GIVE TIL IT HURTS!

I stand with Texas!

Tactical Hermit spells it all out for us, simply and concisely.

As per usual with liberal communist propaganda drivel, note how the article seeks to appeal to the humanitarian/emotional side:

DHS officials said Saturday that a woman and two children drowned in the Rio Grande after Border Patrol agents “were physically barred by Texas officials from entering the area” under orders from Republican Gov. Greg Abbott.

While all the while ignoring the cold hard facts that the Federal Government is helping to subsidize an outright invasion of 7 Million plus ILLEGAL ALIENS.

Let’s not forget that word ILLEGAL.

EVERYTHING that is transpiring on the Southern Border is UNLAWFUL and in Direct Opposition to the both the U.S. and Texas Constitution.

“Because the facts and law side with Texas, the State will continue utilizing its constitutional authority to defend her territory, and I will continue defending those lawful efforts in court,” Paxton wrote.

The sovereign Republic of Texas has a Constitutional Right to Protect it’s Citizens from FOREIGN Invasion when the Federal Govt. is aiding and abetting the enemy.

Eagle Pass may become our Fort Sumter very soon.

Prepare Accordingly.

 Please note that the entire DHS story about the three illegal-alien would-be border jumpers who drowned was, as you would expect from the evil Leviathan-state, a damned lie: none of it, not one single aspect of it, really went down the way FederalGovCo says it did.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stuck to the narrative — not the facts — the Biden administration parroted after three migrants drowned last Friday while attempting to cross the Rio Grande.

After the tragedy, the Biden administration rushed to blame Texas for the incident. Homeland Security, for example, accused Texas National Guard soldiers of having “physically barred” Border Patrol agents from responding to migrants in distress. The White House, on the other hand, suggested the migrants could have been saved had Texas soldiers not “blocked U.S. Border Patrol from attempting to provide emergency assistance.”

But the Justice Department admitted in a filing to the Supreme Court on Monday that the migrants — two children and an adult woman — had already drowned when Mexican officials alerted Border Patrol agents of the tragic deaths. In fact, they had been dead for at least one hour.

On Wednesday, Fox News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich confronted Jean-Pierre over the White House’s dishonest narrative. She asked, “Will the administration amend its separate statement that implied that Texas officials were responsible for the deaths of those three migrants when, in fact, they had nothing to do with it?”

“They had already been dead for an hour by the time Mexico told anyone in the U.S. about it, and the administration admitted as much in their court filing,” Heinrich noted. “But the statement from the White House implies that Texas was responsible, and a number of outlets were forced to issue corrections and editor’s notes because of that White House statement.”

The falsehood exposed, Jean-Pierre responded by urging Heinrich to be “sensitive” because of the “devastating situation.” But then she refused to acknowledge the truth after repeatedly stumbling over her thoughts.

Ahhh, the usual fallback of the hack goobermint spokesweasel when caught in a blatant fabrication: “sensitivity.”

The Fox News reporter then read Jean-Pierre the White House statement — which said that “Texas officials blocked U.S. Border Patrol from attempting to provide emergency assistance” — but the press secretary simply restated her earlier point.

“There were other migrants in the water as well,” she said.

“Then why wasn’t that included in the statement?” Heinrich shot back.

Easy-peasy lemon squeezy: because they some lyin’ mothafuckas, yo. If ANYBODY is directly “responsible” for the drownings, apart from the criminal aliens themselves, it would be the senile, staggering stumblebum who threw open the former Border In Name Only and encouraged the flood of illegals to cross it in the first goddamned place…and we all already know who that is, thenksveddymuch.

Right back atcha, Slick

Is the traditional D卐M☭CRAT monopoly on political violence about to be brought to a screeching halt?

Democrats Are Catching On That Political Violence Can Go Both Ways
Political violence isn’t a one-way street. It has taken Democrats too long to figure that out, and now it’s too late.

The accomplice media evidently got a new set of instructions from Joe Biden’s people that they need to start hyping up the possibility of violence coming from Republicans ahead of the election.

Democrats may finally have gotten the message that the threat of force isn’t a political tool that only they get to use, which is great news. Now that they’ve realized it, though, they’re trying to convince voters that it’s only a real problem when their opponents do it, namely (of course) Trump voters.

The advantage Democrats have had in recent years is that, unlike independent and Republican voters, they know their activists put politics above everything else. For them, only one thing matters: getting their way. If that means destroying public property and private businesses, so be it. If a few people are hospitalized or die for it, that’s a price they’re willing to pay.

Intimidation and harassment are their default strategies. It’s their voters who screamed in the faces of perfect strangers for not wearing face coverings. It’s their voters who torched and trashed inner cities in the name of “racial justice.” It’s their voters who showed up to menace Supreme Court justices at their private residences. It’s their voters ginning up a second Holocaust over a religious conflict between two nations 6,000 miles away.

True, the other side showed on that one fateful day that it’s capable of taking things to the streets when things aren’t going so smoothly. But rather than Democrats saying to themselves, “Hmm, maybe we should all settle down some,” they proceeded to censor, prosecute, and disenfranchise their opponents.

If there has been any increase in violent threats from the right, Democrats have themselves to thank for it. They might do themselves a favor this time and knock it off before any of those threats are made good.

They chose to drive down this road. Now they understand it’s a two-way street.

Well good, and not a moment too soon either. This would be the perfect time to run the D卐M☭CRAT clown-car off the road and into the ditch, drag them from the smoking wreck, and thump the living shit out of their worthless carcasses while they’re still dazed—a golden opportunity that should NOT be passed up, lest it never come along again.

Update! So many targets of opportunity it’s hard to know where to start. But unless I’m much mistaken, a couple of likely prospects just reared their butt-ugly heads.

CNN started to cover Trump’s speech, but Jake Tapper curiously cut away from the feed after Trump started talking about Joe Biden’s border crisis.

“We’re going to seal up the border because right now we have an invasion,” Trump began. “We have an invasion of millions and millions of people that are coming into our country. I can’t imagine why they think that’s a good—“

And that’s when Tapper started talking over him. “Donald Trump, declaring victory with a historically strong showing in the Iowa caucuses if these numbers hold. The biggest victory for a non-incumbent president in the modern era for this contest. A relatively subdued speech as these things go so far, although here he is, right now, under my voice. You can hear him repeating his anti-immigrant rhetoric.”

As if that wasn’t bad enough, MSNBC just refused to air it at all. Rachel Maddow couldn’t even say his name.

“At this point in the evening, the projected winner of the Iowa caucuses has just started giving his victory speech,” Maddow said. “We will keep an eye on that as it happens. We will let you know if there is any news made in that speech, if there is anything noteworthy, something substantive and important.”

Maddow went on to explain why MSNBC and other like-minded outlets have been censoring Trump. “The reason I’m saying this is, of course, there is a reason that we and other news organizations have generally stopped giving an unfiltered, live platform to remarks by former President Trump. It is not out of spite; it is not a decision that we relish; it is a decision that we regularly revisit. And, honestly, earnestly, it is not an easy decision,” she claimed. 

“But there is a cost to us, as a news organization, of knowingly broadcasting untrue things. That is a fundamental truth of our business and who we are,” she continued.

Bold mine, and utterly, utterly hilarious. My GOD, the balls on this Madcow bint! Props to her, though, for somehow managing to spout such patently risible codswallop with a straight (if somewhat horse-like) face.

1

TRUMP WINS!!!

Ho hum. Not giving a moist fart about it—scanned a few headlines, skipped the articles entirely—I wasn’t gonna bother mentioning the Iowa shindig at all. Then I read Aesop’s projection for the 24 “election.”

