Category: FUCK YOU, WAR!

In honor of Breitbart

Spicier ‘n’ spicier

Posted on      by     

Simply unbelievable.

Divemedic knows the score as well as you do.

The reason for this, at least to me, is completely obvious. They WANT some looney to assassinate one or more of them. Such an act would allow Biden to name their replacement. This is nothing more than a group of people who want to commit murder but don’t have the balls to do it themselves. They know that there are people in their movement whose screws are loose, and are hoping that they can spur them into action by broadcasting the location of their desired targets.

I am willing to be that there will be a serious assassination attempt on a SCOTUS justice before the end of the year, with more copycats, and I would give you a 50% chance that at least one of those attempts will be successful before the 2024 election.

I must confess, I’m kinda surprised one of these filthy scum hasn’t had a go at offing the great Clarence Thomas long before now. Another of these depraved groups, Now or Never, boasts that “conventional tactics are not enough” and that they feel it’s “time to escalate.” For my money, I can only agree with them: it’s time, and past time, for Real Americans to “escalate” right on up to killing these baglappers in job lots.

Update! Ted Cruz lets ‘er rip, most righteously.

US. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said attacks against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife after the court overturned Roe v Wade are “despicable.”

“The racist hatred directed at Justice Thomas and his family is despicable,” Cruz said. “Absolutely vile.”

The senator made the comment in response to a photo published on social media of a protestor’s sign reading, “Ginny Thomas is a 21st cent. slave owner,” referring to Thomas’ white wife.

Cruz, a former Supreme Court clerk, warned in May that President Joe Biden’s refusal to condemn activists’ targeting of justices’ homes was “literally threatening the lives of these justices.”

Since then, some have called for Thomas to be assassinated and threats and disparaging remarks continue to be made about him.

A female protester recently called Thomas a “swine” and “illegitimate pig.”

And a politician, media personality and actor have called him “an Uncle Tom,” conservative commentator and former Republican gubernatorial candidate Larry Elder noted. He told Fox News LA that using the racial slur is “outrageous. You can disagree with somebody without making a racial slur like that. It’s unfair what he’s been called.”

Well said, Ted, and good on ya for having the stones to come to our greatest Justice’s defense this way.

In defense of discrimination

Posted on      by     

In the original sense of the word, that is, not the Ignorati-inflaming euphemism for “White racism” to which the Left has perversely reduced it.

While leftists make my skin crawl with their pungent scent of evil, there is one group of people that is even more annoying, and that’s the fence-sitters and fake moderates.

Though these people will never admit it, there are times when social conflict arises and one side is completely right while the other side is completely wrong. Fake moderates pretend as if there are merits to the side that is wrong even when there are none because they want to appear as though they are “wise.” The truth is they don’t have the guts to take a stand one way or the other, and so they act as if neither side is correct, or that both sides are partially right.

Meaning, the side of destruction is given license to continue their pillaging because, hey, we don’t want to seem like we are discriminating or biased, right?

This is how societies and cultures are slowly but inevitably erased and the principles they hold dear are eroded to nothing. It’s mostly done through apathy and a sedate tolerance of corruption. Compromise is the hallmark of “democracy,” and it is also the root of tyranny. If people did not compromise on their principles and freedoms, tyranny could not exist. This why the Founding Fathers of the US opposed pure democracy and formed our nation as a Constitutional Republic with checks and balances. Democracy alone often demands acceptance of poisonous and oppressive behaviors we might otherwise stop, all in the name of appeasing the “majority.”

Discrimination, at times, can be a good thing. It is a biological imperative that contributes to tribalism and has allowed humanity to survive as a species for millennia. Without the ability to discriminate, all behaviors no matter how radioactive would proliferate, and this is what we are facing today in western societies.

When tribes were faced with narcissist members, psychopathic members, or outright schizophrenic and delusion(al) members, those people were often cast out or ignored and for good reason. When the insane and the sociopathic are allowed to integrate into a culture they are also allowed to inject a certain level of moral insanity into that culture. Insanity is generally an inborn condition, but insane habits can also be learned, and if people think there are benefits and gains associated with acting insane, some of them will do so and the problem will grow.

The political left argues that all discriminating tendencies are a form of bigotry. Yet, they are some of the most bigoted people on the planet when it comes to opposing ideals and beliefs. We can see this attitude within their own policies and the people they seek to censor. They readily embrace full bore erasure of all ideas that contradict their beliefs and they do this because they know, given enough time, that this kind of censorship works.

They are trying to reverse the old tribal model – These days, anyone who is SANE must be converted or cast out of society.

Make no mistake, this philosophy of “equity” might seem like random madness but it serves a very specific agenda. If all behaviors must be tolerated, then any evil can become acceptable. The only evil action you can then commit is intolerance of evil. See how that works?

Millions of Americans do not trust the left and they certainly don’t want to live in a world where there are no boundaries and all discrimination is considered a hate crime. At their genetic core, most people understand that certain behaviors are wrong on every level and cannot be allowed. And if acceptance is actually a mantra for leftists, then they should also have to accept the existence of principles that do not align with their own.

The backlash against these people is very real. They see it as a conservative insurrection, but really, it’s only the beginning of a pendulum swing back to center by people who have a conscience. This swing has to be uncompromising, because if there is any semblance of weakness the leftists will use it to pull us all back into the insane asylum. There can be no moderation at this time, no fence sitting, no slack. The time for pretending there are merits to the leftist cult is over. The time to draw a line in the sand has begun.

It sure has, to say the very least. Certainly, there can be no moderation in our dealings with the Left—not merely “at this time,” though, but ever. Moderation, compromise, and fence-sitting are the tiny cracks in the wall of American resolve through which Leftist termites creep in, gaining them the foothold from which they will gnaw at our foundations until they’ve brought the House of Liberty crashing down into rubble.

At long, long last, let all Real Americans see the scabrous villeins for what they, really truly are. They are NOT honorable; they are NOT decent; their intentions are anything BUT good. Be not fooled: they are hate-suffused, bestial, rapacious, and utterly ruthless. They cannot be trusted—not EVER. They lie reflexively, with the breezy carelessness of well-established habit—yet somehow, despite their great wealth of experience, they’re no more guileful or convincing liars than a slow-witted five-year-old nabbed red-handed in some minor childhood trespass. Their maniacal thirst for unchecked power and control can never be quenched, and they will unhesitatingly crush any who stand in the way of securing it for themselves into a gooey red paste. They are NOT “our fellow Americans”; they are the implacable, vicious enemy of every TRUE American.

Open-eyed acceptance of those unlovely realities is the first step on the path to defeating them.

Illegitami? Non carborundum

Posted on      by     

Daddy, tell me the story again about how we can live peaceably with these “people.” That one’s my favorite.

If you are under 40, you grew up in a world in which a Republican being President was deemed per se illegitimate. You grew up in a world where what those illegitimate Presidents did was per se illegitimate. It is the air you breathed and the water you drank. This is what you know.

This is simply the truth. Bush was installed by the Supreme Court and then did *handwave* something wrong to be re-elected, after all, he shouldn’t have been President in the first place. Republicans play a game with the Electoral College, which is anti-democratic, to win.

Every Republican President is wrong and everything they do is wrong, and Trump let Russians change votes to make him President so what he did was extra super wrong. Since everything they did is wrong, then every action they took is wrong and SCOTUS is illegitimate. It’s logic.

It is irrelevant whether this is true. It is what two generations of people have been told. People believe this because why would those people who are the experts in politics say this if it wasn’t true? That’s what they are paid to do, that’s what they know, they wouldn’t lie.

I comprehend the urge to eyeroll when the wailing starts about how SCOTUS is illegitimate because the justices were appointed by Presidents who did not win the popular vote and thus are illegitimate. It is eyeroll worthy. However. Enormous numbers of people who vote believe this.

Many a pixel has been slain, and that’s just by me, decrying the total lack of knowledge of how the American electoral system works. Many more have been slain noting how destructive this is to public discourse. I am here to tell you that it will only get worse.

Another part of my internet life is very Left indeed. I keep my mouth shut over there because that’s where I go to try to escape politics. I am here to tell you that the Kids These Days do not understand what Dobbs did. They believe, utterly, that abortion was just banned.

They believe that Republicans are an existential threat to democracy and that Republicans should be banned from all manner of things, practicing medicine, practicing law, going to college at all, holding jobs, partaking in society at large. Because Republicans are evil and cheat.

A very few people there know that I have a JD and I was asked privately to explain what Dobbs meant. When I told those people that Dobbs meant states decided abortion laws and that CA and NY now have some of the most permissive laws in the world, I was met with shock.

Why? Because all the news sources they consume told them otherwise. I was accused of lying. I was accused of making it up. And when they went and checked and found out I was correct, the utter cognitive dissonance was painful to behold. Because these sources they trust lied.

The response was not to question worldview and whether those sources were lying to them about other matters. The response was ego defense. Okay well this is wrong but TX banned and that’s what the rest of the country will do and they weren’t lying, they were just upset!

That is the mental barrier with which messaging that’s not fully of the Left, let alone being of the Right, is up against. Two generations of being told that Republicans are evil cheaters who aren’t a legitimate political party. Two generations of no civics education, not really.

People don’t like to question priors because doing so means admitting you did not interpret the world correctly and the ego will defend against that. It’s been +/- 18 years since I’ve had to admit my view of Middle Eastern geopolitics was absolutely wrong. I’m still bitter.

We discuss Othering and that is also a problem. But there are two generations of Americans for whom a baseline worldview is that if the Republicans win, that can be ignored because it’s not legitimate. And that I don’t see changing. It’s only going to get uglier from here.

As is alexthechick’s usual wont, she’s right, and you know she is.

