Losing our manhood

Well, this certainly explains a lot of things. I mean, a LOT.

Shocking Brand New Research: Testosterone in Total Freefall, May Account for Explosion in Transgenderism

The left celebrates the trend while the right laments it, but what everyone can agree upon is that rates of transgenderism have exploded in the past decade.

“About 42,000 U.S. children ages 6 to 17 were diagnosed with gender dysphoria in 2021, nearly triple the number in 2017,” Reuters reports. A tripling in transgenderism should shock any honest public policy analyst and beg for intense scrutiny.

Many cultural critics and behavioral scientists have postulated that there is a notable “social contagion” element to the trend — in which children are conditioned through public school indoctrination and social/corporate media to assume “transgender” identities for greater social status. Certainly, there is extensive evidence to back up this theory, especially for girls who are more sensitive to social pressures.

Monkey see, monkey do.

The social contagion angle is red meat for the populist right-wing base, who see their children immersed in cult-like groupthink in every civic institution, bankrolled by woke corporate foundations with their own interests in mind. Their outrage is morally justified in this regard.

But the parallel physiological drop-off in sperm counts and testosterone levels, which effectively feminizes boys and men, is also likely an underappreciated angle and arguably even more important than social conditioning.

Eminent researcher Dr. Shanna Swan explains her findings from a recent study that paint an even bleaker picture regarding testosterone and sperm counts than previously imagined.

More, and worse, from Ilana Mercer back in October.

American men are indeed losing the stuff that makes them macho.

Wrote Reuters in 2007:

“A new study has found a ‘substantial’ drop in U.S. men’s testosterone levels since the 1980s.” The average levels of the male hormone have been dropping by an astounding 1 percent a year. A 65-year-old in 1987 would have had testosterone levels 15 percent higher than those of a 65-year-old in 2002.

The reasons for the reduction in testosterone levels remain unclear. A rise in obesity and a decline in smoking have been suggested, since “testosterone levels are lower among overweight people and smoking increases testosterone levels.”

I knew it. Goddammit, I KNEW all those years of smoking were gonna pay off for me sooner or later, one way or another. Other possible factors? Oh, you betcher.

FEMINIZATION

It is very possible, even likely, that the feminization of society over the past 20 to 30 years is changing males, body and mind. It is very possible that the subliminal stress involved in sublimating one’s essential nature is producing less manly men.

Consider: When they are not twerking tush with transexuals, today’s tykes are required to hack their way through page-turners like One Dad Two Dads Brown Dad Blue Dads. Boyhood today also means BB guns and “bang-bang you’re dead” are banned.

Boys are hardwired for competition; the contemporary school enforces cooperation. Boys like to stand out. But team-work obsessed, mediocre, mostly female school teachers teach them to fade into the background. Boys thrive in more disciplined, structured learning environments; the American school system is synonymous with letting it all hang out.

Sons are more likely to be raised without male mentors, since moms, in the last few decades, are more inclined to divorce (and get custody), never marry, or bear children out of wedlock. The schools have been emptied of manly men and staffed by feminists, mostly lacking in the Y chromosome. Although boys (and girls) require discipline, the rare disciplinarian risks parent-driven litigation.

DEMONIZATION

Boys leave secondary school suffused with a sense of their gender as a repository for society’s ills. As if that’s not bad enough, they soon discover that society privileges girls in tertiary schools and in the workplace. Why, even girls favor girls. Most young women swoon over washed-out, asexual celebrities—cherubic-looking, soft-spoken, “girlie-men,” are replacing deep-voiced, macho men as hot favorites.

Women say they look for partners who are “sweet and sensitive.” If they’re having children with androgynous men who grow bum-fluff for stubble, then perhaps they’re breeding out testosterone.

The smashing success of politically incorrect books such as The Dangerous Book for Boys proves how desperate little boys are to be boys again—the book reintroduced a new generation of youngsters to the joys of catapult-making, knot-tying, stone skimming, astronomy, and such “toxic masculinity”. (Concocting rocket fuel from saltpeter and sugar is not in the book, but is a lot of fun—or so my husband tells me.)

Well, sure, but you gotta watch out handling that damned saltpeter stuff; as I recollect (and I could very well be all wet on this), they used to hand it out in prisons to blunt the edge of the raging male sex drive by inducing impotence, thereby averting the obvious (ahem) problems that commonly happen in the Big House.

As for the rest of it, like I’ve said many times, the now-ubiquitous phrase “toxic masculinity” is an abomination in and of itself, one that has wrought incalculable damage on entire generations of young American men and boys. How can a society spend decades excoriating masculinity—effectively selecting for sissification and emasculation—and then act all shocked and surprised when it winds up ridiculously overstocked on emasculated sissies?

A good while back, I set up a “Toxic Feminism” category here at Ye Olde Colde Furye Blogge. There was a reason for that, and it remains a very good one. The sad, sorry fact of the matter is, it’s Toxic Feminists who did that to us; now, society will be paying the price for going along with that genuine hate-crime for years to come.

(Via Vodkapundit)

3

You will ALL become one with the Borg

Whether you like it or not.

Genvax Technologies, a startup dedicated to bringing advances in self-amplifying mRNA (saRNA) vaccine production to animal health, has secured $6.5 million in series seed funding.

United Animal Health led the financing with participation from Johnsonville Ventures, Iowa Corn Growers Association, Summit Agricultural Group and Ag Startup Engine. This investor coalition represents animal health, nutrition, feed, meat packers and consumer products in the fight against existing and emerging threats to the food supply chain.

“The threat posed to producers and consumers by foreign animal diseases like African swine fever (ASF) and constantly mutating variants of swine influenza is extraordinary,” Joel Harris, CEO and co-founder of Genvax Technologies, said in a release. “The goal is to develop a vaccine that matches 100% to the specific strain when a disease outbreak occurs.”

The company’s proprietary saRNA platform allows for rapid development of herd-specific vaccines matched 100% to the variant strain circulating in an animal-production operation. By inserting a specific transgene or “gene of interest” (GOI) matched to the variant strain into the platform, the saRNA can generate an antibody response without requiring the whole pathogen, Genvax explained.

Over to Bayou Pete for the truly scary part.

