Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Click Here To Save $15 at Ammo.com

Facebook (and Twitter, and YouTube) alternative?

Bracken knows of one:

Now, on to social media, and the issue of punching right. Like millions of conservatives, I am strongly dissatisfied with the liberal slant of today’s social media, which is demonstrated daily by Google, YouTube (owned by Google), Facebook and Twitter. (I am currently on my sixth 30-day Facebook ban in the past year.) So two years ago, I joined a small but growing Twitter replica forum called Gab.ai, despite its policy of welcoming the most disgusting neo-Nazi Hitler worshippers. Over that time on Gab I have blocked and muted dozens of Hitler cultists, who almost daily create new accounts to post anti-Semitic Nazi-era cartoons and so on. Like I said, drooling retards.

While I have opposed Gab’s open-door policy toward open Nazis, it’s not my platform to reform. I have held my nose and pressed on, blocking new Nazis almost daily. But I have also felt strongly that Gab could never break through to respectability if the first thing that newcomers notice are glowing portraits of Hitler and caricatures of cringing hooked-nose Jews copied from old Nazi-era propaganda. I just blocked them and moved on, but many normal people must have immediately backed away from Gab, never to return.

But in the last few weeks, I have been contacted by a coder who has been working for the past year to create an entire new suite of social media platforms called FreeZoxee.com. This suite of platforms combines the best attributes of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, podcasting, Patreon-like funding, and not only text but voice messaging among users and groups. All of these platforms are integrated under one roof, held in our own friendly conservative and libertarian hands.

But FreeZoxee, unlike Gab, does not roll out the red carpet for those who openly promote ideologies with a track record of destroying freedom when they rise to power. “Free Speech Uber Alles” becomes a suicide plan when, for example, in its name thousands of radical mosques are allowed to spread across Europe. In time, this tolerance for the intolerant will lead to an unimaginably bloody religious civil war, or the forced imposition of Sharia Law, and then the absolute death of free speech.

Sounds pretty good, and I already signed up myself. Truth is, though, I don’t Tweet and barely use Facebook at all. So I don’t know how much use I’ll really be making of this thing. But it’s a good idea anyway—one that’s long overdue—and I humbly doff my cap to the FreeZoxee folks for their effort in putting it together. If you’re a Facebook or Twitter kind of person, this sort of endeavor is well worth supporting. The link is here.

Share

A new low

The question rings out: Can they really BE this dumb? And the answer comes instantly back: Oh, quite a bit dumber than you think, even.



I won’t bother explaining what’s fundamentally wrong with that risible assertion. You guys all know already, and they ain’t listening anyway. Even if they were, it would be over their heads, like reading Shakespeare to a damned dog or something.

OOOPS update! Another hilariously ludicrous assertion which I don’t have to bother explaining. But it’s remarkable in its own right, because it’s Hillary!™ telling nothing but the pure, unvarnished truth, possibly for the first time in her entire miserable life, if inadvertently.

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour interviewed Clinton about the joint speaking tour she is going on with Bill, where tickets to attend are going for up to $700 each, according to the Daily Mail.

“You say that you are going to talk about the difficulties that your husband went through, that you went through,” Amanpour said. “Obviously you’re going to be prepared to have questions about that moment in 1998, the impeachment, the allegations of sexual [misconduct] against your own husband.”

“Are you prepared to answer those questions?” Amanpour asked. “Is he prepared to answer them? And how do you see that similar or different from what President Trump is being accused of and Kavanaugh and others today?”

Clinton responded by saying the allegations against her husband were totally different because partisan politics were involved.

“There’s a very significant difference,” Clinton responded. “And that is the intense, long-lasting partisan investigation that was conducted in the ’90s.”

Yeah, they’re different all right, and significantly for sure: the ones against your “husband” were, y’know, true, with plenty of evidence to back ’em up.

Share

Declaration of intent to double-down

Because the crazy we’ve seen over the last two years, having reached a scalding supernova with the Kavanaugh Krapfest, hasn’t been NEARLY batshit loony enough.

Politico “After failing to stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Democrats wonder if it’s time to be more ruthless.”

No, really; it would seem that, against all odds and reason, they’re actually serious. Aesop, needless to say, is on it.

Seriously, Sh*tForBrains Libtards, last warning:

Make one move in that direction, and this is where your party ends…

Same day. Hand to heaven.

You will be hunted for sport, tortured for pleasure, and dissected, alive, for practice.
And then, your families, lest the error multiply.

You’re not as smart as feral hogs, not as hard to find as deer, and not as wary as bear, all of whose heads decorate legions of trophy walls from coast to coast. You’ll last about a New York minute, which is ironically fitting.

Nobody’s going to give you a proportional response, they’re going to pay you back 1000:1 at minimum, and most likely, simply decide that you’re all a luxury we can no longer afford.

You’re going to start disappearing in batches, and your heads are going to be used as decorations in the town square. People will tell their grandkids about how you all went suddenly and completely extinct, and then your final resting places will, likely as not, be roadside ditches as you flee, in scenes reminiscent of the Highway To Hell from Kuwait City to Baghdad circa 1991. (And FTR, Canada doesn’t want you, and Mexico will eat you for lunch, and those are the friendliest responses to your would-be refugee status. Cuba is liable to just sink your rafts at sea, and let sharks and crabs solve that problem without letting it get to their shores.) What happens to you will be used to frighten children around campfires for decades, and then you’ll be completely forgotten.

And everyone else will nod their head, cluck their tongues, and mutter something like “Fucked around and found out…”

He’s just getting warmed up, pulling it all together with this:

You might want to call that party off before it starts. Because once it does, it’s not going to be half-assed: it’s going to be for keeps. And you’re going to get sorted out once and for all.

Too bad they ain’t listening. They really do seem to believe that there’s a market out there for even more puerile, obnoxious, shit-witted tantrums, hissy fits, disruptions, harrassment, and random violence.

Also, note well: this is official representatives of the Democrat-Socialist Party who are talking about being “more ruthless,” not their semi-coherent, drooling, slope-shouldered, asylum-escapee footsoldiers. The Party apparatchiki are supposed to be the reasonable ones—the grownups, the ones with careers, bank accounts, and secure positions invested and therefore at least some motivation to resist careening off the rails entirely. They’re supposed to be the brakemen on Krazy Train, the ones holding the others back, preventing the fringe characters from taking a flying leap right over the edge.

“More ruthless”? “MORE”? Somebody needs to ask Steve Scalise about that one. Or Mrs Rand Paul, at the very least.

Update! Hillary!™ really is the gift that keeps on giving, ain’t she?

In an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton said it’s time for the left to stop being civil and take the gloves off.

“You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about,” she said. “That’s why I believe if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again. But until then the only thing the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength.”

Wow. I’m just…wow. I mean…WOW.

Her remarks come just a day after Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was ceremonially sworn in to serve at the highest court in the land following a weeks-long campaign by leftists to paint him as a serial gang rapist. While he was taking the official oath of office on Saturday, protestors stormed the Supreme Court building and banged on the doors in an effort to force them open. Several Republican senators who supported Kavanaugh’s confirmation have received death threats, have had their home addresses published online, and been chased out of restaurants.

So the question remains: What civility do liberals have left to abandon? How can the left get any less civil than they already are without breaking into open street riots? Does this mean instead of threatening violence liberals should actually follow through and harm those who disagree with them?

Umm, maybe you didn’t notice, but both of those things—riots, and the escalation from mouthy threats to actual acts of violence—have already happened, you know. They’ve been going on for two years now, actually. Which sad, sorry fact brings us ’round to this:

Take the example of Hillary Clinton. In the very first sentence in her new scaremongering essay, which makes the case that America’s “democratic institutions and traditions are under siege,” she attacks our democratic institutions and traditions. “It’s been nearly two years since Donald Trump won enough Electoral College votes to become president of the United States,” the piece begins.

The intimation, of course, widely shared by the mainstream left, is that Trump isn’t a legitimate president even though he won the election in the exact same way every other president in U.S. history has ever won election. According to our long-held democratic institutions and traditions, you become president through the Electoral College, not the non-existent popular vote.

So when Clinton, or writers at Vox, or The Atlantic, or Politico, or new liberal favorite Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, say it’s “well past time we eliminate the Electoral College, a shadow of slavery’s power on America today that undermines our nation as a democratic republic,” you’re either tragically ignorant about our system or cynically delegitimizing it. Or maybe it’s both.

The Electoral College isn’t ornamental; it exists to undercut the tyranny of direct democracy and ensure the entire nation is represented in national elections. When you attack it, you’re not condemning Trump, you are, in a very palpable way, attacking a core idea that girds much of our governance.

With this in mind, it’s not surprising that the anti-majoritarian Senate is also suddenly problematic for many Democrats. When a NBC reporter, commenting on a Washington Post article, says “the idea that North Dakota and New York get the same representation in the Senate has to change,” he’s probably not ignorant about why the Founders implemented proportional voting, or why there is a difference between the House and Senate, or why the Tenth Amendment exists. He simply favors a system he thinks would allow liberals to force others to accept his preferred policies.

