Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Click Here To Save $15 at Ammo.com

No consent from losers

While we’re re-running oldies but goodies from 2016 and all, have another. Might want to find some really dark goggles, even a welder’s mask, to read it with though; the irony is so blazingly, piercingly incandescent it could easily blind somebody.

Donald Trump likes to sort the world into winners and losers, which isn’t a bad way of thinking about democracy. Winners and losers of elections have essential responsibilities in functioning democracies. Winners do not exact revenge on their opponent by, say, abusing the powers of their office and jailing that opponent, as the Republican candidate threatened to do at the second presidential debate. Losers do not refuse to accept the results of a vote judged free and fair by a country’s governing institutions.

Yet the Republican candidate has spent the past week—really, much of the general election—strongly suggesting that he will not accept a loss to Hillary Clinton. He has repeatedly claimed that “Crooked Hillary” is “rigging” the election with help from the media and a global network of power brokers. The rigging, he says with certainty but no compelling evidence, consists of the coordinated assassination of Trump’s character, as well as looming voter fraud. And the rigging will, in Trump’s telling, produce nothing less than the dissolution of the republic; the United States will be overrun by immigrants and ISIS. Trump’s message is that the election will be stolen from his supporters, as will the country. Many Trump supporters expect this outcome; roughly half aren’t confident that ballots will be accurately counted on Election Day.

Donald Trump’s loose talk of imprisoning Clinton and his preemptive rejection of the election’s outcome pose one of the most serious challenges to U.S. democracy in recent memory. They endanger the “democratic bargain,” to quote the authors of Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. That study examines how losing works in democracies around the globe, and the bargain at issue “calls for winners who are willing to ensure that losers are not too unhappy and for losers, in exchange, to extend their consent to the winners’ right to rule.” This bargain is also one of the core components of democracy.

Of course, now we know that the conspiracy to rig the election went far, far beyond Her Herness, the media and “inaccurately” counted votes. Its tentacles extended deep into the Obama junta, the DoJ, the CIA, and elsewhere in the darkest recesses of the Deep State labyrinth. The investigation into the corrupt, seditious plot is only beginning, with no guarantee that we’ll ever see justice done. And that doesn’t even touch the subsequent soft-coup attempt by those same players, a desperate ploy to not only conceal their seditious crimes but to hinder and ultimately remove a duly-elected President under false pretenses.

All of this—ALL of it, mind you—because the Democrat-Socialist Party, NOT Trump, flatly and traitorously refuses to abide by the results of any election it can’t swindle its way into “winning.”

This is why the democratic bargain is so important: Winners do not suppress losers, which means losers can hope to be winners in the future. As a result, the losers’ doubts about the legitimacy of the political system gradually recede as they prepare for the next election.

But if the losing candidate doesn’t uphold his or her side of the bargain by recognizing the winner’s right to rule, that acute loss of faith in democracy among the candidate’s supporters can become chronic, potentially devolving into civil disobedience, political violence, and a crisis of democratic legitimacy. How the loser responds is especially critical because losers naturally have the most grievances about the election.

“[I]n the aftermath of a loss, there is plenty of kindling for irresponsible politicians to set fire to,” Bowler notes. “Most politicians who lose elections recognize this potential for mischief, and so they ordinarily make a creditable run at helping to keep matters calm.”

Ahh, but in this case it’s not just the losing politician acting “irresponsibly.” It is the entire party—along with its Praetorian Media allies; the overwhelming majority of its supporters; its already-elected officeholders in positions both high and low across the entire country; and the unelected officials seeded throughout the federal bureacracy who are either party members or sympathizers.

Then we come to a yearningly winsome recap of Honest Al AlGore and his forced “concession” after his loss in 2000. Yes, it’s every bit as full of shit as you would expect.

In December 2000, for example, Al Gore conceded defeat to George W. Bush after one of the country’s closest and most divisive elections. The Supreme Court halted the recount of votes in Florida and effectively handed the presidency to Bush, even though Gore won the national popular vote and had good reason to argue that the court’s decision was politically motivated.

The SC “halted the recount” after, what, six or seven previous ones had failed to gin up enough fraudulent ballots to convincingly hand the swine Gore the election. Inevitably, the Atlantic also trots out the good old “popular vote” hobbyhorse for another good flogging, the problem being that THERE IS NO RELEVANT “POPULAR VOTE” IN A US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION—as is explicitly mandated by the US Constitution for some very excellent reasons. The Electoral College, God willing and in defiance of the most devious efforts of those Constitution-loving Democrat-Socialists, will be with us for a while longer, for which everyone not interested in being governed according to the whim of the residents of the nation’s blighted urban areas should be deeply thankful. Yet more twaddlelicious bullshit then ensues:

By the time Clinton’s statement was delivered, all those bitter complaints had been removed from the text, save for brief mentions of disagreement with the court’s ruling and the need for bipartisan election reforms. Clinton’s team clearly recognized that it was time to put out fires, not to leave kindling lying around. “President-elect Bush and Vice President Gore showed what is best about America,” Clinton said. “In this election, the American people were closely divided. The outcome was decided by a Supreme Court that was closely divided. But the essential unity of our Nation was reflected in the words and values of those who fought this great contest.”

The SC, “closely divided,” yeah. As I recall, the vote that decided things ended up being 7-2. That, after our noble Albert “Arnold The Pig” AlGore had duly made his election-stealing preparations beforehand, by flying teams of lawyers out to certain places ready to contest the results by any grubby means necessary. Why, how very big of this noble Knight-Protector Of America Democracy to graciously concede after EVERY SINGLE LAST AVENUE likely to enable him to hoodoo his way into the Oval Office had been thoroughly exhausted, and not one moment before! Gee, what a guy!

Here’s the fact of the matter: Gore, his army of legal-beagle rumpswabs, and his criminal conspiracy masquerading as a legitimate political party happily dragged the country through every fetid puddle of lawyerized sewage they could find FOR MONTHS before finally backing down and slinking away. The Atlantic’s zealous attempt at turd-polishing aside, Al Gore remains exactly what he always was and always will be: a sleazy, slimy, duplicitous, dimwitted, professional-politician hack. Nothing less. And damned sure nothing more.

As for that “essential unity” bushwa, I suppose we must in fairness recognize a distinction betwixt Gore’s eventual if reluctant submission to defeat and the unhinged, delusional rejection of American electoral reality we’re being subjected to now. Bad as Gore and the rest of the Demonrat den of iniquity all were in 2000, their successors are unquestionably much, much worse. The distinction is one not of kind but of degree, yes. But at this point AlGore should at least have developed sense enough to take what he can get.

Share

Fundamentally transformed

I’m having a VERY hard time not just throwing blockquote tags around this 2016 Myron Magnet classic and swiping it entire.

We have lost the government we learned about in civics class, with its democratic election of representatives to do the voters’ will in framing laws, which the president vows to execute faithfully, unless the Supreme Court rules them unconstitutional. That small government of limited powers that the Founders designed, hedged with checks and balances, hasn’t operated for a century. All its parts still have their old names and appear to be carrying out their old functions. But in fact, a new kind of government has grown up inside the old structure, like those parasites hatched in another organism that grow by eating up their host from within, until the adult creature bursts out of the host’s carcass. This transformation is not an evolution but a usurpation.

What has now largely displaced the Founders’ government is what’s called the Administrative State—a transformation premeditated by its main architect, Woodrow Wilson. The thin-skinned, self-righteous college-professor president, who thought himself enlightened far beyond the citizenry, dismissed the Declaration of Independence’s inalienable rights as so much outmoded “nonsense,” and he rejected the Founders’ clunky constitutional machinery as obsolete. (See “It’s Not Your Founding Fathers’ Republic Any More,” Summer 2014.) What a modern country needed, he said, was a “living constitution” that would keep pace with the fast-changing times by continual, Darwinian adaptation, as he called it, effected by federal courts acting as a permanent constitutional convention.

Modernity, Wilson thought, demanded efficient government by independent, nonpartisan, benevolent, hyper-educated experts, applying the latest scientific, economic, and sociological knowledge to industrial capitalism’s unprecedented problems, too complex for self-governing free citizens to solve. Accordingly, he got Congress to create executive-branch administrative agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, to do the job. During the Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt proliferated such agencies, from the National Labor Relations Board and the Federal Housing Administration to the Federal Communications Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, to put the New Deal into effect. Before they could do so, though, FDR had to scare the Supreme Court into stretching the Constitution’s Commerce Clause beyond recognition, putting the federal government in charge of all economic activity, not just interstate transactions. He also had to pressure the justices to allow Congress to delegate legislative power—which is, in effect, what the lawmakers did by setting up agencies with the power to make binding rules. The Constitution, of course, vests all legislative power in Congress, empowering it to make laws, not to make legislators.

As these agencies have metastasized, they have borne out not a single premise that justified their creation, and their increasingly glaring failure has drawn citizens’ angry attention to them. Expert? As a New Deal congressman immediately recognized with shock, many of those who staffed the Administrative State were kids just out of law school, with zero real-world experience or technical knowledge. Efficient? Can-do America, which built the Empire State Building in 11 months and ramped up airplane production during World War II from 2,000 in 1939 to nearly 100,000 in 1944, now takes years of bureaucratic EPA busywork to repair a bridge or lay a pipeline, and who knows how many businesses never expand or even start because the maze of government regulation is too daunting and costly to navigate? Only last year, EPA “experts” fecklessly stood by as workers under their supervision accidentally dumped 3 million gallons of toxic wastewater into the Colorado River, and the agency vouchsafed not a word of warning to downstream Colorado and New Mexico officials for an entire day before the poisonous, fluorescent-orange flood hit them. Over at Veterans Affairs, those who’ve fought for their country die in droves while waiting for medical care. But what’s the problem? asks agency head Robert MacDonald blithely. After all, at ever-popular Disneyland, “do they measure the number of hours you wait in line?”

Ensuring the citizens’ health and safety? Where is the Food and Drug Administration as counterfeit medicines and medical supplies from China infiltrate our hospitals? As for the infamously dysfunctional Transportation Security Administration, its Keystone Kops’ regularly reported inability to spot journalists carrying banned weapons onto airplanes, while they are too busy fondling travelers’ private parts or undressing grannies, is a standing national joke—on us. We lost our constitutional safeguards for this?

We didn’t lose ’em, exactly; we gave ’em away, sitting back and watching passively as, gradually, they were stolen one after another after another.

Share

How it all starts

There’s a bad moon on the rise.

Senator Kneepads is about to get an education on delusional grandstanding.

“I also have as part of my background and experience working on this issue, when I was attorney general [of California], and we put resources into allowing law enforcement to actually knock on the doors of people who were on two lists — a list where they had been found by a court to be a danger to themselves and others and another list where they were precluded and prohibited from owning a gun because of a conviction that prohibited that ownership,” she added.

Harris commented that she would send law enforcement door-to-door to confiscate guns from illicit people.
“Those lists were combined and then we sent law enforcement out to take those guns, because, listen, we have to deal with this on all levels, but we have to do this with a sense of urgency and we have to act. Enough with the talk,” she said.

Let’s be clear here, if you’re a felon in possession, or you’ve failed a court hearing on your sanity, with counsel present on both sides, I have no problem with this. But Sen. Kneepads isn’t talking about that. Those people should have ALREADY had their guns taken away. She’s talking about doing this with “Red Flag” laws, which violate all constitutional and common law, and every rule of jurisprudence going back to before Magna Carta. (Common Core grads, look it up.)

That illegal abomination of ideas is going to get Officer Friendly a face full of buckshot, and he’ll deserve it, every single time. And I hope it happens, until the cops wise up and tell the politicians they’re under arrest for violating everyone’s civil rights.