Sounds exciting, doesn’t it?…until one comes to the bit about “inserting a specific transgene or “gene of interest”. Wait a minute.  You’re going to inject a new gene, distributed using the same mRNA technology that’s blamed for many of the COVID-19 vaxx side-effects, into our food supply?

If this goes on, how can we trust pork and pork products to be safe to eat? Oh, the technologists will doubtless scoff at such fears, and assure us that there’s nothing to worry about – but they said that about the COVID-19 vaccines as well, didn’t they? Look how well that’s worked out!

It’s not just pork, either. Other meat products may find themselves treated in the same way. For that matter, scientists have already spoken of inserting mRNA vaccines into vegetables and fruit. What if, over time, our entire food supply becomes a carrier of this stuff?

I may not be a scientist, and I lack their perspective on this: but I can’t help thinking that this may be one of the most dangerous, most potentially threatening technologies ever developed. The further away we can keep it from our food supply, the better, as far as I’m concerned.

Whodathunkit? After dreading the possibility of race war, civil war, religious war, revolutionary war, &c for all this time, it may well turn out that a war of the Purebloods versus the Vaxxed is the likeliest prospect of them all.

4

Look back in anger sorrow

Diplomad takes a look in the ol’ rearview, not just at the disastrous annum just past, but a lot further back than that.

This is where I go full old man.

This no-good, horrid year of 2022 draws to a close–none too soon for my taste–and I can only hope that 2023 will prove better. Will it? While I have no great powers of observation and foretelling, what little I do have tell me that things will not get any better. Sorry to be so cheerful.

The impending death of the current year has me reflecting on my own life, and what I have done and not done with it.  First, my own life. What have I done? Not much really. I spent some 34 years in the State Department; my tenure there will pass, as they say in Spanish, “sin pena ni gloria,” i.e., unnoticed one way or another. I devoted my adult life to what I thought was my country, its values, and interests. I am now wracked with doubts that that was the case. As we see from the “Twitter Files,” the doubts I had about what was really going on have proven out. I am deeply saddened and depressed by that. Those institutions with which I worked closely for so many years, e.g., FBI, CIA, DOJ, have turned out to be the real enemies. The Taliban, AQ, PRC, or the USSR, could not undermine our nation to any degree comparable to what has been done by our high-tech mafia, allied with the pro-regime media, and the key institutions of the Deep State. The enemy is here; they are in our house, and as we so graphically see every day on our border are openly working to tear it apart. Not just here. I see the same happening in Australia, New Zealand, the UK, and all over Western Europe.

The assault on the values, even the most basic ones, of our civilization is relentless. The world we leave our grandchildren is a horrid one: Twerking drag queens in our libraries and schools; feral youth owning the streets; malicious cretins dominating our legal, educational, and public health institutions; an entertainment industry promoting violence and perversion. Not cheerful.

Given the way things currently stand, only a fool, a hermit, or a still-slumbering Rip Van Winkle could be.

6
2
1

Raise a glass!

I’ll drink to that.

Most of today’s regulatory framework for alcohol traces back to the immediate post-Prohibition years. The basic assumption was that alcohol consumption is bad but unavoidable. The goal, then, was to regulate in ways that led people to drink less, via high taxes and inconveniences, without returning to the bootleggers and speakeasies of the disastrous Prohibition era.

Though things have lightened up a bit since then, that’s still the basic philosophy today. Alcohol discussions tend to turn on things like liver damage, impaired driving, violence and so on.

These negative consequences are real. But as Slingerland makes clear, they aren’t the whole story. There are a lot of less-heralded positives.

Given the downsides, alcohol consumption must also offer some advantages, Slingerland reasons, else it would have died out. But it hasn’t. In fact it’s hard to find successful civilizations that don’t use alcohol — and those few that qualify tend to replace it with other intoxicants that have similar effects.

Drinking doesn’t just make us feel good,

Until the hangover sets in.

it also makes us get along better,

Until the brawl breaks out.

cooperate more effectively

Until the obstreperousness spills forth.

and think more expansively.

Until the blackout occurs.

Of course, drinking isn’t all upside, but that isn’t the point. The point is that it’s not all downside, either — yet we regulate it, essentially, as if it were. We need a more balanced approach.

Said a mouthful there, Glenn.

And it isn’t just alcohol. As our culture has veered in an increasingly bossy and punitive direction, the tolerance for any sort of downside is vanishing. The “playground movement” at the beginning of the last century argued “better a broken arm than a broken spirit.” Today’s society takes a different approach.

Indubitably so…and there’s a reason for that, too. In present-day Amerika v2.0, broken spirits are the goal, the real point of the whole exercise. Why? The better to oppress you with, my dear. Docile slaves are much easier to lord over than resentful, belligerent ones, you see. The bottom-line problem propping all this foolishness up? The deep-seated Progressivist aversion to any and all risk.

During the pandemic, we saw a degree of safety-ism that discounted the value of humans getting together in the face of tiny or even notional risks, leading to absurdities like ocean paddle-boarders being arrested for paddling maskless. There’s much more value in the activity than risk in being unmasked at sea.

The list of cases where killjoys focus excessively on the negative is huge, and anyone reading this can think of many examples. But what do we do about it?

Ain’t but the one thing: start killing the killjoys. It really is the only way to be rid of them for any meaningful length of time, although even that isn’t permanent.

2
1
3

Ask a silly question Part the Eleventy Million Billion Kajillionth

A: Absofuckinglutely.

Should We Boycott the 2024 Election?
Maybe until the FBI stops directing our political process.

Republicans, no longer pretending to be the opposition party, just helped get the FBI a $600 million budget increase after the censorship bombshells conclusively demonstrated extensive bureau meddling in election-related speech. Every member of Congress now serving has won at least one election in the present era of FBI election manipulation. Some are probably beneficiaries. Should we be surprised that there are so few voices calling for it to end?

But maybe if we vote harder! Maybe the economic conditions, the memory of the riots of 2020, and dissatisfaction with the regime’s pandemic policy will lead the American electorate to wake up and vote smarter? If the FBI could stop a Democratic rout in 2022, why should 2024 be any different? Candidate quality? Don’t insult our intelligence. So Republicans need to run more candidates like John Fetterman?

