Liberals Lie

Ever-shifting shitib opinions, values, and mores

Posted on January 17, 2026 by Mike 2 Comments

First, this happened (bold mine).

Curtis Houck
@CurtisHouck

Jim Acosta: “[JD Vance is] the future of MAGA. It is a — a — it is a fascist, authoritarian, white nationalist MAGA.”

Jennifer Welch: “It’s worse than Trump.”

Acosta: “It is worse than Trump.”

Welch: “He’s worse.”

Acosta: “It’s Trump with staying power. You know, Trump, the other day is, you know, he’s — he’s — he’s asking, am I gonna go to heaven? Am I gonna go to heaven?”

Welch: “Yeah.”

Acosta: “It must be dawning on him that the sand in — in Dorothy’s hourglass is running out, you know, in the Wizard of Oz.”

Welch: “The curtains are closing.”

Acosta: “The curtains are closing. JD Vance doesn’t have to worry about that. This whole crew of guys who are going to try to come in after it, they’re — they’re not worried about that. The American people have to show that movement the door. I’m not talking about — Republican presidents want to come in, and act like Mitt Romney and — and — and folks like that —”

Welch: “Right.”

Acosta: “— everybody can deal with that. Everybody can stomach that. If — if Mitt Romney had been president instead of Donald Trump in 2016, you and I probably wouldn’t be talking right now —”

Welch: “That’s right.”

Acosta: “— because you — you know, Jen, you’d be down in Oklahoma enjoying your life”

Welch: “Instead of doing interior design, yeah.”

A pair of half-assed, half-baked Leftard bullshit artists, these two. Remember back when Mittens Romneycare was himself a demonic Hitlerite spawned in the hottest pits of Hell, anyone? Nah, me neither.

Mitt Romney is owed an apology for how he was attacked in 2012. He’s unlikely to get it
“Romney didn’t win, did he?”

That was former Senate Democratic majority leader Harry Reid’s response to whether he regretted lying about then-GOP presidential nominee — and now Utah senator — Mitt Romney.

Reid accused Romney on the Senate floor in 2012, when he was running for president, of not having paid any taxes in four years. It was absolutely untrue and was discredited by Washington Post fact-checkers and others at the time. But that didn’t stop the onslaught of unfair and inaccurate accusations and innuendos.

The Mitt Romney who ran for president in 2012 went on to vote for conviction in President Trump’s impeachment trial. And that same Romney became the first known Republican senator to march with the George Floyd protesters over the weekend.

You remember 2012, right? That was the year of the last presidential election before Donald Trump’s victory. And the way liberals attacked Romney’s presidential campaign on opinion pages of newspapers, news broadcasts and in the media echo chamber of blue check-mark Twitter, has a lot to do with how the next election went — and how this one will go. Their treatment of Romney was an inflection point for many on the right.

It’s straight out of the Left/lib/Progtard playbook: any and everyone not a flaming, Red-in-tooth-and-claw Leftist who dares to run for office against a sheep-dipped Woketer revolutionary will be duly vilified, defamed, and slandered outrageously right up until the next cloven-hoofed GOPe “rising star” emerges, at which juncture the previous Two Minutes’ Hate target will be miraculously rehabilitated as perhaps misguided, but in the main a decent, fair-minded centrist.

In praise of meat

Posted on December 31, 2025 by Mike

Or, in this benighted day and age, it might be more appropriate to say “in DEFENSE of” etc etc. Which, as the title of the article shows, the author knows well enough.

In Defense of Steak: Listen to Your Body, not the Bug People
There is a particular smell that quiets a room or backyard: beef hitting heat, butter melting, fat crackling over open flame. Conversations pause. Children wander closer. Adults become very present, childlike in their eagerness. Something ancient has briefly reclaimed priority.

This response appears across cultures, centuries, and cuisines, persisting despite decades of scolding lectures about moderation, sustainability, and restraint. No one salivates at the thought of cricket flour. No one waxes poetic about lab-grown protein slurry. Even people committed to eating less meat tend to speak about steak the way one speaks about a lost love. We are told this reaction, this anticipation of pleasure, reflects indulgence, weakness, or conditioning, but a simpler explanation exists.

Pleasure can be information.