As I said in Aesop’s comments, Officer Friendly already knows all about that face-full of buckshot, he doesn’t care for the idea, and so has gotten himself busy in several at-risk locales to officially announce his desire to be included out of the festivities before they commence (examples here and here, with further common-sense analysis from a Utah LEO here). Now, not all cops are as bothered by the prospect of betraying their oaths and finishing the Constitution off for good, of course. Maybe even a majority of them aren’t, I dunno. However it works out, though, I’m confident that, for whatever reason, enough of them will sell their souls to Gun Grabber Satan as to create a real mishegoss of a mess of a clusterfuck when we get down to nut-cutting time. So, in sum:

This is not going to go like they planned when the entire country goes all Flight 93 on them.

The look of surprise on their faces will be priceless, and the last thing that goes through their minds will likely be 158 grains of lead.

Minds? Hell, if they had those, we wouldn’t even be talking about this crap at all.

Share

Forecast: increasing spiciness, with a strong chance of Hell on Earth

Big John has his latest CW2.0 Weather Report up. It’s a link-rich roundup that, taken all in all, might very well freeze your gizzard.

Share

Wait, he’s still alive?

Tired, raddled old has-been pops off for no good reason, beclowns self.


Yeah, whatever. In reality, though, we should take Lee’s squalid little rant seriously, because against all odds he’s actually quite correct: what he’s threatening is without doubt precisely what the Left has planned for us, should Americans ever make the almost certainly-fatal mistake of allowing them to seize power again.

So yeah, preach it, Tommy-rot, and thanks a pantload for the heads-up. Read it, learn it, live it, Real Americans.

Via Breitbart, who mischaracterizes Tommy-rot as Mertley Croi’s “frontman,” when he was actually just the drummer.

Share

But is anyboy listening?

The good word on Shitholimore, straight from the horse’s mouth, no less.

On Monday, street reporter Austen Fletcher, a.k.a “Fleccas,” released about ten minutes of footage of West Baltimore residents talking about the conditions of the area and how they felt about President Donald Trump’s recent comments concerning West Baltimore — which the mainstream media and many top Democrats framed as racist.

“Baltimore city is definitely ‘Murderland,’” she later added. “There are contracts out here for nothing, to kill someone for less than $100. The statement is definitely true. I got my gun permit eight years ago. You really have to feel some type of way that you have to be armed to live in Baltimore city — granted, mine is legal.”

“I saw a man rob a man, right here,” a man working from behind a shield at a convenience store said. “A customer went out of the door, and this guy, he just opened the door for him and put a gun to his head and he robbed him right in his car.”

“I feel like nobody cares about this area here, they’re not concerned about us,” a middle-aged female said.

And, at least when it comes to professional-politician scum like Elijah Cummings, you would be entirely correct.

Two men then complained that Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) has been representing the area for 25 years and has nothing to show for it.

“He allocated $4.6 billion for illegal immigrants but he hasn’t donated any money right for North Avenue … West Baltimore. Where has he been at?

Why, in his palatial, taxpayer-funded digs in Mordor On The Potomac, where else? That’s the natural habitat of ALL orcs.

When asked about President Trump’s comments, one of the men answered, “Me personally, I want him to say things like that because it’s true…I don’t have no problems with the man. I really respect him as a man because he’s upfront, he’s truthful. They keep wanting to say, ‘he a racist, he a racist, he a racist’; that’s not the problem, especially with black people, because I don’t see white men killing my own kind, you know what I mean.”

Whether inadvertently or not, this man just underlined the most telling point of all; he says he wants Trump to keep saying these things because they’re true…and that’s the very reason the Demonrats demand that he STOP saying them. Nonetheless, the fact remains: Democrat-Socialists are interested in those they’ve made victims only as long as they can be used for Democrat-Socialist political purposes, and not one second beyond. The moment their political usefulness has expired, they might just as well expire themselves—bodily.

Anybody who wants to go beyond politesse and civility and just call that sort of thing evil, I’ll put a yes to it myself.

Share

Hef, spinning

Know how I always ask if there’s really NOTHING the killjoy Left won’t leave alone, NOTHING they won’t try to ruin?

Well.

Playboy has abandoned Hugh Hefner’s legacy and hired a team of millennials to transform it into a woke publication with a focus on social consciousness — while still continuing to fill its pages with naked women.

For the first time in the magazine’s history, no one in the Hefner family is involved with the publication, which relaunched earlier this year as an ad-free quarterly under the editorial leadership of a gay man and two women who are all under the age of 32. 

While struggling to find its voice following Hefner’s death in 2017, the magazine has now reinvented itself with a feminist tilt — even though its chief executive Ben Kohn is still a straight white male and three-quarters its readers are men.

Anybody besides me seeing the potential problem here?

The publication tried banning nudity in 2015, only to bring it back a few years later with the tagline ‘Naked is normal.’

The new Playboy claims to have moved away from the male gaze, but no matter how tasteful it may be, it is still relying on nudity. 

I’m betting you’ll be moving a good bit further away from the “male gaze” than you might wish, before all’s said and done.

The summer issue contains articles on BDSM and gender-neutral sex toys as well as a profile of Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg Buttplug

Fixed it for ya.

and an interview with Tarana Burke, the activist who founded the #MeToo movement.

Because of COURSE they did.

For the upcoming fall issue, artist Marilyn Minter has shot a photo essay celebrating female pubic hair.

Hey, maybe you guys could do female armpit hair next.

Despite the changes, the debate over whether or not Playboy is even worth saving is still being had nearly two years after Hefner’s death.

Whether or not it was then, it definitely ain’t worth saving now. So, any bets on how long before we see this cover, then?

TheNewPlayboy-cover.jpg

(Via Ol’ Remus)

Share

The REAL “red flag”

Diplomad has it.

All over the West, not just in the USA, we have created in the past three or four decades a vile, toxic culture that leads to the sorts of murderous sprees we have seen, for example, in Norway, New Zealand, and, of course, the USA. Radicalization via Internet? Sure, but it goes much deeper than that. It goes deeper than porno and vile video games.

There is a pervasive rot spread by Hollywood, the universities, and the media, both new and legacy. It tells us we must welcome endless waves of dirt-poor aliens, who enter our country illegally, and ply them with free health care, voting rights, housing, and free schooling. We must sing the praises of single mothers; promote abortion up to the moment of birth and even beyond. Judeo-Christian values, institutions, and traditions are ripe for ridicule and destruction, and, of course, deservedly so! Western history, after all, is just an endless catalog of racism, imperialism, genocide, patriarchy, and assault on the very earth. Gaia weeps because of the white man!

Man. Men. Male. These are now foul words and concepts. There is an ongoing war, yes, war, against men and what it means to be male, in our decrepit universities, in the decaying industry known as Hollywood (notice that white men have virtually disappeared from TV commercials?) and in the media. Instead, for example, of celebrating the amazing accomplishment of American men landing on the moon, the WaPo harangues us with nonsense that the Soviet moon program was much more diverse and, of course, it sent the first woman into space and the first non-white into space. Don’t you dare think, much less say, “Yes, but the object was to get to the moon first.”

We see, as I have written before, young men alienated from their culture, told by their intellectual betters than they are all rapists and murderers and racists and just plain “TOXIC!” University orientation programs seek to deprogram the male out of young men students. Hollywood tells them they are murderers and clowns, that the future is female, and, besides, women can kick your ass, buddy! These men find the universities, the entertainment industry, the media, and the work environment hostile. Many retreat into delusional and dangerous corners of the Internet, and link up with others like them. They have no historical context for what is happening as the schools are garbage and no longer teach history, or Western philosophy, or the great accomplishments of the West; they pick up scattered and often insane ideas from weird web sites that promote dark conspiracy theories. Yes, they are radicalized by the Internet but the roots go deeper.

We are destroying Western Civilization and the result is bloody massacre.

That’s your “red flag.”

And, as the man says, it’s one you won’t ever see Enemedia or Hollywood discuss. Certainly not honestly, anyway.

Share

On projection, lies, and the Left

Murder: it’s a Democrat thing.

We can start with the striking statistic that 68 percent of all homicides occur in just certain parts of 5 percent of America’s counties — and all, or virtually all, of these are Democrat areas.

Obviously, viewing people as objects leads to objectification; you use objects and, when the spirit moves you, maybe even abuse objects. This is why leftists such as sanctimonious Pete Buttigieg and Irish Bob (O’Rourke) will politicize tragedies such as the El Paso and Dayton shootings before the blood is even dry. To them, the victims are objects that serve a purpose, a means to an end.

Of course, projecting, leftists are also full of the hate they ascribe to others. (After all, they’re incapable of hating what they see as the sin without hating whom they see as the sinner, so they assume that others operate likewise.) This is why former CNN host Reza Aslan, an Iranian immigrant who once ate human flesh on television, recently sent a tweet in which he appeared to say all Trump-supporters should be eradicated.

If that was his meaning, he’d just be carrying on a long tradition. The “Left” has been bloody ever since it was born during the French Revolution, where Maximilien Robespierre’s crew killed thousands in the Reign of Terror. Since then, the USSR’s Stalin, China’s Mao, Cambodia’s Pol Pot, and others have added approximately 100 million corpses to the total. The formula is simple, too: Leftists+Sufficient Power=Dropped Mask and Mass Murder.

Onwards, to one of Proggy’s go-to tools.

The bodies in Gilroy, El Paso, and Dayton were still in the morgue when the progressive “carrion-picking crows” started politicizing the murders. But everything they said about gun control, “white nationalism,” and Trump’s culpability was based on lies and stale clichés recycled for political gain.

The argument that more gun control laws will lessen substantially such murders has been disproven with facts over and over. In the Nineties, gun homicides fell by half, even as the number of guns increased 56%. The reason has been obvious since Prohibition in the Twenties: if enough people want something, black markets and criminal gangs will exist to get it for them. We’ve spent about a trillion dollars on reducing the availability of drugs, yet any savvy teenager in America can get just about any drug in less than a day. Likewise, someone bent on mayhem can circumvent the most stringent gun control laws. Just look at the crime rate in Democrat-controlled cities like Chicago, D.C., or Baltimore. They have some of the most restrictions on guns, and some of the highest murder rates.

Yet after the El Paso massacre, Democrat primary candidate Amy Klobuchar, a “moderate” only by comparison to her hard-left rivals, wrote, “The U.S. House has passed common sense gun safety legislation. It is long past time to pass it in the Senate. The question to ask: Whose side are you on? The NRA’s or the people’s?”

With an estimated membership of somewhere between five and ten million, the NRA IS the people, or a considerable percentage of ’em anyway.

“Beto” O’Rourke decried “lax gun laws,”

What, all 20-some-odd-thousand of ’em are lax?

Bernie Sanders called for “common-sense gun safety legislation,”

What, 20-some-odd-thousand of ’em ain’t enough to do the trick?

and Kamala Harris vowed during her first 100 days as president to block the import of “assault rifles”.

Which have been banned and/or strictly regulated since 1934, actually, depending on which specific type of weapon you’re talking about.

These empty statements have become anti-gun-nut mantras designed to exploit the suffering of the victims and the ghoulish spectacle of the crimes.

Precisely—and disgustingly—so. Thornton goes on to debunk many, many more related Lefty lies before winding things up:

We know that these comments and reactions are all about the Democrat primary and  terminal Trump Derangement Syndrome. If we had a consistent principle about rhetoric causing crimes, then the Democrats would have condemned Black Lives Matter for the policemen assassinated in Dallas and Brooklyn, or Bernie Sanders for the shooting of Republican Congressmen by one of his supporters. They would have called for proscribing sermons in mosques that include verses from the Koran and Hadiths, which jihadists have told us repeatedly inspire their terrorist murder of infidels. The fact is, millions and millions of people hear hateful speech but don’t go out and massacre innocent people.