How many times did a Democrat even mention the Constitution during the Kavanaugh hearings? I imagine, if we’re lucky, a perfunctory handful. Trump, far more than the previous administration, has strengthened proper separations of power. One of the ways he’s done it is by his judicial appointments. And Democrats’ inability to make any distinction between the neutral processes of governing and their partisan goals makes them, to this point, a far bigger threat to constitutional norms than the president.

The Constitution, like just about everything else, is brought up by them only for purposes of undermining it further.

Share

Bought and paid for

And very, very organized.

I started following the money for the “resistance” when it was born, hours after Election Day 2016. I have organized my findings in a spreadsheet I have made public. At least 50 of the largest organizations that participated as “partners” in the Jan. 21, 2017, Women’s March had received grants from Mr. Soros’s Open Society Foundations or similar funds in the “House of Soros,” as his philanthropic empire was once called internally. The number of Soros-backed partners has grown to at least 80. At least 20 of the largest groups that led the Saturday anti-Kavanaugh protests have been Open Society grantees.

On Saturday I also studied the fine print on the signs as protesters waved them defiantly at the Capitol and the high court. They came from a familiar list of Democratic interest groups that have received millions from Mr. Soros: the American Civil Liberties Union, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the Center for Popular Democracy, Human Rights Campaign and on and on. MoveOn.org, a Democratic organizing and lobbying group founded with Soros money, sent its army of partisan followers regular missives that led them to a Google form to ask for train tickets and places to stay.

Under a ginkgo tree on the East Lawn of the Capitol, Center for Popular Democracy field marshals put protesters through a “training” Saturday morning. “Are you ready to be arrested?” she asks. “Yes!” the crowd shouts, although one woman asks quietly: “For what?”

“If not,” the field marshal orders, “stand in line for the visitor’s gallery so an experienced protester can go inside and yell.” One organizer hands out tickets to the Senate visitors gallery for the express purpose of violating the law. That they did—the proceedings were repeatedly interrupted by shrieks from the gallery.

MoveOn.org wrote a guide, “How to Bird Dog”—harass officials in public places—in the spring of 2017, in preparation for town-hall meetings during a congressional recess. Over the past year, I have dialed in to MoveOn.org’s Sunday evening phone calls where they plan the operations and tell their “troublemakers” how to corner lawmakers. I still get alerts for their planning sessions. The last ones have been to #stopKavanaugh.

The treasonous manipulations of the nefarious Nazi collaborator and international criminal Soros need to be stopped, permanently, by any means at all. Period. As long as he’s at large and free to work his Machiavellian schemes, liberty and Constitutional government will be endangered.

Share

Don’t gloat?

Yeah, no.


Ace sets up his response to this “please can’t we just get back to losing with dignity” bushwa in an earlier post. Reposted here in full, and to hell with fair use, since the central point (which I’ll take the additional liberty of boldfacing) is one I’ve already made a thousand times and don’t feel like restating myself:

A Look Back at the NeverTrumpers Who Brainlessly Taunted Trump Supporters With a Stupid Twitter-Snark “But He Fights!” Jab
—Ace of Spades

But Gorsuch.

But Kavanaugh.

But a 49 Year Low in the Unemployment rate.

But He Fights.

Let me point out that the same people who attack Trump for juvenile baiting on Twitter try to do so themselves. Oh, I’m sure they’ll make excuses why they should be permitted to do this while Trump should be condemned; phony moralists and sanctimonious hypocrites are forever minting reasons why they are entitled to do things that other people are forbidden to.

SJWs do this a lot. And the SJWs of the nominal right, get this, imitate them.

They’ll say “But he’s the President!”

Okay– but you guys are writers for what pretends to be an important intellectual magazine, National Review. We might say Trump should have more care to defend the dignity of the office.

Should not Jonah Goldberg et al take more care to defend the dignity of a once-illustrious magazine? Or are the juvenile taunts an admission that that magazine no longer has much dignity to protect?

The other thing I’d note is that these people do fight, in their own condescending, nasty twitter-coward way.

It’s just that they believe in fighting conservatives and fighting to defend the leftist-dominated culture and institutional order.

They will fight — but for causes they believe in. Such as the prerogatives and privileges of the left.

What they’re really complaining about is Trump’s mainstreaming of the idea that the liberal, Rockefeller-Republican-dominated fake-conservative Republican Establishment should be fought.

They don’t want that fought. They don’t want their progressive friends fought, or not too seriously at least. (They like pretend-fighting and then having cocktails later.)

What they want are genuine conservatives and grassroots activists — the dirty upstarts! — fought.

Ace’s link above is the same one Steyn used in the post I excerpted below, which I didn’t transcribe. You should check it out despite my laziness, because it’s a stinging evisceration of a whole slew of NeverTrumpTards who deserve every bit of it, climaxing thusly:

The list goes on and on.

As noted:  They take the one thing that’s actually the most true, and marginalize it to reduce or eliminate its potency. And Trump beat them all because they thumb-wrestle for participation trophies while he dropkicks people for the win.

Just to be very clear: If Trump didn’t fight, then Brett Kavanaugh would be a footnote and right now we’d be fending off claims that Amy Coney Barrett once attended a party where someone said something racist.

You’re damn right Trump fights. And it’s a good thing too.

The greatest, most biting irony of all this? What got them Trump in the first place was that they never bothered to fight anybody but other conservatives, just as Ace notes (“The great thing about never fighting is that you never win and therefore never had the opportunity to gloat“) and I’ve said over and over again. As for “don’t gloat”? Well, it just so happens that that article was written by longtime liberal activist and Obama-admin appointee Cass Sunstein, headlined: “GOP’s Toasts to Kavanaugh Are Unspeakably Cruel.”

So, y’know, yeah. Sunstein even has the balls to trot out a Lincoln comparison (!), and moans piteously about the importance of “empathy” and not “mocking human suffering” without once acknowledging the suffering Kavanaugh and his entire family were put through by a dishonest smear campaign waged against him by “people” who took enormous pleasure in the pain they inflicted in service to a lie.

“Empathy”? Kiss my ass, shitlib. “Don’t gloat”? Better peddle that someplace else, ain’t no market for it here. You and yours will never, EVER suffer pain enough to suit me.

Share

Civility? No!

Go big or go home.

Ms Ford was not a “credible” witness. Rather the opposite, in fact. Read the report by Rachel Mitchell, the Deputy County Attorney brought in to question the accuser so that the GOP members of the Judiciary Committee wouldn’t look all mean and white and old and Republican. Unlike Trump, Ms Mitchell is benign, pleasant and unthreatening, but her conclusions are devastating to Ms Ford:

In the legal context, here is my bottom line: a ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that.

It goes on from there. Ms Mitchell seems very nice and reasonable, and, for that very reason, she’s already forgotten and not one in a hundred thousand Americans has read her report. To defer to Ms Ford’s frankly incredible “credibility” is to do what Republicans always do – play defense, on terms framed by their opponents, and on the tiny cramped bit of turf permitted by the media. The President understands instinctively that that’s a recipe for losing.

Not all “conservatives” grasp that. I wrote for The Spectator in London for many years and loved it, and I have also enjoyed its recent Australian edition. But its new American branch office is a more fitful and unsatisfactory affair. Their take on Kavanaugh:

Kavanaugh is almost through — but at what cost to the Republicans?

The rage that is percolating in America will be exploited by the Democrats as they point to Kavanaugh’s presence on the court as a permanent blot on the judiciary.

Hmm. This blogger, meanwhile, is having some sport with those NeverTrumpers who turned a favorite line of the President’s supporters (“But he fights!”) into a sneer. I regret to find my old National Review comrade Jonah Goldberg is among them. I understand there are those who like what Trump does but deplore his personal style – but the personal style is essential. What the Democrats did this last month was outrageous, and to be polite and house-trained about it is to ensure it will happen again and again, and worse and worse.

I seem to remember some minor, eminently forgettable political figure or other making a remark some years back about the inadvisability of bringing a knife to a gunfight. It was about the only thing he ever got right.

I’m just gonna come right out and say it: Trump is nothing short of a damned genius, possessed of absolutely unerring and masterful political instincts. The bit I heard from Limbaugh earlier ought to be proof enough for anybody:

Donald Trump — and, by the way, a lot of people think Susan Collins was the turning point. No. Susan Collins was not the turning point. Susan Collins’ speech didn’t change any votes, but she did something far more important. The votes were already cast by the time she gave her speech on Friday afternoon. She did something far more important than that, which we’ll discuss as the program unfolds.