It becomes more undeniable with every passing day that the Left really, truly does want us eliminated, that they want a war with us; hell, they’re now to the point of saying so explicitly and unequivocally, not even bothering with the usual evasion and dissembling. We avoid acknowledging this brutal reality at our own mortal peril. Just this once, they should be given exactly what they say they want, just as hard and ferociously as it can possibly be given to them: unrestricted war, no-shit war, HOT war. War to the knife, knife to the fucking hilt. Shoot them, stab them, garrote them, beat them bloody with fists and feet. Let the pitiful remnant of shell-shocked survivors of our long-postponed wrath lapse into full-bore catatonia at the merest suggestion they might ever even DREAM of fucking with us again.

Will the US fall like Rome?

Posted on      by     

Maybe not. Then again, maybe so.

Added to greed, avarice, and incompetence was a mix of climate change, unstable borders, and an elite population soaked in corruption. All told, you have a basic understanding of what destroyed the Roman world.

Yes, the history of this civilization often sounds like our own. But then, it sounds like most every other civilization that has existed in any part of the world at any time in history. There is something consistent and familiar everywhere you travel in human history.

Believe it or not, this is where the good news is found. Yes, America is a republic, but it is not, by any means, Rome. This observation was made in correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams in 1819. Jefferson wrote,

I ask myself What was that government which the virtues of Cicero were so zealous to restore, & the ambition of Caesar to subvert?…I do not say to restore it, because they never had it…if their people indeed had been, like ours, enlightened, peaceable, and really free, the answer would be obvious. ‘restore independance (sic) to all your foreign conquests, relieve Italy from the government of the rabble of Rome, consult it as a nation entitled to self-government, and do it’s will.

What is important here is that the American Founders were not naïve about the weaknesses of Rome. In particular, they despised the emperors and sought whatever good they could find in the old republic.

The American Founders admired the Roman virtues of citizenship and piety, and the Roman government balanced by the citizens, Senate, and magistrates. However, there was no idea of “rights” among the Roman citizens. Only power.

The Romans would never have created a “Declaration of Independence” in which these beautiful, high-minded words would be announced: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

This sort of thinking could only have emerged after the prohibition of the gladiatorial bloodlettings of the Roman world, or the imperialistic greed of the emperors. It could never have been written by a society that believed the enslavement of human beings to be the norm. While some signers of the Declaration, like all humans, struggled with hypocrisy, their ideals have made America great in a way that Rome could have never imagined.

America, like all republics, has freedoms that allow citizens the right to go insane. No free nation will be free of human nature. The current internal and external threats to America do not have to bring, out of necessity, its destruction.

The good news is that America has stronger foundations than Rome ever knew, and those foundations not only seem to be holding, many Americans are rediscovering those foundations in the midst of a modern contest for the soul of the nation.

And the bad news is, with the rise of an insane, despotic Left in our very midst we now find ourselves obliged to cope with the selfsame struggle the Founding Fathers faced in their own time, a battle waged in one sense or another since the emergence of Western Civilization itself: the neverending struggle between Liberty—ie, Good—and Tyranny—ie, Evil.

The essential nature of our Leftist Enemy is that it MUST rule, that it MUST conquer, that it will countenance NO dissent or disagreement whatsoever. It can leave NO ONE alone and unmolested, to live out his life according to his OWN wishes and beliefs. Thus is our essential problem at once as unneccessary as it is utterly insuperable.

I commend to y’all’s attention my Notable Quotes section over in the right sidebar, NC Reed’s immortal summation in particular: 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. Which, when all is said and done, means that we cannot live peaceably among them. Not for long, we can’t. There can be no comity, no accomodation, no compromise with tyranny. It is a binary solution set: one side must win, and one side must lose. There is truly, literally nothing more to it than just that.

We MUST NOT lose.

Is Trump “the greatest man alive”?

Posted on      by     

Dan Gelernter makes the case.

Here’s my question to the January 6 committee: If Trump made a call for violence on January 6, how could I possibly have missed it? I was glued to the TV all day. I watched Trump’s speech; I hung on every word. I recognized it as a pivotal moment in American history: We were about to certify an unelected, illegitimate president. It was an impending catastrophe that only the boldest possible action could have prevented.

If Trump had called out to the nation in his January 6 speech—if he had said, “We must stop this, come to Washington with your guns!”—millions of Americans would have come. The response would have been massive and overwhelming. You can bet your boots that Ashli Babbitt would not have been the only person shot and killed that day.

Trump easily—easily—could have started a civil war. He had only to make the call. Millions would have answered it. America was watching and waiting. But Trump never made that call, and Washington knows damn well he didn’t.

Which is why he is where he is today, bringing the entire country along for the ride. He had overwhelming support, the weight of numbers on his side, a willing and available counterrevolutionary force with more guns than every branch of the US military combined. We’re talking here about people who are one hundred percent dedicated to destroying the Leftist enemy and reclaiming America That Was. He shoulda damned well pulled the fucking trigger, not just for his and his family’s personal well-being, but that of the betrayed and defiled Republic, and its sane, normal, decent population.

In some very real ways, we’d all be better off right now if he’d done it; the ones who would have been worse off are the windrows after windrows of shitlib corpses stacked high and tight from sea to shining sea, and they have it coming. We can argue from now till Doomsday about why Trump didn’t call on all able-bodied Citizen Soldiers to rally to the side of our rightful President to back him in standing up to the most dangerous threat America has ever had to face, but it doesn’t much matter anymore—whatever his reasons, and I can think of a good few that hold at least some water, he didn’t, so…so…

Well, as I always say: here we all are. Be that as it may, there’s an argument to be made Trump’s perfectly understandable disinclination to go to the last desperate extreme speaks well of the man, in at least some ways.

If you ask me, Trump has shown greater restraint than any man alive in the world today. Greater restraint perhaps than almost any man in history: For there are very few men, even in small and trivial nations, who could launch a civil war if they chose to do it. That sort of following—so wide, so deeply committed, and so much on the precipice of fury unleashed—is truly rare. The fact that Trump did not call upon his supporters to do violence on January 6 is singular, incredible: What leftist, on the verge of losing his power in Washington, and yet possessed of the means of retaining it through coercive force, would have walked away as Trump did?

Now the establishment—the Liz Cheneys, the Nancy Pelosis, the Mitch McConnells and Mitt Romneys—are terrified because they know Trump still has that following. They know the nation, left to choose its own president, would choose Trump again. And they can’t possibly let that happen.

Trump is the only real threat—not to world peace and stability, not to economic security or energy independence, but to the power of the elites. The elites want that power more than anything—they cannot walk away—and they are willing to do anything, even destroy the entire planet with war or disease, sooner than they would see Trump become president again.

But they ought to be careful. The next time they steal an election, it may not take a speech to start a civil war.

After having been run through the Democrat meatless-meat grinder over the last several years with no letup in sight, one would certainly hope it wouldn’t, since a resolute, swift, and uncompromising response to blatant, self-evident treason would constitute evidence that at least some Americans do still retain a kinship with the ideals, the bravery, and the selfless devotion to duty of the Founding Fathers, and are willing to let those timeless beliefs guide their actions and decisions.

Sadly, all available signs from November 2020 up to right this very minute would seem to point us in a very different direction. It’s all too apparent that all too many of us have learned all too little from the supine, boneless response to the broad-daylight theft of an American Presidential election—a barefaced coup for which no criminal conspirator has yet faced serious consequences. No sane person wants this fight to commence, and who would? The prospect is utterly dreadful, horrifying beyond comprehension.

In any event, all of Dan’s above-cited points are well taken and ably made, certainly. But for my money, the most interesting part comes earlier in the piece.

For all the hysteria over Trump’s divisive tweets, the truth is that Trump is the only unifying figure in modern political history: He persuaded millions of people who had never voted for any Republican, indeed for any president, to vote for him. During his first term, he increased his share of the vote with every segment of the population, except college-educated whites. No Republican since Reagan received such broad support from so many groups. And he won their support not by pandering to their sub-category interests or to the things that set them apart, but by appealing to them as Americans.

Spot on, and of far greater import than one might realize at first glance, if only for the big fat hint it provides as to how many out there might still consider a candidate for office “appealing to them as Americans” to be a good thing, rather than a bad or even offensive one. Alas, it’s much too late now to hold out hope that any such Trumpian reassertion of American unity and shared values might suffice to heal this mortally wounded nation.

No sane person wants this fight; who would? But the lines are firmly established; the ideological breach cannot be reconciled, negotiated away, or blithely ignored for very much longer. The national divide is real, serious…and wholly meet and just, actually. Like it or not—and nobody should like it—this is a battle that every American who takes his God-granted liberty, his rights, and self-determination at all seriously has no choice but to fight, and to win.

One can easily sense a broad uneasiness across the American landscape, a foreboding that violence and bloodshed might erupt at any time: in a month, in a week, in a few days, or in the morning. The distempered nitwits at The Grauniad post some stats.

More than one quarter of US residents feel so estranged from their government that they feel it might “soon be necessary to take up arms” against it, a poll released on Thursday claimed.

This survey of 1,000 registered US voters, published by the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics (IOP), also revealed that most Americans agree the government is “corrupt and rigged against everyday people like me”.

The data suggests that extreme polarization in US politics – and its impact on Americans’ relationships with each other – remain strong. These statistics come as a congressional committee is holding public hearings on the January 6 insurrection.

Naturally, being Mark-1 Mod-0 shitlibs, The Grauniad whiffs badly on the stark reality that the phonied-up, purely partisan J6 dog and pony show currently being staged in Mordor On The Potomac constitutes irrefutable proof that “most Americans” are RIGHT to believe that their vile, tyrannical government is “corrupt” and “rigged,” in every least particular. Can there possibly be even a single knave left among us so foolish, so blind, so out of touch that he’d contend—sans sarcasm, irony, or satirical intent—that it ISN’T?

