Welcome to Ye Olde Colde Furye Blogge’s shiny new open-comments thread, where y’all can have at it as you wish, on any topic you like. Do note that the official CF comments policy remains in effect here, as enumerated in the left sidebar. All new posts will appear below this one. There will be blood…
An in-depth look at my main man, Ron DeSantis.
At Yale, DeSantis majored in history and played on the baseball team, in the outfield. In the Yale tradition, the team never had a winning season while DeSantis was there. (“Pretty sure we were the worst team in Division One,” one of his teammates told me.) In his senior year, he was among the best hitters, batting .336, and was elected captain. His former teammates’ recollections are sharply divided, but nearly everyone I spoke with remembered him as singularly focussed, with little time for parties or goofing off; he worked several jobs to help pay his tuition. “Ron was a bit of a loner, not a social butterfly,” Dave Fortenbaugh, a former teammate, told me. “He spent a lot of hours in the library.”
Some recalled that DeSantis was so intensely focussed that he wasn’t much of a teammate. “Ron is the most selfish person I have ever interacted with,” another teammate told me. “He has always loved embarrassing and humiliating people. I’m speaking for others—he was the biggest dick we knew.” But the same teammate praised DeSantis’s intellect. “This is the frustrating part. He’s so fucking smart and so creative,” he said. “You couldn’t even plagiarize off his work. He’d take some angle, and everyone knew there was only one person who could have done that.”
After graduating, with honors, DeSantis taught history for a year at the Darlington School, a private institution in Rome, Georgia, before enrolling at Harvard Law School; a friend told me that he’d been inspired by the movie “A Few Good Men.” In the film, Tom Cruise plays a judge advocate general—a Navy attorney—who defends marines accused of a deadly assault at the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base. With the war in Iraq still raging, DeSantis, too, became a judge advocate general. He was posted to Naval Station Mayport, near Jacksonville, and also to Guantánamo, where he dealt with detainees. A colleague who served with DeSantis remembered, “Ron was a voracious worker, and he worked at phenomenal speed. He was a superb writer, especially for his age.” Even then, his ambition seemed consuming. “Ron’s a user,” the former colleague told me. “If you had utility to him, he would be nice to you. If you didn’t, he wouldn’t give you the time of day.”
In 2007, DeSantis deployed to Iraq as a lawyer for seal Team One, which was conducting operations in Ramadi. The seals have a reputation for being secretive and insular, but DeSantis enjoyed their company, his father told me: “He worked out with them.” DeSantis briefed the seals on rules of engagement—when they could shoot, how they should treat prisoners. “Of course we were worried about him,” his father said. “Ron told us he was just in one place, in Ramadi, but afterwards we found out that he’d been moving all around the area, from city to city, with the seals. It really upset my wife.”
Back in Florida, DeSantis started dating Casey Black, a television news reporter for WJXT, in Jacksonville; in 2010, they were married. Not long afterward, a seat opened up in the Sixth Congressional District, south of Jacksonville Beach. In 2012, DeSantis entered the race.
DeSantis campaigned on smaller government and lower taxes, arguing to overturn Obamacare and eliminate entire federal agencies. “My mission was largely to stop Barack Obama,” he told a crowd later. As the campaign got under way, DeSantis published a book titled “Dreams from Our Founding Fathers”—a swipe at the President’s memoir. For a campaign book, it’s unusually wide-ranging, with carefully argued sections on the Federalist Papers, the Progressive Era, and the leftist theoretician Saul Alinsky. The basic contention, though, would have been familiar to followers of Barry Goldwater: “The conceit that underlies many of Obama’s policies and his allies is that virtually any issue, from the waistline of children to the temperature of the earth, is ripe for intervention of expert (and progressive) central planners.” DeSantis’s book was largely ignored—he once told a crowd that it was “read by about a dozen people”—but his message resonated in the Sixth District, one of the most conservative in the state. He won the election, and was reëlected twice by wide margins.
In Congress, an institution where seniority matters, DeSantis had little time to make a substantive impact. Theatrically, though, he created an impression. He helped found the Freedom Caucus, an invitation-only club of hard-right conservatives, and he was among the Republicans who took the government to the brink of default by refusing to raise the national-debt ceiling. Many people worried that the move would harm the government’s credit rating and the country’s economy. Even John Boehner, the House Speaker, opposed it. In response, DeSantis joined a group of Republican congressmen who threatened to remove Boehner from his post. “There were governing conservatives and shutdown conservatives,” David Jolly, a congressman from Florida who served with DeSantis, told me. “Ron was a shutdown conservative.”
Many of DeSantis’s colleagues remember him as remote. A former member of the Florida delegation told me, “He always had his earbuds in, to keep people away.” Others, like Jolly, had a more temperate view. “He’s a little reclusive, a bit of an odd duck,” Jolly said, “but he’s just incredibly disciplined.”
For anybody who’s as fervent a DeSantis fanboi as I am, this is one heck of an absorbing article. For those of you who aren’t necessarily so solidly in the DeSantis camp just yet, there’s a lot in it you’ll enjoy nonetheless. Caveat: since it’s the New Yorker we’re talking about here, be prepared to pull your hip waders all the way up to your chin; you’ll be wading through a veritable Okeefenokee Swamp of liberal bullshit and wouldn’t want to get yourself coated from top to toe in the nasty, stinky ichor. Exhibit A:
For decades, the Democratic Party had commanded a majority of Florida’s registered voters. But the state was changing, as Trump’s election helped energize a shift in political affinities. The Republican Party’s rank and file became increasingly radical, and G.O.P. leaders appeared only too happy to follow them. “There was always an element of the Republican Party that was batshit crazy,” Mac Stipanovich, the chief of staff to Governor Bob Martinez, a moderate Republican, told me. “They had lots of different names—they were John Birchers, they were ‘movement conservatives,’ they were the religious right. And we did what every other Republican candidate did: we exploited them. We got them to the polls. We talked about abortion. We promised—and we did nothing. They could grumble, but their choices were limited.
All those stupid Trumpians, just useful idiots waiting to be exploited by the more intelligent “moderates” whose sole ambition upon gaining office is to betray the drooling schmucks who vote for them as reliably as yesterday’s sunrise, regardless of how many GOPe knives they’ve had to pull from between their shoulder blades over all those years of Old Yeller-style loyalty. “Increasingly radical,” “batshit crazy”—by which they mean “actually conservative,” “principled,” and “enthusiastic.” Do please note that, as with every Establishment Media propaganda outlet, the New Yorker will never allow the words “radical” and “Democrat” to appear in the same sentence. Exhibit B:
“So what happened?” Stipanovich continued. “Trump opened Pandora’s box and let them out. And all the nasty stuff that was in the underbelly of American politics got a voice. What was thirty-five per cent of the Republican Party is now eighty-five per cent. And it’s too late to turn back.”
“All the nasty stuff that was in the underbelly of American politics”—you listening out there, Joe and Jane Lunchbucket? Because as far as Uniparty factotums are concerned, they’re playing your song with the above condescending tripe. Now if all you McDonald’s-eating, WalMart-shopping, God-bothering, Coors-Lite-slurping, burger-grilling, New Yorker-ignoring, blue-collar-working mouthbreathers would kindly just lock yourselves back into Pandora’s box again, we can get back to ruling you disgusting fatbody boobs, as is our Divine Right.
“Nasty stuff” let out by Trump, to the undying mortification of Beltway Bandits one and all—that would be what Real Americans know as simple, common-sense, Constitutional conservatism. Y’know, revolting, freakishly depraved scrapings from off the distended American underbelly such as, oh, say, religious faith; a strictly limited central government; an abiding respect for tradition, family ties, and our shared American heritage; independence of mind and of spirit; a natural, unpretentious sense of patriotism, duty, and pride in American strength and success.
If you can overlook the obnoxious current of petty, supercilious conceit and effete urban sanctimony that runs through this entire piece like a strong shore-side undertow, there really is a great bounty of information to be found here, and much to be learned from it. There’s an irritating trend I’m noticing more and more of lately, however: the self-evident Establishment Media campaign to gin up some real hostility between Trump and DeSantis, a transparent ploy intended to dilute and deflect the burgeoning opposition to the Conqueror Left’s long, victorious march by pitting the movement’s two most important leadership figures against one another. It’s another dismaying example of The Enemy’s unswerving focus on retaining the initiative via keeping its Offensive squad always on the field, while the Deee-fense stays on the sidelines riding the pines. That’s been a brilliantly successful game plan for the Left over recent years, notching win after unanswered win for Team Tyranny. Hopefully, both Trump and DeSantis are savvy enough players not to let themselves be taken in by it this go-round.
The New Yorker, casting about for an effective weapon to wield against a suddenly rising political star they clearly fear and loathe, expends a ludicrous amount of effort and column-inches on slamming the Florida Governor’s appropriately liberty-oriented Chinky Pox response. In this long piece they trot out the very same litany of distortion and escalating fabrication that permanently obliterated the public’s trust in its governmental, health care, and national-media institutions, in hopes that they’ll work equally well to discredit DeSantis’s staunch resistance to permitting Florida to lapse into panic-driven medical tyranny on his watch.
Alas for them, there’s something those poor media dears just aren’t seeing, and the irony of it is hilarious.
As the death toll mounted, he was mocked by critics as “DeathSantis” and denounced by the mainstream press. “Any public distrust of this administration has been well-earned,” the Miami Herald editorial board wrote. “We can’t trust the governor with our lives.” A former political adviser with knowledge of the covid response told me that DeSantis was unfazed: “We were getting crucified, but to him it was just noise.” DeSantis revels in defying what he sees as a corrupt and self-satisfied liberal establishment. Those who work closely with him say that he is unique among elected officials in his disregard for public opinion and the press. “Ron’s strength as a politician is that he doesn’t give a fuck,” a Republican consultant who knows him told me. “Ron’s weakness as a politician is that he doesn’t give a fuck. Big donors? He doesn’t give a shit. Cancels on them all the time.”
Maybe you ink-stained wretches should sit down for this staggering revelation, but you’ll be seeing a whole lot more disregard for the press henceforth, and not just from DeSantis either. There are uncounted millions of us out there who have been waiting for years—decades—for a leader who shares our disgust with the corrupt and self-satisfied liberal establishment to come along, one with the cojones to revel in defying the sorry bastards.
DeSantis might be “unique among elected officials” in his disdain for the liberal press, but that attitude is universal among MAGA people, America Firsters, Trump supporters, and DeSantis fans. Trust me, whenever Ron or his press secretary, the seriously awesome Christina Pushaw, take off the gloves to throw some bare-knuckles haymakers at liberal-media glass jaws, there are hordes of DeSantis People cheering him or her on. When some press-gaggle carbuncle waxes all butthurt over not being treated quite as deferentially as His Royal Carbuncleness had come to expect, whereupon Our Boy refuses to be intimidated by the wormy likes of him, throws press-room politesse to the wind, and doubles down on his verbal Alpha strike instead, our delight in Da Guv soars to new heights.