Now, what turned this was Trump. Trump in his rally where he was accused of “mocking” Dr. Ford. He didn’t mock Dr. Ford. He didn’t imitate her. He didn’t make fun of her. He simply repeated the truth of her testimony! She doesn’t know who, what, when, where, why, she doesn’t know how, she doesn’t know when, she didn’t know where it happened, what floor, second floor, what room, she didn’t know any of that. The reason that was important is because nobody that reads the Drive-By Media knew any of that.

In the hearings, Christine Ford’s assertions were not challenged. So in the broad-based media coverage of the hearings, the fallacies and the unprovable allegations in her testimony were never brought up. So the average Joe Blow out there never knew that she couldn’t identify where with it happened, when it happened, how she got home, who took her home, what happened afterwards. She couldn’t even identify the year or the month.

They didn’t know this. They didn’t know that everybody she placed in the room failed to corroborate what she said. The average Joe Blow reading the average Drive-By Media didn’t know that until Donald Trump pointed it out. That was the turning point, and that’s why the media turned on Trump for this for mocking her because Trump gave up the ghost. Trump spilled the beans on what they were trying to hide in the rest of the Drive-By Media. And it was a turning point for public opinion. Make no mistake about that.

Donald Trump was on with Judge Jeanine Saturday night after his rally, and she asked him why he did that — why did he call out the fallacy of her testimony — and this is what the president said…

THE PRESIDENT: There were a lot of things happening that weren’t correct, they weren’t true, and there are a lot of things that were left unsaid. And I thought I had to even the playing field, ’cause it was very unfair to Judge — now I can, you know, very nicely say Justice — Kavanaugh. It was a very unfair situation. So I evened the playing field. Once I did that, it started to sail through. He was treated very, very unfairly.

Both Rush and Trump are right on the beam with this analysis, and you know it. Trump’s unequivocal expression of support for Kavanaugh in the strongest of terms—at precisely the right moment in the whole disgusting shitshow, too—not only inspired confidence enough in Kavanaugh to stick with it, but stiffened the spines of normally squishy GOPers like Collins and Graham as well.

In Graham’s case, the absence of the restraining hand of John “Judas” McCain shouldn’t be discounted, either; Graham has remained fiery and defiant since, and will hopefully continue on in the same laudable vein, bless his heart. It’s a measure of just how much damage the “Maverick” really did to the nation over the course of his too-lengthy career, and of how profoundly grateful we all ought to be that he’s gone at last.

Trump, Kavanaugh, Collins, and the rest all deserve plenty of credit, right enough. But in the end, the loudest huzzahs have to go the President. This is what real leadership looks like, folks. Hopefully there are a lot of rising young Republicans watching carefully and taking notes.

Update! John Nolte, in the course of an excellent piece totting up the winners and losers, says this:

Simply put, with this, his second Supreme Court Justice, Trump has secured his presidential legacy. The dream of a 5-4 conservative court is as old as I am, and only Trump could have ensured this, because Trump is the only Republican president who would have ever had the courage to not sacrifice Kavanaugh in the hopes of getting someone else approved before the midterm elections.

President Trump showed enormous character where no one else would have.

Let me repeat that word… Character.

Indeed. You listening, NeverTrumpTards? You better be…for your own sakes.

Share

Never NeverTrump

Once a cuck traitor, always a cuck traitor.

For two years, NeverTrump has united with the Left to sabotage Trump’s presidency, smear congressional Republicans who support him, and ridicule Trump voters. Led by Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large-and-getting-larger of the Weekly Standard, this group is as culpable as the news media and Democratic politicians for the smoldering hellscape that now is American politics.

NeverTrump has bolstered the sham special counsel probe into phony claims of election collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin; they have joined the Left on several occasions to demand that the president be removed from office—in late August, Stephens insisted the president’s actions met the “high crimes and misdemeanors” standard for impeachment. They mock Trump supporters with the childish, “But, Gorsuch!” mantra at every presidential misstep, an insult aimed at Americans who voted for Trump singularly out of concern about the future composition of the Supreme Court.

Many NeverTrumpers including National Review’s Goldberg and David French have helped legitimize Michael Avenatti, the creepy porn lawyer also trying to take down Kavanaugh. The president has been compared to Adolf Hitler and Mussolini by this crowd, while they compare themselves to courageous dissidents who fought communism. “Expert” Tom Nichols claimed Trump voters are ruining the country, and the Washington Post’s reprehensible Jennifer Rubin condoned violence against Trump aides, including Sarah Sanders, the first mother to serve as White House press secretary.

On every issue, big and small, NeverTrump worked in lockstep with the media, Hollywood and the Democratic Party to undermine Trump’s presidency and damage anyone aligned with him.

There are still NeverTrump holdouts. Kristol, Nichols, Rubin and Boot are not just opposing Kavanaugh’s nomination but urging people to vote for Democrats this fall, which would empower the very thugs who are leading this assault on our political system and our democracy. Nichols argued that Kavanaugh’s conduct is worse than the Democrats, and accused him of buying into conspiracy theories. So NeverTrumper nutters still abound.

But their numbers are shrinking, and it’s only a matter of time before they turn on each other. That will be a gratifying scene to watch unfold. Sadly, the pile of post-2016 political wreckage lies all around us, with Brett Kavanaugh now in the center of the debris. And NeverTrump, even those now seeking atonement, is as responsible for this as anyone.

I always said I considered Vichy GOPers to be even more reprehensible than the Democrat Socialists. Admittedly, some are worse than others; even Kurt Schlichter, after all, was a NeverTrumper early on. The likes of Rubin, Kristol, Goldberg, and French, and Boot, however, are beyond redemption, and needn’t look for leniency or forgiveness from me. Not that they’d care about such a thing, of course.

Rubin, for one, was never really a conservative anyway; she was one of a handful of liberals terrified by 9/11 who embraced the neocon War On Something Or Other and has slowly slid back into liberal-“moderate” irrelevance since, as the threat to her personally seems to have receded. The others seem to be burdened with a smug, sanctimonious sense of being part of an “elite” which causes them to recoil in horror at Trump’s “obnoxiousness,” his “rudeness” and “coarseness,” his cantankerous eagerness to go to the mattresses in bare-knuckle, down-and-dirty battle with his (our) enemies. Their preference for losing in a genteel fashion rather than risk winning by involving themselves in a vulgar brawl long ago rendered them useless and obsolete. Their obvious disdain for the ill-bred, ignorant hoi polloi who support Trump is no less offensive than the Left’s always has been.

And all that makes them something perhaps even more damaged, crippled, and contemptible than being merely “traitors,” at least in the current intoxicating climate of WINNING: it makes them losers. Sore losers, at that. They can do their sniffing and grumbling from the sidelines now; they’re as far removed from the great struggle to reclaim and restore this country as Julius Caesar’s ghost is, and nothing they say or do matters even slightly to anybody but themselves. They’ve reduced themselves to spectators now, and the pain that surely causes them is no more than their just deserts.

Share

Yum yum!

Y’all no doubt remember my prediction that Kavanaugh would never get a confirmation vote, much less in time to take his rightful place for the next session of the Court. I said then that I’d be delighted to be forced to eat crow if that turned out to be wrong, but I didn’t expect it. Well…ummm…can somebody find me a knife and a fork, maybe?

WASHINGTON DC – Judge Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in as the 114th Supreme Court justice late Saturday, just hours after the Senate voted to confirm him to the nation’s highest court after a rancorous confirmation battle.

Kavanaugh was sworn in by Chief Justice John Roberts in a private ceremony, accompanied by his wife and children. It means that now-Justice Kavanaugh will begin hearing cases before the court on Tuesday.

Bold mine, proving I was dead wrong on both counts. On the even brighter side, a heaping helping of liberal tears ought to help my unexpected meal go down nicely.

HYSTERICAL LIBERALS Break Down SOBBING After Senate Votes to Confirm Judge Kavanaugh (VIDEO– PICTURES)

Go check out the pics, they’ll do your heart good. Meanwhile, I gotta go look up a decent recipe for crow here.

Unhinged update! More sweet, sweet liberal tears.

I was in the Senate gallery this afternoon when Justice Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed. You would have thought I was at an exorcism in an insane asylum.

Perhaps you were watching on television and heard the disruptions, though you certainly didn’t see them. The attenuated audio probably didn’t catch the frightening, incoherent shrieking – including the lingering screaming and howling as they were being dragged down the hallways outside the gallery.

If there was any doubt that the opposition to Kavanaugh was unhinged, uncivil, disruptive, rude, and borderline nuts, my experience in the gallery made it clear.

The first example  came when Senator Cornyn rightfully railed against the mobs who spent the last three weeks assaulting and assailing Kavanaugh supporters.

“Mob rule is necessary,” one shrieking woman shouted before security personnel could settle her down.

At least she was honest. It did not appear that Capitol Police removed her for her crime, unfortunately. That would soon change.

Nothing they were yelling and howling could be heard. It was the sound of all of them, in discordant, rage-fueled, wild fury, that was so unearthly. I have never heard a sound like it before.

