GIVE TIL IT HURTS!

The trouble with teachers

“Chalkboard Heresy” for sure, he’s blaspheming against the Left’s Bull God.


If you don’t want to bother with the annoying “Read more” click-generator, which I cordially despise myself, here’s the full text:

One thing I’ve realized after working with teachers for 12 years is that it’s very hard to get them to commit to political or ideological neutrality in the classroom because:

A. They view teaching as an inherently political act intended to turn students into political units (activists/“change agents.”)

B. They attach moral value to their beliefs, and thus view the proliferation of those beliefs as a moral obligation.

C. They do not recognize particular beliefs as political or ideological, and believe they’re “just teaching truth.”

D. When trying to be balanced, requiring students to compare two sources or opinions, they engineer- purposefully or unwittingly- the lesson to bring students to certain conclusions.

He’s right, right down the line. It’s always the way with shitlibs; they truly, sincerely cannot fathom how any intelligent, decent, well-intentioned person could possibly disagree with their noxious, proto-fascist views except out of pure, black-hearted evil. They are right, you are wrong, and that’s the end of it. There really is no point in trying to reason with them, or even talk to them at all; their belief in their own righteousness is rock-solid, and there’s nothing more to discuss. They aren’t interested, therefore aren’t listening anyway. They cannot be persuaded, they can be neither bargained with nor wheedled; they perceive no need whatever to reconsider or even re-examine their own opinions. Put in the simplest terms possible, they cannot see, and have no desire to.

In effect, shitlibs are, as the priests used to caution, “obstinate in sin.” So to Hell with them, then. When you persist in attempting to debate fairly and factually with them, all you’re really doing is teaching a pig to sing. Unfortunately, we all already know what that fool’s errand will get ya ere the end.

Via Stephen, who adds:

Plus this: “This is so contrary to the teachers I grew up with in the 70’s and 80’s. I didn’t even know if most of them were married, let alone their political persuasion. There were always 1 or 2 more “radical” teachers who didn’t hide their politics, but they were rare.”

I’ve joked for years that I knew so little about my teachers’ lives outside of school that, for all we knew, they blinked in and out of existence when the morning and end-of-school bells rang.

Not so much with my teachers; nearly all of them went to our church, knew my entire family well, and were considered good friends. Several had even taught my dad when he was but a wee bairn, and remembered him fondly. Looking back, it’s another benefit of growing up in a small, close-knit town.

As for knowing your teacher’s marital status, that was simplicity itself: the ones who went by “Mrs” were married, the ones who were “Miss,” as was my young, attractive 3rd grade teacher Miss Fitzgerald, weren’t. The negligible fraction of “Mr’s” among the faculty…well, frankly, who cares? I didn’t have a single male teacher until Junior High, now renamed “Middle School,” to prevent the lasting psychological damage inflicted upon fragile young minds by the hateful insult implicit in the word “Junior,” I reckon.

Naturally, the shitlibs had to get busy doing away with the Mrs/Miss linguistic convenience as quick as they could. “Disrespectful,” “derogatory,” “injurious” and/or “offensive,” an archaic remnant of the Patriarchal edifice of Systemic Misogynist Opression and Enslavement, holding the Sisterhood entire back from being all they could and should be, don’tchaknow. Thank God Gaia we’ve “evolved” beyond that particular hideous atrocity, at least.

3
2

You can almost hear him choking on the words

How bad must it suck to be a “liberal” and continually be having to write these “Sorry, I’m an idiot, I got it all ass-backwards and wrong, mea maxima culpa” essays after reality has curb-stomped your stupid, stubborn, self-righteous ass yet again? No wonder they’re all so goddamned miserable, and absolutely determined to make sure everyone else is miserable right along with ‘em.

Why so many of us were wrong about missile defense
Writing about military spending is difficult.

No shit, Dick Tracy, where’s the fuckin’ squad car? Funny, innit, how that wasn’t your attitude AT ALL back when you were sanctimoniously ridiculing Reagan’s proposal supporting research into ground-based and aerial anti-missile defense systems as “Star Wars,” insisting the very idea was preposterous, impossible, and just downright insane.

A couple of days ago, Iran launched a major attack against Israel, in retaliation for Israel killing one of Iran’s military commanders. The attack included about 170 drones, 120 ballistic missiles, and 30 cruise missiles. But something pretty incredible happened — almost all of the drones and missiles were shot down before they could hit Israel, by a combination of Israeli, U.S., Jordanian, French, British, and possibly Saudi forces. Only a few ballistic missiles made it through, wounding one Arab Israeli girl severely and causing minor injuries to a few other people.

My thoughts on the geopolitics of this attack are going to be pretty familiar — the Middle East conflict is a distraction from far more important matters in East Asia, and we should keep our role to a minimum. The Gaza war has not fundamentally altered the balance of power in the Middle East; Israel and the Sunni powers are unofficial and uneasy partners against Iran and its proxies. Both sides are pretty brutal, and neither looks likely to dominate the other. U.S. resources and attention are far better spent elsewhere.

With that out of the way, I think the really interesting part of this story is that almost everything the Iranians threw at Israel was intercepted. Drones are slow-moving and easy to shoot down, but ballistic missiles are fast-moving and generally very hard to hit. Yet Israel’s Arrow system, jointly developed with the U.S., had little trouble knocking most of Iran’s ballistic missiles out of the sky — with some interceptions even occurring outside of Earth’s atmosphere.

That’s pretty interesting, because for most of my adult life, I believed that ballistic missile defense was a hopeless, failed cause. From the 2000s all the way through the 2010s, I read lots of op-eds about how kinetic interceptors — “hitting a bullet with a bullet” were just an unworkably difficult technology, and how the U.S. shouldn’t waste our time and money on developing this sort of system. For example, all the way back in 2006, Matt Yglesias — among my favorite bloggers, both then and now — wrote the following:

No excerpt, because fuck that noise. What we have here is yet another reliably-wrong shitlib idiot flapping his yap as if he knew a single damned thing about what he’s lecturing his intellectual betters about. SO…onwards.

In short, Matt and the many other critics of missile defense were right that missile defense will probably not provide us with an invincible anti-nuclear umbrella anytime soon.

Which nobody ever once suggested it might, you disingenuous fool.

But they were wrong about much else (as Matt has since acknowledged).

Gee, what a guy! Such COURAGE!™ Such STUNNING, such BRAVE! Why, the man’s literally a HERO!!!

The purpose of this post isn’t to dunk on Matt or any of the other critics — after all, I also believed missile defense didn’t work. But the way in which critics got this issue wrong illustrates why it’s difficult to get good information about military technology — and therefore why it’s hard for the public to make smart, well-informed choices about defense spending.