Indeed so, and there’s every bit as much solid, useful information in this piece as there is pleasure in eating a fat, juicy filet mignon. For example:

Meat is often treated as interchangeable with whatever happens to meet a protein target, as though nourishment were merely arithmetic. This misses what meat actually is: an exceptionally efficient nutritional delivery system shaped by evolution to meet human needs with minimal friction.

Animal protein arrives complete, providing all essential amino acids in proportions the body immediately recognizes and uses. Absorption is high. Muscle repair is straightforward, using precisely the amino acids our meals just provided. No pairing, combining, or supplementation is required. Fat, so long maligned, provides stable saturated and monounsaturated fats that slow digestion, stabilize blood sugar, support hormones, and carry fat-soluble vitamins. Speaking of fat, humans did not spend thousands of years figuring out how to obtain more fat because it was harming them.

Then there are the nutrients rarely discussed in fashionable debates but central to human function: vitamin B12 for neurological health, heme iron that the body absorbs efficiently (iron in supplements or vegetables is poorly absorbed), zinc for immune function and growth, creatine and carnosine for muscle and brain performance, choline for liver and cognitive health. These are not optional extras. They are foundational for good health and a properly functioning body.

Claims that humans do not “need” animal protein hinge on a technicality. With careful planning, supplementation, fortified foods, and modern logistics, it is possible to assemble these nutrients without meat. That is not equivalence. It is compensation. A diet that requires constant vigilance to avoid deficiency is not revealing a hidden natural balance; it is leaning heavily on modern intervention and often industrially manufactured frankenfood.

I repeat: indeed. Butbutbutbut…but…WAIT, they whine. What about Eating Ze Bugs, shitlib fascists snivel. Wilson outs paid to that codswallop with a quickness.

Insects are often presented as the logical successor to meat, reduced to the claim that they “contain protein” and are therefore interchangeable. Biology is less accommodating.

Insects contain chitin, the substance that forms their exoskeletons, which humans do not digest well. Chitin inflates protein numbers on paper while reducing absorption in practice because it resists breakdown and in fact interferes with nutrient uptake. From a nutritional standpoint, counting chitin as protein is a bit like counting fingernails as food: it contains nitrogen, which looks impressive on a label, but the human body cannot do much with it. Edible, yes. Nourishing, not really.

Digestive discomfort after eating bugs is common enough that most insect products are heavily processed into powders, undermining both nutritional and environmental claims. Amino acid profiles vary widely by species, but they all tend to be lower in key amino acids such as leucine, which plays a central role in muscle maintenance and repair, particularly as people age.

Micronutrients present further problems. Vitamin B12, heme iron, and creatine are unreliable or absent, requiring supplementation to compensate. Allergy risks are also underplayed, as insects share protein structures with shellfish. Insects are edible, certainly, but edible is not the same as optimal, and bug protein is not in any way an upgrade over beef, chicken, or fish.

Annnnnd bingo, there you have it. Myself, I don’t give a fiddler’s fuck about how smart the person telling me to switch from steak to cricket paste thinks he/she/it is, I simply ain’t gonna do it.

There’s only one song I can think of that will suit.

Tell it true now, Jim.

2

1

FEUD!!

Posted on December 16, 2025December 16, 2025 by Mike

The Hatfields and McCoys, it ain’t.

JD Vance Turns Tables on Reporter’s ‘Conspiracy Theorist’ Gotcha Question in Spectacular Fashion
As we’ve extensively reported, the mainstream media loves to stir the pot when it comes to alleged “tension” among members of the Trump administration, which we’ve seen play out, for example, in hit pieces about Secretary of State Marco Rubio and various members of the Trump team.

One of the more notorious ones involved Rubio and Steve Witkoff, United States Special Envoy to the Middle East, and a longtime close friend of President Trump. A CNN write-up from March claimed without evidence that Rubio was miffed because he allegedly thought he was being “overshadowed” by Witkoff.

Both Witkoff and Rubio shut the rumor down soon after, with Rubio in particular tweeting that “CNN is an anti-Trump gossip tabloid that uses thinly sourced stories to generate clicks and try to make trouble. Witkoff is one of the people I work with the CLOSEST on our team. These people are pathetic.”

