Not on Our Side

Utterly, completely appalling. Also despicable.

Although yes, this nauseating, enraging vid comes to us from the People’s Republic of Australia, anybody still expecting any significant number of American lawdoggies to jump in on the side of We The People when the shit truly hits the fan is STRONGLY advised to rethink that fanciful delusion.


Perpetual escalation

When they say “mission creep,” this is one of the things they’re talking about.

Trust the CDC, they alway know what’s best for you

Via Chief Nose Wetter and Aesop, who is horrified, and rightly so:

I’m not anti-vaxx per se, unlike Jenny McCarthy-level nutters (vaccines have utility, and wiping out smallpox worldwide was no petty accomplishment), but pumping this quantity of shit so often, and so young, has long since crossed the line into sheer lunacy, and has a lot to do with how you ever got to Covidiocy now. This nonsense should’ve been nipped in the bud about thirty years back.

Just one among many, many other things that should’ve been as well. The Founders knew and greatly dreaded a home truth that we have, to our great detriment, allowed ourselves to either forget or perhaps ignore: perpetual escalation is the way of all government. Give government a single inch, and it will eventually take everything you have.


Trending now

Bill is thinking along the same lines as I have been lately.

What if the Ruling Party understands the damage to public trust in institutions they caused with the ham-handed fraud, (and the Covid insanity) and have decided to throw Biden and the Dems overboard in the mid-terms, thus accomplishing several things:

  1. Widespread electoral fraud doesn’t exist. You lost fair and square two years ago, but you won fair and square this year. See? No fraud.
  2. Polls have gotten more accurate, so you can trust the pollsters.
  3. Our institutions and leaders are fine. You can trust them.
  4. Election deniers really are partisan nutcases.

I can make a case for this because the Ruling Party knows that handing the GOP a two or three seat majority in the Senate, and a 30 seat bump in the House isn’t actually going to change anything. Plus, it will get rid of some real problems for them, like the fact that so many Dem leaders are 110 years old, or older. Nancy Pelosi will be swept out of power, FJB will be publicly neutered and the path paved for a different nominee in 2024, and so on.

So the entire legislative part of the government goes into neutral, (although the Permanent Administrative State does not) with the likes of Bitch McConnell stage-managing the Senate for the Ruling Party (make sure you do as much damage to Trump pols as you can, Mitch!), and the RINO from California will make sure that House GOP majority is all show and no go. (Actually do some damage to the Dems? Don’t be silly. We’re better than that, you know.)

Then in 2024, with memories of 2020 faded back into a vague assumption of normalcy in the electorate, and with all their ducks in a row, they’ll go right ahead and steal the election outright from Trump or DeSantis.

I could very well be wrong about all this, as could Bill. That said, the Bipartisan Fusion Uniparty is cunning enough, some of them at least, to realize that holding off on the blatant, brazen fraud this time out would serve their long-term purposes a lot better than forever reducing the very notion of free, fair, and relatively honest elections among those Americans who still do believe in such chimeras to an obscene joke will. And if there’s anything we ought to have learned about them by now, it’s that they tend to plan for the long term, when circumstances allow for it.

Update! Despite having no faith whatsoever in US “elections” or the Vichy GOPe swindle these days, and rapidly dwindling interest in all that sort of thing, there still is one inviolable rule I urge those less-cynical-than-I types to observe: never, ever, EVER vote for a Democrat. Not EVER.

Via WeirdDave.


The impossibility of reform

When you can’t reform it, you must either remove it, or continue enduring it until such time as your resolve hardens, your spine stiffens, and your self-respect is restored.

Break up the FBI
The Republican staff of the House Judiciary Committee released a 1,000-page report on Friday on the “politicization of the FBI and Justice Department.” While sometimes overwrought and sometimes overbroad in its claims, the report supports well its fundamental assertion that “the Federal Bureau of Investigation, under the stewardship of Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland, is broken. The problem lies not with the majority of front-line agents who serve our country, but with the FBI’s politicized bureaucracy.”

Uh huh, I see. SO, get rid of Wray and Garland and all will be well then, right? Is that the basic premise here, or nah?

Garland and Wray have repeatedly stonewalled legitimate attempts at congressional oversight, sometimes (by this observer’s reckoning) almost criminally. In a Nov. 2 letter to Garland, ranking committee Republican Jim Jordan of Ohio listed an astonishing 32 outstanding requests for information (stemming from eight different inquiry letters from committee Republicans) that Garland or his agents have yet to fulfill. Likewise, Wray has failed to fulfill 38 informational demands from eight other letters.

Riiiight. And THEN what happened, eh?

Even accounting for a tendency for the minority party in Congress to make some demands for information seemingly more crafted for political “gotcha” theatre than for legitimate oversight, the recalcitrance of Garland and Wray on obviously substantive demands is an affront to the public. Instead of the transparency due in a government based on the citizenry’s consent, this behavior looks like the sort of cover-up common to authoritarian rule.

