Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Click Here To Save $15 at Ammo.com

“No viable business model can be developed from this”

Just another epic Fail.

Over the last decade, journalists have held up Germany’s renewables energy transition, the Energiewende, as an environmental model for the world.

With Germany as inspiration, the United Nations and World Bank poured billions into renewables like wind, solar, and hydro in developing nations like Kenya.

But then, last year, Germany was forced to acknowledge that it had to delay its phase-out of coal, and would not meet its 2020 greenhouse gas reduction commitments. It announced plans to bulldoze an ancient church and forest in order to get at the coal underneath it.

“The Energiewende — the biggest political project since reunification — threatens to fail,” write Der Spiegel’s Frank Dohmen, Alexander Jung, Stefan Schultz, Gerald Traufetter in their 5,700-word investigative story.

Over the past five years alone, the Energiewende has cost Germany €32 billion ($36 billion) annually, and opposition to renewables is growing in the German countryside.

“The politicians fear citizen resistance” Der Spiegel reports. “There is hardly a wind energy project that is not fought.”

Meanwhile, the 20-year subsidies granted to wind, solar, and biogas since 2000 will start coming to an end next year. “The wind power boom is over,” Der Spiegel concludes.

All of which raises a question: if renewables can’t cheaply power Germany, one of the richest and most technologically advanced countries in the world, how could a developing nation like Kenya ever expect them to allow it to “leapfrog” fossil fuels?

Many Germans will, like Der Spiegel, claim the renewables transition was merely “botched,” but it wasn’t. The transition to renewables was doomed because modern industrial people, no matter how Romantic they are, do not want to return to pre-modern life.

The reason renewables can’t power modern civilization is because they were never meant to. One interesting question is why anybody ever thought they could.  

Oh, I doubt very much that anyone ever thought they could, least of all the most fervent among the “renewables” advocates. We need to look at the equation the other way ’round: they don’t want to power modern civilization. They want to end it—to turn back the clock to a mythical golden age, before industrialization and modernity, when we all lived in total harmony with nature. Y’know, like the Native Americans did. Like so much of what liberals think they know, this, too, just isn’t so.

Contrary to the hype, solar panels and windmills are old technologies—centuries old, in fact. They were abandoned for a reason; quite a few reasons, actually, foremost among ’em that those old technologies don’t work nearly as well as the more evolved and efficient tech that replaced ’em.

Not that any of it matters a whit to the Luddite Left, natch. They view humans not as a natural part of the biosphere but as a blight upon it—and, if they can’t excise us like the deadly alien cancer we supposedly are, will at least do everything they can to return humanity to a state of helpless primitivism: at the paltry mercy of Ma Nature, rather than coping quite nicely with her implacable ruthlessness.

Good on the German peasantry for resisting. “The politicians” damned well OUGHT to “fear citizen resistance” as far as I’m concerned, and on a whole lot more issues than just this one. For a closer, I just gotta rerun this brilliant George Carlin diatribe one mo’ time ag’in.


If you think that last link just above is something of a non-sequitur, you should review the performance it came from and think again. Ahem. Also: Heh.

Share

KCR Machine Gun Shoot threatened

Another NYC libmedia outlet has found out about it.

Twice a year, firearm enthusiasts meet at the Knob Creek Gun Range in Bullitt County, Kentucky, for an event billed “the world’s largest machine-gun shoot.” Visitors can avail themselves of a wide variety of powerful weapons, including magazine-fed and belt-fed machine guns, automatic rifles from the 1930s, and more exotic artillery, like a full-size cannon.

Buying and using high-powered weaponry can be an expensive hobby: for example, an NFA Class III arm — the category under which machine guns fall — can go for $20,000 or more, says an attendee, who, like many at the event, prefers to remain anonymous. Those guns can put out more than 600 rounds per minute, at a cost of at least 20 cents a round. (Visitors who do not own such guns have the opportunity to rent and shoot at a separate range.) Steve Sumner, a member of the family that owns the range, claims that shooting machine guns is “the fastest way to turn money into noise.”

Yep, it is that. Unexpectedly, the article isn’t the usual frothy mess of gun-grabber hysteria, but a pretty straight recitation of the bare facts; it’s short on text, long on cool photos, and entirely devoid of “analysis,” thank goodness.

I myself got briefly quoted years ago in a much more in-depth story about the Shoot which ran in NYPress, a more or less Right-leaning Village Voice competitor now more or less defunct:

I hung out for a while with Mike Hendrix, a rock ‘n’ roller affiliated with a band called the Belmont Playboys. We talked about my stint writing for High Times, Amsterdam and Knob Creek. “These things are just fun,” he said, “and these people are great. You should come to the one in the spring. It’s a great place to meet women. The women here are really interesting.” He mentioned that he and his band are due here in Manhattan soon to play the Rodeo Bar, and we made a tentative date for some serious drinking.

I recall the author, one Alan Cabal, as being more or less a newbie shooter, but not really anti-gun at all. Alas, we never did hook up for any of that “serious drinking” for some reason. But he seemed a nice enough fella.

(Via MisHum)

Share

Pardons a-poppin’

Good on ya, Mr President.

President Donald Trump issued a full pardon Monday to former Army First Lieutenant Michael Behenna, who served five years in prison after being convicted of murdering a suspected Al-Qaeda terrorist.

In May 2008, Behenna was questioning Ali Mansur Mohamed, a suspected terrorist who had allegedly been involved in an IED attack that killed two U.S. soldiers. The interrogation ended when Behenna fired two rounds into the terrorist — which the 1st Lt. claimed was in self-defense after Mansur lunged for his pistol.

A military court convicted Behenna of unpremeditated murder in a combat zone in 2009. The prosecution said Behenna was not acting in self-defense, but in retaliation for the deaths of his fellow soldiers, and killed Mansur while returning him to his hometown.

Fine with me if that’s what happened, I don’t give a shit either way. A dead Muslim terrorist is a dead Muslim terrorist, and I’m all for that. Now do this one:

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) on Wednesday is planning to show interested members of Congress a video from a Navy SEAL’s helmet camera that he believes will help exonerate Navy SEAL Chief Eddie Gallagher on war crime charges he faces when his trial begins later this month.

“When other members of Congress see the video as he has seen it, that it’s going to shed light on the situation as a whole and the case that the Navy is presenting against Chief Gallagher,” Michael Harrison, a spokesman for Hunter, told Breitbart News on Sunday.

“When Congressman Hunter saw the video, his first response was that it exonerates Chief Gallagher. But his second was that as many members of Congress that can see this need to be able to see this,” he added.

Gallagher, 39, is accused of stabbing a wounded teenage Islamic State  in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) fighter to death during his most recent deployment to Iraq from 2017 to 2018, during the final major battle against ISIS in Mosul.

However, according to Gallagher’s wife Andrea Gallagher and his brother Sean Gallagher, the video shows that Gallagher gave medical aid to the wounded teenager, who admitted to being an ISIS fighter before he died.

Andrea and Sean have not seen the video themselves, since it is under protective order, but Parlatore has described its contents in court. According to his description in court, the roughly two-minute video shows the wounded male teenager being dragged off the hood of a humvee by Iraqi partner forces.

Chief Gallagher then is heard asking an Iraqi general about the fighter, “Is this ISIS?” The general affirms he is, and Gallagher says, “OK, I got him.” Gallagher then clears the crowd, gets out his medical kit, assesses the fighter’s wounds, and begins cutting the fighter’s pant leg to treat his most severe wounds.

“The video is 100 percent exculpatory,” Andrea said in an interview with Breitbart News on Friday.

Once again: I do not give a damp squishy fart about the means used by US soldiers to remove the enemy from this mortal coil and enroll him in the Choir Invisible. As far as I’m concerned, every ISIS or al Qaeda scumbag that assumes room temperature at the hands of one of ours is cause for applause, not prosecution, regardless of method employed. I wouldn’t dream of requiring our boys to provide the enemy with the slightest aid or comfort—a humane gesture Chief Gallagher unexpectedly found himself harrassed over—although I certainly do respect his decency and compassion.

The battlefield imposes ethics all its own, incomprehensible and sometimes even bizarre to those without experience of the scorching, all-consuming crucible of combat. Far be it from any cake-eating civilian like me to armchair-quarterback the Chief from the quiet comfort of a peaceful, secure home. That goes quintuple—at least—for pus-nutted Congresscritters looking to gain some notoriety via second-guessing men whose boots they are unfit to lick. Sans compelling evidence of real atrocity, we should all just sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up, and let these men get the fuck on with the job we sent them into harm’s way to do.

It’s a damnable disgrace how overlawyered our soldiers now are, with every goddamned REMF JAGoff and his sister’s cat’s grandmother peering over the shoulders of the warriors actually bearing the load in these far-flung hellholes, under ROEs that reduce American fighting men to easy targets, providing far more protection to the enemy than to our own.

Who knows, maybe Trump could grant a preemptive pardon to every ground-pounder and Marine upon graduation from boot camp, then start letting them carry loaded weapons on patrol. After that, allowing the men at the pointy end to plan those patrols without JAGoff and/or Congressional interference, with an eye towards aggressively seeking the enemy, denying him all refuge and resource, pursuing and harrying him to the very ends of the Earth, and then burying him in it.

I know, I know. Crazy talk. But still.

Share

Madeleine wins big!

So my young ‘un had to write an essay a couple months back on “Why I’m the proudest kid in Gaston County.” At the time she complained to me that, and I quote, “I’m NOT the proudest kid in Gaston County. I don’t really like it here.” Which, y’know, out of the mouths of babes and all that. I nevertheless told her it wasn’t all THAT bad—when I was younger I could hardly wait to make my own escape, although I’m back in Gaston County now and damned glad and grateful to be too—and suggested some topics she might cover: the Schiele Museum, Daniel Stowe Botanical Gardens, Holy Angels hospital, and a few other outstanding local attractions.

Well, the essay won at school level and then citywide, and an awards banquet was held in Gastonia last night. Link to the video of Madeleine’s essay being read at the banquet, followed by her marching on up to receive the plaque while she absolutely beams with slightly puzzled joy, is here, for the interested parties among y’uns. Next, it’s on to Raleigh to be recognized by the NC Senate.