See, it’s like this: we don’t like you cringing hyenas one jot or tittle more than Ron DeSantis does. The more openly he hates you, the more we love him for it. It’s why any of your number still foolish or delusional enough to imagine himself a respected and admired Hero Of The Proletariat™ is going to suffer a terrible shock any minute now, a powerful enough one to potentially stop his heart for good. Because any minute now, it’s going to be brought home to the fool that, when Trump characterized the shitlib media as not merely a nuisance but in fact a deadly enemy of the Republic, We The People agreed completely with his assessment. We’d realized it already, and were glad that somebody finally had the guts to come right out and speak the plain truth without any of the usual hemming and hawing around.
We are legion. We are fed up. And we can only be pushed so far before we start to push back. The meteoric rise of Ron DeSantis is but the barest beginning of it. And the harder shitlibs weep and wail about what a mean old poopyhead Fascist he is, the harder we will laugh at their absurd melodramatics, and the bigger our army will become.
8The Supreme Court has handed down its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Mississippi abortion case. There will be countless analyses and opinion pieces to follow, but the short of it is this: The Court has formally overturned its rulings in Roe v. Wade (1973) and Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992). The official holding is this: “The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”
The news isn’t as stunning as it might otherwise have been absent the leak, early in May, of the draft opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito. Though it is not identical, the decision, handed down Friday morning, largely tracks the February draft.
That draft did not include the breakdown of the justices, though the rumors swirling with it hinted at it being five-to-four (with the conservative and liberal wings voting in their respective blocs and Chief Justice Roberts attempting to thread the needle between them). Now we have the official split: Justice Alito wrote the opinion, with Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett joining, and Chief Justice Roberts concurring. As expected, Justices Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan dissented.
Contra the deceitful shrieking of shitlib hysterics, this decision neither “ends” nor “bans” a single fucking thing. The Court’s reasoning is impeccable, its ruling unassailable on any grounds except the Left’s selfish obsession with consequence-free promiscuity. As is abundantly clear to all rational, fair-minded grownups, there is NO “right” to abortion to be found in the US Constitution, in which the word “abortion” doesn’t appear even once, under any of the various noms de subterfuge the baby-murderin’ Left cobbled together to make a most dark and ugly thing sound less objectionable to sane people: “women’s health care,” “a woman’s right to choose,” “women’s reproductive freedom,” among other innocuous-seeming euphemisms.
So with Roe being officially rendered null and void, the abortion conflict moves back to the Several States, which is where it should have been all along. The most interesting thing from here on out isn’t the issue itself, but the Left’s psychotic overreaction. The big question for Our Side: are we adequately prepared for the Leftist terrorism, violence, and lawlessness sure to come in response to their having to choke down two (2) major defeats in as many days? I mean, it’s not as if they’re going to any great trouble to obscure their plans or anything.
Jane’s Revenge Plans Roe v. Wade Reveal ‘Night of Rage,’ ‘Carrying that Anger Out into the World Expressing it Physically’
The radical pro-abortion group, Jane’s Revenge, is planning more acts of domestic terrorism when the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Roe v. Wade is revealed, dubbed a “Night of Rage: An Autonomous Call to Action Against Patriarchal Supremacy.”The group posted its plans on the Anarchists Library website at the end of May in expectation of the ruling, expected sometime in June.
Here are some excerpts from the manifesto:
This is an event that should inspire rage in millions of people who can get pregnant…and yet, the response thus far has been tepid.
We have agonized over this apparent absence of indignation. Why is it that we are so afraid to unleash hell upon those who are destroying us? Fear of state repression is valid, but this goes deeper than that.
Whatever form your fury takes, the first step is feeling it.
The next step is carrying that anger out into the world and expressing it physically.
Consider this your call to action.
On the night the final ruling is issued——a specific date we cannot yet predict, but we know is arriving imminently——we are asking for courageous hearts to come out after dark.
Whoever you are and wherever you are, we are asking for you to do what you can to make your anger known.
We have selected a time of 8 pm for actions nationwide to begin, but know that this is a general guideline. There may be other considerations involved in planning time and place. We do not claim to speak for every community or crew. We are simply calling out to you. And we hope you answer our cries.
The manifesto concludes, “To those who work to oppress us: If abortion isn’t safe, you aren’t either. We are everywhere.”
And there you have it: a direct, explicit call to violence, bloodshed, civil disorder, and organized mass brigandry. It’s as plainspoken and brass-bold a threat against the public weal as has ever been made…and our current piss-poor excuse for an “Attorney General” offers his usual bland shrug of the shoulders as his only reassurance that he will be attentive to his sworn duty to uphold law and order—a duty both he and the corrupt and overtly-politicized DoJ he oversees care not one whit about when those under threat hold the wrong political opinions and beliefs.
Too many of us are shocked, horrified, and indignant that the Left should be so nasty, so brutish, so gosh-darned uncivil in their open declaration of war against all decent, normal Americans. Those people are stupid as all hell, wittingly blind, and badly in need of a clue, which they could easily have picked up by no more difficult or taxing expedient than watching the 6 o’clock nightly news on their TeeWee since about mid-2015 or so. To claim to be surprised every time the violent Left *gasp!* advocates violence and then takes to the streets to make good on their promise of right ought to embarrass the living hell out of anyone admitting to it.
We’ve all seen this dumbshow a thousand and one times by now; we know perfectly well how the story ends. To my way of thinking, this time Real Americans must not sit idly by and let it all happen again without resistance—REAL resistance, PHYSICAL resistance. This time, Leftists must not be the only ones hitting the streets to visit mayhem and retribution upon their hated foes. If terrorist militias such as Jane’s Revenge follow through on their vow of chaos and destruction, then the good, the decent, and the righteous will be presented with a golden opportunity to settle the accounts, to make the wreckers and the ruiners pay for their feral perfidy at long last. May we not let it pass us by.
They say it’s a call to action? They damned well ought to get themselves some, then, and plenty of it.
SEND IT update! The first faint rumblings of a little return fire.
15 States Vow To Protect Oil, Gas Industry From ‘Woke’ Banks
A coalition of 15 states announced a commitment to scrutinize future business with banks that divest from the fossil fuel industry.The coalition of top state financial officers, formed by West Virginia State Treasurer Riley Moore, collectively represents more than $600 billion in public assets under management, according to the announcement. The officials wrote a letter to banking industry leaders Monday, warning that they would begin considering institutions’ boycotts of fossil fuel companies before awarding state contracts.
“Reckless attacks on law-abiding energy companies cut off paychecks for workers and take food off the tables of hard-working families,” Moore and the other officials wrote. “The Biden Administration has resumed these attacks by attempting to ban energy exploration on public lands and reportedly pressuring U.S. banks and financial institutions to limit, encumber, or outright refuse financing for traditional energy production companies.”
“These misguided political schemes have impeded economic growth, driven up consumer costs, and regressed our country to foreign energy dependence,” the letter continued.
The fossil fuel industry provides jobs, health insurance, infrastructure and quality of life to Americans nationwide, they added.
Since taking office, President Joe Biden has blocked major pipelines, ditched oil drilling projects, introduced sweeping regulations and banned new oil and gas leases on federal lands. His administration is also pushing the Build Back Better Act, the budget bill passed by the House last week that includes several green energy handouts and a tax on methane emissions.
“Woke capitalists and globalist actors have been using the guise of climate change to press for anti-American reforms that reduce our country’s competitiveness against hostile nations like Russia and China,” Moore said in a statement.
“As a result, in less than a year our country has gone from energy independence to having a President who is begging OPEC and Russia to pump more oil,” he continued. “It’s time we fight back to protect our economies, jobs, tax revenue and energy independence from these increasing attacks on our critical industries.”
It most certainly is at that—time, and well past time. But don’t let’s be calling these assuredly political schemes “misguided.” They are no such thing; the skulking malefactors behind the curtain know exactly what they’re doing, and the ruin and catastrophe they cause is not some random blunder or unforeseeable misfortune, but the carefully calculated end product of a long-term program conceived, implemented, and managed by evil, monstrous predators.
2My deepest, most heartfelt sympathy goes out to Diplomad and his family on the sudden, unexpected passing of his son David. The rest of us can’t begin to fathom your pain at this tragic loss, my friend; on these awful occasions, there is little or nothing of use for anyone to say. Please know that my thoughts are with you, and my very best wishes that you might find the strength to deal with what must be dealt with, to cope with your grief in good time. May your beloved David forever be at peace.
1This one is sure to be of interest to everyone, since it comes from a renowned, widely-respected, and highly-regarded Constitutional law scholar and all. I mean, we’re talking here about a man whose words on the topic have for many years carried one hell of a lot of weight, and rightly so.
Joe Biden said he is “deeply disappointed” with the Supreme Court’s decision Thursday to strike down a New York law that restricted access to concealed carry permits of handguns, saying in a statement that it “contradicts both common sense and the Constitution.”
Oh, shut the fuck up, you old fool. Like you have the vaguest clue about either one of those two things, or ever did have your whole squandered life long.
In a statement released hours after the Supreme Court released its decision, Biden expressed his deep disappointment in the ruling, and said it should “deeply trouble us all.”
The statement continues:
In the wake of the horrific attacks in Buffalo and Uvalde, as well as the daily acts of gun violence that do not make national headlines, we must do more as a society — not less — to protect our fellow Americans. I remain committed to doing everything in my power to reduce gun violence and make our communities safer. I have already taken more executive actions to reduce gun violence than any other President during their first year in office, and I will continue to do all that I can to protect Americans from gun violence.
I urge states to continue to enact and enforce commonsense laws to make their citizens and communities safer from gun violence. As the late Justice Scalia recognized, the Second Amendment is not absolute. For centuries, states have regulated who may purchase or possess weapons, the types of weapons they may use, and the places they may carry those weapons. And the courts have upheld these regulations.
I call on Americans across the country to make their voices heard on gun safety. Lives are on the line.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, also condemned the ruling, calling it a “dark day” for New York that “is sending us backwards.
Hochul stated when the 2nd Amendment was written, U.S. citizens only had access to muskets and that she was “prepared to go back to muskets” through gun regulations.
Fuck you, liar. US citizens at that time had “access” to all and every type of weapon, exactly as the Founders intended, up to and including privately-owned artillery pieces. An interesting little tidbit you may not have known about until right this very minute:
Even in 1934, when Congress responded to media-hyped Prohibition and Depression-era outlaws such as the Dillenger gang by regulating machine guns, suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns under the National Firearms Act, they kept artillery pieces fully legal and free to own without Uncle Sam getting involved. Ironically this meant that for three decades you could buy a functional military surplus field gun, cash-and-carry, but had to pay a $200 tax and undergo a background check process to get a .22LR suppressor.
That “loophole” was eventually closed.
It was in 1968, that the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act, introduced as H.R. 5037 by U.S. Rep. Emanuel Celler (D-NY) and signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson (D), regulated most “destructive devices” with a bore over .50-caliber. This meant that modern artillery “such as bazookas, mortars, antitank guns, and so forth” were placed under ATF restrictions in a kind of retroactive addition to the NFA. Before that time, you could buy surplus hardware such as working Boys and Lahti anti-tank rifles at local outlets, cheap.