As well it might, seeing as how we assuredly do NOT have “a government based on the citizenry’s consent” anymore. For any who requires evidence in support of the proposition that we are currently under authoritarian rule, as the author of this piece seems to be waiting for: by your own standard, the first two ‘graphs ought to suffice, I should think.

For example, in light of a concerted Justice Department effort to target anti-abortion protesters, which has included dangerous use of heavily armed SWAT team raids of homes with children readying for school, Republicans have asked for department communications referring to this aggressive campaign. Garland has not complied.

“Asked for.” You gotta love that.

In general, citing numerous whistleblower reports, committee Republicans produce copious evidence of “political bias [against conservatives or Republicans] by the FBI’s senior leadership,” of a “systemic culture of unaccountability,” and of “rampant corruption, manipulation, and abuse.” The most familiar complaints are about the targeting of parents who dare speak up at school board meetings, the major transgressions involved in the part of the “Russia probe” that targeted former President Donald Trump (rather than just Russian election interference more generally, which was significant), and the outlandish cover-up of concerns about the laptop and international business dealings of presidential son Hunter Biden.

And THEN what happened? Anything? Anything at all? Anybody? Bueller…?

The FBI is an immensely valuable agency with thousands of good workers. Its centralized top ranks, though, have become corrupted by too much power with too little accountability. House Republicans are right to limit its abuses, and McCarthy makes sense in proposing to reduce its mission.

Stuff and nonsense, every last syllable of it. The FBI has been abusive, unaccountable, and entirely immune to oversight, reining in, and reform since its very inception, BY DESIGN. The Bureau has no Constitutional remit whatsoever, which is another confirmation of the wisdom of our Founding Fathers. They would have abhorred the very idea of any such rogue, out-of-control federal agency. It’s a sad, sorry measure of how very far we’ve strayed from their original vision that it even exists at all, or ever did.


The TRUE threat

HINT TO SHITLIBS: It ain’t us, it’s you.

Biden’s Rhetoric is a Threat to the Republic
This isn’t just pandering to the base

The only good thing about this speech is that it didn’t have a color scheme out of V for Vendetta and didn’t feature Marines in the background. Whoever runs these things at least learned from that attempt at looking like Biden was about to declare martial law, suspend habeas corpus and make everyone read Gender Queer and How To Be An Anti-Racist at gunpoint in a gulag.

With the countdown underway, voters have made it clear that they care about the economy and crime. Anyone who finds the “threat to democracy” routine persuasive is already a solid blue voter and ActBlue donor who probably showed up for at least one D.C. protest.

This isn’t just pandering to the base, it’s pandering to the Elizabeth Warren base.

Biden’s call to “vote knowing what’s at stake and not just the policy of the moment, but institutions that have held us together as we’ve sought a more perfect union are also at stake” is an admission that his faction has lost the policy argument and doesn’t have anything else to work with.

While the delivery is laughable, the premise isn’t. Biden’s speeches may not interest voters, but they continue to push the totalitarian message that “democracy” is embodied by Democrats and threatened by Republicans, that if Dems fail to win, then the result will be the end of America.

That kind of rhetoric is typical, but under Obama and Biden, it’s been backed up by arrests, investigations, surveillance, raids, imprisonment, censorship and the whole banana republic gamut.

Daniel is a bit too blasé about Slow Joe’s overheated bargain-basement histrionics amounting to no more than mere pandering to Leftard extremists to suit me. Bribem and his fellow like-minded fanatics aren’t so much pandering to their proven-violent followers as they are trying to motivate them, along with granting tacit permission for them to do what they so badly want to do already.

It’s never been more vital that Heritage Americans pay unflagging heed to a hoary old military mantra, a handy phrase I was first introduced to at the NAS Oceana O-club by the fighter-jocks therein assembled: head on a swivel, total SA. Indeed, it could well turn out to be a matter of life and death for some of us before all is said and done, depending on where you are, what you’re doing, and who you’re with.


RINO is as RINO does

What a disappointment this Eyepatch McCain fellow has turned out to be.

Why would Rep. Crenshaw go on a podcast, Hold These Truths, with Nick Troiano for less than a week before the elections to make America First candidates look bad?

Troiano said that most of the Republican nominees for the House “aren’t accepting the results of the 2020 election.”

Troiano asked Crenshaw what that meant for the future and claimed, “this is a, you know, real threat to our ability to keep the republic.”

Crenshaw claimed that people who question election results are attention seekers.

Oh absolutely, Dan. Say, know where else Da Peepul are forbidden to “question elections”? Oh, bastions of liberty like Iran, Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Somalia, garden spots like that. Jesse Kelly puts it quite well, I think.

Remember, now, Crenshaw still misrepresents himself as a “conservative.” Asshole. “QUESTION” the election? Hell, I’ll just say it straight up: THE 2020 ELECTION WAS FRAUDULENT. And the day I let some professional politician tell me I’m not allowed to say so is…well, it won’t be a good day, let’s just leave it at that. There are two pertinent questions remaining before us, and Aesop ain’t a-skeered to axe ’em.