But suspicions are one thing. We can say with certainty that our government interferes with election-related speech to the benefit of one party and to the detriment of the other. The FBI’s interference in election speech, in (and) of itself, is sufficient to make the elections noncompliant with international election standards. That is the first and most important reform that must be made or our elections cannot be deemed fair.

So why participate in an election that’s being manipulated by the FBI and other government agencies? In sham democracies, when the government refuses to adhere to international standards of fairness and transparency, the opposition parties have simply boycotted the elections.

The FBI censorship scandal is just the latest in a string of questionable actions by the Justice Department that have impacted our elections.

We can all recall that three months before the 2022 election, stories about  the FBI raiding Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago compound dovetailed with the January 6 committee’s effort to convince midterm voters that President Trump planned or directed the Capitol incursion. Just before the 2020 election, the FBI made news in the swing state of Michigan by claiming to have broken up a “plot” to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer, the Democratic governor. Revelations in the subsequent criminal cases exposed the caper as a false flag or entrapment operation, as it turned out that the FBI planned and financed the whole thing. The FBI exercised full control over the timing of the pre-election announcements.

It was, as Julie Kelly reported, “flagrant election interference.” One can remember Robert Mueller’s ridiculous probe, which used leaks to publicly harass the president through the 2018 midterms. In 2016, the FBI famously meddled by exonerating Hillary Clinton of a scandal involving the Clinton family foundation taking money from people seeking favors from the State Deparment when she was secretary of state. The FBI went on to launch a spying operation against candidate Trump’s campaign figures, including Carter Page, and shared classified details of that spying with candidate Clinton’s subcontractor Christopher Steele. (Yes, that happened. See pages 114-115 of the inspector general’s report.) The FBI’s election interference has had real historic consequences. Obamacare would not have been possible, for example, if the FBI had not unseated Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) by framing him for taking a bribe.

Somebody should ask Joe Biden whether he’s willing to sign an executive order banning government involvement in moderation of election-related speech. The next time a hostile reporter tries to slam a dissident politician, maybe someone should retort with a question asking whether that reporter or her employer accepts money from the government. The practice of the FBI sharing information and coordinating with social media is totally destructive of its crucial independence from the government—especially when the FBI uses taxpayer money to pay for the requested censorship.

Sorry, no. Just…NO. None of us should be “asking Joe Biden” and the rest of his sleazy posse of fellow Swamp rats a gott-damned thing. Instead, we should be telling him, and them, a great many things—in terms strong and specific enough to leave no margin whatsoever for error, interpretation, or misunderstanding on anybody’s part.

We can prove government-directed censorship of election-related speech. Now that the FBI said it plans to continue or even expand these efforts, we have a choice to make. Do we legitimize the sham by trying really really really hard to overcome the rigged political forum? Or do we just boycott these sham elections until the FBI stops directing our political process?

I have a much better idea, in two parts which dovetail quite nicely and can be worked simultaneously without impinging on one another at all: 1) we go right on boycotting our ludicrously corrupt elections en masse, thus denying them even the flimsiest scrim of illusory legitimacy, trust, or value via our non-participation, while 2) we systematically dismantle the FBI and DoJ root, branch, and bough—until, as a great man once said, not one stone is left standing on another.

Yep, works for me.

Update! George Carlin says it for me, so I don’t have to.

Wisdom
Words of wisdom

What can one say but, Heh. Duly swiped from WRSA.

1

WHOSE party?

Not yours, not mine, not ours. THEIRS.

At their convention in 1900, the Republicans renominated William McKinley for president. They also had a problem on their hands: a boisterous trouble-maker with an exceptional ability to inspire crowds. His name was Teddy Roosevelt, a man more than one contemporary would describe as “the most remarkable man I ever met.” But the Republican Party had never liked Roosevelt, principally because he was impossible to control. He had a penchant for saying exactly what he thought and doing exactly what he wanted, no matter whether it was in line with the approved party platform.

In 1900, Roosevelt had been making a huge nuisance of himself as governor of New York, a position of massive importance in which, as he grew more and more popular, he became harder and harder to control. The Republicans, led by Thomas C. Platt (“Boss Platt”), wanted him out—out of New York, and out of power, period. So they hatched the perfect plan, nominating him for vice president, where he couldn’t do anything.

Roosevelt took the bait. The temptation of being a top man in Washington, D.C., was too great for him to resist, even though he knew he’d have no real power. And when McKinley won the election, the political bosses were doubly delighted: They had the White House, and they had managed to move TR from the vital role of New York governor to the totally impotent role of vice president.

The vice presidency at the turn of the century was a political graveyard, where politicians were sent to be gently eased out of power forever. We had not yet arrived at the modern tradition of having vice presidents generally rise to the presidency, or at least to the nomination. A vice president wasn’t even guaranteed to be nominated as the running mate for the second term of the president he had served. (McKinley’s first vice president was Garret Hobart, although he had a particularly good reason for not getting a second term—he died in office of a heart attack.)

Teddy Roosevelt’s political career was considered over when he went to Washington as vice president after the Republican victory of 1900. And it would have stayed that way if not for a freak twist of fate: In September 1901, McKinley became the third American president to be assassinated. Roosevelt was elevated from obscurity to the office he most desired and was best-suited to fill. The political bosses realized they had made a mistake, but it was too late: Their mistake haunted them through three presidential terms (two of TR’s and one of Taft’s). And then, after Taft’s first term, things got really bad.

TR wanted to be president again. He thought Taft was doing a mediocre job. And he argued (with a certain logic) that he’d never really had the two terms to which an American president was traditionally entitled because he’d only been elected president once—his first term, remember, had merely been the completion of McKinley’s.

But the Republican Party hated TR even more by 1912, even if the voters adored him. So they renominated Taft against the popular consensus. In response, TR founded a third party, the infamous “Bull Moose” party. This split the Republican vote, though in the process, TR got more votes than Taft, the only time in history that one of the two main parties finished in third place. This handed the presidency to Woodrow Wilson, one of the most destructive men of the 20th century (and the first academic to be elected president). Wilson never would have stood a chance had the Republican nomination gone to TR—he was elected with a mere 41 percent of the vote, an historic low.