Finally, the Democrats’ habit of using mass shootings as fodder for their partisan political message is despicable. If they really cared about crimes against “people of color,” they would have long ago been talking about the violence of blacks against black people in the cities they run. It’s shocking moral idiocy that a party continually harping on “racism” ignores the fact that more blacks are murdered in one year than were killed in the whole history of racist violence from Reconstruction to the Civil Rights Act.

Despicable as it most definitely is, it’s not “moral idiocy,” I’m afraid. It’s something much worse: moral depravity, calculated and cynical. Worse still: it’s a loathsome, poisonous hellbrew of dishonesty, megalomania, and shameless expediency, in brazen defiance of every human impulse towards decency and compassion.

Share

STOP FIGHTING BACK!!

Kass makes some good points, and then mars them with nonsense.

Those angry loner white boys with guns, this time in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, have again erupted on the body politic.

And those with eyes to see are reminded that the American culture is ill.

But what of the mass shootings in Chicago, the 55 people shot over the weekend, with seven hit near a park and then eight more not far away?

You might think these are “mass shootings” too, but, in political/media terms, they’re not treated as such. The victims, and in all likelihood the shooters, are black. And Democratic politicians find no political advantage in weaponizing the victims of everyday street violence in a Democratic town. So Chicago’s dead are stepped over by national media and national Democrats on the way to 2020.

Republicans want the focus moved from President Donald Trump and his idiotic, often incendiary tweets to the violence in Baltimore and Chicago. Presidential daughter Ivanka Trump tweeted, somewhat desperately, “we mustn’t become numb to the violence faced by inner city communities every day.”

Nice try, but she failed, and she was immediately condemned. Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, under pressure to do something, anything, about the slaughter, must be thankful that the Trumps give her cover and a target for sarcasm. Lightfoot dismissed Ivanka Trump’s tweets as “nonsense.”

Oh, absolutely. Trump simply MUST start acting with proper GOPe decorum and roll right over for these liars and their slimy manipulation without demur, the uncouth ape. Right, John?

Years ago, before Trump was elected president, there were white boys with guns too, slaughtering innocents. And those of us who made the culture argument back then, rather than advocate ripping the Second Amendment out of the Bill of Rights, were denounced, predictably, as know-nothing conservatives.

There had already been tens of millions of legal abortions serving as grim building blocks of an American death cult. And there were increasingly violent video games that fed the isolation, growing nihilism and misogyny in those sad, angry, mentally disturbed boys who nonetheless pass their background checks, buy their guns and make the news.

Now? They are lost in public schools that teach them about their toxic masculinity, they are loners, they are armed, in a culture that turns its face away from God.

But Trump is president now, and his constantly belligerent rhetoric, used to wage war against the corrupt status quo, has given the left great license to conflate complicated issues. They see opportunity and power to be had, and before the victims from El Paso and Dayton were buried, the dead were weaponized.

All Trump’s fault too, natch. Because they had never, EVER done anything of the sort before. And once that awful, obnoxious Trump is gone, why, they’ll surely stop and go back to treating us respectfully and civilly again, like before. Right, John?

Right?!?

Jeez, what a fucking dope. Insty approvingly heads his own link to this bilious twipe with: “JOHN KASS IS UNSPARING.” As I said before, he does indeed make some good points here, and his mention of true American hero Pfc. Glendon Oakley at the end is most welcome. But all in all, as per usual with effete NeverTrumpTard status-quo snobs, Kass only winds up “unsparingly” shooting himself in the foot.

Update! Important reminder from Schlichter.

Weird how the liberal solution to every problem is always to make you less free.

One of their tactics is exhaustion – to exhaust the weak among us and get them to say, “Gosh, if we just give in we can put this unpleasantness behind us.” But you can’t put anything behind you with these people, because there is nothing to put behind you. It’s all a lie. You are not a racist. Your guns won’t hurt anyone but criminals and aspiring tyrants. And the leftists know it. They know they are spewing skeevy slanders, and if you give in on this one – handing over your AR-15 and hanging your head over prejudices you don’t possess – the libs and their newsprint lackeys will just club you with another set of grievances that you can only atone for through further submission.

It will never end. They will always hate you. Always. Nothing you can do will change that. Nothing. So get used to it and invite them to pound sand.

It would be nice to have libs and their media goons not sliming us all the time with manifest falsehoods. It would also be nice to have a pet unicorn named Chet always ready to make a run to the liquor store to pick up a sixer of Dos Equis and some Doritos. Neither one is going to happen, and you can’t change that by giving in. No matter how much you abase yourself it will never be enough for them to not hate you. 

They are always going to hate you, so get any idea out of your head that if you just surrender then this endless tsunami of lies will finally be over. It won’t, because it has nothing to do with what you actually think or have actually done. Nothing. It’s a means of oppression, a tactic to stop you from exercising your right to be a citizen instead of a serf.

Defenseless, silenced and paying for everyone else’s stuff, all while being abused and disrespected – that’s what the left wants for you.

Everything the left says or does is designed to make them more powerful by making you less free. You can never give enough of your money or freedom away to make them stop hating you, so don’t try. Get woke to their scam – luckily we have a president who is – and don’t play along. They’ll always hate you, so stop caring about their lies.

You listening out there, John? You and the other Surrender-Monkey GOPers? Because y’all damned sure oughta be.

Share

Storm clouds a-gathering

Codevilla on how to ignite a civil war.

In societies riven by mutual hate, the people who control the police and public communications make all the difference. When they maintain impartiality, as did Germany’s Weimar government while the Nazis and Communists struggled for primacy, partisan warfare tends to be resolved politically—though the results are harsh. When societal hatred or the partiality of authorities results in deaths, long-smoldering cold civil war can blaze into holocaust.

We Americans are now facing the danger of a civil war thus ignited. We do not think of civil war this way because our Civil War from 1861 to 1865 was less a conflict within society than it was a highly organized war between states. That war notwithstanding, personal friendships and mutual esteem persisted on both sides, such as that between Ulysses S. Grant and prominent Confederate General James Longstreet.

What we face now is worse.

Probably, yeah. What I’m even more confident of, though, is this: we have NO IDEA what it will actually be like. Not how it might begin, nor how it might play out, nor how long it might go on, nor how it might end, nor what shape its aftermath might take.

I’ve long been annoyed at how most politicians, pundits, and others—left, right, whatever—insist on viewing the Trumpian uprising exclusively through the lens of the past. They base their analyses on established rules that have been upended and made irrelevant. Vanishingly few of them seem able to grasp that maybe, just maybe, the societal tsunami represented by Trump and his supporters might not play out in precise accord with the old, established playbook they’re comfortable with. Even some of the writers I like and regularly excerpt here fall into this trap.

And I don’t get that, I really don’t, especially when it comes from the people who were most shocked and stunned by Trump’s 2016 victory. Seems to me that those most humiliated by the shattering of their predictions of a surefire Hillary!™ win would be a little more circumspect about their obviously misplaced faith in Ye Olde Ways now, and would be among the quickest to consider abandoning them. Guess sometimes hindsight ain’t 20-20 after all.

And the same principle applies to CW speculation. Any civil war we might wind up stumbling blindly into will likely share one, and only one, characteristic with any of its predecessors: it will be nothing like what any of us expects now. In any event, though, Codevilla knows who should be held accountable.

What should happen, what can happen, when the real, existing violent organizations of the Left—Antifa and the several radical black organizations—try to exclude or to punish? Several cities—Portland, Oregon and Charlottesville, Virginia among them—have had their streets taken over. What happens when these organizations organize mobs to harass their least favorite people? What happens when some of them wind up dead?

At a certain point, the other side shoots back. Here as elsewhere, the several police forces may be expected to split and take opposite sides. Then the army’s special forces become the arbiters, and the war rages.

We know that our ruling class having largely made government into a partisan thing, America has crossed the threshold of revolution. While we have no way of knowing what lies ahead, we know that the spiral of political violence has already taken its first fateful turns, and that the logic of our partisan ruling class is pushing for more.

Heaven help them should they get it.

Update! Call me a weirdo, maybe, but I find at least some reassurance among Bill’s words of despair:

What is there to say? It’s all so frickin’ predictable.

We’ve got a bunch of new judges, many of whom seem…oh…shaky, at best.

We replace swamp monsters with new swamp monsters. Everybody has lots of excuses and explanations for that, but the fact remains – one step forward, one step back.

It’s depressing. And starting to get, at least for me, profoundly uninteresting.

Is there going to be a hot civil war?

No, because there are not enough people in this country willing to point a gun at another person and pull the trigger over political differences. The vast majority of fatal gun violence is carried out over disputes over real things like drugs and familial hatreds. The percentage where somebody pulls the trigger because they hate conservatives, or hate immigrants, or hate leftists is tiny, little more than statistical noise.

That may change, but I’d be surprised if it happens any time soon.

I bolded the comforting part to distinguish it from the rest, which is all the more bleak because it’s, y’know, true.

Share

The more things change…

Then again, some things NEVER do.

It may be that the best book that will ever be written about today’s progressive mind-set was published in 1941. That in The Red Decade author Eugene Lyons was, in fact, describing the Communist-dominated American Left of the Depression-wracked 1930s and 1940s makes his observations even more meaningful, for it is sobering to be confronted with how little has been gained by hard experience. The celebration of feelings over reason? The certainty of moral virtue? The disdain for tradition and the revising of history for ideological ends? The embrace of the latest definition of correct thought? Lyons was one of the most gifted reporters of his time, and among the bravest, and his story of the spell cast by Stalinist-tinged social-justice activism over that day’s purported best and brightest—literary titans, Hollywood celebrities, leading academics, religious leaders, media heavies—would be jaw-dropping if it weren’t so eerily familiar.

Indeed, looking backward from a time when, according to surveys, more millennials would rather live under socialism than capitalism, it’s apparent that Lyons was documenting not just a historical moment but also a species of historical illiteracy as unchanging as it is poisonous, its utopianism able to flourish only at the expense of independent thought. On a range of issues, alternative views were defined as not merely mistaken but morally reprehensible; and among the elites who dominated the cultural sphere, deviants from approved opinion were subject to special abuse. Of course, having lived and worked in Soviet Russia, Lyons made distinctions about relative abuses of power. Under Stalinism, dissidents were liquidated, or vanished into the gulag; the American Left could only liquidate careers and disappear reputations.

Well, not as hideous as being gulag-ed or Holodomor-ed, admittedly. But ask any one of the many who have had their ability to make a living destroyed, their home violated and damaged, themselves and their spouses/children hounded and stalked everywhere they went by gangs of violent commie thugs about it sometime, and just let them tell you all about how much fun it was. You’re sure to get an earful about those wonderful, compassionate humanitarians.

He acknowledges that most who followed the leftist line meant no evil—he calls them the Innocents Club, “high minded, idealistic, eager to be useful…Not their hearts, but the organs located in their skulls, were at fault.” Still, he gives no one a pass. Decades before Tom Wolfe wrote Radical Chic, Lyons showed a special disdain for the wealthy who embraced radicalism to salve their guilty consciences. Perhaps the most prominent of these was Corliss Lamont, son of the chairman of J. P. Morgan & Company, who, as head of the Friends of the Soviet Union, emerged as the chief public apologist for Stalin’s crimes. As Lyons wrote, Lamont spared “neither his money nor his energy in defending the mass slaughter in Russia, and in damning those who dared examine that horror.” Affronted, the multimillionaire sued. The suit went nowhere, but Lamont’s grandson is today governor of Connecticut.