It seems to me that what folks ought to be pondering about now, are the answers to two related questions:

1) If the 2022 elections follow the same pattern that 2020 did, and you watch it stolen in broad daylight right before your eyes, and the other side gaslights you into thinking you should ignore your lying eyes. AGAIN;


2) If there’s a Red Tsunami, but when the dust settles, and the media pants-wetting is over, nothing changes, because the Stupid Party is unalterably spring-loaded to feckless and studied incompetence, like always, rather than cutting out the civilizational rot with machetes, and burning it all with a flamethrower,


As I said the other day, I’m more and more leaning towards the belief that the Donks will try to bolster confidence in the integrity of American “elections,” now at their lowest ebb in our history, by letting the GOPe win this one, although I will also certainly admit to the possibility that they’ve become so emboldened by win after win that they’ll cheat just as a matter of long-established habit, if nothing else.

As for Question 2, that one’s a lead-pipe cinch, unfortunately. Which leaves us all staring down the barrel of that last one, the only one that truly matters anymore.


A Woke military is worse than no military at all

Man, this decline-and-fall business isn’t turning out to be nearly as amusing as it looks like being in all those old movies about the Roman Empire in its final days.

Our Disunity Is a National Security Threat
The military now reflects the selfishness and fragmentation of our culture. Welcome to the looting-the-treasury phase of imperial decline.

In the lawsuit challenging Harvard’s affirmative action practices, a group of senior retired military officers filed an amicus brief, which argued that maintaining affirmative action was a “national security imperative.” Those signing off include four former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, six former superintendents of the service academies, and 17 retired four-star generals, including Wesley Clark and William McRaven.

A ““national security imperative”? SERIOUSLY? Sorry, fellas, but I’m gonna need you to explain to me, in detail, exactly how you arrived at THAT bizarre conclusion.

Recruiting an adequate number of troops and increasing their quality also seems pretty important. But we know that recent efforts at recruiting have been a disaster, amplified by the mass expulsion of troops who refused the COVID vaccine.

While things carried on for a while out of habit, eventually the patriotic, mostly white, rural Americans who formed the backbone of the military started doing an about face. Polls show that fewer veterans now want their kids to follow in their footsteps. Conservative Republicans, once the most stalwart supporters of the military, have lately become more critical and less trusting.

No real mystery about that. Hell, I’ve wondered for a while now what the hell any new enlistee might think he’s signing up to defend with his very life, literally, and what the hell might be keeping career soldiers in the ranks nowadays.

Declining interest in service by conservative and white Americans is not irrational. Why fight for a governing class that hates you, deems you the central political problem, seeks to humiliate you, and disrespects your ancestors at every opportunity? Why serve an American empire that pursues foreign wars like those in Iraq and Ukraine that have almost no relationship to actual national security and explicitly serve a left-wing ideology?

One might respond that military service is good even under these conditions in order to get useful training and make a living. But even under such a self-serving standard, the incentive to do so is declining, as white men within the military are subject to a rigged game, where it is harder to get ahead, and the old standards of excellence no longer matter. This will only get worse without a dramatic reset in the culture of our military and political leaders.

During the War on Terror, lavish praise for military service flowed from a widespread feeling of guilt. After the 9/11 attacks, the country wanted safety and revenge—but, other than service members and their families, very few Americans carried the burdens of war. The civilian-military gap was amplified by the increasing self-perception of servicemembers as “warriors,” rather than mere soldiers. From this romantic view of military service as a superior way of life undertaken by superior people, we see the first seedlings of a warrior aristocracy.

A constitutional republic and a warrior aristocracy are polar opposites. The European aristocracy found its origins in rewards for battlefield merit, where particular acts of bravery led to a title bestowed on the hero and his heirs, as well as land, the right to income from taxes for land-bound peasants, and exemption from taxes otherwise owed to the king.

Since every national military establishment must necessarily be representative of the broader society it both serves and is drawn from, how could anybody find any of this at all shocking? As corruption, venality, and self-absorption have gradually become endemic in American society, its military has declined right along with it, in direct proportion. How could any reasonable, rational person possibly expect otherwise? Thus:

In exchange for the prestige and perquisites of military service, one thing is absolutely essential: loyalty to the country, the Constitution, and the American people. Without patriotism, the military becomes a very sophisticated gang, one that easily can be turned against the American people. Some will scoff that such a prospect is unthinkable, but one would have thought General Mark Milley undermining the commander-in-chief or a Marine selling his services to the Chinese were impossible too.

Again: shocking? Unexpected? Hardly. “Loyalty to the country, the Constitution, and the American people” have all become mighty thin on the ground amongst the general populace, over many decades. In effect, the military amounts to a mirror held up to American faces, no more nor less. If Americans don’t like what they see there, the only people who can change that is…well, guess who.



Questions, questions Vol MCLXVIII

Our old bud Jeff Goldstein, via his posh, dee-luxxe new Substack joint Protein Wisdom Reborn, has ’em.

You are being told that your hate speech is the proximate cause of a politically motivated attack on the husband of the House Speaker. Simultaneously, you’re being condemned for not simply flagellating yourself for your sins of believing in deregulation and lower taxes.