Even farther beyond the demonstrably limited ken of The Grauniad and their intellectual brethren is another inescapable truth: the endemic corruption mentioned in Paragraph Two is the very thing which has forced Real Americans to conclude that a resort to the Second Amendment Solution “might soon be necessary,” a prospect lamented with such horror and dread in Paragraph One. Far from being unrelated, the two notions are indivisible; absent the one, the other would likely not exist.

Liberal nincompoops will rend their garments, gnash their teeth, and tear their hair out in great hanks over how awful all this is, something underlined by the inter-party disparities in this graph:

SpicyTimeStats.jpg

Myself, I can’t honestly say I share the Left’s blood-curdling perturbation over this survey’s revelation of a perfectly accurate perception of massive corruption and malfeasance so deeply embedded in the central government it can never be rooted out by less than extraordinary measures and what might be the upshot of that. Nor am I troubled in the least by the calm acceptance of the Founders’ explicit prescription for how a free people must always deal with this intolerable situation—sentiments common amongst a rapidly growing cohort of Americans. To me, that’s encouraging news, albeit with a darker implication in train: if the American “education” system was what it should be—and, not all that long ago, actually was—we wouldn’t be discussing an embarrassingly niggling percentage of “more than one quarter of American residents” here. No, if Americans had been properly schooled in history and civics, that measly “more than a quarter” number would be well up into the 90s, as it damned well ought to be.

The notion that a liberty-minded citizenry might not disdain to avail themselves of the selfsame methods by which our long-abused country was created in the first goddamned place is assuredly NOT radical, extreme, or in any way indicative of a fascination with “white supremacy.” Like so very many other of the Founders’ ideas, the Freeman’s solemn obligation to rise up in revolt to overthrow any would-be oppressor who dares to proclaim himself the Freeman’s rightful Master rather than his humble employee is eternal. This obligation may be shirked; it is certainly an inconvenient, difficult, and demanding one. But none can ever call himself free who refuses to at least try to meet the challenge it represents.

Truth will out has outed

Posted on      by     

A week that has made history.

The Supreme Court has handed down its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Mississippi abortion case. There will be countless analyses and opinion pieces to follow, but the short of it is this: The Court has formally overturned its rulings in Roe v. Wade (1973) and Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992). The official holding is this: “The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”

The news isn’t as stunning as it might otherwise have been absent the leak, early in May, of the draft opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito. Though it is not identical, the decision, handed down Friday morning, largely tracks the February draft.

That draft did not include the breakdown of the justices, though the rumors swirling with it hinted at it being five-to-four (with the conservative and liberal wings voting in their respective blocs and Chief Justice Roberts attempting to thread the needle between them).  Now we have the official split: Justice Alito wrote the opinion, with Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett joining, and Chief Justice Roberts concurring. As expected, Justices Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan dissented.

Contra the deceitful shrieking of shitlib hysterics, this decision neither “ends” nor “bans” a single fucking thing. The Court’s reasoning is impeccable, its ruling unassailable on any grounds except the Left’s selfish obsession with consequence-free promiscuity. As is abundantly clear to all rational, fair-minded grownups, there is NO “right” to abortion to be found in the US Constitution, in which the word “abortion” doesn’t appear even once, under any of the various noms de subterfuge the baby-murderin’ Left cobbled together to make a most dark and ugly thing sound less objectionable to sane people: “women’s health care,” “a woman’s right to choose,” “women’s reproductive freedom,” among other innocuous-seeming euphemisms.

So with Roe being officially rendered null and void, the abortion conflict moves back to the Several States, which is where it should have been all along. The most interesting thing from here on out isn’t the issue itself, but the Left’s psychotic overreaction. The big question for Our Side: are we adequately prepared for the Leftist terrorism, violence, and lawlessness sure to come in response to their having to choke down two (2) major defeats in as many days? I mean, it’s not as if they’re going to any great trouble to obscure their plans or anything.

Jane’s Revenge Plans Roe v. Wade Reveal ‘Night of Rage,’ ‘Carrying that Anger Out into the World Expressing it Physically’
The radical pro-abortion group, Jane’s Revenge, is planning more acts of domestic terrorism when the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Roe v. Wade is revealed, dubbed a “Night of Rage: An Autonomous Call to Action Against Patriarchal Supremacy.”

The group posted its plans on the Anarchists Library website at the end of May in expectation of the ruling, expected sometime in June.

Here are some excerpts from the manifesto:

This is an event that should inspire rage in millions of people who can get pregnant…and yet, the response thus far has been tepid.

We have agonized over this apparent absence of indignation. Why is it that we are so afraid to unleash hell upon those who are destroying us? Fear of state repression is valid, but this goes deeper than that.

Whatever form your fury takes, the first step is feeling it.

The next step is carrying that anger out into the world and expressing it physically.

Consider this your call to action.

On the night the final ruling is issued——a specific date we cannot yet predict, but we know is arriving imminently——we are asking for courageous hearts to come out after dark.

Whoever you are and wherever you are, we are asking for you to do what you can to make your anger known.

We have selected a time of 8 pm for actions nationwide to begin, but know that this is a general guideline. There may be other considerations involved in planning time and place. We do not claim to speak for every community or crew. We are simply calling out to you. And we hope you answer our cries.

The manifesto concludes, “To those who work to oppress us: If abortion isn’t safe, you aren’t either. We are everywhere.”

And there you have it: a direct, explicit call to violence, bloodshed, civil disorder, and organized mass brigandry. It’s as plainspoken and brass-bold a threat against the public weal as has ever been made…and our current piss-poor excuse for an “Attorney General” offers his usual bland shrug of the shoulders as his only reassurance that he will be attentive to his sworn duty to uphold law and order—a duty both he and the corrupt and overtly-politicized DoJ he oversees care not one whit about when those under threat hold the wrong political opinions and beliefs.

Too many of us are shocked, horrified, and indignant that the Left should be so nasty, so brutish, so gosh-darned uncivil in their open declaration of war against all decent, normal Americans. Those people are stupid as all hell, wittingly blind, and badly in need of a clue, which they could easily have picked up by no more difficult or taxing expedient than watching the 6 o’clock nightly news on their TeeWee since about mid-2015 or so. To claim to be surprised every time the violent Left *gasp!* advocates violence and then takes to the streets to make good on their promise of right ought to embarrass the living hell out of anyone admitting to it.

We’ve all seen this dumbshow a thousand and one times by now; we know perfectly well how the story ends. To my way of thinking, this time Real Americans must not sit idly by and let it all happen again without resistance—REAL resistance, PHYSICAL resistance. This time, Leftists must not be the only ones hitting the streets to visit mayhem and retribution upon their hated foes. If terrorist militias such as Jane’s Revenge follow through on their vow of chaos and destruction, then the good, the decent, and the righteous will be presented with a golden opportunity to settle the accounts, to make the wreckers and the ruiners pay for their feral perfidy at long last. May we not let it pass us by.

They say it’s a call to action? They damned well ought to get themselves some, then, and plenty of it.

SEND IT update! The first faint rumblings of a little return fire.

15 States Vow To Protect Oil, Gas Industry From ‘Woke’ Banks
A coalition of 15 states announced a commitment to scrutinize future business with banks that divest from the fossil fuel industry.

The coalition of top state financial officers, formed by West Virginia State Treasurer Riley Moore, collectively represents more than $600 billion in public assets under management, according to the announcement. The officials wrote a letter to banking industry leaders Monday, warning that they would begin considering institutions’ boycotts of fossil fuel companies before awarding state contracts.

“Reckless attacks on law-abiding energy companies cut off paychecks for workers and take food off the tables of hard-working families,” Moore and the other officials wrote. “The Biden Administration has resumed these attacks by attempting to ban energy exploration on public lands and reportedly pressuring U.S. banks and financial institutions to limit, encumber, or outright refuse financing for traditional energy production companies.”

“These misguided political schemes have impeded economic growth, driven up consumer costs, and regressed our country to foreign energy dependence,” the letter continued.

The fossil fuel industry provides jobs, health insurance, infrastructure and quality of life to Americans nationwide, they added.

Since taking office, President Joe Biden has blocked major pipelines, ditched oil drilling projects, introduced sweeping regulations and banned new oil and gas leases on federal lands. His administration is also pushing the Build Back Better Act, the budget bill passed by the House last week that includes several green energy handouts and a tax on methane emissions.

“Woke capitalists and globalist actors have been using the guise of climate change to press for anti-American reforms that reduce our country’s competitiveness against hostile nations like Russia and China,” Moore said in a statement.

“As a result, in less than a year our country has gone from energy independence to having a President who is begging OPEC and Russia to pump more oil,” he continued. “It’s time we fight back to protect our economies, jobs, tax revenue and energy independence from these increasing attacks on our critical industries.”

It most certainly is at that—time, and well past time. But don’t let’s be calling these assuredly political schemes “misguided.” They are no such thing; the skulking malefactors behind the curtain know exactly what they’re doing, and the ruin and catastrophe they cause is not some random blunder or unforeseeable misfortune, but the carefully calculated end product of a long-term program conceived, implemented, and managed by evil, monstrous predators.

Another opinion released

Posted on      by     

This one is sure to be of interest to everyone, since it comes from a renowned, widely-respected, and highly-regarded Constitutional law scholar and all. I mean, we’re talking here about a man whose words on the topic have for many years carried one hell of a lot of weight, and rightly so.

Joe Biden said he is “deeply disappointed” with the Supreme Court’s decision Thursday to strike down a New York law that restricted access to concealed carry permits of handguns, saying in a statement that it “contradicts both common sense and the Constitution.”

Oh, shut the fuck up, you old fool. Like you have the vaguest clue about either one of those two things, or ever did have your whole squandered life long.

In a statement released hours after the Supreme Court released its decision, Biden expressed his deep disappointment in the ruling, and said it should “deeply trouble us all.”