Senator Dick Durbin said a few weeks ago in response to the committee that these were the sounds of democracy.

No they weren’t. They were the sounds of a group of people tinkering with madness. They were the sounds of irrational, unhinged, and unmoored lunatics. These were the people who opposed Kavanaugh’s nomination. They were an embarrassment to themselves.

These are not merely insane disruptors. These are people who care nothing for the country’s institutions. Even courtesy in the Senate gallery is an institution these monsters hate.

Trump pounced tonight at a rally in Kansas. “You don’t give power to an angry left-wing mob. The Democrats have become too dangerous and extreme to govern.

Bold mine, and dead on the money. “The sound of democracy”? Self-serving twaddle; it’s the sound of democracy derided and undermined—of anarchy, chaos, insolence, sedition, and madness. These people are overgrown brats throwing a tantrum of extraordinary, vein-busting vehemence; any parent of a spoiled toddler would recognize it right away. Their every bitter defeat is a bounty and a boon, their anguished caterwaul a delight to the ears of real Americans. I’ve posted this vid before, and it remains evergreen:




I repeat: SUCK IT, SHITLIBS. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. YOU LOST.

Share

Force and will

Methinks he might be a mite too optimistic about the likelihood of the Left ever accepting defeat.

Plenty has been written about the absurdity of running a republic by way of whisper campaigns, uncorroborated smears, and malicious innuendo. There is no need to rehash the mistreatment—some of it irrevocably damaging—of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. What’s important to remember is that this will now be the new norm of nomination battles. It marks the inevitable decline of our confirmation process over the last 30 years. I write “inevitable” because as soon as progressivism’s explicit living constitutionalism and implicit legal “realism” became dominant on the Left, the descent of the judiciary committee from respectable judiciousness to partisan bedlam was foreordained.

Our national politics in recent decades has lost its bipartisan consensus. The middle has collapsed, and the Democrats and Republicans are pulling away from one another on the deeper principles of politics, with policy disagreements following in train. The standard and incorrect explanation for this divergence is mere partisan recalcitrance and stubbornness. It is more profound than that.

Truth is, we are polarized now about foundational questions of human nature, constitutionalism, and justice. Our cold civil war and partisan rancor will only end when one party finally wins the argument about these fundamentals in a decisive and conclusive victory and uses that victory to solidify and sustain an enduring electoral coalition for a generation or more. Should such a turn come, the losing side, as has been the case repeatedly in American history, will then be forced to accommodate, regroup, reevaluate, and moderate (we of course have the one glaring historical exception of the Democrat-led secession movement in defense of slavery that led to the tragedy of our hot Civil War in 1860).

The stakes are high right now in American politics. When Michael Anton wrote “The Flight 93 Election” in September 2016, many on the political and intellectual Right objected in strong (and often histrionic) terms. It has been encouraging to watch in recent weeks as independents and moderate Republicans have come to Kavanaugh’s (and, on behalf of Kavanaugh, to Trump’s) defense. The president and his nominee are players in a much larger fight over fundamental questions about who we are as a people and who ought to govern and for what purposes.

Even with these high stakes, all Americans ought to pray fervently and hope fondly that we continue this passionate and spirited national argument as fellow citizens, rather than as enemies. Come what may, each side must abide the consequences of legitimate political victory when and if it comes.

Umm, hate to bring it up and all, but they’ve spent the last two years demonstrating beyond any possible doubt their total unwillingness to do just that, leaving no stone unturned to undo a “legitimate political victory.” As for “enemies,” they’ve openly declared us as their enemies, and have done one hell of a lot of violence to back it up, with many flat promises of more to come. I see no prospect of any sudden change of heart on their part, although I’d certainly love to be proven wrong about that.

Share

Fight…or lose

Clear, concise, to the point…and one hundred percent true.

This is a lesson that should be tattooed on the forehead of every GOP politician. We are in these fights to win. You don’t win by standing there and letting the other guy punch you, hoping that his knuckles break before he knocks you out. You have to punch back. If we are to stop this tsunami of last-minute allegations in critical nominations, we must raise the cost of entry to the point where only allegations that have documentary evidence are allowed to be heard. I don’t care what Ford says happened. I don’t care what Ramirez says happened. I don’t care what Swetnick says happened. Put up or shut up.

The secondary lesson was for future presidents. GOP senators and a lot of Trump’s advisers were both risk averse and were very much out of sync with the mood of the GOP base. That is a given for all administrations. If you are willing to fight until the last dog is dead for your nominees, you can win. If you show the slightest indecision or weakness, then your nominee is dead and the base stops caring. And when the base stops caring, the House and the Senate stop caring as well.

The essential truth of this covers a hell of a lot more ground than just Court nominations, too.

(Via Bill)

Share

“This is a remarkable moment in American life: A man is killing actual living, gurgling, bouncing babies on an industrial scale – and it barely makes the papers”

Steyn reveals what the Kavanaugh fight was really all about, via movie review.

On the day that Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed as a judge on the highest court in the land, this new film is as appropriate a choice as any for our Saturday movie date: it was America’s abortion absolutism that drove both the fanatical opposition to Justice Kavanaugh’s nomination and the media blackout on the case of Dr Kermit Gosnell, and their opposition to anyone telling his story. Gosnell opens in movie theaters this coming Friday, but a few days ago The Mark Steyn Club Cruise hosted a special screening with filmmakers Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer as we sailed through the Gulf of St Lawrence. The audience was profoundly moved. One lady, having worked in a very famous West Coast medical facility, said that Dr Kermit Gosnell’s preferred method of “abortion” – live births – was common there too, and that we were all “complicit”. Another viewer focused on his own profession of anesthetist, and teared up as he recalled the untrained fifteen-year-old who functioned as Gosnell’s and used a handmade color-coded chart to remember what to give whom. In fact, unlike the older women with whom she worked, the teenager had at least some semblance of sympathy for the patients, a rare sighting of human feeling in a building from which it had otherwise fled.

In the course of bringing one Philadelphia “doctor” to trial, almost every person in a position of authority in Pennsylvania cautioned that this case “is not about abortion”. And thus the tale as told by the writers and director Nick Searcy: it starts out as a story not about abortion, but about illegal drugs, and a multi-agency federal/state investigation that leads to a particular inner-city clinic. When they enter, they find a garbage-strewn dump where cats wander in and out of operating rooms defecating freely, where “medical waste” is piled up wherever space can be found, and where the kitchen fridge is filled with dozens of jars containing tiny baby feet preserved as if they were pickled eggs. The doctor arrives with food for his pet turtles, who are treated better than any of the women. “This is normal?” asks Detective Stark (Alonzo Rachel). “I dunno,” says his partner (Dean Cain). “I’ve never been in an abortion clinic before.”

Their curiosity is resented by the bigshot feds from the DEA and the FBI, who don’t want abortion getting in the way of their routine drugs bust. Likewise, the Department of Health has sent along a hatchet-faced nurse to ensure that the raid does not in any way impede the “procedures” being performed at the clinic: No one wants this case to be “about” abortion – not the District Attorney, concerned about the politics of being seen to oppose “reproductive rights”; not the Assistant DA’s own obstetrician or the doctor next door, both of whom refuse to testify; and certainly not the lady judge, who’s more concerned about the welfare of Gosnell’s turtles than of his patients.

Wandering genially through the squalor and degradation is the abortionist himself. Earl Billings is the spitting image of Kermit Gosnell and plays him as an affable black man with a beatific smile and a soft-spoken manner that never rises to any epithet stronger than “Oh, my!” It is a remarkable performance of a man of many contradictions, not least in the strange mix of refined esthetic sensibility and total indifference to minimum hygiene standards: in one memorable scene, he plays Chopin on the parlor piano as millions of fleas swarm up the legs of the cops in the basement below.

If Kermit Gosnell isn’t to be considered the living embodiment of evil—evil incarnate, evil made flesh—then the word truly has no meaning at all. And I say that as someone who is NOT blanketly opposed to all abortions always; I still believe that there are circumstances where they are tragically, sadly necessary, the lesser of two evils. In fact, I have a close friend who was forced to resort to it in an extreme circumstance, when he and his wife…well, that’s a topic for another day, maybe.

And it isn’t relevant to this particular case anyway. Gosnell was a warped, inhuman monster operating not a “clinic” but a real, true chamber of horrors straight out of a B-grade horror flick. That the Abortion At All Costs Left has so deftly swept him under the rug to protect their gruesome sacrament blackens their very souls. And there’s even more sick-making, near-incomprehensible horror throughout the rest of Steyn’s post, if you can believe it.

Share

The preliminaries are over

Francis links to a sobering, link-rich piece:

The unhinged left is planning violence against conservative members of congress, supreme court justices and their families

A lot more than just those specific groups, you may rest assured.