I mean, just…just…WOW. The essay, which I didn’t get a chance to read before it was turned in and only just saw, is quite well-written. I even get a mention in the thing my own personal self, which made me grin like a mule eating briars. Why yes, Daddy IS just bursting with pride right now. Why do you ask?

Update! It seems there’s a permissions problem preventing some folks from viewing the vid, probably on the ex-wife’s end. Apologies for that; I’ll check into it tomorrow.

Share

Christians Vs Churchians: what works, what doesn’t

If you preach it, they will come.

Stop accepting the Bible as true and admit Christianity has gotten it terribly wrong on homosexuality. This is the advice Rev. Oliver Thomas gives in a recent opinion article in USA Today for how the church can stop “hemorrhaging members” and see brighter days.

He warns that “the church is killing itself” because it has painted itself into a corner by actually believing what the Bible says. He contends that Christians should just admit that the Bible gets it wrong on so many important issues and that “reason and experience” should be our new guide, as if this is a new idea. He says the church is terribly wrong about sexuality, particularly homosexuality, and would do very well to wise up, lest it find itself reduced to a warehouse for cobwebs.

“Churches will continue hemorrhaging members and money at an alarming rate until we muster the courage to face the truth: We got it wrong on gays and lesbians,” he says.

We don’t have to wonder whether Thomas is correct. Not only is he wrong, but an impressive body of very strong data and experience demonstrates the precise opposite of what he claims is true.

Yes, many churches are hemorrhaging members, and have been since the early 1970s. But anyone who studies these things carefully will tell you this is happening almost exclusively in the more politically and theologically liberal mainline churches. These are the same churches that are doing exactly what Thomas calls for: rejecting the credibility and authority of Scripture.

This same research shows the churches he says must change or else are holding rock-solid steady in attendance. These are the more conservative congregations that unapologetically take the Bible at its word, including on homosexuality. His advice here is not just ill-advised, but the equivalent of telling any retailer that the way to growth is to stop being helpful to your customers and jack up your prices. Let’s see how true this is.

Research done jointly at Harvard and Indiana universities makes this clear, reporting that the number of adults attending liberalizing mainline churches has tanked precipitously from 35 percent of the American population in 1972 to 12 percent in 2016. This decline of the mainline churches began in the early 1960s when they started to question and officially change their positions on historic Christian basics like the deity of Christ, the existence of miracles, the reality of sin, and the atoning death of Jesus and His resurrection, as well as jettisoning biblical convictions about sex, gender, and abortion. People started running for the doors of these churches with every new compromise, and this exodus continues en masse today. It could hardly be worse if these pastors asked their parishioners to leave and never come back.

The Harvard/Indiana University research also shows that the churches that take the Bible as the reliable word of God are doing very well. Compromising on biblical truths was, and is, a devastating church-growth strategy. Holding fast to these truths and preaching them boldly is a very effective one. Let’s look at some real numbers from the folks at the Pew Research Center showing the same thing.

Pew’s “America’s Changing Landscape” explains that, between 2007 and 2014, mainline Protestant churches declined by 5 million adult members. This is hemorrhaging by any sober accounting. Churches in Pew’s “evangelical” category grew in absolute numbers by about 2 million between 2007 and 2014. Again, the exact opposite of what Thomas prescribes.

Since we all know liberalism poisons and ultimately destroys absolutely everything it is allowed to touch or influence, that’s no surprise—especially when we’re talking about an institution they hate as vehemently as they do Christianity. But here’s where things get interesting:

When same-sex-attracted Christians go to church, they are not choosing the pews of churches Thomas is calling us to become. Again, it’s just the opposite. Research conducted jointly at Columbia University and the University of California at Los Angeles by scholars who are not shy about supporting gay politics found that gay- and lesbian-identified people are 2.5 times more likely to attend churches that took a more conservative view on Christianity (including homosexuality) than the so-called “welcoming and affirming” congregations that celebrate it.

The authors of this study were paternalistically perplexed about why same-sex-attracted people would choose churches that they assumptively described as having a “hostile social environment to LGB individuals,” as if such people don’t know what’s good for them. Well, maybe same-sex-attracted individuals find such churches are indeed not hostile or hateful.

The assumption of bigotry and intolerance on the part of most if not all Christians is a core tenet of liberalism, irreducible and non-negotiable, which is pretty ironic in light of their present-day alliance of convenience with murderous Islam. The old mantra “love the sinner, hate the sin” was much more than just a slogan for the congregation of the small town church I grew up in, and I’m sure it’s probably the same in most others. It was an obligation for those sheltered folks, a standard to be lived up to. They might have been put off by homosexual behavior; they surely considered it immoral, a willful flouting of Biblical strictures against self-indulgence and morbid sins of the flesh. But the bottom-line truth is, in almost twenty years of every-Sunday-without-fail attendance and participation there, I can’t recall much in the way of either discussion of or interest in the whole issue. I damned sure never heard any “hatred” expressed over it.

Ironically, those rainbow flags you see flying outside some churches proudly announcing “We welcome all!” are not appealing to the very people they are intended to attract. It’s the churches that so many on the left mistakenly and irresponsibly accuse of “hating the gays” that are actually where many gay people find what they’re really looking for.

People seeking Christ are not looking for a scripture-denying church. They want the real thing, not in spite of it making real demands upon them and teaching the scriptures as they are, but very likely because of it.

Kinda surprising, that. A heck of a lot more thought-provoking stats and analysis to be found in the rest of the article, arriving here:

It’s finally time to stick a fork in the liberalizing project within Christianity that has been hard at work over the last 60 years or so. Hard numbers judge it a massive failure on every measure year after year.

If you know the Left and its established MO of infiltrating, corrupting, and perverting institutions until they’re brought fully into line with Leftist ideology, it’s pretty hard not to conclude that the “failure” was actually the real objective all along. Remember the unassailable truth of O’Sullivan’s Law: any organization or enterprise that is not expressly right wing will become left wing over time. You won’t find a better example of it than what’s been done to Christianity; its enfeeblement was accomplished in an incredibly short span of time relative to the fifteen hundred years in which it had flourished. The onset of the Church’s descent into fossilized irrelevance closely coincides with the Left’s ascension to dominance, which can reasonably be viewed as something more than mere happenstance.

Share

“We hate America, and want you to elect us to be your rulers so we can set you contemptible oafs STRAIGHT!”

How dare you question their “patriotism.”

Move your sloppy Commie ass to Iran then, Buttplug. Be sure to take your “husband” along, in the interest of “dialogue” and “understanding.” We’ll see how that works out for ya. Meanwhile, from deep in a comforting gin-soaked fever dream:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said at a Los Angeles event Saturday that the 2016 election was stolen from her.

The 2016 Democratic presidential nominee spoke with her husband at “An Evening With The Clintons” event.

“You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you,” she said, according to CNN.

Yeah, piss off, you crapulous old soak; dry up, blow away, eat some paste, drop dead. I’m one hundred percent with Ace on this:

This is dangerous talk for America, and I don’t even care any longer that it’s dangerous.

Court the danger, Hillary. Secede into your own country where you can win the presidency.

I want done with these people.

Me too, times a million kajillion. I’m reaching the point where I’m willing to countenance any extreme measure at all to rid ourselves of these tiresome screechmonkeys at last. Whatever that takes, and I DO mean whatever, will be fine with me. No, mustard gas, tactical nukes, and mass up-to-the-neck live burials in a giant fire-ant mound are NOT off the table as far as I’m concerned.

As for the Democrat-Socialist supergenii, they should definitely keep on fucking that chicken. After all, everybody knows the one surefire way to win elections is to gratuitously insult more than half the electorate, making no attempt whatsoever to conceal just how fanatically you loathe and despise them.

vote_Democrat_2020.jpg

Update! Just in case anyone was wondering about the things Democrat-Socialists oppose:

Consider the latest unemployment data released Friday. Alongside an increase in productivity of 3.6%, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday that the unemployment rate fell to 3.6% over the first quarter 2019. That’s the lowest rate since we first landed on the moon. And that 3.6% matching speaks to an economy that is growing, dynamic, and moral. Consider that the data also shows Hispanic unemployment is now at just 4.2%. Aside from static year-on-year changes in (still very low) unemployment for blacks, and a 0.2% year-on-year increase in unemployment for teenagers, the economy is boosting employment for every listed demographic subset.

Yet Democrats say that Trump’s economy is somehow immoral. When they aren’t trying to assign credit for it to Obama, they claim that it punishes the middle class and the poor. And so, rather than doubling down on the economic fortune we now find, Democrats are pledging to shred Trump’s corporate tax reforms, escalate regulation, and increase state control in the economy.

So what, you ask, are they FOR instead? Easy-peasy.


Shitholehat.jpg

So this really is where we’re at now, folks. And to think, after they get Trumpified again in 2020, they’re all going to resume screaming bloody murder about the “stolen,” “fraudulent” election and blaming any and everybody else for their defeat—when all anyone really has to do is just sit back, relax, and let the stupid fucks defeat themselves.

Enemies of the people update! Yeah, throw these shitpuppies into the blender too.

Dunking on the mainstream media is as easy as tripping a fat kid in a cast, except we would probably feel sorry for a fat kid in a cast who we tripped and sent slamming into the pavement piehole first. Unless the fat kid in a cast was a mainstream media journalist, in which case it would be totally hilarious.

They hate you, so feel free to hate them back. The MSM was not infuriated with Donald Trump when he called these hack transcriptionists for the liberal elite “the enemy of the people” because he was lying. The MSM was not infuriated with Donald Trump because he was telling the truth.

The mainstream media is our enemy. That’s undeniable; to deny it is to deny what we see and hear with our own eyes and ears every day. Don’t be a “the media is garbage” denier. It would be like denying climate change if climate change was a real thing instead of a media-driven scam designed to take your money and freedom.

