artwork is updated & will be in stores soon.”

Wonder how much the sudden increase in their business would have amounted to if they’d had the stones to tell the pathetic dweeb to go take a flying fuck at the moon? Then again, if they had any balls in the first place, they would’ve made ALL the damned things yellow and dispensed with any attempt at pussified PC “diversity” right out of the gate—yellow being the color of most corn and all, and of the actual cereal itself. In fact, now that I think of it, they never would have changed from their old, no longer acceptable name: Sugar Pops.

Which only illustrates the rule: you give in to liberals even once, you’ll never be allowed to stop. With them, there is no satisfactory resolution that will placate them; there is only perpetual escalation. Better to just ignore the annoying psychos until they go bother somebody else. Yes, they’ll most likely be back eventually with another complaint. Ignore them then, too. It’s not as if these green-teethed granolaheads would even dream of buying your unhealthy, murderous product anyway, you know.

In a statement to USA TODAY, spokesperson Kris Charles said Kellogg respects all people and is committed to diversity.

See what I mean? That right there is where you made your mistake, chump. You paid the Progressivegeld; now you’ll never be rid of the Progressive.

Is anybody but me becoming kind of concerned over the prospect of living and raising children in a society run by such unbalanced yammerheads?

(Via Daniel)

Share

RIP, BSA

Aesop knows Full Convergence when he sees it. And he knows what’s behind it, too.

Surrendering completely to the hopelessly polluted cultural tides, the Boy Scouts of America announced they will start letting girls into the organization next year.

Of course this is an asinine, self-destructive, and completely wrong move for the organization, but it’s just another proof that it needs to crawl under the porch and die.

First is was the atheists pushing back against reverence, then it was the gay Scouts and NAMBLA would-be scoutmasters pounding out any notion of a scout being “morally straight”.

Both of those are a problem for a post-Christian society run by the most toxic iteration of secular humanism, and now we can add feminism to the list of afflictions.

Because a large swath of bitter, ugly, misandrists is perpetually offended at the idea of boys being boys, and growing up to become men. “We can’t be having any of that.” they say with an upturned nose, and a chip the size of Gibraltar on their shoulder. In a way, it was inevitable, as fathers have been relentlessly pushed out of the home by one-sided divorce courts where due process goes to die, aided and abetted by no-fault divorce, and most boys are lucky if they even know their own father, let alone have one around to go to a scout troop meeting or outdoor adventure.

We can’t let boys be boys, and we certainly can’t have them hiking, running, building muscles and healthy bodies, climbing rocks, shooting bows and rifles, and slingshots, learning responsibility, self-reliance, masculine strength, personal and physical courage, whether on a swim across a lake, or learning to save lives at the pool or when someone is injured, or learning how to do 87 different things to such a degree that most Eagle Scouts should probably be given a college associate’s degree on the spot. They’ll get all self-assured, they’ll tussle, they’ll skin their knees, break some bones, get dirt on the carpet, and generally become the men that women of today still long for (in vain, mostly) if the ratings for Mad Men and Daniel Craig’s rebooting of 007 back to Connery levels were any indication. The sisterhood won’t allow that, for it swims upstream against the currents of the depraved culture, and one glimpse of it undoes hour of tedious lectures on diversity and metrosexuality, while making the buckets of Ritalin and Prozac and Paxil heaped into and hurled at normal, healthy school-age boys a total waste of money.

We have a society of harpy man-hating women, and pussified metrosexual males, that go pale at the thought of raising boys who’d climb mountains, sail around the world solo, join the military and kill people and break things, find buried treasure, hunt pirates, or go to the moon. Only women and people of color should do that, because they’re better than the rich white old male patriarchy that carved the greatest nation on earth out of harsh wilderness with two hands, a strong back, a sharp mind, and guts. Oh, and while we’re at it, stop singing the praises of your mother country. It triggers the snowflakes.

Society now wants boys to shut up, check their privilege, wallow in their race guilt, genuflect to defective dystopian savages, and go sit on the couch in their footie pajamas sipping cocoa. Not bring groceries to a widow and her kids, or mow an old woman’s lawn, or – God forbid! – go to church or synagogue and read a Bible.

We can’t have them building things, building strength, building their minds, building their confidence, and learning to Be Prepared. O hell no! They need to learn to depend on government, and its endless soul-sapping bureaucracy, to let it be the same fount of plenty it is for millions of welfare moms married to the government in fatherless homes, once a rarity, but now, the near-universal norm across all races and every level of economic status.