Well well. Seems that, despite eleventy-eleven indictments for everything from overdue library books to wearing a bad hairpiece in public, Trump only beat every other GOP-lite candidate, combined, in the Iowa Cornbowl.

Fourth-place finisher Ramalamadingdong, who only trailed Trump by 43 percentage points (more than the tally totals of Jeb #2 and Jeb #3 combined), has ejected from further headfirst smashes into the brick wall, rolled over, and kissed Trump’s ass, in the bid to become the next Veep running mate.

None of that means fuck-all for the actual 2024 election. Team Poopypants’ continued Keep-Him-The-Hell-Away-From-Live-Microphones-For-Another-Year strategy, a carbon-copy of the 2020 plan, points to the re-deployment of another massive Election Steal apparatus in 2024, except likely a necessary order of magnitude larger, to counteract what looks to be an actual 70-30 Biden drubbing, were a conventional (read “factual, free, and honest”) election to be held this year.

It won’t be.

My prediction of what happens in 2024 is a re-do of 2020: 

Biden “wins” again this time, improving on his 81M imaginary votes from 2020, with a final score of Biden 972%, and Trump 49%. Nothing to see here. Move along.

An actual election scares hell out of both parties, because they know who’d win that. Just like he did the last two times. They’re morons, but they’re not complete idiots.

The Deep State would hold a motorcade for Trump in Dallas the day he wins the nomination, and the GOP would donate the convertible for him to ride in before that would happen. The FBI and CIA can be relied upon to supply the Usual Book Depository Spectators, as they both have some wee experience with that sort of thing.

But in the meantime, the spectacle of Trump single-handedly upending the entire assembled crew of GOPe midgets, every single time it’s tried, is heartwarming, in that it sets the poo-flinging monkeys from both wings of the Uniparty (that would be just about all of them) to digging in their diapers for more offerings to throw at President Trump, and highlights the desperation and blatant frothingly mad depths of shrieking hysteria to which they’ll happily succumb, in their ceaseless quest to keep their jackboots on the neck of the American people.

A-yup, that squares entirely with my own take on the whole dumbshow: mildly entertaining, not much use otherwise. Said jackboots, as a rule, cannot be removed by simply voting them off our necks, and they’re the really important issue for us at this late date.

The great Justice Clarence Thomas

A good and decent man whose understanding of the Constitution as written by our Founding Fathers is matched only by his abiding reverence for it, we are fortunate indeed to have him on the Court.

Clarence Thomas and Me
To speak as a black man at odds with the consensus of other blacks can be burdensome—and liberating.

Clarence Thomas is a black American icon. There is no more American story, and no blacker story, than his. We should celebrate him as a living embodiment of this nation’s greatness, given his rise from the challenging circumstances of his upbringing—poverty, segregation, colorism, linguistic alienation—to holding a seat on the Supreme Court. Excluding Thomas from any history of African-descended people in this country would render it incomplete,  just as ignoring his influence would leave any history of the current Court incomplete. 

Justice Clarence Thomas is unquestionably a towering figure in American jurisprudence. As Scott Douglas Gerber, a leading authority on his legal theories, has noted, Thomas’s impact on constitutional law over the last quarter-century has been stunning. His long-standing views have carried the day in major cases. He has stuck to his principles in his three decades on the Court, and it has paid off. Thus, his insistence that the Commerce Clause does not empower the federal government to regulate everything under the sun is now the law. His position that federal agencies should have relatively restricted power is now the law. His view that the Second Amendment means what it says, and that individuals have a fundamental right to carry firearms, is now the law. His conviction that no constitutional right to an abortion exists is now the law. And, perhaps most poignantly, his passionately articulated view that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause forbids racial preferences in higher-education admissions decisions is now the law. Indeed, his principled stance that the Court’s job is to discern the original understanding of the constitutional provision at issue in a case has become the Court’s dominant approach. One could even plausibly hold that this is now Justice Thomas’s Supreme Court, not Chief Justice John Roberts’s. Thomas is its longest-serving sitting member, and his legacy will continue well after his time on the bench is over, as many of his former clerks are now federal judges themselves. 

And yet, despite his now-undeniable skill as a jurist and judge, Thomas finds himself the target of criticism that differs in kind from that reserved for the Court’s other conservative justices. One expects public disagreement with his most controversial opinions; we should welcome intellectually rigorous dissent, for no one can test the validity of ideas without it. But too often, critics attack not Thomas’s ideas but the man himself—and this is especially true of black critics, who regard him not merely as mistaken but as a traitor who has forfeited his status as “authentically black.” For them, he is an Iago-like figure, driven by a perverse impulse to degrade African Americans. The quasi-religious conviction that Thomas’s reasoned defense of capitalism, color blindness, and individual liberty amounts to a disgust for his fellow blacks is, in my view, the outcome of a projected disgust for Thomas himself.

Most close observers of Thomas’s place in American life are accustomed to this reaction. Nobody blinks, for example, when Ibram X. Kendi issues yet another broadside against yet another of Thomas’s perceived sins. As far back as 2013, before Kendi was crowned the arbiter of racial goodthink, he questioned how a man like Thomas could hold the opinions he does. Writing of Thomas’s concurring opinion in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, Kendi finds that the justice is “either being blatantly dishonest” in his comparison of affirmative action and de jure racial segregation or that he has a “blatant inability to decipher, to assess and to judge.” It could not be that Thomas is intellectually capable of coming to this conclusion and that he believes it. What black person who grew up in segregated Georgia could? (Never mind that Kendi misreads Thomas’s opinion, accusing him of questioning the sincerity of the University of Texas’s position on diversity, while believing the sincerity of segregationists’ “separate but equal” doctrine. Thomas clearly disbelieves both.) 

This tendency to respond to Thomas by questioning either his honesty or his competence has been a through-line for his critics for decades. Thomas himself noted the phenomenon in his speech before the National Bar Association in 1998. At the time, he regularly heard the charge that he was merely following Antonin Scalia’s lead rather than working out his own conclusions about cases before the Court. Thomas remarked:

With respect to my following, or, more accurately, being led by other members of the Court, that is silly, but expected, since I couldn’t possibly think for myself. And what else could possibly be the explanation when I fail to follow the jurisprudential, ideological and intellectual, if not anti-intellectual, prescription assigned to blacks. Since thinking beyond this prescription is presumptively beyond my abilities, obviously someone must be putting these strange ideas into my mind and my opinions. Though being underestimated has its advantages, the stench of racial inferiority still confounds my olfactory nerves. 

Thomas was right to point to the racist undercurrent that flowed through questions about his competence and independence. Only a failure of intellect, of courage, of race pride, or some deeper, unnamed corruption could account for his departure from the “common sense” of his tribe. Such an attitude ironically demonstrated the soundness of Thomas’s long-standing critique of affirmative action—that it made its beneficiaries, whatever their objective merits, appear less competent than their white peers. Here was Thomas, a beneficiary of affirmative action at Holy Cross and Yale Law School, encountering the exact questions about his abilities that he worried could haunt any black person as long as affirmative action persisted.

Who asked those questions? Some whites, yes. If we are being generous, perhaps they could be forgiven for asking—if only in their minds—the questions that affirmative action suggested. But shouldn’t blacks know better? We know that the best of us are just as good, just as smart, just as competent as the best of everyone else. So why were so many blacks eager to unleash against Thomas the very tropes about inferiority that had dogged us for centuries?

Because the “Uncle Tom” mythos is so indelibly ingrained in the “liberal” psyche it’s damned near reflexive by now, a near-instinctual reaction to every black man like Justice Thomas who dares to abandon the D卐M☭CRAT intellectual plantation and think for himself—a mythos reaching far enough to ensnare blacks who have been brainwashed by dogmatic Left-liberalism, as so many others have, in its fetid toils to this very day.