Given his intimate acquaintance with the Left, Lyons well knew what calumnies the publication of The Red Decade would bring down on his head. At the time, especially in elite circles, the charge of “red baiting” was akin to that of racism, sexism, or homophobia today; whether made in anger or with premeditated intent, it was enough to halt any challenge to the Left’s worldview. It was a weapon deployed, he wrote, by “literary critics, book reviewers and political commentators…a neatly contrived device for heading off free and uninhibited discussion of little things such as man-made famines, horrifying blood purges, forced labor on a gigantic scale.” In fact, in almost every meaningful arena of American life, those who “ran afoul of the revolution were made to feel the full weight of their crimes; they were ostracized socially, handicapped professionally and not infrequently stripped of their jobs as well as their reputations for ordinary decency.”

Lyons’s own world of book and magazine publishing was so dominated by leftists that former adherents who turned against the Party, deemed “moral monsters and turncoats,” could be made essentially to evaporate from mainstream view. He lists no fewer than 30 writers who suffered that fate during “the intellectual red terror,” including (as if to underscore the point for contemporary readers) such now largely forgotten former luminaries as Max Eastman, John Dos Passos, and James T. Farrell. He includes himself on that list. “The part I cannot induce the uninitiated to believe is how effective the terror could be,” he writes. “When you first met a particularly far-fetched libel on your character, it merely seemed funny in its absurdity.” But continually repeated, he adds, the lies take their toll, for wherever one tried to make one’s way professionally, “there were manuscript readers, casting directors, book reviewers who—consciously or by a sort of pack instinct—took their prejudices ready-made from the Popular Front comrades.”

For all the Left’s capacity to shape opinion in Lyons’s time, the power wielded by today’s progressives is even more malign, for its heavy hand is all but unconstrained by countervailing forces. For one thing, 70 or 80 years ago, organized religion held such sway in America that even committed leftists understood that it could be derided only behind closed doors; and while there were some prominent clergymen who fell hard for the progressive line, they usually made sure to do so only as private citizens. Even they would have dismissed as lunacy the possibility that one day not only their congregants, but entire religious orders, might be widely characterized as dangerous zealots for adhering to traditional beliefs, or that agencies of government would compel them to violate their most deeply held spiritual convictions.

At least rhetorically, the Communists of the late 1930s were, in fact, far less hostile to the American idea than are today’s run-of-the-mill progressives. In an age where Americans were raised to revere their country’s singular history, they all but wrapped themselves in the flag. “Communism Is Twentieth-Century Americanism” went the party’s famous Popular Front slogan, and they did not hesitate to name their Spanish battalions for Lincoln and Washington or the Party school for Marxist instruction after Jefferson. The contrast with today’s Left, which sees American history as a cavalcade of oppression, could not be more striking. Little wonder that today’s Democrats, seeking to stay abreast of their fervent base, are as publicly invested in identity politics and collectivist economics as the denizens of any faculty lounge.

Indeed, this speaks to the most striking difference between the world that Lyons described and the one we contend with today: it’s no longer a tiny, if disproportionately influential, political entity waving the Left’s banner; it’s one of the two major parties.

This article is both chilling and infuriating simultaneously. Communism’s enduring appeal for dopes and dupes across the globe is way beyond baffling. It’s a zombie ideology that never seems to die—no matter how abject its failure, how cruel and demeaning the life-circumstances and conditions it invariably creates—nor does it ever want for fools advocating the imposition of its misery on everyone else. It just keeps staggering blindly on, to blight everything it touches along the road to ruin.

Share

Quite a collection

The more observant among you will no doubt note that I finally got the threatened comments policy posted over there at top left, which includes a great image I swiped from WeirdDave’s Friday ONT. Since Dave’s post is a lengthy collection of some of the greatest memes I believe I ever did see—the “None Pizza with left beef” one in particular had me howling right out loud with laughter—I figgered it would be worth mentioning. So enjoy, y’all.

Share

There they go again

It’s tragic and sickening, but liberal ghouls have themselves some new coffins to shamelessly climb up on for gun-grabber pep rally purposes. Here are a couple of hefty buckets of cold-water reality to splash in their purpled, frenzied faces, not that it will do a damned bit of good.

A common myth you can expect to hear a lot in the coming days and weeks is that the United States “leads the world in mass shootings” and therefore we must pass some law that will do nothing to stop future mass shootings, but will infringe on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

What you might not hear is that this claim is completely bogus.

Sure, if you following conservative media, you’re probably aware of this. Townhall, The Daily Signal, Bearing Arms, FEE, The Washington Examiner, and others have all previously reported on how the myth that the United States leads the world in mass shootings is based on a deeply flawed study, which has been debunked by the Crime Prevention Research Center.

Yet, the myth remains alive and is sure to be regurgitated endlessly again.

Yep, count on it. Even Barry “Obama” Soetero interrupted his recent public-spotlight vanishing act—probably taking time out to sweat the slow exposure of his many crimes related to the sudden unexpected collapse of the Mueller witch-hunt—to weigh in with an unwelcome dollop of his habitual moronic duplicity featuring the bogus claim. They’ll squawk about this and they’ll squawk about that, in most careful and diligent avoidance of examing the REAL root causes.

It’s quite tiresome, really. In truth, the main underlying cause of increased mass-murder events — and so much evil in general — is a severe philosophical/spiritual malaise besetting our nation.

Were gun control the remedy here, mass shootings would be rare. Not only were there fewer firearm laws many decades ago, but in 1940s and ‘50s New York City, boys would often take guns on the subway because they had rifle clubs at school. So is access to firearms really the problem’s root cause?

As for the El Paso shooter’s motivation — our immigrationism combined withleft-wing environmental concerns — there are people who will do evil in a cause’s name regardless of its nobility or ignobility. The real question here is, boiled down: Why are we seeing so much more evil in America now than in bygone days?

Say what you will about TV, the Internet, video games, violence, or mass murder, it can’t be right or wrong if there is no right or wrong. It’s the ultimate self-evident reality: How can you build a moral society when its shades-of-gray people don’t even believe in morality?

Not that I’m trying to argue with the basic assertion he’s making, but I remain convinced that a far more important aspect of any serious root-causes examination would have to be the way shitlib culture has treated America’s young men: by viciously attacking them; shaming them; denouncing them as “rapists,” every last one of them. Ordinary, healthy young men are to be regarded as sexist, misogyist, thuggish primitives, guilty of being fundamentally incapable of reining in their violent and antisocial impulses until proven otherwise. They are denied any healthy outlet for the natural masculine urge for competition, for earning their rightful place in a clearly-defined hierarchy built around physical achievement and ability. The term “toxic masculinity” itself ought rightfully to be banished as a hate-crime, if we’re going to have to put up with such folderol as the asinine notion of “hate crime” at all.

Our young men are being beaten down, harrassed, and horribly scarred by a ruthless campaign to emasculate them—to remake them in compliance with a truly toxic Progressivist design for their “improvement.” After decades of such abuse, how could any of us be surprised when the more fragile among those poor, wrongly-scourged souls finally do break and lash out against a world that so cruelly tormented them?

Over to Larry Correia’s timeless 2012 masterpiece for the bottom line:

Well, I suppose if your need to do something overrides all reason and logic, then by all means let’s ban guns.

Australia had a mass shooting and instituted a massive gun ban and confiscation (a program which would not work here, which I’ll get to, but let’s run with it anyway.). As was pointed out to me on Facebook, they haven’t had any mass shootings since. However, they fail to realize that they didn’t really have any mass shootings before either. You need to keep in mind that mass shooting are horrific headline grabbing statistical anomalies. You are far more likely to get your head caved in by a local thug while he’s trying to steal your wallet, and that probably won’t even make the evening news.

And violent crime is up in Australia. A cursory Google search will show articles about the increase in violent crime and theft, but then other articles pooh-pooing these stats as being insignificant and totally not related to the guns.

So then we’ve got England, where they reacted swiftly after a mass shooting, banned and confiscated guns, and their violent crime has since skyrocketed. Their stats are far worse than Australia, and they are now one of the more dangerous countries to live in the EU. Once again, cursory Google search will show articles with the stats, and other articles saying that those rises like totally have nothing to do with regular folks no longer being able to defend themselves… Sensing a trend yet?

And then we’ve got South Africa, which instituted some really hard core gun bans and some extremely strict controls, and their crime is now so high that it is basically either no longer tracked or simply not countable. But obviously, the totally unbiased news says that has absolutely nothing to do with people no longer being able to legally defend themselves.

Then you’ve got countries like Norway, with extremely strict gun control. Their gun control laws are simply incomprehensible to half of Americans. Not only that, they are an ethnically and socially homogenous, tiny population, well off country, without our gang violence or drug problems. Their gun control laws are draconian by our standards. They make Chicago look like Boise. Surely that level of gun control will stop school shootings! Except of course for 2011 when a maniac killed 77 and injured 242 people, a body count which is absurdly high compared to anything which has happened America.

Because once again, repeat it with me, criminals simply do not give a crap.

In conclusion, basically it doesn’t really matter what something you pick when some politician or pundit starts screaming we’ve got to do something, because in reality, most of them already know a lot of what I listed above. The ones who are walking around with their security details of well-armed men in their well-guarded government buildings really don’t care about actually stopping mass shooters or bad guys, they care about giving themselves more power and increasing their control.

If a bad guy used a gun with a big magazine, ban magazines. If instead he used more guns, ban owning multiple guns. If he used a more powerful gun with less shots, ban powerful guns. If he used hollowpoints, ban hollowpoints. (which I didn’t get into, but once again, there’s a reason everybody who might have to shoot somebody uses them). If he ignored some Gun Free Zone, make more places Gun Free Zones. If he killed a bunch of innocents, make sure you disarm the innocents even harder for next time. Just in case, let’s ban other guns that weren’t even involved in any crimes, just because they’re too big, too small, too ugly, too cute, too long, too short, too fat, too thin, (and if you think I’m joking I can point out a law or proposed law for each of those) but most of all ban anything which makes some politician irrationally afraid, which luckily, is pretty much everything.

They will never be happy. In countries where they have already banned guns, now they are banning knives and putting cameras on every street. They talk about compromise, but it is never a compromise. It is never, wow, you offer a quick, easy, inexpensive, viable solution to ending mass shootings in schools, let’s try that. It is always, what can we take from you this time, or what will enable us to grow some federal apparatus?

Then regular criminals will go on still not caring, the next mass shooter will watch the last mass shooter be the most famous person in the world on TV, the media will keep on vilifying the people who actually do the most to defend the innocent, the ignorant will call people like me names and tell us we must like dead babies, and nothing actually changes to protect our kids.

Larry includes absolute reams of statistical, historic, and factual backup for his argument here; if you haven’t seen this one before, do NOT fail to read every word of it now. There are many fine points to be made in support of the individual right to self-defense with legally-available tools best suited and adequate to the task; Larry makes most of ’em in this piece, and makes ’em quite well too.

None of which will change a single damned thing, as I said, nor move this now-pointless and intractable shouting match forward so much as an inch.

The Leftist position on guns can be filed under one of two overall categories: well-meaning, or ill-intentioned. For the well-meaning, their view is founded entirely on ignorance, emotion, irrationality, and assumptions that are in error. Some small few of these people are in fact amenable to persuasion by our side, to whatever degree. Most aren’t. They have been thoroughly propagandized, their indoctrination facilitated by a total lack of any experience with or exposure to guns, along with the terror inspired by that ignorance. They don’t think beyond the immediate feel-good rush from new legislation, restrictions, or even bans and confiscation; assuming as they do that all problems can be legislated away, the practical impossibility of actually implementing their “imagine no guns!” fantasy never occurs to them. Their hearts break at the suffering of the victims and their loved ones; they’ve never had any use for guns in their own lives, and can’t even begin to imagine a good reason why anyone else would either. They’re afraid of guns, so you should be too. Anyone who actually likes the evil things might as well be an alien from another planet. In a sense, they are.