One big reason critics got missile defense wrong was that they didn’t understand the technological advances that were making it possible to “hit a bullet with a bullet”. No, the basics of rocketry and aerodynamics haven’t changed much in recent years. But the key to hitting a bullet with a bullet isn’t building a faster or more maneuverable rocket — it’s figuring out where the target is going to be. Advances in detection technology — better sensors, and especially better software to process the signals from sensors — have made it a lot easier to observe a missile’s trajectory to a high degree of precision. Therefore it has become more feasible to predict exactly where it’s going to go, so you can get an interceptor there first.

In other words, you didn’t even know what you didn’t know. How perfectly typical.

Why didn’t critics realize the central importance of detection software, and how fast it was improving? Well, because they’re not experts in the field. This isn’t a knock against them, or a demand that they “stay in their lane” — if you’re a writer who writes about politics and policy and budget priorities, you pretty much have to have an opinion on defense spending, because it’s a big and important part of the budget. No writer can be an expert on everything (except Brian Potter, but he’s one of a kind). So instead, as a writer, you go looking for domain experts to explain things to you, or at least point you to some good reading material so you can teach yourself the basics.

Would that it were so. No, what you and your insufferable “journalist” ilk always and forever do instead is simply assume a mantle of expertise your knowledge and experience can in no wise support, scold your political opponents as if they were semi-retarded puppies who have just piddled on the rug again, declare another “victory,” and then move on to the next topic you know precisely jack and shit about. Lather, rinse, repeat, ad infinitum ad nauseum.

Then, decades hence, after the raucous accolades from your equally pig-ignorant celebrity admirers have finally died away, the microscopically tiny handful of you possessed of even a wafer-thin scrim of honesty and integrity get to write another non-apology-apology like the above.

And that’s about it for me, I refuse to subject myself to another syllable of this self-serving twaddle. Those of you who wish to peruse the rest of the author’s rotgut self-justification, lame explication, and blame-shifting blather are perfectly free to do so, although I recommend against it.

2
1

Digging a hole, digging a hole, digging a hole

Too, too funny.

After Being Completely Exposed by Its Own Editor, NPR Responds in the Worst Possible Fashion
On Tuesday, a 25-year veteran of NPR who still serves as an editor at the outlet thoroughly exposed the left-wing network’s bias and its attempt to quash stories inconvenient to the Democratic Party. In a self-written article, Uri Berliner laid out multiple examples of how NPR has heavily skewed its news coverage while allowing essentially no viewpoint diversity in the newsroom.

Some examples Berliner gave included the “news” organization’s coverage of the COVID-19 origins, the Russian collusion hoax involving Donald Trump, and the Hunter Biden laptop story.

No worries, though. I’m happy to inform you that NPR has told NPR that NPR is doing just fine. That includes a doubling down on the DEI regiment that has led the network to reduced viewership and a cratering of its credibility.

NPR’s chief news executive, Edith Chapin, wrote in a memo to staff Tuesday afternoon that she and the news leadership team strongly reject Berliner’s assessment. 

“We’re proud to stand behind the exceptional work that our desks and shows do to cover a wide range of challenging stories,” she wrote. “We believe that inclusion — among our staff, with our sourcing, and in our overall coverage — is critical to telling the nuanced stories of this country and our world.”

Without realizing it, Chapin has just admitted the primary problem with forcing “inclusion” by way of racially-based diversity quotas. Doing so does not lead to an increased range of viewpoints. Instead, because DEI is exclusively a left-wing pursuit, it leads to an overabundance of the same viewpoints in the newsroom. Far from being “critical to telling the nuanced stories of this country and our world,” it has led to NPR having no nuance in its reporting, instead parroting whatever its far-left staffers agree on.

The NPR article responding to Berliner goes on to miss the point yet again by bragging about how four out of 10 staffers are “people of color.”

In recent years, NPR has greatly enhanced the percentage of people of color in its workforce and its executive ranks. Four out of 10 staffers are people of color; nearly half of NPR’s leadership team identifies as Black, Asian or Latino.

It’s like talking to a wall. They just can’t grasp how stocking the newsroom with DEI hires instead of hires based on actual viewpoint diversity could possibly lead to the outcome Berliner exposed in his piece.

It’s LIKE talking to a wall because it IS talking to a wall; shitlibs never listen, they only ever double down, again and again and again, no matter what. It’s all they know to do, almost as if “smug,” “stubborn,” and “irrational” were hard-coded in their DNA or something. Because hey, they’re smarterer than you stupid troglodytes, see. If you don’t believe it, just ask ’em, they’ll tell ya…at excruciating length, they will.

2
1

From machine to bureaucracy: the hotrails to Hell

Riding at breakneck speed.

On the windowsill above the gas fire sits a surprisingly heavy square box. Its back is dirty, thick plastic; its battered and much-dented front is metallic, with rows of tiny ridges and microscopic holes creating a nubby texture if you run your hand across it. A leather strap is buckled into the top for ease of carry, in front of a retractable metal antenna. When the antenna is fully outstretched above the squat rectangle, it looks comical. In the top third of the box’s face, a vertical orange needle moves across the rows of numbers denoting frequency scales. You move the needle with a metal knob. There are four knobs in total, and a switch, and a few helpful legends: am/fm, volume, and, in neat, raised letters, general electric.

This is the family radio. It is at least fifty years old. My mother remembers her family listening to it after dinner; I remember sitting on the porch, hearing the Phillies playing in the background, summer after summer. The other night we turned it on again to catch the first game of the National League Championship Series. A few of the technologically savvy younger generation were home, and at first we tried to get the game on the big-screen Internet-enabled TV. Something was wrong with the pirating site, which is a tough situation for appropriately-directed complaint filing. You could get the game on the MLB app, but the app wants to know your cable provider, which precise lack was the reason we were on the app. Hulu was streaming it, apparently. We tried to sign up for a free trial that we could cancel before they’d get around to billing us. (This is not taking advantage of the free option, because we would have forgotten to cancel; if anything, Hulu is taking advantage of our rosy-eyed good intentions.) Of course it turned out that everyone had already at some point or other created a now-lapsed account; we would have to pay. No problem. We’re big like that. One of us tried to log in. None of us remembered our passwords. The message on the screen directed us to visit some variant of hulu.com/forgotpassword/idiot. We weren’t messing around with that. By now we were fifteen minutes past the start of the game.

Radio it would have to be. But at least we had our Internet-enabled big-screen TV speakers. We would listen to Internet radio and pipe the game through the whole downstairs. What was the name of the Philly station? How did the search function work? How long could painstakingly scrolling to and clicking on each requisite alphanumeric character with the touch-sensitive Apple remote possibly take? The answer to none of these questions mattered because, as it turned out, three increasingly incredulous searches later, Internet radio had never heard of our local broadcast station.