I repeat: Real Americans are most fortunate to have him on the USSC, but we’re hardly the only ones to benefit: the US Constitution itself is fortunate to have as staunch, able, and wise a defender and protector as Justice Clarence Thomas on its side. A little of the backstory for those younger folks who weren’t around for it, or for any of us greybeards who might have forgotten.

Thomas was born in Pin Point, Georgia. After his father abandoned the family, he was raised by his grandfather in a poor Gullah community near Savannah. Growing up as a devout Catholic, Thomas originally intended to be a priest in the Catholic Church but was frustrated over the church’s insufficient attempts to combat racism. He abandoned his aspiration of becoming a clergyman to attend the College of the Holy Cross and, later Yale Law School, where he was influenced by a number of conservative authors, notably Thomas Sowell. Upon graduating, he was appointed as an assistant attorney general in Missouri and later entered private practice there. He became a legislative assistant to U.S. Senator John Danforth in 1979, and was made Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education in 1981. President Ronald Reagan appointed Thomas as Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the next year.

President George H. W. Bush nominated Thomas to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1990. He served in that role for 19 months before filling Marshall’s seat on the Supreme Court. Thomas’s confirmation hearings were bitter and intensely fought, centering on an accusation that he had sexually harassed Anita Hill, a subordinate at the Department of Education and the EEOC. Hill alleged that Thomas made multiple sexual and romantic overtures to her despite her repeatedly telling him to stop; Thomas and his supporters alleged that Hill and her political supporters had fabricated the accusation to prevent the appointment of a black conservative. The Senate confirmed Thomas by a vote of 52–48, the narrowest margin in a century.

Since the death of Antonin Scalia, Thomas has been the Court’s foremost originalist, stressing the original meaning in interpreting the Constitution. In contrast to Scalia—who had been the only other consistent originalist—he pursues a more classically liberal variety of originalism. Thomas was known for his silence during most oral arguments, though has since begun asking more questions to counsel. He is notable for his majority opinions in Good News Club v. Milford Central School (determining the freedom of religious speech in relation to the First Amendment) and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (affirming the individual right to bear arms outside the home), as well as his dissent in Gonzales v. Raich (arguing that Congress may not criminalize the private cultivation of medical marijuana). He is widely considered to be the Court’s most conservative member. Thomas has accepted luxury trips and gifts from Harlan Crow, a wealthy Republican donor, for two decades since at least 2004 and failed to report them.

The above having been culled from shitlib Wikipedia *GAG SPIT*, it’s no surprise that they’d just HAVE to get that last little dig in as if it amounted to a goddamned thing, anymore than the patently spurious Hill smear-job attempt did. Nice try, ya fucktards.

Having risen above the initial controversy of his appointment and confirmation to assume the mantle of a true titan of American jurisprudence, Clarence Thomas is hands-down the greatest USSC Justice we’ve had in my lifetime, probably of ALL time. Long may he live and continue to serve; we shan’t see his like again.

3
1

FUCK the Feds!

Man, Abbott just keeps on making all the right moves, don’t he?

Abbott Seizes All City Property Along the Riverfront at the Border in the Eagle Pass Area
Texas Governor Greg Abbott used his emergency powers and seized city property along the riverfront at the border in the Eagle Pass area. This includes federal processing locations and equipment.

#BREAKING The state of Texas has seized all city property along the riverfront at the border in the Eagle Pass area under governors emergency powers, including federal processing locations and equipment—This is according to multiple sources.

All access to the property is limited to state authority only. Border Patrol will be permitted to enter the property to remove their equipment and supplies—Agents will not have access to the area unless there is a medical emergency.

I am told that the state plans to start arresting all who cross for criminal trespass—This is not under the new illegal entry law #SB4– They have been arresting for criminal trespass for months.

This is Abbott’s latest attempt to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into Texas. The Texas Department of Safety (DPS) closed and took over a park in Eagle Pass that is on the banks of the Rio Grande River. This didn’t sit well with Eagle Pass Mayor Rolando Salinas, a Democrat.

Thursday, Mayor Salinas posted a video on Facebook. He said he received a call from DPS on Wednesday which alerted him to the fact that Governor Abbott signed an emergency declaration. Officers will take full control of Shelby Park indefinitely. The park is 47 acres.

“That is not a decision that we agreed to. This is not something that we wanted. This is not something that we asked for as a city,” Salinas said in the video.

Salinas said he was told that the reason for the operation is to prevent immigrants from illegally crossing the Rio Grande into Texas.

Good on ya once again, Guv. Bill Melugin Tweets the deets.


Matt Gaetz follows up with some explanatory background, featuring Border Patrol swine engaging in some truly despicable, nefarious actions.


Worthless bastards.

5
2

Star Trek TOS, a “liberal” show?

Shet yo’ mouth.

Shatner Suggests That Moderns Feel Threatened by Capt. Kirk
I’m an actor, not an activist! That’s a line that a lot of modern entertainment gurus apparently need to hear. According to actor William Shatner, Paramount will not be bringing back his iconic character of Captain Kirk and will continue to sideline Kirk because people “feel threatened” by the heroic starship officer.

A strong male leader who defies the odds — and sometimes the rules — to be the main hero? That’s almost as offensive as misgendering a hulking dude in a dress! Some of us might be okay with Captain Kirk not being resurrected again from the standpoint that Shatner played the role best, but it does seem mystifying that so many recent Star Trek ads or graphics excluded Kirk. Fans might love all the supporting characters of the original cast, and all the newer characters that came after, but Captain Kirk was essential in making Star Trek the hugely popular franchise it is.

There were definitely undertones of progressivism and liberalism in the original Star Trek show, and I’d guess Shatner is no conservative. But it does make sense that the masculine, weapon-wielding Kirk, definitely in command of his ship and appealing to lovers of the classic American hero (as a white male, no less!), should have been beloved in his heyday but suppressed by modern wokies. 

The esteemed George MF Washington begs to differ with that “liberal Trek” business.

So first, let’s be clear about what the original Star Trek series, Gene Roddenberry’s first creation, actually was…it was a smart, muscular and unapologetic defense of the power of Western Civilization to change the world (universe) for the better…and it was a series which celebrated courage and risk taking as among the most important of all human virtues.

If any of that sounds like something that would send Conservatives fleeing for their lives like vampires before a runaway garlic truck with a busted brake line, well then you’re probably a BLM activist…or at the very least you are admitting that you’re entirely ignorant of the things that modern Conservatives actually believe.

The problem, in my experience, is that most Progressives have not actually seen much of the original series (TOS), and have only a very rudimentary understanding of the show’s ethos. To the extent they are familiar with TOS at all, it is often through modern media “criticism” of the show which focuses on what mainstream critics, which is to say Leftists, have concluded…that the show’s politics were proudly and unapologetically Progressive.

The problem is that this conclusion just ain’t true it’s a misunderstanding often based on a single episode… “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”, which has become the most famous episode of Star Trek precisely because it is about race…our modern culture’s most fraught, most talked about, most obsesssed-over issue.

“Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” (S3; EP15): In this most broadly well-known episode of TOS, Kirk and his crew stumble on two aliens, one of whom is a criminal being pursued across interstellar space by the other. These two men’s faces are split down the middle, one side is black, the other white. The intractable problem, these aliens explain to a befuddled Captain Kirk, is that while the right side of one man’s face is white, the other man’s face is white on the left side.

Other than that, they are identical in every way…the only thing that differentiates these two men is…the color of their skin.

But that is not the full story of “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield.”

In the end, “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” is not an argument for modern Progressive obsessions like CRT, Race-based preferences, Diversity and Equity programs, reparations or any other form of racial remuneration… the episode makes a much larger, and oppositional point. It makes the case that our obsession with race is unworthy of an intelligent advanced species, that it is terminally corrosive to any pluralist society and that, in the end, this unhealthy obsession will doom us all… just as, in the episode’s final twist, it dooms Bele and Lokai’s entire planet.