Worse, the mainstream media is an enemy that considers you unworthy of the courtesy of not lying to your face about obvious things. Liberal journalists have such contempt for us that they won’t even make the effort to gaslight us properly any more. Maybe it’s because liberal journalists think you are dumb. Maybe liberal journalists are themselves dumb. Or maybe – probably – it’s some combination of the two. But they are no longer even showing you the respect of trying to pretend that they are not lying to you.

WE HATE YOU, YOU BASTARDS SUCK, SHUT UP AND DIE! OH HEY, WHY AREN’T YOU BUYING OUR DYING NEWSPAPERS OR WATCHING OUR FAILING NEWS NETWORKS? NO FAAAIIIIRRRR!!!!

I’ll say it before, I’ll say it again: somebody just let me know when it’s open season, no bag limit on the whole mangey menagerie of shitlib twatwaffles. You just gotta love Schlichter’s suggested correction, too: “If we had a real media, the story would have been ‘Bitter Liberal Hillary Donors On Witchfinder General’s Team Make Pathetic Play To Try To Cause Further Political Damage To Guy Who Was Too Clean For Them To Frame.’” But Kurt, how could they have milked two years of phony anti-Trump reportage out of that, man?

Share

Politicized, weaponized

US intelligence and federal law enforcement bureaucracies have been subverted by the Left into tyrannical abominations. But hey, we all knew that already, right? An open letter to traitorous IC leadership, from a man who knows whereof he speaks.

I served with and supervised intelligence professionals many times in my more than three decades of service in uniform to the United States, including as a senior officer leading an intelligence unit. I am stunned at what I am seeing coming from your professional community and utterly dismayed at what sure looks like a series of politically motivated published intelligence reports and leaks of misinformation. These actions put intelligence information into the public domain without vetting, credibility, or authoritative support in order to de-legitimize a duly elected President of the United States in the weeks leading up to the inauguration of Donald J. Trump as our 45th President.

The latest is the fiasco that resulted in the release of false information (the unverified Steele Dossier) from your profession through two media organizations who average citizens now know as fake news outlets, thanks to the courage and communications ability of the President-elect. I demand to see some resignations and retirements from this one.

Just the week before that damning release of misinformation, your agencies actually published a report (the Intelligence Capability Assessment ordered by President Obama in December of 2016) making unsubstantiated assessments that Russia actually changed the outcome of a presidential election. I have read the report and its lousy work. Whoever approved it wasted American tax dollars. The thing is full of speculation highlighted by assessments that present NO EVIDENCE AS PROOF and not all intelligence agencies on the thing even agree with the presented assessments confidence level. Interestingly it does admit there is NO EVIDENCE Russia tampered with any election systems that could affect outcomes and clearly states the information released to the media by Wiki Leaks WAS NOT FORGED. Obviously, the information itself, accurate information from the Democrats and Mrs. Clinton herself, had some impact on the election but to link the outcomes specifically to successful Russian influence operations is unprofessional AND undermines our political process legitimacy, violating your oaths of office by causing grave damage to the United States.

This guy is a retired Air Force intelligence and bomber-squadron commander (he was on duty at the Pentagon on 9/11, bless his heart) who is now deeply and correctly indignant over the intolerable illegalities perpetrated by his erstwhile colleagues, saying “I for one, am ashamed to have ever been associated with the intelligence community and am calling you out to clean your own house!” The sentiment speaks well of his integrity, and damningly of theirs. He gets this part wrong, however:

The average American probably finds it difficult to believe these agencies are politicized but the evidence is now overwhelming.

With all due respect, sir, I’m afraid the average American is far more likely to just assume it at this late date. After watching the miserable boob Obama wield it so brazenly against his political enemies throughout his entire lamentable tenure, why wouldn’t they—indeed, how could they not? His too-optimistic assertion aside, though, Maness goes on from there to seriously scorch some Swamp critter snout, and it’s good stuff.

Share

Running scared

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share

Asked, answered

Roger Simon asks the silliest of questions:

Should Journalists Go to Jail for Spreading Russia Lies?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share

Stick to your guns, Mr President

Hands off Venezuela. Or boots-on-the-ground off, rather.

This is by far the closest to an actual foreign policy crisis that Trump administration has faced yet. It is also the one for which a single misstep could cause total chaos. Naturally, there were prominent (and predictable) voices calling for an intervention. While Maduro is indeed a despotic ruler, we need to think hard before suggesting any further misadventure. Consider the questions one needs to ask before another military intervention, which will inevitably result in a regime change and a civil war.

First, what strategic interests are there for the United States in Venezuela? Venezuela is an oil-rich country, but it is also an economic basket case. There’s no unity in the political class, the military is pretty solidly behind Maduro, and no large-scale defections or popular uprisings are spontaneously happening that look likely to topple Maduro anytime soon. In fact, the regime is propped up by Cuban forces.

Consider the similarity to Iraq immediately post-intervention, and the entire Baathist military and bureaucracy disbanded and pushed underground, fueling insurgency with the support of Iran. In other words, a regime change is a recipe for insurgency and civil war.

Second, what are the intervention plans, and what about mission creep? Would we have an exit strategy and timeframe? There is, so far, no clear coherent plan adopted by the administration, nor is it even possible, because of the reasons mentioned above. Dictators often leave the country and retire with their millions, but that is when they see the situation is hopeless. In this case, the situation isn’t.

The Monroe Doctrine is still active, and America is well within her rights to intervene if any other great power approaches and forms a base that can change the balance of power of the region. But 100 Russian military advisors don’t change the balance of power. It is not the Cuban missile crisis redux, and neither Russia nor China currently has any cross-continental power projection will or capability.

Venezuela is a humanitarian concern, not a strategic concern, a key difference that needs to be considered. It’s easy to sympathize and offer diplomatic support, aid, food, and even weapons. It’s entirely another thing to intervene militarily, and force regime change.

He stands within the cusp of history, of being the first American president in more than a quarter-century to not have started an open-ended and costly so-called humanitarian intervention. He should trust his original electoral instincts and aspire to make that his legacy.

Amen to all that. Let the invade-the-world-invite-the-world types, both civilian and military, gnash their teeth down to nubs over the “missed opportunity” to set up another quicksand-box in their already-oversized playground. Stepping in with anything more than an offer of bargain prices on bulk M4 purchases would be a serious mistake for Trump—and for America. The Venezuelan people foolishly voted themselves into socialism; let them learn on their own that they must shoot their way out of it.

Share

THE END IS NIGH!

Only three days left? Well, damn. And I was thinking about doing some laundry next weekend.

Climate change is in the news again. Earlier this year, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–NY) warned us that we have only 12 years to address the harm that human beings are doing to the planet. Last week, Beto O’Rourke amended that, suggesting we have only 10 years. Now, I don’t want to scare anyone, but according to my calculations that I arrived at by reading science, both Beto and Ocasio-Cortez are looking at this problem through rose-colored glasses. In fact, the world has precisely three and a half days to change its ways or it will basically be destroyed.

As I write this, it is 1:45 pm on Friday May 3rd. By sometime in the midmorning on Tuesday, if we don’t take action, Miami will be underwater, Toledo will be on fire, a swarm of locusts will descend upon Houston, and Brooklyn … well, actually Brooklyn will be fine, but that’s not the point. The point is that we have just over 72 hours to change everything we do and hand the entire economy over to the state or else we will witness an apocalypse that will make Revelations look like Sesame Street.

I know what you’re saying, you’re saying, “Dave, how can we possibly reverse the damage done by the entire two centuries of the industrial revolution by Tuesday? It’s impossible!” But when Hannibal’s elephants looked at the Alps, did they tell Hannibal they couldn’t get across them? No. When Rocky Balboa was forced to train in a drafty Russian barn and outrun KGB agents in the snow, did he say, “This is too hard?” No.

The time to act is now. In fact, more accurately the time not to act is now. So what can you not do? First of all, do not become pregnant and deliver a child in the next three and a half days. That is literally the worst thing you can do for climate change. I know babies are cute and all, and pretty small, but believe me, those suckers pump out greenhouse gasses like 19th century dark satanic mills. And you can try to tell them to stop, but they don’t understand words, so …

Another thing you should not do is fly, or drive, or really go anywhere at all. What’s that? You have a doctor’s appointment? Something about a weird growth on your leg? Well, let me ask you bluntly, what is that growth on your leg going to matter when Denver is under 24 feet of burning snow?

Now I know all you folks are the right kind of people, and I’m going to be perfectly frank; individual inaction is not enough. What we need more than anything else is a global governing body that can enforce inaction.

Actually, I might be in favor of that, as long as the governing body itself was included in any and all inaction mandates.

If we don’t take our heads out of the sand in the next several minutes, there will be nothing but sand left on the planet.

Wait, there’s actually still going to be a planet? I had just assumed old Terra was going to fly apart or be blown to bits or something. Or maybe spontaneously ignite because of a 1.4 degree rise in yearly mean temperature over three hundred years and burn itself to cinders, which will be scattered across the galaxy by the solar wind.

So: what, then? Will there still be a planet after all, just no more climate? Or will there be a climate too, but one that kills off all us humans for unforgivable sins like the internal combustion engine and air conditioning and delicious, juicy cheeseburgers? Will there still be animals? How about stinkbugs? Tall buildings? Shrubbery?

Man, all this science is making my head hurt. Seriously, though, if Albert “Arnold The Pig” AlGore had been right in that famous movie of his, An Inconvenient Prediction, the world would have ended long before now. And he ain’t the only half-bright Chicken Little who got it completely wrong, either.

Share

Cheney V2.0?

More rich, buttery Barr goodness.

Barr is the new Dick Cheney: a stocky, bespectacled, confrontational, blunt, intelligent, unapologetically conservative, experienced, and high-powered official who believes in and fights for the office of the president. Just as Democrats loathed Cheney as a bugaboo manipulating President George W. Bush to further the interests of Halliburton, they attack Barr as a dishonest factotum of President Trump’s. The qualities that drove Democrats batty over Cheney—his inscrutability, his cleverness, his asperity, and above all his success—make them incensed about Barr. These happen to be qualities Republicans find appealing.