But from the Republican perspective, it was better to lose the presidential race and have a Democrat in power with whom they could work—one who could play the game and be part of the machine—than it was to have someone who couldn’t be controlled. They never again made the mistake of nominating a man who wasn’t under their thumb. At least, not until 2016.

So remember: The GOP isn’t really our party. It never was. That is the central truth that the Trump phenomenon has exposed—or exposed anew. It’s a political machine, just like the Democratic Party, and it wants to run itself, not be run by “ordinary” people like you and me. Trump’s nomination the first time around, from the GOP’s perspective, was a huge mistake, just as TR’s had been. And they have no intention of repeating that kind of mistake.

Keep the story of the 1900 Republican Convention in mind, too, when you think of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis: He’s a huge success in Florida, and is the only governor standing up to the federal government in any meaningful way. What could be better than to seduce him away from that role with the promise of the presidency? Kill two birds with one stone, and kill America, too, while you’re at it.

Trump was a huge mistake: He was the biggest mistake machine politicians had made in over a century. The success of Trump’s presidency dealt establishment politicians a heavy blow. A second Trump term might kill them, and they know it.

Nah, not a chance. They’ll kill HIM long before they ever let that happen, count on it. Don’t dare kid yourself that they wouldn’t, or couldn’t, or don’t dare to. As I keep saying, that leaves us with just the one option, and we all already know full well what that option is.

2

State of the nation

Radicalized, disenfranchised, post-Constitutional, post-Republic, teetering on the ragged, jagged edge of Apocalypse.

Who Radicalized the Right?
In the process of steamrolling normal people, the Left may have created the very “fascists” they claim to be against.

The term “far-right” is applied far too liberally these days, but the Right has doubtless moved away from conservatism and toward a more radical form of politics. There aren’t too many defectors from Donald Trump’s camp who feel the man is too extreme. Rather, the argument from Trump’s right is that he is not disciplined enough to—as the online Right likes to say—“crush our enemies.” Whether Trump, Ron DeSantis, or some other figure is the Republicans’ nominee in 2024, the frontrunner will not win the hearts of the base by appealing to what conservatives are pleased to call “principle” and speaking in a trans-Atlantic accent. That person will do it by showing he is strong and can be a protector to half the nation.

Of course, the whole purpose of constitutions is to limit power. In a constitutional system like ours, one is not supposed to be motivated by crushing one’s enemies. This has never been the inclination or aim of conservatives, who do not share the Left’s aversion to limits on political power. But things have changed. What happens when one side has no regard for the constitution or the limits of power?

The other side had damned well better recognize what has happened, acknowledge frankly that those they once thought of as “Our Fellow Countrymen” have morphed into an implacable, slavering, ruthless Enemy, and deal with them in accordance with that bleak reality if they hope to get through the inevitable conflict with even a pitiful tittle of their former liberties and rights still intact, that’s what.

The goodwill of the conservative has been mercilessly abused, and he is searching for shelter from the obscene freak show of anarchy and disorder that has descended upon his country.

Joe Biden is but the vessel of the deranged, domineering spirit behind the corruption. This malign force is not the beneficent liberalism of the founders, who cherished freedom of speech, religion, and opinion and, of course, the right to bear arms, and its implicit right of revolution. It is a tyrannical will that asserts total ownership of everything, proudly celebrates evil by calling it good, treats decent people like terrorists, exalts criminals and the insane, snatches children from their parents, and requires submission to itself—in mind and body—for citizens to earn bread.

On top of it all, the means of democratic recourse appear to be slipping. Our elections are a Third World sham, and millions of foreigners with no right to be here live in the country without fear of removal. Their numbers are rapidly growing under the explicit protection of an administration whose party, in between giving lectures on the rule of law, brags about replacing and disenfranchising the country’s natives.

The country is changing fast. A decade ago, the Left said, “We just want gays to be able to marry,” and now they say, “We just want to parade our depraved fetishes in public and sexualize children.”

Faced with all of this, a Caesar who promises to sweep away the trash begins to look appealing to many.

Appealing, hell. In times as fraught and parlous as these, countenancing the rise of a Caesar can quickly become a matter of sheer survival, quite literally so.

Especially when those on the other side are disingenuous, like our leftists, and appeal to principles they do not themselves believe in to get their way. No, the Left doesn’t care about constitutionalism, democracy, liberalism, or any of the high phrases that pepper their pompous speeches. Like a communist Popular Front, these are just words they use to put a benign face on tyranny, and blackmail their opponents into unilateral disarmament.

Forgive me, but for the life of me I can’t recall the last time I heard any Leftist even mention any of those things in passing, much less “pepper(ing) their speeches” with them. Well, excepting “democracy,” as in the “Our Sacred Democracy” bullshit, I suppose. Which mention was as transparently insincere and false as it was convenient for them in the moment, a mere tactic and nothing whatsoever more.

Most on the Right have awoken to this, which is why, outside of a handful of naïve but sincere conservatives, few went out of their way to condemn Trump when he apparently called to suspend the Constitution.

Okay, maybe it’s just me and my fading memory, but I really can’t recall Trump ever having issued any such call, either “apparently” or explicitly.

This may not be a “principled” way of thinking, as some conservatives understand it, but it is not an unreasonable approach in times of such enmity and trouble. The increasingly medieval nature of American politics has left many feeling that a faith in what used to be called principle is outdated and foolish.

When one’s opponents have declared themselves his enemies, nakedly and unequivocally, and regard “principles” not as a quality to be admired but as a weakness to be exploited, insistence on clinging to those principles is the exclusive province of a soon-to-be-subjugated fool.

In a stable, secure nation at peace internally, principles are fine and noble things, a source of pride and strength…provided those principles are shared in common amongst a clear majority of its populace. In a faltering, decaying nation, riven by strife, beset by rampant crime and corruption, however, a mulish adherence to principle can be not only a source of weakness, it can be downright dangerous.

The two dominant factions now resemble hostile nations living under one government while speaking completely foreign languages.

NOW you’re getting it. Because that is precisely where we are now.