We pulled the long spindly antenna all the way up. We flicked the switch to FM. We twisted the volume knob as far as it would go. The warm familiar crackle — then Kyle Schwarber was in our living room, hitting a home run.

I cannot think of a single piece of personal technology that I expect to be able to give to my grandchildren in working order. Some cars fit this bill, because there is an expectation and infrastructure of ongoing repairs. But in terms of smaller items? Apple, to give the devil his due, is probably the closest. I ran my iPhone over with a car last year; a quick trip to the electronic repair store and it may last me ten years, if Apple does not sabotage me with operating systems updates or charger modifications. But there’s nothing like the GE radio, nothing that I can expect to use, day in and day out, for fifty years, without touching it.

Things used to work in this country. This is the stock complaint of the Baby Boomers, and if you are lucky enough to inherit a piece of their technology, you may find yourself agreeing. But when I say “things used to work,” the object of inherited nostalgia is not only manufacturing standards before planned obsolescence and offshoring. Things used to, literally, work. You turned a knob, and sound came on, because the knob controlled the mechanism that tuned the radio to the broadcast that the big metal radio towers dotting the landscape beamed at you. I am not a gearhead of any description and don’t care much about how the insides of electrical devices work, but I know exactly what I, personally, have to do to operate my end of the GE radio. There are no downloads, no platforms, no passwords, no little pull-down menus, no verifications or account recovery protocols. There is no streaming. Personal technology used to be a machine. Now it’s a bureaucracy.

Call her incompetent, call her a neo-Luddite, call her what you will, but there’s no denying she does have a point. For every technological advancement, there is something lost along with it, sweeping away at least some things probably worth keeping. Is the benefit worth the accompanying cost? In general terms I’d have to say yes, but I also have to wonder sometimes.

In certain quarters the current vogue is to bitch to high Heaven about modern smartphones, with some folks going so far as to foreswear their use altogether—a reflexive, pettifogging abhorrence usually announced with a braggadocious sneer, as if the speaker was extremely proud of his self-denial, iron-willed fortitude, and clear superiority over lesser mortals. It reminds me of my dad’s strenuous denunciation of VHS machines as instruments of Satan Himself back in the late 70s.

Me, I wouldn’t give up my smartphone for all the tea in China. No, my continued existence doesn’t depend on the thing by any stretch, nor does my life revolve around it. But life for me has for sure been enhanced by it.

I’ve taken what steps I know about to shut off its pocket-spy capabilities, although living as we do under the constant, sleepless gaze of the Surveillance State panopticon—its cameras peering down at us from every lamppost, building, and street sign 24/7/365—it’s doubtful at best how much that really amounts to. In that light, smartphones look like pretty small beer.

Taken for all in all, our phones ratting us out to Big Uncle is a fairly trivial issue in my estimation, scarcely worth any serious person getting his bloomers in a bunch over. Drag Queen Story Hour; the “transgender” intifada; nonexistent borders facilitating an invasion of hostile illegal aliens; economic collapse; worthless fiat currency; a central-government behemoth that has openly declared itself the enemy of We Duh Peepul—it ain’t as if we lack for more pressing and far worse concerns to cope with at the moment, after all.

5
1

Continuing education

Important Stuffz For Gals To Know 101.

A New Year – A New You
I post this only as a public service. We here at DMF have always prided ourselves with unceasing efforts to help create a well informed citizenry, as with our ongoing Public Service Educational Crash Course Series. This was sent to me by one of our smart-ass loyal readers, whom I have a strong suspicion is divorced………or soon will be.

MEN TEACHING CLASSES FOR WOMEN AT THE ADULT LEARNING CENTER 
REGISTRATION MUST BE COMPLETED By FEBRUARY 13, 2024

NOTE: DUE TO THE COMPLEXITY AND DIFFICULTY LEVEL OF THEIR CONTENTS, CLASS SIZES WILL BE LIMITED TO 8 PARTICIPANTS MAXIMUM.

Class 1: Up in Winter, Down in Summer – How to Adjust a Thermostat Step by Step, with Slide Presentation. Meets 2 weeks, Monday and Wednesday for 2 hrs. beginning at 7:00 PM.

Class 2: Which Takes More Energy – Putting the Toilet Seat Down, or Bitching About It for 3 Hours? Round Table Discussion. Meets 2 weeks, Saturday 12:00 PM for 2 hours.

Class 3: Is It Possible To Drive Past a Wal-Mart Without Stopping?–Group Debate. Meets 4 weeks, Saturday 10:00 AM for 2 hours.

Class 4: Fundamental Differences Between a Purse and a Suitcase–Pictures and Explanatory Graphics. Meets Saturdays at 2:00 PM for 3 weeks.

Class 5: Curling Irons–Can They Levitate and Fly Into The Bathroom Cabinet? Examples on Video. Meets 2 weeks, Tuesday and Thursday for 2 hours beginning at 7:00 PM

Class 6: How to Ask Questions During Commercials and Be Quiet During the Program Help Line Support and Support Groups. Meets 4 Weeks, Friday and Sunday 7:00 PM

Class 7: Can a Bath Be Taken Without 14 Different Kinds of Soaps and Shampoos? Open Forum .. Monday at 8:00 PM, 2 hours.

More yet at the link, all of it equally hilarious—if not more so, especially nos. 8, 10, and 12.

2
2

Just a guy in a lawnchair with a pen and a notebook

Is the evolution of the Surveillance State more or less a naturally-occurring phenomenon, or is it an insidious encroachment being intentionally foisted on us as part of a long-range plan hatched by shadowy FederalGovCo malefactors? Is there any realistic way to slow, halt, or reverse its growth, or to do away with it altogether once it’s fully implemented? Interesting questions, and with every passing day, more urgent ones.

When you think about what our emerging surveillance state will look like, you think 1984. You imagine East Germany powered by Google and Amazon. You recall your favorite dystopian sci-fi film – or maybe horror stories of China’s social credit system. Thoughts of a frustrated middle-aged police chief from a mid-sized Midwestern town attempting to procure security cameras with innovative new features probably don’t come to mind. You definitely don’t think of a guy in a lawn chair jotting down the license plate numbers of passing vehicles in a notebook. And that’s partly how the surveillance state is going to emerge as it creeps its way into one small town at a time.

Whether a surveillance state is the end goal is hard to say. The police chief of Pawnee, Indiana probably isn’t plotting the development of his own mini-Oceania. But, 18,000-plus mini-Oceanias operating across multiple platforms with varying degrees of integration, both locally and nationally, is undoubtedly the direction in which we are heading as salespeople peddle shiny new surveillance gadgets to cities big and small, making often unverified but intuitively appealing claims of how their devices will decrease crime or prove to be useful investigative tools.