But something wonderful is happening. The accused here are clapping back. Without contrition, and with pro-active venom. They are asking specific questions that a coordinated narrative driven by legacy media / Democrat party in lockstep, collaborators not used to being challenged without the ability to simply cancel the challenges, has proven ill-prepared for.

Early reporting of the attack included a few details since walked back by media outlets and SF police — from the number of people in the house, to the state of dress of the attacker, to the relationship, if any, between the attacker Paul Pelosi was able to identify by name, according to dispatch records, and Mr Pelosi himself.

Pelosi called police from inside his bathroom but then went back out into the house where the attacker was. Why would he do that? And what attacker gives his prey a bathroom break?

The offender — whom the legacy media insists represents all Republican voters — appears to have been living in a hippie commune, complete with a Rainbow BLM flag and a dilapidated school bus, known to neighbors as a drug den. He’s been described as a drug-addled nudist and sometimes male prostitute whose erstwhile life-partner, a self-described “progressive,” is in prison for stalking a 14-year-old boy. Is the attacker even a citizen? Is he in the country legally? Can he vote in US elections? If he’s simply crazy, how does that comport with legacy media reporting that those of us who haven’t attacked Paul Pelosi — or anyone else, for that matter — are responsible for his actions? If he was truly motivated by politics, and he was lucid enough to express that fact, how is he any different from a Bernie Bro who shot up a Republican baseball practice? Or the guy who ran over and killed a teen he suspected of being a Trump supporter after Biden’s speech from Hell’s mouth? Or the person who traveled across the country prepared to assassinate Kavanaugh? Or the monster who severely beat a young canvasser for the Rubio campaign? Why is one instance considered by the legacy media and Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, fully representative of a political party, while all the others are….not?

These are all legitimate questions, many of which could be answered with video and police body camera footage. Or even a press conference — which, as we saw in the wake of a Texas school shooting, we should still take with a grain of salt. But none of this has been forthcoming. Why is that? And how is it, in lieu of these questions having no clear, agreed upon answers, that the legacy media feel confident enough to report on the attacker’s motives? Or even what actually transpired that evening?

What we don’t deserve are unfounded generalized recriminations based on our political affiliations.

What we do deserve are answers.

And in the post-fascist Twittersphere, we’re going to keep demanding them.

Threatening to cancel our speech is off the table now. And we have zero fucks about the progressives’ phony outrage left to give.

The times, they are a-changing.

Thank God.

Kuenstler has a few questions himself, for which he provides some speculative answers that comport a hell of a lot better with Occam’s Razor than any of the cockamamie crapola they’ve tried to get the more gullible among us to swallow so far.

If David DePape didn’t walk fourteen miles from Berkeley to Pacific Heights, or take a cab (expensive), how did he get there? Here’s a theory: he rode the BART subway from Berkeley to the Church Street and Mission station in the city, a five-minute walk to the Castro, San Francisco’s fabled gay district. Sometime before 2:00 a.m. closing time, he met up in a bar there with Paul Pelosi, who drove DePape to the Pelosi house in a car not equipped with an interlock device. That is to say, David DePape was let into the house by Mr. Pelosi.

The police and the news media have theorized that DePape broke into the place by smashing a glass door in back. Uh-huh…. Ask yourself: would there not be an alarm system at least on all the ground floor windows and doors in the house? Would there not be security cameras on the back side of the house — the side that burglars might prefer, if they could get over the wall? Would the Speaker of the House, with a discretionary budget on top of a $300-million fortune, and in a time of epic political rancor, not have a team of security guards in place at her private home?

Initial news media chatter had both DePape and Paul Pelosi dressed in their underwear, struggling over a hammer which turned out to belong to Mr. Pelosi. Not until the police entered the house did DePape wrest the hammer from Mr. Pelosi and commence to brain him with it. What does the arrest report actually say about the two men’s state-of-dress? It is not public information. How and why were the police just watching until DePape assaulted Mr. Pelosi — who was hospitalized afterward and had surgery on his cracked skull? (Uh, how did a blow that literally broke his skull not kill the elderly Mr. Pelosi?)

The news media initially suggested that somebody — a third person on the scene — opened the door to let the police in. Now they are saying no such person was there. Was the front door unlocked? (Weird, considering the general threat level for a public figure of Nancy P’s stature.) Or, did police break the glass door in the rear of the house to get in? (However, photos of the door show the glass being broken from the inside and shards spread over the outside.) Odd, also, that such a wealthy and powerful couple would not have hard-to-smash security glass on such a door. (It’s easy to buy.) Odd, too, that there was not one human security guard on the premises. The house had security cameras all over the exterior and interior. No mention in the news media or from the SFPD of what might have been recorded by these cameras at the time of the incident.

My assessment of this bizarre episode as follows: Paul Pelosi was out drinking late the night of the incident. He hooked up with David DePape, a hustler he might have been previously acquainted with, and took him back to the house in Pacific Heights. Something went wrong with the transaction. Considering that DePape exhibited psychotic behavior at times, it might have taken little to set him off. All the authorities involved are playing it coy, but failing to construct a narrative that adds up.

