Let’s follow the science a bit further

I hereby demand MY reparations check.

Welcome to 2020. The New York Times wins a Pulitzer Prize for its “1619 Project,” which depicts slavery as a distinctly American phenomenon and as the very foundation of American civilization. For several weeks, a half-dozen all but unreadable books seeking redefine the concept of racism hover at or near the top of the bestseller lists. Meanwhile, the cities of America become battlegrounds in a race war waged by young people, many of whom think that America invented the institution of slavery.

This is but one of many historical facts about which they’re wrong. The truth is that fewer than 4 percent of the slaves who were transported across the Atlantic Ocean from Africa ended up in the territory of what is now the United States. More slaves were shipped to the small island of Barbados than to the vast areas that started out as British North America and then became the United States.
 
The same applies to Trinidad and the Windward Islands (Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Grenada, Dominica, and Martinique). Ditto the Guianas (now Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana). Ditto the Spanish-speaking mainland of Latin American. Over 8 percent of transatlantic African slaves—twice the number sold between Maine and Georgia—were sold in St. Domingue, a French colony in what is now Haiti. Over 8 percent of slaves also ended up in the Spanish-speaking Caribbean. The largest numbers of all are for Jamaica (over 11 percent) and Brazil (over 30 percent).

In recent years, as schools and universities increasingly focus on racial issues, young Americans’ heads are filled with heaps of information—much of it from books like A People’s History of the United States—about the American legacy of racism and, in particular, the history of slavery and Jim Crow. But virtually none of them know that the slaves who were shipped to the present-day United States were a small fraction of the victims of the African slave trade.

Ignorance also surrounds another aspect of slave history. The other day I posted on Facebook a quotation from Thomas Sowell. “More whites were brought as slaves to North Africa than blacks brought as slaves to the United States or to the 13 colonies from which it was formed. White slaves were still being bought and sold in the Ottoman Empire, decades after blacks were freed in the United States.”

Facebook users responded in disbelief. “This can’t possibly be true! What’s he talking about?” commented one, whose Facebook page identified him as a “senior research fellow.” Another, a filmmaker, wrote: “Seems dubious.”

In fact, the white slave trade was a terrifying reality for generations of Westerners from the 1400s to the 1800s. Several sovereign North African entities—the Sultanate of Morocco, and the independent Ottoman provinces of Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli—were all active in the capture and sale of European and American slaves. Some whites were taken from ships on the high seas in acts of piracy; others were captured during coastal raids on the European mainland and Newfoundland. 

As usual, it’s not that liberals don’t know anything; it’s that so much of what they think they know isn’t so. You’re bound to love this next bit:

During the later phase of the white slave trade, European powers paid large sums to the North African powers to protect their citizens from enslavement. After the United States declared its independence, it refused to make such payments, which resulted in the taking of American seamen by Arab pirates. In 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met in London with the ambassador from Tripoli to discuss the matter. When they asked why Tripolitanians would “make war upon nations who had done them no injury,” the ambassador replied “that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Sounds all too familiar, doesn’t it? Guess some things really never DO change. Read all of it.

T’was ever thus

Tweaking the Ol’ Grey Whore.

Four years after it abandoned its traditional standards of fairness to try to defeat Donald Trump, the paper is now fixated on rewriting the story of America. The drive-by attack on the Rushmore presidents was part of its cancel-culture agenda.

Yet the Times has never applied to its own history the standards it uses to demonize others. If it did, reporters there would learn that the Ochs-Sulzberger family that has owned and run the paper for 125 years has a “complicated legacy” of its own.

That legacy includes Confederates in the closet — men and at least one woman who supported the South and slavery during the Civil War. In fact, Times patriarch Adolph S. Ochs contributed money to the very Stone Mountain project and other Confederate memorials the Times now finds so objectionable.

To be clear, I detest the Times’ determination to judge and revise history using criteria conceived 20 minutes ago. The paper’s Marxist-inspired activism and race-based fetish have taken it so far off course that it no longer functions as an actual newspaper.

Having spent my formative journalistic years at the Gray Lady, I came away with immense respect for the editors’ commitment to fair and impartial news coverage. That commitment started with Ochs, who, from the day he took control of the Times in 1896, insisted on a strict separation of news and opinion, a tradition that lasted more than a century. It was those traditions — fairness and safeguards against reporters’ bias — that gave the paper its credibility and made it the flagship of American journalism.

But those days are gone, with the standards eroded slowly at first and then abolished under current Executive Editor Dean Baquet. Every story these days is an editorial as the paper demands that every institution and individual conform to the Times’ views, or be denounced as racist, homophobic, Islamophobic and misogynistic. Because of the Times’ exceptional influence, its demagoguery is playing a major role in shredding the fabric of our country.

At the very least, the paper ought to be honorable enough to apply its freshly minted standards to its own past. If it did, I believe the owners, editors, reporters and stockholders would be shocked by what they discover.

Doubt it. In fact, it’s unlikely that they’d care at all. Like all other liberal media outlets, the NYT has an agenda to advance, a program to push. As long as they go on working diligently for the side of the “righteous,” all prior sins can be overlooked… and will be.

Frankly, anybody, be they liberal or American, who is the least bit shocked to see the Whore so overtly and shamelessly hiking its skirt and flashing some Lefty leg at this late stage of the game is nothing but a blind damned fool anyway. That said, this is a fine piece just the same, as well as being unusually lengthy and in-depth for the Post—a solid thumb in the eyeball for an insufferable passel of pompous, supercilious assholes who richly deserve it.

Hatehoax nation

Racist hate crimes: so scarce on the ground they have to make ’em up themselves.

As the great woke wars of 2020 continue, an Oregon politician has found himself on the receiving end of a racist latter. Of course, he also found himself on the sending end of it.

Candidate for Commissioner of Umatilla County Jonathan Lopez has apologized for writing the letter and dropping it in his own mailbox in one of the lesser convincing faux hate crimes.

The letter avows “America is for the God fearing, pro gun, pro life humans who refuse to be controlled by the government. Theres (sic) no room for people like you here!”

This stunt is the latest in a string of fake hate from notes supposedly scribbled on restaurant bills towards black waiters to actor Jussie Smollett’s infamous Subway run-turned-hate crime hoax.

That they have to gin these things up so that a sick, obssessive fantasy might be brought to some kind of life is a measure of just how truly demented Lefty race-fanatics are. That they’re so often caught at it, yet keep right on trying their hand anyway, is a measure of just how truly fucking stupid they are.

Payoff, or payback?

Goes both ways, bitch.

Rep. Ayanna Pressley said on the House floor that the Black Lives Matter movement is a “mandate,” and the time has come for people to “pay us what you owe us.”

“I rise today on behalf of every black family that has been robbed of a child,” the Massachusetts congresswoman and member of “the Squad,” said. “On behalf of every family member that has been forced to see their loved one lynched on national television. Driving while black. Jogging while black. Sleeping while black. We have been criminalized for the very way we show up in the world. Under the harsh gaze of far too many, my black body is seen as a threat, always considered armed.”

“Centuries of institutionalized oppression will not be undone overnight, for racism in America is as structural as the marble pillars of this very institution,” the Democrat added. “With the power of the pen we must legislate accountability, dismantle these systems, and move in the direction of justice and healing. The Justice in Policing Act is a critical step forward, and I applaud the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus.”

Pressley continued: “But our work is unfinished. There is a rallying cry in communities across the nation. Black Lives Matter is a mandate from the people. It’s time. Pay us what you owe us. Our black skin is not a crime, it is the beautiful robe of nation builders.”

Yeah, the way you built the nation of, say, “Wakanda,” right? Because apart from that risible dream-world, what “your people” have built is God-forsaken perennial shitholes such as Ethiopa, Somalia, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Haiti, and a whole bunch of other blighted shitrapies entirely dependent for their continued survival on Western foreign aid, relief organizations, and personal charity.

When you’re not “building” corrupt, chaotic basket-case “nations” like the aforementioned—the plight of which is never, ever the fault of the Negro kleptocrats and/or bloodthirsty warlords in charge of governing them, naturally, but of American whites who have never even been there, and couldn’t find them on a map—you’re pulling down the once-great nations that are stuck being the victims of your violent crime; picking up the tab for your hopeless ghettos and their eternally dysfunctional culture; your shiftless layabouts; your fatherless children; and your general uncivilized degeneracy.

Idi Amin was one of yours, sweetheart, not ours. And he fucking ate people, may I remind you.