What’s behind conservative support for Cheney and Barr is their lack of embarrassment. Most Washingtonians, no matter their party, find it important to be held in esteem by the city’s tastemakers, who are overwhelmingly liberal. Not these two. The classic Cheney moment was his 2004 exchange with Pat Leahy on the Senate floor. Cheney complained that Leahy had called him a war profiteer. Leahy responded that Cheney had said he was a bad Catholic. So Cheney ended the conversation by telling Leahy to perform a physically impossible four-letter act. “You’d be surprised at how many people liked that,” Cheney recollected in a 2010 interview. “It’s sort of the best thing I ever did.” He’s selling himself short.

Republican fans of Barr circulated clips of his Senate appearance Wednesday even as media coverage of his testimony was uniformly negative. No Democrats are held in less esteem by conservatives than the ones on the Judiciary Committee. They will never live down their treatment of Brett Kavanaugh. Trump supporters nodded in agreement when Barr said the controversy over his March 24 description of the Mueller report is “mind-bendingly bizarre.” They chuckled when he said Mueller’s March 27 letter to him was “a bit snitty and I think it was probably written by one of his staff members.” They guffawed when Barr described the verb “spying” as “a good English word.” They cheered when Richard Blumenthal asked for notes Barr had taken of his phone conversation with Mueller and Barr told him no. “Why should you have them?”

Where his predecessor was genial and deferential to Congress and the press, Barr is disdainful and combative. At his April 18 press conference before the publication of the Mueller report, a CBS reporter asked Barr if his use of the word “unprecedented” to describe the circumstances of the Russia investigation was “quite generous to the president and his feelings and emotions.” Barr replied, “Is there another precedent for it?” “No,” the reporter acknowledged sheepishly. Another reporter wondered, “Is it an impropriety for you to come out and sort of spin the report before people are able to read it?” Barr said, “No,” and left the room. Lib owned.

Some out there are reminding us of something we all already know: that the chances of top-level malefactors like HILLARY!™ and Ogabe ever facing justice remain slim, and I can’t disagree. Nor do I anticipate meaningful reform of dangerously powerful and corrupt federal bureacracies from Barr’s efforts. Nonetheless, it sure is enjoyable to watch Barr roughly manhandle the Democrat-Socialists, making them squirm like a salted slug on a hot sidewalk. Elsewhere, Lindsay V2.0 scores a stinging, smarting hit himself, calling Mr Integrity out for his weaselly manipulation.

I am filing this story in the “put up or shut up” category of invitations. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham Friday morning sent a letter to Special Counsel Robert Mueller inviting him to testify about the phone call he had with A.G. Barr following the letter Mueller sent to Barr about the summary of findings the A.G. issued, pending release of the full report. That letter, purportedly meant to be private, nonetheless was leaked right before Barr testified before Graham’s committee and was used by Democrat members to criticize the A.G.

Mueller knows that Barr had him on a speakerphone, with witnesses present and taking notes. (Incidentally, what does that tell you about the actual regard in which Barr holds Mueller — a man he has known for decades?) Reportedly, during the conversation, Barr asked Mueller if there were any inaccuracies and was told by Mueller, no.

Meanwhile, the Democrat-controlled House Judiciary Committee is negotiating with Mueller over possible testimony. Just a guess: They are not demanding that staff members be given a half-hour to question Mueller.

The last line in Graham’s beautifully direct request to get all the cards on the table: “Please inform the Committee if you would like to provide testimony regarding any misrepresentation by the Attorney General.” Time to fish or cut bait, Slippery Bob.

Update! Gerard posts a Solzhenitsyn quote made all the more poignant by current events.

In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.

We are also dishonoring our own integrity and posterity, thereby sowing the seeds of bloody strife, upheaval, and misery for those new generations sooner or later, as faith in the system and justice itself crumbles into ruin.

Obstruction update! Via Insty: “Barr is investigating Democrats. Democrats call for Barr to resign. According to Nadler, that’s obstruction of justice!” But it’s more than just that. It’s also this:

Don’t fool yourself. This latest assault on Attorney General Barr is a coordinated hit job cooked up between the media, the special counsel, and their allies in Congress. And it has only one purpose, to stop or slow Barr’s inquiry into the gross abuses leading up to the effort to spy on the Trump campaign.

I explained exactly why Mueller defied Barr here: “By salting the report with grand jury information that required redaction, Mueller guarantees the president remains subject to the innuendo and suspicion that comes with unnecessary secrecy.” In other words, it was a dirty trick. Open your eyes, Mr. Attorney General, because they’re coming for you now.

Oh, he seems like a smart enough fella. I’m pretty sure he already knows.

Coordinating with their allies in the media and the Senate, Mueller has attempted to set-up the attorney general. Barr was asked whether he knew why Mueller’s team was upset with the attorney general’s summary. He said he did not know what their concerns were. That was a truthful statement. But Sen. Patrick Leahy has attempted to use Mueller’s leaked letter to argue that the attorney general lied to Congress when he said he didn’t know what was of concern to Mueller’s team. The attorney general gave a factual and able explanation for the ginned up discrepancy.

What is Mueller’s endgame here? Impeachment? Don’t be ridiculous.

To answer that question, go back and look at where the Mueller people were standing on the night that Donald Trump shocked the world by upsetting Hillary Clinton. Robert Mueller left a $3.4 million partner job with WilmerHale, the same law firm that had just won a lawsuit for the Clinton Foundation, keeping Clinton emails secret. The Mueller probe provided former Clinton Foundation attorney Jeannie Rhee with the opportunity once again to protect Clinton by making sure the word “Fusion” never appeared in the Mueller report and by steering the Papadopoulos prosecution to help obscure the role of the Clinton-financed dossier in the hoax. The end-game is to continue to protect the coup plotters and deep-state bad actors who have used surveillance of Americans in much the same way the Soviets used it in Eastern Germany.

This is high stakes stuff. If the elites can continue using intelligence and law enforcement to interfere in American elections, they will eventually get good at it and we will lose our republic. The deep state allies are fighting like the “Unsullied” protecting the gates of Winterfell to cover for the bad actors still fumbling for their golden parachutes. Bottom line, the report, these new leaks, they’re just desperate attempts to delay the reckoning. The attorney general is now subject of a campaign of smear and intimidation and he must be protected so he can hold these villains to account.

Seeing as how the Clintons are up to their necks in this, Barr needs more than merely political protection; he should consider putting some serious private security on the payroll, lest he be found on a DC park bench after having committed suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head seventeen times.

Share

Truth, out

I dunno, would I be taking things a little too far by calling this unlooked-for first step towards honesty for Democrat-Socialists a “baby step”?

U.S.—After Alabama state representative John Rogers made horrific comments on abortion, the nation admitted it was actually sort of proud of Democrats for finally being honest about their position on abortion.

“You kill them now or you kill them later. You bring them in the world unwanted, unloved, you send them to the electric chair. So, you kill them now or you kill them later,” he had said, sparking outrage among those with consciences.

However, in the midst of the outrage, the nation took solace in the fact that at least liberals are being honest now.

“It’s actually kind of refreshing to hear this kind of honesty,” one man in Texas said as he watched the revolting video of Rogers’ comments. “At least they’re being upfront about how abortion is murder now. It’s a step in the right direction. Before, they’d pretend it was healthcare or women’s rights or something. It’s good to hear some truth from the left for once.”

Yep. Unexpected, too.

Share

Rejection rationale

Looks like HILLARY!™ ain’t the only one floating down De Nile.

Former President Barack Obama was unhappy with Hillary Clinton and her failed “soulless campaign” in 2016, saying he saw her loss as a “personal insult.”

The new details come from a recently released update to New York Times Chief White House Correspondent Peter Baker’s book Obama: The Call of History.

The new edition, which includes Obama’s reaction to the 2016 election, said Obama compared himself to Michael Corleone, the titular character of “The Godfather.” Obama thought he “almost got out” of office untouched, like a mob boss avoiding a hit job.

Obama found himself shocked by the election results, thinking before Nov. 8 there was “no way Americans would turn on him” and “[h]is legacy, he felt, was in safe hands.”

Your disastrous legacy is what it is, Jugears. You should worry more about NOT being forgotten, seems to me. Hopefully, your “legacy” will soon be getting way closer attention than you’ll wish, and fading quietly away into unheralded obscurity might come to look like a sweet, unreachable dream.

Update! Is De Nile actually a river of cheap gin?

Hillary Clinton’s defenders will never stop making excuses for why she lost in 2016: It was Matt Lauer! It was James Comey! It was men being sexist! It was women being sexist! It was voter suppression! It was Citizens United! It was fake news! It was WikiLeaks! It was Facebook! It was the Russians!

Today, a new excuse: It was Jon Stewart!

In the middle of last week, Huma Abedin must have bustled over to Hillary’s place with a lovingly bound copy of the latest in cutting-edge academic research, a report that says Jon Stewart’s retirement is ACKSHULLY the reason Donald Trump won. We’ll all be able to hear more about this in Frau Pantsuit’s next memoir, “7,573 Other Reasons I Lost That Totally Were Not My Fault, You Ungrateful Pissants.”

How long will it take academia and the pundit class to learn that dropped objects fall to earth, water is wet and Hillary Clinton’s biggest problem was Hillary Clinton? She’s a horrible politician, as corrupt as a medieval warlord and as cuddly as a leprotic armadillo.

As Dennis Miller puts it in his special “Fake News, Real Jokes,” “They could have passed out a big sheet of paper that had two boxes on it, one that said ‘Hillary’ and one that said ‘not Hillary,’ and I was gonna put my X in the ‘not-Hillary’ box, OK?”

She’s not just a horrible politician, she’s a horrible, vile person—a “nasty, nasty woman,” as Trump so handily put it. Via Surber, who quips: “…as if being too drunk to stand on 9/11 did not have anything to do with her 30-state stomping.” Not to mention all those other times she was caught on camera suffering from the blind staggers, too, and couldn’t stumble into the Drunkmobile without assistance from five burly security guards.