Automatic license plate readers, or ALPRs, can be used to log a person’s movements through the license plates of their vehicles. Given the exponential increase in their use over the past few years and the ease with which data from the cameras of some vendors are integrated, they also pose a threat to privacy on par with facial recognition and cell site simulators.

Often positioned on street lights, traffic lights, independent structures, or police vehicles, ALPRs are a type of camera that captures the license plate and other identifying information of passing vehicles before comparing the information in real time to “hot lists” of vehicles actively being sought by law enforcement and transmitting the information to a searchable database. ALPRs sold by some companies are even said to be able to assess a car’s driving patterns to determine whether the person behind the wheel is “driving like a criminal.” 

You have nothing to worry about, you’re told. The town down the road brought them in six months back. Chief Jones over there said they helped solve that murder from the news. And, by the way, they’re not really that much different from a concerned citizen just keeping an eye on things. 

At the town hall in Urbana, for example, then-police chief, Bryant Seraphin, worked to dismiss the notion that ALPRs actually pose a threat to privacy or even constitute a surveillance tool. 

Repeatedly, he emphasized that ALPRs do not capture any information about the person driving a car or automatically link to information about the person to whom a vehicle is registered. Their ubiquity in the area was accentuated. Supposed success stories were shared.

To allay any remaining notion that there might be something scary about ALPRs, Seraphin described them with a folksy metaphor: “One of the things that I’ve talked about with these things is that if you pictured somebody sitting in a lawn chair writing down every plate that went by, the date, and the time when they wrote ‘red Toyota ABC123’, and then they would make a phone call and check the databases and then hang up and then go on to the next one – that’s what [an ALPR] does automatically and it can do it over and over again…with incredible speed.”

Yet, when Anita Chan, the director of the University of Illinois Community Data Clinic, proceeded to raise concerns regarding “the potential violation of civil liberties” and how a license plate alone is sufficient for the police to not just find out “where you live and where you work but also…who potentially your friends are, what religious affiliation you might have, essentially where you get medical services…[and] suss out essentially who’s traveling and where,” Seraphin acknowledged all this is possible. However, he assured her with a frustrated chuckle, ALPRs simply provide a notebook that would only be referenced when investigating serious crimes.

By the same logic, facial recognition simply provides a notebook as well. As do cell site simulators. As do any surveillance device. Yet, there is a fundamental question of whether such a notebook should exist. Does the chief of police in Urbana or the sheriff in Pawnee need a notebook containing your approximate location three Thursdays ago at 8:15pm, as well as a record of who attended last week’s political rally, in order to solve a murder? Should he be allowed to keep such a notebook if it might help solve an extra murder in his town each year? If the answer is yes, then what are the limits to the tools he and his department should be afforded?

Furthermore, there is also something a little off about the disarming metaphor of a guy who spends his days sitting around in a lawn chair jotting down the license plate numbers of passing vehicles. Something a little insidious. Something that perhaps Anita Chan was picking up on.

Although they’re not mentioned in the article, it brings to mind the strident denunciations of smartphones, social media, and even the internet itself currently prevalent among many on Our Side of the political aisle, all of which devices are apparently tools of the Devil Himself: a spy in your pocket or on your desk, devouring your liberty and eliminating your personal privacy and security whether you foolish, unwitting Sheeples realize it or not.

This is an old, old debate, going back at least to the early days of television itself if not even farther. While I am certainly not one to dismiss legitimate concerns of broad Snooperstate infringement on the citizenry’s right to privacy and essential liberty, to me it seems that what we’re witnessing is an inevitable byproduct of the ongoing march of technological advancement and innovation.

What we have here might be thought of as a clock that cannot be turned back to the semi-mythical Golden Days of yore, which exist now only in our collective cultural memory. T’was ever thus, I think; as wondrous new technologies become available and affordable—therefore ubiquitous, eventually—the convenience, assistance, and entertainment they provide are also accompanied by some less salutary and desirable secondary aspects as well. To imagine nefarious, skulking Bad Actors might not exploit those secondary aspects to the fullest possible extent is nothing but a fool’s hope. Such a fantasy ignores the very nature of government itself, even after the Founders explicitly forewarned us in their Declaration, Constitution, and Federalist Papers.

That being so, the remedy ought to be damned obvious to every right-thinking American: we do not ban the devices and technologies, thereby denying ourselves the myriad positive aspects they bring to the world. Instead, the right way to go about it is to keep the Bad Actors firmly and securely leashed, and severely punish any of them who dares to exceed his proper Constitutional remit at the very first hint he’s even considering such a thing.

Don’t like being surveilled, tracked, and/or put into a database by your smartphone? Don’t blame the smartphone, then; blame the assholes who use it not for its original intended purpose, but as a spy’s tool and a dictator’s security blanket. THEY’RE the problem, not technological progress and the near-magical, undreamed-of devices that enhance life for Normals. Blame the warped assholes and their villainous schemes, and make sure they pay a high price for their perverse authoritarian impulses—each and every time, always and forever, no exceptions. As the Founders knew, it really is the only way.

(Via WRSA)

1
1

TRUMP WINS!!!

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

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

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

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

It won’t be.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pursuing, wielding, using, abusing…and, ultimately, losing

Power abhors a vacuum.

Joe Biden certainly knows how to wield his ‘power’ — to transform the country for the worse

Or his behind-the-scenes puppeteer, one Bathhouse Barry Soetero, does, more like.

Joe Biden let slip a telling boast after his latest Dark Brandon speech.

“I understand power,” he whispered into the microphone as the first lady wrangled him off stage to stop him impersonating a Roomba.

While ostensibly a self-deprecating cliché about wives’ control over men, “I understand power” also was a statement of unwavering confidence in his own mastery of today’s political landscape.

It’s hard to admit, given Biden’s manifest frailties and incompetence, but he’s right.

The president does know how to use power to transform the country.

From all available evidence, the so-called pRetend ***”pResident”*** doesn’t even know what year it is anymore. Nor who he is, who he’s speaking with, where he is at any given time, or what his minders brought him there for. Not that Pedo Peter ever was what any sentient soul would call the sharpest knife in the drawer, mind, even on his very best day.

What did Donald Trump achieve of any lasting value in the four years he had power? Clearly, he was a better president on every important measure: the economy, the border, foreign affairs, energy policy.

But every achievement of Trump’s was undone on day one by Biden, and many of his aspirations were foiled by Biden’s Deep State allies.

Power is all Biden has ever cared about. In his dismal first speech of the election season near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, on Friday, Biden used the word 13 times. He said “insurrection” or “insurrectionists” 11 times, because that is how he intends to hang on to power, by fashioning his entire campaign pitch around Jan. 6 and Trump’s threat to “democracy.”