The latest addition to the mainstream media’s “feud” narrative comes from Vanity Fair, which published an interview they did over the course of 11 months with White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, who, in turn, described the story as “a disingenuously framed hit piece on me and the finest President, White House staff, and Cabinet in history,” an article where “significant context was disregarded,” according to Wiles.

Many members of Trump’s cabinet have rallied to Wiles’ defense, along with Vice President JD Vance, who was asked after an economic speech he gave in Allentown, PA, on Tuesday about a quote from Wiles in the piece where she stated that Vance had been “a conspiracy theorist for a decade.” Vanity Fair did not provide any context for the remark, lending credence to Wiles’ statement about things being taken out of context.

As for Vance, he just nailed it in his response, turning the question around on the reporter by pointing out that not only had the “conspiracy theorist” chatter been a running joke between Wiles and him for months, but also that he was a conspiracy theorist only in the cases where the theory proved true.

Not that truth, facts, or observable reality matter one iota to Enemedia “journolismists,” natch. These jackanapes would NEVER permit such footling inanities to get in the way of a good narrative, don’tchaknow.

The perfect response

Posted on November 22, 2025November 22, 2025 by Mike

Another “politics as usual” story I wouldn’t ordinarily give a fiddler’s fuck about, except for this one beautiful thing.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries appeared on CNBC on Friday, expecting another friendly segment where he could blame Republicans for everything under the sun without being challenged. Instead, he ran into Rebecca Quick, who did something that clearly stunned him: she asked real questions, pressed him for real answers, and refused to let him filibuster with recycled talking points. What followed was a live, televised meltdown that revealed just how much Jeffries depends on compliant hosts to keep his political theater afloat.

Quick opened with a straightforward point: If Democrats claim they want to avoid the expiration of key Obamacare subsidies, they need Republican votes. So why not start with something achievable?

“If this is something that you want to satiate, if you want to get done, you are going to need at least some Republicans to come over,” she said. “Why not start with a one-year extension or potentially even a two-year extension?”

Jeffries immediately shifted into campaign mode. He declared, “Leader Schumer offered a one-year extension in the context of trying to end the Trump Republican [sic] shutdown.” He went straight to the past, ignoring the question. Quick stopped him.

“That’s different. I’m talking about what you have now,” she said. “Let’s not go back to what’s done in the past and what has not been extended.”

Jeffries started getting irritated at this point. “You can ask me the question. I’ll provide the answer,” he snapped.

Quick didn’t flinch. “Answer the question instead of going back.”

The dodging, weaving, and dissembling continues from there, until finally Ms Quick’s patience is so thoroughly exhausted by the ongoing barrage of ever-less-persuasive weasel words that she can no longer contain her exasperation, culminating in what would have to be one of the finest moments in the history of journalisming.

New gif for your future Hakeem replies pic.twitter.com/0KMglxsTwS

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman)

November 21, 2025

Heh. If I was a MSM reporter/anchor/newsreaderperson, the network would can me after my second day on the job, citing my inability to stop pulling that same face throughout the broadcast as justification. There would almost certainly be some girlish giggling involved as well, which wouldn’t help me any.

Eat ’em up, Kid

Posted on November 9, 2025November 9, 2025 by Mike

Here’s hoping he sues them into penury so extreme the whole coven ends up living under a Detroit bridge.

“YOU DEFAMED ME ON LIVE TV — NOW PAY THE PRICE!” — Kid Rock Drops $50 Million Legal Bomb on The View and Whoopi Goldberg After Explosive On-Air Ambush
Los Angeles, CA – November 3, 2025 – The airwaves of daytime television just got a whole lot more litigious. In a move that’s already igniting debates from Nashville honky-tonks to New York greenrooms, rock-rap firebrand Kid Rock—real name Robert James Ritchie—has unleashed a blistering $50 million defamation lawsuit against ABC’s flagship gabfest The View and its outspoken co-host Whoopi Goldberg. What began as a seemingly innocuous segment on cultural divides and free speech has erupted into what Ritchie’s attorneys are calling “a full-frontal assault on truth and decency,” broadcast live to an audience of millions.