“Listen to me…you both must end up dead…if you don’t stop hating…” Kirk implores them both as the two men careen towards an entirely avoidable tragedy…

I do not know a single American Conservative, white black or other, who would object to that message.

And while “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” dealt specifically with the issue of race, the original Star Trek series tackled a broad range of political hot button issues week-in-and-week-out, beyond just race, over the course of its three seasons…

GMFW goes on to examine several TOS episodes in like fashion, with accompanying video clips including Kirk’s brilliant “Risk is our business” soliloquy, before coming to the beating, bleeding heart of the whole thing.

Look, I could go on and on, citing episode after episode which mirror aspects of our current political moment and which advocate for a modern Conservative (or at the very least a classically Liberal) point of view, but in the end that’s not even really the point, because STAR TREK: TOS has the ultimate trump card hidden in its deck…one singular thing that stands as an unimpeachable argument against the idea that Star Trek represents a modern Progressive ideal that has no appeal whatsoever to the average American conservative.

And that thing is the show’s main character…the iconic and incomparable Captain James T. Kirk himself.

Captain Kirk is everything that the broader Progressive dominated culture has been teling us for years that we are supposed to hate. He is the very definition of what is now called “toxic masculinity” by our Progressive “betters.”

Kirk is a total stud…he’s handsome, he’s unabashedly heterosexual, he has absolutely no confusion about his gender identity and he doesn’t hesitate to take his shirt off.

In his career, as in his life, Kirk is an aggressive Alpha Male… and while he certainly has the guts and skill to fight his way out of just about any situation, he’s also smart, charismatic and clever enough to talk his way out of trouble whenever he recognizes that his is the weakest hand at the table.

Star Trek, and in particular its iconic lead character, celebrated those things about Human nature from which Progressives, and our participation trophy culture in general, tend to recoil like slugs from salt…courage, risk taking, steadfastness, self-sacrifice and confidence in one’s culture and principles. One need only to have survived the COVID pandemic and its concomitant lockdowns and mandates to understand that Progressives no longer admire these things, that indeed they often seek to use their political advantage to suppress or even eliminate them altogether.

The courage to face risk has become something of a lost art here in America of the early 2020’s, to our country’s great detriment. It is our culture’s multi-decade project to decouple risk from reward that has softened the population to the extent that the COVID lockdowns were greeted, not with the rage, indignation and resistance they deserved, but with a quiet un-American acquiesence…almost as if large majorities of the population were eager for Government to remove risk from their lives, regardless of whatever rewards might be thrown overboard right along with it.

But once upon a time, Star Trek and Captain Kirk stood athwart this corrosive “safety first” instinct for risk aversion at all costs and tried to remind us of an America where risk was a necessary part of achieving the things we wanted most in our lives…love, adventure, career success, victory…all those things that make life worth living.

And that is a Conservative impulse to its core.

Much as I’ve always adored both TOS and TNG, I’ve never really thought of it this way before. But now that he mentions it, the man makes one hell of an excellent point, I think.

3
3

COOOOL!

If it’s gonna be done, it’s gonna have to be Musk that does it.

180 Days for a SpaceX Starship Moonbase
There is a proposal to use the SpaceX lunar starship as a rapidly deployable moonbase. It could be completed 180 days after the SpaceX lunar Starship lands on the moon.

The payload area of the Starship is about 1000 cubic meters. This proposal would tip over the lunar Starship and cut it open to use three times as much volume and enable it be buried for radiation shielding.

NASA and Thales Alenia just rolled out their first Moon Base concept for the Artemis project. Why do we need a tiny module when we have over a thousand cubic meters in Starship? Does this base have any use at all?

Does it really matter? It’s nothing but pie in the sky, a pipe-dream. NASA can’t even get a man into low-earth orbit anymore.

Via Insty, who quips: NOW THIS IS MORE LIKE THE 21ST CENTURY I WAS HOPING FOR. Heh, indeed. Now about those Jetsons-style flying cars we’ve all been waiting for, Elon…

Which reminds me of a humorous incident from a cpl-three weeks ago. I was trying to access a shopping-center wheelchair ramp blocked by one of those damned Teslas, see. Thankfully, the driver was still in the driver-seat—her BF/husband/whatever had dashed into a restaurant to grab their go-order while she waited, it soon developed. Anyhoo, as she backed out of the way for me the car made that burbling beedle-beedle-beedle noise originally produced by the Jetsonmobiles in the classic old Hanna-Barbera cartoon. I just about fell out laughing at that, and I’m still laughing.

I solemnly swear to you here and now, that Tesla sounded so exactly, precisely like the above I have to conclude that Musk must have licensed a recording of it to use in lieu of the exhaust note typical of an ICE. Good going, Elon!

So, how’s that forced EV-conversion thing working out for ya, Mr “pResident”?

NOT. TOO. GOOD.

Hertz is selling 20,000 electric vehicles to buy gasoline cars instead
Hertz, which has made a big push into electric vehicles in recent years, has decided it’s time to cut back. The company will sell off a third of its electric fleet, totaling roughly 20,000 vehicles, and use the money they bring to purchase more gasoline powered vehicles.

Electric vehicles have been hurting Hertz’s financials, executives have said, because, despite costing less to maintain, they have higher damage-repair costs and, also, higher depreciation.

“[C]ollision and damage repairs on an EV can often run about twice that associated with a comparable combustion engine vehicle,” Hertz CEO Stephen Scherr said in a recent analyst call.

And EV price declines in the new car market have pushed down the resale value of Hertz’s used EV rental cars.

“The MSRP declines in EVs over the course of 2023, driven primarily by Tesla, have driven the fair market value of our EVs lower as compared to last year, such that a salvage creates a larger loss and, therefore, greater burden,” Scherr said.

Simply put, people are generally willing to pay a certain amount less for a used car than for a new one. As the price of new car goes down, that also pushes down what people are willing to pay to buy a used one.

Hertz expects to take a loss of about $245 million due to depreciation on the EVs, an average of about $12,250, per vehicle the company said in an SEC filing.

If you don’t already know it by now, you certainly should: Mike’s Iron Law #187: There’s always a workaround, and true Americans will always be able to find it. Flipping the big honking middle-digit salute at FederalGovCo like this counts as one of the very best examples I can think of.

On the other hand, though, watch now as the goobermint takes over the rent-a-car industry entire in retaliation. Who can say, maybe such a dick-move was the whole idea from the very beginning?

Why yes, my ideology IS better than yours, Leftards

S’truth.

To use a metaphor, if I activate a burner on a stove I know that if I put a cast iron pan on it, it will get very hot and denaturize anything I place in that pan.

The left believes that the pan is a cat.

I’m hardly kidding. Radical ideologies force people to perceive reality in a way that isn’t real. Like Don Quixote, a simple windmill becomes a monster they must tilt at. Any attempts to tell them it’s just a windmill are met with the leftists accusing the truth-teller of being monsters themselves.

They’re so buried in their own ideological beliefs that, not only can they not see reality, but they also delude themselves into believing they’re heroic and better than everyone else for seeing around them all and spotting what the “evil” hiding in the hearts of the masses.

As feminist grifter Anita Sarkeesian once confessed, “Everything is sexist, everything is racist, and you have to point it all out.”

Moreover, they believe it’s their job to destroy it by any means necessary. This includes what are blatant attempts at brainwashing, but what they believe is actually “fixing” problems. So full of themselves are these social justice adherents that they will take the works of people like Tolkien and pervert and corrupt them to fix the “problematic” issues they believe are embedded in his stories.