And the same things that have pussified the rest of society will now become the norm in the troops, as they have in the military, and business, and school, and churches, and in short order, only the pussified priggish beta males will be left there, along with the militant recruiting LGBTEIEIO contingent, and in a few short years, everything the girls who wanted into the Boy Scouts to find will have been driven out of it, by the herds of clueless feral shitting and scratching-up-everything hens that they are, like their mothers before them were.

The men will leave, and the boys, forced into a game where they can’t win, will quickly lose interest, and quit in droves. And so, a once-proud and honorable organization, that had raised millions of exceptional scouts into Star, Life, and Eagle Scouts, and millions more boys into simply decent, confident, and competent men, will fade into obscurity and irrelevance. Which, after all, was the whole point of the exercise driving all the pressure on them in the first place. Mission Accomplished, ye shitweasels of cultural decay, you’ve felled another oak, and rotted another pillar of society.

Ah, but all is not lost. After the final Moslem victory over us, the harpies will be subjugated, LGBTTSTVTPXQ39 will be mouldering in mass graves, the Commie Left will be cowed and its media propaganda arm silenced, and the rest of us will be forced to toughen up a great deal if we’re to manage any sort of effective resistance at all. The BSA won’t be a part of that, alas. But I’d bet a good many troopers from the Old Scouts will.

Share

Sad!

Just…sad. And THESE are the pathetic slime-molds we let take over and destroy our civilization?

At breakfast, in the glass-towered city of Vancouver, five-year-old Abigail looks glumly at her half-eaten bowl of cereal.

“What is it, honey?” I brush the bangs back from her face.

She lets out a big sigh. “I wish I wasn’t white.”

I start. Nothing in the parenting manuals has prepared me for that.

“All we’ve ever done is hurt people,” she continues. “I wish my skin was dark and that I had a culture.”

We live in a part of the city where immigrant families abound. Our neighbours are homesick, first-generation Mexicans, which means that salsas and pinatas and Aztec legends feature prominently at shared social gatherings. Our family regularly eats in Little India where we gush over the flavours of curry and dhal, and every February, we attend the Chinese New Year parade in the slanting rain. Plus, my husband and I are children of missionaries and harbour an acute guilt for the cultural imperialism of our forebears. To compensate, we’ve raised our children with a deep appreciation of non-Western cultures.

So when Abigail laments the colour of her white skin, part of me is programmed to protest. Is it not my moral obligation to tell her that her feelings of poor self-worth are nothing compared with the psychological ruin of real racism? Girl, everything about Canadian culture weighs in your advantage and you have no right to snivel!

The very fact that such dimwitted twaddle would be the first thing to spring to this useless bint’s mind—putting her insipid liberal politics above her own fucking child, to that child’s obvious detriment—tells you just how despicable she is. Her kind deserves absolutely everything they’re going to get, from Moslem rape gangs to their violent demise at the hands of whatever roving bloodthirsty mob their weak-kneed political-correctness inspires to ultimately come for them. The sight of their charred corpses piled in heaps or their heads on pikes scattered throughout the urban shitholes they infest will inspire nothing more than scornful laughter and a hearty “good riddance” from saner sorts.

Instead, I feel a sadness settle over me. We thought we were raising the enlightened child of the 21st century. We thought we were doing our part in setting the history record straight.

You weren’t setting a damned thing straight, you were leaving out the bits that offended your vapid Progressivism to assuage your own crippled conscience and bolster your overweening smugness. You weren’t teaching history, nor were you “correcting” it. You were corrupting it.

Yet, in doing so, it seems we have robbed our oldest child of something primal to psychological health, something elemental to her well-being as a human being: cultural roots.

I don’t know what to say.

After decades of hectoring, nonstop lectures aimed at your actual moral betters, that would have to be a very welcome first.

Via Vox, who says:

The word “fundamentalist” stems from those who go back to the basics of the religion, back to the fundamentals. It is time for us to become cultural fundamentalists, and our roots are Christianity, the Greco-Roman legacy, and the European nations.

The alternative is this societal suicide in the name of not being called racist. Of all the reasons for a society to die off, this simply must be the most utterly stupid ever witnessed on this planet.

Ain’t THAT the miserable truth.

Share

Categories

Archives

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

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



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

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

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

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

All original content © Mike Hendrix