This isn’t your garden-variety celebrity spat. It’s a seismic showdown between a self-made provocateur who’s sold over 35 million albums worldwide and a media juggernaut that’s thrived on hot takes for nearly three decades. At its core, the suit accuses Goldberg and her co-hosts of orchestrating a “vicious, calculated ambush” that smeared Ritchie’s reputation, tanked potential business deals, and inflicted “profound emotional distress.” As one legal eagle close to the case put it, “They didn’t just disagree—they drew blood on national TV. Now, they’re going to bleed in the courtroom.”

It started innocently enough. Ritchie, clad in his signature trucker hat and leather vest, leaned into the couch with his trademark swagger, cracking jokes about his “Sweet Southern Sugar” tour and reminiscing about his Detroit roots. “Y’all know I love this country,” he drawled, his voice a gravelly mix of Motown soul and rebel yell. “From the factories to the farms, we’re all in this together.” The audience chuckled, and even Behar cracked a smile at his quip about “building bridges instead of walls—unless it’s a mosh pit.”

But then Goldberg struck. Drawing on Ritchie’s vocal support for Second Amendment rights and his criticisms of “woke Hollywood,” she unleashed a barrage that left the studio audience—and Ritchie himself—reeling. “You parade around like some redneck savior,” Goldberg fired off, her tone sharp as a switchblade, “but let’s be real: your ‘American spirit’ is just code for hate-mongering and division. You’ve built a career on shock value, alienating half the country with your beer-soaked rants. Is this really leadership, or just another grift?”

The room froze. Ritchie, mid-sip of water, set his glass down with a thud that echoed through the microphones. Co-host Hostin piled on, nodding vigorously: “Exactly—your so-called patriotism ignores the marginalized voices you’ve trampled on for years.” Haines chimed in with a softer but no less cutting remark about Ritchie’s “outdated machismo,” while Behar let out a theatrical eye-roll that drew laughs from the crowd. What followed was a 10-minute evisceration, with the panel painting Ritchie as a “dangerous relic” whose influence “poisons the well of public discourse.” No punches pulled, no commercial breaks for mercy.

Ritchie sat there, jaw clenched, as the barbs flew. He attempted a few deflections—”Hey, Whoopi, I respect the hustle, but facts over feelings, right?”—but the hosts steamrolled ahead, framing his political activism as “reckless endangerment” to democracy. By the segment’s end, the applause was polite but tepid, and Ritchie exited stage left without his usual fist-pump to the crowd. Backstage, sources say he was “fuming,” confiding to his team, “That wasn’t an interview—that was an execution.”
T’Was indeed—and was also perfectly typical of what these shit-slurpers and others of their vile ilk do every single day under the guise of “fair” and “honest” “journalism.” Like I said: Penury. Bridges. Immiseration. Etc etc.

Yeppers, go get ’em, Kid, and don’t stop Rocking until their livelihoods are lost, their shows canceled, and their networks are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Kid Rock Inc.

Via Lakeside Joe, who quips: “This is gonna be fun to watch.” Said a real mouthful there, buddy.

Update! Don’t know how I could have mentioned Kid Rock without appending this righteous Kid classic hereupon.

Same game, same field, same rules, same refs

Posted on November 9, 2025November 9, 2025 by Mike

Same results.

STUDY: TV News Spends Shutdown Playing Defense for Democrats
For the past month the big three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) have hammered both Congressional Republicans and President Trump with a wall of negative shutdown coverage, while largely shielding Democrats from blame for the now-historic gridlock.

MRC analysts examined every evening newscast on ABC, CBS, and NBC between October 1 and October 31, 2025. Across the 67 reports and news briefs which discussed the government shutdown, 87 percent of the coverage favored Democrats. Analysts found 83 evaluative statements in which anchors or reporters were critical of Republicans, but just twelve criticizing Democrats.

Summary of Findings

Broadcast shutdown coverage heavily favored Democrats over Republicans (87% to 13%).

Only 12 reports (less than one fifth) even mentioned that Senate Democrats had refused to vote for a clean continuing resolution.

Not a single report mentioned that Democrats voted back in March to end the same Obamacare subsidies which they’re now demanding.

Democrats Routinely Shielded from Blame

Coverage across all three networks was conspicuously vague about how the shutdown even had occurred. There were only 12 instances in which any of the three outlets hinted that Senate Democrats had voted repeatedly against a continuing resolution. On both ABC and CBS, only 12.5 percent of reports on either network mentioned this basic detail. On NBC, that fact was included in just 31 percent of newscasts.