Probably ought to stick to that sweet politician grift, honey. For the rest, there’s always professional sports, a life of preying on more iunduystrious white folk, or the dole. Because contrary to that noise you’re spewing, you people purely suck at being “nation builders.”

“Pay us what you owe us?” Sure, sure—the moment you pay US for providing the dismaying percentage of the Negro population who are no more than illiterate, ungovernable savages with a level of comfort, privilege, and ease that are the envy of the upper classes in many less-affluent countries.

A half a million of us gave our lives to free you from slavery—and that was well over a century and a half ago. Yet here you are, STILL bitching about it to this very day, with never a syllable of condemnation for the places where slavery still exists. Even though nobody alive today was ever a slave and doesn’t know anybody who was, too many of “your people” cling desperately to this 150-year-old grudge, constantly citing it to excuse your own inability to stand on your own two feet and achieve anything of note, and to stoke guilt in people who have never done you one bit of harm, and have no wish to.

Then we had school desegregation, Urban Renewal, the Civil Rights movement (with plenty of whites marching right alongside you, do please note), the War On Poverty. We forked over trillions for welfare, job training programs, drug and alcohol rehab, and literacy programs. But still, it’s slavery that’s keeping you pinned to the mat.

So let’s just put it as a simple question: when, exactly, might we expect you people to abandon the “helpless, put-upon victim of Bad White abuse” act and start pulling your weight around here? When do you lay off tearing down and start building? When do you start contributing something besides abandoned families, cracked-out welfare moms, and wildly-disproportionate crime statistics to American society, instead of bitching about it and trying to destroy it? When do YOU start being expected to “give back” to the community—our shared American community, not just your own dysfunctional corner of it—the way white people are always being sanctimoniously hectored to do?

Besides peanut butter, I mean. Thanks and all for that; it really is good stuff, truly it is. Although it’s also true that you guys didn’t actually invent it. But come ON. Even if we let the false claim slide and award you the point, peanut butter hardly even begins to stack up in comparison to the myriad life-enhancing products of Caucasian imagination and industriousness including, for example:

  • Trains
  • Planes
  • Automobiles
  • The combine harvester
  • Air conditioning
  • Indoor plumbing and electricity
  • TV and radio
  • The internet
  • The cotton gin
  • Germ theory and modern medicine
  • The electron microscope
  • Lots of other great stuff, way too much to list

So you should be getting the picture by now that, even if we throw in wonderful things like early jazz and the blues (both of which white people also played a role in shaping and advancing), y’all are still WAY too far on the debit side of the ledger to be going around browbeating anybody about being “owed” a goddamned thing.

You’re right, though, about one thing, and one thing only: black skin is most assuredly NOT a crime. Speaking as a thoroughly Southern good ole boy of a certain advanced age, I can tell you there’s not a living soul in my fairly extensive circle of acquaintance who thinks it is, or at least ought to be. But there is no serious, good-faith argument to be made that “systemic racism” exists in America today, unless we’re talking about the reverse-racism that affirmative action actually amounts to.

Which doesn’t mean there isn’t a REAL crime associated with black skin that needs to be discussed, and that’s the way all too many black folks use the color of their skin as an excuse, a shield, a weapon, and an entitlement to phony “reparations” they didn’t earn, to be extracted from people who didn’t incur any such debt. It ain’t “reparations,” it’s robbery. Last I heard, that was still a crime.

SECOND wave?

There never was a first one—not that remotely resembled the pig in a poke we were sold, anyway.

The coronavirus doomsayers could not even wait until the fall for the apocalyptic announcements of the dreaded second wave. Because the red states recklessly loosened their lockdowns, we are now told, the US is seeing a dangerous spike in coronavirus cases. ‘EXPERTS SKETCH GLOOMY PICTURE OF VIRUS SPREAD: FAUCI TELLS OF “DISTURBING” WAVE, WITH A VACCINE MONTHS AWAY,’ read the front-page lead headline in the New York Times on Wednesday. ‘VIRUS SPREAD AKIN TO “FOREST FIRE”’ read another front page headline in the Los Angeles Times on Monday, quoting Michael Osterholm, one of the media’s favorite public health experts. Osterholm had told NBC’s Meet the Press: ‘I’m actually of the mind right now — I think this is more like a forest fire. I don’t think that this is going to slow down.’

The ‘this’ is an uptick in daily new cases from 19,002 on June 9 to 38,386 on June 24. The high to date in new daily cases was on April 24 — 39,072. Since April 24, the daily case count started declining, then began rising again after around June 9. What virtually every fear-mongering story on America’s allegedly precarious situation leaves out, however, is the steadily dropping daily death numbers — from a high of 2,693 on April 21 to 808 on June 24. That April high was driven by New York City and its environs; those New York death numbers have declined, but they have not been replaced by deaths in the rest of the country. This should be good news. Instead, it is no news.

There are no crises in hospital capacity anywhere in the country. Nursing homes, meat-packing plants, and prisons remain the main sources of new infections. Half the states are seeing cases decline or hold steady. Case counts are affected by more testing; the positive infection rate captured by testing is declining. The current caseload is younger, which is a good thing. The more people who have been infected and who recover, the more herd immunity is created. Meanwhile, daily deaths from heart disease and cancer — about 3,400 a day combined — go ignored in the press.

From all I’ve seen, the “exploding” number of case counts currently threatening to exterminate all life on Earth (almost all of which cases are asymptomatic) closely tracks with the huge increase in testing, which only stands to reason. Hey, anybody out there remember when our masters were saying America dared not reopen until more testing was done? It was the second subterfuge they used to extend their usurpation of freedom, right after “flatten the curve” and before the ludicrous “not until there’s a vaccine.” Of course, it was a lie; all three of these stalling tactics were, along with pretty much everything else they’ve said about this phony crisis. But still—good times, good times.

More inconvenient truths, actual data, and genuine science that will be ignored in favor of continued Commie opression:

Early in the epidemic, public-health experts feared the virus might kill up to 2 percent of those infected, potentially causing millions of deaths in the United States and tens of millions worldwide. Those terrifying estimates prompted the lockdowns that have done incalculable harm to the economy, shattered small businesses and left children traumatized and untold numbers suffering from brutal isolation.

In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ­esti­mated in May that the coronavirus kills about 0.26 percent of the people it infects, about 1 in 400 people. New estimates from Sweden suggest that only 1 in 10,000 people under 50 will die from the virus, compared to 1 in 14 of people over 80 and 1 in 6 of those over 90.

To be sure, these estimates still have some uncertainty. The ­actual figure could be as low as 0.1 percent or as high as 0.4 to 0.5 percent, though treatment advances should mean it will trend lower over time. Even at 0.26 percent, the rate is still significantly higher than influenza most years, more comparable to a bad flu strain like the 1968 Hong Kong flu.

But it is far lower than we initially thought — a fact that should be cause for celebration.

Instead, some media outlets insist on using the out-of-date estimates that are much higher. For example, an ESPN article this week said public discussions about reopening the National Football League were “ignoring a mortality rate that has been estimated at 1.4 percent.” That figure is more than five times the CDC’s best estimate. Even more jarring, it is more than 100 times the actual risk to people in their 20s and 30s — the age range for nearly all NFL players.

Using those overstated estimates is a recipe for panic, bad public policy — and continued lockdowns that may delay to ­return to normality.

Let’s hope that isn’t the reason people in the media are using them.

OF COURSE it’s the reason, you big silly. What other reason could there be? What, you think the same Enemedia that tripped over itself to gleefully praise the national spree of urban violence and destruction is all of a sudden suffused with concern about a clear and serious danger to the health and well-being of Americans or something? Gedouddahere, willya.

The COVID shamdemic was much ado about very little all along, the proof of which is mounting every single day. And you can be sure that the Clampdown is going to continue, with onerous restrictions and requirements; patently illegal and unconstitutional decrees; a total rejiggering of our routines, habits, and daily lives without our consent; and an ongoing metastasization of the Amerikan police/surveillance state and its authoritarian powers, regardless of what the science is telling us. Perhaps that might provide a sharpish hint as to what this is really about, no?

WE. HAVE. BEEN. HAD. They fully intend to bend us over and have us again, too—in the exact same way, using the exact same lies as their justification. If we passively allow it to happen, then we deserve no better, and never really did.

(Both via Insty)

Update! Lest we forget: even the underwhelming reported body count is a sham.

Dr. Deborah Birx, the respected physician who heads the Trump administration’s coronavirus team, reportedly argued back in May at a closed Centers for Disease Control meeting that the agency’s death estimates were 25% too high, according to a Washington Post report.