Biden’s dishonest depiction of the Capitol riot as something far worse than it really was is out of kilter with the way 73% of Americans in a weekend CBS poll see it, as a “protest that went too far.”

But it’s no coincidence that his speech coincided with strategic leaks from special counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 probe, which cast Trump as inciter-in-chief, exactly the question that has been dumped in the lap of the Supreme Court by puerile Biden proxies in Colorado and Maine, as 32 other states similarly consider removing Trump from the ballot on “insurrectionist” grounds.

Yet not one person of the 1,200 charged over the Capitol riot has been charged with insurrection.

And how could they be, prithee tell? What with the batch of unexpurgated J6 tapes having finally—FINALLY—been released into the wild after years kept tightly under wraps, it’s plain to the meanest intelligence that there WAS NO insurrection, not even remotely close to anything like one. Ah, but now we come to the tally of obfuscatory shitlib word-wrangling.

“Democracy” came up 30 times in Biden’s speech, too. Apparently it’s “on the ballot.”

“The alternative to democracy is dictatorship,” he thundered.

It’s a bizarre statement for the president of a nation that was founded deliberately, not as a democracy, but as a constitutional republic, precisely to avoid the “tyranny of the majority,” which James Madison warned about.

That’s why we have an Electoral College, and not a presidential election determined by popular vote, where New York would overrule Iowa.

Biden’s pursuit of power at any cost is behind his insidious new eulogies to “democracy.”

Similarly, he has dropped the word “unity,” which he invoked no fewer than 11 times in his inaugural address back in 2021.

The divider-in-chief has given up even pretending he meant it.

Which indicates, as I’ve long insisted, that far from being “terrified” or “afraid” of us as so many erroneously proclaim, they are instead contemptuous of us—that they now believe their grip on absolute power to be so secure, so unchallengable, that they no longer perceive any necessity to keep the iron fist carefully concealed beneath the proverbial velvet glove.

As time marches ever on, though, this assumption will eventually be proven incorrect. History tells us that every would-be dictator carries deep within himself the seed of his own undoing, whether it be arrogance, greed, recklessness, or some other unlovely hobgoblin of his little mind. It’s an old, old story, going at least as far back as Hubris and Nemesis if not farther still, and it will be no different with our current crop of (mis)rulers.

2
1

A sordid history

Steyn reviews his op-editorializing on the J6 put-up job—of which there’s a gracious plenty, all up to the usual Steyn standard of excellence.

Re Rubio: well, the scene was still unfolding, and you’d have to be made of sterner stuff than a Republican senator not to get swept up in all the shameful-desecration-of-the-world’s-greatest-deliberative-body wankery. But what was Ted Cruz’s excuse when he denounced it, one year later, as a “violent terrorist attack”? Has he ever given a plausible explanation for that? “Oh, sorry, I forgot I was making a public statement. I thought I was just shooting the breeze in the Capitol hot tub with Chuck and Nancy”?

“Violent terrorist attack”? I thought that was Speaker Pelosi’s talking point. Say what you will, but the Dems play the long game very effectively. As opposed to the GOP, who don’t play it at all. Whoever’s waggling the dead husk of a moth-eaten sock-puppet that is Joe Biden planted the word “insurrection” within twenty minutes of the smoke clearing knowing full well its constitutional significance—and here we are three years later with judges and state officials using the term to ban the leading candidate from the ballot in the interests of “saving democracy”. The Maine Secretary of State’s statement is particularly instructive in this regard.

Meanwhile, in Nevada this career thug trying to kill his judge gets more lenient treatment than gran’mas with no criminal records who wandered around “the people’s house” for half-an-hour:

That last bit refers to the Jungle Bunny HoF’er mentioned here yesterday. Next up, another appalling horror-news item I’d nearly forgotten about.

Re that bit about the Capitol Police, the name of that woeful constabulary rang a vague bell with me, and I eventually recalled the last time I’d written about their shooting of a young woman, seven years earlier. Please read on to what I regard as the most repulsive aspect of this story: Congress’s standing ovation for the Capitol Police’s dispatch of that poor defenseless mom. You can read the full column here, but this is the pertinent part:

An unarmed woman was gunned down on the streets of Washington for no apparent crime other than driving too near Barackingham Palace and thereby posing a threat to national security. As disturbing as Miriam Carey’s bullet-riddled body and vehicle were, the public indifference to it is even worse. Ms Carey does not appear to be guilty of any act other than a panic attack when the heavy-handed and heavier-armed palace guard began yelling at her. Much of what was reported in the hours after her death seems dubious: We are told Ms Carey was ‘mentally ill’, although she had no medications in her vehicle and those at her home back in Connecticut are sufficiently routine as to put millions of other Americans in the category of legitimate target. We are assured that she suffered from post-partum depression, as if the inability to distinguish between a depressed mom and a suicide bomber testifies to the officers’ professionalism. Under DC police rules, cops are not permitted to fire on a moving vehicle, because of the risk to pedestrians and other drivers. But the Secret Service and the Capitol Police enjoy no such restraints, so the car doors are full of bullet holes. The final moments of the encounter remain a mystery, but police were supposedly able to extract Ms Carey’s baby from the back of a two-door vehicle before dispatching the defenseless mother to meet her maker.

In perhaps the most repugnant reaction to Ms Carey’s death, the United States Congress expressed their ‘gratitude’ to the officers who killed her and gave them a standing ovation. Back in the Eighties, the Queen woke up to find a confused young man at the end of her bed. She talked to him calmly until help arrived and he was led away. A few years later, Her Majesty’s Canadian Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien, was confronted by an aggrieved protester. As is his wont, he dealt with it somewhat more forcefully than his sovereign, throttling the guy, forcing him to the ground, and breaking his tooth, until the Mounties arrived to rescue the assailant from the PM. But, had the London and Ottawa intruders been gunned down by SWAT teams, I cannot imagine for a moment either the British or Canadian Parliament rising to applaud such an outcome. This was a repulsive act by Congress.

Miriam Carey is already forgotten, and the lawyer her family hired has now, conveniently, been jailed for a bad debt. I am not one for cheap historical analogies: My mother spent four of her childhood years under Nazi occupation, and it is insulting to her and millions of others who know the real thing to bandy overheated comparisons. But there is a despotic trend in American government. Too many of our rulers and their enforcers reflexively see the citizenry primarily as a threat. Which is why in Congress the so-called people’s representatives’ first instinct is to stand and cheer the death of a defenseless woman.

Ted Cruz’s anniversary remarks were very much in the spirit of that 2013 Congress. On the broader point, that “despotic trend” I noted a decade ago is well advanced now. I don’t do the constitutional-fetishisation shtick because, aside from anything else, from Miriam Carey to Ashli Babbitt, from Covid to ballot access, it’s increasingly clear that in the pseudo-republic citizens don’t count. Hence the daily scenes at the Rio Grande. Ultimately, open borders render citizenship a nullity. That’s one reason they do it to you.