Consequently, politics has become a struggle for survival in which, because of universal suffrage, all are conscripted. The inconsequential noise of mutual recrimination leads many to tune out, but to do so, to remain unallied, is to let oneself be trampled.

This is a sad state of affairs, but it is reality.

Yep. We don’t have to like it—SHOULDN’T like it, in fact. But like it or no, we DO have to face up to it, without flinching, dissembling, or further ado. Who “radicalized” us? Who gives a damn? That’s a dead issue at this late date, of no import and well behind us. The only thing that matters now is whether we retain the gumption to embrace that radicalization, and exact a heavy price from the rat-bastards for what they’ve done to us.

1
2

THAT’S how you do it

What I like to call balling the fucking jack, Jack.

Missouri mayor bans kids from attending ‘A Drag Queen Christmas’

A concert venue in the suburbs of St. Louis has barred children from attending an all ages Christmas drag show, as states have moved to restrict cross-dressing public displays.

The Factory in Chesterfield announced hours before “A Drag Queen Christmas” that no ticket holders under 18 would be allowed to attend. The production is touring 18 states with performers from the reality television show “RuPaul’s Drag Race.”

“We specifically in the City of Chesterfield have ordinances. Protecting minors and not allow[ing] minors to be exposed to certain types of entertainment of a sexual orientation, etc.,” Chesterfield Mayor Bob Nation told news outlet KMOV on Wednesday.

The cancellation comes amid a growing backlash against the production and other “family friendly” drag shows, which critics argue sexualize young children.

Drag events advertising themselves as “family friendly” have sparked 141 protests in 47 states this year, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) reported Friday.

As well they ought to have, the loathsome kiddie-diddlers. In fact, I’d be fine with something a goodish bit more, umm, kinetic, shall we say, than mere peaceful protests, myself. Naturally, the local gendarmerie was called out to “control” the protesters concerned over their kids’ well-being at the hands of sicko pedophiles and mentally-diseased groomers; to the disgust and dismay of every good and decent citizen extant, I’m sure John Law was most enthusiastic and energetic about protecting the pedos to the fullest possible extent from the justly-wrathful, fed-up parents of the young ‘uns these Groomer Clowns (h/t to Bracken for the dead-on nomenclature) confidently expect to prey on with total impunity.

Protests against “A Drag Queen Christmas” have swept the nation this week in response to viral social media videos of the production’s recent Austin, Texas, performance.

Independent conservative journalist Tayler Hansen recorded the performance, which features nude prosthetic body parts and simulated sex acts. One of the characters is named “Screwdolph the Red Nippled Reindeer.”

Oh for the love of Christ, they can’t even leave poor Rudolph out of their marrow-deep obsession with perverted sex?

I gotta admit, I did NOT see this next bit coming.

The presence of children at the Austin performance underscores the reason for the protests, said Gregory T. Angelo, president of the conservative New Tolerance Campaign.

“As a gay man myself, I remain flummoxed that LGBT advocates seem fixated on this idea of drag shows for kids,” said Mr. Angelo, a former head of the Log Cabin Republicans LGBTQ group. “It would not be the end of the world or of the LGBT rights movement if folks hit pause and focused on issues of real consequence.”

UNEXPECTED!™ Might this indicate an unlooked-for chink forming in the Gay Mafia’s heretofore-impermeable armor, perchance? Whatever the case may be, kudos to Angelo, who seems to have his head screwed on right, for a refreshing change. They would doubtless strongly disapprove, but it seems to me like the right time to swipe and update an old Pink Floyd line: Hey, creature, leave them kids alone.

2

Exceptional

Comic Rob Schneider waxes serious.

I believe we in western civilization have departed from “The Age of Reason,” and are now falling into “The Age of Emotion.” We are in the process of trading critical thinking and logic for the excesses of ‘how one feels.’ Rational people are the new heretics who dare question it.

This “Age of Emotions” has it’s belief systems and superstitions that act as a religion. You are not allowed to question any part of it or you are excommunicated. At the same time the world is experiencing democracy fatigue. Which opens the door to totalitarianism.

And now with the help of big tech, government has at its disposal new enormous powers to control narratives & crush any dissent & to destroy people who resist or fight back.

Crisis after crisis will continue to be used to eliminate individual liberties

Andrea Widberg follows up.

Many Americans remember Rob Schneider from his time on Saturday Night Live in the late 1980s through the early 1990s, when he created several amusing characters. After leaving SNL, he’s had a decent Hollywood career, although he hasn’t had the fame his pal Adam Sandler has enjoyed. I hope, though, that Schneider will be remembered for something else. In a Twitter thread, he expressed his love for America and her constitutional values, especially when arrayed against the mindless emotionalism and techno-fascism that now threatens those values.

Schneider’s political trajectory was not foreordained. As a half-Jewish San Francisco Bay Area native and San Francisco State graduate (usually a sure sign of leftism) who then made his career in Hollywood, leftism would seem inevitable. Instead, Schneider is not just a conservative but also a proud American who understands and values America’s unique virtues and recognizes the forces arrayed against her.

Too many Republican politicians are afraid to say what Schneider said or, if they say those things, they don’t exercise their politics in line with those ideals or as a response to those threats. Many kudos to Schneider for his courage and wisdom.

Amen to that.

13

Of tautology, coercion, mafiosi, and…bad drivers?

Peters pulls all that together for us.

If they can’t get you “vaccinated” via a mandate, maybe they’ll be able to get you using the mafia. The insurance mafia.

How?

By citing a “study” – you know, The Science – published by the American Journal of Medicine, that associates not taking whatever drugs the government/corporations order you to take with…a higher likelihood that you’ll wreck your car.

Fortune cites the study, which claims that the un-drugged (the proper term to use, as these drugs are not vaccines since vaccines prevent infection and stop transmissions – and these drugs do neither) are “72 percent more likely to be involved in a severe traffic crash in which at least one person was transported to the hospital” than those who have been drugged.

The premise of this claim is not, however, evidence that being un-drugged has a negative effect on driving competence. It is an oily assertion of correlation with not-following-the-rules (as regards traffic rules) and not following orders, as regards the taking of drugs.