We are now learning that left-wing domestic terrorism groups are openly discussing “kill team” tactics on Twitter and Facebook, discussing methods of carrying SBRs (short-barreled rifles) under their clothing, blending in with crowds, then popping out of the crowds to assassinate prominent conservatives such as U.S. Senators, Supreme Court justices and prominent conservative radio personalities. All this was first reported by PJ Media.

I have recorded and published a warning to all Americans, detailing the plans of unhinged, deranged Leftists who continue to be driven to insanity by a lying, dishonest left-wing media which “feeds the frenzy” on a daily basis. With USA Today now printing columns that essentially declare Brett Kavanaugh to be a pedophile who should never be allowed near children, the so-called “media” in America has jumped the shark, abandoning anything resembling the First Amendment role of reporting the news and now resorting to smearing innocent people while encouraging mass hysteria and violence among left-wing lunatics.

The media is deliberately driving America into a bloody civil war in a desperate attempt to destabilize the nation, invoke shooting in the streets and ultimately call in United Nations “peacekeeping” troops that will depose President Trump and attempt to disarm the entire U.S. civilian population. (Fortunately for America, the people own 100+ million firearms and have a Second Amendment right to defend their nation against foreign invaders.)

All that used to be the stuff of paranoid conspiracy-theorizing. No more; nowadays, it’s observable reality. And, as Aesop notes, it’s only the beginning:

In case you thought the recent shenanigans were Peak Crazy, we have bad news for you.
It could very well be that was all just a set-up for what happens next.

Later today, we may (or not) see Judge Kavanaugh confirmed to the vacant seat on SCOTUS.

Either way, in less than a month, the chickens from all the Dumbocrat mind-losing will come home to roost, and may turn the electoral wave from blue to red. (Be still, my beating heart.)
HopeyDopey got the Left President Trump. The Kavanaugh Caper could get them slaughtered (metaphorically) in the mid-terms. And how pleasant that would be. Even more so if it turns into a two-fer.

And at any time after today on into November, or beyond, the Leftardian legions may finally unleash their unhinged end game, and go full retard. Not metaphorically.

“May”? Ain’t no “may” to it, I’m afraid; like I said, what we’ve seen with the Kavanaugh freakshow is merely the opening salvo. Wait till the anally-inserted popsicle stick propping up Ginsberg’s mouldering corpse finally breaks and Trump nominates Amy whatsername to replace her. Or even earlier, maybe, after this November’s impending electoral shellacking. Even if they can somehow contrive to restrain themselves through those sore trials, Trump’s landslide reelection in 2020 will assuredly open the madhouse gates for real. Count on it.

Share

TOO MUCH WINNING!

Make it stop. Oh, please, make it stop. I’m tired, I tell you; tired of all the winning.

In a pig’s eye.

Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed to serve as a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States with a vote of 50-48 on Saturday.

After weeks of a brutal fight and an FBI investigation into allegations of sexual assault made against him, several key swing senators voted in favor of confirming Kavanaugh, including Republicans Susan Collins of Maine and Jeff Flake of Arizona, and Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia — the only Democrat to cross party lines.

Good quote from…uhh, Mitch McConnell?

“A vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh today is also a vote to send a clear message about what the Senate is,” he continued. “This is an institution where the evidence and the facts matter. This is an institution where the evidence and the facts matter. This is the chamber in which the politics of intimidation and personal destruction do not win the day.”

Another excellent Yertle quote, via Ed:

“It’s been a great political gift for us. The tactics have energized our base,” he said, adding: “I want to thank the mob, because they’ve done the one thing we were having trouble doing, which was energizing our base.”

Heh. And then there’s this:


Crazy times we’re living in, ain’t they? Don’t care. In response to Pissypants Acosta’s piteous whimper, as mentioned here yesterday: We don’t care about “winning gracefully,” fuckface. We care about kicking your fucking commie asses up between your fucking scrawny-ass shoulderblades, by any fucking means we can contrive, fair or foul. As long as your side goes right on losing, that’s all that matters to us.

Hats off to the Justice Brett Kavanaugh, for standing his ground with resolve and dignity under one of the most abominable shitflings ever undertaken by the orcs of Mordor on the Potomac; to Collins, Graham, and McConnell, for doing the right thing under tremendous spressure; most of all, to the greatest President in American history, the great Donald J Trump, for engineering yet another resounding victory for the side of the righteous. Good job, sir.

And: keep ’em coming.

Update! SUCK IT, SHITLIBS.

TrumpandtheWeeper.gif

Copped from Ace.

Share

Fake news!

Oh, but this is rich.

CNN’s Jim Acosta posted about the looming confirmation vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, ticking off a laundry list of liberal causes that might be affected by a more conservative court. Acosta was called out for spouting liberal talking points and did not take it well, deleting a tweet that accused his GOP critics of “bullying the press” and whining, “Can’t you guys win gracefully?”

Acosta initially tangled with the account of Don”Stew” Stewart, Deputy Chief of Staff to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). The deleted tweet was a reply to the personal account of Zach Roday, who describes himself as, ” @RepublicanAGscomms director | previously Paul Ryan’s political spox, House flack, Scott Walker ‘14, Romney/Ryan, Senate aide “

Acosta tweeted, “With a single speech, Sen. Collins, announcing her support for Kavanaugh, has paved the way for a much more conservative Supreme Court for the next generation. Abortion rights, gay rights, climate change, and health care reform could well be impacted for decades to come.”

Stewart tweaked him with, “Heads up: I think PFAW hacked your account.” (Note: PFAW is the acronym for the leftist group founded by Norman Lear, People for the American Way.)

The thin-skinned Acosta whined to Stewart about the First Amendment, “More bashing the press by those in power. First Amendment getting you down Stew?” Stewart replied, “Nope, in fact I was exercising my First Amendment rights. You get to express opinions; I get to express opinions. That’s how it works. Thanks for the RT.” Acosta came back, “Awww Stew… I get it. Reporting you don’t like gets labeled “opinion.” Hey buddy.. I’ve been called worse.”

Acosta must really love his King of the Whiney Media Bitches status; he seems awfully determined to maintain it, at any and all cost.

“Bullying the press.” No, Jim, it’s calling you out for the lying propagandists you are. Sorry our President ripped your mask off and left you cowering and cringing, fully exposed to public view and all. But hey, them’s the breaks. If you really think a little gentle ribbing is “bullying,” better brace yourself; by all rights you and yours got a lot more, and a lot worse, coming yet.

Share

What are the rules?

Schlichter takes a stab at enumerating ’em, but there really ain’t but one.

Now, the elite insists that the alleged and disputed actions of Brett Kavanaugh as a drunk teen forever bar him from a seat on the Supreme Court. Okay, but then how does the disqualification rule apply to other situations? Let’s take Tex Kennedy. Beto O’Rourke drove drunk as a 26 year old, got busted after nearly killing some people and tried to ditch the scene. Let’s put aside whether he’s lying to the voters about absconding and focus on the glug glug vroom vroom part.

Does an adult DUI disqualify him from the Senate? If not, why not? Why are his undisputed actions less disqualifying than Kavanaugh’s alleged one? If true, both represent, at best, huge misjudgments. Both subordinated the safety and rights of others to the malefactor’s personal desires. Both involved alcohol, but one involved a minor and the other an adult. Why aren’t both disqualified?

Can someone explain the rule to me that makes both Kavanaugh irredeemable and Beto – pardon the expression – the toast of Texas Democrats?

What’s the rule?

Here’s what I think. I think there actually are no rules anymore. I think the elite is so terrified it is losing its power that it is tossing out the foundations of the society it is supposed to organize and manage, that is, the rules. I think our elite actually does not believe in rules, that their attempts at enforcing the rules are merely a grift designed to jam up Normals and provide a way to keep them in line.

Of course it is. Which brings us around to the One Rule: anything, anything at all, that Democrat Socialists or Leftists do=GOOD. Anything, anything at all, that Repubicans or non-Leftists do—even if it’s THE SAME DAMNED THING THE LEFT JUST DID—is BAD. No more, it’s just that simple.

Share

Mob rules

Not just a Black Sabbath album anymore. Unfortunately.

For the first time in history, we have a populace who will not abide by the results of our election process, and its effort to obstruct and destroy is damaging the fabric of our society and the foundation on which this country rests. We have a lawful process in place to address the will of the people, and currently we see the Democrats destroying the institutions we have relied on since our founding to carry out the will of the people. Whether it is the unlawful plots at the FBI and the Justice Department to frame an innocent President Trump, the weaponization of the IRS to silence conservatives, or the theater of the absurd at the confirmation hearings for Judge Kavanaugh, the left’s dirty tactics are now a threat to our liberty and democracy. There is not an institution that has not been impacted. Many of us are asking what institutions we can still trust and rely on.