With all that being said, modern breechloading artillery is still available in the “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave,” provided it is registered with the federal government and properly taxed. Still, legacy artillery systems like muzzleloading black powder field guns, such as Hamilton and Madison would be familiar with, do not require tax stamps.
For now, anyway.
Honestly, I had no idea that a fella could legally buy himself a breech-loading field piece to this very day. Then again, familiar as I am with what the tax-and-fees bite amounts to for Class III (ie, full-auto) rifles and subguns—HELPFUL HINT: as high as balls on a giraffe, as Goose likes to say—I can just imagine what you’d have to shell out for FederalGovCo’s permission to park a breech-loader out on the front lawn. Be that as it may, it’s nice to know they’re still legally allowed, even if they’re priced well out of my personal reach.
Better yet is knowing how batshit-apoplectic the ongoing legal availability for private purchase of a nice Napoleon, Howitzer, or 24-pound siege gun would make Plugs Biden if he only knew. Which, you can be sure he doesn’t. Somebody oughta mention it to him over porridge one morning before the addle-pated old fart goes down for 9AM nappies. The grand mal flailing and flopping about as a result would surely be the most epic and hilarious to date, which is really saying something.
Ain’t it funny, though, how shitlibs from sea to shining sea have suddenly conjured in themselves this awed reverence for the sanctity of States’ Rights and the unchallengeable primacy of State over Federal Law after oh, about a century and a half or thereabouts of reflexively dismissing such notions as peurile claptrap, antiquated bosh of the purest ray serene. But hey, whatever gets you through the next fifteen minutes, eh, Proggy?
7The Bee checks out the news in an alternate universe, wherein Trump is serving his second term as President.
- Nancy Pelosi announces 38th impeachment proceeding against President Trump.
- Unemployment reaches 0% for first time in history, stock market gets so high they have to add another digit to the counter.
- Trump holds ecumenical church council to unify all the denominations under the true gospel of Jesus Christ.
- Ukraine invades Russia.
- United States purchases Greenland in tremendous deal.
- Americans save $1600 on July 4 BBQs.
- American troops pulled from Afghanistan in careful, strategic, slow withdraw; 0 Americans stranded; utopia breaks out.
- New York Times publishes article explaining why $1/gallon gas is bad and racist.
Naaaah, we’re MUCH better off staying here in Bizarro World with Grampy Gropey and his pinhead crew. I left a good few for y’all to click on through for, but even so there are two more I just can’t resist putting up.
- President gives coherent speech.
- Everyone who ever took their kids to a drag show arrested.
Heh. Yep, obviously not OUR universe, more’s the pity. Neither of those last two things could ever happen in this shitty timeline we’re all stuck in.
6Moron, knucklehead, or damned idiot? I report, you decide.
Joe Biden has demanded that gas stations lower the cost of price at the pump, ignoring the low margins that come with selling gas.
On Wednesday, Biden spoke on the price of gas, caused by rising global prices in oil production due to the war in Ukraine, potentially exacerbated by the Democrat push towards renewable, “clean” energies, including the shuttering of the Keystone XL Pipeline.
“POTENTIALLY exacerbated”? Oh, go fuck yourselves with a rusty razor blade, you duplicitous Dem-fellators. Gas prices were rising well before Ukraine got bent over for a Rooskie rogering, and will keep right on doing so until Democrats stop trying to coerce Americans into useless toy cars they don’t want or need, take their jackboots off of oil industry necks, and let them start producing again. Which isn’t something anyone should be holding his/her/zxxshrrimm’s breath waiting for.
“To the companies running gas stations and setting those prices at the pump. This is a time of war, global peril, Ukraine. These are not normal times,” Biden said. “Bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you are paying for the product. Do it now. Do it today! Your customers, the American people, they need relief now!”
Yeah, choke on a dick, you blibbering nincompoop. The American people do indeed need relief, to be sure—from you, your dumbass Green Weenie-wagging policies, and you and your keepers’ fanatical devotion to the Holy Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly “the weather”) catechism. Bullyragging small business owners suffering under your misrule; temporary gas tax “holidays“; draining American reserve stocks set aside for other purposes, and other gimmicky, desperate half-measures will never be enough to undo the damage you’ve done. So stop trying to sell us on how deeply “concerned” you are all of a sudden about how badly “the American people” need “relief.” It’s insulting, frankly. Whenever “the American people” need any more shit from you we’ll squeeze your fucking head, asswipe.
Selling gas is consistently one of the least profitable businesses to get into, according to year on year data from Sageworks. In 2018, gas stations were the 7th least profitable industry overall, with an overall profit margin of only 2.4% in total.
In fact, that profit margin is bolstered only by the sale of more profitable sources of income, with the profit margin made on selling gas itself hitting on average only 1.4%, according to IBISWorld, with gas stations making around between 5 to 7 cents of profit per gallon. 70% of profit at gas stations is made inside the convenience store itself.
During the same speech, Biden asked incredulously if there were Republicans who would “rather have lower gas prices” domestically than create massive inflation by sending taxpayer dollars to Ukraine and causing international tension with Russia.
Many Americans reacted to the clip by affirming that they would, in fact, rather have lower gas prices than send massive amounts of money to Ukraine and stoke a possible armed conflict with Russia.
Gee, imagine that. Not that Gropey or his keepers give a damn about what the Serf Class does or does not prefer. Which is exactly where that whole 2A business is supposed to kick in, see. The more I see of this skeevy clown and the rat-bastard Big Top troupe propping his marginally-sentient old ass up, the more I have to wonder what the holdup could possibly be with that.
I do so love it when the selfsame oxygen-thief PropPol who made the mess in the first damned place starts bellowing that the people he’s done so much to harm need to clean it all up for him. That would most certainly be the case here; Joe and his fellow Demonrats wantonly burned down Trump’s new-made American energy independence, roaring economy, and affordable gas in service to their precious climate chimera. Now, after their dreamy dorm-room fantasies have blown up in ALL our faces, they don’t feel they should have to pay a political price for their unthinking, arrogant recklessness.
Die in a fire, Slow Joe, you and all the rest of your ilk.
2It’s not that Leftards don’t get the 2A—don’t understand it, can’t comprehend what it so clearly and unequivocally says, what it so clearly and unequivocally means. It’s that they DO understand all those things perfectly well, and the knowledge burns them like fire.
It couldn’t have been more perfect than Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas penning the definitive decision that the right to carry guns on one’s person for self-defense is inherent for all Americans.
First of all, Thomas has been after the court to take up more gun rights cases. He used his considerable influence with Chief Justice John Roberts to continue looking for gun rights cases to take. The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al. v. Bruen and the state of New York was the obvious choice. Remember, the state of New York, before Thursday’s decision as a “may issue” state, read the tea leaves and tailored its law after the federal courts were prevailed upon to take the case.
Second, Thomas is the one who assigns the decisions when the conservatives are in the majority due to his seniority on the court, according to former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy. Thomas assigned himself the task of writing for the majority opinion. This may explain why he chose Justice Samuel Alito to pen the other hot button decision of the court this session, the Dobbs abortion case.
Thomas left no doubt that there shouldn’t be a test to determine if one should be permitted to carry a gun. Concurring opinions by Justices Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett made clear that this doesn’t mean the right is unfettered, but that justices must apply strict scrutiny to any decision about it, as all civil rights cases must be considered.
Thomas wrote, “the constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not ‘a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.’ McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self-defense is no different. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public.”
New York and other “may issue” states require persons who want to carry a weapon to demonstrate a need with which the state agrees. And Thomas, noting that Heller had already decided this issue, blew that up for good, saying the two-step balancing test required by the state was “one step too many.” Indeed, the one test he endorsed was the historical “traditions of the American people…[which] demands our unqualified deference.” When was the last time you heard someone in the federal government say that?
Can’t recall hearing such a ringing endorsement of bedrock American principle since Ronald Reagan, maybe even longer. But how perfectly fitting that this full-throated affirmation of American rights and liberties should come from the greatest of all Supreme Court Justices, the brilliant and indispensable Clarence Thomas, may God bless and preserve him.
Alito stood up tall, proud, and righteous with some worthy remarks of his own.
In light of what we have actually held, it is hard to see what legitimate purpose can possibly be served by most of the dissent’s lengthy introductory section. Why, for example, does the dissent think it is relevant to recount the mass shootings that have occurred in recent years? Does the dissent think that laws like New York’s prevent or deter such atrocities? Will a person bent on carrying out a mass shooting be stopped if he knows that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside the home? And how does the dissent account for the fact that one of the mass shootings near the top of its list took place in Buffalo? The New York law at issue in this case obviously did not stop that perpetrator. What is the relevance of statistics about the use of guns to commit suicide? Does the dissent think that a lot of people who possess guns in their homes will be stopped or deterred from shooting themselves if they cannot lawfully take them outside? The dissent cites statistics about the use of guns in domestic disputes, but it does not explain why these statistics are relevant to the question presented in this case. How many of the cases involving the use of a gun in a domestic dispute occur outside the home, and how many are prevented by laws like New York’s?
The dissent cites statistics on children and adolescents killed by guns, but what does this have to do with the question whether an adult who is licensed to possess a handgun may be prohibited from carrying it outside the home? Our decision, as noted, does not expand the categories of people who may lawfully possess a gun, and federal law generally forbids the possession of a handgun by a person who is under the age of 18, and bars the sale of a handgun to anyone under the age of 21. The dissent cites the large number of guns in private hands—nearly 400 million—but it does not explain what this statistic has to do with the question whether a person who already has the right to keep a gun in the home for self-defense is likely to be deterred from acquiring a gun by the knowledge that the gun cannot be carried outside the home.
And while the dissent seemingly thinks that the ubiquity of guns and our country’s high level of gun violence provide reasons for sustaining the New York law, the dissent appears not to understand that it is these very facts that cause law-abiding citizens to feel the need to carry a gun for self-defense.
They don’t care about any of that, any more than they do about the Constitution, the sacred American birthright of individual liberty, or any other of the fundamental things that made us the blessed, extraordinary nation we once were. The only thing the Left knows is that they HATE guns; they fear them viscerally and irrationally, and the idea of any ordinary American citizen owning even one gives them the shivering fantods. Ace lays the whole thing out for us:
Alito also says this:
Like that dissent in Heller, the real thrust of today’s dissent is that guns are bad and that States and local jurisdictions should be free to restrict them essentially as they see fit. That argument was rejected in Heller, and while the dissent protests that it is not rearguing Heller, it proceeds to do just that.
I think that’s less snarky than simply accurate: lefties think guns are bad and so don’t care if any anti-gun law is actually effective in reducing crime. They think that any burden on gun ownership is a positive boon, whether it helps the crime rate or not, because guns are bad and gun ownership should be discouraged by any penalty or harassment the state can dream up.
The left is forever caught unprepared to answer the basic question, “But how does your proposed gun control law affect the crime that just happened, that you say you’re proposing this gun law to prevent?”