Anecdotal evidence at the state level suggests this is true. In fact, estimates may be off by more than 25%.

…But the fact remains: The death totals are almost certainly grossly exaggerated due to intentional miscounting. There are strong incentives to over-report, but few to under-report.

The Centers for Disease Control admits as much in its June 24 update of the data:

“For 7% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.5 additional conditions or causes per death.”

So in only one in 14 deaths out of the current total of 125,000 can COVID-19 be said to be the actual cause.

As grotesque a manipulation as all that is, though, it’s just the tip of the deception and hype iceberg:

This Issues & Insights editorial (cited above—M) does a good job of bringing together some of the relevant data. But let’s start with something they didn’t mention: this acknowledgement by the Director of the Illinois Department of Public Health:

I just want to be clear in terms of the definition of people dying of COVID. So, the case definition is very simplistic. It means that at the time of death it was a COVID-positive diagnosis. So that means if you were in hospice and had already been given, you know, a few weeks to live and then you were also found to have COVID, that would be counted as a COVID death. It means that if, technically, even if you died of a clear alternate cause but you had COVID at the same time it’s still listed as a COVID death. So, everyone that’s listed as a COVID death doesn’t mean that that was the cause of the death, but they had COVID at the time of death.

That certainly is clarifying.

Ain’t it, though. Ain’t it just. John finishes up:

Why is this important? Because in all likelihood, the actual Wuhan fatality rate is not much different from a relatively virulent seasonal flu. Every year, the seasonal flu bug kills tens of thousands of Americans. Just two years ago, the CDC says it killed 62,000–and that was without a Medicare spiff or other pressures to build up the numbers. The reality is, I think, that in response to the COVID-19 epidemic, we devastated our economy–which means that we devastated tens or hundreds of millions of lives–needlessly.

So what do we do next year, or the year after? It is a virtual certainty that during next year’s flu season, absent a comprehensive shutdown, and perhaps with a shutdown, tens of thousands of Americans will die, and have their deaths attributed to that virus. COVID-19 presumably will still be active and will add to the total. There are powerful forces in our society that yearn to shut down economic activity and thereby increase poverty, unemployment and dependence on government. Those forces likely control the Democratic Party, which could well be in charge of the Executive Branch in January.

Without any track record of sensible risk assessment, what will stand in the way of another shutdown next Winter? Or the year after that? The case for hysteria will be more or less as strong as it was this year.

The case was never strong at all. The problem is that enough of us are weak, cowardly, and stupid enough to let them get away with it anyway.

And because of that stupidity, cowardice, and total absence of any will whatsoever to resist the abridging of Constitutional rights and freedoms they neither appreciate nor understand, you can count on occasional shutdowns, masks, social distancing, one-way grocery store aisles and bare shelves, plastic sneeze-guards between you and the cashier, and the rest of the Commie rot as now being integral parts of our New American Life. Those things and more were always on Big Boss Man’s wish list, and now that he’s seen how easy it was to get ’em, only a fool would think he’ll ever give them up.

Stalin could only dream of having a slave class as docile and compliant as present-day America’s.

The science is settled, the facts are in

COVID is a sham, and masks are the bunk.

I wore surgical masks daily for 36 years as an anesthesiologist. Their purpose was to reduce the chance that I would infect an open wound with bacteria from my mouth. This article of faith has been shown to be false. If staff who are working outside of the immediate sterile field do not wear masks, there is no increase in wound infections. And this is in a closed environment where staff will be present for hours. This casts a very large cloud of doubt on the utility of masks for COVID-19.

Another problem arises when we look at the use of masks by the public. Even accepting the uncertain premise that masks are useful, “incorrect use and disposal may actually increase the risk of pathogen transmission, rather than reduce it, especially when masks are used by non-professionals such as the lay public.” Given that most “masks” are simply kept handy for use when required, set aside, and then re-used, most mask-wearing by the public is likely to increase virus exposure, not reduce it.

But do properly used surgical masks reduce disease spread in the general public? To say there are almost no data would not be overstating the case. When households with sick kids were examined, even rigorous mask-wearing provided no statistically significant improvement in adult infections.

Let’s put that in plain English. Even if you did everything to protect yourself with surgical masks, even keeping it on when your kid wants to see your face, it might reduce your chance of getting sick, but we can’t prove it. And that’s in a well designed study intended to get a meaningful result. “[H]ousehold use of face masks is associated with low adherence and is ineffective for controlling seasonal respiratory disease” (emphasis added).

What about homemade cloth masks? In a study using influenza, masks made from cotton T-shirts “should only be considered as a last resort to prevent droplet transmission from infected individuals.” They were only one third as effective when worn by the sick person as a surgical mask. If you’re sick, they’re better than nothing, but that’s not much. The CDC says, “Cloth face coverings may slow the spread of the virus and help people who may have the virus and do not know it from transmitting it to others.” Translation: It might help, but we don’t have any data to back that up.

As we can see from other studies, even surgical masks have minimal benefit in preventing you from getting sick. This was confirmed in a hospital study. Cloth masks had a “relative risk” of flu infection thirteen times greater than medical masks. “Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection.”

What about the fabled N95 respirator masks? “Respirators work as PPE only when they are the right size and have been fit-tested to demonstrate they achieve an adequate protection factor.” Translation: If you haven’t gone through the fit-testing I’ve been through (the first model didn’t fit!), N95s won’t reduce your exposure to the virus. Sorry.

Of course, smarmy, grasping little pétit dictators like NC’s own Comrade Cooper almost certainly know all this, and issue royal decrees mandating universal mask use anyway. Might there be an explanation for that, you ask? Oh, there certainly might at that.

Merriam-Webster defines pseudo-science as “a system of theories, assumptions, and methods erroneously regarded as scientific.” The Oxford dictionary clarifies by stating, “a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.“

Pseudo-science quickly emerged as the principal domain of Technocrats, but they soon found that scientific debate with those promoting real science was most inconvenient to their social engineering goals. The solution was simple: claim that their own pseudo-science was indeed the real science, and then refuse debate by excluding all other voices to the contrary.

The American public is being spoon-fed a steady diet of pseudo-science in order to justify the wearing of face masks, social distancing and contact tracing. Yet, the actual science points in the polar opposite direction.

Furthermore, those who try to present the real science are shamed, ridiculed and bullied for having such narrow-minded views.

This is a clear sign of Technocrats-at-work. Instead, these are the ones who should be exposed, shamed and ridiculed.

In sum, these dangerous and destructive policies are designed to curtail economic activity, break down social cohesion and control people.

There you have it, folks. And yet somehow, as I always say, here we all are.

No, no, a thousand times no

Remember when I said there was no way in hell I’d be strapping on one of those silly-ass face diapers, no matter what devious, conniving NC state official might insist that I do so in the name of “safety” over their dud COVID scam? Well, here’s another thing I can solemnly assure I ain’t gonna be doing: “taking a knee.”

Others, however, feel differently.

White police officers and members of the community gathered on Saturday to wash the feet of black faith leaders in North Carolina in an echo of the Biblical story of how Jesus washed his disciples’ feet, according to a report in the Daily Mail.

The feet-washing event was part of a walk in Cary, North Carolina, to protest the death of George Floyd, led by Legacy Church Center co-pastors Faith Wokoma and husband Soboma.

Wokoma and her husband organized the walk, which included the “Washing of the Feet” ceremony, where at least three white law enforcement officers and three other white attendees washed their feet.

According to pictures on social media, the group knelt in prayer with buckets as the pastors sat on a bench. One attendee is heard on a megaphone praying for forgiveness.

Sad, pathetic, disgraceful—and, ultimately, futile and self-defeating. Mike’s Iron Law for dealing with the Left: they will never be satisfied, no matter what you yield up to them. Each met demand will always and forever generate another more bizarre and/or outrageous one. Far better instead to refuse to grant them a single goddamned thing, so as to forestall the deadly spiral of escalating demands that inevitably results from catering to even the most trivial of their wishes.

Ignoring that Iron Law for so long is probably the biggest single reason you could point to for why we find ourselves at the current sorry pass; appeasing the Left in even the smallest way is a sure-fire recipe for disaster in the long term, no matter how innocuous their initial demand might seem. As with Kipling’s famous wisdom about the Danes and the Danegeld, no matter what you give them, they will always be back for another bite, usually a lot sooner than you might think. Then another. And another. And another. Lather, rinse, repeat, until suddenly you’re shocked and horrified to find yourself standing in the ashes of a burned city, your nation’s history erased and rewritten, your national treasures and monuments reduced to smoking rubble.