Since the left has not been able to advance its agenda at the ballot box, its followers rely on activist judges in black robes to advance their radical agenda. It was a process that worked well for them under Clinton and Obama, but now, without Congress or the Executive Branch and with the possible loss of the Supreme Court, they see their grasp on power slipping away, and they have become unhinged. They have openly stated they will stop at nothing in their effort to remove a duly elected president. In an effort to  hang on to power, they are now employing mob rule and character assassination in the halls of Congress, as we witnessed during last week’s congressional hearing.

Thus, it is not enough to denounce the thugs. George Soros, the billionaire funding the assaults and attacks, must be brought to justice for not only inciting violence, not to mention investigated for sedition, a crime we need to begin to take seriously. He and his minions are obstructing the agenda we voted on and one we won. It is imperative that Republicans in office begin to use the term “sedition” in public.

Those who plot the overthrow of the United States as a constitutional republic for a one-world order, as Soros has openly advocated, can no longer be ignored. He and his marching minions must be prosecuted for funding a war waged against our republic, and let it be a warning that we will no longer sit idly by as we watch our country destroyed from within. 

He calls for real Americans to vote the Treasoncrats out en masse in November, and he isn’t wrong to do so. His call to bring the truly, literally evil Soros to justice and resurrect the concept of sedition is also right on. Certainly, a Red Wave that removes large numbers of Democrat Socialist politicians from the halls of power can only be a good thing.

But anybody who thinks the ballot box is going to end—or even slow—the Left’s descent into violent, revolutionary madness is dreaming. They’re only to get worse instead, and harsher measures than the vote will be required to rid ourselves of them, if such is ever to be done at all.

Update! Did I just say Leftist insanity and violence will get worse? You bet it will.

Sen. Rand Paul’s wife on Wednesday demanded that a Democrat take back his comment encouraging activists to “get up in the face of some congresspeople,” and said she now keeps a loaded gun near her bed after Paul was mobbed by protesters this week at an airport.

“Preventing someone from moving forward, thrusting your middle finger in their face, screaming vitriol — is this the way to express concern or enact change?” Kelley Paul wrote in an open letter to Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., condemning the incident. “Or does it only incite unstable people to violence, making them feel that assaulting a person is somehow politically justifiable?”

“I would call on you to retract your statement,” Paul said in the letter. “I would call on you to condemn violence, the leaking of elected officials’ personal addresses (our address was leaked from a Senate directory given only to senators), and the intimidation and threats that are being hurled at them and their families.”

It ain’t gonna happen. Violence is all they have left, and they’ve already demonstrated that they’re too power-crazed to just let it go at being defeated in an election. Bless your heart, Mrs Paul, and your husband’s too, but what we’ve seen so far is only the beginning, I’m afraid.

The New America update! Hinderaker says:

I am sure a lot of Republicans in Washington are upgrading their security systems and making sure they are prepared to defend themselves against crazed Democratic Party activists. This isn’t the America I grew up in, but it is the America we all live in now.

The thing I don’t understand is, why do Democrats like Cory Booker, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer, etc., think they are the only ones who can use violence to advance their cause? Do they not understand what a whirlwind they will unleash if they try to use political violence as a path to power?

They don’t care; they think they’ll win, and the depth of the fanatical hatred that drives them won’t allow them to stand down.

Share

Let’s just stop pretending here, ‘kay?

Ace gets down to brass tacks on Ballsey-Fraud:

I’m getting a little tired of bending over backwards to claim “something certainly happened” to Blasey. I think she’s straight-up lying.

I can’t be sure of that, of course.

But she seems to act in bad faith a lot. I can’t fly. I went to a marriage therapist to discuss the ongoing strife of a fucking second entrance we put in two years before. I never heard you wanted to come to California to talk to me, even though it was in news accounts.

The party was near the country club. What’s that? Investigators can’t find any known “party houses” near the country club? Oh, I meant the party was somewhere between my house and the country club, a 20 minute drive by car.

Wait, none of the people I named as being at the party lived in a house that conformed to my description of it? Oh there were some other people there too. I don’t know who. I guess it was a house that belonged to a Conveniently Unknown Person.

But for me, the worst example is the nasty passive-aggressive mean-girl insinauation she dropped about Leland Keyser, claiming, innocently-sounding, that she hopes that Leland Keyser gets over the “health challenges” she’s having, strongly implying that Keyser has some kind of brain-affecting progressive disease like Alzheimer’s.

Spoiler alert: It’s not. She has back and neck problems. Nothing to do with the brain.

But Lil’ Miss Innocent Baby-Talk Vocal Fry strongly implied that her “friend” was deranged.

Some friend.

So excuse me if I do not join in with the pretend “Facts don’t care about your feelings” crowd in asserting that I know, somehow, as a fact, despite the total lack of facts to establish it, that “something happened” to Blasey.

There is absolutely no actual evidence, beyond a sneaky, deceitful woman’s say-so, that anything happened, ever.

After seeing some of her fraudulent, kid-gloves “testimony” last week, my take was/is: the woman is insane. Like, clinically, pathologically not right in the head. Mentally disturbed. Truly, deeply, pathetically off the rails.

She may in fact believe that “something happened” to her; she may well believe that, whatever it may have been, it was Kavanaugh who did it. Doesn’t matter. She’s quite clearly delusional. She appeared, throughout the part of the hearing I saw, to be hovering right on the edge of a complete breakdown. I’d bet she spends a good part of her average day teetering on that same razor’s edge between “treatable, maybe” and “completely hopeless, lock-her-up-in-a-rubber-room-and-throw-away-the-key” cray-cray. Or so it looked to me, anyway.

Kavanaugh was dead-on when he testified that he believed SOMETHING must have happened to her, but he has no idea what. And maybe something, God only knows what, actually did, sending her permanently around the bend into La-La Land. Either that, or she deserves a Best Actor Oscar for her performance. Given her intricate, years-long maneuvering to prepare for savaging Kavanaugh, perhaps the thing to do is to embrace the healing power of “and” here, eh?

Update! A vote for “calculating” over “demented.”

At first, those of us paying attention were anxious to hear Ford’s story. The bits of news that preceded her appearance before the Judiciary Committee were titillating. Was it possible that this man, Brett Kavanaugh, with a thirty-years-plus record of impeccable judicial service to his country, had a dark side? Then we heard Blasey Ford “testify.” How anyone who listened to her practiced, phony childish act could believe that this was not calculated is a mystery. She was obviously scripted, coached, and performing.

Perhaps she did not expect to have to appear before the committee. She and her handlers may have assumed that the taint of her accusation would bring about his withdrawal from the nomination or that Trump would withdraw it. Guess they have not been paying attention to how Trump operates or who Kavanaugh is. They guessed wrong.

Given the numerous falsehoods of the FBI and DOJ we now are aware of – the “two front doors” lie, the fear of flying lie, the claustrophobia lie, her polygraph lies – what seems credible now is that this was a manufactured, orchestrated setup at the outset. They used Mark Judge’s book as a template and contrived a tall tale.

And then, thanks to Lindsey Graham, Trump, and Kavanaugh himself, it blew up in their faces.

Share

Advise and consent

Damned good advice if you ask me.

There is no office where a person can go to get back his or her good name after a lifetime of effort and achievement is destroyed in a moment by unsubstantiated accusations. But under our system of justice there is a place where an individual can go to seek redress and accountability for accusations that destroy reputation. Judge Kavanaugh, you have spent much of your adult life there – that place is a court of law. Because you are a sitting member of the federal judiciary and may yet be a justice on the United States Supreme Court, you may be disinclined to be a litigant in civil defamation lawsuits. If these are your feelings, I urge you to reconsider.

As you well know, the law provides that republishers of unsubstantiated, false accusations are liable for such accusations even when initially made by others if they republish those accusations with a reckless disregard for truth or falsity. Since at least 1896, our courts have recognized the legal maxim that “talebearers are as bad as talemakers” in the eyes of the law.

Your list is long. NBC, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, USA Today, The New Yorker, and the parade of individuals of all stripes who cannot resist the lure of the bright lights and cameras to echo and validate your accusers in the media. And to restore some public faith in our profession, include on your list a lawyer named Michael Avenatti, who has abused and demeaned you and our system of justice for personal publicity, fame, and fortune.

The members of this list, and many others, have demonstrated considerably more than the requisite degree of recklessness in promoting their agendas by accusing you. Their constant republications of unsubstantiated accusations have and will adversely impact your life – and the lives of your family members – for generations. Sue them all.

If we brought the code duello back, that would put an end to one hell of a lot of this, if not all.

Share

Conversion therapy

Let a million Breitbarts bloom.

Anyone who knew the late Andrew Breitbart knew that there was one seminal moment in his youth that altered the course of his life and, by extension, the course of American history: the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings of 1991.

Fresh from his American history degree at Tulane University, Breitbart was a self-described “default liberal.” As a child growing up on the tony streets of Brentwood in West Los Angeles, he was surrounded by liberals. The only real and legitimate “permissible” political identity was liberal. “It was my factory setting,” he would say. Four years at a liberal arts university did nothing to alter that fact.