Share

A deep dive with Buttplug

Not so deep, actually, but penetrating nonetheless. I just wanted to note that, in the highly unlikely event Buttplug actually makes any serious headway in his narcissistic quest for power he is wholly unqualified to wield, we can expect the Left to decry the abominable hate-crime of referring to him as Buttplug—uncouth, they’ll surely cry; obscene, insulting, a disgusting, sexually-loaded term which shouldn’t be used in polite circles! Enemedia will just refuse ever to utter it for any reason, no matter how widely it might come to be used.

My fellow bloggers, other shitlords one, all, and everywhere: let us hereby pledge to keep on, umm, plugging regardless. Hammer the little dweeb hard and fast with Buttplug, along with any other kind of raunchy innuendo you can come up with. If Lefty bitches annoyingly enough, we can always just toss a Teabagger or two his way, no?

Share

Bust ’em up, shut it down

Laura Hollis presents an idea whose time has surely come.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share

The bane of liberalism

Unintended consequences, always catching the self-proclaimed Smartest People On Earth by surprise.

Tenants are fleeing a D.C. high rise as the city’s progressive housing policy has led to panhandling, marijuana smoking, and at least one overdose death in the past year.

Sedgewick Gardens is an historic landmark in a high-priced neighborhood in northwest Washington, D.C., the Washington Post reported. But in the past two years, it has also come to play home to a number of formerly homeless people, many of whom may not have been pushed into housing before exposure to treatment as part of the District’s “housing first” approach to policy.

The pushing of formerly homeless people into housing prior to access to drug treatment or psychological care is part of the “housing first” approach to homelessness assistance, which argues that housing is itself a kind of care, and so people should always be provided with housing as soon as possible.

The neighborhood itself is quite liberal—the Post notes that 95 percent of voters there opposed President Donald Trump in 2016—but the results of the move-in were what the Post describes as “a high-stakes social experiment that so far has left few of its subjects happy.”

That experiment has led to a tripling of police calls to the complex, rising to 121 in 2018 compared to 34 in 2016. Only five of the 2018 calls actually were eventually linked to a crime. But they also were prompted by other harrowing situations, including a man barricading himself in his apartment and threatening to shoot police with a shotgun if they intruded; and another man found to have died from using drugs laced with the deadly synthetic opioid fentanyl.

These two events are the most extreme examples of a general coarsening of the environment. Tenants have complained of panhandling in the halls, the smell of marijuana in the hallways, and feces on the landing of the stairwells.

It’s an all-too-familiar situation for me personally. When I lived in Atlanta, I was in a quite nice complex of historic industrial buildings newly renovated into apartments, the Fulton Cotton Mill Lofts—new enough that only my own building was finished, the other three were still under construction.

Alas, there was a catch: having been built in part with government money, it was required that half the aparments be set aside for Section 8 benefit recipients. In a nutshell, this meant that people shelling out a thousand bucks a month or more were forced to endure certain “amenities” such as garbage-strewn lobbies and parking lots; late-night confrontations with scary-looking thugs roaming the premises; loud, shrieking domestic disputes; aggressive panhandlers, and other examples of Diversity’s dubious benefits.

The only thing missing from all this was the feces. And who knows, they probably turned up too eventually, I was only there for two years.

Our lobby had a mailbox center in the middle of it, for which the management was gracious enough to provide convenient recycling tubs to toss the day’s pile of junk mail into. They posted up a flier above them requesting that residents NOT use the junk-mail bins to toss household and kitchen garbage bags into, with a reminder of the dumpsters located nearby. They even put a map on the fliers, if I remember right.

I’m sure you know how well THAT worked out. Immediately on entering the front door you were confronted with the eye-watering stench of rotting food, curdled milk, soiled diapers, half-full 40’s of Old English, cigarette butts, cat litter, and whatever other nastiness the Section 8 animals were disposing of that day. The junk-mail bins quicky filled, whereupon Section 8’ers would just toss their overflowing, nasty bags right onto the floor.

It wasn’t just inside the building, either. I was out on the parking lot one stifling summer afternoon to work on my girlfriend’s car—they don’t call it Hotlanta for nothing, folks. I crawled up under the car, dragging my tools along with me, and sort of inch-wormed my way to where I need to be. After a few minutes I noticed two things: an unknown object or objects jabbing painfully into my back, and a truly nauseating stench. I wriggled back out and took the look underneath that I should have thought of before getting under there, to find that I had been lying on a big pile of maggot-ridden, half-eaten fried chicken bones left to fester in the sun for who even knows how long.

It was a great big old pile of DISGUSTING, that’s what. Coincidentally, or probably not, a year or two I had an Uber rider leave a gift of rib bones in my back seat, wrapped in a greasy, BBQ sauce-smeared wad of paper napkins. The magnanimous gesture on the part of my middle-aged black female fare was left unbeknownst to me, until the end of the day when I went to clear any such debris out of the back seat. And I had had several subsequent passengers after her, too. God only knows what they might have thought about all that.

Pleaase note that I am NOT presenting those last two stories as some kind of “ohh, them niggers and their chicken and ribs and watermelons!” thing. Just noting that a mighty casual attitude on the part of so many of your standard lower-class Dindus towards not trashing his or her immediate surroundings may possibly not be entirely coincidental, that’s all. Could be—COULD be—there’s something bigger at work here.

Anyways, back to the Lofts. You always knew which apartment housed a Section 8’er or three (or thirty). You couldn’t miss ’em. They were the apartments with the unpleasant smell wafting through the short corridor outside the door; the rap “music” blasting out at ear-rupturing volume any and all hours of the day or night; the malt liquor bottles and gooey pizza boxes piled in ziggurats adjacent to the door; the sounds of violent altercations, furniture being rougly shoved around, or shattering glass. Now and then a resident passed out on the floor by the door, maybe, which door might or might not be left standing partially or fully open.

In sum, I have NO intention of ever subjecting myself to dwelling in any complex that also hosts Section 8 recipients if I can help it. Likewise, I am NOT in the least surprised to read about the sad denouement of inflicting such thoughtless slobs on a once-grand old property like the Sedgewick Gardens. The Libs In Charge of this ill-considered farce coulda asked me, I woulda been glad to tell ’em how things were gonna work out for’em in the end. Not that they would want to hear it, or profit from the knowledge they gained.

Share

Bunkered up

Ever wonder why that Hitler rant after the Mueller report dropped was so damned funny? Mostly because it cut so close to the bone.

Historians tell us that in the final days of the Third Reich, as the Red Army surrounded the Berlin Führerbunker, a crazed Adolf Hitler ranted, raved, and issued increasingly irrational orders for non-existent Wehrmacht divisions to counterattack and repel the invaders. Even as Germany was being laid waste by the British and American armies advancing from the west and the Russians from the east, Hitler still appeared to believe that victory was within reach. After all, when he had started World War II, world domination by the Nazis had been all but certain. It had to have been inconceivable to him that he had been so wrong from the beginning, and now he would have to face the consequences.

Equally deluded and disbelieving was Josef Goebbels, the Reich’s propaganda minister. According to historical reports, even at that late date and in those dire circumstances, Goebbels’ deluded denial of the advancing peril equaled that of his Führer.

I couldn’t help but think back to crazy Adolf as I watched the utterly bizarre performance by the unhinged Democrat senators who hurled meaningless, semi-hysterical invective at Attorney General William Barr as he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Similarly, the mainstream media’s equally outlandish portrayals of Barr’s steady, thoughtful, and intelligent testimony reminded me of the credulous and loyal Goebbels. Just as Adolf and Josef couldn’t accept the reality that they had lost the war, Senators Richard Blumenthal (D., Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii), Kamala Harris (D., Calif.), and their media enablers seem to be incapable of accepting the results of the Mueller investigation.

Although the Attorney General carefully avoided saying that he had reached any conclusions about “overreach” by top government officials, the mere fact that he raised that possible investigative subject should induce night sweats and fitful insomnia throughout the bedrooms of the Seat of Government.

Who knows? Just like the popularity of backyard bomb shelters during the height of the Cold War, underground Führer-style bunkers may become the hot new trend among deep state leaders looking to make a desperate, crazed last stand against the approaching forces of justice.

We should make sure those bunkers are well-stocked with sidearms and plenty of ammo, to ensure strict fidelity to historical precedent and thereby achieve the desired result. As I said a little while ago, the Democrat-Socialist bedlamites have dug themselves into a very deep hole, especially considering this:

More than two-thirds of Americans want an investigation into the Justice Department’s handling of the Russia Collusion Hoax.

This is very bad news for Barack Obama, the corrupt Deep State, their minions in the establishment media, and Democrats.

According to a April 25-28 poll of 1,007 random adults taken for CNN (a far-left fake news outlet), a full 69 percent “think Congress ought to investigate the origins of the Justice Department’s inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including 76% of Democrats, 69% of independents and 62% of Republicans.”

And the “origins” of that inquiry means the Obama Justice Department.

The poll also shows that a mere 37 percent want to see Trump impeached while a clear majority, 59 percent, do not. Last September, that number was nearly tied with 47 percent wanting Trump removed from office while 48 percent did not.

So: bad news for libtards all around, then. Looks like it’s either bunker up or lawyer up for you Corruptocrats. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of assholes.

Share

Cornered, like rats

Lest anybody forget, there’s more going on than just Barr’s thang.

Many of us have believed for the last several years that a small, but extremely powerful cabal within the intelligence community and law enforcement felt – because of their self-righteous arrogance and partisan leanings – that they could use the immense power of the surveillance state to conduct a partisan attack on a political opponent.

These officials felt justified in their actions because they believed Donald Trump was not a suitable person to be president of the United States and because they had policy differences with Trump.

In addition, it appears that some in that cabal feared Trump becoming president because they believed he would demand great accountability and transparency inside of the intelligence and law enforcement community.

I hope that investigations likely coming out of the inspector general’s report will lead to answers regarding former CIA Director John Brennan’s role in giving credence to the Steele dossier.

And I hope the inspector general’s report will provide answers to why the initial FISA application authorizing surveillance of Page was approved and then renewed three more times.

I suspect that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judges took the FBI at its word and that someone who is guilty at a minimum of the crime of falsifying by omission did not admit to the court that the applications were based on a piece of partisan propaganda.