Reports often included lines about the Trump administration “pressuring Democrats,” or soundbites of Republicans demanding Democrats “fund the government,” but usually stopped short of explicitly acknowledging that Senate Democrats were the ones preventing a funding bill from passing.

No, SRSLY?!? Surely not. Why, even good ol’ Captain Renault himself couldn’t possibly be any more shocked than I am at this revoltin’ development.

Give it a rest, bitch

Posted on September 12, 2025September 12, 2025 by Mike

Just another bog-standard shitlib attempt to shift responsibility away from the limp-dick Leftards who truly deserve it, and fob it off onto somebody who doesn’t, that’s all. As such, there’s nothing whatever new to see here.

Unbelievable: Nancy Pelosi Defends Dems’, the Left’s Violent Rhetoric After Charlie Kirk’s Assassination
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) appeared to defend the violent rhetoric on the left after the founder of Turning Point USA, Charlie Kirk, was assassinated and said her party “cannot take responsibility for the minds that are out there.”

Speaking at an event in Maryland on Friday, the former Democratic House leader called for an end to gun violence and completely disregarded the often violent rhetoric that comes directly from those in her party, in their comments about President Donald Trump, his supporters, and other Republicans in the public eye.

“People don’t have any intention of saying something that’s going to lead to something dangerous,” Pelosi said. “But we cannot take responsibility for the minds that are out there and how they hear it.” In short, the Democrat lawmaker is saying there’s no way the left could take responsibility for their rhetoric against Conservatives because they had no idea that it could lead to violence. At one point, Pelosi said that after Kirk’s murder, “Most of our colleagues put out similar statements of— while we may not agree politically, philosophically, or in any other way, that doesn’t matter. What does matter is that our prayers and thoughts are with the family, and may he rest in peace.”

Yeah, whyn’tcha just go die in a fire or sumpin’, you shit-slurping hard-Left em-B-syle. Sorry, I’m afraid your lame try at blame-shifting isn’t fooling anyone.

Breakthrough!

Posted on August 12, 2025 by Francis W. Porretto

I was greatly gratified by this:

Lee Zeldin left a CNN host staring blankly for nearly two minutes on Monday as he took her apart regarding a recent proposal at the EPA. As the interview started, host Kasie Hunt dumped an attempted gotcha question on the EPA administrator, asking him if he accepts the “overwhelming scientific consensus” that greenhouse gas emissions drive “man-made climate change.” That was in the context of a recent announcement that the Trump administration will revoke a 2009 endangerment finding that led to the implementation of stringent regulations.
Zeldin clearly came prepared, because he peppered Hunt with facts, and for once, a CNN host couldn’t come up with a reason to interrupt a Republican.

Here’s the video of the event:

WATCH: EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin just completely OBLITERATED CNN's running propaganda. 😂

CNN: "Thank you so much for being here….Do you accept the overwhelming scientific consensus that these greenhouse gas emissions are the biggest drivers of man made climate change?"… pic.twitter.com/S6y8uecwN7

— DeVory Darkins (@devorydarkins) August 3, 2025

I know I’ve said it before, but just one more time:

Science Is Not Done By Consensus!

Yet that’s what the warmistas, overt or covert, would have you believe. Why?

It’s a simple matter, really. “Global warming / climate change” is a fraud, but it’s a useful fraud: i.e., it’s useful to the Left, which seeks more power over you. As there is absolutely no evidence that human activity is causing global mean temperatures to rise – as there is absolutely no evidence that global mean temperatures are rising! – the fraud must be buttressed with something other than evidence. What remains once evidence is omitted? Consensus! That is, prevalent opinion.

But how is such a “consensus” to be fabricated in the face of the facts? By data manipulation, data selection, sleight-of-hand, and – above all – bribery. Note how frequently the temperature records of past centuries have been “adjusted.” Note how temperature monitoring stations have steadily moved toward “heat islands.” Note how inconvenient data have been excluded from consideration. Note how “models” – the technical term is simulations — are presented as if they constitute sources of evidence. And note how government grants, and the favoritism of prestigious scientific periodicals, are lent to the “global warming / climate change” cause.