So there he was with the rest of America watching the Anita Hill sexual harassment testimony play out on national television. He heard that Judge Thomas was some kind of predatory monster who had to be “taken down” for his horrible behavior. He tuned in expecting, wanting this man to get what he deserved for being so horrible to Ms. Hill.

“I watched Day One, I watched Day Two, I watched the entire thing,” he said years later in an interview on C-SPAN. “I went from wanting him to be taken down to saying, ‘Where’s the beef? What’s going on here?’

“I don’t understand what I’m watching here. I don’t understand the color commentary that’s on the screen, where they’re saying, ‘Oh, this is outrageous.’ And I didn’t understand the bumper stickers that were going by me on the streets that say ‘I believe Anita.’ I believe Anita WHAT? What’s going on here?”

Breitbart not only was unmoved by the laughable allegations made against Judge Thomas, but he was also dumbfounded by the experts, pundits and journalists proclaiming to the world that what we were hearing was so outrageous and “disqualifying” that Judge Thomas should be removed from consideration for the nation’s highest court. He (and most other Americans) could see through the partisan efforts of the media and the political class who didn’t pause for a moment of reflection before trying to destroy a good man’s reputation for the sole purpose of keeping him and his unacceptable political ideology from sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court.

He saw through the duplicity masquerading as political analysis and reporting. He also saw through the hypocrisy of those who sat in judgment of Judge Thomas. They were the heroes of his political party. They were all Democrats.

“I didn’t understand how Ted Kennedy … THE Ted Kennedy from Chappaquiddick fame … how Howard Metzenbaum and Joe Biden, a series of privileged white men, could sit in judgment of this man who was the son of grandparents who were sharecroppers who raised him. And he went to Yale Law School. He did everything right. I did not understand how it could be that these white men of privilege were attacking this black man who was in this historic position while the mainstream media took him down.”

Sound familiar?

All too. The most salutary long-term effect the Demonrat-Socialists’ late circus might end up having isn’t necessarily putting Kavanaugh on the Court, but the spawning of a legion of new Breitbarts out there.

Biting ’em in the ass update! Thanks to the Demonrat-Socialist self-immolation, a McMuffinhead (!) sees the light.

I have wobbled back and forth on the idea of supporting President Donald Trump in 2020. I opposed him in 2016 and voted third-party. The candidate I supported, Evan McMullin, has, like so many others, abandoned all his values as his hatred of Trump poisons his conscience. I dare say the worst mistake in my life was not when I climbed a mountain only to remember I was scared of heights, or when I played with a scalpel that nearly cut off my finger as a kid. It was voting for McMullin.

Jennifer Rubin, who the Washington Post fraudulently claims is a conservative, has become the most predictable mouthpiece for the insanity that has affected a certain brand of Republican. They view Trump as anathema to their values, so they have abandoned their pre-Trump values. Rubin once favored moving our embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. She now opposes it because of Trump. She once supported withdrawal from the Paris Accord, but now opposes it because of Trump.

I have long been critical of Republicans who abandoned principles to stand with Trump, and I am as critical of Republicans who abandon principles to oppose Trump. Principle should stay, because people go. The Kavanaugh nomination has been clarifying in this regard. Seeing some conservatives aid and abet character assassins because Trump nominated Kavanaugh is disgusting.

I find myself in an odd position where, for the first time, I see myself, one of the original so-called “Never Trump conservatives,” voting for Trump in 2020. I have inevitably concluded at times that Trump would do something to push me away from him. He has not disappointed on that front, from tariffs to character issues. But now I do not see how anyone else can offer a more compelling alternative to the president. Each time the president does something I do not like, his opponents play a game of “hold my beer.”

Yeah, well, in truth, Erick, most of the things you probably don’t like about him aren’t really true anyway. And the others—his “obnoxious,” “crass,” “rude” behavior; his cantankerousness; his pull-no-punches, confrontational bluntness, to name a likely few—are actually assets. Bottom line:

Between Trump and his opposition, I would rather vote for him, despite his flaws, than for his opponents who want a flawless progressive utopia. Trump is neither an ambassador for my values nor the articulate champion of my principles I would prefer. But he is a safe harbor in a progressive storm that seeks to both destroy my values and upend our constitutional republic.

“Safe harbor”? No, Trump is a lot more than just that; he’s exactly the bare-knuckle brawler we need to fight these bastards. Far from being a grudgingly-accepted last resort, there’s simply nobody better out there to do the job that needs doing. Erickson will likely come to realize that before the end. Baby steps, people, baby steps. Welcome the Dark Side, E. I promise you you’re going to enjoy all the winning.

Share

“Democrats overplayed their hate. November will be a Red Wave”

I repeat: be of good cheer.

In late October 2016 a number of polls showed Hillary Clinton leading Donald Trump by various margins. One poll reported by NBC/WSJ showed Hillary ahead by 11. However, it was never pointed out that the poll was created by a Hillary Super PAC.

Also, it’s also well known that the widely reported Monmouth University poll was run by a Hillary Huckster who was caught manipulating the poll and then lied about it.

Realclearpolitics.com took an average of these distorted polls to come up with their analysis of the 2016 race. Their efforts were a great example of the phrase – ‘garbage in – garbage out’.

Many if not all of the polls included samples that were heavily skewed towards Democrats or women. WikiLeaks released Clinton emails showing the Democrat Party efforts to work with pollsters to corrupt the polls and discourage Trump supporters.

WE NAILED IT! Candidate Donald J. Trump won the election in an electoral landslide.

Election 2018
Here is our prediction for the mid-terms:  Republicans will pick up at least 5 and possibly 6 or 7 or more seats in the Senate and Republicans will maintain leadership in the House. Below is our support for this prediction.

He has plenty of it, too.

As noted above, the 2016 polls were not accurate and this has not changed. Democrats continue to try and manipulate people through polls. They just don’t get it that Americans can now, thanks to President Trump, see through the liberal antics. The polls for this year’s election are local and are even more skewed due to smaller population sizes. We base very little credence on the polls except in cases when the Republicans are in the lead. In these cases it is highly likely that the Republican will win due to the polls already being skewed towards the left.

As I’ve always said: the polls are bunk, probably more so now than ever before. Via Francis, who cautions:

The article is definitely worth reading in its entirety. But if the prediction is correct, one consequence will be a redoubling of Democrats’ use of lurid allegations against Republicans and conservatives named as candidates for high office.

It’s the only tactic remaining to the Left that has any potency. Their allegations of various “isms” have all dwindled in effect as bad behavior by Negroes, feminists, homosexual activists, Muslims, and so on has been reported. The smaller their caucuses grow, especially in the Senate with its “advice and consent” role, the shriller, more strident, and more lurid the accusations will become.

That’s not a reason to throw the elections, of course. But it is a reason to be as prepared as possible for what could follow them.

Keep your powder dry, and your mags loaded.

Share

Another distinction without a difference

Fascism and Bolshevism: different sides, same coin?

Anti-fascism evolved from an academic fetish among Frankfurt School members into a cult of sorts in the 60’s and 70’s. The Antifa loons of today are well within the tradition of prior anti-fascist loons. The puzzle is why no similar movement ever started in response to the Soviet atrocities. Even if you think the Nazis were worse than the commies, in terms of intensity, the Bolsheviks were around a lot longer. They also managed to kill, or cause to be killed, millions around the world. The commies were a global killing machine.

Why is the former the symbol of evil, while the latter is still popular?

Paleocons, like Paul Gottfried, have suggested that communism may have an appeal to Christians that fascism lacks. That is, communism in the abstract is inclusive, universal and egalitarian. These are concepts that you find in Christianity, at least in the general sense. Anyone can become a Christian and everyone is equal before God. The Social Gospel sounds a lot like neo-Marxism and post-colonial socialism. Liberation Theology in South America is explicitly Marxist. The current Pope is out of this movement.

The problem here, of course, is that, in Europe, the Latin countries were explicitly Catholic and fascist. In fact, some scholars argue that fascism is an outgrowth of Catholic ideas like corporatism and localism. Spain under Franco was both Catholic and fascist. Portugal under Salazar was also Catholic and fascist. Of course, Mussolini’s Italy was very popular with American Progressives until the outbreak of the war. The best you can argue is that fascism seems to have had less appeal to Protestant academics that Bolshevism.

he fact is, the anti-Semitic and philo-Semitic arguments explaining the popularity of Bolshevism versus the demonization of fascism, don’t hold up under scrutiny. Both answers have some truth to them, but they don’t provide a complete answer. A big reason is that no one, especially anti-fascists, can provide a workable definition of fascism. In the book Fascism: The Career of a Concept, the aforementioned Paul Gottfried does an excellent job explaining the various and contradictory definitions of historical fascism.