All of these things are deeply troubling because our surveillance and law enforcement regimes are based primarily on trust. Trust that those seeking FISA applications to surveil American citizens are being honest, and trust that they are above reproach.

The problem that we now confront is that the trust placed in these people and in the process has been shattered. We must remember that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was enacted in response to abuses at the FBI under Director J. Edgar Hoover, who headed the bureau from 1924 until his death in 1972.

All of what we have seen over the last several years has revealed the FISA safeguards are an utter sham. If FBI agents and Justice Department lawyers are willing to lie and falsify information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court – and more importantly, if there are no consequences for those actions – then FISA is a joke.

This also means that our civil liberties are a joke and we will have accepted a police state that can use a piece of partisan propaganda or anything else as a justification to spy on private citizens.

The only way we can deal with this abuse is to have serious consequences for these actions. People must go to prison for breaking the law.

Absolutely, positively, one bazillion percent correct, to the very last syllable of it. But really, why don’t we all just cut to the chase here and do something these shrieking Democrat-Socialists seem to desire above all else:

The details of the Russiagate conspiracy theory, that some combination of Russian Facebook trolling, most of which took place after the election and targeted black people, and the hacking of the emails of Hillary’s campaign chair, whose contents no one outside the media and political activists cared about, somehow swung the election, are gibberish. But the facts don’t matter in the paranoid style of politics.

Hillary Clinton, whose people invented the Russia conspiracy theory and used it to convince Obama officials to spy on Trump allies and staffers, compared it to 9/11. Other Democrats and media outlets like the Washington Post and the New York Times compared it to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor.

“This was an act of war, in my view,” Senator Richard Blumenthal said. Senator Tim Kaine also thought it was an act of war. Senator Ben Cardin said that the election conspiracy amounts to an “act of war”. Rep. Steven Cohen also agreed that it was an act of war.

An “undeclared, but very real, ‘war’ has already come to the United States,” Senator Chris Coons claimed.

If they really believe that Facebook trolling is an act of war, then they should declare war on Russia.

President Trump can’t declare war. Only Congress can do that. President Trump should ask Democrats to put up or shut up with a declaration of war. If they truly believe in their conspiracy theories, if they really think that what happened was as bad as 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, that it was, in their own words, an “act of war”, they should have no problem voting unanimously for a declaration of war against Russia.

If they truly believe that what happened was an act of war, why won’t they defend America?

The only thing they REALLY believe is that they should be in power: unchecked, unchallenged, always and forever.

Share

Chickens, roost, all that

As the man himself has reportedly said, they’re poking the wrong Barr.

Democrats, as expected, tried to cloud the conclusions by suggesting there was too much smoke in the president’s actions for there not to be fire somewhere. The best hope they had was a letter from Mueller telling Barr he was unhappy with the AG’s initial four-page letter on the report’s conclusions, saying it “did not fully capture” the scope of the entire 450-page report.

Barr called the letter a “bit snitty,” and countered the criticism by saying he had moved quickly to release the entire report, minus minimal redactions, and the whole world could see what Mueller had found — and didn’t find.

It was a legitimate, if thin, line of questioning, but Dems didn’t like the answer and lost it again. Obviously frustrated that their main talking point for the entire Trump presidency has come up empty, they savaged Barr and accused him of covering up for a corrupt ­president.

It was politics at its most dishonest as they tried to argue that up is down and black is white. Barr was mostly stoic, but allowed himself a brief moment to brilliantly summarize the outlandish effort to twist reality.

“How did we get to the point where the evidence is now that the president was falsely accused of colluding with the Russians, accused of being treasonous and accused of being a Russian agent, and the evidence now is that that was without a basis?” he asked. “And two years of his administration have been dominated by allegations that have now been proven false. But to listen to some of the rhetoric, you would think the Mueller report had found the opposite.”

No better, more concise statement has been made about the bankrupt nature of the Democratic Party and its leaders. They bet everything on Mueller validating their Big Lie of Russia, Russia, Russia, and now they have nothing.

Barr’s comportment as AG so far has been exemplary: quiet, judicious, and straightforward. Exhibit A:

In mid-February, shortly after he was sworn-in, Barr instructed Mueller’s team to identify any grand jury material in the final report “so we could redact that material and prepare the report for public release as quickly as we could.” Barr confirmed his order during his opening statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday morning. But Mueller did not abide by that request, and instead submitted a raw report without suggested redactions.

Since the report had not been vetted by the special counsel’s office, Barr explained, and it would have taken at least three weeks to protect sensitive information in the document, he decided to compose a summary of the report’s conclusions in order to partially satisfy the public’s interest.

“I made the determination that we had to put out some information about the bottom line,” Barr told the committee. “The body politic was in a high state of agitation. There was massive interest in learning what the bottom line results of Bob Mueller’s investigation was, particularly as to collusion. Former government officials were confidently predicting that the president and members of his family were going to be indicted. So I didn’t feel that it was in the public interest to allow this to go on for several weeks.”

A wise move by an honest man, in stark contrast with the worm Mueller’s greasy slithering. In light of Barr’s above statement we now return to Goodwin for another excellent, penetrating Barr quote, leaving no reason to wonder why the Democrat-Socialists hate him so much.

At one point, he talked of possible “overreach” by top officials, then added: “But what we have to be concerned about is a few people at the top getting into their heads that they know better than the American people.”

Perfectly, entirely correct. The trouble being, this attitude is the very cornerstone of Progressivism. It always has been; it underpins absolutely everything they do and say. Without it, they have no real reason to exist at all.

At another point, he said, “We have to stop using the criminal justice process as a political weapon.”

Which is a tactic every bit as fundamental to Progressivism as the sacrament of “rule by expert” is. Barr appears to be a no-nonsense sort of man with a crystal-clear understanding of what his duty as AG is, what his oath to uphold the Constitution means, and no intention whatsoever of brooking any interference from “higher loyalty” types who are in reality nothing more than shifty, corrupt weasels maneuvering in support of a hyper-partisan agenda. It’s like this:

Barr had apparently masterminded the most inept cover-up in history, first by accurately laying out the outcome of the special counsel’s investigation. Then, after some light redactions (none instigated by the president), by releasing the report to the public so the entire world could read it.

Now, if a fresh observer to the Russia collusion circus only heard from Democrats, he might not know that the Mueller report had been public for weeks — sifted through and debated extensively. He certainly wouldn’t know that no criminality was uncovered. But most people heard something else. And Barr’s greatest sin had been preempting the collusion spin for the first time.

In his initial letter, the attorney general informed the public, before media was able to manipulate and confuse the core findings, that, despite its best efforts, the special counsel — an open-ended, unimpeded investigation with virtually no oversight — couldn’t find evidence to corroborate the prevailing myth that had been perpetuated for more than two years by Democrats and the political media.

By accurately conveying that the investigation had exonerated Trump and his administration of criminal conspiracy or coordination with the Russians, two years of ostensibly serious reporting was exposed as little more than resistance fan fiction. Rather than take a moment’s self-reflection about how their actions had caused unprecedented political chaos, undermined trust in the electoral system and crowded out legitimate coverage of the presidency, the entire collusion industry just moved its frenzied focus onto obstruction.

Well, under oath, the attorney general confirmed that he had spoken to Mueller on the phone and that the special counsel had been “very clear” that the AG’s letter laying out the conclusions was not inaccurate. There’s been no evidence to contradict his claim.

The AG’s letter had also accurately conveyed that Mueller, who it seems spent a lot of his efforts ferreting out unseemly Trumpian outbursts rather than finding nefarious Russians, punted on charges of obstruction. Volume II of the Mueller report, on the issue of obstruction, reads like a political document meant to incite Democrats into doing what the investigation did not. And that is Barr’s other sin: refusing to play Mueller’s game.

Anybody still wondering why they hate him? The most effective endorsement for Barr, though, comes from none other than the irredeemable scumbucket Adam Schittforbrains:

The attorney general of the United States misled the country about an investigation implicating the president. Then he lied to Congress. Then he did something worse: He effectively said that the president of the United States is above the law.

William Barr should resign.

When Mueller finished his nearly two-year investigation, Barr could have released Mueller’s own summaries. He instead chose to write his own summary, and one that mischaracterized Mueller’s findings and conclusions.

Not according to Mueller it didn’t, Schittbag.

In his March 27 letter, Mueller stated that Barr’s actions had undermined a central purpose of the special counsel regulations, to “assure full public confidence in the outcome” of the investigation. Mueller was right, but Barr’s actions and statements have done far worse than that. They have undermined public confidence in the independence of the DOJ and the fair administration of justice.

Nope, not hardly. That was already taken care of by Comey and his filthy crew, scrambling around desperately to get Ogabe and Hillary!™, among plenty of others, clear of a due and proper reckoning for election-tampering by using the DoJ to illegally spy on Trump. Among plenty of other things.

In testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 1, Barr gave no convincing defense of his actions, nor his false statements to Congress, nor why the obstruction of justice laws do not apply to a president who instructs those around him to lie in an effort to conceal his actions. Instead, he said the president can end a criminal investigation simply because he thinks it’s “unfair” or unwarranted: “I think the department’s position would be that the president can direct the termination or the replacement of a special counsel.”

Seems a little Constitutional refresher might be helpful for ya, genius: the DoJ is part of the Executive branch, which is run by and subordinate to, y’know, the CHIEF EXECUTIVE. He can fire, hire, direct, initiate, terminate, or rearrange anyfucking thing he wants in the branch he is in charge of—within the Constitutional constraints placed on his own office, of course.

That’s more than enough of that garbage, I think; whenever we want any more shit from Schitt, we can always squeeze his enormous head. The day I’m willing to humbly sit back and take lessons on the Constitution from a devious Democrat-Socialist mediocrity like him is…well, I assure one and all that that day just ain’t coming.

Go get ’em, Mr Barr. Go get ’em all, each and every one; let the guilty parties be brought to justice, and cram it all right down Schitt and Co’s throats until they choke and fucking die.

Update! “Lied to Congress,” was it? Bullschitt.