Nope, because they can’t—it’s all just too convoluted, too bizarre a script for suspension of belief to ever hope to cover all of it, featuring a cast of jaded, Dionysian, über-wealthy sexual deviants American Normals can’t relate to at all, and have no real desire to. Which speaks well of THEM, at least.



Happy Halloween to all CF Lifers everywhere, and to all the ships at sea. Buck Throckmorton posts up a good ‘un in celebration of the day.

Now, one from my dear departed friend Ronnie Dawson.

Though they share the same title, near as I can tell the two songs have no connection with one another: not chord progressions, not tempo or rhythm, not lyrics, not nothin’. But now that I brought up Uncle Ronnie (that’s what I called him, at his insistence, which I found quite flattering), no way am I gonna pass up the opportunity to post this one.

Now as fate would have it, I attended the Conyne taping along with a large contingent of the NYC-RAB scenesters, and a good time was had by all, believe you me. Backing Ronnie up is the absolute best rockabilly combo I’ve ever seen or heard tell of: High Noon, a trio from Austin Texas, with the welcome addition of the brilliant and drop-dead gorgeous Lisa Pankratz pounding the skins.

Ronnie always gave a good, energetic performance onstage, but out of a thousand and one Dawson shows I either saw or played on, I never, ever saw him as charged up as he was that incredible night. Not just Ronnie, but the whole band was very nearly sending sparks flying off their bodies, they were all so excited and exhilarated. The audience was, too, even Conan himself. Take especial note of what Ronnie does at 3:34 in the vid: he’s waving his arm around over his head at the NYC-RAB crew. We were all up dancing in the aisles, and he was beckoning us to come right down front to dance closer to him nearer to the stage.

After the performance, when he got over to sit on the couch and chat a bit with Conan, first thing out of O’Brien’s mouth was a stunned but amused “My GOD, what have you DONE to these people?” Watch the vid again, you can just about see the sheet-lightning emanating from Ronnie and the band. It was fucking shit-hot, that’s what. I’ve never seen anything remotely like it, in all my years of rockin’ and rollin’.

When the taping was done, me and my gf at the time met Ronnie, Lisa, and the High Noon crew up at their Midtown hotel and went out bar-hopping to celebrate this historic triumph for real rock and roll. We hit several Midtown dive bars—yes, there are a few, but you gotta look for ’em—until airtime for the Conan show started getting close (the taping was at 5:30). Then we began to ask each bartender at wherever we were at the time if they would pretty please turn the TV to the right channel so we could watch the show, since several of us were gonna be on it. After being turned down by three (3) assholes who preferred watching some goddamned sportsball event instead, somebody (wasn’t me) suggested that we all go downtown to cram ourselves into my apartment to watch.

And so we did. Mine and Jen’s less-than-palatial crib was more crowded and smoky even than it usually was, which is saying something; the drinks were flowing freely, we had the TV cranked to window-rattling volume, and the laughter, shouting, and general hullaboo was boisterous enough to almost drown THAT out.

We celebrated for a few more hours, watching the show over and over on the VCR, and then everyone piled into my rattletrap E350 van for the drive back uptown to drop the band off at their hotel. As we jounced and shook up the perpetually-under-construction FDR drive at a leisurely 80mph, a fear-stricken Lisa shouted from the back, “Mike, I think you’ve been in New York too long!”

It was without a doubt the most wonderful night of my entire life, and I wasn’t even onstage.


Is EVERYBODY involved in the Pelosi bludgeoning a sicko degenerate?

It’s beginning to look that way, yeah.

The nudist ex-lover of the man who attacked Paul Pelosi is a pedophile who attempted to kidnap a 14-year-old boy and allegedly bought sex dolls for her sons to use.

Oxane ‘Gypsy’ Taub, 53, the former lover of David DePape who is charged with attacking Pelosi in his San Francisco home, was convicted in 2021 for child abuse.

Prosecutors said Taub, who once protested naked in front of San Francisco City Hall, had been stalking the boy, sending him emails and messages and trying to lure him to secretly meet with her.

Following his attack on Pelosi, DePape has been accused by his daughter of sexually assaulting his three children when they were kids.

Y’all may remember Paul Pelosi’s arrest a few months back for nearly killing a girl while driving drunk—on which charges this rich-boy child of extreme privilege skated without doing a single day in jail, after not even bothering to show up in court for his “sentencing”—but I bet you didn’t know this carefully-excised part of the story:

It’s been a rumor for years in SF that Paul Pelosi is gay. David Depape is said to be a Castro Nudist. “The lunatic who allegedly assaulted Paul Pelosi is a Berkeley resident and a ‘Former Castro Nudist Protester’ and hemp ‘jewelry maker’ …sounds totally MAGA Republican to me. 🤣🤣” this from Twitter.

When Paul Pelosi was busted for drunk driving accident earlier in the year, he had a young man with him, and that too was covered up by the police and the press.