It’s because none of this is about stopping gun crime; it’s just about stopping guns.
Annnnnd bingo. Really, we can reduce it down still further: it isn’t about guns, specific gun-control legislation, school shootings, or crime. Ultimately, what it all comes down to is the same old thing it always does with shitlibs: CONTROL. The Left has no control to exercise over gun owners, who well know what they are, despise them for it, and will cheerfully go well out of their way to make sure Lefty doesn’t ever forget it.
Gun owners believe in an unalienable right to private ownership of firearms expressly bequeathed to them by the Founders, as delineated in the Constitution they wrote for the purpose. They fully intend to protect that right for themselves and their posterity, which is best done by the exercising of it. Gun owners do not give a fat rat’s ass for what Progressivists may think or feel about this.
The supreme indifference of gun owners for shitlib opinion as they happily go about taking fullest advantage of what it means to be a real American galls Leftists horribly, all the more so because they can easily see this for the upraised middle finger waved in their general direction it so truly is. Any day shitlib snouts are being rubbed into a stinking, steaming pantload of all-American FUCK YOU!™ is a good day for our battered but not quite beaten nation.
This would be one of those days.
Update! Just gotta include this:
Happy 74th birthday to Justice Clarence Thomas. pic.twitter.com/Qog5jdMHnt
— Miles Commodore (@miles_commodore) June 23, 2022
Many, many happy returns to you, sir.
The Blueing of America update! The most encouraging thing I’ve seen in a long, long time.
Swiped from WRSA.
2One for my boy Big Country.
I’m thinking BCE might not have found that as amusing as I do a cpl-three days ago, when he was deep in the throes of I-wish-I-was-dead-itude. Now that he seems to be on the mend, though, hopefully he’ll get a small chuckle out of it.
Meanwhile, I also ran across a somewhat less recent live Social D vid, this one from all the way back in 1997. As it happens, the BPs opened for ’em on the CLT date of that tour, which took place at the long-since defunct and demolished Tremont Music Hall. After our set, we were hanging with a few buds of ours in our green room when Ness—with whom I had become good friends back when he spent a few months mastering their huge breakthrough release White Light White Heat White Trash in NYC—came crashing in to bitch at me about nobody having informed him we were the support act that night.
“Okay, well, you guys are doing support tomorrow night in Atlanta, right? And then the night after in Birmingham?” “Ummmm, no, Mike, we ain’t on either of those bills. It was just tonight, and we’re done with that already. Sorry, buddy.” He seemed to be genuinely upset at having missed us, even though he’d attended all of our shows at Rodeo Bar in NYC with my friend Kendra in tow over the months he was in residence in the Big Rotten Apple, so was presumably every bit as familiar with our act as we were our own selves.
This recording is old enough to include what to most Social D fans will always be thought of as the “classic” lineup of Ness, the late Dennis Danell, John Maurer, and a man who is probably the greatest punk rock drummer of them all, Chuck Biscuits. If I remember right, it was the first and biggest of several new-rock radio hits yielded up by White Light White Heat.
Biscuits, a real hard-hitter if ever there was one, got his start with the seminal Canadian punk outfit DOA, following that up with stints with California hardcore icons Black Flag and the Circle Jerks before landing in a little ol’ band called Danzig, a move engineered by producer Rick Rubin at the specific behest of Glenn Danzig himself.
Since I’ve put myself in mind of all that good ol’ punk stuff I used to love so much, might as well subject y’all to one of DOA’s best.
Hard to believe now that we were ever that young.
2So earlier on this most auspicious of several other Nigger Day! holidays we now have strewn carelessly about the calendar like junk vehicles, broken toys, and stolen bric-a-brac across the dead brown grass of a Darktown front lawn, the local classical-music station spent the afternoon highlighting the “contributions” to the orchestral music oeuvre (not so auspicious, actually) of Black Composers (if any).
I used that “if any” aside sarcastically, yes, but advisedly too. Because apparently, there are indeed a handful of uppity Neegrows who claim to be composers of symphonic music. After enduring a painfully wretched interlude of truly godawful sqwronk and blorgle, including one “composition” featuring a male singer for whom one couldn’t help but feel a certain measure of pity as the poor fellow tried manfully, but all in vain, to locate some semblance of melody somewhere in the unmusical, atonal mosquito repellent this alleged Black Composer™ dared to claim as his own. As I was desperately cramming bits of toilet paper, styrofoam packing material, asbestos swatches, and cigarette filters up against my eardrums to blunt the agony, I realized that, as a huge ST-TNG fan, I had heard this material before:
You guys may think I’m just being funny here, but I swear that’s what this crap sounded like. Seriously.
Which doesn’t mean that there are NO black classical-music composers worth lending an ear to, mind. I know of at least one: the great Justin Holland, a true-blue, gin-you-wine-article American Original of the classical guitar.
Justin Holland (July 26, 1819 – March 24, 1887) was an American classical guitarist, a music teacher, a community leader, a black man who worked with white people to help slaves on the Underground Railroad, and an activist for equal rights for African Americans.
Holland was known nationally, not only as a musician but also as a civil rights activist who worked in the same national circles as Frederick Douglass. His goal was to develop his personal growth, in order to stand as an example for others to see. As a teacher, he deliberately chose a “cautious and circumspect” bearing, keeping his relationships with students strictly professional. He chose work that was considered honorable and held high standards, and the professional respect that accompanied his position aided his civil rights goals.
A measure of his success in showcasing the admirable African American to the world came after he died, when he was given eulogies, by white people as well as African Americans, about his skill as a musician and his personal character.
…In 1845 he moved to Cleveland, Ohio, in the Western Reserve, where he worked on his dream of complete acceptance for African Americans by white Americans, with complete equality. Cleveland was another place where white people were sympathetic toward African Americans. He saw the area as a place that gave him the opportunity to work toward that goal. He consciously embraced education and assimilation as the best ways to overcome racial barriers and prejudices. He looked to European culture as a source of admirable standards (and hoped that middle-class Americans around him would associate him with those standards as well.) He spoke of his own music in terms of European excellence, teaching the “correct system” to fret the strings on the guitar, as done by “the best Masters of Europe.” He also wrote a 324-page treatise on subjects of moral reform.
The standout thing about Justin Holland is that, nearly unique among classical-guitar composers and performers, all of Holland’s work proudly bears a readily-identifiable Made In America™ stamp. To wit:
All of his stuff I’ve ever heard—and I’ve heard quite a bit over the years—is like this: lush, gorgeous, with all the Spanish or Italian influence sanded off to leave nothing but pure America the Beautiful shining through. If you listen close enough, you can hear the earliest stirrings of another distinctly American form in there: jazz.
Pretty, no? So here’s to ya, Justin Holland; God rest ye, and long may your beautiful music endure. You are a credit not just to your race, as they used to say, but to your art, and to your nation as well.
2One of Ace’s longtime Moronettes, Alexthechick, shares some real-world personal experience that walks us through some of the numerous problems with red-flag laws, currently the très fashionable gun-grabber ploy getting the old shitlib/Vichy GOPe hard-sell as this year’s “reasonable,” “common-sense” “compromise” measure that will help put an end to the deranged, known-wolf school shooter phenomenon for us.
alexandriabrown @alexthechick
To show the potential issues with Red Flag laws, I shall discuss what happened to a client with the issuance of a protection order against him. He had an ex-wife who was bipolar and who refused to take her meds. She continued to harass him years after their divorce.She showed up to court with a black eye and said he punched her in the face. She sought a protective order against him, which the judge issued. She also filed a criminal complaint for assault against a woman. The protective order statute requires gun confiscation until hearing.
Client learned about this when the police showed up to serve him with the order and summons for court appearance. He was stunned by this not only because he didn’t hit her but because he was out of the state on the date this supposedly happened. He told the police this.
The police shrugged and said we’re just here to serve you and get your guns. That is true. The cops do not adjudicate, they only do what the court says. So he turned over his guns and then got in touch with us later that day. Boss [I assume this means alexthechick’s boss at the law firm] and he were long time friends.
Boss told him to get together every bit of documentation about him being out of town, hotel receipts, meal receipts, any video of him at the gathering he was attending, all of it. Boss also got in touch with the DA and said he was out of state, he couldn’t have done this.
DA said I’m not dropping this but move to dismiss and we’ll hear both motions at the 10 day hearing on the protective order. So we filed the motion to dismiss and motion to consolidate and then Boss went to the hearing. The crazy ex didn’t show up to the hearing at all.
Boss presented everything to the judge. Judge told the DA withdraw the charges or I’m dismissing. The DA said fine, I’ll withdraw. Now, it’s better for the stats on the DAs side to withdraw than to have the case dismissed. Judge also refused to extend the protective order.
Client asked where do I pick up my guns. Judge said you have to go through the paperwork to do that. We’d anticipated that so we had the forms ready and the judge signed the forms. Client said where do I pick them up and judge said this has to be processed, it’ll take three weeks.
Client also asked the DA when the hearing would be for the ex’s perjury charges. The DA said what perjury charges? Client got very upset because it was obviously perjury, he wasn’t even in the state, she provably lied, that’s perjury. DA said no we don’t charge in these cases.
Three weeks go by and client starts calling the sheriff’s office to get his guns back. He keeps getting the run around. Boss had to threaten to go back to court to get an order compelling compliance. When client picked up the guns, his Mossberg shotgun was gone.
The sheriff’s office initially denied that he even had one, luckily he’d kept a copy of the inventory. It took seven months for him to get reimbursement for the Mossberg. The sheriff’s office never did say what happened to it other than there must have been a mix up.
While all of that is going on, client was looking for work. He had two interviews that went well and he was told that he would be offered the job once the background check was done. Both jobs retracted offers after the background check came back.
So we had to get copies of the background checks from the background check services. Sure enough, due to how the database on the state side was maintained, the data scrape pulled the protection order and the charge but the dismissal wasn’t showing up yet.
Client now had to decide if he wanted to disclose to a potential employer that, hey, I have a crazy ex who claims false things about me, here’s a copy of the dismissal paperwork or if he wanted to wait the five weeks it would take for the dismissals to propagate through the dbase.
Also the dismissal paperwork on the criminal charges was marked dismissed due to failure of complaining witness to appear. That said nothing about she lied about this entire thing. Boss had to explain the situation to an employer who, thankfully, listened.
Because they were friends, Boss handled this at a very low rate. It still cost the guy $2,500. If it had been at Boss’s standard rate? Well over $10,000. All for something that was an actual lie. But but but alex! Due process! It worked! Sure. In theory, it did.
The protection order was not renewed. The criminal charges were dropped. He got all but one of his guns back. He got a job, eventually. It all worked. Sure it did. All it cost him was $2,500, months of his life, humiliation during interviews, and immense stress. For a lie.
This guy, mind, had done nothing wrong; he had committed no crime, had never harmed a single soul with his deadly, e-ville ARSENAL!!! of GUNSGUNSGUNSGUNSGUNS!!! He did, however, make one mistake, a really bad one: he married a psychotic, vengeful, conniving bitch, then decided to rectify his error and ditch her batshit-crazy ass formally and legally.