The real problem is that Mueller wanted Barr to execute a public-relations hit on Trump and wasn’t happy that Barr confined the summary to the bottom-line conclusions. Barr said he didn’t want to attempt to summarize the entire report and would let the report speak for itself. He has never deviated from that explanation and Mueller’s letter points to no inaccuracy or misleading information.

Thus, Barr’s answer was 100 percent accurate.

Barr has now revealed that Mueller made a conscious choice to salt the report with unsegregated grand jury material. It wasn’t until after Barr released his March 24 summary that Mueller redacted the summaries from the report. Barr wasn’t interested in making a press release for the president’s enemies. That makes him an enemy of the juggernaut. That’s his real crime.

We just learned that the Justice Department sent a less-redacted Mueller report to Congress and that the Democrats haven’t bothered to read it. Instead, they now want a legal battle over Barr’s refusal to turn over a completely unredacted report.

To be clear, they don’t want the report, which is 98 percent unredacted in the public form. They want the fight.

They’re all in a very deep hole, and have no clue how to get themselves out other than to just keep right on digging.

Share

Fords and Chevvies and fuckups, oh my!

Remember the other night when I waxed nostalgic about the nearly-forgotten Ford/Chevy rivalry? Of course, that’s not to say that there aren’t still a few of us geezer types determined to keep those flames ablaze. There’s a largish number of street rod/rat rod/classic car whippersnappers out there who feel likewise, as well.

And then we have those benighted fools who take the matter WAY too seriously.

BEDFORD CO., VA — An argument over which truck is better, Ford or Chevy, escalated and ended with gunshots in a Virginia home on Easter. 

According to WSET, prosecutors said it happened during dinner involving Mark Turner, his girlfriend, her son and the son’s girlfriend. 

Turner and his girlfriend’s son got into an argument about trucks. 

“The allegation is that there was alcohol involved

Oh, go on. You can’t POSSIBLY mean that.

and a dispute began against Logan Bailey, the son of the girlfriend, and Mr. Turner about what type of vehicle is best, Chevy versus Ford,” attorney Wes Nance said. 

Investigators said Turner pulled out a knife and threatened Bailey. Turner’s girlfriend stepped between her boyfriend and her son. 

Turner stabbed his girlfriend in the lowerback, leaving a six-inch wound, according to Nance. 

Then, things got even worse.

And believe it or not, they did. They really, really did. Body count as of this writing, near as I can make out: eight gunshot wounds; at least one stab wound; and one (1) skull cracked.

I was originally hipped to this whole embarrassment via MisHum’s ONT link to a different report, over which version I am going to be forced to do a little annoyed harrumphing here.

Since the dawn of time, the battle between Chevrolet and Ford has burned brightly. Legend has the age-old, mullet-inspired argument has produced absolutely no winners. But a plethora of losers. Now, yet another battle has been fought, this time at the hands of a Virginia man with a knife and a gun.

Bold mine, because…uhhh, dude, what the fuck? That HAD to be written by some kid trying to be funny, blissfully unaware that when this rivalry started the menfolk were wearing the back and sides high and tight, and no gentleman would dream of venturing out of the house without a hat anyway. Mullets didn’t even exist back then, for crying out loud. The kind of long, flowing locks the mullet ‘do requires were for women only in those days; any adult male who tried to cross that particular line would have found himself with way more trouble on his hands to worry about than Fords and Chevys, with a quickness.

On the bright side, however, the Drive youngster’s version of events does include a most amusing mugshot of the ignernt knucklehead in less than showroom condition after having his empty head clouted by the po-po, so there’s that. The cub reporter mentions Turner being “struck” by something yclept “a flexible baton round”; since I have not the slightest idee what the devil that might even be, I’m just gonna assume he got his bell rung by an Asp baton, which pretty much all cops everywhere carry.

All in all, I’m harboring the suspicion that this sad-sack Turner was just looking for a reason to get busy shooting and cutting those other folks to begin with, and likely had been working himself up to it for a good long while. He was probably just waiting for the night he got hisself likkered and doped up enough to go ahead and get the party started, I’m guessing.

It all got me to thinking that I need to establish a brand-new category here for this sort of thing—by which I mean Ford-specific items, not slope-browed ridgerunners venting the ol’ spleen on their kinfolk over little to nothing at all. So I did: Fords forever, baby!

Oh, and: Skeptic, I’ll getcha for that one someday, buddy. Heh. Honestly, all kidding around aside, I’d never heard that zinger before.

Share

Looks like another one I’ll be stomping the whole concept of “fair use” over

Fortunately, it’s an unusually long ‘un, so I don’t feel quite so bad about it. Kurt sets the stage with an intriguing first-person recounting of the 1992 LA riots.

I was a first-year law student, back a year from the Gulf War, and I had just joined the California Army National Guard. My unit was the 3rd Battalion, 160th Infantry, and we got called up early the first night and were on the streets for three long weeks. Making it even more delightful was the fact that the unit was in Inglewood, which was pretty much on fire. They burned most everything around, except our armory – that would have gone badly for them – and the Astro Burger.

My battalion commander grabbed then-First Lieutenant Schlichter, and we went all over the city in his humvee as he led his deployed and dispersed troops. Our soldiers came, in large part, from the areas most effected by the riots, and they were notably unpleasant to the thugs and criminals who quickly discovered our guys had no patience for nonsense. One dummy discovered that the hard way when he tried to run over some Guard soldiers from another battalion; he had a closed casket funeral.

The city went insane. Order simply ceased to exist. It was Lord of the Flies. I remember a cop totally breaking down because everything was completely out of control.

But I had a M16A1 – a real assault rifle – and I had a bunch of buddies with M16A1s. The regular folks … not so much. The decent people of LA were terrified, and with good reason. See, the dirty little secret of civilization is that it’s designed to maintain order when 99.9% of folks are orderly. But, say, if just 2% of folks stop playing by the rules…uh oh. Say LA’s population was 15 million in 1992…that’s 300,000 bad guys. There were maybe 20,000 cops in all the area agencies then, plus 20,000 National Guard soldiers and airman, plus another 10,000 active soldiers and Marines the feds brought in. Law enforcement is based on the concept that most people will behave and that the crooks will be overwhelmed by sheer numbers of officers. But in the LA riots, law enforcement was massively outnumbered. Imposing order took time.

And until then, our citizens were on their own, at the mercy of the mob. Betting that the cavalry was going to come save you was a losing bet.

LA’s Korean shopkeepers knew that. They operated many small businesses in some of the least fashionable areas of Los Angeles, and they were already widely hated by activists, being scapegoated for problems and pathologies that long pre-dated their immigration to Southern California. So, they became targets for the mobs.

Bad decision by the mobs.

See, most of these Koreans had done their mandatory service in the Republic of Korea’s Army. Those ROK soldiers are the real deal – the Norks are not a theoretical threat and the South Korean army does not spend a lot of time talking about feelings. They were some solid dudes. So, when the local dirtbags showed up for some casual looting, they noticed the rooftops were lined with hardcore guys packing some serious heat, including the kind of scary rifles that the Democrats want to ban.

The Rooftop Koreans.

It did not take long for the bad guys to realize that the Rooftop Koreans were not playing games – they were playing for keeps. The mob went away in search of softer targets.

There’s a lesson there.

Boy, isn’t there. Isn’t there just. The denouement:

It’s your duty to be prepared to defend our community. Your duty. Yes, being a citizen of a free country is sometimes hard. Too bad. Tighten up and be ready and able to pick up a weapon. Whether it’s a riots and disaster, or whether it’s some scumbag who decides to shoot up your house of worship or a shopping mall, it’s on you.

You have a job to do when chaos comes – no shirking your responsibility and outsourcing it to the local police or the Army. Being a citizen is not a spectator sport.

Now, the left does not see things that way. The mere idea of a good guy with a gun makes them wet themselves. The left hates the notion that we citizens might take personal ownership of, and responsibility for, the security of our own country – that we might act like citizens. See, citizens are unruly. Stubborn. Uppity. We’re hard to control at the best of times. Armed, 300 million of us are impossible to control, unless we consent to it.

Now, the Founders, who enshrined the natural right of free men to keep and bear arms in our Bill of Rights preceded only by the rights of free speech and freedom of religion, knew this. To them, an armed citizenry that is prepared, mentally and logistically, to respond to threats to the people is a feature.

To the liberal elite, it is a bug.

And there’s a reason for that, too, which can easily be inferred from this picture of how the minions of exactly the kind of socialist shitrapy people like AOC, Buttplug, Omar, Obama, Pelousy, HILLARY!™, &C intend to inflict on us respond to even peaceably-expressed dissent:

Venezuela-victim.jpg


Gee, wonder if that poor bloody wreck at left might wish he and his fellow protesters had been armed.

Share

A matriarchy, if you can keep it

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.

In contemporary America, women and men still act out ancient roles. From the point of view of the men, the society is a matriarchy: Women have physically less demanding jobs — with the sole exception of childbirth, by now a rare event in the average woman’s life. Women sustain far fewer injuries on the job, are not required to go to war, take better care of their health, and for these reasons and many others enjoy a lifespan significantly longer than that of men.

In this society, men use their physical strength, when necessary, on women’s behalf. Women claim to be equal partners when that suits them and claim to be entitled to special consideration when that suits them. They insist on autonomy in maintaining or aborting pregnancies, but at the same time, they determine the fathers’ duties-and rights, if any. Women claim child support. They can either demand or impede fathers’ continuing involvement with their offspring, as the women see fit. The result is that women have advantages over men in child custody suits, just as they have learned to use charges of child sexual abuse and domestic violence.

Though dozens of studies show that women, by their own account, initiate violence against their domestic partners as often as (if not more often than) men, and cause as much injury when weapons are involved, somehow the social mythologies of this country keep that fact from gaining broad public attention, let alone credence.

But worst of all, in terms of the interactions of daily life, are women’s emotional demands on men. At home, men routinely sit through harangues that demonstrate women’s greater verbal skills and emotional agility. Men, inarticulate, try to figure out what is required of them in a given situation. Not by accident, verbal therapies in this society archetypically began with men listening and women speaking. Even as little boys, males learn to be in awe of girls’ verbal fluency. The feeling of ineptness, of being no match for females at the verbal and emotional level, is the common inheritance of all but a few exceptional males.