Look at any piece of work that has been commandeered by the radical leftists in Hollywood. Can you honestly say they improved the works of people like Tolkien? Of course not. Amazon’s “Rings of Power” series was a complete joke and the viewership numbers reflected that. As we speak, Marvel and Star Wars, once untouchable brands, are crashing and burning at breakneck speeds thanks to a hefty woke injection of modern politics.

What about that makes these “better,” and how does that prove the radical left’s ideas are “better?”

They may answer with “Well, we’re not racist, sexist, or bigoted.”

Ah, but the left is all of those things, they just think they aren’t because they believe who they’re racist, sexist, and bigoted against deserve it. Their idea is that the people they believe they’re fighting the good fight against are purely evil, and that everything they love and care about must be destroyed, taken, or perverted.

This doesn’t just mean works of art, this also means your workplace, your government, your military, your doctor’s office, your food, your home, and your children just to name a few. And each inroad they make doesn’t improve anything but causes suffering, depression, hunger, suicide, destruction, and death.

What about that is “better?”

Not a damned thing, of course. The ironic part is, we’re going to have to adopt the Left’s own policy regarding what must be done about the opposition and do it to them for real, if we hope to survive. To wit: if the truly superior ideology—namely, ours, having been proven so over centuries of successful application—is to continue and prevail, the inferior one and its proponents will necessarily have to be destroyed. No one asked for that, no one really wants it, but their having forced it upon us, it’s just the sad, harsh, implacable reality. There’s simply no around it, much as we might long for there to be.

It’s a VIP post, but I ran it through The Wayback Machine so’s you could read it all, which you’re gonna want to do.

5
1

Moar sanctuary cities, stat!

Well, certain specific varieties of ‘em, that is: Gun Sanctuary Cities, Free Speech Sanctuary Cities, Conservative Sanctuary Cities, Wokester-Free Sanctuary Cities, and so on.

Just 1% of Illinois Gun Owners Register ‘Assault Weapons’ Ahead of Ban
Only a tiny fraction of Illinois gun owners registered their AR-15s and similar firearms before the state’s ban officially took effect.

Fewer than 30,000 of the state’s Firearms Owner Identification (FOID) card holders registered firearms recently classified as “assault weapons” by the end of the December 31 registration deadline, according to updated data the Illinois State Police (ISP) released on Tuesday. That means only 1.2 percent of the state’s 2.4 million documented gun owners complied with the state’s terms for allowing continued ownership of AR-15s despite enforcement of the ban beginning on Monday.

The final year-end numbers paint a picture of mass non-compliance with the efforts of Illinois officials to crack down on the supply of AR-15s, the most popular rifle in America, and similar firearms in civilian hands despite facing the threat of criminal penalties. Starting Monday, possession of an unregistered assault weapon became a misdemeanor, while the manufacture and sale of one became a felony. It adds to a recent trend of gun owners being reluctant to go along with similar gun bans and registration requirements in states like New York and California.

Good on ’em, and keep it up, Fightin’ Illini. Elsewhere, how’s that original-recipe Sanctuary City thing working out for you sanctimonious shitlibs?

NOT. TOO. GOOD.

New Jersey deploys cops to send dumped migrants to NYC in desperate move: ‘F–k this’
Migrants in Jersey? Fuhgettaboutit.

New Jersey officials are making sure the Big Apple doesn’t dump the out-of-control migrant mess on the Garden State — and are even deploying cops to usher asylum seekers from the US border onto Manhattan-bound NJ Transit trains as soon as they get off their buses.

The scrap across the Hudson comes as New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy tries to rally the state’s mayors to form a unified front, while New York City Mayor Eric Adams pleads with Murphy to take on at least part of the migrant burden that is burying the five boroughs.

“New Jersey just said, ‘F–k this,’” one source close to the situation told The Post on Wednesday. “New Jersey Transit cops were waiting for them in Secaucus to show them how to get on the train to New York.”

Multiple Garden State sources described the scene as hectic over the last few days, as nearly two dozen migrant buses rolled into train stations with “chaperones” — with NJ Transit cops then taking over and serving as guides to get nearly 1,000 asylum seekers across the river.

The process has been successful so far, with no migrants choosing to stay in Jersey.

Well hey, who would that didn’t just absolutely have to? Abbott lays down the real bottom line here:

Earlier this week, Abbott boasted online that he had sent 95,000 asylum seekers north — including 33,600 to New York since August 2022 — and would continue to do so.

“Sanctuary cities like NYC & Chicago have seen only a FRACTION of what overwhelmed Texas border towns face daily,” he wrote on X. “We will continue our transportation mission until [President] Biden reverses course on his open border policies.”

Exactly, precisely so, right down the line. They’ve always talked a big open-borders game, but it seems those self-righteous “Sanctuary City” denizens really don’t seem to like being forced to put their money where there big fat yaps are, don’t it? In the words of a memorable schoolyard taunt issued back in Junior High by my now-deceased friend Sherry Beatty, tough titty said the kitty, but the milk’s still good. Now, sit back and suck on it, whydon’tcha.

Update! Dang it, I’ve had this one sitting in an open tab all this time just waiting for me to get around to it, and damned near forgot to include it.

Why 2024 Needs to Be the Year of the Energy Sanctuary State
As the world’s climate luminaries hop back on their private jets in Dubai after COP28, Americans should be worried.

Among the ideas being pushed is a global tax on oil and gas, shipping, and financial services. Its supporters are demanding nearly $10 TRILLION dollars to implement the green agenda around the world. With the Biden Administration well represented at the conference, America’s governors need to be thinking about what they can do to protect families from this radical push.

Here’s an idea: 2024 should be the year that “Energy Sanctuary States” are introduced to fight a globalist agenda.

The concept of sanctuary states is used extensively by those on the left, usually around immigration and drugs. However, it can and should be extended to the energy sector.

The new year is an ideal time for states to embrace their energy sovereignty. Such states would be able to contend with burdensome federal regulations by focusing on delivering reliable and affordable energy to their citizens. The left has decided to ignore federal immigration and drug laws. Let’s apply the same treatment to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the rest of Joe Biden’s Green New Army.

Currently, states must sue the Biden Administration for relief, as they did in West Virginia vs. the EPA that resulted with the Supreme Court rolling back the federal government’s ability to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. However, looking for relief through the courts takes time and a lot of money. States would be better off standing up first and suing later. Furthermore, redirecting state resources away from an unwanted climate agenda is a sensible move that benefits both the economy and energy consumers.

An energy sanctuary state should seize the opportunity to bypass onerous federal regulations that often impede progress and hinder affordable energy delivery. The current federal regulatory framework creates significant challenges for states in pursuing viable and efficient energy solutions. By establishing an energy sanctuary state, a state would be able to tailor its regulations in a way that best suits its unique circumstances. This flexibility allows for quicker decision-making, streamlined processes, and the ability to adapt to changing energy demands.

Indeed so—exactly as the Founders intended from the very beginning, ironically enough. We seem to have somehow lost track of the concept over our long, slow downhill slide into the socialist ditch, but the fact is that’s why those great men wrote the Constitution as they did in the first damned place—which fact even a cursory review of said simply-worded, easy-to-comprehend document will make clear as crystal and beyond further debate, without the average reader having to so much as break a sweat over it.

Come to think of it, “ironic” doesn’t begin to meet the case.

1
1

Anarcho-tyranny perfectionists

SO. They figure out how to eliminate Trump from either running or winning next year, thereby at last getting him “out of the way” so they can come after us, in accordance with his canny prediction. Then what happens?

This is what they will do:

Nothing.

At least, nothing we are not seeing already, just perfected.