The statement continues:

In the wake of the horrific attacks in Buffalo and Uvalde, as well as the daily acts of gun violence that do not make national headlines, we must do more as a society — not less — to protect our fellow Americans. I remain committed to doing everything in my power to reduce gun violence and make our communities safer. I have already taken more executive actions to reduce gun violence than any other President during their first year in office, and I will continue to do all that I can to protect Americans from gun violence.

I urge states to continue to enact and enforce commonsense laws to make their citizens and communities safer from gun violence. As the late Justice Scalia recognized, the Second Amendment is not absolute. For centuries, states have regulated who may purchase or possess weapons, the types of weapons they may use, and the places they may carry those weapons. And the courts have upheld these regulations.

I call on Americans across the country to make their voices heard on gun safety. Lives are on the line.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, also condemned the ruling, calling it a “dark day” for New York that “is sending us backwards.

Hochul stated when the 2nd Amendment was written, U.S. citizens only had access to muskets and that she was “prepared to go back to muskets” through gun regulations.

Fuck you, liar. US citizens at that time had “access” to all and every type of weapon, exactly as the Founders intended, up to and including privately-owned artillery pieces. An interesting little tidbit you may not have known about until right this very minute:

Even in 1934, when Congress responded to media-hyped Prohibition and Depression-era outlaws such as the Dillenger gang by regulating machine guns, suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns under the National Firearms Act, they kept artillery pieces fully legal and free to own without Uncle Sam getting involved. Ironically this meant that for three decades you could buy a functional military surplus field gun, cash-and-carry, but had to pay a $200 tax and undergo a background check process to get a .22LR suppressor.

That “loophole” was eventually closed.

It was in 1968, that the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act, introduced as H.R. 5037 by U.S. Rep. Emanuel Celler (D-NY) and signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson (D), regulated most “destructive devices” with a bore over .50-caliber. This meant that modern artillery “such as bazookas, mortars, antitank guns, and so forth” were placed under ATF restrictions in a kind of retroactive addition to the NFA. Before that time, you could buy surplus hardware such as working Boys and Lahti anti-tank rifles at local outlets, cheap.

With all that being said, modern breechloading artillery is still available in the “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave,” provided it is registered with the federal government and properly taxed. Still, legacy artillery systems like muzzleloading black powder field guns, such as Hamilton and Madison would be familiar with, do not require tax stamps.

For now, anyway.

Honestly, I had no idea that a fella could legally buy himself a breech-loading field piece to this very day. Then again, familiar as I am with what the tax-and-fees bite amounts to for Class III (ie, full-auto) rifles and subguns—HELPFUL HINT: as high as balls on a giraffe, as Goose likes to say—I can just imagine what you’d have to shell out for FederalGovCo’s permission to park a breech-loader out on the front lawn. Be that as it may, it’s nice to know they’re still legally allowed, even if they’re priced well out of my personal reach.

Better yet is knowing how batshit-apoplectic the ongoing legal availability for private purchase of a nice Napoleon, Howitzer, or 24-pound siege gun would make Plugs Biden if he only knew. Which, you can be sure he doesn’t. Somebody oughta mention it to him over porridge one morning before the addle-pated old fart goes down for 9AM nappies. The grand mal flailing and flopping about as a result would surely be the most epic and hilarious to date, which is really saying something.

Ain’t it funny, though, how shitlibs from sea to shining sea have suddenly conjured in themselves this awed reverence for the sanctity of States’ Rights and the unchallengeable primacy of State over Federal Law after oh, about a century and a half or thereabouts of reflexively dismissing such notions as peurile claptrap, antiquated bosh of the purest ray serene. But hey, whatever gets you through the next fifteen minutes, eh, Proggy?

Biden angrily demands that something be done to bring down gas prices he blew into orbit himself

Posted on      by     

Moron, knucklehead, or damned idiot? I report, you decide.

Joe Biden has demanded that gas stations lower the cost of price at the pump, ignoring the low margins that come with selling gas.

On Wednesday, Biden spoke on the price of gas, caused by rising global prices in oil production due to the war in Ukraine, potentially exacerbated by the Democrat push towards renewable, “clean” energies, including the shuttering of the Keystone XL Pipeline.

“POTENTIALLY exacerbated”? Oh, go fuck yourselves with a rusty razor blade, you duplicitous Dem-fellators. Gas prices were rising well before Ukraine got bent over for a Rooskie rogering, and will keep right on doing so until Democrats stop trying to coerce Americans into useless toy cars they don’t want or need, take their jackboots off of oil industry necks, and let them start producing again. Which isn’t something anyone should be holding his/her/zxxshrrimm’s breath waiting for.

“To the companies running gas stations and setting those prices at the pump. This is a time of war, global peril, Ukraine. These are not normal times,” Biden said. “Bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you are paying for the product. Do it now. Do it today! Your customers, the American people, they need relief now!”

Yeah, choke on a dick, you blibbering nincompoop. The American people do indeed need relief, to be sure—from you, your dumbass Green Weenie-wagging policies, and you and your keepers’ fanatical devotion to the Holy Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly “the weather”) catechism. Bullyragging small business owners suffering under your misrule; temporary gas tax “holidays“; draining American reserve stocks set aside for other purposes, and other gimmicky, desperate half-measures will never be enough to undo the damage you’ve done. So stop trying to sell us on how deeply “concerned” you are all of a sudden about how badly “the American people” need “relief.” It’s insulting, frankly. Whenever “the American people” need any more shit from you we’ll squeeze your fucking head, asswipe.

Selling gas is consistently one of the least profitable businesses to get into, according to year on year data from Sageworks. In 2018, gas stations were the 7th least profitable industry overall, with an overall profit margin of only 2.4% in total.

In fact, that profit margin is bolstered only by the sale of more profitable sources of income, with the profit margin made on selling gas itself hitting on average only 1.4%, according to IBISWorld, with gas stations making around between 5 to 7 cents of profit per gallon. 70% of profit at gas stations is made inside the convenience store itself.

During the same speech, Biden asked incredulously if there were Republicans who would “rather have lower gas prices” domestically than create massive inflation by sending taxpayer dollars to Ukraine and causing international tension with Russia.

Many Americans reacted to the clip by affirming that they would, in fact, rather have lower gas prices than send massive amounts of money to Ukraine and stoke a possible armed conflict with Russia.

Gee, imagine that. Not that Gropey or his keepers give a damn about what the Serf Class does or does not prefer. Which is exactly where that whole 2A business is supposed to kick in, see. The more I see of this skeevy clown and the rat-bastard Big Top troupe propping his marginally-sentient old ass up, the more I have to wonder what the holdup could possibly be with that.

I do so love it when the selfsame oxygen-thief PropPol who made the mess in the first damned place starts bellowing that the people he’s done so much to harm need to clean it all up for him. That would most certainly be the case here; Joe and his fellow Demonrats wantonly burned down Trump’s new-made American energy independence, roaring economy, and affordable gas in service to their precious climate chimera. Now, after their dreamy dorm-room fantasies have blown up in ALL our faces, they don’t feel they should have to pay a political price for their unthinking, arrogant recklessness.

Die in a fire, Slow Joe, you and all the rest of your ilk.

SHALL. NOT. BE. ETC ETC ETC

Posted on      by     

It’s not that Leftards don’t get the 2A—don’t understand it, can’t comprehend what it so clearly and unequivocally says, what it so clearly and unequivocally means. It’s that they DO understand all those things perfectly well, and the knowledge burns them like fire.

It couldn’t have been more perfect than Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas penning the definitive decision that the right to carry guns on one’s person for self-defense is inherent for all Americans.

First of all, Thomas has been after the court to take up more gun rights cases. He used his considerable influence with Chief Justice John Roberts to continue looking for gun rights cases to take. The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al. v. Bruen and the state of New York was the obvious choice. Remember, the state of New York, before Thursday’s decision as a “may issue” state, read the tea leaves and tailored its law after the federal courts were prevailed upon to take the case.

Second, Thomas is the one who assigns the decisions when the conservatives are in the majority due to his seniority on the court, according to former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy. Thomas assigned himself the task of writing for the majority opinion. This may explain why he chose Justice Samuel Alito to pen the other hot button decision of the court this session, the Dobbs abortion case.

Thomas left no doubt that there shouldn’t be a test to determine if one should be permitted to carry a gun. Concurring opinions by Justices Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett made clear that this doesn’t mean the right is unfettered, but that justices must apply strict scrutiny to any decision about it, as all civil rights cases must be considered.

Thomas wrote, “the constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not ‘a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.’ McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self-defense is no different. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public.”

New York and other “may issue” states require persons who want to carry a weapon to demonstrate a need with which the state agrees. And Thomas, noting that Heller had already decided this issue, blew that up for good, saying the two-step balancing test required by the state was “one step too many.” Indeed, the one test he endorsed was the historical “traditions of the American people…[which] demands our unqualified deference.” When was the last time you heard someone in the federal government say that?

Can’t recall hearing such a ringing endorsement of bedrock American principle since Ronald Reagan, maybe even longer. But how perfectly fitting that this full-throated affirmation of American rights and liberties should come from the greatest of all Supreme Court Justices, the brilliant and indispensable Clarence Thomas, may God bless and preserve him.

Alito stood up tall, proud, and righteous with some worthy remarks of his own.

In light of what we have actually held, it is hard to see what legitimate purpose can possibly be served by most of the dissent’s lengthy introductory section. Why, for example, does the dissent think it is relevant to recount the mass shootings that have occurred in recent years? Does the dissent think that laws like New York’s prevent or deter such atrocities? Will a person bent on carrying out a mass shooting be stopped if he knows that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside the home? And how does the dissent account for the fact that one of the mass shootings near the top of its list took place in Buffalo? The New York law at issue in this case obviously did not stop that perpetrator. What is the relevance of statistics about the use of guns to commit suicide? Does the dissent think that a lot of people who possess guns in their homes will be stopped or deterred from shooting themselves if they cannot lawfully take them outside? The dissent cites statistics about the use of guns in domestic disputes, but it does not explain why these statistics are relevant to the question presented in this case. How many of the cases involving the use of a gun in a domestic dispute occur outside the home, and how many are prevented by laws like New York’s?