Hm, lemmesee now:

  • State-sanctioned murder of its subjects
  • Applause for said murder from its well-insulated, invulnerable political class
  • Fraudulent national “elections”
  • Manifestly authoritarian lockdowns, Vaxx and mask mandates, and other unlawful edicts wholly incompatable with the concept of self-government, ordered liberty, and the rule of law
  • Leading opposition candidates barred from running for office via “legal” harrassment, smear and innuendo, and direct declarations of ineligibility issued by state-level officials with no authority to do such
  • A federal intelligence agency in flagrant violation of its own founding charter, which expressly restricts it to foreign surveillance and intel-gathering operations only
  • A heavily-politicized federal police force deployed against the ruling party’s civilian opponents absent indictment, due process of law, or credible evidence of criminal offense
  • An elephantine, lawless, prodigiously-rapacious central government gone rogue: untouchable, unstoppable, and entirely out of control, checked by neither meaningful oversight, periodic impartial review, nor accountability to its tax-slave populace

A credulity-straining litany of shocking malfeasance, shamelessness, and illegitimacy, and we’ve still barely skimmed the surface. SO: anybody out there want to try explaining to me in what sense Amerika v2.0 is NOT a dismal, banana-republic-style shitrapy? Because from where I sit, this one sets a new all-time record for shitrapy-ness.

3
1
1

An “open air prison”

It’s not that the Paleosimians in Gaza are angry about being “mistreated” by the Israelis; they’re angry that Israel—and ((((JooJooJooJOOOOOOOZ!!!)))) generally—exists at all.


Yep, pre-Oct 7 Gaza sure looked like Hell on earth for those poor suffering Paleosimians, didn’t it? After being treated as inhumanely as that—forced by the Israelis (who, by the way, control absolutely everything and everyone in the entire world) to live in such extreme squalor and deprivation as seen above—no WONDER they’re so implacably pissed off. What rational, reasonable human being yearning only to breathe free and be left alone to live their lives in peace WOULDN’T be?

But hey, you know ((((DemPeskyJOOOOOZ!!!))) and their never-ending propaganda trickery. The above footage was probably shot in Milan or Nice or Martinique, and the IDF just P-shopped in the Arabic-language signage on the storefronts and whatnot to fool everybody. JOOJOOJOOJOOOOOOOO!!! Plus, they all have big noses, wear funny hats, are greedy as hell, and sound like a throat-cancer victim trying to hock up the world’s worst phlegm-ball when they talk in that fucked-up Yid language of theirs, the rat-bastards. Right, Jew-haters?

And those JOOOOOO women, they’re just the WORST, right? Compare, contrast:

Yep, looks like a no-brainer to me all right. Then again, I’ve obviously been deceived by the International JOOOOO Conspiracy©, so never mind, I guess.

3
1
1

Yeah, NO

Old soldiers may never die, but some of them ought at least to have the decency to just fade away.

Petraeus says Israel should try U.S.-style counterinsurgency in Gaza
CARLISLE, Pa. – Retired Army Gen. David Petraeus, who led a surge of U.S. troops and shifted Iraqi militia alliances to help turn the tide of the Iraq War, now says a similar, counterinsurgency-based approach could work for the Israel-Hamas conflict.

The former CIA director, who was later tasked with stabilizing the Afghanistan War, spoke on Nov. 30 at the U.S. Army Heritage and Education Center near the home of the Army War College at Carlisle Barracks, following the October release of the book “Conflict: The Evolution of Warfare from 1945 to Ukraine,” which he co-authored with military historian Andrew Roberts.

Shifting his attention to the current Israel-Hamas War, Petraeus said the “big idea” Israel has landed on is destroying Hamas. But how that happens and what comes next remain unresolved.

Petraeus, who said he has ongoing discussions with interlocutors in the Middle East, claimed that Israel has determined Hamas is the equivalent of the Islamic State, meaning it is an irreconcilable, extremist organization.

“You have to, therefore, destroy them,” Petraeus said. Israel cannot allow Hamas to reconstitute as a militant group and it also must dismantle the group’s political wing, he argued, adding that military force alone won’t accomplish that goal.

“But there are some big ideas missing,” Petraeus said. “You can’t kill or capture your way out of an industrial strength insurgency.” The Hamas challenge echoes what U.S. forces faced in Iraq and Israel should take a similar approach, he said.

“The campaign should be a counterinsurgency campaign,” Petraeus said. “Don’t clear and go on. Clear, hold and build.”

Oh goody, more nation-building! That’s always worked out SO well, every time it’s been tried. Well, the exceptions being Germany and Japan post-WW2, I suppose. But then neither of those two nations bears even a slight resemblance to the Mooselimb-run Shitholistans of the world, so there’s also that.

Either way, I do think it’s just sooo cute how Betrayus thinks anybody still gives a flying fuck what he has to say about anything at all, or even should. This Jason Dempsey fella seems to have the right of it.

Jason Dempsey, an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, told Military Times, “the only lesson on COIN that we as Americans have to offer or should be offering, is that one, we didn’t do it very well.”

Annnnnd bingo. Trying to sell peace, love, and democracy to nump-brained savages who hate that shit like the cancer is, was, and ever shall be nothing but a mug’s game.

Another day, another…

Another madman shoots up a school, another demand for law-abiding, non-insane people who have never shot anybody and never WILL shoot anybody to surrender their 2A rights.

Las Vegas police: 3 dead, 1 injured after Wednesday shooting at UNLV
A source close to the investigation says that the suspect is believed to be a 67-year-old college professor.

President Biden on Wednesday afternoon issued a statement on the shootings in Texas and Nevada:

“Yesterday, in Austin and San Antonio, at least six people were killed and several more injured by a gunman—leaving families devastated, and communities forever changed. And just hours ago, the University of Nevada at Las Vegas became the latest college campus to be terrorized by a horrific act of gun violence, and the community is still awaiting information on casualties.

Jill and I join citizens across our nation in praying for the families of our fallen, and for those who were injured during these latest acts of senseless violence. We are also grateful for the courageous work of law enforcement—who risked their own safety to bring an end to these deadly shooting sprees. Federal law enforcement officials are on the ground working with State and local law enforcement in both states and I have directed that all necessary support be provided to assist in the investigations and support these communities.

This year alone, our nation has experienced more than 600 mass shootings, and approximately 40,000 deaths due to gun violence. This is not normal, and we can never let it become normal.