You have likely heard the phrase “anarcho-tyranny,” originally coined by Sam Francis thirty years ago. He put it best when he described it as:

Essentially a kind of Hegelian synthesis of what appear to be dialectical opposites: the combination of oppressive government power against the innocent and the law-abiding and, simultaneously, a grotesque paralysis of the ability or the will to use that power to carry out basic public duties such as protection or public safety. And, it is characteristic of anarcho-tyranny that it not only fails to punish criminals and enforce legitimate order but also criminalizes the innocent.

Just today on the left’s new favorite holiday, Washington, D.C. attorney Matthew Graves announced the scope of the DOJ’s persecution of people present on January 6th will expand to everybody who was at the Capitol but did not enter (provided here by ALX on TwitterX), right as the FBI arrested three other participants.

If you browse Twitter/X, you will see Democrats shamelessly crowing about how scary that day was and how we need to protect “our democracy,” and people swallow it up. Others gleefully say Ashli Babbitt deserved to be killed (even stealing the meme about George Floyd) and that it was a shame she was the only one.

Who needs a salaried, uniformed, professional secret police when random people ginned up on regime rhetoric demonizing political opposition will do it for free, as this attitude suggests? Might I remind you that just the other day a campaign speech and ad both called Trump supporters extremists, if not enemies of the country?

We have already seen a casualty of this rhetoric when Cayler Ellingson was murdered in 2022 by Shannon Brandt, who said Ellingson was a “Republican extremist.” Brandt has only been given five years.

“But wait, what about the schemes of the World Economic Forum to make us live in pods, eat bugs, and own nothing?” you may ask. That goal could very well be on the table, but the stated objective to enslave us by 2030 might just be a means of provoking outrage. If people object too loudly? Just keep on saying they are conspiracy theorists.

In essence, the good thing about anarcho-tyranny for power-mad psychopaths is that you need to do very little on your own part to oppress the populace. But patience is required because, by its own logic, dissidents cannot be purged, just whittled away.

And rest assured, the Power can expect plenty of assistance from the willing victims of their own self-enslavement: ie, all the Karens, Kens, and sundry other shitlibs who favor “freedom FROM choice” over “freedom OF choice.” Factor in, too, the vigorous cooperation of the born-snitch types who infest every suburban neighborhood, trendy urban enclave, and modern condo community. These Nosy Nellies enjoy a frisson of near-orgasmic bliss at the prospect of diming-out all who A) flatly refuse to mask up; B) decline to get Vaxxed as ordered; C) are possessed of the outrageous temerity to live free no matter what.

In every society independent, liberty-minded people have always been a tiny minority, and always will be; the toil, hazard, and strong sense of personal accountability required by true freedom hold no attraction for the vast majority of stupefied Sheeple, a condition which has been exacerbated by many decades of government-school indoctrination and mass-media exhortation. Shamed by their own pathetic desire to cower under the warm, cozy security blanket of conformism and compliance, they can only resent their betters, and will do all they can to thwart them, hinder them, and see them punished. Last week I posted a meme that’s well worth remembering:

 

Ahh, but once the anarcho-tyrannists DO overtly, aggressively “come after us,” surely we can rely on the military to step into the breach, refuse illegal orders, and fulfill their oath to the Constitution, right?

RIIIGHT?!? USAF vet Mike McDaniel sure thinks so.

Forget it. They’re going to kill their families, neighbors, pastors and friends? The people they’ve grown up with and live with? What they are going to do is walk away with as many weapons, as much ammo and other gear as they can carry and haul in the trucks they’re going to take with them. A few higher-ranking, idiot true-believers might try to stop them, might even try to use deadly force. Heh.

To be sure, there will be some social justice warriors that will turn traitor out of a misplaced sense of duty, or just because they want to be on what they think will be the winning side. But even now, most people in our military love America and Americans. They’re the people buying the guns, living the American military ethic of duty, honor and country. They like Red Dawn and The Patriot. They’re not going to kill fellow Americans. They know who America’s enemies are.

Who are the few that will? They’re the people who shrink from killing our actual enemies, people who haven’t won a war in decades, people who can’t bring themselves to kill the demons that would gladly murder every American. They surely get excited, however, about strafing Des Moines, or nuking South Dakota. Suzie Soccer Mom and traditional Catholics are so much easier to beat than actual armies.

Most of our military—probably enough—will either just walk away, or will fight for liberty, taking as much materiel with them, and sabotaging the rest, as they can. Many will try to go neutral, but won’t be able to maintain that for long.

I pray that he’s right, but I fear that he’s wrong, persisting in a pleasant delusion countered by a plethora of recent evidence indicating otherwise. Commenter Chuck Lowe makes an airtight case.

We already know exactly what will take place. It has already happened. When Americans wanted redress in the streets, BLM-Antifa were given “room to destroy” & allowed to burn 2 Billion dollars to the ground, assault and murder cops-people and Kamala Harris went on TV to get everyone to help make bail for them to get out of jail.

When we went to the capital, to protest the FBI/Deep State irregularities and corruption associated with the election, we were shot dead, imprisoned, marginalized, economically destroyed and placed on watch lists.

Even the incarceration or suspicious death of Trump, or a Black Swan event, will not get the majority of people off of their couches and into the street.

‘Fraid so, yep. Bottom line: there is NOBODY coming to save us, to set things right, to correct the nation’s course and restore America That Was—not the cops, not the military, not the Congress, not the courts—NOBODY. Painful though it is to admit it, liberty-minded folks are well and truly on their own. For whatever cold comfort it offers, t’was ever thus.

It was so in 1776, it remains so in 2024 and, human nature being what it is, it probably always will be. Liberty has many false friends who gushingly extol its virtues, when it suits their immediate purpose. Those who truly, sincerely love it—who are dedicated enough to foreswear a life of convenience and ease to pursue and sustain it at any cost—will never number much more than a handful, relatively speaking.

Doesn’t matter, don’t care. Samuel Adams expressed the sentiment better than anybody:

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.

Amen, brother. Calls for yet another rerun of Jack Nicholson’s classic soliloquy in response to Dennis Hopper’s nonplussed bewilderment, I believe.

What a great fuckin’ movie. Well, right up to the part where the rednecks brutally beat George to death while he’s sleeping; I always have to turn it off before that scene, it’s just too much to endure.

2
1

Feisty, fearless, forthright

Don’t know much at all about him, not giving three whoops in Hell about the farcical 2024 Presidential “election” contest, but I gotta say: every time I read another attempted GOTCHA! story quoting the guy he leaves me nodding along in complete agreement.

In a fiery exchange last month, CNN anchorwoman Abby Phillip told GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy that there was “no evidence” to support his claim that federal agents abetted protesters at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Ramaswamy shot back that the FBI conspicuously has never denied that law enforcement agents were on duty in the crowd. He argued that federal officials have repeatedly “lied” to the American people about not only that investigation but one that has gotten much less attention: the alleged failed plot to kidnap and kill Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan in 2020.

“It was entrapment,” Ramaswamy said. “FBI agents putting them up to a kidnapping plot that we were told was true but wasn’t.”

His zeroing in on the Michigan case highlighted an uncharacteristic development in contemporary politics, where progressives vigorously defend law enforcement power while conservatives view it with deep suspicion. Further, Ramaswamy’s linking of Jan. 6 and the Whitmer plot resonated with many on the right who want similarities between the two episodes exposed to the general public, especially the FBI’s reliance on informants and other paid operatives.

Our Gal Jules then dons the wet-suit, snorkel mask, and fins for a deep dive into the Superstate Stasi’s phonus-balonus Whitler “kidnapping” piss-puddle in her usual impeccably-thorough fashion.