The ill-intentioned, on the other hand, may or may not be ignorant of the facts…which doesn’t matter even slightly, because they don’t care. Their opposition to private ownership of firearms and the 2A springs not from a desire for a safer, more civilized world, nor from compassion or empathy for the victims. It comes from an unslakable thirst for ever-greater power and control, just as Larry says above. For them, neither truth nor logic enters into it in any way, and are really either irrelevancies or impediments. Their interest is not in protecting, shielding, or safeguarding anybody, and the only thing they want to put an end to is the ability to resist or defy them.

So what are we left with, then, as we watch every last law-abiding American gun owner slandered in the press yet again—as Enemedia despicably uses hysterical, terrified kids as props in pursuit of their tyrannical agenda? The arguments have all been made. There is little if any productive discussion to be had here, not a whole lot left to talk about. It’s all rapidly boiling down to the one thing, and either they will or they won’t.

So: come and take them, Leftards.

Full stop, end of story update! LawDog spells it out:

And — again, gods and little green apples — my inbox comes up with emails starting with: “It’s time for …” or “Common sense …” or “You have to agree …”

Let me stop y’all right there.

The answer is “No.”

No, I’m not going to give up my guns.

I don’t care. I’m not giving up my guns.

I didn’t murder anyone. My guns didn’t murder anyone. My friends haven’t murdered anyone. My friends guns haven’t murdered anyone.

80 million American gun owners didn’t murder anyone.

I am not going to be punished for some pustulent little bridge-troll deciding to vomit his evil into a Wal-Mart in El Paso.

And, yes, taking my guns away is punishing me. I will not be punished for the evil of someone else; evil that I had NOTHING TO DO WITH.

This is not up for debate. We’ve tried debate at the national level and the only thing debate got us was incremental chunks of our gun rights taken away by you faithless dacoits.

I am no longer going to engage in a debate in which I lose every time. Sod that for a game of soldiers.

So, let me stop you right there, Scooter. The answer is “No.”

Cut, print, that’s a wrap, people.

(Via Aesop)

Share

The spookiest damned blog post you’ll ever read

DUDE.

Early one morning, we proceeded out to the desert wastelands he was familiar with around Twentynine Palms, and when jackrabbits proved scarce there, and he got his van stuck in the sand, we returned closer to the pavement.

He got the great idea to go shooting much nearer home, up in the empty hills around the San Fernando Valley where we lived. In this case, up in the Santa Susanna Pass, between the SFV and Simi Valley, during our summer vacation from school.

You’ve seen the territory in the backgrounds of any number of westerns from the movies beginning in the 1930s to TV shows in the 1970s.

But we were there in mid-summer of 1969. June, or maybe even July.

We, pardon the phrase, “sure as shooting” were in unincorporated LA County, and not actually breaking any laws AFAIK, but even though it was unincorporated, and thus outside of city limits and LAPD territory, it wasn’t that far from L.A. city limits, and civilization, so in short order, doubtless one or more of the nearby residents must have dutifully reported someone shooting some guns off up in the canyon.

We saw the LA Sheriff’s car arrive on the road up above where we were beating the brush for jackrabbits, lizards, and such, and before he saw us. So we cheesed it, taking temporary refuge in some nearby rocky caves, because Older Brother had an inkling that no deputy was going to get his street shoes dirty chasing through the cactus and underbrush for kids shooting .22s off in the scrub and rocks thereabouts.

And while we were waiting and biding our time under cover, we were joined by some local hippie chicks who wandered by, asking what we were up to and such. They were friendly, and shared our momentary disdain of “The Man”, and it wasn’t very long in the summer sun before the local Barney Fife headed off to pursue more important wrongdoers, while we, particularly Older Brother, decided maybe it was time to call it a day as far as shooting, and head on home.

Which we did, without further incident.

So just a nothing story, until this year, while wormholing through the internet, when I came across this photo, eerily familiar, of some of the rocks we were sheltering under.

I absotively, posolutely gar-on-tee you you have NO IDEA where he’s going with this, and that’s a promise. But just wait till you read the rest and find out. It’ll make the hair on back of your neck stand up and salute, it will. All’s I can say is: wow.

Share

The real Robert Mueller

Go-Go Gohmert nails the repellent Deep-State sleazebag to the fucking cross.

Robert Mueller has a long and sordid history of illicitly targeting innocent people that is a stain upon the legacy of American jurisprudence. He lacks the judgment and credibility to lead the prosecution of anyone.

I do not make these statements lightly.

What I have accumulated here is absolutely shocking upon the realization that Mueller’s disreputable, twisted history speaks to the character of the man placed in a position to attempt to legalize a coup against a lawfully elected President.

Any Republican who says anything resembling, “Bob Mueller will do a good job as Special Counsel,” “Bob Mueller has a great reputation for being fair,” or anything similar; (A) wants President Trump indicted for something and removed from office regardless of his innocence; (B) is intentionally ignorant of the myriad of outrageous problems permeating Mueller’s professional history; or (C) is cultivating future Democrat votes when he or she comes before the Senate someday for a confirmation hearing.

There is simply too much clear and convincing information available to the contrary. Where other writers have set out information succinctly, I have quoted them, with proper attribution. My goal is to help you see what I have found.

That’s from the opener to a Gohmert-compiled PDF that runs to 48 pages (!), a disturbing compendium of corruption, abuse, and outright criminality that one strongly suspects is STILL not all of it. Trust me, folks: no matter how bad you might think it is…it’s worse.

Vietnam-war-hero me no Vietnam war heroes, either; Mueller is as dirty as dirty comes, he has been for a very long time now, and as far as I’m concerned whatever he may or may not have been in the long-ago and far-away buys him not one damned thing after seeing him confirm the warp of his woof in the here and now. As Vietnam war heroes go, I put Mueller in the same (Swift) boat as John Heinz-Kerry: kindred souls, brothers from different mothers, two peas in a pod, and to hell with the both of ’em. Not all of those who serve serve honorably, nor do those who did necessarily remain forever honorable after getting their mustering-out handshake and DD214.

After only a quick skimming of the PDF, I’m now more skeptical than ever of the veracity of Mr Integrity’s ass-covering “I’m old, I’m confused!” Vaudeville act during last week’s Democrat-Socialist flea circus. Good work by Gohmert; he’s committed an act of true public service by peeling the slime off this filthy toad.

(Via Clarice Feldman)

Share

Let’s get nuts!

Catholicism: you’re doin’ it wrong.

You follow the antics of AOC and the so-called “Squad” of hers and you wonder if the left has lost its mind. Your instincts are correct. And if it’s any comfort to the left, it is not alone. In fact, there are even loonier elements loose among the elites.

On the East Coast, the Manhattan-based leftist Jesuit magazine America regularly produces copy that assaults the teachings of the Catholic Church. (Some Jesuits are born with that DNA.) But the magazine has outdone itself now, even by its standards. It has published an article titled “The Catholic Case for Communism” by its Toronto-based correspondent Dean Dettloff, who just happens to be a member of the Communist Party of Canada.

Dettloff concedes, “Christianity and communism have obviously had a complicated relationship. That adjective ‘complicated’ will surely cause some readers to roll their eyes.” Well, he’s right. It did. Communists have murdered millions of Catholics all over the world. Millions more in China, Cuba and elsewhere continue to be persecuted. “Complicated”? Programming a remote control can be complicated. There’s a better word for this communist-Catholic dynamic. It’s called “genocide.”

This communist argued, “though some communists would undoubtedly prefer a world without Christianity, communism is not simply a program for destroying the church.” Except that is precisely what communism has tried to do all over the world since its founding, and for good reason. Catholicism is its mortal enemy.

So, do you think it can get any more intellectually incoherent than that? Let’s just mosey over to the West Coast now and see what we find there.

Oh, I just bet I can guess easily enough.

Share

Keeping hope alive

Jabba the Nadler just can’t let go.

Democratic New York Rep. Jerry Nadler argued Sunday that the impeachment of President Donald Trump was still a strong possibility, claiming during a segment of CNN’s “State of the Union” that the president had “violated the law six ways from Sunday.”

“I want to clear this up here. You’re investigating possible impeachment but you haven’t formally opened an impeachment inquiry. Are you trying to have it both ways here?” Tapper asked.

“No, we’re not trying to have it both ways,” Nadler responded. “We said exactly what we’re doing. We’re investigating the question of — we’re investigating the corruptions of the administration, the abuses of power, what Mueller showed, the possible violations of the emoluments clause, that might recommend articles of impeachment and it has been recommended to the committee and we’re investigating to determine whether we should report those to the house and we’re going to court to get more evidence.”

Tapper turned the question to Nadler personally, asking whether he would support impeachment.

“My personal view is that he richly deserves impeachment,” Nadler said. “He has done many impeachable — he’s violated the law six ways from Sunday. But that is not the question. The question is can we develop enough evidence to put before the American people who — we’ve broken the log jam.”

“The president and the attorney general were lying to the American people saying that the Mueller report found no obstruction or collusion and exonerated the president,” the chairman continued. “I think the hearing the other day was an inflection point because it showed quite clearly that the report did not exonerate the president.”

Ahem *cough cough* harrumph: The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities. Direct quote, you pathetic loser. But by all means, you go right ahead on with your bad self. You, and the rest of your treacherous, treasonous co-conspirators. Let’s all just see what your seditious, anti-American skullduggery gets you in the end.

Share

Trump trolls ’em again

RACIST!™

President Donald Trump criticized Rep. Elijah Cummings on Saturday, calling him a “brutal bully” to border patrol officials and suggesting he should help fix the city of Baltimore.

“Rep, Elijah Cummings has been a brutal bully, shouting and screaming at the great men & women of Border Patrol about conditions at the Southern Border, when actually his Baltimore district is FAR WORSE and more dangerous,” Trump wrote on Twitter.

Trump challenged Cummings after the veteran lawmaker exploded at Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Kevin K. McAleenan for the treatment of detained migrant children crossing the border.

Trump defended the border facilities as “clean, efficient, and well run,” albeit “very crowded,” while Cummings’ district was considered the “worst in the USA.”

“Cumming District is a disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess,” he wrote. “If he spent more time in Baltimore, maybe he could help clean up this very dangerous & filthy place.”

Trump said the congressman’s district should be investigated for all of the federal money that is invested there despite its being a “corrupt mess.”

All of which is true, naturally. But it ain’t just Baltimore; not by a long shot, it ain’t. So might there be some common thread, some unifying characteristic shared by America’s shitholiest of shitholes? We wonders, yes we wonders.

Look at other cities in similar dilapidation and there holds a unique truth: Democrats run them all.

How long will sewage run down the streets of San Francisco? How long will St. Louis, Detroit, and Baltimore, continue to rotate as the nation’s most dangerous crime infested metros? And how long will federal dollars keep chasing bad money with new?

Seattle is just as bad. Los Angeles has zoomed past them both.

And according to the FBI Uniform Crime Report and as reported in the USA Today (from Feb 19, 2019), the top 10 most dangerous cities in America are run by Democrats.

The overwhelming majority of them are also all governed by Democratic Governors. And the Congressional districts represented are also majority Democratic.

HAS to be a coincidence.

For Baltimore it’s been this way for decades.

And the only reason that Elijah Cummings got passionate about the issue, isn’t because it’s true. It’s because he got called out on it, by someone who is working to make America better for everybody. Thus revealing—whether in knowledge or in ignorance—Congressman Cummings hasn’t been.

But Democrats who lives in these cities already know that.

They live in the land of corrupt squander every waking day.

And yet they keep right on voting for Demonrats. Right up until they just can’t take it anymore and flee the nest they so thoroughly fouled…only to get busy as beavers repeating the whole disastrous process, blighting somebody else’s home the exact same way they did their own.