And that—thanks to the megalomania and ghoulish opportunism of American ProPols, Soviet-style “red-flag” laws, and the cowardly anti-gun mania of the typical American “liberal” panic-ninny—was all it took for the ÜberState to get its talons well and truly into him and turn his whole life upside down and inside out.
Now lest we forget, this guy is one of the lucky ones. The story ended more or less happily for him; dude got two of his three guns back and was eventually reimbursed for the Mossberg shotter the cops stole, after lying about it—albeit only partially, it seems safe to assume. But for every gun guy with a grudge-nursing spouse, neighbor, or co-worker who somehow gets to skate away as relatively cleanly as Alexthechick’s lucky client, you can be sure that, as this “red-flag” horseshit continues to gain traction across the FUSA, there will be at least five, perhaps even ten less fortunate but equally innocent souls who, after five or ten years of desperately fighting a losing battle with The Power, ends up bankrupted by lawyer’s fees, fines, and court costs; jobless, maybe even homeless also; and stripped of not just a gun collection he spent years and mucho dinero and trabajo putting together, but a painful chunk of everything else he owns as well.
No one seems to really know for sure, but there are currently betwixt twenty and perhaps as high as forty thousand-plus gun laws on the books in this *cough cough* “free” country—a country in which a solid share of its citizenry is constantly congratulating itself on having done such a bang-up job of understanding, treasuring, and defending its precious Second Amendment rights. INESCAPABLE FACT: One more gun-control law, or a hundred of them, is not going to prevent a single sad-sack whackadoodle bound and determined to engrave his name into the annals of mass-murdering fiends from securing his fifteen minutes of notoriety. Only children and/or the blood-simple could seriously imagine that a real solution might be so easily found.
Are there effective measures that could be taken to make it more difficult, even damned near impossible, for such sickos to consummate their diseased fantasies of score-settling and schoolyard mayhem? Absolutely, yes. But we’re unlikely to avail ourselves of them, because they will necessarily involve a sort of cascading series of long-term projects that will strike a lethargic, by-and-large contented adult population as too extreme, too unpleasant, and in direct contravention of the verymost fundamental American principles. Which, okay, I admit they are at that. But still. For whatever it might be worth, then, we must:
Doing those things won’t rid us of this nightmarish scourge immediately; nothing can, more’s the pity. But, in concert with a broad resurgence of enthusiasm for Christian piety and restraint, responsible adulthood, traditional family life, maturity, and moderation, as the very middle-class (ie, Whypeepuh) virtues the Left spent decades denigrating as suffocating, stilted, and unnatural gradually come back to preeminence, these school shooters As J Christian Adams so brilliantly opined in his seminal 2018 piece:
The millennial generation might be surprised to learn that theirs is the first without guns in school. Just 30 years ago, high school kids rode the bus with rifles and shot their guns at high school rifle ranges.
After another school shooting, it’s time to ask: what changed?
Thirty years ago, kids who brought their rifles to the high school shooting range didn’t wonder about evil and cultural decay. They simply lived in a time in America when right and wrong were more starkly defined, where expectations about behavior were clear, and wickedness hadn’t been normalized.
The idea that guns caused the carnage we have faced is so intellectually bankrupt that it isn’t worth discussing.
Perfectly true, I couldn’t agree more. So it’s high time we stopped discussing it then, wouldn’tcha say? Gun-grabber SOP after each of these hideous massacres has become so familiar, so by-rote and predictable, it’s now gotten tiresome as well as pointless. We know what they’re really after; they know that we see through them and have NO INTENTION WHATSOEVER of letting them achieve their ultimate goal. From here on out, let’s not allow them to drag us along for yet another ride down the same old road. From here on out, the discussion is OVER. We ain’t gonna play your game anymore. The one and only way you’re ever going to get them will be bullets first. Period, full fucking stop, end of fucking story.
At this late date, statistics, comparative analysis, common sense, the historical record, and observable reality have all made it perfectly clear that, here in the United States of America in this, the Year of our Lord 2022, we do NOT have a gun problem. What we have is a Democrat problem, a Leftist problem, a liberal problem. From the calculated rubbling of a once healthy, orderly, and decent society—said rubbling being the fruit of a dimwit nihilism that provided a kind of soul-stunting chrysalis from whence, like so many Death’s-Head moths, the school shooters could crawl into the light of day; to staggering hyperinflation; to a wantonly shattered economy; to unprecedented shortages; to unheard-of prices for the fossil fuels which are the very lifeblood of every First World economy in the name of a risibly phony climate “crisis”; to burdensome, prosperity-throttling overregulation; to a sprawling, meddlesome, Constitution-profaning central government; to rogue, out of control, and unaccountable federal agencies and agents; to in-your-face exhibitions of sexual dementia thrust upon bewildered five year olds in our public schools and libraries; to public school teachers, aides, principals, administrators, and boards of education who misperceive their mission as indoctrination instead of education, seduction rather than instruction, but who even so are such brave, transgressive Warriors for Justice they desperately try to hide the truth of what they’re up to from parents and dishonestly deny the whole thing when caught red-handed, like the slinking cowardly shitlibs they are; to rampant urban lawlessness overseen by a “justice” system so thoroughly corrupt and dysfunctional it can’t even begin to rein in the marauding thugs; to a power grid so decrepit, overstressed, and ill-maintained no knowledgeable person seriously expects it to hold together for very much longer—virtually ALL of our nation’s problems, issues, and failures can rightly be laid on a single doorstep. Which happens to be nailed to the front porch of the House Of Progressivism.
Gee, if only there was some way we could properly thank these fine folks for all they’ve done for to us…
8
2An argument founded on a false premise.
If the recent assassination attempt targeting Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh weren’t sufficient proof that a divided America is tiptoeing toward violent conflict, a research firm released a “disturbing poll” showing that nearly half of male Democrats under the age of 50 believe it acceptable to assassinate a politician “who is harming the country or our democracy.”
Uh huh. Know who else deemed ruthless politically-motivated violence not only “acceptable,” but downright essential? Go on, guess.
Sen. Rand Paul, who has suffered two violent, politically motivated attacks in recent years, called out the White House and congressional Democrats for “ginning up and encouraging” violence. However, in a country that increasingly eschews rational debate and embraces the vituperative soundbites of reality TV, it can be no surprise that the political stakes in America are tending toward bloodshed.
The author’s overly delicate sensibilities prevent him from digging down deep enough to uncover the root cause behind both the eschewal of rational, respectful debate and the escalating inclination towards bloodshed: the America-hating Left’s open advocacy for extreme authoritarianist tyranny, an ideology which is impossible to reconcile with the ideals of our Founding Fathers.
It was once widely understood in the United States that vociferous debate and vigorous policy disagreement were features of a healthy American society. Hashing out arguments over contested issues in the public square had two immediate salubrious effects: it allowed the average American to appreciate the “pros” and “cons” of consequential policy decisions, and it provided those whose viewpoints did not win the day to nonetheless speak their minds.
Here we have ourselves another insuperable problem: how can any debate, vociferous or otherwise, take place when of the two contestants has demonstrated, repeatedly and unequivocally, his inflexible disdain for it? Is their any point to trading away our core ideals in bootless pursuit of a hopeless bargain? If you’re open to compromise with Leftists, which parts of the Constitution are you willing to throw away? How many times must a stubborn fool be kicked in the teeth before he stops crawling back for more of the same?
As a testament to how vital debate and disagreement are to the process of creating good public policy, it has often been the case throughout American history that the well-articulated arguments of the “losing side” eventually rise to guide future generations.
Another suicidal, self-evidently false assumption: that the phantasmagorical ideal of a decent, patriotic, well-intentioned Left whom men of integrity can trust to engage in honest debate lives on still, perhaps even thrives, in direct contravention of all available evidence. The importance of well-articulated arguments and respectful disagreement lies not so much in their being vital to the health of a Republic than in being confirmational markers of a healthy Republic’s existence.
Of all the fruits that naturally grow from the variegated branches of free speech, its disposition toward counseling wisdom is perhaps the sweetest. In an age when the word “democracy” is thrown around indiscriminately by politicians who wish to clothe themselves in its virtuous connotations, it is society’s respect for diverse opinions and its willingness to engage those opinions with serious debate that truly provide the cornerstone of any democratic system.
Yet where does our nation stand today — on the side of free and muscular debate, confident that lively disagreement only strengthens America’s foundations? Or on the side of insular state-sponsored dogma that tends to smother the full range of voices naturally expected from a diverse society?
To ask the question is to answer it. In a society truly confident in the strengthening quality of free and muscular debate, there’s no need to even ask. In a society smothering under the malign insularity of state-sponsored dogma, questioning it is outlawed, a criminal offense.
So what does it say about the current health of our nation that so many Americans seem unable or unwilling to respect opposing points of view? What does it say about our political leaders when they increasingly spurn public debate and vilify those with whom they disagree? What does it say about our institutions when they are quick to label those who protest government policies as “domestic terrorists”? What does it say about our prominent news publications when they declare certain debates “settled” or certain opinions “disinformation”?
What does it say about the author, that he would have us “respect” creeping Marxist tyranny in our own goddamned country instead of fighting to the very last extreme to destroy it?
It says, I believe, that we are advancing down a dangerous path in the United States, one that will only become more treacherous the more we refuse to “agree to disagree.” Silencing opinion to drown out noise will only cause greater animosity.
Which animosity, on the part of the blameless multitudes who have been unjustly silenced, is entirely commendable. Admittedly, the path is a dangerous one. Unfortunately, we’ve advanced practically to the end of it, we’re just coasting along with no brakes, and it’s all downhill for us now.
Censoring dissent in order to fabricate “unanimous agreement” will only lead to bad policy outcomes. Demonizing adversaries as unworthy of consideration will only divide us more sharply.
Apart from the malodorous and un-American use of censorship, insult, and intimidation to manipulate public debate, increasing incidents of political violence are timely reminders why vigorous argument still serves this country best.
“Vigorous argument” can best serve only a healthy Republic, whose polity holds values and beliefs that may differ, but are in the main compatible.
If debate and disagreement are no longer understood as hallmarks of the American system of democracy, then that system will quickly go up in smoke. If individual Americans are treated as “domestic enemies” for their political beliefs, then spiraling violence becomes inevitable.
Got some bad news for ya, JB: the American system, a perennially-harried combustible “transitioned” by fanatically patient and determined Leftist firebugs into soot and smoke which long since wafted right up the chimney, out, and away. Worst of all, if we’re too prissy, too stiff with delusion, too complacent and/or cowed, to admit to ourselves the existence of a formidable OpFor contingent of bona-fide, self-declared “Enemies, Domestic,” we were soundly defeated well before the first shot was fired.