The dissent cites statistics on children and adolescents killed by guns, but what does this have to do with the question whether an adult who is licensed to possess a handgun may be prohibited from carrying it outside the home? Our decision, as noted, does not expand the categories of people who may lawfully possess a gun, and federal law generally forbids the possession of a handgun by a person who is under the age of 18, and bars the sale of a handgun to anyone under the age of 21. The dissent cites the large number of guns in private hands—nearly 400 million—but it does not explain what this statistic has to do with the question whether a person who already has the right to keep a gun in the home for self-defense is likely to be deterred from acquiring a gun by the knowledge that the gun cannot be carried outside the home.

And while the dissent seemingly thinks that the ubiquity of guns and our country’s high level of gun violence provide reasons for sustaining the New York law, the dissent appears not to understand that it is these very facts that cause law-abiding citizens to feel the need to carry a gun for self-defense.

They don’t care about any of that, any more than they do about the Constitution, the sacred American birthright of individual liberty, or any other of the fundamental things that made us the blessed, extraordinary nation we once were. The only thing the Left knows is that they HATE guns; they fear them viscerally and irrationally, and the idea of any ordinary American citizen owning even one gives them the shivering fantods. Ace lays the whole thing out for us:

Alito also says this:

Like that dissent in Heller, the real thrust of today’s dissent is that guns are bad and that States and local jurisdictions should be free to restrict them essentially as they see fit. That argument was rejected in Heller, and while the dissent protests that it is not rearguing Heller, it proceeds to do just that.

I think that’s less snarky than simply accurate: lefties think guns are bad and so don’t care if any anti-gun law is actually effective in reducing crime. They think that any burden on gun ownership is a positive boon, whether it helps the crime rate or not, because guns are bad and gun ownership should be discouraged by any penalty or harassment the state can dream up.

The left is forever caught unprepared to answer the basic question, “But how does your proposed gun control law affect the crime that just happened, that you say you’re proposing this gun law to prevent?”

It’s because none of this is about stopping gun crime; it’s just about stopping guns.

Annnnnd bingo. Really, we can reduce it down still further: it isn’t about guns, specific gun-control legislation, school shootings, or crime. Ultimately, what it all comes down to is the same old thing it always does with shitlibs: CONTROL. The Left has no control to exercise over gun owners, who well know what they are, despise them for it, and will cheerfully go well out of their way to make sure Lefty doesn’t ever forget it.

Gun owners believe in an unalienable right to private ownership of firearms expressly bequeathed to them by the Founders, as delineated in the Constitution they wrote for the purpose. They fully intend to protect that right for themselves and their posterity, which is best done by the exercising of it. Gun owners do not give a fat rat’s ass for what Progressivists may think or feel about this.

The supreme indifference of gun owners for shitlib opinion as they happily go about taking fullest advantage of what it means to be a real American galls Leftists horribly, all the more so because they can easily see this for the upraised middle finger waved in their general direction it so truly is. Any day shitlib snouts are being rubbed into a stinking, steaming pantload of all-American FUCK YOU!™ is a good day for our battered but not quite beaten nation.

This would be one of those days.

Update! Just gotta include this:


Many, many happy returns to you, sir.

The Blueing of America update! The most encouraging thing I’ve seen in a long, long time.

Swiped from WRSA.

A pig in a poke

Posted on      by     

One of Ace’s longtime Moronettes, Alexthechick, shares some real-world personal experience that walks us through some of the numerous problems with red-flag laws, currently the très fashionable gun-grabber ploy getting the old shitlib/Vichy GOPe hard-sell as this year’s “reasonable,” “common-sense” “compromise” measure that will help put an end to the deranged, known-wolf school shooter phenomenon for us.

alexandriabrown @alexthechick
To show the potential issues with Red Flag laws, I shall discuss what happened to a client with the issuance of a protection order against him. He had an ex-wife who was bipolar and who refused to take her meds. She continued to harass him years after their divorce.

She showed up to court with a black eye and said he punched her in the face. She sought a protective order against him, which the judge issued. She also filed a criminal complaint for assault against a woman. The protective order statute requires gun confiscation until hearing.

Client learned about this when the police showed up to serve him with the order and summons for court appearance. He was stunned by this not only because he didn’t hit her but because he was out of the state on the date this supposedly happened. He told the police this.

The police shrugged and said we’re just here to serve you and get your guns. That is true. The cops do not adjudicate, they only do what the court says. So he turned over his guns and then got in touch with us later that day. Boss [I assume this means alexthechick’s boss at the law firm] and he were long time friends.

Boss told him to get together every bit of documentation about him being out of town, hotel receipts, meal receipts, any video of him at the gathering he was attending, all of it. Boss also got in touch with the DA and said he was out of state, he couldn’t have done this.

DA said I’m not dropping this but move to dismiss and we’ll hear both motions at the 10 day hearing on the protective order. So we filed the motion to dismiss and motion to consolidate and then Boss went to the hearing. The crazy ex didn’t show up to the hearing at all.

Boss presented everything to the judge. Judge told the DA withdraw the charges or I’m dismissing. The DA said fine, I’ll withdraw. Now, it’s better for the stats on the DAs side to withdraw than to have the case dismissed. Judge also refused to extend the protective order.

Client asked where do I pick up my guns. Judge said you have to go through the paperwork to do that. We’d anticipated that so we had the forms ready and the judge signed the forms. Client said where do I pick them up and judge said this has to be processed, it’ll take three weeks.

Client also asked the DA when the hearing would be for the ex’s perjury charges. The DA said what perjury charges? Client got very upset because it was obviously perjury, he wasn’t even in the state, she provably lied, that’s perjury. DA said no we don’t charge in these cases.

Three weeks go by and client starts calling the sheriff’s office to get his guns back. He keeps getting the run around. Boss had to threaten to go back to court to get an order compelling compliance. When client picked up the guns, his Mossberg shotgun was gone.

The sheriff’s office initially denied that he even had one, luckily he’d kept a copy of the inventory. It took seven months for him to get reimbursement for the Mossberg. The sheriff’s office never did say what happened to it other than there must have been a mix up.

While all of that is going on, client was looking for work. He had two interviews that went well and he was told that he would be offered the job once the background check was done. Both jobs retracted offers after the background check came back.

So we had to get copies of the background checks from the background check services. Sure enough, due to how the database on the state side was maintained, the data scrape pulled the protection order and the charge but the dismissal wasn’t showing up yet.

Client now had to decide if he wanted to disclose to a potential employer that, hey, I have a crazy ex who claims false things about me, here’s a copy of the dismissal paperwork or if he wanted to wait the five weeks it would take for the dismissals to propagate through the dbase.

Also the dismissal paperwork on the criminal charges was marked dismissed due to failure of complaining witness to appear. That said nothing about she lied about this entire thing. Boss had to explain the situation to an employer who, thankfully, listened.

Because they were friends, Boss handled this at a very low rate. It still cost the guy $2,500. If it had been at Boss’s standard rate? Well over $10,000. All for something that was an actual lie. But but but alex! Due process! It worked! Sure. In theory, it did.

The protection order was not renewed. The criminal charges were dropped. He got all but one of his guns back. He got a job, eventually. It all worked. Sure it did. All it cost him was $2,500, months of his life, humiliation during interviews, and immense stress. For a lie.

This guy, mind, had done nothing wrong; he had committed no crime, had never harmed a single soul with his deadly, e-ville ARSENAL!!! of GUNSGUNSGUNSGUNSGUNS!!! He did, however, make one mistake, a really bad one: he married a psychotic, vengeful, conniving bitch, then decided to rectify his error and ditch her batshit-crazy ass formally and legally.

And that—thanks to the megalomania and ghoulish opportunism of American ProPols, Soviet-style “red-flag” laws, and the cowardly anti-gun mania of the typical American “liberal” panic-ninny—was all it took for the ÜberState to get its talons well and truly into him and turn his whole life upside down and inside out.

Now lest we forget, this guy is one of the lucky ones. The story ended more or less happily for him; dude got two of his three guns back and was eventually reimbursed for the Mossberg shotter the cops stole, after lying about it—albeit only partially, it seems safe to assume. But for every gun guy with a grudge-nursing spouse, neighbor, or co-worker who somehow gets to skate away as relatively cleanly as Alexthechick’s lucky client, you can be sure that, as this “red-flag” horseshit continues to gain traction across the FUSA, there will be at least five, perhaps even ten less fortunate but equally innocent souls who, after five or ten years of desperately fighting a losing battle with The Power, ends up bankrupted by lawyer’s fees, fines, and court costs; jobless, maybe even homeless also; and stripped of not just a gun collection he spent years and mucho dinero and trabajo putting together, but a painful chunk of everything else he owns as well.

No one seems to really know for sure, but there are currently betwixt twenty and perhaps as high as forty thousand-plus gun laws on the books in this *cough cough* “free” country—a country in which a solid share of its citizenry is constantly congratulating itself on having done such a bang-up job of understanding, treasuring, and defending its precious Second Amendment rights. INESCAPABLE FACT: One more gun-control law, or a hundred of them, is not going to prevent a single sad-sack whackadoodle bound and determined to engrave his name into the annals of mass-murdering fiends from securing his fifteen minutes of notoriety. Only children and/or the blood-simple could seriously imagine that a real solution might be so easily found.