When I was in academia, this sort of thing would bring the contempt of other researchers down on the rascals’ heads in a torrent. Clearly, with the preponderance of research funding coming directly from Washington, and the Left having infiltrated of the periodicals so deeply, it’s no longer so.

Francis Collins, whose blog I can no longer find, commented in the abstract on the Left’s pattern in fomenting “crises:”

Something must be done,
This is something.
Therefore, we must do this.

Of course, that first step – persuading the public that there’s a crisis in town and that therefore, “something must be done,” is a doozy. But the Left has many old hands who are adept at whipping up the necessary hysteria over nothing. Consensus, real or imagined, is also useful in engendering widespread fear. After all, if “leading scientists” are telling us that there’s something to fear, maybe we should get to it!

More thoughts on the warmista scam can be found here. As a fillip to jaded tastes, Cold Fury’s Gentle Readers might enjoy this article. (It’s paywalled, so contact me if you want a copy.) Also, Richard Dreyfuss’s wonderful old movie The Big Fix, from a novel by Roger Simon, has an interesting bit to say about the kinship between political agitation and advertising, through Supporting Cast character Howard Eppis.

Eat ’em alive, Kid!

Posted on August 9, 2025November 9, 2025 by Mike

Here’s hoping he reduces ‘em to penury so extreme the whole coven winds up sleeping under a Detriot bridge.

“YOU DEFAMED ME ON LIVE TV — NOW PAY THE PRICE!” — Kid Rock Drops $50 Million Legal Bomb on The View and Whoopi Goldberg After Explosive On-Air Ambush
Los Angeles, CA – November 3, 2025 – The airwaves of daytime television just got a whole lot more litigious. In a move that’s already igniting debates from Nashville honky-tonks to New York greenrooms, rock-rap firebrand Kid Rock—real name Robert James Ritchie—has unleashed a blistering $50 million defamation lawsuit against ABC’s flagship gabfest The View and its outspoken co-host Whoopi Goldberg. What began as a seemingly innocuous segment on cultural divides and free speech has erupted into what Ritchie’s attorneys are calling “a full-frontal assault on truth and decency,” broadcast live to an audience of millions.

This isn’t your garden-variety celebrity spat. It’s a seismic showdown between a self-made provocateur who’s sold over 35 million albums worldwide and a media juggernaut that’s thrived on hot takes for nearly three decades. At its core, the suit accuses Goldberg and her co-hosts of orchestrating a “vicious, calculated ambush” that smeared Ritchie’s reputation, tanked potential business deals, and inflicted “profound emotional distress.” As one legal eagle close to the case put it, “They didn’t just disagree—they drew blood on national TV. Now, they’re going to bleed in the courtroom.”

The fuse was lit during a taping of The View on October 28, 2025, just days after a raucous election cycle that saw Ritchie stumping hard for conservative causes in swing states like Michigan and Pennsylvania. Invited ostensibly to discuss his latest foray into politics—Ritchie had teased a potential 2026 gubernatorial run in Michigan—the segment quickly devolved into what Ritchie describes as a “gotcha” trap. Cameras rolled as Goldberg, flanked by co-hosts Joy Behar, Sunny Hostin, and Sara Haines, pivoted from light banter to pointed interrogations.

It started innocently enough. Ritchie, clad in his signature trucker hat and leather vest, leaned into the couch with his trademark swagger, cracking jokes about his “Sweet Southern Sugar” tour and reminiscing about his Detroit roots. “Y’all know I love this country,” he drawled, his voice a gravelly mix of Motown soul and rebel yell. “From the factories to the farms, we’re all in this together.” The audience chuckled, and even Behar cracked a smile at his quip about “building bridges instead of walls—unless it’s a mosh pit.”

But then Goldberg struck. Drawing on Ritchie’s vocal support for Second Amendment rights and his criticisms of “woke Hollywood,” she unleashed a barrage that left the studio audience—and Ritchie himself—reeling. “You parade around like some redneck savior,” Goldberg fired off, her tone sharp as a switchblade, “but let’s be real: your ‘American spirit’ is just code for hate-mongering and division. You’ve built a career on shock value, alienating half the country with your beer-soaked rants. Is this really leadership, or just another grift?”