And they’ll still hate you anyway, and want you dead. Make this your motto:



Kneel before them now, and before you know it you’ll be fellating them while you’re down there. And why not? By agreeing to humiliate and debase yourself at their command, you’ve already demonstrated the nature of what you truly are. After that, it’s merely a matter of haggling over price.

Some black lives matter

And some…do not.

On D-Day, everything everyone fought for, white, black, asian, native or hispanic has been overshadowed by the forces of communism using social justice as a cause. The one undeniable fact, if they are bothering to deny it, is that all of the damage done has been done in cities run by communist Democrats. Most of the black lives lost have been lost in communist democrat-run cities by police forces under their control, acting (it would be logical to conclude) under their direction. In Chicago, long run by communists (whether they admit it or not) black lives are cast away by the dozens and there are no protests for those black lives. If black lives truly mattered to these governors and mayors, they would not use them to their political advantage. They allow shootings to go on every day in order to get gun control legislation. They use it as an excuse, but those young black lives are lost and these mayors turn their backs, because they are benefiting politically. These same mayors can’t stand people protesting to feed their families, run their businesses and make a living, but when their communist political allies, Antifa and BLM protest, the mayors protect them, let them out of jail as soon as they are arrested, the police are told to stand down. If the people want control of their cities, they have to start by ridding themselves of the communists in city, state and county governments. 

We are not witnessing a racial revolution, that is a lie being told by communists in both the Antifa and BLM leadership to present their opposition as racists, but there is nothing racist about hating communists or communism, that is the duty of every human being who does not want to be ruled by a dictator, forced to live under conditions of the pandemic lockdown forever. The deception is to ask if black lives matter, which, of course they do. Black lives were lost in all of our wars, all the way back to the Revolutionary war, more black lives have been lost in some wars than others, but black lives have mattered throughout the history of this nation. There are black lives that have mattered to the economy of the nation, entrepreneurs who revolutionized business. There are major corporations in the hands of black lives that matter. In order to be faithful to truth and history, it must be recognized that the celebration of freedom is to celebrate black lives honorably and courageously employed in maintaining that freedom and trying to overthrow that nation is to disrespect those black lives. But Black Lives Matter is a political organization not a term, not a recognition, not an understanding so to agree that black lives matter is not to agree with Black Lives Matter.  

It is not enough to recognize that black lives matter. Most will happily agree that black lives pursuing the American dream, agreeable to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, patriotic to the idea of freedom and the republic matter more than black lives pursuing communism, who are antagonistic to the ideal of freedom and individual rights, seeking a dictatorial government in the false belief that they will be in charge of it.

I feel sorry for those who have had their heritage co-opted by an aggressive political organization (BLM), feeling bullied into going along with the communists thinking that they are standing up for racial equality. It is a difficult distinction for many of them to make. The pride they feel when seeing images of people like Frederick Douglass, Martin Luther King, Jr, Jesse Owens, the Tuskegee Airmen and others is rightfully theirs and it is not for Black Lives Matter, the organization, to co-opt those images and put them to work for their cause of communism, a cause most of those individuals would not support. 

And yet that is precisely what they’ve done—brazenly, audaciously, unconscionably—just one among an endless and ever-growing litany of despicable Leftist crimes.

More on Mia

The son of the artist involved reveals yet more on the shameful Land-O-Lakes brouhaha.

With the redesign, my father made Mia’s Native American connections more specific. He changed the beadwork designs on her dress by adding floral motifs that are common in Ojibwe art. He added two points of wooded shoreline to the lake that had often been depicted in the image’s background. It was a place any Red Lake tribal citizen would recognize as the Narrows, where Lower Red Lake and Upper Red Lake meet.

In my education booklet, “Rethinking Stereotypes,” I noted that communicating misinformation is an underlying function of stereotypes, including through visual images. One way that these images convey misinformation is in a passive, subliminal way that uses inaccurate depictions of tribal symbols, motifs, clothing and historical references. The other kind of stereotypical, misinforming imagery is more overt, with physical features caricatured and customs demeaned. “Through dominant language and art,” I wrote, “stereotypic imagery allows one to see, and believe, in an invented image, an invented race, based on generalizations.”

I provided a number of examples. Mia wasn’t one of them. Not because she was part of my father’s legacy as a commercial artist and I didn’t want to offend him. Mia simply didn’t fit the parameters of a stereotype. Maybe that’s why many Native American women on social media have made it clear that they didn’t agree with those who viewed her as a romanticized and/or sexually objectified stereotype. Instead, Mia seems to have stirred a sense of remembrance and place, one that they found reassuring about their existence as Native American women.

I don’t know why Land O’Lakes dropped Mia. In 2018, the company changed the image by cropping it to a head shot. That adjustment didn’t seem like a bow to culturally correct pressure. Perhaps her disappearance this year is about nothing more than chief executive Beth Ford’s explanation that Land O’Lakes is focusing on the company’s heritage as a farmer-owned cooperative founded in 1921. But questions remain.

Mia’s vanishing has prompted a social media meme: “They Got Rid of The Indian and Kept the Land.” That isn’t too far from the truth. Mia, the stereotype that wasn’t, leaves behind a landscape voided of identity and history. For those of us who are American Indian, it’s a history that is all too familiar.

The Lid blog sums it all up.

Excellent work, cancel culture. In your zeal to purge the world of racism, you have (what’s that word you use for it) ‘erased’ an actual piece of legitimate, iconic, and native-crated artwork.

And like everything else the left does, you did it ‘for our own good, or as Albert Camus once wrote. “The welfare of the people, in particular, has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.”

How long until you admit you’re just another stripe of totalitarians glibly burning down everything in society that doesn’t fit neatly into your narrow little world view.

They don’t check into a logo’s background before they call a logo bigoted, Just like the complaints about the Washington Redskins. The cancel culture calls the team logo racist. But the logo was “first designed in 1971 in close consultation with Native American leaders. Among those who unanimously approved and voiced praise for the logo was Walter “Blackie” Wetzel, a former President of the National Congress of American Indians and Chairman of the Blackfeet Nation. Years earlier, Mr. Wetzel had been deeply involved with U.S. President John F. Kennedy in the movement for civil liberties, civil rights, and economic freedom for all. In 2014, Mr. Wetzel’s son Don commented, “It needs to be said that an Indian from the State of Montana created the Redskins logo, and did it the right way. It represents the Red Nation, and it’s something to be proud of.”

Huh. Didn’t know that. But in the end none of this will matter to the SJW’s—for whom history is rewritable; facts are malleable according to political convenience; and truth is what Kryptonite is to Superman.

Curiouser and curioser

Unpossible, I say!

As of Wednesday (April 8), officials in eight remaining states have yet to issue full stay-at-home orders. Those states are Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Officials in three other states — Alabama, Missouri, and South Carolina — only issued stay-at-home orders within the last few days after being resistant to enacting such a measure in the weeks prior.

Conventional wisdom would suggest that those states, due to their inaction, would reap the consequences in the form of higher COVID-19 death toll projections. But that has not been the case.

According to data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, which tracks the coronavirus outbreak in each individual state, predicting its death toll and hospital resource usage, all but one of the states in question have downgraded their death toll projections.

In addition to downgraded death toll projections, the states also saw significant downgrades for their projected hospital resource use, which include intensive care unit beds and ventilators.

The data doesn’t suggest that social distancing as a whole is worthless, or that it isn’t having any effect. But it does raise the question of whether every single state and locality needs to institute the same exact stay-at-home-on-government-orders regime. Many commentators have suggested that such measures might well be necessary in some places, but not necessary in others. The fact that both hospital usage and fatality projections are going down even in states without stay-at-home orders indicates that these people might be right.

I’d say so, yeah. But YMMV—particularly if you’re a Democrat-Socialist apparatchik looking to take advantage of widespread panic to advance your eternal agenda of glomming more power and control while you have the chance. Julie Kelly suggests that it might be time to shitcan the scare-mongers.

Those alarming forecasts were based on a model produced by the University of Washington late last month. Dr. Christopher Murray, director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in Seattle, assembled a set of graphs to show how COVID-19 would overwhelm the country’s health care system, causing a shortage of hospital beds, intensive care units and ventilators.

Murray also originally calculated that 2,271 people would die on April 15, which would be the peak “death day” in the United States. But that wasn’t the only scary news. Sick people would by dying in the streets and entryways outside of hospitals across the country because no beds would be available.