Are there effective measures that could be taken to make it more difficult, even damned near impossible, for such sickos to consummate their diseased fantasies of score-settling and schoolyard mayhem? Absolutely, yes. But we’re unlikely to avail ourselves of them, because they will necessarily involve a sort of cascading series of long-term projects that will strike a lethargic, by-and-large contented adult population as too extreme, too unpleasant, and in direct contravention of the verymost fundamental American principles. Which, okay, I admit they are at that. But still. For whatever it might be worth, then, we must:

  • Surgically excise the malignancies seeded by the Left like time-bombs throughout American society and institutions, which in turn will require that we
  • Disrupt and erode the Left’s ability to exercise unwholesome or destructive influence on American society and institutions henceforth, no matter what it might take
  • Develop uncompromising, proactive strategies to counter and/or prevent dissemination of political philosophies which advocate replacing our Founding ideals with collectivist, Statist, Marxist/socialist, or totalitarian-Left ideological systems

Doing those things won’t rid us of this nightmarish scourge immediately; nothing can, more’s the pity. But, in concert with a broad resurgence of enthusiasm for Christian piety and restraint, responsible adulthood, traditional family life, maturity, and moderation, as the very middle-class (ie, Whypeepuh) virtues the Left spent decades denigrating as suffocating, stilted, and unnatural gradually come back to preeminence, these school shooters As J Christian Adams so brilliantly opined in his seminal 2018 piece:

The millennial generation might be surprised to learn that theirs is the first without guns in school. Just 30 years ago, high school kids rode the bus with rifles and shot their guns at high school rifle ranges.

After another school shooting, it’s time to ask: what changed?

Thirty years ago, kids who brought their rifles to the high school shooting range didn’t wonder about evil and cultural decay. They simply lived in a time in America when right and wrong were more starkly defined, where expectations about behavior were clear, and wickedness hadn’t been normalized.

The idea that guns caused the carnage we have faced is so intellectually bankrupt that it isn’t worth discussing.

Perfectly true, I couldn’t agree more. So it’s high time we stopped discussing it then, wouldn’tcha say? Gun-grabber SOP after each of these hideous massacres has become so familiar, so by-rote and predictable, it’s now gotten tiresome as well as pointless. We know what they’re really after; they know that we see through them and have NO INTENTION WHATSOEVER of letting them achieve their ultimate goal. From here on out, let’s not allow them to drag us along for yet another ride down the same old road. From here on out, the discussion is OVER. We ain’t gonna play your game anymore. The one and only way you’re ever going to get them will be bullets first. Period, full fucking stop, end of fucking story.

At this late date, statistics, comparative analysis, common sense, the historical record, and observable reality have all made it perfectly clear that, here in the United States of America in this, the Year of our Lord 2022, we do NOT have a gun problem. What we have is a Democrat problem, a Leftist problem, a liberal problem. From the calculated rubbling of a once healthy, orderly, and decent society—said rubbling being the fruit of a dimwit nihilism that provided a kind of soul-stunting chrysalis from whence, like so many Death’s-Head moths, the school shooters could crawl into the light of day; to staggering hyperinflation; to a wantonly shattered economy; to unprecedented shortages; to unheard-of prices for the fossil fuels which are the very lifeblood of every First World economy in the name of a risibly phony climate “crisis”; to burdensome, prosperity-throttling overregulation; to a sprawling, meddlesome, Constitution-profaning central government; to rogue, out of control, and unaccountable federal agencies and agents; to in-your-face exhibitions of sexual dementia thrust upon bewildered five year olds in our public schools and libraries; to public school teachers, aides, principals, administrators, and boards of education who misperceive their mission as indoctrination instead of education, seduction rather than instruction, but who even so are such brave, transgressive Warriors for Justice they desperately try to hide the truth of what they’re up to from parents and dishonestly deny the whole thing when caught red-handed, like the slinking cowardly shitlibs they are; to rampant urban lawlessness overseen by a “justice” system so thoroughly corrupt and dysfunctional it can’t even begin to rein in the marauding thugs; to a power grid so decrepit, overstressed, and ill-maintained no knowledgeable person seriously expects it to hold together for very much longer—virtually ALL of our nation’s problems, issues, and failures can rightly be laid on a single doorstep. Which happens to be nailed to the front porch of the House Of Progressivism.

Gee, if only there was some way we could properly thank these fine folks for all they’ve done for to us…

When only one side is open to fair and honest debate, guess which side will win

Posted on      by     

An argument founded on a false premise.

If the recent assassination attempt targeting Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh weren’t sufficient proof that a divided America is tiptoeing toward violent conflict, a research firm released a “disturbing poll” showing that nearly half of male Democrats under the age of 50 believe it acceptable to assassinate a politician “who is harming the country or our democracy.”

Uh huh. Know who else deemed ruthless politically-motivated violence not only “acceptable,” but downright essential? Go on, guess.

Sen. Rand Paul, who has suffered two violent, politically motivated attacks in recent years, called out the White House and congressional Democrats for “ginning up and encouraging” violence. However, in a country that increasingly eschews rational debate and embraces the vituperative soundbites of reality TV, it can be no surprise that the political stakes in America are tending toward bloodshed.

The author’s overly delicate sensibilities prevent him from digging down deep enough to uncover the root cause behind both the eschewal of rational, respectful debate and the escalating inclination towards bloodshed: the America-hating Left’s open advocacy for extreme authoritarianist tyranny, an ideology which is impossible to reconcile with the ideals of our Founding Fathers.

It was once widely understood in the United States that vociferous debate and vigorous policy disagreement were features of a healthy American society. Hashing out arguments over contested issues in the public square had two immediate salubrious effects: it allowed the average American to appreciate the “pros” and “cons” of consequential policy decisions, and it provided those whose viewpoints did not win the day to nonetheless speak their minds.

Here we have ourselves another insuperable problem: how can any debate, vociferous or otherwise, take place when of the two contestants has demonstrated, repeatedly and unequivocally, his inflexible disdain for it? Is their any point to trading away our core ideals in bootless pursuit of a hopeless bargain? If you’re open to compromise with Leftists, which parts of the Constitution are you willing to throw away? How many times must a stubborn fool be kicked in the teeth before he stops crawling back for more of the same?

As a testament to how vital debate and disagreement are to the process of creating good public policy, it has often been the case throughout American history that the well-articulated arguments of the “losing side” eventually rise to guide future generations.

Another suicidal, self-evidently false assumption: that the phantasmagorical ideal of a decent, patriotic, well-intentioned Left whom men of integrity can trust to engage in honest debate lives on still, perhaps even thrives, in direct contravention of all available evidence. The importance of well-articulated arguments and respectful disagreement lies not so much in their being vital to the health of a Republic than in being confirmational markers of a healthy Republic’s existence.

Of all the fruits that naturally grow from the variegated branches of free speech, its disposition toward counseling wisdom is perhaps the sweetest. In an age when the word “democracy” is thrown around indiscriminately by politicians who wish to clothe themselves in its virtuous connotations, it is society’s respect for diverse opinions and its willingness to engage those opinions with serious debate that truly provide the cornerstone of any democratic system.

Yet where does our nation stand today — on the side of free and muscular debate, confident that lively disagreement only strengthens America’s foundations? Or on the side of insular state-sponsored dogma that tends to smother the full range of voices naturally expected from a diverse society? 

To ask the question is to answer it. In a society truly confident in the strengthening quality of free and muscular debate, there’s no need to even ask. In a society smothering under the malign insularity of state-sponsored dogma, questioning it is outlawed, a criminal offense.

So what does it say about the current health of our nation that so many Americans seem unable or unwilling to respect opposing points of view? What does it say about our political leaders when they increasingly spurn public debate and vilify those with whom they disagree? What does it say about our institutions when they are quick to label those who protest government policies as “domestic terrorists”? What does it say about our prominent news publications when they declare certain debates “settled” or certain opinions “disinformation”?

What does it say about the author, that he would have us “respect” creeping Marxist tyranny in our own goddamned country instead of fighting to the very last extreme to destroy it?

It says, I believe, that we are advancing down a dangerous path in the United States, one that will only become more treacherous the more we refuse to “agree to disagree.” Silencing opinion to drown out noise will only cause greater animosity.

Which animosity, on the part of the blameless multitudes who have been unjustly silenced, is entirely commendable. Admittedly, the path is a dangerous one. Unfortunately, we’ve advanced practically to the end of it, we’re just coasting along with no brakes, and it’s all downhill for us now.

Censoring dissent in order to fabricate “unanimous agreement” will only lead to bad policy outcomes. Demonizing adversaries as unworthy of consideration will only divide us more sharply.

Apart from the malodorous and un-American use of censorship, insult, and intimidation to manipulate public debate, increasing incidents of political violence are timely reminders why vigorous argument still serves this country best.

“Vigorous argument” can best serve only a healthy Republic, whose polity holds values and beliefs that may differ, but are in the main compatible.

If debate and disagreement are no longer understood as hallmarks of the American system of democracy, then that system will quickly go up in smoke. If individual Americans are treated as “domestic enemies” for their political beliefs, then spiraling violence becomes inevitable.

Got some bad news for ya, JB: the American system, a perennially-harried combustible “transitioned” by fanatically patient and determined Leftist firebugs into soot and smoke which long since wafted right up the chimney, out, and away. Worst of all, if we’re too prissy, too stiff with delusion, too complacent and/or cowed, to admit to ourselves the existence of a formidable OpFor contingent of bona-fide, self-declared “Enemies, Domestic,” we were soundly defeated well before the first shot was fired.

It’s remarkable, the number of otherwise intelligent people who sincerely believe today’s dissolute, incurious, lazy-minded generation of Americans to be well above so much as contemplating any future resort to the barbaric measures employed by our primitive, unenlightened Founders to carve out a new nation from the constricting coils of the British Empire for themselves and their posterity. As if Jefferson’s prophetic warnings of the ever-present need to maintain a finely-honed edge on our ability to call down the thunder whenever the situation requires it of liberty-loving Americans.