Bold mine, and every bit as hinky as the rest of this loony-bin shit-circus is. EXPLAINER: this “Castro Nudist” thing is basically a small group of gay male prostitutes with a penchant for parading around the streets of SF wearing nothing but maybe a cock-ring, not that there’s anything wrong with that.

So okay, yeah, obviously all of the reprobates in the Pelosi Skull Cracking cast of characters are not merely ordinary, everyday weirdos, but are truly, deeply depraved. Back to the revelations from DePape’s nekkid former lover.

SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — The former partner of the man accused of violently attacking Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband at their San Francisco home on Friday is revealing new details about the suspect.

“Hello this is Gypsy Taub. I am the ex-life partner of David DePape and the mother of his children,” said Oxane Taub, calling from the Californian Institution For Women in Corona, California.

“He is mentally ill. He has been mentally ill for a long time,” said Taub, who last year was found guilty on 20 counts, including the attempted abduction of a 14-year-old boy near his Berkeley high school.

She described a time DePape returned home after disappearing for a year.

“He came back in very bad shape. He thought he was Jesus. He was constantly paranoid, thinking people were after him,” Taub said. “And it took a good year or two to get back to, you know, being halfway normal.”

Tara Campbell: “Did he ever show any aggression towards politicians, were his political beliefs extreme in your opinion?”

Taub: “Well when I met him, he was only 20 years old, and he didn’t have any experience in politics, and he was very much in alignment with my views and I’ve always been very progressive. I absolutely admire Nancy Pelosi.”

Uh oh; there goes the Usual Suspects’ hastily cobbled-together narrative, that DePape was a violent Rightwing Extremist MAGA Nazi, looks like.


The greatest story lie ever told

I repeat: if it weren’t for lies, they’d have nothing to say at all.

More than two years since the lockdowns of 2020, the political mainstream, particularly on the left, is just beginning to realize that the response to Covid was an unprecedented catastrophe.

But that realization hasn’t taken the form of a mea culpa. Far from it. On the contrary, in order to see that reality is starting to dawn on the mainstream left, one must read between the lines of how their narrative on the response to Covid has evolved over the past two years.

The narrative now goes something like this: Lockdowns never really happened, because governments never actually locked people in their homes; but if there were lockdowns, then they saved millions of lives and would have saved even more if only they’d been stricter; but if there were any collateral damage, then that damage was an inevitable consequence of the fear from the virus independent of the lockdowns; and even when things were shut down, the rules weren’t very strict; but even when the rules were strict, we didn’t really support them.

Put simply, the prevailing narrative of the mainstream left is that any upside from the response to Covid is attributable to the state-ordered closures and mandates that they supported, while any downside was an inevitable consequence of the virus independent of any state-ordered closures and mandates which never happened and which anyway they never supported. Got it? Good.

Astonishingly, in a debate on Monday, Charlie Crist, Democratic candidate for governor of Florida, accused Ron DeSantis of being “the only governor in the history of Florida that’s ever shut down our schools.” “You’re the only governor in the history of Florida that shut down our businesses,” Crist went on, “I never did that as governor. You’re the one who’s the shutdown guy.”

In fact, as DeSantis pointed out, Crist had publicly sued DeSantis to keep kids out of school in 2020, and he wrote DeSantis a letter in July 2020 saying the entire state should still be in lockdown.

Arguments like these are as facile as they are transparent. Does anyone honestly think these people would be arguing that lockdowns didn’t happen, or that it’s impossible to measure their effects, if the policy had been a success?

Read on for an incredibly chilling rundown of the veritably incalculable and multifarious damage done by those newly “nonexistent” lockdowns—first and foremost among that being, for me at least, the wreckage it made of such piffling concerns as individual autonomy, self-determination, and the very idea of unalienable, Constitutionally-protected rights.

The piece continues from there with pictures, almost none of which I’d seen before, putting this wanton, needless destruction on display for all to see and be shamed by. Bottom line? You’ve been had. Hoodwinked. Bamboozled.

By pretending that all of these horrors were attributable to public panic, apologists for the response to Covid are attempting to shift blame away from the political machines that imposed lockdowns and mandates onto individuals and their families. This is, of course, despicable and bunk. People did not voluntarily go hungry, or stand in the freezing cold to get food, or remove themselves from hospitals while they were still sick, or bankrupt their own businesses, or force their own kids to sit outside in the cold, or march hundreds of miles in exodus after losing their jobs in factories.

The collective denial of these horrors, and the refusal of media, financial, and political elites to report on them, amounts to nothing less than the greatest act of gaslighting that we’ve seen in modern times.

Further, the argument that all of these terrible outcomes could be attributed to public panic rather than state-imposed mandates would be far more convincing if governments hadn’t taken unprecedented actions to deliberately panic the public.

Does it get even worse yet? Oh, you bet your sweet bippy it does.

report later revealed that military leaders had seen Covid as a unique opportunity to test propaganda techniques on the public, “shaping” and “exploiting” information to bolster support for government mandates. Dissenting scientists were silenced. Government psyops teams deployed fear campaigns on their own people in a scorched-earth campaign to drive consent for lockdowns.