The Murray model has been fully embraced by the president’s top two health advisors, Dr. Deborah Birx and Dr. Anthony Fauci. The pair presented the doomsday model to President Trump on March 28, which prompted his decision to extend the CDC “social distancing” guidelines until the end of this month. (It bears repeating that the Murray model factored in “full social distancing” such as the shutdown of schools and nonessential businesses as well as stay-at-home orders through the end of May.)

Birx and Fauci also presented Murray’s charts to the White House press corps on March 31. Birx, relying on the model’s most extreme range of total fatalities, warned that upwards of 240,000 people would die of coronavirus in the United States by the beginning of August. The next two weeks, Birx admonished at the time, would be particularly painful. “As sobering as that number is, we need to be prepared for it,” Fauci told the socially distanced reporters in the briefing room. “Is it going to be that much? I hope not.”

But this week’s Pearl Harbor and 9/11 didn’t happen. Widespread death and devastation couldn’t be found.

Aside from two states, the rest of the country escaped terrorist-attack level fatalities this week. Between April 4 and April 9, a little more than 8,000 people in the country reportedly died from COVID-19; more than half of the fatalities occurred in New York and New Jersey. A tragedy no doubt, but certainly not the “hardest and saddest week” for most Americans, as Adams warned.

Only one other state—Michigan—has more than 1,000 recorded deaths so far. Populous states such as California, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Texas have fewer than 500 fatalities. Many states are still in the double-digit range.

Further, the Murray model has been revised dramatically since its publication. An April 2 update predicted more than 93,000 total deaths by August; the April 5 update revised that figure downward to about 82,000. The total number of hospital beds needed dropped drastically between the two updates, from 262,092 beds to 140,823 beds. Predicted demand for ICUs dropped by about 10,000; ventilator demand dropped by nearly 12,000. Some of the model’s state-by-state projections also changed.

Beds and ICUs are aplenty across the country. There are so many ventilators available that we will now supply the machines to other countries in need.

Rather than admit the inherent flaws in the Murray model and confess the doomsday scenarios were completely unwarranted, Fauci, Birx, and Adams are stepping up their demands to keep the country under house arrest while the once-vibrant U.S. economy dives into Depression-era territory.

Curious indeed. Why, it’s almost as if there might be a different agenda at work here than the one they’ve been shrieking about. As if—I dunno, it’s such a crazy, out-there idea I really hate to even think it—as if goobermint bureau-rats and “experts” might possibly be ass-covering, incompetent liars or something.

Ohnononono, that’s just ridiculous. Sorry I mentioned it, folks. Go home, stay home, wait for further instructions from the proper authorities. That is all.

Update! Heard this great old tune on the radio earlier, and it seemed particularly appropriate for a Saturday night house-arrest music selection.



The Great Disconnect

The fishy smell intensifies.

According to most national media hospitals are overwhelmed with coronavirus patients.

U.S. media claim doctors and nurses are collapsing under the stress and strain of conditions they describe as “war zones” in the battle against COVID-19.

Media are now reporting about nurses and doctors committing suicide as they try to deal with severe PTSD, and psychological trauma, as a result of endless shifts in overcrowded hospitals filled with desperate and dying patients.  Additionally, refrigerated trailers now fill with piles of dead bodies as the morgues are overwhelmed with deceased coronavirus patients.

Influencers, perhaps people with an interest in pushing an agenda, are sharing videos of nurses and doctors pleading for help and crying under duress amid their struggle.  It all seems rather sad and unnerving.  Additionally, professional instability that severe seems a little disconcerting…. That said, that’s one summation of a recent 24-hour media cycle.

However, there is a disconnect.

I’m not talking a little disconnect; there is a profound and entirely opposite set of reports from nurses, doctors and healthcare workers –in multiple states– who are being laid-off, sent home, told not to come in; and doctors worried of losing their practices because hospitals, and their offices are completely empty.

For every media claim of overwhelmed hospital war-zones, there are a dozen reports from actual workers, nurses, doctors and medical personnel reporting exactly the opposite; and yes, a disparity in reporting even in the New York metropolitan area.

Medical personnel in Wisconsin, Missouri, California, Florida, Colorado, Oregon, Georgia New Jersey, and every region in the USA are reporting there are few to no patients in their facility and the medical staff is being laid-off, or told to go home and/or stay home, because there is nothing to do.

How the heck is this level of profound disconnect possible?

Here here, sirrah! Have I somehow misconstrued? Or do you seriously imply that our national liberal-media complement—so essential to the well-being of the entire Republic, now as always—might conceivably be LYING to us?

Why, you impudent scoundrel! Such damnable slander against good and honorable “journalists” cannot be borne, SHALL not be borne, without consequence! To the field of honor straightaway then—where, on my oath as a gentleman, I shall see justice done upon you, decency and righteousness upheld! Pistols at dawn, I say!! PISTOLS AT DAWN!!!

Sundance solicits reports on all this from readers working in the field, and he gets plenty of ’em. Call me a conspiracy nut if you will, but considering the source of the horror stories—and also bearing in mind, as we should here and elsewhere, that the plural of “anecdote” is not “data”—I nevertheless feel the idea that Enemedia might possibly NOT be giving us the straight dope is in no way too great a strain for rationality to bear.

(/sarcasm)

A man of the people

Senile Uncle Gropey is so inept and out of it he can’t even fake being one with conviction anymore.

Think about the image his latest confrontation projected, of a guy who sweats while he works getting an incoherent, finger-wagging lecture from a pompous clown steamed that this peasant isn’t on his knees genuflecting before the Democrat Demigod of Dover. There once was a time when the Democrats styled themselves as the party of the working man – for all his myriad flaws, Biden’s crustacean competitor Bernie Sanders at least pays lip service to the workers – but that day is long past. Begone, you dirty-nailed cis-trogs, with your uncurated ideas of gender identity and upper body strength.

The Democrats are now the party of the Pumpkin IPA-sampling hipster, the woke tech tool, the militant diversity consultant, and the cat-fancying public school teacher whose husband went out to get her some Diet Coke when she was 48 and never came back.

Oh, and the buried lede was that “his sons” hunt and own shotguns. His good son, by all accounts a decent guy, passed away, leading to the other son Hunter getting with his ex. So, that’s awkward. And now we learn that the Stripper Tapper is strapped, that the guy who got booted from the Navy for drugs is packing? Is that even legal?

It doesn’t matter. We all understand that the rules that apply to us don’t apply to moronic mandarins like Gropey Joe or to their relatives like Hunter, the Snortunate Son.

And that’s how the Democrat establishment wants it. Or, rather, that’s what it wants to return to. By rallying around the tattered banner of Joe Biden, the Democrats have forfeited the chance to offer the candidate of change. Rather, they seek to offer the candidate of change back, back to the ineptly managed national decline of the Barack Obama years. If Joe Biden wins, he will not serve – he will be out in the Rose Garden frying bugs with a magnifying glass while a brainless trust of Obama retreads gets to work transforming all of America into Scat Francisco.

Gropey’s fractured fairy tale about his sons and their shotguns doesn’t matter, and not only because of the legal issue Kurt cites. It’s a baldfaced lie to begin with, the standard-issue subterfuge every gun-grabbing Democrat-Socialist wannabe tyrant trots out whenever it seems necessary to soothe the rubes who might be getting Woke to the con. Whenever a Democrat-Socialist goes out a-huntin’ and a-shootin’ and a-rooty-toot-tootin’, it’s strictly for photo-op purposes, nothing more. Unfortunately for them, these manufactured propaganda events always wind up looking about as natural, spontaneous, and sincere as Fauxcahontas appears to be in her own damned home:




HILLARY!™‘s and Gropey’s on-again, off-again Southern patois; Fauxcahontas’s risible down-home drawl expressing her sudden, TOTALLY UNSCRIPTED desire to “grab myse’f one a’ them thar BEEERS!”; Ogabe’s comically oafish mishandling of a gun clearly altogether alien to him; assorted Democrat-Socialist snake-oil salesmen lifelessly reciting fork-tongued protestations that they’re hunters themselves, that “no one is coming to take your guns,” that they “support” the 2A and have a lifelong familiarity with and respect for firearms, only to reveal a comprehensive ignorance of any and every aspect of the topic in the very next breath—NO American concerned about his fragile, already-eroded 2A rights ought to believe a single word out of their yaps.

Not ONE WORD. Not EVER.

The point of the Happy Ending

Well, I mean, DUH.

Bill Clinton waves off his tawdry affair with then-White House intern Monica Lewinsky in a new documentary — by saying it was something he did “to manage my anxiety.”