Cummings is a complete moron, of course, and good on Trump for slamming his stupid, worthless ass. Best part, though? Gotta be this:


And there you have it, folks: our current state of political dysfunction and decay, neatly wrapped up in a single Tweet.

Overrun update! Just more coincidence, I’m sure.

The Baltimore Sun’s editorial board published a scathing op-ed later in the day that simultaneously waved off the city’s rat problem while calling Trump a rat. “Better to have a few rats than to be one,” blared the headline.

But according to earlier reports from The Baltimore Sun, that rat problem is actually quite a bit more extensive than the editorial board implied.

In April of this year, the same editorial board published another op-ed titled “Baltimore’s perpetual trash problem.” Among other issues, the article detailed some of the problems that stemmed from ubiquitous piles of trash — increased rodent infestations among them.

In September 2018, another Baltimore Sun article quoted then-Mayor Catherine Pugh as saying that the problem was so extensive that “you can smell the rats.”

The problem was so far-reaching that “Rat Film,” a documentary based on Baltimore’s constant battle with the prolific rodents, premiered at a local film festival in 2017 and aired on public television in 2018. The Baltimore Sun covered the PBS premiere.

As incredible as it may seem, there’s even more. All in all, what we have here is more of the usual old thing: Trump states the plain truth, the Democrat-Socialists and fake-news Enemedia are goaded into flipping the fuck out…then wind up shitting and falling back into it—hilariously. The man is living rent-free in their empty heads, and they just can’t get him out.

Method to the madness update! Forcing them to defend the indefensible.

President Trump has done it again.

Just as he forced Democrats to defend the far-left ‘Squad’ in his unexpected ambush on Rep. Ilhan Omar and her pals, he’s now forcing Democrats to own the urban shambles and filth that characterize one-party blue-city rule, putting all Democrats on their backfoot. That’s what’s behind his surprise Twitter assault that began with Rep. Elijah Cummings and his rat-infested Baltimore district, which pretty much came out of the blue.

What’s he doing? Forcing a new narrative as election time kicks in, making Democrats have to address the reality that they have been in power for decades in one-party blue districts and cities, and they have left those districts smoking ruins, rat-infested hellholes, “places no human being would want to live,” complete with live-action shots. The video of the Baltimore resident decrying the Democratic area’s neglect is absolutely deadly.

How are Democrats going to defend themselves from this one? In one-party blue cities, states and districts, there’s no one to blame but themselves. Trump’s tactic is particularly ripe for propagation in solid-blue, shambling expensive California and already Trump is moving his attack onto Pelosi with his latest tweets.

Thus far, Democrats are fighting back by yelling ‘racism.’ It’s a tired, weak weapon, grotesquely overused, and unlikely to rally black voters to Democrats, given the truth of Trump’s tweets. What’s more, it can’t be employed by Pelosi, who’s white. The issue and the narrative Trump is pushing out there is that all-blue cities are hellholes and they’ve been made hellholes because Democrats did it.

This is political brutality cubed, a sign that Trump is a going to beformidable candidate to Democrats seeking to unhorse him. What it shows is Trump not only means to ‘win’ against his opponents, he intends to annihilate them. His election game is on and he’s not playing beanbag. He using the same powerful tactics he was able use on Pelosi and her bickering ‘squad’ which had the effect of forcing Pelosi to defend the indefensible and making Rep. Ilhan Omar the face of the Democratic Party. Now he’s making urban decay the second face of the Democratic Party. His poll numbers went up after the first one. Count on them going up again after this. 

Now you shitlibs go ahead and complain some more about how “stupid” Trump is, whydon’tcha, while he continues to run rings around all you self-proclaimed Supergeniuses.

Caught in his own web update! Even Bernie the Bolshevik knows a shithole when he sees one. Or used to before Trump seconded his now-inconvenient assessment, anyway.

Also on Sunday, the official “Trump War Room” Twitter account released a video from 2015 in which Sen. Sanders disparages West Baltimore:

But anyone who took the walk that we took around this neighborhood would not think you’re in a wealthy nation; you would think that you were in a Third World country…But today, what we’re talking about is a community in which half of the people don’t have jobs. We’re talking about a community in which there are hundreds of buildings that are uninhabitable. We’re talking about a community where kids are unable to go to schools that are decent.

The Washington Examiner dug up a tweet from 2016 in which Sanders wrote: “Residents of Baltimore’s poorest boroughs have lifespans shorter than people living under dictatorship in North Korea. That is a disgrace.”

Oh, there’s disgrace aplenty here for sure, Red Bernie—all of it one hundred percent, exclusively owned by you and yours.

Share

Putting the “dog” in “dogfight”

The F35: boondoggle, or abject failure?

The F-35 (also known as the Joint Strike Fighter) is a military jet that was supposed to be able to do it all. The program was started in the 1990s with the intention that it could serve the Air Force, the Navy and the Marines and their various mission needs with only minimal changes to the initial platform. That would deliver cost savings across decades as one jet replaced (at least) three other types of planes. It seemed like a great idea in concept.

But, predictably, the jet that tried to do everything ended up having more problems than successes. By the time designers had added stealth technology, short runway functionality, and various weapon systems, they had a jet that was too bulky, too slow and too costly. “The result is an expensive jack-of-all-trades, but a master of none,” The National Interest’s Dave Majumdar writes, calling the JSF “one of the 5 worst fighter jets ever made.”

It wasn’t supposed to be this way. By this time, Lockheed was supposed to be churning out F-35 jets at a cost of $40-$50 million each. Instead, the military now says it wants to buy 470 of the fighters, at a cost of $34 billion. That would be more than $80 million per plane, twice what was promised.

Yet even as it tries to buy more of these planes, throwing good money after bad, the Pentagon admits the JSF program is failing. The Air Force’s top testing official wrote in 2016 that the F-35 is “not effective and not suitable across the required mission areas and against currently fielded treats.”

It also falls short of existing platforms. Military analyst Dan Grazier writes, “In the air-to-air mission, the current F-35 is similarly incapable of matching legacy aircraft like the F-15, F-16, and F-22.” And when it comes to supporting troops on the ground, the one job the JSF was supposed to be designed for, “testing shows the F-35 is incapable of performing most of the functions required for an acceptable close support aircraft, functions the A-10 is performing daily in current combat.” One reason for that failure is that the F-35s guns aren’t very accurate. A report noted that pilots routinely miss their targets because of software failures.

As I’ve noted before, almost every new military aircraft, going at least as far back as the early Allison-engined P51 variants, gives off a certain stench of failure in the beginning. Not just aircraft, either: anybody recall back when the preliminary versions of the M1 Abrams MBT—now regarded by one and all as a more-or-less invincible world-beater—was declared a too-slow, too-heavy, too-fragile hunk o’ junk in the early runnin’s?

There’s always a shake-down period before any new piece of military hardware’s finer qualities begin to come shining through, particularly when what we’re talking about isn’t an incremental update we’re talking about, but a relatively radical departure from whatever preceded it. Those shake-down periods can take a long time before all the bugs are worked out, too. And if any of y’all can remember the last time a shiny new system like the F35 came in under—or even CLOSE TO—budget, feel free to remind me. Because I can’t.

For whatever it’s worth, my own opinion is that our mistake was made when we abandoned the F22 platform prematurely. An old Vodkapundit article linked at the end of the above one shares that sentiment:

For the U.S. Air Force, the most obvious alternative would be to resurrect the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor. While reconstituting the production line would be expensive and difficult, it could be done. The U.S. Air Force stored the tooling for the aircraft—and while that storage process has problems, it’s not an insurmountable challenge. The more difficult problem will be the subcomponents. Indeed, most of the Raptor’s antiquated computer hardware hasn’t been built in years. However, a fleet of four hundred new F-22 Raptors would give the service a force capable of knocking down the door for follow-on conventional fighters such as upgraded or even new Lockheed F-16s or Boeing F-15E Strike Eagles.

As Stephen muses, a thornier dilemna would be figuring out where Marine Corps fixed-wing aviation will be left should the F35 be dumped, and how to resolve it. Marine CAS cannot live on Harriers and Ospreys alone, it seems.

Experience shows that almost every attempt at producing any variety of all-purpose, “jack of all trades” device or system, in whatever field of endeavor, is doomed to wind up squarely in “master of none” territory. As the article says, “good enough for government work”—most particularly when it comes to military hardware—is just not good enough. Sadly, that begins to look more and more like where we all are with the F35, I’m afraid.

On the other hand, this part speaks well of the F35’s potential for future success once all its bugs have been well and truly exterminated:

The Washington Post reports that “the late senator John McCain called the F-35 a ‘poster child for acquisition malpractice’ a ‘scandal’ and a ‘tragedy’ at different points during his tenure as Senate Armed Services Committee chairman.” I frequently disagreed with Sen. McCain, but he was correct here. Even after all the time and money invested, the F-35 isn’t very good.

I dunno, man. If McStain was ag’in it, it’s pretty hard for me not to be for it. Tnen again, stopped clocks, blind squirrels, etc—you know the drill.

Share

Crime and (no) punishment

Good ol’ Tucker lays it all out clean and tight for us.

The Russia hoax ended on Wednesday — we can say that. It ended not with a bang, but with the muddled half-memories of a fading old man slipping in and out of focus.

America sat transfixed by Robert Mueller’s halting testimony before Congress. No honest person could have come away at the end believing that the president of the United States colluded with the Russian government to steal an election. That was the allegation, you’ll remember.

And then, after the most extensive investigation in modern American history, we found the truth. And so, we can say conclusively, once again, what we told you the day this all started, the whole thing is a crock. It never happened. They were lying to you. That’s clear now. The debate is over.

What should happen to these people now? Congressman Adam Schiff, for example. Schiff claimed he possessed actual evidence of Russian collusion. And he didn’t just say that one time, he said it repeatedly.

In the end, you know what happened — or didn’t. Schiff did not produce the evidence. He didn’t have it because it doesn’t exist. Schiff was bluffing, which is to say he was lying. He still is, actually. As of Wednesday, Schiff was continuing to claim that the Trump campaign “embraced foreign help, made use of it and covered it up.” In other words, collusion. Schiff still believes the collusion hoax.

Or does he? On Thursday, Adam Schiff went on CNN to carry water for his boss, Nancy Pelosi. “Impeachment might not be a great idea,” he told CNN’s viewers.

But wait, that doesn’t seem to make sense. If Donald Trump is working for a hostile foreign power, as Adam Schiff has told us countless times that he is, how can we not impeach him? No one on CNN asked Adam Schiff to explain that contradiction, unfortunately. Not that it matters. Think about it for a second, and you’ll see exactly what’s going on.

Adam Schiff never believed a word he was saying about Russian collusion. I suppose the good news is Schiff is not delusional. The bad news, though, is that Adam Schiff is a soulless liar. He is a man willing to say literally anything for political advantage, and that’s really the worst of all. Being a lunatic would be much more appealing than that.

For my money, Schiff is probably the lowest, most detestable piece of shit besmirching American politics today. To call him a dirty scumbag is to gratuitously slander dirty bags filled with scum. He is ten pounds of rancid sputum in a five pound sack. Apart from such damning traits as his nonexistent integrity or treacherous nature and speaking purely in physical terms, his bulbous, misshapen head and unpleasant face perfectly bespeak the noxious, calculating character festering within. The greasy, phony, off-kilter smile only adds to the broader nausea. Democrat-Socialist Rule Numero Uno applies tenfold to this asswart: when he’s smiling, it means capital-T Trouble for America.