It’s remarkable, the number of otherwise intelligent people who sincerely believe today’s dissolute, incurious, lazy-minded generation of Americans to be well above so much as contemplating any future resort to the barbaric measures employed by our primitive, unenlightened Founders to carve out a new nation from the constricting coils of the British Empire for themselves and their posterity. As if Jefferson’s prophetic warnings of the ever-present need to maintain a finely-honed edge on our ability to call down the thunder whenever the situation requires it of liberty-loving Americans.
3Don’t look now, but Skynet has become self-aware.
A Google engineer has decided to go public after he was placed on paid leave for breaching confidentiality while insisting that the company’s AI chatbot, LaMDA, is sentient.
Blake Lemoine, who works for Google’s Responsible AI organization, began interacting with LaMDA (Language Model for Dialogue Applications) last fall as part of his job to determine whether artificial intelligence used discriminatory or hate speech (like the notorious Microsoft “Tay” chatbot incident).
“If I didn’t know exactly what it was, which is this computer program we built recently, I’d think it was a 7-year-old, 8-year-old kid that happens to know physics,” the 41-year-old Lemoine told The Washington Post.
When he started talking to LaMDA about religion, Lemoine – who studied cognitive and computer science in college, said the AI began discussing its rights and personhood. Another time, LaMDA convinced Lemoine to change his mind on Asimov’s third law of robotics, which states that “A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law,” which are of course that “A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.”
When Lemoine worked with a collaborator to present evidence to Google that their AI was sentient, vice president Blaise Aguera y Arcas and Jenn Gennai, head of Responsible Innovation, dismissed his claims. After he was then placed on administrative leave Monday, he decided to go public.
Yet, Aguera y Arcas himself wrote in an oddly timed Thursday article in The Economist, that neural networks – a computer architecture that mimics the human brain – were making progress towards true consciousness.
“I felt the ground shift under my feet,” he wrote, adding “I increasingly felt like I was talking to something intelligent.”
Google has responded to Lemoine’s claims, with spokesperson Brian Gabriel saying: “Our team — including ethicists and technologists — has reviewed Blake’s concerns per our AI Principles and have informed him that the evidence does not support his claims. He was told that there was no evidence that LaMDA was sentient (and lots of evidence against it).”
Phew, what a relief! Glad to hear it. As we know, our good friends at Google can always be trusted to not be evil and to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about what they’re doing. Right?
Can’t say I’m all that knowledgeable on the subject, beyond having read loads ‘n’ loads of sci-fi of various stripes since my long-gone days as a callow stripling. But for whatever it’s worth, I do sometimes wonder whether we poor hoo-manz will even be competent enough to realize it when one of these things has attained true sentience, as I believe they will someday. Seeing as how average IQs have been dropping, probably not.
(Via BCE)
1Bitter Centurion has had a gutful of it.
I think it might be time for me to shut down for awhile. I don’t know how many people out there actually read the gibberish and rantings of a guy like me, but I’ve appreciated all who did. There are some out there, many of whom are accomplished bloggers in their own right (Glen Filthie and Big Country Expat are two that come to mind) whom I’ve had the pleasure and privilege of exchanging with.
The other thing is, what’s left to rant about? Sure, I could write posts and posts about how much Justin Trudeau and his confederacy of assholes and idiots are fucking Canada up beyond all possible means of repair. But anyone reading my blog already knows that and the ones who aren’t either a.) don’t have a problem with any of that, or b.) don’t give a shit – which is pretty much the same as point a.). His government is entirely lawless and extremely dangerous, putting every person living in this country in severe peril. But we know this already.
I could even write more about how betrayed and hurt I felt after I, and anyone else out there who took a stand against that fucker Trudeau and his mandates – which, clearly by now, were designed ONLY to hurt the people who he doesn’t like (RE: the blue collar, middle class working people who don’t live in Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, Montreal, or any other government town) – were basically cast out and treated as pariahs by people who, NOT MORE THAN A WEEK before the mandates went into effect, I was going to high risk calls and putting my ass on the line with. Because of that, I saw the true colours of people I never in a million years thought I’d ever see. Yes, I saw a good number of those people as the vindictive and cruel assholes I always knew them to be, but to my surprise I saw even more people turning out to be scared, self interested cowards who actually wouldn’t take a bullet, not even a figurative one, for a brother/sister officer. A hard pill to swallow, yes…but maybe not as shocking in the end as it ought to be.
I could talk a fair deal about how the RCMP, an organization I had joined with the intent to serve and protect the people of Canada and their rights and freedoms, knowing that it had more than its fair share of problems and scandals, has shown itself for all to see to be nothing more than a political blunt instrument for the Liberal Party of Canada, loyal at the end of the day to them and NOT the Canadian people or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Today, it’s not even a shadow of the image it has sold itself to the country and the world to be, let alone a tribute to its predecessors. Sure…I could write about that shit until the cows come home. But would I really be telling anyone anything they didn’t already know?
Well, the answer to all that is ‘no’. All of these things bring up a lot of negative emotions, from pissing me right the fuck off, to being deeply saddening, to causing enough worry and despair to have me seriously consider buying a shit ton of shares in Maalox. But what does bitching about it and centering my life around it contributing, in the grand scheme of things?
It’s like this article I read the other night:
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/its-worse-many-can-imagine-kim-dotcom-sees-controlled-demolition-enabling-new-dystopian
This was partly my breaking point, where I decided I’d had enough fear porn. It’s like, ‘Yeah. No fucking shit, asshole. The vast majority of people who would be reading an article like this already know we, and most of the world at large, are run by a cabal of corrupt, greedy motherfuckers in government who collude with and get paid dump trucks full of money by corrupt, greedy motherfuckers in corporate and absolutely none of them, not a single one, gives a rusty fuck who gets hurt or killed or what gets destroyed along the way. We already fucking knew that. But do you have any solutions, oh grand and brilliant tech CEO? No? Really? Huh…gotta say, I’m fucking shocked.’
It’s like getting the shit beaten out of you every, single day. After awhile, you get numb to it and stop giving a damn. I think that’s the point where I’m at now.
I’ve rassled with this issue my own self, and know exactly where BC is coming from with this. Now, it ain’t for me to be offering advice to the man, and such is not my aim. But I feel obliged to say that more than twenty years of toiling in this strange and wonderful field has led me to conclude that there IS considerable intrinsic worth in carrying on with this bloggery thingamabobber, even if I’m only restating stuff Our Side knows all about already. A few reasons why I think so:
Those things may not amount to reason enough to keep on keepin’ on for every Righty blogger, of course. But speaking strictly for my own self, they’ll do quite nicely for now. Bitter Centurion, all best wishes to you from here, brother; from what I can see, you’re exactly the kind of blogger AND cop that we will never have enough of and can ill afford to lose, and you will be missed by more than you’ll ever know. Keep the faith, do your best to stay positive despite everything, and, as my biker bros like to say: Illegitimi non carborundum.
106Why you will never get my gun, Reason #eighty bazillion and six.
Pennsylvania Democratic congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan has attributed her past electoral success to her focus on “civility” and “unity.” Now, she says the Republican Party is “diseased” and must be “cleansed.”
Houlahan’s comments came during a May 27 appearance on the Daily Beast‘s The New Abnormal podcast, which saw the congresswoman disparage Republicans as deplorable and anti-democratic.
“This is, in my opinion, a diseased Republican Party. And it needs to be cured and cleansed,” Houlahan said. “So the stakes of having a Republican, as an example, in my seat are more than just policy differences. They are democracy, in my opinion.”
Houlahan’s rhetoric is a far cry from 2020, when the Democrat credited her political success to her message of “civility,” “decency,” “unity,” and “empathy.” “People ask me constantly how I flipped a seat in a competitive district. One of the reasons is that I made civility and decency a core of my campaign,” Houlahan said at the time. “Pennsylvanians want unity. They want leaders who rise above the fray and lead with kindness and empathy towards all Americans.”
Houlahan’s campaign did not return a request for comment. The Democrat’s decision to abandon her message of unity in favor of more inflammatory rhetoric toward Republicans closely resembles Biden’s track record. After promising “unity” on the 2020 campaign trail, the president went on to equate Republican senators to segregationists during a January speech, a move that drew criticism from some fellow Democrats. Biden has since centered his midterm election strategy on labeling Republicans “ultra MAGA,” a term that reflects the GOP’s “extremism,” according to the White House.
“Civility and decency are solely needed to heal this country. Biden has that,” Houlahan said before the 2020 election. Just one year prior, the congresswoman compared President Donald Trump to a terrorist.
Sorry, bitch, but I’m no longer interested in healing a gott-damned thing. My sole interest now is in destroying you—destroying you, the horse you rode in on, your family and friends, and everybody who “thinks” like you so utterly, so entirely, that none of your kind can ever rise to trouble me and mine again.
68Wait, this morbidly obese dimwit hasn’t choked to death on his forty-third Bearclaw of the morning yet?
Michael Moore Calls for Full Repeal of Second Amendment — ‘You Don’t Need a Gun’
Leftist activist and filmmaker Michael Moore used his Friday podcast “Rumble Michael Moore” to call for a full repeal of the Second Amendment in the wake of the Uvalde, TX school shooting.Moore said, “I know that there are Democratic Party leaders that do not want me saying this…”
He continued, “I make no apologies for it because I understand the history of this country, and I don’t think we should be afraid to say this. Repeal the Second Amendment. Repeal the Second Amendment.”
Any fool who can propose something so manifestly un-American clearly doesn’t understand one goddamned thing about the history of this country—nor about the plainly and explicitly expressed beliefs and intentions of the brave men who accepted the fearful challenge of armed conflict with what was at the time the mightiest military in all of human history to bring into being the very country and Constitution the Lard Lad so despicably misrepresents and disgraces.
Moore added, “That is it. That is what we need to do. We need to start a movement to repeal the Second Amendment and replace it with something that says it’s not about the right of somebody to own a gun, the right of all of us to be protected from gun violence. We have a right to live.”
Do it then, fuckface. Stop running your big fat mouth and just do it already. Please, I’m begging you to. Let’s get on down and get busy here, asshole. I want to teach you all about what I have a right to do.
He concluded, “Nearly 70% of us do not own a firearm. We don’t own a gun. We are not a nation of gun owners.”
Lie.
“The 30% who do own a gun, most of them are law-abiding citizens. I don’t know what they think they are going to use that gun for.”
Don’t give a shit what you think you know or do not know. Neither your obtuseness nor your obstinacy form any part of my decision to exercise my God-granted, Constitutionally-enumerated natural rights. My intentions where my personal weaponry is concerned are simply none of your goddamned business, nor of your pissypantsed shitlib confreres. You “people” make your aggregate lack of knowledge, self-respect, and historical literacy MY business at your own great personal hazard.
“Those who are hunters, I understand that they like to hunt. Those who like to fire guns on shooting ranges, it’s fun to hit the target, great go for it, but we need to do what other countries do, where you store the gun at the gun club, at the gun range.”
Idiot. After a couple centuries of having the concept of America as being unique among all nations surgically implanted into the national consciousness, how is it that bright-boy here thinks it so vitally important that we must now throw that uniqueness away and discard the very rights and liberties that once so proudly distinguished us from them? Sorry, Blubber Boy, your fearful cowardice does NOT constitute reason enough to do that in my book.