The New Abby Normal

Posted on      by     

Why you will never get my gun, Reason #eighty bazillion and six.

Pennsylvania Democratic congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan has attributed her past electoral success to her focus on “civility” and “unity.” Now, she says the Republican Party is “diseased” and must be “cleansed.”

Houlahan’s comments came during a May 27 appearance on the Daily Beast‘s The New Abnormal podcast, which saw the congresswoman disparage Republicans as deplorable and anti-democratic.

“This is, in my opinion, a diseased Republican Party. And it needs to be cured and cleansed,” Houlahan said. “So the stakes of having a Republican, as an example, in my seat are more than just policy differences. They are democracy, in my opinion.”

Houlahan’s rhetoric is a far cry from 2020, when the Democrat credited her political success to her message of “civility,” “decency,” “unity,” and “empathy.” “People ask me constantly how I flipped a seat in a competitive district. One of the reasons is that I made civility and decency a core of my campaign,” Houlahan said at the time. “Pennsylvanians want unity. They want leaders who rise above the fray and lead with kindness and empathy towards all Americans.”

Houlahan’s campaign did not return a request for comment. The Democrat’s decision to abandon her message of unity in favor of more inflammatory rhetoric toward Republicans closely resembles Biden’s track record. After promising “unity” on the 2020 campaign trail, the president went on to equate Republican senators to segregationists during a January speech, a move that drew criticism from some fellow Democrats. Biden has since centered his midterm election strategy on labeling Republicans “ultra MAGA,” a term that reflects the GOP’s “extremism,” according to the White House.

“Civility and decency are solely needed to heal this country. Biden has that,” Houlahan said before the 2020 election. Just one year prior, the congresswoman compared President Donald Trump to a terrorist.

Sorry, bitch, but I’m no longer interested in healing a gott-damned thing. My sole interest now is in destroying you—destroying you, the horse you rode in on, your family and friends, and everybody who “thinks” like you so utterly, so entirely, that none of your kind can ever rise to trouble me and mine again.

No deal, fatass

Posted on      by     

Wait, this morbidly obese dimwit hasn’t choked to death on his forty-third Bearclaw of the morning yet?

Michael Moore Calls for Full Repeal of Second Amendment — ‘You Don’t Need a Gun’
Leftist activist and filmmaker Michael Moore used his Friday podcast “Rumble Michael Moore” to call for a full repeal of the Second Amendment in the wake of the Uvalde, TX school shooting.

Moore said, “I know that there are Democratic Party leaders that do not want me saying this…”

He continued, “I make no apologies for it because I understand the history of this country, and I don’t think we should be afraid to say this. Repeal the Second Amendment. Repeal the Second Amendment.”

Any fool who can propose something so manifestly un-American clearly doesn’t understand one goddamned thing about the history of this country—nor about the plainly and explicitly expressed beliefs and intentions of the brave men who accepted the fearful challenge of armed conflict with what was at the time the mightiest military in all of human history to bring into being the very country and Constitution the Lard Lad so despicably misrepresents and disgraces.

Moore added, “That is it. That is what we need to do. We need to start a movement to repeal the Second Amendment and replace it with something that says it’s not about the right of somebody to own a gun, the right of all of us to be protected from gun violence. We have a right to live.”

Do it then, fuckface. Stop running your big fat mouth and just do it already. Please, I’m begging you to. Let’s get on down and get busy here, asshole. I want to teach you all about what I have a right to do.

He concluded, “Nearly 70% of us do not own a firearm. We don’t own a gun. We are not a nation of gun owners.”

Lie.

“The 30% who do own a gun, most of them are law-abiding citizens. I don’t know what they think they are going to use that gun for.”

Don’t give a shit what you think you know or do not know. Neither your obtuseness nor your obstinacy form any part of my decision to exercise my God-granted, Constitutionally-enumerated natural rights. My intentions where my personal weaponry is concerned are simply none of your goddamned business, nor of your pissypantsed shitlib confreres. You “people” make your aggregate lack of knowledge, self-respect, and historical literacy MY business at your own great personal hazard.

“Those who are hunters, I understand that they like to hunt. Those who like to fire guns on shooting ranges, it’s fun to hit the target, great go for it, but we need to do what other countries do, where you store the gun at the gun club, at the gun range.”

Idiot. After a couple centuries of having the concept of America as being unique among all nations surgically implanted into the national consciousness, how is it that bright-boy here thinks it so vitally important that we must now throw that uniqueness away and discard the very rights and liberties that once so proudly distinguished us from them? Sorry, Blubber Boy, your fearful cowardice does NOT constitute reason enough to do that in my book.

“You don’t want a gun in the house. If you’re afraid of somebody breaking in, get a dog. You don’t need a gun.”

Not for you to say, not your decision to make, none of your goddamned motherfucking business. Who the fuck do you think you are anyway, shitass?

“You have a greater chance of harming yourself or others in your family with that gun in the house.”

Lie.

I speak now directly to the contemptible, arrogant Michael Moore himself:

I WILL DEFEND MY RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES TO THE VERY DEATH AGAINST ANY AND ALL WOULD-BE DESPOTS WHO WOULD TRY TO STRIP THEM FROM ME. YOU WILL NEVER, EVER GET MY AR-15. NOT EVER. I WILL RESIST ANY AND ALL ATTEMPTS TO DO SUCH, BY EVERY METHOD AND/OR TACTIC AVAILABLE TO ME, UP TO AND VERY DEFINITELY INCLUDING KILLING YOU WITH MY BARE HANDS.

Consider that my promise to you, shitlibs. Fuck around and find out.

YOU. WILL. NOT. GET. MY. GUNS.

Update! A little of that history Big ‘Un up there disingenuously claims to “understand.”

There is a great deal of misinformation—if not disinformation—regarding “assault weapons.” Contrary to popular belief, the “AR” in AR-15 does not stand for “assault rifle” but “Armalite,” the company that first manufactured the AR-15, which it subsequently sold to Colt. Like most magazine-fed pistols and rifles, it is a semiautomatic weapon, which means that the shooter must pull the trigger for each round discharged. The military version, the M-16, which was introduced during the Vietnam War, differs from the AR-15 in that it has a selector, enabling the shooter to depress the trigger once to fire multiple rounds.

The first rifle with the features of today’s AR-15 was introduced in 1907: the semiautomatic Winchester Model 1907, which anyone could buy from the Sears-Roebuck catalog. While American soldiers continued to carry bolt-action rifles until they were issued the M-1 Garand at the beginning of World War II, American citizens had access to a rifle that differs from today’s AR-15 in that it fired a larger round (.351 caliber) and lacked the short, black, plastic stock that makes the AR-15 look so sinister.

The fact that both the Winchester M-1907 and the AR-15 were developed and sold to U.S. civilians before they were adapted to military use leads to the question often raised by advocates of gun control: why is it necessary for ordinary citizens to own “military-style” weapons?

The answer lies at the heart of America’s constitutional system and explains the critical importance of the Second Amendment. What is new about the gun control debate is that gun control advocates, who once at least paid lip service to the Second Amendment of the Constitution, now target it openly. For instance, Biden recently claimed that “the Second Amendment is not absolute.”

First, it is important to realize that the Constitution does not grant or confer “rights.” It protects the antecedent rights that individuals possess “by nature.” Those fundamental rights are enumerated in the Declaration of Independence: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Abraham Lincoln articulated the relationship between the Declaration and the Constitution: the latter was, he wrote, a “frame of silver” around the former, “the apple of gold.” The frame of silver exists for the sake of the apple of gold.

Implicit in the right to life and liberty is the right of self-defense, both against others and a tyrannical government. The idea of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny and governmental oppression lies at the heart of the Second Amendment. America’s founders inherited the teachings of the 17th century “Commonwealthmen,” such as James Harrington, who wrote in opposition to Oliver Cromwell’s use of a standing army to abolish Parliament and rule as a dictator. They saw the same use of a standing army by royal governors to usurp the rights of colonists.

Many advocates of gun control argue that the wording of the amendment—“a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”—means that only members of the National Guard, the successor to the founders’ militia, are to be armed. But this misconstrues what the founders meant by the term. For them, a militia, “a people numerous and armed,” constituted the ultimate guardian of liberty, the primary means of enabling citizens not only to protect themselves against their fellows but also to protect themselves from an oppressive government.

“The militia is our ultimate safety,” said Patrick Henry during the Virginia ratifying convention. “We can have no security without it. The great object is that every man be armed…” Both the Pennsylvania and Vermont constitutions asserted that “the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state…”

What can be done to prevent tragedies like Uvalde? Improve security at schools. Abolish the nonsensical idea of gun-free zones. Pay serious attention to potential shooters who telegraph their intentions. Focusing on guns is the worst sort of mental laziness. As the case of the aforementioned Winchester M-1907 suggests, access to powerful firearms does not explain the recent spate of mass shootings. When I was growing up, many high schools had shooting clubs. Teenagers carried rifles and shotguns in their cars and trucks. Other problems in American society, e.g. absent fathers, a disdain for masculine virtues, and social isolation, are more likely at fault.

The Second Amendment is not the culprit here. The founders understood the importance of an armed citizenry. History has shown us what happens when the country’s people are disarmed. Some may claim that our government poses no such threat to U.S. citizens, but recent events should have disabused us of that conceit.

The senile bastard Biden may not think the 2A is “absolute,” but I do. And who cares what a liberal idiot like him thinks anyway? He and his ilk have already revealed more than any of us will ever need to know about just how little the Founders’ Constitution means to them. Sorry, assholes, but I say it again:

YOU. WILL. NOT. GET. MY. GUNS.

Priorities

Posted on      by     

Tucker nails it clean and tight yet again.

You know it tells you a lot about the priorities of a ruling class that the rest of us are getting yet another lecture about January 6th tonight from our moral inferiors, no less. An outbreak of mob violence, a forgettably minor outbreak by recent standards, that took place more than a year and a half ago, but they’ve never stopped talking about it.