Moreover, as a study by Cardiff University demonstrated, the primary factor by which citizens judged the threat of COVID-19 was their own government’s decision to employ lockdown measures. “We found that people judge the severity of the COVID-19 threat based on the fact the government imposed a lockdown—in other words, they thought, ‘it must be bad if government’s taking such drastic measures.’ We also found that the more they judged the risk in this way, the more they supported lockdown.” The policies thus created a feedback loop in which the lockdowns and mandates themselves sowed the fear that made citizens believe their risk of dying from COVID-19 was hundreds of times greater than it really was, in turn causing them to support more lockdowns and mandates.

Those who publicly spoke against lockdowns and mandates were ostracized and vilified—denounced by mainstream outlets like the New York Times, CNN, and health officials as “neo-Nazis” and “white nationalists.” Further, among those who really believed the mainstream Covid narrative—or merely pretended to—all the authoritarian methods that had supposedly contributed to China’s “success” against Covid, including censoring, canceling, and firing those who disagreed, were on the table.

Though many now claim to have opposed these measures, the truth is that publicly opposing lockdowns when they were at their apex in spring 2020 was lonely, frightening, thankless, and hard. Few did.

A-HENH. Actually, although it was certainly lonely, I saw nothing whatsoever hard about it, much less frightening; way more frightening to me was how very many of us failed to see through this patently bogus nonsense, even supported it at the time.

This revisionism is all the more disappointing because a small handful of politicians including Ron DeSantis, Imran Khan, and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith have proven that admitting error in implementing lockdowns and mandates isn’t that hard, and can even be politically profitable.

The same should go for the political left. Thus far, we have yet to see anything remotely resembling regret from any leader on the left, but this is what a decent, Truman-era Democrat might say in these circumstances:

“The lockdowns of 2020 were a terrible mistake. While they were outside my field, it was my duty to properly vet the credibility of the advice that was coming from health officials and to end the mandates as soon as it was clear they weren’t working. In that role, I failed, and you all have my humblest apologies. Given the unprecedented harm that’s been done by these mandates, I support a full investigation into how this advice came about, in part to ensure there hasn’t been any untoward communist influence on these policies.”

Those who spoke against lockdowns and mandates in early 2020 showed that they were willing to stand up for the freedoms and Enlightenment principles for which our forebears fought so tirelessly, even when doing so was lonely, thankless, and hard. For that reason, anyone who did so has reason to feel extremely proud, and the future would be brighter if they were in positions of leadership. That fact is now becoming increasingly clear—unfortunately, even to those who did the opposite. One more reason to keep all the receipts.

Any liberty-oriented American worth his salt must never, ever forget the needless, intentional disaster of Spring 2020, on pain of seeing one of the bleakest chapters of our history repeat itself. Because it’s for sure and certain that they’re going to try, and the only way they can get away with it again is if We The People allow them to. If you only read through all of one thing I link to this entire weekend, this one absolutely must be it.

(Via Ed Driscoll)


Going asymmetrical

Progress, if you like.

In 1337 the “Hundred Years’ War” started. Great armies marched to meet each other in the fields of battle. They fought and 2.3 to 3.3 million men died.

In 1792 the French Revolutionary war started. It lasted 7 years and between 1.2 million and 1.4 million men died in the fields of battle.

In 1803 the Napoleonic wars started. Somewhere between 3.5 million and 7.0 million men died in the fields of battle and in the misery of being on campaign.

Between 1955 and 1975 somewhere between 0.9 million and 3.8 million people died in the Vietnam War. There were around 300 thousand soldiers killed in Vietnam, 58 thousand Americans and 254 thousand South Vietnam.

What was the significant change between the previous wars and Vietnam?

Asymmetrical Warfare.

During the 20 years of “The Troubles” in Ireland 8 to 10 thousand people were active members of the IRA. By the 1980’s it was believed that there were around 450 active members and 300 support members. Yet this small number of dedicated people were able to keep the British at bay.

This equates to around 9/100,000 at the low point and 10/100,000 at the high point. If there was this level of asymmetric warfare in the US that would be around 30,000 active participants every year. Even with people rotating in and out.

In 2021 there were 38.5 million hunting licenses issued. If we assume 12/100,000 this would be 4632 people with the right equipment in hand to take a deer sized target at 100 to 200 yards. Not to mention all the other firearm owners that don’t hunt but are proficient with their firearms.

So at a low end we would have somewhere around 5000 and at the high end about 50,000 actives in the such warfare in America.

All of these people look just like the people they are living with. We saw what this was like in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition there is a higher probability of members of the resistance existing unseen within the government/military complex.

We look at what people with minimal industrial knowledge were able to accomplish. Their ability to make hand crafted firearms, their ability to create IEDs. All of that knowledge from people that don’t have the same level of education as most of the people that read this blog.

Do not take counsel of your fears, do not despair, no matter what. As history tells us, even at the lowest ebb, when the situation looks bleak and all seems lost, hope endures.