This is why conservatives fall for the “liberals are the real Nazis” stuff peddled by grifters like Dinesh D’Souza and Jonah Goldberg. Fascism is a poorly defined political movement that can mean just about anything at this point. Even in the interwar period, the various fascist movements had some things in common, but they also had things in common with the Bolsheviks. After decades of anti-fascist proselytizing, fascism is simply a catch-all term for that which the Left currently finds upsetting or threatening.

As Z says, the Left liked Mussolini before the war; Hitler was also quite popular with the original Progressives…right up until he betrayed Stalin and invaded Poland, to general Leftist amazement and dismay. They and their descendants have never forgiven fascism for that. Z maintains that there’s a meaningful distinction to be made between fascism and Bolshevism, and maybe he’s right about that per se. But I think flatly declaring that no common ground exists between fascism and modern Leftist “thought” just might be a bridge too far:

Editor’s note: For the past year scholars James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian have sent fake papers to various academic journals which they describe as specialising in activism or “grievance studies.” Their stated mission has been to expose how easy it is to get “absurdities and morally fashionable political ideas published as legitimate academic research.”

To date, their project has been successful: seven papers have passed through peer review and have been published, including a 3000 word excerpt of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, rewritten in the language of Intersectionality theory and published in the Gender Studies journal Affilia.

Another, entitled “Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism” reworked, and substantially altered, part of Mein Kampf. The most shocking, (not published, its status is “revise and resubmit”) is a “Feminist Approach to Pedagogy.” It proposes “experiential reparations” as a corrective for privileged students. These include sitting on the floor, wearing chains, or being purposely spoken over. Reviewers have commented that the authors risk exploiting underprivileged students by burdening them with an expectation to teach about privilege.

From “My Struggle” to “Our Struggle” ain’t exactly what you’d call a giant leap. But in the end, nobody needs to spend a great deal of time splitting these ideological hairs. What we’re really talking about, then and now, is tyranny versus liberty. Hang whatever name on it you like, that eternal struggle remains the basic distinction, and the bottom line.

Share

Dead ideals

They’re gone. And they ain’t coming back.

As the spurious case against Brett Kavanaugh disintegrates, splinters, and re-forms into a cacophony of whiny, irrelevant expostulations, it is instructive to step back and survey the field upon which this battle took place.

The ground is littered with dead and wounded ideals: civility, dead; basic decency, dead; the presumption of innocence, gravely wounded, ditto for the idea of due process. And this disgusting carnage is all on you, O ancient one, Dianne Feinstein, and your self-important, preposterous colleagues. You were desperate to keep Brett Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court so you abandoned any semblance of decency and respect. You travestied the processes of the United States Senate for the sake of a cynical grab at power. I’d say that you should be ashamed of yourselves, but, like the thugs that you are, you have no shame. You believe the acquisition of power is a magical antidote to shame. You are wrong about that, and one can only hope that you will one day reap some portion of the obloquy you have sowed.

At a rally last night, President Trump, speaking about Judge Kavanaugh, said: “A man’s life is in tatters. His wife is shattered.” Musing on the attempted public execution the country just witnessed, the president continued, “They destroy people. They want to destroy people. These are really evil people.”

Yes, they are. But here’s the saving grace. The president, like Brett Kavanaugh, is a fighter. The president’s support has been as unwavering as Judge Kavanaugh’s determination to stay the course. Senator Spartacus (neé Cory Booker, and the accent is not a mistake) says that whether Judge Kavanaugh is “innocent or guilty”the Senate should “move on to another candidate.” Why? Because he’s tainted.

So: Democratic jackals on the Senate Judiciary Committee, aided and abetted by their loyal public relations firms — the mainstream media — and hectoring unpleasant people funded by George Soros, heap mud on Brett Kavanaugh for weeks and then step back and say: “He’s got mud all over him! Let’s move on to a more pristine victim.”

Funny how that works, innit? But seeing as how it’s the nature of who and what we’re dealing with, it therefore behooves us to acknowledge the sorry situation and get on with the necessary if distasteful task of getting in their faces, of punching back twice as hard—and of crushing them so completely that the very thought of ever again attacking us in such a way makes them literally want to vomit from fear and horror. It’s either that, or accept defeat and adjust to our newfound serfdom as best we can. Muir has the right of it:


DBD-10-3-18.jpg


Indeed. Best we get on with melting their asses right down to bubbling slag, then. It’s the only way to be sure.

Share

“Ten Songs From the ‘80s That You’ve Probably Forgotten About”

The 80’s, eh? Then it’s a safe bet I’d much rather keep right on forgetting about ’em, thanks, excepting the Joe Jackson number, which is okay with me. But the post reminded me of an excellent tune I wrote about last year, and was close to forgetting about again until I heard it on the radio the other day. Here’s last year’s post in toto; enjoy.

So the other day I heard a song on the car radio I hand’t heard in years and years but always loved. I had NO clue who did it, or what the title was; after hearing it, I had the guitar licks worked out in my head, but I could not for the life of me remember who played it. Had a couple of the guys hanging out at my place the next evening, and I played the song for ’em to see if any of them knew it. The only snippet of the lyrics I could recall was “Special love/I have for you” in the chorus, and I sang that bit along too.

But it was no use, we were all stumped. So I got to digging around on YouTube; I dunno, for some reason it just sounded to me like it might be a Badfinger song, so I did a search and started digging through the results when lo and behold, about four or five songs down, there was that distinctive guitar lick! I was so damned thrilled, I was jumping around and shouting like a fool. And now you guys get to enjoy my small victory too.



LOVE that song. It’s a genuine earwig for sure; once it’s in there, it burrows in deep, and ain’t coming out without tongs.

Know what blows my mind, though? That songs from the 80s are now “oldies” to a lot of people. I still listen to a hell of a lot of classic rock stuff from the 60s and 70s myself, along with old blues and rockabilly from an even dustier, mustier era, and swing going all the way back to the friggin’ 20s. I guess that stuff would be tantamount to Bach or Palestrina to those same folks. If they thought of it at all.

I remember working at Cheap Jack’s in NYC back in the 90s, where we were selling the ridiculously exaggerated bell-bottom jeans from the 70s as “vintage fashion.” Big bucks they brought, too; we had supermodels falling over each other to snap ’em up. I sold a few pairs to Julia Roberts once, no lie. But… vintage? It wasn’t long ago that I was wearing them godawful things myself, they couldn’t be “vintage.”

And now Cheap Jack’s, something of a NYC institution for a lotta years, is long gone too. Damn, but I’m old.

Share

True colors

Last True Conservative Cap’n Bill Kristol outs himself fully at last.


To which Schlichter responds hilariously:


“Ahoy.” I love it. Good one, Kurt.

Via Ace, who says:

Becoming? As in, action in progress but not yet completed?

Permission to speak freely? I think that ship’s done already sailed, Cap’n Cuck.

Ouch again. I do like that Cap’n Cuck bit too, and will therefore be using it in the future, should I ever feel the need to bring Kristol up again.

Share

“I wasn’t 100 percent sober…”

No, I should say you weren’t. That much is obvious enough.

Blame it on the alcohol.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg blames falling asleep at this year’s State of the Union address on not being “100 percent sober.”

“The audience, for the most part, is awake because they are bobbing up and down and we sit there, stone faced,” Ginsburg said Thursday during an event hosted by The Smithsonian Associates in Washington, D.C., according to CNN.

She continued, “But we’re not, at least I was not, 100 percent sober.”

She was drunk as a boiled owl—blackout drunk, no less—not decades ago, at a long-since-forgotten teenage party, but as an adult, a Justice of the highest court in the land, during the performance of one of her solemn if admittedly peripheral duties. Any Republican even halfway serious about fighting shitlib fire with fire and beating their asses like a big bass drum would be screaming loud and long about the absolute imperative necessity of impeaching her and getting her alkie ass off the court.

And then she repeated the disgraceful performance five years later, too. Now, I personally am inclined to be forgiving of such a lapse myself, but then again I ain’t a liberal, either. Obviously, the woman has a problem—one that clearly indicates she lacks the judicial temperament required to be on the USSC. So here’s the deal, libtards: either shut your fat yaps about Kavanaugh’s teenage peccadilloes, or send Rummie Baked Ginsot’s ass packing, toot damned sweet. Thank you.

Slap back update! That’s how you do it.

President Trump hinted Tuesday at a rally in Mississippi that Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., could have a drinking habit.

“Patrick Leahy — oh he’s never had a drink in his life,” Trump sarcastically said at the campaign-style rally. “Check it out. Look (online) under ‘Patrick Leahy slash drink.’”

Trump, who does not drink, seems to be flipping the script on Democrats who have thoroughly questioned the drinking habits of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh when he was a teenager.

“‘How dare you have a beer when you’re in high school?’” Trump said in a mocking tone toward the Democrats who questioned Kavanaugh.

And the NeverTrumpTards still can’t figure out why we love the guy. They oughta lay off of whining about Trump and get busy taking notes instead.

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