“The authors (of the study) theorize that people who resist public health recommendations might also ‘neglect basic road safety guidelines.’ “

Meaning, they assert a causal link between “resist(ing) public health recommendations” and “neglec(ting) basic road safety guidelines.” It is as “scientific” a theory as the one that insisted others must wear a “mask” to “protect” those who are already wearing one.

Or two.

It presumes that both “public health recommendations” – which are no such thing, since the “recommendations” carried the de facto force of law – and “road safety guidelines” are correct, ipso facto.

In fact, the “public health recommendations” (sic) were entirely wrong – and it was therefore sensible to “resist” them.

“Masks” – and maintaining a space bubble around you six feet feet in radius – did nothing to “stop the spread” of anything. In fact, they spread alienation and fear. They helped to instill millions of cases of pathological hypochondria. The drugs all-but-forced on the population were not vaccines, though people were deliberately misled to believe they were. Those who just took them, just trusting them, are discovering their trust was abused. Those who didn’t just trust – who “resisted” the “recommendations” – have been proved right to have resisted them.

Man, no way could I not include that image, it’s just too perfect. Read it all, it’s one of Eric’s best yet.

3

Church militant

We need more hardass clergymen like Dagger John Hughes, and fewer of the namby-pamby, weak-as-water shitlib sobsisters mainstream Christianity is currently burdened with.

We are not the first generation of New Yorkers puzzled by what to do about the underclass. A hundred years ago and more, Manhattan’s tens of thousands of Irish seemed a lost community, mired in poverty and ignorance, destroying themselves through drink, idleness, violence, criminality, and illegitimacy. What made the Irish such miscreants? Their neighbors weren’t sure: perhaps because they were an inferior race, many suggested; you could see it in the shape of their heads, writers and cartoonists often emphasized. In any event, they were surely incorrigible.

But within a generation, New York’s Irish flooded into the American mainstream. The sons of criminals were now the policemen; the daughters of illiterates had become the city’s schoolteachers; those who’d been the outcasts of society now ran its political machinery. No job training program or welfare system brought about so sweeping a change. What accomplished it, instead, was a moral transformation, a revolution in values. And just as John Wesley, the founder of Methodism in the late eighteenth century, had sparked a change in the culture of the English working class that made it unusually industrious and virtuous, so too a clergyman was the catalyst for the cultural change that liberated New York’s Irish from their underclass behavior. He was John Joseph Hughes, an Irish immigrant gardener who became the first Catholic archbishop of New York. How he accomplished his task can teach us volumes about the solution to our own end-of-the-millennium social problems.

John Hughes’s personal history embodied all the virtues he tried so successfully to inculcate in his flock. They were very much the energetic rather than the contemplative virtues: as a newspaper reporter of the time remarked of him, he was “more a Roman gladiator than a devout follower of the meek founder of Christianity.” He was born on June 24, 1797, in Annaloghan, County Tyrone, the son of a poor farmer. As a Catholic in English-ruled Ireland, he was, he said, truly a second-class citizen from the day he was baptized, barred from ever owning a house worth more than five pounds or holding a commission in the army or navy. Catholics could neither run schools nor give their children a Catholic education. Priests had to be licensed by the government, which allowed only a few in the country. Any Catholic son could seize his father’s property by becoming a Protestant.

When Hughes was 15, an event he was never to forget crystallized for him the injustice of English domination. His younger sister, Mary, died. English law barred the local Catholic priest from entering the cemetery gates to preside at her burial; the best he could do was to scoop up a handful of dirt, bless it, and hand it to Hughes to sprinkle on the grave. From early on, Hughes said, he had dreamed of “a country in which no stigma of inferiority would be impressed on my brow, simply because I professed one creed or another.”

Fleeing poverty and persecution, Hughes’s father brought the family to America in 1817. The 20-year-old Hughes went to work as a gardener and stonemason at Mount St. Mary’s college and seminary in Emmitsburg, Maryland. Working there rekindled in him a childhood dream of becoming a priest, and he asked the head of the seminary, John Dubois, if he could enroll as a student. Dubois, a French priest who had fled Paris during the French Revolution armed with a letter of recommendation from Lafayette, turned him down, unable to see past his lack of education to the qualities of mind and character that lay within. This was no ordinary gardener, Dubois should have recognized; indeed, as he went back to his gardening chores, Hughes wrote a bitter poem on the shamefulness of slavery and its betrayal of America’s promise of freedom. Not one to forget a slight, Hughes harshly froze Dubois out of his life when he became prominent and powerful. Indeed, in later years, Hughes won the nickname of “Dagger John,” a reference not only to the shape of the cross that accompanied his printed signature but also to his being a man not to be trifled with or double-crossed.

And that he most certainly was, with big ol’ bells on. As I recall, Mike Walsh has written an essay or two about Dagger John, extolling his uncompromising, stout refusal to bend the knee to any earthly prince or potentate and meekly accept his fate as a second-class citizen because of his professed faith.

It’s easy to forget these days, perhaps, but even as recently as 1960 there were a great many Americans who questioned JFK’s fitness for the office of President purely because he was Catholic. They were strongly suspicious of the risk of what they called “popery” and “dual loyalty”—that, as a Roman Catholic, Kennedy’s primary fidelity would necessarily lie not with the US but with the Vatican. If that sounds eerily reminiscent of the accusations hurled at a certain ethnic group today, well, that ain’t no coincidence.

Read on for lots more about the life and times of a truly fascinating man; it’s good stuff, for sure.

2

A problem in search of a solution

Our Race Realist confrére Arthur Sido teases it out for us.

“Racism” Is A Solution, Not A Problem

Although Tucker Carlson is one of the few voices of any prominence that takes on issues like wasting money in Ukraine, or Covid-19 nonsense or even the occasional tepid defense of Whites, he still cucks and cucks hard on race all too often. His video last evening is a prime example…

While he addressed the very real issue of Whites being looted of our wealth to bribe black and mestizo voters, without using that language, he also reverted back to declaring multiple times that the only difference between a White person and a black is “skin shade”. He even tossed in a couple of Boomer-level references to “NAZIS!”. The whole “Democrats are the real racists!” thing is dumb because it is utterly ineffectual. You can never out-racism the Left. For the average Normielib, the indisputable fact that they are Goodthinkers and Allies Of The Downtrodden And Oppressed is an article of faith for them. When you accuse them of racism it doesn’t even register, it is unthinkable. Worse, it reinforces the idea for Normiecons that this is a viable strategy, keeping them from realizing that it isn’t and that the only truly viable path forward is racial tribalism.