Power, destruction, death

Quoth Captain Malcolm Reynolds: If somebody tries to kill you, you kill ’em right back.

Middle Earth had its Mount Doom, into which the One Ring of Power could be tossed, ridding that evil from J.R.R. Tolkien’s fictional setting. Real Earth is not so fortunate, but in all other aspects the lessons drawn from his classic apply. It only comes up short in one respect. Tolkien never delved into the psychology of Sauron, Saruman, and the lessor denizens of Middle Earth who lusted after the One Ring’s power, other than to depict the inevitable corruption of the soul their lust produced.

There are two conclusions uncorrupted souls have difficulty accepting, although both experience and logic point uncompromisingly towards them. The first is that those in power and those who lust for it want power for power’s sake, ultimately to destroy and kill. The second is that they want to destroy and kill because they want to destroy existence and kill themselves. We owe the first conclusion to Orwell, the second to Rand. (For a fuller explanation see “The Last Gasp,” Robert Gore, SLL, March 24, 2020.)

This article assumes both conclusions are well-founded and that the second in particular is the key to understanding where the world is now and where it’s going. They offer a realistic assessment of the chances for nuclear Armageddon.

It is no coincidence that the twentieth century witnessed history’s most totalitarian regimes and its bloodiest wars and genocides. By all indications the twenty-first century will extend the connected trends. Power goes hand-in-hand with destruction and death. Governments are based on their capacity to inflict violence; what else can they produce? Rejecting lofty rhetoric and revolutionary rationales, Orwell wrote that: Power is not a means; it is an end. The twentieth century demonstrated that power is a means to inflict incalculable destruction and death. Know them by their fruits—those are the true ends of those who seek and hold power.

Report after report details the injury and death inflicted by the Covid mRNA vaccines, puncturing hollow platitudes and invocations of “Science.” The travesty offers a refresher course we don’t really need: from world leaders down to petty politicians and functionaries, they want to kill us. Those who aren’t killed are to be frightened into compliance with their ghastly and tyrannical edicts, herded like cattle into some other slaughterhouse.

The gelatinous souls who move whatever direction the bowl tilts usually don’t recognize what’s happening until the moment of their execution. Beforehand, a few of the more intellectually adept will argue that the powerful will be limited by their instinct for self-preservation—if they kill too many they’ll end up killing themselves. Perhaps that thought offers comfort, however scant.

But what if the powerful are like those mass shooters whose terror ends only when they turn their guns on themselves? What if mass murder is the means to their desired end: suicide? Someone who kills himself but no one else is to be pitied. Someone who kills innocents before taking his own life perpetrates paramount evil.

Which would give our putative “leaders” not one moment’s pause, being willing representatives of Paramount Evil their own selves.

(Via Dave Renegade)


Publick Notice UPDATE

Many, many thanks to all the CF Lifers who showed up to register at Claire’s Freedomista forums today, from both myself and Claire. She told me earlier that she was absolutely stunned at the response to yesterday’s mention, saying, and I quote:

Not only am I going to be busy this morning, but it’s possible you’ve just single-handedly — and very generously, I must add — altered the nature of the forums forever.

I am proud to know you, my friend.

…I have never been very good at promoting myself or my creations. You just did more for the forums than I’ve managed in the last year.

“Proud to know me”? Right back atcha, Claire, tenfold. And the same goes for the CF Lifers as well, also WRSA for so kindly linking the original post. Thanks again, everyone.


Who is this guy, and what has he done with Bono?

Better late than never, I guess.

U2 singer Bono says he realized commerce and capitalism help poor people, not the redistribution of resources
Bono, the lead singer of U2, said that he has realized the redistribution of resources won’t help poor people the way that commerce and entrepreneurial capitalism will help them.

The iconic musician and humanitarian made the comments during an interview with the New York Times published Monday. He talked about starting out as a left-wing activist but eventually realizing that capitalism helps the most poor people.

“I ended up as an activist in a very different place from where I started. I thought that if we just redistributed resources, then we could solve every problem. I now know that’s not true,” Bono explained.

He went on to point out that businesspeople are heroes because they bring jobs to communities.

“Capitalism is a wild beast. We need to tame it,” Bono said. “But globalization has brought more people out of poverty than any other -ism. If somebody comes to me with a better idea, I’ll sign up. I didn’t grow up to like the idea that we’ve made heroes out of businesspeople, but if you’re bringing jobs to a community and treating people well, then you are a hero. That’s where I’ve ended up.”

He also said he doesn’t like seeing people wear shirts with the visage of Che Guevara, the communist fighter who helped a dictatorship seize control of Cuba.

“I still don’t like Che Guevara T-shirts. [Expletive] Che Guevara,” he said.

Wow. I must admit, I did NOT see that coming. If this is truly the first step along the road to killing off Shitlib Bono for good, then hey, I’m all for it. After all, even Rip Van Winkle had to wake up sometime.

(Via MisHum)


Comments policy

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) 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.



"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:

Allied territory

Alternatives to shitlib social media:

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


"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

“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."

"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


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

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

Copyright © 2022