“Soulless liar” is likely the most positive description a scrupulously honest person could ever offer of him. And even that is probably being overly generous to the abominable wretch. Of course, being the kind of (ulp!) “man” he is, Schiff would probably be quite pleased with the moniker, no doubt considering it flattery most ebullient. And he might just be right, considering; as condemnatory as it is, it doesn’t go far enough, is way too polite, and still far better than he deserves.

Share

Tables: turning

Make it so, Mr President. Hammer and fucking tongs.

During a surprise event on Friday President Trump invited the press into the oval office where Guatemalan Interior Minister Enrique Degenhart and acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan were signing a joint asylum agreement.  The President then held a press conference filled with lots of news.

The Guatemala agreement is certainly news, and Trump also works in a complimentary mention of the Mexican government’s sudden burst of cooperation on border security after he waved the threat of punitive tarriffs in its face. But this is the part I like best:

And we’re doing this all because the Democrats won’t give us what we need. So simple: Get rid of the loopholes; work on asylum. It would take a very short period of time. They won’t do it. All they want to do is impede. They want to investigate. They want to go fishing.

And I watch Bob Mueller, and they have nothing. There’s no collusion, there’s no obstruction. They have nothing. It’s a disgrace.

We want to find out what happened with the last Democrat President. Let’s look into Obama the way they’ve looked at me. From day one, they’ve looked into everything that we’ve done. They could look into the book deal that President Obama made. Let’s subpoena all of his records. Let’s subpoena all of the records having to do with Hillary Clinton and all of the nonsense that went on with Clinton and her foundation and everything else. We could do that all day long.

Damned skippy, Mr Prez. Let’s just do that thing. Subpoena it all, declassify it all, release it all. Bring everything out into the fresh, clear light of day; let’s all see what deep, dark Obama-Clinton skullduggery, manipulation, and treachery might be dragged from under its rock. Full disclosure, full exposure of the lies, the criminal and even treasonous acts, the collusion and conspiracy. The failed attempt to steal an election by fraudulent and illegal means, the subsequent attempt at overturning said election using nefarious methods. The spying, the lying, the mad, amoral drive to seize a power they only ever abused.

Unfortunately for Trump, though, he’s probably gonna have to go out and find himself an honest, non-partisan FBI head before any of that can happen.

Frankly, the Republicans were gentlemen and women. When we had the majority in the House, they didn’t do subpoenas all day long. They didn’t do what they — what these people have done.

What they’re doing is a disgrace. So destructive to our country. And I think that’s why we’re going to take back the House. That’s why we’re easily going to hold the presidency and we’re going to continue to hold the Senate.

Trump moved on to answer questions on Turkey, Guatemala and Mexico before lighting up the Democrat-Socialists again:

You know, the amazing thing about the Democrats: It was all fine, everything was great, four or five years ago, before I was President. And now they think we’re going to win, so they’re doing everything they can — with the impeachment nonsense, where you had no obstruction, you had no collusion.

You know, obstruction is sort of interesting. They’ve interviewed 500 people. They’ve interviewed lawyers. They’re interviewed everybody that they wanted to interview; people that have — I could have kept back by using presidential privilege. I could’ve kept back everybody. They didn’t have to interview anybody.

I gave them a total — and they say “obstruction.” These people are clowns. The Democrats are clowns. They’re being laughed at all over the world. And I watched this morning — I watched Nancy Pelosi trying to get through that, with the performance that Robert Mueller put on, where — I don’t think he ever read the agreement or the document. And the document said, “No collusion.” They don’t even talk about that. So there was no crime. They said, “Well, there was no crime but he obstructed.” How do you obstruct if there’s no crime? But, actually, it was worse than that because it was a phony crime that they put on. The crime was what they put on.

But I watched Mueller — for two and a half years, we’ve watched this. And that’s the best they have, and it’s a disgrace. And the world is laughing at them. And unfortunately, it’s so bad for our country. It’s bad in our relationships with other countries, including Russia. There’s no reason we shouldn’t get along with Russia. There’s no reason we shouldn’t get along with other countries.

Big Boss Man is sounding in fine fettle and feisty after this week’s resounding repudiaton of the coup cabal’s impeachment plot. He’s slipped the Mueller leash, and is now free to launch a vigorous counterattack against his tormenters, with fewer (but still some) political restrictions and repercussions hanging over his head. So get going, Mr Prez; your encouraging words are fine and all, but what we all need to see now is real no-holds-barred action taken against the vile, villainous curs who so scurrilously tried to pull the White House down around your ears.

Don’t hesitate, don’t waffle, don’t take counsel of your fears (or those of your more diffident advisors); don’t allow yourself to be talked into a “cautious” or “careful” approach. Go on the attack—a real Alpha Strike against the sleazy, conniving bastards who wantonly subjected you, your family, your team, and your legion of supporters to more than two years of misery, stress, and harrassment—all of it based entirely on nothing but utter bullshit.

It’s now time to make the bastards pay for the damage they’ve done, the destruction they’ve wrought, the discord they’ve sown—pay in FULL, cash money, right up front. The prize here isn’t mere vengeance; it’s justice—not just for yourself but for ALL of us, carrying along with it as it does a stark warning to any who would ever contemplate committing such profoundly heinous deeds again.

Do it. MAKE. THEM. PAY. Do it now.

Share

Comments conversation

So you CF miscreants may (or may not) have been aware of the recent banning of the latest in a long string of annoying comment-section blowflies, a human carbuncle yclept “dmvgringo.” Now, trolls and troll-banning aren’t any kind of big deal at all; just part and parcel of the blogging game, that’s all. Having been at this game since the very dawning of the modern blog-era, I’ve seen ’em come and I’ve seen ’em go, by the numbers. It’s always the same, as predictable as the sunrise, almost as if the trolls were following a script or guidebook or something.

This dmvmosquito guy is an example from one among several species of common troll defacing comments sections since the early days: the Keyboard Commando. All hat and no cattle, the Keyboard Commando blathers ceaselessly about how eager he is to launch The Revolution Proper and start in shooting people. He alternates that with rabid condemnation of everybody not quite as committed as he to embracing the coming putsch and/or civil war as “weaklings,” “pussies,” “lightweights,” and such—despite never having actually met the target of his outrage, thus knowing nothing whatsoever about how the other fellow might be spending his days off. Sooner or later, ablaze with a desperate craving for attention and affirmation, the Keyboard Commando will resort to hurling the most unimaginative, junior-high-level personal insults in the common vernacular. He may in time descend to real stalker-type behavior, issuing blood-curdling threats against specific writers or blog habitues, at which point the assistance of law enforcement has sometimes been sought.

Naturally, almost all of these pasty doughboys wreak their online vengeance against a bored and indifferent world not from a reinforced, secure bunker bristling with rifles, subguns, sidearms, heavy weapons, night-vision systems, explosive ordinance, and Type IV body armor. Oh, no. They urge the violent overthrow of FederalGovCo and all its works from a battered armchair deeply ensconced in a personal Fortress Of Solitude:h Mom’s war-torn basement, over an internet connection Mom writes the check for each month. They’ve fired not a single shot in anger, at not a single living soul. Despite all the thunderous bravado, they never will. Highly-skilled, resourceful, steely-eyed warriors on the Innarnuts, in the real world the furious clack-clack-clack of keys a-typing is the most dangerous threat they can manage, one easily dismissed by the more stout-hearted sorts among us. There has never yet been a case of grievous bodily injury done to anyone I’m aware of which was inflicted by perusal of their misspelled, unpunctuated, ungrammatical screeds.

What gripes the pitiful dweebs most is being denied the attention, deference, and awe they so desperately seek. In their skewed, self-absorbed view, general acknowledgment of their obvious superiority is no more nor less than their just due. Yet somehow, inexplicably, recognition of the simple facts eludes them; more unfair still, it seems not to be forthcoming.

The most amusing chapter in the ongoing saga of this dmvmosquito person’s own lonely quest for ego reinforcement has to be the time when, after having found his way around his dismissal from these environs to excrete a few more buttnuggets into my comments section and then seeing the turds promptly flushed by yrs trly, the twerp emitted an agonized, girlish scree complaining about…wait for it…

wait for it

“Censorship.” Followed right away by a slobbery string of pointless invective—full of sound and fury, signifying absolutely nothing.

No really, y’all. He complains about having been 86’ed for tossing obnoxious, peurile insults at me, then whines like a little bitch about “censorship.” To wit:

Ah, there’s nothing like the stench of censorship
in the morning………it smells like child rapists, faggots dying of AIDS, treasonous shitbags, statists, communists, the Uniparty, registered republican voters, boomer cuck defeat, and Mike.

Censorship. Because, you see, as the sole proprietor of this blog I am Constitutionally required to observe and guarantee, to any mouth-breathing retard who wanders in here, his 1st Amendment right to use MY platform to call me a faggot, child rapist, et al. On a website I designed, built, maintain, write, AND FUCKING PAY FOR myself. Free speech demands this, see. As if HE has some unalienable right to break into MY house, shit on MY sofa, pour MY beer over MY head, and then bleat about “injustice” should I call the cops, or just physically toss his sorry ass out myself. Like I am somehow obligated to let stand untouched a whole long string of offensive comments calling me a “faggot dying of AIDS,” among other reprehensible things—a stinking, greasy loaf pinched by some random obstreperous lackwit—because, y’know, CENSORSHIP!

Yeah, no. Not happening, Lonely Boy. It is to laugh, and laugh, and laugh. As I’ve told others of your ilk over the years: go get your own goddamned website. Then you can say bad things about me to your heart’s content, unmolested. I promise you I won’t give a damp fart. Around here, when the day comes that I’m willing to sit back and meekly put up with some flabby pud-puller insulting me ON MY OWN TURF and just let it all slide…well, actually, that day ain’t ever gonna come. You should NOT be holding your breath in anticipation of it, either. Trust me on this, little man.

It’s not difficult for any moderately web-savvy person—especially one with plenty of free time on his hands thanks to his not having friends, dates, a job, or a life outside the dank confines of Mommy’s “downstairs apartment”—to find ways around a simple IP-lockout type of ban. And I have neither the time nor the give-a-damn to go to any great lengths making sure the place is one hundred percent secure against any reinfestation of pestilences and vermin previously expelled. When and if they crawl back in, I just quickly delete the leavings and get on with my life. According to past experience, Whack-A-Moles like dmvmosquito can be expected to pop back up with some regularity in the wake of a swinging of the ban-hammer. Eventually, it dawns on even the dimmest bulb that their efforts gain them little or nothing, and are noticed by their intended audience not at all. Then they scuttle off to bother some other blogger, and the process begins anew.

You just can’t quit me, can you, ‘gringo? I never did get such self-defeating, futile behavior; the very last thing I would want to do is inflict my society on people who have made it clear that I was unwelcome. But his obssession would seem to outweigh his self-respect; dmvmosquito will doubtless continue to vie for attention, any attention, about once a week or so here. His droppings will be duly scooped up and trashed. And eventually, he’ll fade away. All a very minor nuisance, to be sure, of no more impact or significance than the annoying buzz of a gnat bumping against a window before it gets smushed flat. Routine, all routine.

The only reason I’m nattering on about such trivia at all is that I received some few emails today, from commenters who found themselves unable to post for some reason, wondering if the outage might be system-wide. I suspect a causal connection to the banning of several IPs associated with our chum dmvmosquito; I’ll look into that possibility, to the admittedly limited extent of my expertise, over the weekend. But meanwhiles, I’d bigly appreciate a head’s-up from anyone else suffering like problems, via dropping a line to me at mike @ thisurl.