As for Ramaswamy, although I gravely doubt his ability to A) get “elected,” and B) get anything useful accomplished even if he did, still, his heart sure seems to be in the right place at least, and God bless him for it. He’s not afraid to speak bluntly about topics the rest of the Vichy GOPe field shies away from like startled mustangs; better, he seems to be constitutionally incapable of taking a second’s worth of shit from slime-encrusted “journalist” bubbleheads, understanding as he obviously does that they’re going to mangle and/or manipulate whatever he says to promote the Press-Gaggle Panic O’ The Week© anyway.

Best of all, Vivek unblenchingly expounds on things you really don’t hear mentioned by anyone else, on either side—GOOD things, IMPORTANT things that not so long ago were universally-accepted American first principles that have become so objectionable nowadays they get any unevolved naif who so much as moots them for discussion—in any tone other than either horrified disapproval or snickering, supercilious disdain at the absurd ideas these subnormal provincials are willing to swallow—hysterically denounced as a “dangerous” “radical” “extremist” seeking to overthrow Our Sacred Democracy in favor of a dystopian-nightmare dictatorship.

Following his ritual denunciation, our witless knuckledragger will be Doxxed, Cancelled, ruined personally, socially, and financially, exiled from Polite Society, busted down to the lowly rank of Permanent Pariah—effectively, a sentence of life without possibility of either parole or pardon summarily handed down not just to him but his family along with him.

As if it wasn’t a dictatorship already, the contemptible cretins. But since FederalGovCo is a dictatorship conceived, installed, and run entirely by them, well hey, it’s okay, I guess. There are two distinct flavors of dictatorship, apparently. Given how fond shitlibs are of endlessly reminding one and all that they’re the Good People and all who dare to cherish divergent opinions assuredly are not, the dichotomy of dictatorship is as follows: Theirs=GOOD. Ours=BAD. According to them, this is a vitally crucially vital distinction to make.

Is it any wonder, then, that young Vivek hasn’t the slightest chance of becoming President in Amerika v2.0?

1

FINALLY

It’s about damned time somebody said it. Besides me, I mean.

Let’s Stop Using the Words: ‘Trump Tried to Overturn the 2020 Election’
After almost three years — and as Democrats in Colorado and Maine ban Donald Trump from the Centennial State’s ballot — it is beyond time for the media to stop “reporting” that “Trump tried to overturn a presidential election” and to quit referring matter-of-factly: to “the election that Trump lost”; to “Trump’s defeat” and his “baseless” “false claims”; and to “Trump is challenging the results” of “Biden’s victory (in, say, Georgia)” and to “swing the election in his favor.”

It is equally time for news organizations to stop “reporting” that the four (who’s counting?) indictments are nothing more than valid or understandable (if ill-timed) reactions to punish Trump for his (“criminal”) attempts to “disenfranchise voters” and thus “subvert democracy.”

This is not a neutral, objective, and non-partisan view of of the facts of the 2020 election. Far from it. No. It is the (self-serving) DNC version. It is akin to asking “When did you stop beating your wife?”

Phrases like “baseless fraud claims,” “sham election investigations,” and “false claims of election fraud” come straight from the Democrat party. At a minimum, readers and viewers are used to circumspect “allegedlys,” to prudent “reportedlys,” and to cautious “accused ofs“. What happened to them?

Easy-peasy: they’re not useful to D卐M☭CRATs in this instance, so they must be expunged. Temporarily, of course; next time it suits them, their Praetorian Media partners in crime will trot those terms back out to club us over the head with as before.

Remember that his whole message — as was that of the protestors on Jan. 6, 2021 (not a single one of them, to my recollection, brandishing weapons other than cellphone cameras for selfies) — is exactly, or almost exactly, the same — i.e., that it was the Democrats who tried to overturn (and, indeed, who succeeded in overturning) the 2020 election and thus democracy (hence his, and the protesters’, far from unreasonable anger).

We could even use similar wordings: “the election that Biden lost,” “Joe’s defeat,” “false claims,” and “the Democrats tried to change/challenge (and succeeded in changing/challenging) the results.” Indeed, the 45th President called it “stealing the election” and thus…if anyone disenfranchised voters and undermined democracy, it was the party of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden.

Yes. YesyesyesyesyesohshitmuddafugginHELL. YES. Every last one of us ought to be out there shouting it from the gott-damned rooftops, each and every time any Lyin’ Liberal, great or small, so much as even attempts that “baseless” bushwa again. Right before we slap the taste right out of his/her/its mouth, of course, in a response we’ll call “mostly peaceful.”

Remember, too, that this ain’t just about Trump, either. At this very moment, there are patriotic Americans doing hard time for the “crime” of exercising their Constitutional right to petition the government for redress of grievances, after being untruthfully smeared as “violent insurrectionists.” All of it, every bit of it, based on nothing but baldfaced lies, used by the Power against these poor victims so as to

  • Disempower, intimidate, and subjugate Real Americans
  • Depose a duly-reelected President
  • Demoralize his supporters
  • Discredit their chosen candidate, and rationalize said candidate’s ongoing persecution
  • Defang the political opposition entire
  • Seize power for a figurehead “president” and his éminence grise puppetmasters

Then again, though, when it comes to the “mainstream” press, such in-your-face propagandizing and manipulation is no more than we’ve come to expect from them. Doesn’t make it any more tolerable or less grating, but it’s nonetheless par for the usual course. The truly confounding thing, at least to me, is why so many otherwise sensible people have just sat silently back and taken it all this time—worse still, that they’ve adopted this patent codswallop themselves, bleating the “baseless claim” mantra like so many hypnotized lemmings as if there had ever been one iota of truth to it. To wit:

The way that even conservative outlets like Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, not to mention RINOs like Mike Pence, buy into and repeat the Left’s “talking points” and double standards is disconcerting. (A WSJ editorial defended Donald Trump against “lawfare” (to wield war on people through the legal system, by imprisoning them or “merely” ruining them, a tactic the Democrats have already used on such Trump allies as Gen. Michael Flynn and Rudy Giuliani) while calling his “post-election behavior” in 2020 “deceitful and destructive” and referring to his “disgraceful” “malfeasance.” While National Review also pushed back against the Trump indictments, all the while feeling the need to point out that it “condemned Trump’s appalling actions in the aftermath of the 2020 election” as well as “Trump’s deceptions”: “Mendacious rhetoric in seeking to retain political office is damnable.”) 

An otherwise outstanding post at the Power Line Blog by the usually outstanding John Hinderaker, gives us, paragraph after paragraph, evidence of cheating and lying by Democrats. And still, that can’t prevent Hinderaker himself from being polite and handing some rope to the opposition, ending said post with the words, Trump’s “obviously indefensible claims,” and with these immortal lines:

In sum, the indictment does not make out a case that Trump is a criminal who should go to prison. But it does make out a strong case that Trump is a dishonest egomaniac with terrible judgment who should never again be entrusted with a responsible government position.

You have just written 15 paragraphs detailing the Democrats’ lying, cheating, and criminal interference in the 2020 election, John Hinderaker — not least in the very indictments that have been served up by Bolshevist prosecutors. Where do those two final sentences fit in except to prove that with enough pressure and broadsides, the Drama Queens’ left-leaning propaganda will overwhelm even the most open-minded and the most honest brain?

Indeed so, good sir, to the eternal disgrace of all who have so docilely gone along with this abominable crime. The esteemed Mr Svane, who I didn’t know about before seeing this excellent piece, goes on at some length from there—all of it every bit as on-target as it is long, long, LONG overdue.

In re the rest of it: gird them loins, load them mags, and stock them larders, people. For Spicy Time cometh, and that right soon, I’m afraid.

3
1

Back atcha!

This. This. Right. Here.

Then the People’s House damned well better pass the thing, and may the D卐M☭CRATs all die screaming of apoplexy from it. Tonight, preferably. Via WRSA.