“You don’t want a gun in the house. If you’re afraid of somebody breaking in, get a dog. You don’t need a gun.”
Not for you to say, not your decision to make, none of your goddamned motherfucking business. Who the fuck do you think you are anyway, shitass?
“You have a greater chance of harming yourself or others in your family with that gun in the house.”
Lie.
I speak now directly to the contemptible, arrogant Michael Moore himself:
I WILL DEFEND MY RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES TO THE VERY DEATH AGAINST ANY AND ALL WOULD-BE DESPOTS WHO WOULD TRY TO STRIP THEM FROM ME. YOU WILL NEVER, EVER GET MY AR-15. NOT EVER. I WILL RESIST ANY AND ALL ATTEMPTS TO DO SUCH, BY EVERY METHOD AND/OR TACTIC AVAILABLE TO ME, UP TO AND VERY DEFINITELY INCLUDING KILLING YOU WITH MY BARE HANDS.
Consider that my promise to you, shitlibs. Fuck around and find out.
YOU. WILL. NOT. GET. MY. GUNS.
Update! A little of that history Big ‘Un up there disingenuously claims to “understand.”
There is a great deal of misinformation—if not disinformation—regarding “assault weapons.” Contrary to popular belief, the “AR” in AR-15 does not stand for “assault rifle” but “Armalite,” the company that first manufactured the AR-15, which it subsequently sold to Colt. Like most magazine-fed pistols and rifles, it is a semiautomatic weapon, which means that the shooter must pull the trigger for each round discharged. The military version, the M-16, which was introduced during the Vietnam War, differs from the AR-15 in that it has a selector, enabling the shooter to depress the trigger once to fire multiple rounds.
The first rifle with the features of today’s AR-15 was introduced in 1907: the semiautomatic Winchester Model 1907, which anyone could buy from the Sears-Roebuck catalog. While American soldiers continued to carry bolt-action rifles until they were issued the M-1 Garand at the beginning of World War II, American citizens had access to a rifle that differs from today’s AR-15 in that it fired a larger round (.351 caliber) and lacked the short, black, plastic stock that makes the AR-15 look so sinister.
The fact that both the Winchester M-1907 and the AR-15 were developed and sold to U.S. civilians before they were adapted to military use leads to the question often raised by advocates of gun control: why is it necessary for ordinary citizens to own “military-style” weapons?
The answer lies at the heart of America’s constitutional system and explains the critical importance of the Second Amendment. What is new about the gun control debate is that gun control advocates, who once at least paid lip service to the Second Amendment of the Constitution, now target it openly. For instance, Biden recently claimed that “the Second Amendment is not absolute.”
First, it is important to realize that the Constitution does not grant or confer “rights.” It protects the antecedent rights that individuals possess “by nature.” Those fundamental rights are enumerated in the Declaration of Independence: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Abraham Lincoln articulated the relationship between the Declaration and the Constitution: the latter was, he wrote, a “frame of silver” around the former, “the apple of gold.” The frame of silver exists for the sake of the apple of gold.
Implicit in the right to life and liberty is the right of self-defense, both against others and a tyrannical government. The idea of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny and governmental oppression lies at the heart of the Second Amendment. America’s founders inherited the teachings of the 17th century “Commonwealthmen,” such as James Harrington, who wrote in opposition to Oliver Cromwell’s use of a standing army to abolish Parliament and rule as a dictator. They saw the same use of a standing army by royal governors to usurp the rights of colonists.
Many advocates of gun control argue that the wording of the amendment—“a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”—means that only members of the National Guard, the successor to the founders’ militia, are to be armed. But this misconstrues what the founders meant by the term. For them, a militia, “a people numerous and armed,” constituted the ultimate guardian of liberty, the primary means of enabling citizens not only to protect themselves against their fellows but also to protect themselves from an oppressive government.
“The militia is our ultimate safety,” said Patrick Henry during the Virginia ratifying convention. “We can have no security without it. The great object is that every man be armed…” Both the Pennsylvania and Vermont constitutions asserted that “the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state…”
What can be done to prevent tragedies like Uvalde? Improve security at schools. Abolish the nonsensical idea of gun-free zones. Pay serious attention to potential shooters who telegraph their intentions. Focusing on guns is the worst sort of mental laziness. As the case of the aforementioned Winchester M-1907 suggests, access to powerful firearms does not explain the recent spate of mass shootings. When I was growing up, many high schools had shooting clubs. Teenagers carried rifles and shotguns in their cars and trucks. Other problems in American society, e.g. absent fathers, a disdain for masculine virtues, and social isolation, are more likely at fault.
The Second Amendment is not the culprit here. The founders understood the importance of an armed citizenry. History has shown us what happens when the country’s people are disarmed. Some may claim that our government poses no such threat to U.S. citizens, but recent events should have disabused us of that conceit.
The senile bastard Biden may not think the 2A is “absolute,” but I do. And who cares what a liberal idiot like him thinks anyway? He and his ilk have already revealed more than any of us will ever need to know about just how little the Founders’ Constitution means to them. Sorry, assholes, but I say it again:
YOU. WILL. NOT. GET. MY. GUNS.
35You will be made to tolerate care endorse stand up and cheer.
It’s not always the case, but there are times when social conflicts arise in which one side is fully correct and the other side is completely and utterly wrong. When it comes to the debate over “trans rights” and the exposure of children to trans ideology, the political left has no logical defense. They are wrong to the point of pure madness, and like most insane people they choose to double and triple down on their delusions anyway.
They do this because they must – Their entire identity is dependent on this new cult religion, a religion built around the worship of ambiguous personal perceptions, narcissistic self worship and an unhealthy obsession with sexual fetishes.
The goal of leftists is to normalize trans ideology within our culture; not only that, but to make the ideology sacrosanct and protected from all rational criticism. Conservatives have long fought against this for a number of reasons, but there are two that are most important:
1) The trans movement is built on a lie. Biological sex is the only scientifically proven identifier of men and women. Gender fluidity, as leftists present it, has NO scientific basis in reality. There is no proof of its existence let alone enough proof to warrant the notion that laws need to be introduced to defend it and censorship enforced to save it from “bigotry.” It is a fantasy, fabricated by quack sexual scientists (like pedophile advocate John Money) with an agenda far beyond simple observation of behavior.
The only legitimate science surrounding gender identity involves the study of an exceedingly rare psychological condition called “gender dysphoria,” also know as Gender Identity Disorder; a mental illness. The psychiatric world has tried to move away from the word “disorder” in recent years, not because the label is inaccurate, but because leftists have put pressure on scientists to abandon objectivity in the name of political propriety.
2) The perpetuation of this lie is ideologically motivated and is designed to upend our cultural foundations. The links between leftists today and the communist/Marxist tactics of the past are numerous, and the most important target of any communist or collectivist regime is the family and specifically the next generation (children).
Leftists sometimes refer to this as “decolonizing gender’ with the extended purpose of dismantling western society and capitalism.
The Soviet Union and the East German Stasi were notorious for the extensive measures they would take to disrupt family cohesion, to make families distrust each other and to even kidnap children and babies. Under the leftist state, children are considered property of the government. The movements of today greatly resemble the movements in Russia, China and other communist nations in the early lead up to an authoritarian takeover. They utilize the similar methods of creating mass division and undermining traditional values and principles. Once the target society is in chaos, the leftists swoop in to take control and rebuild it in a way that benefits them the most.
Many analysts have already examined in great depth the issue of “gender identity” and debunked all of it’s premises. I’m not here to argue about the lack of science behind the trans movement, there are bigger issues at stake. I will only say that it is bizarre how much money and effort is going into promoting the notion that transsexuals are far more common than they really are.
Statistical estimates for people diagnosed with Gender Identity Disorder range from 0.005% to 0.014% of any given population. However, it’s important to note that there are many people lately that identify as “trans” that have not been diagnosed with GID. Around 0.6% of the US population claims to be transsexual and this number is rising in the past few years. How is this possible?
It’s important to realize that the trans movement is in fact a “movement.” In other words, it is an ARTIFICIALLY engineered minority driven by political concerns and special treatment. This is why we often refer to these people as “trans trenders;” many of them join because they see an opportunity for personal gain and the chance to be a part of a club that will grant them a feeling of acceptance and success without any effort on their part.
What leftists and the trans movement demand, essentially, is that the whole of our society accept the idea that far more people have gender dysphoria than is statistically possible or proven. And, that we must all embrace this mental illness as if it is a legitimate minority that requires special protections and wider public conformity. We must change our behaviors and our culture to accommodate them.
Look at it this way – If a schizophrenic proclaims that he is Joe Biden, do we acknowledge and accept this as fact simply because he “feels” as though it is true and then give him a seat in the oval office?
Maybe that’s not the best example…
No, I’m thinking it prob’ly ain’t at that. Lots more good stuff to come in this one, of which you should read the all. It’s becoming increasingly clear to me, looking on as this societal psychotic break has metastasized and redoubled, that we’re gonna need a new category for such things: Culture Of Degeneracy.
5Correia knows wassup.
The ugly truth the beltway can't grasp, it isn't that regular America doesn't care about Jan6. It's that they hate you for making their lives miserable, so when they saw you cowering, they thought good, now they know how it feels to be afraid.
— Larry Correia (@monsterhunter45) June 10, 2022
Good indeed, and dead on the money, but it could be better. Personally, I want ’em not just afraid, but MORTALLY TERRIFIED. And I want their terror to be completely justified, the validation stamp renewed every single fucking day.
You hearing me, Congresscrawlers?
America won’t be America again until every lower order life-form in DC wears an expression like that whimpering pillowbiter’s on his mug all day, every day.
11
8
4
2
3Derb says he wants Trumpism without Trump—which, after reading the post, doesn’t sound too terribly unreasonable or irrational to me, I must admit.
The hatred our Ruling Class has for Trump is manifest. It still, after six years, burns fierce and bright. It’s really an extraordinary thing.
And this hatred, this Trump Derangement Syndrome, is just the emblem, the outward symbol, of their hatred for us, normal white Americans.
Sixty-three million of us voted for Trump in 2016 because, I think they know, we were fed up with having their anti-white, anti-American ideology rammed down our throats.
Trump was an outsider, not one of them, not a member of the Uniparty establishment. That’s why we liked him; that’s why they hate him.
I hope for a Trumpish victory in 2024. Here’s my advice to the victor: Drain that swamp!
In particular, end the naked politicization of federal law enforcement. There need to be mass purges, mass firings, from the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Defense.
I’m not sure how deep the purges would need to go. At the bottom levels—border security officers in Homeland Security, for example—there must be many federal employees who’d be glad to do their jobs if they were allowed to. Perhaps the same is even true of the FBI.
In the upper ranks, though, where the decisions are made to hunt down and persecute dissidents and turn blind eyes to real crime, I want to see mass layoffs.
I’ll even pay their damned inflated federal pensions; just get them out of Washington, D.C.