For all the action we have taken since I’ve been President, the epidemic of gun violence we face demands that we do even more. But we cannot do more without Congress. Republican lawmakers must join with Democrats in Congress to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, pass a national red flag law, enact universal background checks, require the safe storage of guns, and advance other commonsense measures that will help stem the tide of gun violence. And together, we must do more to prevent more families, and more communities like Austin, San Antonio, and Las Vegas, from being ripped apart by gun violence.”

Yeah, let’s allow you gun-grabber shitweasels to rip the entire fucking country apart by gun “control” and/or confiscation instead. From the above sub-hed, sounds to me like what we could really use here is some reasonable, common-sense loony-toony-college-professor control, Mr “President.” A good first step might be to enact strong legislation preventing opportunistic, lying scum-sucker ProPols like yourself from clambering atop the nearest podium before the sound of the shots has even stopped echoing to thump your scrawny chests and lecture the rest of us about what we must and must not do.

Update! For my money, the great Charlton Heston said it best.

Sure, I’ll be happy to give up my guns to you rat-bastards: bullets first, any old time you feel froggy enough.

4
4

Leftards to Normals: drop dead!

I repeat: Take. Them. At. Their. Word. And govern your response accordingly.

They Might Want You to Eat Bugs, But They Would Prefer You Weren’t Here at All
Back in January, I did a story on Jane Goodall. Someone I thought was the epitome of the schweet, uber feminine British flower, who spoke softly and risked her life nobly doing things like saving chimpanzees.

A heroine of my youth. Who just wishes there were less of us ruining the world she loves.

“We cannot hide away from human population growth, because it underlies so many of the other problems. All these things we talk about wouldn’t be a problem if the world was the size of the population that there was 500 years ago.”

That infamous little snippet was from a discussion at a WEF gathering. The same WEF/Davos conferences for which Klaus Schwab has now removed all the videos that were once available to skewer them with on Twitter. It turns out the most elite, richest, and privileged geniuses among us have very thin skins when it comes to the peasants using their own self-congratulatory recordings to eviscerate their big plans and mock them mercilessly.

But the fact of the matter is, they don’t like us very much and would be thrilled to have fewer of us both to control and despoiling their precious Gaia. Life would be better all around.

Proponents of the idea that the world would be a better place sans a significant amount of the current population have a name unto themselves – it’s “Malthusians.” It springs from a late 18th, early 19th Century English economist named Robert Malthus, who believed that over-population was literally the bane of the Earth.

Dishonorable mentions for Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly The Weather)™ idiot Michael Mann and overpopulation sub-genius Paul Erlich follow, a trio sans brio who, between them, share the inglorious distinction of having been conclusively proven all wet more times than the separate-but-equally-wrong unholy triumvirate of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin has. Then, Beege provides a link to the coup de grace for the whole sorry crowd.

If by fiat I had to identify the most consequential ideas in the history of science, good and bad, in the top 10 would be the 1798 treatise An Essay on the Principle of Population, by English political economist Thomas Robert Malthus. On the positive side of the ledger, it inspired Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace to work out the mechanics of natural selection based on Malthus’s observation that populations tend to increase geometrically (2, 4, 8, 16…), whereas food reserves grow arithmetically (2, 3, 4, 5…), leading to competition for scarce resources and differential reproductive success, the driver of evolution.

On the negative side of the ledger are the policies derived from the belief in the inevitability of a Malthusian collapse. “The power of population is so superior to the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race,” Malthus gloomily predicted. His scenario influenced policy makers to embrace social Darwinism and eugenics, resulting in draconian measures to restrict particular populations’ family size, including forced sterilizations.

Science writer Ronald Bailey tracks neo-Malthusians in his book The End of Doom (St. Martin’s Press, 2015), starting with Paul Ehrlich’s 1968 best seller The Population Bomb, which proclaimed that “the battle to feed all of humanity is over.” Many doomsayers followed. Worldwatch Institute founder Lester Brown, for example, declared in 1995, “Humanity’s greatest challenge may soon be just making it to the next harvest.” In a 2009 Scientific American article he affirmed his rhetorical question, “Could food shortages bring down civilization?” In a 2013 conference at the University of Vermont, Ehrlich assessed our chances of avoiding civilizational collapse at only 10 percent.

The problem with Malthusians, Bailey writes, is that they “cannot let go of the simple but clearly wrong idea that human beings are no different than a herd of deer when it comes to reproduction.” Humans are thinking animals. We find solutions—think Norman Borlaug and the green revolution. The result is the opposite of what Malthus predicted: the wealthiest nations with the greatest food security have the lowest fertility rates, whereas the most food-insecure countries have the highest fertility rates.

Among a plethora of other examples, Ehrlich’s famous losing bet springs immediately to mind:

The Simon–Ehrlich wager was a 1980 scientific wager between business professor Julian L. Simon and biologist Paul Ehrlich, betting on a mutually agreed-upon measure of resource scarcity over the decade leading up to 1990. The widely-followed contest originated in the pages of Social Science Quarterly, where Simon challenged Ehrlich to put his money where his mouth was. In response to Ehrlich’s published claim that “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000” Simon offered to take that bet, or, more realistically, “to stake US$10,000…on my belief that the cost of non-government-controlled raw materials (including grain and oil) will not rise in the long run.”

Simon challenged Ehrlich to choose any raw material he wanted and a date more than a year away, and he would wager on the inflation-adjusted prices decreasing as opposed to increasing. Ehrlich chose copper, chromium, nickel, tin, and tungsten. The bet was formalized on September 29, 1980, with September 29, 1990, as the payoff date. Ehrlich lost the bet, as all five commodities that were bet on declined in price from 1980 through 1990, the wager period.

No more snow; London and NYC underwater no later than 1990/2000/2005/2010/2020 etc etc due to rising sea levels caused by melting polar ice caps/glaciers; nonexistent global warming; the hoary old “peak oil” myth; unbreathable air; acid rain; mass starvation across the developed world; killing floods, drought, tornadoes, and hurricanes all inexorably worsening, year after year; calamitous shortages, scarcity, impoverishment, famine, and war—only shitlib Chicken Littles could be wrong again and again and again about absolutely everything, and yet still unblushingly insist that they’re the smartest people in the room anyhow…no matter what room they happen to be in at the time.

Funny, innit, how all these disparate problems always seem to have the selfsame solution: more government, less freedom, more sacrifice and deprivation, more want. For YOU, that is, not for them. Never them, perish the thought. Why, one could almost be forgiven for wondering whether they might be wrong about that, too. But nah, that couldn’t be, it’s unpossible. Right?

RIGHT?!?

6
1

Part of the problem

Let’s don’t and say we did.