Ya see, what /ourguys/ get (most of them) and Normies on both sides don’t is this:

They don’t see racism as a problem in need of a solution but as a solution to a problem that needs solving.

What is the problem that needs solvin’?

How do you convince White people to surrender what they have built in favor of people who have proven through thousands of years of divergent development their inability to self-govern or to form civil societies?

Solution?

Convince those White people instead that there is something wrong with them and that those other groups are only the way they are because of what White people did to them.

Hopefully you can see how that explains an awful lot of the cognitive dissonance of modern society, it explains why some out of shape White Boomers sightseeing in the U.S. Capitol without permission for a couple of hours is an existential threat to our society but tens of thousands of murders committed by blacks is actually the fault of those same White Boomers. In the very same newscast the average Normie will be told that the greatest threat to America are “White right-wing extremists” while before and after that segment they see mugshots and surveillance photos of black and brown criminals committing wanton acts of unspeakable violence.

It has been a clever and tragically effective strategy. How else can you explain why the race that won the game of life across the globe is running at full speed to surrender everything their forefathers have won to people that lack the basic intelligence and creativity to discover technology our people figured out hundreds and hundreds of years ago? Why else would Europe allow itself to be overrun with Muslims and black Africans who contribute nothing to Europe but rape, murder and ignorance? Why else would America throw open our doors to every mestizo and Desi in the world, while entertaining “slavery reparations” for people that were never slaves to be paid by people that never owned slaves?

While I am by no means any kind of bigot at all; always treasured the many black friends I’ve had over the years, from childhood on; and have nothing but profoundest respect and admiration for the legions of truly brilliant Negro musicians this country has brought forth in the fields of jazz, blues, and trad-folk music, nonetheless there are times, especially as regards this outrageous “reparations” codswallop, when all one can do is just come right out and say it: nigger, please.

As BCE says: nigger fatigue is REAL, and there’s a damned good reason for that. And as my close black friend Mel said to me some years back: if you’re a white liberal and you think there’s no such thing as a nigger, you almost certainly don’t know very many black people.

6

Not “stupid,” not “weak,” not “clueless”—COMPLICIT

None so blind as those who will not see.

What Moves the Voters Republicans Lost?
Unless there is a major turnaround in the culture, the Republicans will have to deal with a strong and vocal opposition in future elections.

In “The Republican Struggle with Defeat,” Conrad Black lays out the situation that the Republican Party confronts after its unexpectedly disastrous midterm elections. Despite Joe Biden’s unpopularity and the range of problems he and his party have caused—from broken borders and inflation to the cultural radicalization of both the military and public education, and debacles abroad—the Democrats did unexpectedly well at the polls. Unlike during the Obama Administration, Biden’s party won the Senate, several governorships, a number of state legislatures, and held its defeats in the House to a minimum.

Black avoids exaggerating the Trump factor in the defeat of Republican candidates. One can point to some worthy Trump picks, including Kari Lake, Blake Masters, Adam Laxalt, Lee Zeldin, and J. D. Vance, even if other picks, such as Herschel Walker and Doug Mastriano, were duds. But there is no convincing evidence that Trump’s support for a candidate was the decisive factor in any person’s defeat. Other circumstances, as Black points out, led to those candidates’ losses. If the United States now “plods on with a one-and-one-half party system” and “veers harder to the left,” we should look elsewhere for the most decisive reasons.

A major cause for the midterm results, argues Black, “is the apparent inability of the Republicans to master the harvested ballot. Trump correctly warned in 2020 this would be used to rig the election, but he was completely inadequate in the counter-measures he took to prevent that.” In my view, one can’t stress enough the games that the Democrats have mastered in changing electoral procedures. From vote-harvesting and voting without personal identification to election outcomes being determined by insecure mail-in ballots sent in more than a month before scheduled in-person voting, these Democratic “reforms” should have met unrelenting Republican resistance.

Unfortunately, they didn’t, which raises the question: How would the elections in Arizona, Nevada, and Pennsylvania have turned out if these states had the voting laws that are in force in Florida?

An utterly pointless debate, an exercise in abject futility, perhaps even outright misdirection, at least in some cases. Those laws are NOT in force; the Vichy GOPe did NOT resist, and only a delusional fool expects that they ever will. If they had any interest in such piffling bagatelles, they would have done so already. Get your head around it already, ferchrissakes, and deal with current reality at long, long last.

For obvious reasons, Republicans are hesitant about contesting questionable ballots.

“OBVIOUS reasons,” is it? Name three for me, please. Don’t strain yourself, I’ll wait.

They quake at the thought of being accused of election denial or suppressing minority votes. This hesitancy puts them at a disadvantage against a radical leftist party that shows no compunctions about cheating or election denial.

Not hardly, amigo. What actually makes them quake at the thought of it is the prospect of upending a comfy, too-familiar applecart, thereby disrupting a wholly rotten system in which they’ve long since accepted their assigned role—a system which has made them rich beyond the dreams of avarice, despite their demeaning status as junior partners therein.

This hesitancy puts them at a disadvantage against a radical leftist party that shows no compunctions about cheating or election denial. The fact that Democratic Party organizers and politicians can engage in their legerdemain with unfailing media protection makes them even more brazen.

That lack of compunction and brazenness is a very, very old story, told from deep within a very crowded memory hole.

Democrat Voter Fraud: A Brief History
This is a “brief history” because the complete history of Democrat electoral malfeasance reaching back to Tammany Hall and Tweed would require four volumes or more. (I’m running into the same problem with a new book I’m outlining analyzing the Democrats as a criminal organization, much like the Mafia or the Camorra.)

So a brief history it is, limited to the past thirty years or so. Believe you me, there’s no lack of cases even in that short span.

The Dinkins Magic Voting Machines

Just days before voting in the 1993 David Dinkins/Rudolf Giuliani election, the New York Times reported that a number of voting machines had been found in a closed Manhattan school. All the machines were loaded with votes for Democrat incumbent David Dinkins.