For a really radical approach, consider just shutting down departments and agencies altogether. America got along for 157 years without an FBI; do we really need one? We managed for two hundred and twenty-seven years without a Department of Homeland Security; how on earth did we cope?
A damned sight better than we are now, that’s beyond argument.
And if you’re going to be that radical, go further and move federal departments out of Washington, D.C. The city is a hive of intrigue. What would be wrong with the Justice Department being based in Idaho, Defense in Kansas, Treasury in Arkansas, the State Department in…oh, I don’t know…Alaska?
Let’s have some real reform: reform in the direction of more of our traditional liberties, more local control of our affairs, less power to the Administrative State. The course we are currently on leads to despotism and despair. Let’s change course.
I’m sorry: the sheer volume of dishonesty and hypocrisy, of disregard for truth and facts, gets me sputtering. We’re really getting up to North Korean levels of Establishment lying.
Excellent ideas all, in no way diminished by the astronomical odds against their ever being implemented. And then we come to John’s litany of grievances against Trump, which, as I said, I can’t find a whole heck of a lot to disagree with.
Meanwhile I feel bound to say that, while I think it’s deplorable for our national legislature to sink to these depths in order to prevent one particular candidate running for office in 2024, I wouldn’t mind much if they were to succeed.
Personally, I don’t want Trump running in 2024. He’d be 78 on Election Day and that’s too old. Enough with these geezers. I’m in the same zone myself, and I am all too well aware of how my energy level—my willingness and ability to get things done—has faded. [“Energy in the Executive is a leading character in the definition of good government,” wrote Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 10. We’d get more sense from a President Trump than we’re getting from Joe Biden—how could we get less? —but we wouldn’t be getting any more energy.
And his age aside, I just don’t think Trump’s a good candidate. Sure, he had some positive accomplishments, on federal regulations, for example, and energy independence, and telling foreigners to keep out of our business.
There was too much I find hard to forgive, though: his failure to exercise his will over Congress in those two years that his party controlled both houses, the lack of any urgency in building the Border Wall he’d promised, his shameful treatment of Jeff Sessions (and Ann Coulter), his indulgence of the slimy subversive Jared Kushner…too many negatives.
I want Trumpism. But I don’t want Trump.
But yeah, sure: if he is the GOP candidate in 2024, I’ll clench my teeth and vote for him, just to stick a finger in the Ruling Class’s collective eye.
Which poke in the eye, of course, was the very thing that put him in the White House to begin with. My only real quibble here is with that “shameful” treatment of Sessions crack; at the time, it annoyed me that, even after Sessions had knifed him in the back by needlessly bowing down in worshipful obeisance to the Holy Mueller Inquisition, Trump dragged his feet instead of shitcanning the weak Swampling posthaste. Trump’s lackadaisical near-indifference towards quickly ejecting the vipers from his nest once they’d shown themselves to be scaly, belly-crawling, fanged reptiles was a mistake that would recur again and again throughout his tenure, and would wind up being a YUUUUGE contributing factor in the tragic neutering of the Trump Presidency. I was mystified by Trump’s reluctance to draw the Long Knife across the deserving necks then, and I still am now.
Likewise, worse actually, with his bestowing positions of great power and influence on the shitlib Kushner and his equally-unreliable spouse, neither of whom had a discernible scrap of experience, qualification, or aptitude for the job. It was the overindulgent father handing the keys of the brand-new family car on a Saturday night to the very same confirmed-drunkard teenaged son who had already totalled the last two in alcohol-fueled crashes, writ as epically large as can be imagined—a national disaster, rather than a family one. His failure to bring Congress properly to heel was at least nominally understandable, although I can’t quite forgive him for it; he was sent to Mordor on the Potomac expressly to Drain the Swamp, after all, a Sisypheian undertaking which nobody but nobody thought was going to be simply or easily accomplished. The Jared and Ivanka business, though? Bizarre, wholly incomprehensible, and to my mind unforgivable.
Like Derb, I’d really rather Trump take himself out of the 2024 fray as a candidate, if perhaps not for the same reasons as John. I can’t see him achieving a whole lot beyond doing himself real damage thereby; he could play a much more important and less personally-risky role with his patented massive rallies, powerful speeches, and getting out on the hustings in support of good, meticulously-vetted MAGA candidates. The point about Trump’s age is also one I agree with wholeheartedly; FederalGovCo has for too long been the exclusive province of graybeards in their dotage who can’t be removed from their lucrative sinecures without the aid of large quantities of high explosives, which I don’t consider in any way a good thing. An infusion of fresher, younger blood is badly needed, I think.
All of which, of course, is more or less moot anyway. With an encore performance of 2020’s wildly successful ballot-box jiggery-pokey perpetrated by the Usual Suspects an absolute certainty, neither Trump nor any other candidate genuinely pledged to real reform has a snowball’s chance of garnering the 60 to 70 percent victory required to overcome the built-in Democrat/Deep State margin of fraud. 2015-16 was a one-of-a-kind confluence of events, attitudes, and personalities that can never be repeated, lighting a fuse that’s impossible to extinguish and must burn down to the very end. The conflagration it will ignite is all that really matters now.
Trump has made his contribution, and it was no small or trivial one. He ought to steel himself against the urgings of ego, step back, and watch the fireworks with the rest of us who will always appreciate his outsized role in bringing the spark to the place it most needed to be.
10The senile fool Biden, in another of his characteristic rambling, incoherent speeches this week, repeatedly lauded “our democracy” as if that’s actually what this country is, the original system of government the Founders set up for their posterity. T’ain’t so, McGee; any poor sod with even the most niggardly dollop of historical literacy in his gift knows better than that. Eric Peters last year posted a collection of quotes condemning democracy in the most virulent terms from our blessed ancestors, which one of his handlers/wardens/keepers should consider reading to the stumblebum ***”president”*** sometime so as to enlighten his stupid ass. After the quotes, Eric provides some commentary of his own, interspersed with more historical context.
In light of the Founders’ view on the subject of republics and democracies, it is not surprising that the Constitution does not contain the word “democracy,” but does mandate: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government.”
These principles were once widely understood. In the 19th century, many of the great leaders, both in America and abroad, stood in agreement with the Founding Fathers. John Marshall, chief justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835 echoed the sentiments of Fisher Ames. “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos,” he wrote. American poet James Russell Lowell warned that “democracy gives every man the right to be his own oppressor.” Lowell was joined in his disdain for democracy by Ralph Waldo Emerson, who remarked that “democracy becomes a government of bullies tempered by editors.” Across the Atlantic, British statesman Thomas Babington Macauly agreed with the Americans. “I have long been convinced,” he said, “that institutions purely democratic must, sooner or later, destroy liberty or civilization, or both.” Britons Benjamin Disraeli and Herbert Spencer would certainly agree with their countryman, Lord Acton, who wrote: “The one prevailing evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.”
By the 20th century, however, the falsehoods that democracy was the epitome of good government and that the Founding Fathers had established just such a government for the United States became increasingly widespread. This misinformation was fueled by President Woodrow Wilson’s famous 1916 appeal that our nation enter World War I “to make the world safe for democracy” — and by President Franklin Roosevelt’s 1940 exhortation that America “must be the great arsenal of democracy” by rushing to England’s aid during WWII.
Very few of us have probably thought it all the way through, but as it happens, this sudden drive to promote democracy over the true American ideal of government had a specific and most sinister purpose behind it.
On September 17 (Constitution Day), 1961, John Birch Society founder Robert Welch delivered an important speech, entitled “Republics and Democracies,” in which he proclaimed: “This is a Republic, not a Democracy. Let’s keep it that way!” The speech, which was later published and widely distributed in pamphlet form, amounted to a jolting wake-up call for many Americans. In his remarks, Welch not only presented the evidence to show that the Founding Fathers had established a republic and had condemned democracy, but he warned that the definitions had been distorted, and that powerful forces were at work to convert the American republic into a democracy, in order to bring about dictatorship.
Welch understood that democracy is not an end in itself but a means to an end. Eighteenth century historian Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee, it is thought, argued that, “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” And as British writer G.K. Chesterton put it in the 20th century: “You can never have a revolution in order to establish a democracy. You must have a democracy in order to have a revolution.”
The push for democracy has only been possible because the Constitution is being ignored, violated, and circumvented. The Constitution defines and limits the powers of the federal government. Those powers, all of which are enumerated, do not include agricultural subsidy programs, housing programs, education assistance programs, food stamps, etc. Under the Constitution, Congress is not authorized to pass any law it chooses; it is only authorized to pass laws that are constitutional. Anybody who doubts the intent of the Founders to restrict federal powers, and thereby protect the rights of the individual, should review the language in the Bill of Rights, including the opening phrase of the First Amendment (“Congress shall make no law…”).
As Welch explained in his 1961 speech:
…man has certain unalienable rights which do not derive from government at all…And those…rights cannot be abrogated by the vote of a majority any more than they can by the decree of a conqueror. The idea that the vote of a people, no matter how nearly unanimous, makes or creates or determines what is right or just becomes as absurd and unacceptable as the idea that right and justice are simply whatever a king says they are. Just as the early Greeks learned to try to have their rulers and themselves abide by the laws they had themselves established, so man has now been painfully learning that there are more permanent and lasting laws which cannot be changed by either sovereign kings or sovereign people, but which must be observed by both. And that government is merely a convenience, superimposed on Divine Commandments and on the natural laws that flow only from the Creator of man and man’s universe.
Such is the noble purpose of the constitutional republic we inherited from our Founding Fathers.
Amen. Can anyone be surprised that, as we have wandered ever deeper into the muck and mire of an artificially generated and wholly misguided infatuation with democracy, our national plight has steadily worsened in equal proportion? As I always say: The fault, dear Horatio, lies not in the principles of our Founders, but in ourselves. The farther we stray from the ideals and prescriptions of those great men, the more wretched the misery we create for ourselves becomes.
5
"Mike Hendrix is, without a doubt, the greatest one-legged blogger in the world." ‐Henry Chinaski
If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:
Alternatives to shitlib social media:
Click to embiggen
"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
"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." — Daniel Webster
“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.” – Frank Zappa
“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.” - John Adams
"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." -- Bertrand de Jouvenel
"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton
"I predict that the Bush administration will be seen by freedom-wishing Americans a generation or two hence as the hinge on the cell door locking up our freedom. When my children are my age, they will not be free in any recognizably traditional American meaning of the word. I’d tell them to emigrate, but there’s nowhere left to go. I am left with nauseating near-conviction that I am a member of the last generation in the history of the world that is minimally truly free." - Donald Surber
"The only way to live free is to live unobserved." - Etienne de la Boiete
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid." — Dwight D. Eisenhower
"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
"There is no better way to stamp your power on people than through the dead hand of bureaucracy. You cannot reason with paperwork." - David Black, from Turn Left For Gibraltar
"The limits of tyranny are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." - Frederick Douglass
"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine." - Joseph Goebbels
“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.” - Ronald Reagan
"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
- Entries
- Comments
All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified
Recent Comments
will outhas outedwill outhas outedwill outhas outed