Lawmakers call for investigation into J6 committee following release of security footage
Republican lawmakers are calling for investigations into a House committee and its members after the release of security footage that captured the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Rep. Troy Nehls of Texas and Sen. Mike Lee of Utah called for the investigation of the now-defunct United States House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, which determined that the riot was an attempted coup by then-President Trump. They said the tapes present a much different view of the chaos at the Capitol that day.

“The J6 committee was a sham,” Mr. Nehls said on X. “I knew it then. Everyone knows it now. Let’s investigate the investigators.”

Yeah, no. It’s just another stall, just another subterfuge, just another waste of time. The newly-released footage constitutes more-than-adequate proof, no further Congressional futzing about with mumble-mumble “investigation” required. Let’s hang the fucking treasonous bastards responsible for the plain, simple, and obvious coup instead. At the very, very least, lock all the NeverTrumpTard/Deep State traitors up and throw the fucking key down a DC sewer drain. In any event, the Goo(g)lagged J6 political prisoners must all be released forthwith. Nothing less will suffice, and that’s still only the first small step.

There’s a reason this incontrovertible documentation confirming high crimes and/or misdemeanors with malice aforethought at the highest levels of the federal government has been suppressed for lo, these past three years. That reason has now been exposed beyond further argumentation, fully and forever.

Yes, yes, I realize that in Amerika v2.0 treason is no longer a punishable offense, hasn’t been for a good many years now. So what? That’s a YUUUGE explanatory factor behind how we reached this sorry pass in the first damned place, perhaps the primary one. Which hurls the biggest question of all directly into our collective face: Are we serious about rectifying that, or are we not?

Time to either shit or get off the pot, seems to me—of course and as always, YMMV. Whatever may transpire from here, no Real American needs to be force-fed any more intelligence-insulting pap from Congresscritters, thenksveddymuch.

5
2

Jewish “journalist” SHOCKED to learn murdering Hamas terrorists are, in fact, murdering Hamas terrorists

…and, being a pluperfect, Mark-1 Mod-0 example of what our blog-bud JJ Sefton aptly dubbed “self-gassing Jews,” is scrupulously careful to make sure that he learns absolutely nothing whatsoever else.

I’m a Jew at ‘The Guardian.’ I Don’t Feel Safe at Work.
An anonymous employee describes the hostile environment at Britain’s foremost left-leaning newspaper.

I wake up on October 7 to a text from my brother-in-law: “Thoughts are with your family in Israel. I hope everyone is safe.”

I check the news. Hamas has entered southern Israel. They’re in a kibbutz. My partner’s family is in that kibbutz. His cousin is nine months pregnant. He’s in contact with them; they’re in the safe room. Terrorists are outside.

I check social media. Reports of hostages, maybe three. I check again; perhaps ten.

There has been a massacre at a music festival. I look at the video. Who do I know there? I check social media again; there are videos of hostages. I look at their faces. Do I know them?

We lose contact with family in the kibbutz. I tell myself that the phone lines are down because the IDF are there. I watch Hamas footage as it is coming out. I go on Telegram for the first time in my life and I see a room full of bodies covered in blood. I see children gunned down. I see the bodies of raped women. I see families holding each other as Hamas livestreams atrocities. I look for people I might know.

I look at the papers the next day. The newspaper I work for has a tank on the front page: ‘Hundreds die and hostages held as Hamas assault shocks Israel’—victorious terrorists hold a Palestinian flag. The subheading reads ‘Netanyahu declares war as 150 Israelis die. 230 Palestinians killed in air strikes.’

I don’t understand. I know people, Israelis, who were murdered. They did not “die,” as if in some kind of accident. I saw footage of terrorism. It was not an “assault.”

On Sunday, we get more information about what happened to my partner’s family, about how Hamas set the family’s house on fire when they thought it was empty, how my partner’s cousin screamed for her life when the room filled with smoke, how her husband had to pin her down to stop her cries, how Hamas laughed when they realized the family would need to crawl out of the room, how they refused to leave the burning building. We hear that they somehow survived and walked out through pools of their neighbors’ blood, pieces of dead children littering the street; kids who’d been playing on a Saturday morning.

My group chats are exploding as family and friends work out what has been happening, who is alive. I go back to the news. I type the name of the kibbutz into the wires. Nothing. I read how Hamas invaded “settlements.” They’re not settlements! They’re small, pre-state kibbutzim.

I find out that a friend of a friend was at the music festival and is missing. I’m shaking at work.

I see a colleague who had posted about “decolonization” all over social media over the weekend. They’re laughing with the rest of their team. They’re having a great day. I used to love their podcast, full of hot takes and celeb gossip. Now they’ve evolved into an expert on the Middle East. It doesn’t look like their family is in the middle of it, though.

No one else at work speaks to me about it. I nod my way through conversations about fonts and I stumble home.

I go back the next day. I look at the front page. A photo of Gaza and “violence escalates.” Israelis “dead” but Palestinians “killed.” If they can’t empathize with the Jews now, they never will.

Hate to be the one to break it to you, schmendrick, but guess what: they never will. Nor will any but the tiniest handful of left-wing ((((JoojoojooJOOOOOOOZ!!!)))) learn, either. Too uncomfortable a truth for any diehard shitlib to ever even consider taking on board, see. Better get used to it, at least until you and yours somehow scrape up the stones to finally remove those tired, worn-out old ideological/intellectual knickers and try a new pair on for size. We won’t be holding our breaths for that, I’m afraid. Until then, it will remain as Ace says:

“If I just repeat the leftwing mantra that will protect me from their hatred.”

Can I see your ticket, sir? Yes, I see; your ticket is in order.

The trouble is, sir, that this ticket proves that you bought the ticket, and now you’ll have to take the ride.

I know: How could you have foreseen this? Socialists and communists are never antisemitic, never ever!

Pretty much, yeah.

How ANY self-respecting person of Jewish descent could even dream of aligning himself with the Left-wing religious creed—much less a solid majority of them—is way beyond me. Yet somehow…well, here we all are, as we have been for years.

6
2

CF Archives

Categories

Comments policy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

Shameless begging

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:

Become a CF member!

Correspondence

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

Allied territory

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

Fuck you

Kill one for mommy today! Click to embiggen

Notable Quotes

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

Claire's Cabal—The Freedom Forums

FREEDOM!!!

"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
Daniel Webster

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

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

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
Frank Zappa

“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.”
John Adams

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
Bertrand de Jouvenel

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

"I predict that the Bush administration will be seen by freedom-wishing Americans a generation or two hence as the hinge on the cell door locking up our freedom. When my children are my age, they will not be free in any recognizably traditional American meaning of the word. I’d tell them to emigrate, but there’s nowhere left to go. I am left with nauseating near-conviction that I am a member of the last generation in the history of the world that is minimally truly free."
Donald Surber

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

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Best of the best

Finest hosting service

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

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

Copyright © 2024