Update! Tyler Durden posts an extremely chilling map.

As jarring as it’s been to witness the anti-democratic, one-two punch in which a court in Colorado and an unelected bureaucrat in Maine decided Donald Trump cannot appear on primary election ballots, there are many more states where litigation is underway to ban the candidate who’s currently leading the national race.

In addition to Colorado and Maine, there are currently active lawsuits challenging Trump’s eligibility in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming, according to a New York Times survey of the situation.  

Together, the states where Trump’s status is under active challenge account for 269 electoral votes—in a game where you need 270 to win.

Bad enough, to be sure—very bad indeed, actually. But it gets even worse.

While there’s a lot of red on that map, it understates the scope of the phenomenon. These are only the states where either officials have decided Trump can’t appear on a ballot, or where litigation is currently underway.

Expect other states to turn “red” in a bad way. Some of them are states like Michigan and Minnesota, where challenges to Trump’s appearance on primary ballots have been dismissed. Those rulings didn’t cover the general election, so look for those plaintiffs to crawl out of their litigation graves after the GOP primaries.

Also via WRSA, a timely reminder.

As if all the above weren’t plenty of upper-case BAD to do us already.

1

After the Day Of When, what?

Shitstorm a-brewing, full steam ahead!

How Many Load-Bearing Walls Have to Come Down Before America Collapses?
Imagine a big, beautiful house, but it has a maniacal group of squatters living in it. They take sledgehammers to load-bearing walls, carelessly tinker with the wiring, and make no real effort to fix things.

If the roof gets a leak, they let it go. If there’s a crack in the foundation, they’re more likely to hit it with a sledgehammer for fun than to repair it. If they’re going out of town when there’s going to be a cold snap, they leave the water running and don’t worry about whether the pipes freeze or not. Maybe a couple of them will board up a broken window or slap some duct tape on things when they’re sober and bored, but there’s no organized plan to hold everything together.

What do you think that house is going to look like a few years down the road? Better question, what do you think our country is going to look like a few years down the road?

Granted, it takes longer for a country to break down than a house, but it does all the same. In fact, if you’re middle-aged or older, you could probably reel off half a dozen ways the house we have today is vastly inferior to the one we had just a few decades ago.

This is not a coincidence. It’s not bad luck. It’s a consequence of the fact that we’ve done a lot of damage to our home, and we’re no longer even going through the motions of trying to keep it in good repair. We still have a roof over our heads for the moment, but we are certainly no longer on track to have a home we’re going to want to leave to our kids.

In John’s piece he cites an earlier one by Insty, wherein we find this:

What makes me sad now is the ongoing game of Civilizational Jenga that our ruling class is playing. One by one, they’re withdrawing the supports of civil society, in a process that will inevitably lead to a collapse. They’re taking what was a very robust society, and consuming all the safety margins, bit by bit.

What really makes me sad is that while some of the people involved – let’s call them “the morons” for convenience’s sake – are doing this out of shortsightedness, cupidity, or sheer partisan bloodthirstiness, I’m increasingly convinced that there’s a contingent at the top that knows exactly what it’s doing, and is fine with it.

When considering any political tactic, after all, one question is what happens if it doesn’t work. But sometimes an equally important question is, what happens if it does?

Say the various Democratic flacks, special prosecutors, and state attorneys general somehow manage to eliminate Trump. What happens?

Half the country – maybe more – will conclude that the whole system is rigged, that the establishment doesn’t follow the rules, and that it will gang up on anyone it sees is a threat. They will conclude, in short, that the government, and indeed the entire system, is illegitimate.

And they will be right. And the politicians of even a generation ago recognized that as enormously dangerous.

Oh, it’s sad all right, but that ain’t all it is. Not by a long yard, it ain’t. Need more specifics before you can take alarums warning of impending national catastrophe seriously? Ragin’ Dave offers a few.

It’s going to get worse, before it gets worse
Someone points out that we’re already in a recession, even if nobody wants to admit it.

Let’s take a look at three key areas.

If honest numbers were being used, they would show that GDP growth has been negative for almost the entire time that Joe Biden has been in the White House. That would indicate that we are at least experiencing a recession.

And if honest numbers were being used, they would show that the unemployment rate in this country is sitting at about 25 percent right now.

Needless to say, that is absolutely horrible. And if the rate of inflation was still calculated the way that it was back in 1980, it would still be in double digit territory even though it has come down a bit. The official numbers that the government gives us are designed to make us feel good about things. But at this point things are so bad that the charade is falling apart.

Food costs are up. Energy costs are up. Housing costs are through the damn roof. If I didn’t already own property up where I live I’d be screwed because I couldn’t afford to purchase it today, and I made far more in my last year of military service than I did when I purchased the property back in the early 2000’s.

And the people with their hands on the levers of power are either in denial about everything, or they’re just flat out lying to you and shoving as much lucre into their bank accounts as they can before it all comes apart. You know it, I know it.

Just on housing costs alone I don’t see how we come out of this without some sort of massive collapse. When the average family cannot afford a home, there’s no incentive to keep pushing forward.

From where I sit it looks to no longer be a matter of if, but of when. Although it probably won’t matter all that much to us once when arrives, for the nonce the question Glenn suggests remains a stimulating topic for consideration: is all this disaster, loss, and grief being brought down on American heads because our so-called leaders are incompetent and/or stupid? Or is this being done intentionally, with malice aforethought?

Y’all already know which side I come down on there, no need for me to belabor the point; many years of close examination of all the available evidence leaves me confident enough in my conclusion that, for once, I won’t proffer the obligatory “but I could be wrong” disclaimer this time. Whatever the case may be, though, it’s clear that we’re fast approaching the point where stopping them in their tracks by any means necessary—ANY means—will become not just a desirable, wise option but an absolute imperative, a matter of survival, quite literally.

2

Latest Posts

Latest Comments

CF Archives

Categories

Comments policy

NOTE: In order to comment, you must be registered and approved as a CF user. Since so many user-registrations are attempted by spam-bots for their own nefarious purposes, YOUR REGISTRATION MAY BE ERRONEOUSLY DENIED.

If you are in fact a legit hooman bean desirous of registering yourself a CF user name so as to be able to comment only to find yourself caught up as collateral damage in one of my irregularly (un)scheduled sweeps for hinky registration attempts, please shoot me a kite at the email addy over in the right sidebar and let me know so’s I can get ya fixed up manually.

ALSO NOTE: You MUST use a valid, legit email address in order to successfully register, the new anti-spam software I installed last night requires it. My thanks to Barry for all his help sorting this mess out last night.

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit.

Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't.

Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar.

Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Ye Aulde CF Blogrolle–now with RSS feeds! (where available)

"Mike Hendrix is, without a doubt, the greatest one-legged blogger in the world." ‐Henry Chinaski

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

Shameless begging

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:

Become a CF member!

Correspondence

Email addy: mike-at-this-url dot etc
All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless specified as private by the sender

Allied territory

Alternatives to shitlib social media: A few people worth following on Gab:

Fuck you

Kill one for mommy today! Click to embiggen

Notable Quotes

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

Claire's Cabal—The Freedom Forums

FREEDOM!!!

"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

“When I was young I was depressed all the time. But suicide no longer seemed a possibility in my life. At my age there was very little left to kill.”
Charles Bukowski

“A slave is one who waits for someone to come and free him.”
Ezra Pound

“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

"If the laws of God and men, are therefore of no effect, when the magistracy is left at liberty to break them; and if the lusts of those who are too strong for the tribunals of justice, cannot be otherwise restrained than by sedition, tumults and war, those seditions, tumults and wars, are justified by the laws of God and man."
John Adams

"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

Best of the best

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

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

Copyright © 2024