The ex-president, in the upcoming Hulu series “Hillary” about his wife, likens working in the Oval Office to being a boxer “staggering” around after a 15-round prize fight that’s been extended to 30-rounds.

“And here’s something that’ll take your mind off it for a while,” Clinton, 73, says of his two-year tryst with Lewinsky that began in 1995 when she was 22.

Forgive me for asking a perhaps too-obvious question here and all, but aren’t stress relief, anxiety reduction, and release from tension all pretty well-known benefits of ripping yourself off a piece of tail now and then? Of course, as notorious and constant a quim-chaser as the Creep always has been, that lame explanation for his scurrilous behavior probably ain’t gonna cut a whole lot of ice with anybody, I’d bet. But this next offhand remark is likely to cause him a whole lot worse trouble:

Episode three of the one-sided, four-part biography series about Hillary Clinton — which premieres Friday — focuses on the sordid, 25-year-old affair that almost ended Clinton’s presidency and dogged his wife throughout her own political career.

Titled “The Hardest Decision,” the episode leads with footage from the 2016 campaign in which President Trump talks about the scandalous liaison, calling Hillary “an enabler.”

Oof. Better keep checking six from now on, Bill, lest…well, you know. Meanwhile, Her Herness staunchly maintains the ongoing effort to rewrite history via misdirection:

“He shouldn’t have done what he did, he shouldn’t have tried to hide it, but it was not an impeachable offense,” says Hillary, who was a member of the impeachment inquiry staff that advised the House Judiciary Committee during Watergate.

And he WASN’T impeached for it. He was impeached for lying about it under oath, you conniving shrew. Which he most certainly DID, repeatedly. He was also charged with obstruction of justice for the crime of suborning perjury from Lewinski and Linda Tripp, and was manifestly guilty of those as well.

Nice try and all, though.

Commies always lie

That steady drip, drip, drip you hear is the sound of the truth, outing.

Xi didn’t actually admit that the coronavirus now devastating large swathes of China had escaped from one of the country’s bioresearch labs. But the very next day, evidence emerged suggesting that this is exactly what happened, as the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology released a new directive entitled: “Instructions on strengthening biosecurity management in microbiology labs that handle advanced viruses like the novel coronavirus.”

Read that again. It sure sounds like China has a problem keeping dangerous pathogens in test tubes where they belong, doesn’t it? And just how many “microbiology labs” are there in China that handle “advanced viruses like the novel coronavirus”?

It turns out that in all of China there is only one. And this one is located in the Chinese city of Wuhan that just happens to be…the epicenter of the epidemic.

That’s right. China’s only Level 4 microbiology lab that is equipped to handle deadly coronaviruses, called the National Biosafety Laboratory, is part of the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

As if the revelations I posted on last week weren’t convincing enough for ya, we now have this too:

What’s more, the People’s Liberation Army’s top expert in biological warfare, a Maj. Gen. Chen Wei, was dispatched to Wuhan at the end of January to help with the effort to contain the outbreak.

According to the PLA Daily, Gen. Chen has been researching coronaviruses since the SARS outbreak of 2003, as well as Ebola and anthrax. This would not be her first trip to the Wuhan Institute of Virology either, since it is one of only two bioweapons research labs in all of China.

Does that suggest to you that the novel coronavirus, now known as SARS-CoV-2, may have escaped from that very lab, and that Gen. Chen’s job is to try and put the genie back in the bottle, as it were? It does to me.

It does to anybody who understands the essential truth about every Communist regime: the truth only emerges from them gradually, one halting step at a time. Not willingly do they come clean, either; the true story must always be dragged forth, as if honesty was actually a physically painful thing for them.

Which, y’know, it is.

Seems to me that, at some point, Red China’s toxic government is going to have to be taken out. Their aggression, their lawlessness, their ongoing attempts to infiltrate and manipulate other nations around the globe make for an intolerable combination. Throw in a clandestine bio-war program that has become a serious threat to the entire world because of the incompetence, deceit, and corruption that are also stock-in-trade characteristics endemic to any Commie shitrapy you care to name, and the only sane course is proactive self-defense against them.

Not that I’m advocating American boots on the ground there, mind. A double handful of well-placed tactical nukes lobbed from around FL200 or so ought to do the trick.

Misfire

Hrm.

John Bolton Admits Last-Minute Impeachment Leak Was A Publicity Stunt

Curiously, the rest of the article doesn’t quite seem to support its sensational headline.

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton admitted Wednesday that his testimony in President Donald Trump’s recent impeachment proceedings involving Ukraine would have had no impact on the trial’s outcome even after sections of his upcoming book leaked attempting to convict the president in its final days.

“People can argue about what I should have said and what I should have done,” Bolton said at Vanderbilt University Wednesday night during a forum with his predecessor Susan Rice, according to ABC News. “I will bet you a dollar right here and now my testimony would have made no difference to the ultimate outcome.”

“I sleep at night because I have followed my conscience,” Bolton added.

In the final days of the trial however, sections of Bolton’s upcoming book were leaked to the New York Times, featuring Bolton accusing Trump of tying the nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine with politically motivated investigations as Democrats alleged. The leak happened to come on the same day the book became available for online pre-order revealing the move as nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Bold mine. Now I don’t doubt for a moment that the move WAS a publicity stunt, mind. But the above hardly amounts to Bolton himself “admitting” to any such, openly and in plain language; his “confession” in the first ‘graph is pretty specific, and obviously refers to something else altogether, albeit related.

Bolton’s acknowledgment that his testimony wouldn’t have altered the outcome of Shampeachment could be construed as kind of a left-handed, backdoor way of admitting to the leak’s publicity-stunt nature, I suppose, however great a stretch that might be. And lord knows I am not in the least bothered by our side using hyperbole and misdirection as a means of attacking our enemies, just as they’ve always done to us. But such weapons must be wielded competently, craftily, to be most effective. And they ought not be wasted on an irrelevancy, a disgruntled, treacherous non-entity whose 15 minutes of (minor) fame already ticked away.

Could be there’s a case to be made for Bolton having actually confessed to perpetrating a “publicity stunt,” somewhere, somewhen. But if there is, I can’t find it in this brief article.

Stolen valor—again

IE, just your typical Democrat-Socialist “war hero.”

When Mayor Pete Buttigieg talks about his military service, his opponents fall silent, the media fall in love, and his political prospects soar. Veterans roll their eyes.

CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Mr. Buttigieg Sunday if President Trump “deserves some credit” for the strike that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani. “No,” the candidate replied, “not until we know whether this was a good decision and how this decision was made.” He questioned whether “it was the right strategic move” and said his own judgment “is informed by the experience of having been on one of those planes headed into a war zone.”

But Mr. Buttigieg’s stint in the Navy isn’t as impressive as he makes it out to be. His 2019 memoir is called “Shortest Way Home,” an apt description of his military service. He entered the military through a little-used shortcut: direct commission in the reserves. The usual route to an officer’s commission includes four years at Annapolis or another military academy or months of intense training at Officer Candidate School. ROTC programs send prospective officers to far-flung summer training programs and require military drills during the academic year. Mr. Buttigieg skipped all that—no obstacle courses, no weapons training, no evaluation of his ability or willingness to lead. Paperwork, a health exam and a background check were all it took to make him a naval officer.

Mr. Buttigieg was assigned to a comfortable corner of military life, the Naval Station in Great Lakes, Ill. Paperwork and light exercise were the order of the day. “Working eight-hour days,” he writes, was “a relaxing contrast from my day job, and spending time with sailors from all walks of civilian life, was a healthy antidote to the all absorbing work I had in South Bend.” He calls it “a forced, but welcome, change of pace from the constant activity of being mayor.”

During a November debate, Mr. Buttigieg proclaimed: “I have the experience of being commanded into a war zone by an American president.” The reality isn’t so grandiose.

Mr. Buttigieg spent some five months in Afghanistan, where he writes that he remained less busy than he’d been at City Hall, with “more time for reflection and reading than I was used to back home.” He writes that he would take “a laptop and a cigar up to the roof at midnight to pick up a Wi-Fi signal and patch via Skype into a staff meeting at home.” The closest he came to combat was ferrying other staffers around in an SUV: In his campaign kickoff speech last April he referred to “119 trips I took outside the wire, driving or guarding a vehicle.” That’s a strange thing to count. Combat sorties in an F-18 are carefully logged. Driving a car isn’t.

Them that did it don’t talk about it. Them that talk about it didn’t do it. That slight twist on a hoary old SpecWarrior truism will peel the mask off a braggadocious little REMF queef like Buttplug every time.