I think I’m also gonna write up and post a detailed comments policy in the sidebar, laying out for all comers exactly what kind of hijinks and tomfoolery are tolerated within the rowdy confines of this hogwallow, and what kind ain’t. It won’t matter, of course. Clueless trolls bereft of a shred of self-awareness or self-respect are gonna embarrass themselves by putting their inadequacy, ignorance, and neediness on public display for people who have no interest at all, as always. It’s just what the troll does; like a new puppy peeing on the rug, he lacks some essential knowledge and therefore can perceive no need to modify his behavior. But maybe having some clearly-stated guidelines up will be of some small value to somebody out there, who knows.

Share

Don’t dream it’s over…even now

They’ll never stop. You know the chorus already.

Former special counsel Robert Mueller’s testimony Wednesday has been described as “excruciatingly awkward,” “confused,” “struggling” and “a stammering, stuttering mess.”

I saw something completely different. From my perspective, after six hours of testimony, it was the 74-year-old career prosecutor and law enforcement officer who won the day. It wasn’t that close.

Tasked with overseeing the most high-profile investigation of our time, Mueller managed to complete the investigation without appearing to have a partisan agenda, with both sides embracing him at times. Even Trump said he acted “honorably”—before he turned on Mueller as “conflicted” and partisan—and touted “total exoneration” soon after Mueller concluded his work. Mueller’s down-the-middle, leak-free handling of the high-stakes investigation was an object lesson in professionalism.

And Wednesday’s performance was no different.

Mueller didn’t want to testify, for good reason. He had done his work already. As a prosecutor, he had to ensure he stayed detached from the political process, presenting his findings in a manner that did not make it appear he was choosing a side or advancing an agenda. One slip of the tongue could be used to undermine his team’s work.

In the long view, the verdict of history depends most of all on Mueller being seen as nonpartisan, measured and above the fray—an operator whose work is unimpeachable and can be relied on (now, or after Trump’s term, or years from now) as a bulletproof statement of fact. So all the little details of the case that members were trying to ferret out pale in comparison to his ability to maintain that status and be seen as a reliable agent of impartiality. During the hearing, that was clearly his goal. In doing that, he succeeded, and history can thank him for it.

The disconnect from reality here is as astounding as it is comprehensive. And sick, delusional droolcases like this oaf are the selfsame people who seek to “Amendment 25” Trump even now, mind you. One can scarcely wrap one’s mind around it, really. It’s not just stupefying, though; it’s also more than a little bit alarming, at this late date.

We can no longer indulge ANY notion of treating with these people as if they were well-intentioned, persuadable, or at all rational opponents. By now, I’m not sure if even the strongest meds available would help. I’m thinking nothing less radical than electroshock therapy stands a chance of piercing the hallucinatory cocoon of pure fantasy they’ve swaddled themselves in as a shield against, y’know, objective reality.

Nobody should be thinking this lunatic is the only one either, or even all that unusual. In truth, I doubt there’s enough available rubber-room square footage in the whole country to house ’em all. Maybe lobotomy en masse might be worth a try.

Share

The Democrat-Socialists’ most spectacularly, awesomely awesome self-beclownment yet

One for the record books, people. Yes, it’s difficult to see how they’re going to top yesterday’s total fiasco. But we all know they will—and that right soon, likely enough.


Ahh, but before they all get their ducks in a row and start trying to claim they never really expected all that much from this “hearing” con-job, remember:


Next: is it parody? It just gets ever harder to tell, don’t it?

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Robert Mueller was being criticized for seemingly answering questions slowly, not recalling key details of his investigation, and appearing to be confused throughout his testimony Wednesday.

After a brief recess, Mueller insisted he was entirely lucid.

“I hear a few murmurs out there that I’ve lost it,” he said. “Well, I haven’t lost it. I’ve still got it. In fact, I’m still sharp as a tack.”

Before testimony could resume, however, Mueller interrupted the proceedings, appearing to reach for his cell phone. “I really have to take this,” he said apologetically as he reached into his pocket and pulled out a banana. “Yeah, go for Bob.”

Mueller proceeded to have what appeared to be a five-minute conversation on the fruit as bewildered congresspeople looked on. “Well, tell them I don’t want to be there this Friday. Matlock’s on, you know that. You know I don’t go out when Matlock is on.”
He shrugged apologetically at those in the room, mouthing “sorry.”

At publishing time, Mueller was seen giving clear, concise, lucid testimony to a soap dispenser in the restroom.

Heh. I do have a slight problem here, though. I admit I haven’t watched a single moment of Mueller’s “testimony,” and I don’t plan to either. But for whatever it’s worth, here’s my idea: Mr Integrity’s senile-old-fool act was just that: an act.

Since his bogus report came out, he’s been sliming around tossing out innuendo and insinuation right and left, broadly dropping hints about not being able to “exonerate” Trump—a legal standard accepted precisely NOWHERE in the entirety of American jurisprudence, as such the one and only thing truly NOT “in his purview” as special witch-hunter—and casting aspersions to anyone willing to listen about Trump’s guilt, particularly on the issue of “obstruction”—another non-issue irrelevance, since, as declared explicitly in his own fucking report, there was no underlying crime for Trump to have “obstructed” the investigation of.

No. Just…no. The Mueller “investigation” was from the beginning no more nor less than exactly what Trump said it was all along: a partisan witch-hunt whose goal was NOT to look into “Russian collusion,” but to: A) obfuscate the Obama admin’s and Hillary campaign’s multiple illegalities; B) smear Trump, shift attention away from their actual crimes to his nonexistent ones, also protecting dirty co-conspirators like Comey, Brennan, et al; and C) provide a pretext for removing Trump from office via impeachment, the 25th Amendment option, or whatever else they could somehow cobble together.

Notice how nobody, not one living soul, made any mention at all of Mueller’s putative mental difficulties back in May, when the report came out? Nor have they since then, when he was casting his slippery little aspersion hither and yon, going to such extremes with the campaign to “keep hope alive” that Barr felt it necessary to call ol’ Honest Bob directly, with recorders running and witnesses present? Barr doesn’t seem to have noticed Mueller being incoherent, confused, and out of touch during that conversation, did he? Odd, that.

Next, the Congressional Democrat-Socialist coup plotters spent the last two weeks coaching Mueller on his testimony, a breach of ethics so broad you could drive a Hummer through it. And guess what? Not one peep from anyone about Mueller’s sudden-onset Alzheimer’s. Not that I would have expected the conniving Demonrats to public acknowledge it were it true, mind. But given how important this was to their coup plot, don’t you think that maybe, just maybe, they would have tried to postpone the thing, or something else along those lines, in order to avert the looming disaster?

And make no mistake, folks, disaster it most certainly was. But you don’t have to take my word for it.


How bad was it? Even Hitler himself knows. A grief-stricken Chris Wallace, Fox News’s senior NeverTrumpTard, also acknowledged the catastrophe, however heartbrokenly:

Wallace said, “This has been a disaster for the Democrats and a disaster for the reputation of Robert Mueller. He has seemed very uncertain with his brief. He doesn’t seem to know what things are in the report.”

Bingo, and no accident. Mueller even made a completely spurious and risible claim to total ignorance about Fusion GPS—which, along with everything else I just mentioned, bolsters my belief that his “I’m old, I’m confused!” routine was nothing but subterfuge; there can’t be a single soul in the whole country who’s paid even cursory attention to the news these last two years who doesn’t know perfectly well who Fusion GPS is, and what their role was in this whole flea circus. Mueller was lying—full stop, end of story. His stated reluctance to testify at the Democrat-Socialists’ dumbshow, along with his testimony, can be put down to a last-ditch, desperate attempt to evade the perjury trap he had already laid for himself. Brandon Weichert says don’t be fooled:

What Americans saw Wednesday was an act by Mueller to deflect attention away from the fact that his investigation was never going to “prove” any “collusion.” The entire thing was a grotesque act of political theater designed to give the anti-Trump forces of the establishment the boost they needed going into 2020.

Mueller also wanted to protect critical intelligence sources from deeper public scrutiny, meaning that those responsible for initiating the absurd investigation into Trump will not be punished for their wrongdoing and, further, that these same people will be free to attempt similar shenanigans in the future. That’s right. The deep state will live to fight another day. Now that their attempt to defeat Trump through investigations and false accusations has faltered, Mueller would rather be viewed as a hapless hack than as the corrupt top cop he is.

Mueller, I believe, accepted the role as special counsel investigating claims of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence because his ego would not allow him to pass up the chance. Not only did Mueller personally and politically dislike Trump (being a “Republican,” as we know, does not preclude NeverTrumpism), but as a career federal prosecutor, Mueller could not help but to envision himself the man to take down this much-maligned president.

Pride goes before a fall, though, and Mueller has suffered through the greatest ego deflation of any public figure in recent memory. Touted as the purest of the pure; proclaimed to be the most respected man in Washington; portrayed as being too smart and tough for Trump to handle, Mueller has been stymied at every turn—and had minimal effect on Trump.

The world did not witness the public nervous breakdown of a once-powerful member of the elite in that hearing. Instead, we saw the shiftiest move an inside operator could make in these tough circumstances. Mueller played dumb; he allowed himself to be the center of a partisan feeding frenzy, while ominously insisting that the president was neither guilty nor innocent—a sort of legal purgatory, awaiting final judgement. 

Yep, that’s about it. Mueller squirmed, wriggled, and gyrated like a worm on a hot griddle, doing his level best to avoid speaking the truth, which remains exactly as was stated in the report which bears his now-blackened name: “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

Ultimately, the whole doomed farce was never about “Russian collusion” anyway, really. In the end, it all comes down to one, thing and one thing alone: the Democrat-Socialist Party, a criminal enterprise masquerading as a legitimate political party, flatly refuses to abide by the results of any election they lose. They sought to overturn Trump’s 2016 victory right out of the gate, as free and fair an election as any can be that has the Democrat-Socialists participating in it. So far, they’ve failed. But there’s a cautionary note to be sounded as well, and Francis does so:

The Left is desperate. Desperate people do desperate things. They stake it all on long odds. They grasp at their sole remaining chance to prevail, however slender, and refuse to look past it. And if possible, they shave the dice, tilt the pinball machine, bribe the refs.

This is the hour of maximum danger.

Recall how many Left-inclined commentators and spokesmen have worried publicly about the outbreak of a second civil war, fomented by us in the Right. Leftist mouthpieces have a history of “worrying” about what the Right will do, while (or just before) the Left does that exact thing. That is where the Republic stands as you read this.

There’s no need for me to wrap hundreds more words around this matter. The writing on the wall is large enough to be read from orbit.

He ain’t wrong about that. Powder dry, mags loaded, y’all. That said, though, I just can’t resist a little pointing and laughing, in the form of my own message to the shitlib Left; the Democrat-Socialist seditionist politicians; the NeverTrumpTard phony conservatives; despicable cucks of all stripes; Enemedia hacks; and every other huckster, Swamp rat, and general reprobate guilty of either foisting this pustulent parade of scoundrels on us or cheerleading the damned thing from the wings. STRONG message follows, on behalf of Da Prez and all of his loyal, much-put-upon supporters:

SUCK IT, you goddamned motherfucking cretinous reptiles. Suck it long, suck it deep, suck it hard, suck it good. And when you’re done lip-locking my schlong, don’t you even DREAM of spitting back any spunk. You’ll swallow every motherfucking drop, lest I clout you right upside your fucking head with a nail-studded Louisville Slugger and make you do it all over again. Then DROP DEAD. And I DO mean dead, dead, dead. You filthy pieces of shit. You bottom-feeding, loathsome scumsuckers. You treasonous, contemptible fuckwits. You cancerous polyps on a warthog’s asshole. Fuck every last one of you all to Hell and gone. EVERY. LAST. ONE.

There, I think that about covers it.

Share

CF Comments Policy Statement

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit. Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't.

Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

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

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

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine." - Joseph Goebbels

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it." - NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in." -Bill Whittle

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