At home and on the job, men are reminded of their emotional inferiority and verbal inadequacy. Nowhere are they as quick as women in their emotional responses, their verbalization of those responses, or their acuity in gauging the dynamics of interaction or situation. And constantly they are reminded of this disadvantage. Women berate them, browbeat them, even physically attack them out of frustration at these characteristics.

Somehow it is always men who are to blame. Even in the schoolyard, little boys suffer from puzzlement, pain, and ostracism as little girls make comments and express expectations boys cannot quite grasp or respond to. Thus, boys are trained into a lifelong awareness of inferiority. At home, mothers demand expression of their sons’ and husbands’ feelings and berate them when they are confused and reticent. At work, women exchange knowing smiles signifying that men ‘Just don’t get it.”

Why, what kind of despicable, sexist, misogynist, knuckledragging PIG of a male could POSSIBLY come up with such outrageous twaddle? It’s extraordinary, even for them.

Ummmmmm…oops.

Dumbass Progtard harpies psychologically castrate our boys; revile them horribly and ceaselessly; shame them for crimes they didn’t commit, and most likely never will; relentlessly drive home their supposed worthlessness and degeneracy; suppress any and all healthy expression of their natural masculinity; encourage them to wear dresses, “explore their feminine side,” and have their dicks chopped off; and just generally make a career out of denouncing, discouraging, and tormenting them at every possible turn. Instead of nurturing them, encouraging them, and appreciating them, they have drawn the boundaries of decent society so as to exclude them.

And then, these boys’ heads all aswirl with confusion, fear, and self-loathing, the harpies turn around and wonder why something like this happens.

Toxic feminism has one hell of a lot to answer for, seems to me.

(Via Insty)

Share

Wrack and ruin and race

Did somebody mention barbarians just now? Why yes, I believe someone did.

In 1989, the Virginia Beach party animals called it Greek Week — one of dozens of such gatherings of black college fraternities and sororities up and down the East Coast over a several-year period. All leaving crime, trash, destruction, and excuses in their wake as they were run out of one town after another.

Today, local reporters are eager to minimize the violence from that time or attribute it to white racist police.

But back then, no one in Virginia Beach questioned whether 50,000 to 100,000 black people were creating incredible levels of mayhem by destroying 100 shops, fighting cops, and breaking the law.

They killed a horse. They threw a cinder block at its head.

Um. Well. Okay, then.

Reporters had trouble describing the epic racial violence and hostility that 40,000 black people brought to Virginia Beach in April of 2013. So let’s start here: Black College Beach Week was organized by black people, for black people, promoted by black people, on black radio stations, at black colleges.

They sent buses to pick up members of black fraternities and sororities. And they brought them all to Virginia Beach. And they raised holy, violent, unapologetic, race-conscious hell.

On Fox43 news, a black woman said mayhem and lawlessness at Black Beach Week is nothing to worry about. “I think it’s still fun,” said Kharizma Jackson. “It happens when you get a lot of people together this stuff happens everywhere you go. It’s like that.”

Well, a lot of SOME people, actually. Best not to talk about that, right? Otherwise, one of those “national conversations” the Left is so enamored of might ensue, with all the accompanying risk of a little truth coming out. But as Virginian-Pilot reporter Mark Morrell said, it doesn’t matter; there’s really no need.

PSA: There were no persons of any other race on the videos perpetrating those crimes. None. Not stealing the bikes, or starting the brawls, or any other illegal, crazy action. Have I mentioned any race at all? Nope!!! Because you know exactly what I’m talking about, I most certainly don’t have to. You can identify me all you want, I’m not scared, and I don’t hide behind my screen — or my newspaper. There is an elephant in the room, Pilot. WHATCHAGONNADOOOOO ABOUT IT???

There is some good news here, and it’s at the beginning of the piece. Lest anyone think that the the Va Beach chaos is in any away unique, or an outlier, I will first commend your attention to the requiem I wrote for the end of the annual Myrtle Beach Spring Rally, reachable via the Leatherballs link up top. MYB was one of the longest-running rallies in the country, until it was stopped. I went every single year myself, and loved it. Never failed to have a good time there, each and every year, for well over a decade.

With my Outlaw Biker article, I had committed my first, last, and only act of true journalism: I interviewed people, reported the facts as they were laid out for me, and tried to look at both the impact of the events and where they might lead in the future. The thing is, though, there’s a story behind the story that was given to me, and then presented. I didn’t find this out until much later, and there’s a reason for that.

See, for all those years the MYB Rally had been a gathering mainly of what most would probably think of as old-school biker types: burly, long-haired, tattooed, leather-clad Harley riders. Lots of MC’s were represented, from true One Percenter clubs and their affiliates to the Blue Knights, although patches were generally not flown in the interest of keeping the peace. The thing happened in early to mid May, and the official Rally itself was run by the NC and SC branches of the HD Dealers Association.

The Rally was relatively sparsely attended; I myself only ever went out to it once or twice. Most of us were there for the riding, the bars, the bands, the asphalt flat track races at Myrtle Beach Speedway, and the general atmosphere of raucous, rollicking good fellowship. Oh, and to gawk at all the other Harleys. And the girls, most definitely to include the bare tits that can be found at any biker event.

The week after the H-D event was always known as Black Bike Week. For this one, a somewhat different and darker atmosphere prevailed. The problems at Black Bike Week were legendary. Shoplifting, out of control near-riots, assaults, stabbings, and even murders, discourtesy and outright belligerence, dine-and-dash incidents—all of these things saw a rise during BBW for which the descriptor “stratospheric” is wholly inadequate. Waitresses, bartenders, and retail staff put in for vacation en masse that week; if they couldn’t finagle the time off, they called in sick. Many establishments made it their practice to just shut down for the week every year.

The Myrtle Beach town officials and influential businesspeople eventually decided enough was enough, and started discussing ways to shut the thing down. One problem was noted right off the bat, and, as Morrell said above, you already know what it was. No way could Myrtle Beach put an end to the wantonly destructive, costly, and downright dangerous catastrophe for the area that BBW had become while allowing the H-D event to continue. Nobody needed a crystal ball to see the howls of outrage over “racism,” the national bad press, and the lawsuits coming.

So the decision was made to avoid all the controversy by killing them both off. This didn’t work out too well for the city of Myrtle Beach. The H-D Rally and its accompanying events just relocated to the surrounding beach towns like Ocean Drive, Cherry Grove, and Murrell’s Inlet—and so did the spike in revenues they generated. Attendance fell off at first, but gradually bikerdom got the word and the numbers came back up; oddly, the name didn’t even change. Even Black Bike Week is still going strong up in the town of Atlantic Beach just north of Myrtle, which back in the days of segregation was traditionally the place where blacks went for their beach vacations.

I don’t know if the accompanying anarchy, disorder, and lawlessness are still prominent features of BBW as well. But I bet I could make a pretty good guess.

Share

Prisoner of our own barbarians

Civilization versus the brats spoiled by its successful advance.

It is by now a familiar cliché, long propagated by Western thinkers and the media, that Europe and European culture are responsible for a multitude of ills. Europeans have been raised to detest themselves, certain that they have inflicted evil for which they must relentlessly atone. This evil is known by two terms: colonialism and imperialism, both driven by capitalism. Nothing today is more European than this self-hatred, this passion for cursing and lacerating ourselves. Yet, by issuing their anathemas, the high priests of defamation only signal their membership in the universe they reject. How can we fail to see that we take a strange pride in being the worst? Self-denigration is all too clearly a form of indirect self-glorification. Evil comes only from us; others are always motivated by sympathy, goodwill, and candor. Such is the paternalism of the guilty conscience: seeing ourselves as the kings of infamy is still a way of staying on the crest of history. Europe remains messianic in a minor mode, campaigning for its own weakness. Barbarism is the European’s great pride; he denies that others are ever barbarous, always finding attenuating circumstances for them, which also denies them all responsibility.

The terrible presumption of the cry “we are civilized” too often meant, earlier in European history, that “we are superior to you.”

Terrible presumption? I’d argue that it happens to be the simple truth, actually. Which does NOT amount to a license to exterminatye inferior, more barbaric cultures, or otherwise victimize or denigrate them. Being fallible and human, though, probably makes such victimization pretty much inevitable.

It also happens that the bourgeois, in turn, can transform himself into a barbarian under the pretext of defending civilization, as when torture is sanctioned in the fight against terrorism. When that happens, there is a grave danger of adopting the enemy’s ways of seeing and doing, the better to defeat him; of setting up a system of generalized surveillance of citizens on the pretext of protecting them; of weakening the marvelous edifice constructed by the founders of the open society. “When fighting a monster, beware of becoming a monster yourself,” warned Nietzsche.

This is an oversimplification. Often, when fighting monsters, the pursuit of victory requires turning their own monstrous methods—their own inhumanity—against them. But I believe it’s possible to make use of those methods without succumbing to them—to recognize the necessity, while careful to maintain the proper abhorrence for them. Thus:

The civilized man must constantly look barbarism in the face, to remember where he comes from, what he has escaped—and what he could become again.

Even more importantly, to see that he does not allow civilization to be overrun by barbarism.

Two dreams confront each other in our Western democracies. One, European, wants to eradicate human malice solely by means of dialogue, tolerance, and constant reminders of past horrors. The other, American, wants to put the darker powers of human nature in the service of social perfectibility—a creative barbarism, analogous to Greek catharsis. An angelism of niceness on the one hand; the channeling and sublimation of violence, on the other. Such is our predicament. We are urged to defend the law, civilization, and decency against savagery, while knowing perfectly well that we need savagery to awaken us. We want to defeat the barbarian and also preserve him, so as to preserve the energy he instills in us. He is both detestable and desirable.

Such irresolvable paradoxes are a part of life on this planet, natural and inescapable. They can be examined; they can be analyzed. Their terms can maybe even be adjusted somewhat—their effects mitigated, their iron grip on us loosened slightly. But they can never be made to just go away, as hubristic, foolish Proggie seems to believe.

Share

Categories

Archives

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

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

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