Voting proceeded without the help of those machines, and of course Rudy was elected. But that was the end of it. As far as I’ve been able to learn, there was no investigation, no inquiries, or, for that matter, any further reportage on it.

Votes from the 8th Dimension

The 2004 Washington state gubernatorial contest between Republican Dino Rossi and Democrat Christine Gregoire ended with Rossi up by 261 votes. A machine recount left him still ahead by 42 votes. The state Democrats paid over $700,000 for a hand recount, and whaddaya know… Votes started appearing from any and all conceivable sources. A bag containing votes here…  an electoral official’s car there… it’s surprising they didn’t start falling out of the sky like the frogs in Magnolia.

By the end of the year Gregoire was ahead by 130 votes and was inaugurated on January 12. Rossi, God love him, continued fighting, taking Gregoire to court over the blatantly illegitimate votes. A Pierce County judge tossed the votes out, only to be overruled by the Washington State Supreme Court. A final decision didn’t come for six months, when Judge John Bridges, a Democrat appointee, tossed aside the concept of “chain of custody” to find in favor of Gregoire. Rossi should have continued on to the U.S. Supreme Court – after all, a critical legal concept was being overthrown – but he does get an E for Effort, since he did more than any other Republican in recent memory.

The Washington case enshrined the concept that all Democrat votes, whether they emerged from a portal into hyperspace or were discovered in a 2000 B.C. Sumerian temple, had to be counted no matter what the circumstances. GOP votes… not so much.

Goshdarnit, People Liked Him

A similar chain of events occurred in the election of Al Franken in Minnesota in 2008. Incumbent Norm Coleman originally prevailed with over 700 votes, which were mysteriously whittled down to 200 in short order. Franken called for a recount, and begorrah, the votes suddenly started appearing. Some, anyway — an envelope of votes from one county simply disappeared, but were counted regardless, the totals evidently being read out from tea leaves. By the time it all ended, Franken was ahead by 312 votes. Coleman, a Republican gentleman of the old school, made perfunctory efforts at protest, but was undercut by the GOP itself, led by former governor Arne Carlson, a RINO to rule them all, who had refused to endorse Coleman during the campaign.

Shortly after the election, it was discovered that at least 1,099 illegal votes had been cast by felons, and this had been known during the vote count, but had been ignored. Franken exchanged his diapers for a suit and spent the better part of two terms voting the way he was told and embarrassing his party before being forced out during the “MeToo” craze.

Lots more where that come from, and remember, these are contemporary examples only. Back to the AG piece for the sad, sorry denouement.

The solution to these problems for Republicans is to ignore the righteous accusations and to challenge unwaveringly suspicious ballots.

It isn’t a “solution,” it’s their sworn and sacred duty, or would be in a better, less ruinously-crooked system than this one is.

It would make even more sense to get voting to take place on election day and in a precinct station under bipartisan surveillance. It is just plain dumb for conflict-averse Republican leaders to tell their constituency to learn to do mail-in voting months ahead of Election Day. Most Republican voters cast ballots, as they should, in the assigned places on Election Day.

Fine suggestions all, not a single one of which has a ghost of a chance of ever being implemented. The larger problem?

Even more problematic for the Republicans are the large voting blocs they are losing by ever larger numbers: 18-to 29-year-old voters, in which the proportion of college students is rising. In November, unmarried women voted 70 percent for the Democrats, and in Pennsylvania they helped significantly in electing the brain-injured radical John Fetterman. More than 70 percent of college students voted, and 63 percent of them broke for the Democrats. Although the Republicans have made modest inroads among black voters and while the Hispanic vote has increased for the GOP by 10 points since 2018, they are losing badly key constituencies. These blocs are mostly on the woke Left and not likely to be won over by appeals to “conservative values.”

Heh. “Not likely,” he says. Understate much, pal?

Further, there is no indication that the electorate cares about Democratic scandals and failures. Republican attempts to call attention to such issues or to the damaged brain of our new Pennsylvania senator or to Joe Biden’s obvious decrepitude fall on deaf ears with these voters. Unrestricted abortion rights count for them far more than broken borders or the venality of the Biden family.

That’s because more and more of us are being brought around to the grim realization of the uselessness, the hopelessness, of Voting Harderer!™ at them to provide a way out of this stinking bog for us. The cynicism and disgust at the wholesale, systemic corruption of “elections” in Amerika v2.0 is growing by leaps and bounds, which I take as a positive sign. The more of us who acknowledge the farcical nature of the whole shit-circus, however unpleasant a reality it might be to confront, the sooner something meaningful might actually be done about it, I believe.

6

A real mystery

Keep checking six, Elon.

Elon Musk Vows To Reveal Government And Media Collusion Once He Figures Out Where These Red Dots Are Coming From

AUSTIN, TX — The world waited eagerly for further information on the Hunter Biden laptop story suppression from Twitter owner Elon Musk, who had vowed to reveal the details of potential government collusion with the media as soon as he can figure out why he keeps seeing little red dots hovering around on his body.

“I have every intention of being as transparent and straightforward in this matter as possible,” Musk said on a Zoom call interview as a trio of red dots swirled around on his forehead. “All will be known very shortly. I just have to determine why I’m suddenly covered in these little, red laser dots.”

Witnesses close to Musk said the dots first began to appear shortly after he tweeted his intention to provide details about Twitter suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop scandal in the fall of 2020, shortly before the presidential election. “Within minutes of writing that tweet, we noticed the little dots appearing on the walls of every room Elon was in,” said Adrian Haj, a member of Musk’s inner circle. “We didn’t think anything of it at first, but now they’re everywhere. Weird!”

It’s funny, but then again it really isn’t…because you know as well as I do that they’d have no qualms whatsoever about offing the guy. Hopefully, Elon knows that too, and will be taking serious precautions going forward.

Update! Really, now, how could any red-blooded Real American not just love this man?


DeSantis hell, I just may endorse Elon Musk for Prez in 2024.

Via Bill, who notes that there’s actually a serious side to this. I repeat: how can you not just love the guy?

3

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