Falsehood. Deception. Propaganda

Without these things, they truly have nothing.

The “1619 Project” is described by Times editorial board member Mara Gay in the following words: “In the days and weeks to come, we will publish essays demonstrating that nearly everything that has made America exceptional grew out of slavery.” In a formal statement, the Times editorial board elaborated: “The 1619 Project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are.”

In other words, in its very conception, the 1619 Project is an historically illiterate lie, whose self-evident purpose is to erase the actual foundation of the nation born in 1776 and memorialized by Lincoln as a “new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

Hannah-Jones’ explanation of the project to make 1619 America’s Founding instead of 1776 or 1787, describes the event in these words: “In August 1619, just 12 years after the English settled Jamestown, Va.,… the Jamestown colonists bought 20 to 30 enslaved Africans from English pirates. The pirates had stolen them from a Portuguese slave ship that had forcibly taken them from what is now the country of Angola. Those men and women who came ashore on that August day were the beginning of American slavery. They were among the 12.5 million Africans who would be kidnapped from their homes and brought in chains across the Atlantic Ocean in the largest forced migration in human history until the Second World War.”

This description is a tissue of fictions beginning with the insinuation that 12.5 million Africans were shipped to America in the Atlantic Slave Trade. The proper figure is 330,000 – bad enough – but a sign that American slavery even in the Western Hemisphere was significantly less than Hannah-Jones and her enablers would like it to be. More strikingly, the statement that this was “the beginning of American slavery” is false on its face. It was a continuation of English – not American practice. And the 20 Africans brought to Virginia in 1619 were not slaves.

As the distinguished African-American Princeton historian, Nell Painter, observed in a critique of the 1619 Project, the Africans brought to Virginia in 1619 were indentured servants, meaning that they would be free within a set number of years, usually five to seven. In fact the majority of laborers in the Virginia colony were indentured servants, almost all of them white. Moreover, neither the 20 indentured servants who arrived in Virginia in 1619 nor the vast majority of actual slaves who came later were “kidnapped” by white Englishmen or any other whites. They were bought at slave auctions centered in Ghana and Benin from black African slave owners. The 20 indentured servants who arrived in Virginia in 1619 had been captured and indentured by black African warlords as spoils of war. All of these facts undermine the Times’ attack on America’s founding, so Hannah-Jones omits them.

The ideological character of the 1619 Project is manifest in the subtitle of Hannah-Jones’ historically illiterate introduction: “Our democracy’s founding ideals were false when they were written. Black Americans have fought to make them true.” This claim is based first of all on a grammatical misunderstanding of the word “ideals,” and then on an extravagant distortion of the historical record. “Ideals” are by their very nature aspirations not facts. The Founders’ ideals were actually commitments they made which they and their heirs did carry out.

In the second place, Hannah-Jones characterization of the founders as pro-slavery in her introduction is just an offensive slander. In the words of C. Bradley Thompson’s scholarly study of the founders attitudes, America’s Revolutionary Mind: “Not a single revolutionary leader ever publicly praised slavery as a positive good. Benjamin Franklin, speaking as president of the Pennsylvania Society of Promoting the Abolition of Slavery, described slavery as ‘an atrocious debasement of human nature.’ George Washington, a slaveholder, told a friend, ‘There is not a man living, who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of [slavery].’ At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, James Madison told his colleagues, ‘We have seen the mere distinction of color made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man.’”

Hannah-Jones’ claim that the Founders led a revolution to protect slavery is also transparently false. The year 1787 saw the passing of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which established settlement of the region that would become Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin. It was a geographical area as large as the existing 13 states. Article IV outlawed slavery in this unsettled land. What rationale would the allegedly pro-slavery founders have for doing that?

Ahh, but the Left’s goal, in this and every other case, is not to arrive at honest answers via a scrupulous and impartial examination of historical fact. It is to distort, conceal, and mislead so thoroughly that such uncomfortable questions are never asked at all. Their interest has never been in advancing or spreading knowledge, but in suppressing it. Horowitz knows full well what the real point is:

The 1619 Project is an outrageous, racist, falsification of American history. A metastasizing curriculum in America’s schools, it is a dagger aimed at America’s heart, at its self-esteem and self-understanding, at its national pride. It aims to destroy America’s shield against its real world enemies. These enemies are legion because tyrannies around the globe hate democracy in general and America in particular, as the most tolerant and most inclusive nation among all nations with large internal minorities.

No American needs to bother looking “around the globe” to find those enemies; there are legions of them right here among us, mindlessly seeking to destroy the very host that nurtures and sustains the witless parasites.

For comparison, there is not a black, brown or Asian nation that has elected as its commander-in-chief a white countryman the way white American majorities elected Barack Obama – not once but twice.

Again: their argument isn’t with us, and it never really has been. It’s with reality—with history, with science, with human nature, with truth itself. It’s an argument they’re eternally doomed to lose, but they always create a lot of havoc and misery before they’re finally taken down.

FUD with words

Tangentially related to that last post, another example of how the Left rewrites history to suit its own nefarious purposes.

Serious problems exist with some of the narrative spun about (Martin Luther) King, in particular, and the civil rights struggle, in general. Part of the problem, of course, is that King died young, enabling others, as with the two Kennedy brothers, to fill in the rest of the story and use it to further certain political agendas. King died short of his fortieth birthday; had he lived longer, presumably he would have evolved and, possibly, become a very different man than he was when he died–we will never know. What we do know is that the Democratic Party and their “progressive” media and education machines have rewritten the history of the civil rights struggle. This was driven home to me some years ago while visiting a college campus. The students assumed King was a Democrat, and the segregationists confronting the peaceful marchers, and using fire hoses, snarling police dogs, and truncheons, and wearing white hoods were Republicans. They assume a Republican killed King–today’s college kids probably believe the Tea Party had him killed. That the exact opposite is true, shocks many. King came from a staunchly Republican family–his father, a prominent leader in his own right–openly endorsed Richard Nixon against JFK in the 1960 presidential election. The Democrats had a one-party lock on the South. The party of slave owners and secessionists, had become the party of Jim Crow, school segregation, anti-miscegenation laws, poll taxes, and on and on.

Many Americans, not to mention foreigners, do not realize not only that the Republican party was formed in opposition to slavery and that Lincoln was a Republican, but that the famous Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, whose rulings dismantled the legal basis for segregation and put serious limitations on the power of police, was a former Republican Governor of California. It was, furthermore, war hero and Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who sent troops to Arkansas to enforce court-ordered desegregation at Little Rock Central High School. Congressional Republicans were the main supporters of civil rights legislation; their votes ensured passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, over the opposition of a significant bloc of Democrats–let us also not forget that Congressional Democrats for years blocked Republican efforts to pass federal anti-lynching legislation. All this, of course, is history, but an important chunk of American history that is being lost, distorted, or otherwise flushed down the memory sewer–along with the fact that anti-leftist J. Edgar Hoover proved the most formidable foe of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), an organization founded and staffed by Democrats, such as long-time Democratic Senator Robert Byrd.

Before I get back to King, let me address another issue that has been badly distorted and become something of a meme among the quasi-literate left. I refer to the idea that the parties have “switched places.” This is something I have heard from some lefties who, knowing the true history of the Democratic and Republican Parties when it comes to race and civil rights, try to argue that that was then, and this is now. Since FDR or so, they argue the Democratic and the Republican Parties “switched” places on the race issue, with Republicans taking the role of protecting white privilege and keeping minorities, especially blacks, down. The truth is quite different. What happened was that the old party of slavers, segregationists, lynch mobs, and secessionists figured out that government programs and intervention were the means to deprive Republicans of a significant voter bloc. The aim was to keep black Americans dependent on the largesse of government and Democrat-run urban political machines. Anyone who doubts that should read the crude comment in which President Johnson revealed the real purpose underlying his massive social program expansion, i.e., to keep black Americans voting Democratic. The Democrats have succeeded admirably at this objective.

The truth is ALWAYS “quite different” when the Democrat-Socialists are the ones telling it. This is NOT a coinkydink, I assure you. Folding, spindling, and mutilating the very language we speak is an age-old tactic of theirs, beginning with their hijacking of the term “liberal” its very self to mean the exact opposite of the original definition. Bejamin Dierker calls it “linguistic activism,” but I prefer the more direct and concise “lying” as a descriptor, myself.

This isn’t innocent linguistic drift or slang; it is a conscious effort to reshape society. The schemes include redefining words for personal gain, using modifiers to alter the meaning of a word, replacing technical words with colloquial ones, and creating new words. Each of these is a bullying tactic, which distort effective discourse.