In the meantime, in the 18 months since January 6, gas prices have doubled. Drug ODs have reached their highest point ever. The U.S. economy is now careening toward a devastating recession at best and scariest and least noted of all, this country has never in its history been closer to a nuclear war.

Yet the other networks can’t be bothered to cover any of that tonight. Instead, they’ve interrupted their regularly scheduled programing to bring you yet another extended primetime harangue from Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney about Donald Trump and QAnon. The whole thing is insulting.

In fact, it’s deranged and we’re not playing along. This is the only hour on an American news channel that will not be carrying their propaganda live. They are lying, and we are not going to help them do it. What we will do instead is to try to tell you the truth. We’ve attempted to do that since the day this happened.

We hated seeing vandalism at the U.S. Capitol a year and a half ago, and we said so at the time, but we did not think it was an insurrection because it was not an insurrection. It was not even close to an insurrection. Not a single person in the crowd that day was found to be carrying a firearm – some insurrection. In fact, the only person who wound up shot to death was a protester.

She was a 36-year-old military veteran called Ashli Babbitt. Babbitt was just over 5 feet tall. She was unarmed. She posed no conceivable threat to anyone, but Capitol Hill Police shot her in the neck and never explained why that was justified. Those are the facts of January 6, but since the very first hours, they have been distorted beyond recognition, relentlessly culminating with last night.

Last night, CBS Nightly News told its viewers that insurrectionists at the Capitol on January 6 “caused the deaths of five police officers.” That is a pure lie. There is nothing true about it, and they know that perfectly well.

Well, duh. Lying is their usual MO, nothing more than SOP for them. It’s how they do their job; more to the point, it’s what they consider their job to be. They’re not wrong, either, seeing as how they’re propagandists rather than actual journalists.

Here’s reporter Bob Costa, who should be deeply ashamed to say something this dishonest.

ROBERT COSTA, CBS: Thursday’s primetime hearing will take Americans back to January 6, when an estimated 2,000 rioters breached the Capitol building, causing the deaths of five police officers.

It’s hard to believe he said that. Rioters cause the deaths of five police officers. You just heard CBS News tell its viewers that. This must be the big lie theory. The more bewilderingly false a claim is, the more likely you will be to believe it. Apparently, that’s what they’re betting on. In fact, precisely zero police officers were killed by rioters on January 6, not five, none. Not a single one. So, how’d they get to five? Well, CBS is counting the suicides of local police officers that took place after January 6, in some cases, long after January 6.

The lies go on copiously unspooling from there, perhaps more of them and more egregious ones than you already knew about. Carlson covers one hell of a lot of ground here, skewering a whole slaughterhouse’s worth of shitlib sacred cows, and you should definitely read the whole thing. I can’t resist including his deft gutting of Ms Lindsey Graham:

In fact, Lindsey Graham, violence worshiper to the end, said that his only regret was that the Capitol Police didn’t shoot more Trump voters in the neck and kill them. “You’ve got guns, use them,” Graham said. So here you have a sitting U.S. senator, a Republican, urging police officers to shoot unarmed Americans, many of whom were ushered into the Capitol building by law enforcement.

Miss Lindsey reminds me a lot of a discarded, jizz-leaking condom I saw worming disgustingly around in the breeze on the beach at Coney Island once. Although, in xhrzhm’s defense, the gasbag IS well-known for running his yap a lot without really meaning a word he says. The thrilling conclusion:

We are not defending and would never defend vandalism, violence, rioting. We disapproved of it when it happened. We disapprove of it now, all riots, not just this one. But this was not an insurrection.

But, you know what will get you to insurrection? If you ignore the legitimate concerns of a population, if you brush them aside as if they don’t matter when gas goes to $5 and you say “buy an electric car.” When cities become so filthy and so dangerous that you can’t live there, when the economy becomes so distorted that your own children have no hope of getting married and giving you grandchildren, when you don’t care at all about any of that and all you do is talk about yourself, nonstop – you might get an insurrection if you behave like that, speaking of insurrection.

In such circumstances, you SHOULD get one; in fact, in the explicit opinion of our Founding Fathers, you MUST.

As I’ve said before here, it’s a curious kind of “insurrection” when the purported “insurrectionists” forget to bring any guns along with ’em to the party. The silver lining to the whole shit circus? This beautiful, beautiful photo:

J6CongressCrawler.jpeg

Crawl, Congresscritters, crawl. I’ve loved that pic since I first saw it, and I’ll love it forever. If nothing else, it’s proof positive of just how easy it would be to mount a real insurrection—against such craven, pussified opposition as that, how could it not succeed? Those overprivileged sissymaries would be too busy shitting themselves and begging for mercy to offer much in the way of effective resistance.

Statesmen? Don’t make me laugh. Consider the above picture the “Now” portion, of which the following would be the “Then.”

The great General Washington
What a REAL President looks like, which is easy to forget nowadays

One of these things is not like the other, eh? Some call it “progress,” but be damned if I ever will.

You’ll never get mine

Posted on      by     

Not one more fucking inch.

We’ve  compromised our Nation and ourselves into a semi-Soviet, woke, ‘through the looking glass’, turning our children into travesties of human beings, and now are seriously talking about giving the Communists what they need to finish the job, namely, disarming the American public.

THIS is the way to stop ‘mass shooters’:  Carry, Practice. Carry. Practice.  And, if that time comes, ‘Take Out the Trash!’

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced Tuesday that he is going to give a bipartisan group of Senators more time to work out how many of our constitutional rights we will lose.

How many? Nah, it’s just the one, actually—the same one it always is, and always has been. As the Duke of Wellington said at Waterloo, they’re coming at us in the same old style. But at long last, it is imperative that Real Americans foresake General Picton’s advice and not meet them in the same old style anymore. The tit-for-tat, proportionality über alles method has permitted them to advance so far that the 2A has been very nearly extinguished as a practical matter, so it’s time and past time for a newer, more defiant and bellicose approach. Unless we swap the kid gloves for a set of knuckledusters with a quickness, all will be lost, and that right soon.

How magnanimous of the Leader. He and the Dems are apparently not in any rush to institute a laundry list of Second Amendment infringements. Why should they be? Each day that goes by their lapdogs in the mainstream media make their case for them. Even FOX News has joined in. FOX’s news actors positively gushed Tuesday over Matthew McConaughey’s recent guns-are-bad performance. “It was so emotional,” one of their vacuous news actors muttered.

And hey, it’s NEVER a bad idea to base national policy purely on emotion instead of reason, logic, and the fucking US Constitution, right? Not that the Democrats would agree, natch—their entire policy platform has been based exclusively on emotion since the mid-60s, if not longer.

Enough is enough.

I am sick of watching our gun rights being bartered away by RINOs, Quislings and traitors, none of whom speak for me. None of whom understand guns. None of whom have likely even fired a damn gun. And, quite frankly, I don’t care which liberal Hollywood actor they drag in next to buttress their case.

We have nothing to gain by entering into discussions with the gun banners. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Conversely, we have everything to lose. Our team should immediately walk away from the table. It’s not like we’re going to get anything from the talks. The gun banners expect us to willingly give up some constitutional rights. They won’t give up anything. This is not even an actual discussion. It’s a strong-arm robbery.

DINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDING WE HAVE A WINNAH! I swear, the above paragraph is so chock-full of rich, buttery goodness you could get fat from reading it.

Instead, we need to hold the line. We need to understand that the Uvalde killings weren’t caused by you or me or the guns in our safes. They weren’t caused by the NRA, the GOA, the SAF, the USCCA or by the scores of state-level gun-rights groups. Neither were the killings the fault of the gun or the gunmaker. The madman was at fault, may he continue to rot in hell.

Correct as far as it goes, which isn’t quite far enough. The madman, directly, yes. Indirectly, the societal rot carefully seeded, nurtured, and brought to full emetic flower by the Evil Left. WE understand this perfectly well already; THEY may or may not, but will never, ever admit the inescapable truth therein, lest their ongoing program of tyranny, subjugation, and untrammeled power suffer for it.

The gun banners excel at instituting a sense of mass guilt whenever one of these atrocities occurs. Unfortunately, many of our lawmakers buy into it and surrender our rights as a result. There are a lot of slices of bread on the table right now – expanded background checks, RKBA infringements for 18-20-year-olds, waiting periods and a national Red Flag law. The gun banners are salivating. I say we put them on a carb-free diet.

Carbs, my squinted eye. The only thing that will work is to put them on a hot-lead diet, as we all damned well ought to know by now. These filthy, conniving shitweasels must never again be treated with as if they were anything other than exactly what we know them to be: liars, manipulators, sneak-thieves, and amoral opportunists with less probity and abstemiousness than a rabid wolverine in rut. Henceforth, the only thing they should ever get from us is the backs of our hands—quite literally, in a way they’ll never forget.

Chuckles Schumer and his fellow Uniparty grubworms think to take guns away from blameless American citizens who have done no wrong whatever, do they? Let them try, then.

Bring it, motherfuckers. Let’s just see what it gets you in the end.

(Via WRSA)

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.

CF Glossary

ProPol: Professional Politician

Vichy GOPe: Putative "Republicans" who talk a great game but never can seem to find a hill they consider worth dying on; Quislings, Petains, Benedicts, backstabbers, fake phony frauds

Fake Phony Fraud(s), S'faccim: two excellent descriptors coined by the late great WABC host Bob Grant which are interchangeable, both meaning as they do pretty much the same thing

Mordor On The Potomac: Washington, DC

The Enemy: shitlibs, Progtards, Leftards, Swamp critters, et al ad nauseum

Burn, Loot, Murder: what the misleading acronym BLM really stands for

pAntiFa: an alternative spelling of "fascist scum"

"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:

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 Sensing

"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 © 2026