It starts with misusing words or defining them based on circumstance rather than objective meaning. The entire purpose of defined language is to hold constant meaning so others can understand. Situational use starts to condition how people feel about words, building up a new connotation.

The classic example is the word “liberal,” which the far-left co-opted. It was adopted because of its positive connotation, and used as a cover for imposing greater leftist control under the guise of liberty. In reality, there is nothing liberal about failing to protect life, burdening individuals with regulations and taxes, or forcing individuals to provide services to others. This is no accidental misnomer, but strategic messaging to influence people. Who doesn’t want to support a policy that is “progressive,” “pro-choice,” or “affordable”?

When they use a word it means just what they choose it to mean, neither more nor less—but the meaning is always subject to change without notice. The question is, which is to be master—that’s all.

Exile for a reason

Telling the inconvenient truths.

Michele Antaki—a former UN interpreter, journalist, and translator—has written and sent me the following exclusive summary of a recent speech given in French by Ernest Tigori, an Ivorian intellectual and political activist, exiled in France, and winner of the 2017 Nelson Mandela Prize for Literature.  In his new book “L’Afrique à désintoxiquer” (“Detoxifying Africa”), he explains why it is crucial to lead Europe out of repentance for its alleged crimes in Africa, and lead Africa out of infantilization. He presented it to great acclaim at a recent patriotic forum in Paris.  Antaki’s write-up begins:

Since the 1990s, Tigori has vigorously denounced the political class ruining his country, and the general lack of prospects compelling Africans to leave their countries in droves, in search of a better future.

Regarding Europe, Tigori warns that uncontrolled migration from the South to the North shore of the Mediterranean may destabilize it beyond repair and that ethnic wars could well be looming on the horizon.

“It saddens me”, he says,” to see the white man beating his breast over and over, too emasculated to put up any resistance to people who’ve come to threaten him on his own doorstep”. He believes that a toxic mix of guilt, “human rightsism”, political naivety and crass ignorance of History have a debilitating effect on Europeans’ capacity to fight the invasion.

He accuses the corrupt African leaders of destroying the lives of hundreds of millions of human beings in all impunity, but is equally critical of the ideologues who are paving the way for them. They should stop blaming it all – slavery, the slave trade, colonialism, neocolonialism and racism – on a forever repentant Europe, who now has to carry the burden of this mass immigration to atone for its supposed sins against Africa.

Tigori explains how the History of black Africa from the 15th to the 20th centuries has intentionally been falsified in the 1940s by Stalinist strategists and their Communist followers, whose covert aim it was to tarnish the image of Western European nations, in order to drive them out of their colonial possessions and take their place. Up until now, that is 30 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the lies have stuck.

The myth the author debunks is twofold. No, Europe is not responsible for the practice of slavery in black Africa, nor is it guilty of colonial crimes. And, no, Africans did not allow themselves to be enslaved or colonized as “poor hapless victims”.

He goes on to explain how the myth of Europe’s debt towards Africa is perpetuated by certain powers that have a stake in keeping it alive. This myth, born out of Cold War Soviet anti-Western propaganda, is now serving another variety of the same agenda.

I have nothing to add except: read every word of it.

(Via WRSA)

Steyn unloads on Shampeachment

Why don’tcha just come out and tell us what you really think, Mark?

The left, being not terribly imaginative, always accuse you of what they’re doing themselves. So, in this case, President Trump is charged with interfering with the 2020 election by men who have been interfering with the 2016 and 2020 elections for over three-and-a-half years now. Which is why we have the preposterous spectacle of four Democrat presidential candidates preparing to vote to remove from office the guy they’re running against.

This is a joke. I gave up on it when, on the eve of the trial, the laughably named “Government Accountability Office” released its supposedly entirely separate conclusion that Trump had acted “illegally”. Aside from the fact that that “finding” is flat out wrong, I wonder whether the permanent bureaucracy ever thinks, “Gee, maybe we should be a little more subtle about putting our Deep State thumbs on the scale.”

But no. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? To whom is the “Accountability Office” accountable? Apparently nobody – just as with James Comey’s FBI and Rod Rosenstein’s DoJ and Lois Lerner’s IRS and all the rest. If bureaucrats want to get political, they should do what politicians do and run for office. But why bother if, simply by being a “career public servant”, you have a license to obstruct mere elected transients and their “policies”? The permanent state is one reason we have so many permanent problems.

Man, when Steyn is on, he is flat-out ON, ain’t he? Meanwhile, rising star Elise Stefanik has got herself a notion:

Representative Elise Stefanik is a member of President Trump’s defense team. In this interview the issue of the deficient articles is raised surrounding witnesses.

House witnesses who gave testimony when the articles were framed could be considered appropriate, if needed, when debating those articles in the Senate. However, witnesses not called by the House; and therefore not used in the assembly of the articles being debated in the Senate; are not valid for consideration.

It is not the responsibility of the Senate, nor is it constitutionally valid, for the Senate to attempt to rehabilitate improperly constructed articles simply because the House refused to assemble with due diligence. Any evidence, including witnesses, that falls outside the originating assembly of the two House articles should be considered null and void.

Limbaugh has a notion himself:

I really think the Republicans ought to bring Schiff in here and put him front and center and I think they ought to call him. I think they ought to make everything the Democrats are doing related to Adam Schiff. This guy needs to upheld front and center as the energy, the face behind this entire thing, because he’ll fold. Folks, he hasn’t said much that is the truth since this began.

I really think it’s critical to expose Adam Schiff in this, I think. If we’re gonna start calling witnesses (we’ll talk about that), get Schiff up there first. Everything revolves around Schiff. You are looking at human slime. I don’t like saying that. You’re just looking at a bad guy, folks. You’re looking at a really bad, poisoned guy. The guy is so partisan that he has just abandoned all pretense of decency — and he cannot tell the truth about any of this.

He’s just openly lying about things, and it’s the poison of this hatred that he’s got for Trump. Adam Schiff is typical of this radical left mentality that has taken over the Democrat Party. It is unreasonable, it is indecent, it has no boundaries of propriety. So I think the guy needs to be exposed. I think he needs to be brought front and center. He’s the guy with ties to the whistleblower, Ciaramella — who we now know has been working on this for two weeks after Trump was inaugurated.

Maybe forcing Schiff to testify under oath could explain the origins of this entire fiasco.

I’m all for it. Put the oleaginous, wormy little fuck under oath and grill his ass until those bug-eyes plop out of the sockets into his lap, and his toddler-size collar begins to constrict that pencil-neck so tightly he strangles. Sweat him old school, like a cheap dimestore hood in an LAPD hotseat circa 1947 or so. Make him squirm, wriggle, and writhe so painfully even I begin to feel pity for him. Senate Republicans could begin taking the air out of this overinflated, treacherous little blowhard by interrogating him on this:

Lead House impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) may have been an anonymous source for the Washington Post as it reported allegations that have led to the impeachment of President Donald Trump.

Schiff may have outed himself during his opening arguments in the Senate trial of the president on Wednesday, as he cited an opinion article written by the Post editorial board — an odd reference in a presentation of factual evidence.

Notably, the Sep. 5 editorial closely tracked the accusations that were contained in the so-called “whistleblower” complaint, whose claims were not yet known to the public at the time.

The Post editorial helped create an atmosphere of suspicion and anticipation that led to the complaint’s release and the impeachment itself. And on Wednesday, the Post editorial conveniently provided a “fact” — a “reliably told” story — that Schiff could cite in his case for Trump’s removal.

But Schiff did not explain why he would treat an opinion article as “fact.” Editorials are not typically reliable sources of original reporting.

The most logical explanation is that Schiff considered the article “factual” because he himself was the source.

Having been caught in an ever-widening death-spiral of lie after lie after lie this early in the festivities, Schiff-for-brains and his Klown Kar Koup co-conspirators haven’t thought this through very well, it would seem. The stiffest possible price must be exacted from them, pour encourager les autres, lest the filthy swine take another run at their perfidy someday.

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) and...you won't. Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

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

"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

"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton

"The only way to live free is to live unobserved." - Etienne de la Boiete

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

"There is no better way to stamp your power on people than through the dead hand of bureaucracy. You cannot reason with paperwork." - David Black, from Turn Left For Gibraltar

"The limits of tyranny are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." - Frederick Douglass

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

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.” - Ronald Reagan

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

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

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

Shameless begging

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:

Best of the best

Fuck you

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Rss feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

Contact


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 © 2020