The room froze. Ritchie, mid-sip of water, set his glass down with a thud that echoed through the microphones. Co-host Hostin piled on, nodding vigorously: “Exactly—your so-called patriotism ignores the marginalized voices you’ve trampled on for years.” Haines chimed in with a softer but no less cutting remark about Ritchie’s “outdated machismo,” while Behar let out a theatrical eye-roll that drew laughs from the crowd. What followed was a 10-minute evisceration, with the panel painting Ritchie as a “dangerous relic” whose influence “poisons the well of public discourse.” No punches pulled, no commercial breaks for mercy.

Ritchie sat there, jaw clenched, as the barbs flew. He attempted a few deflections—”Hey, Whoopi, I respect the hustle, but facts over feelings, right?”—but the hosts steamrolled ahead, framing his political activism as “reckless endangerment” to democracy. By the segment’s end, the applause was polite but tepid, and Ritchie exited stage left without his usual fist-pump to the crowd. Backstage, sources say he was “fuming,” confiding to his team, “That wasn’t an interview—that was an execution.”

Yep—and it was perfectly typical of what these shit-slurpers and all others of their loathsome ilk do every single day, under the guise of “fair” and “unbiased” “journalism.” Go get ’em, Kid, and don’t stop Rocking ’em till their livelihoods are lost, their shows are shut down, and their network has become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kid Rock Inc.

Via Lakeside Joe, who quips: “This is gonna be fun to watch.”

Yeah, tell me another one, Tommy Flanagan

Posted on July 16, 2025July 16, 2025 by Mike

Had to edit the title, for accuracy. My own arcane title reference explained here.

An Exceptionally Good Liar D卐M☭CRAT: Newsom Reimagines His Record on Gun Rights in the Run-Up to 2028

There, that’s better. Now, onwards.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is doing all he can to obfuscate his abysmal record to prepare for a White House bid in 2028. His latest stunt – he received a SIG Sauer P365 XMACRO from Shawn Ryan while he was sitting for a podcast interview.

It gets better.

For certain values of the word “better,” mind.

Gov. Newsom actually said, “I’m not anti-gun at all. I’m just for some gun safe common-sense. I’m challenged by large capacity clips in urban centers, weapons of war sometimes outgunning the police. But otherwise, man, people have the right to bear arms. I got no ideological opposition to that at all.”

If you believe that, I’ve got a Golden Gate Bridge to sell you.

Here’s Gov. Newsom’s problem. We have the receipts. Heck, everyone has the receipts. The firearm industry hasn’t forgotten the time California Attorney General Rob Bonta – working for Gov. Newsom -“leaked” the personal information of every California concealed carry permit holder. Gov. Newsom’s self-professed affinity for the Second Amendment is about as hollow as former Vice President Kamala Harris’ attempt to side with gun owners by saying she owns a GLOCK handgun.

Perhaps Gov. Newsom thinks no one remembers his failed publicity stunt to nullify the Second Amendment with a proposed 28th Amendment. In 2023, Gov. Newsom wanted to export California-style gun control to the rest of the United States by proposing a “Right to Safety” – an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would strip Second Amendment rights from individuals and instead make the government the arbiter of which firearm “privileges” would be allowed. That would be recipe for disaster.

Townhall.com did the math for everyone who hasn’t been attempting to tally every gun control law Gov. Newsom has signed. Don’t feel bad for not keeping track. They’ve been coming at a dizzying pace. Since 2019, when he took office, he signed nearly 70 gun control laws. For someone who claims to respect Second Amendment rights, he’s got an odd way of demonstrating it.

Well, I mean, y’know, DUH. Don’t know who the hell Gruesome Newsome thinks he’s fooling here, but in reality it amounts to just another spectacular demonstration of the plain and simple truth fact, no matter what lies they may try to peddle to the contrary (for instance, “I’ve been an avid hunter my whole life!”), shitlib D卐M☭CRATs and the 2A DO NOT MIX. Never have, never will.

(Via Stephen)

The absolute last word on “birthright citizenship”

Posted on March 5, 2025March 5, 2025 by Mike

It is NOT a thing, has never BEEN a thing, and ought never to BE a thing. Period fucking dot.

The 14th Amendment does not confer automatic citizenship
Claremont Institute scholars, including me, Ed Erler, Tom West, John Marini, and Michael Anton, President Trump’s incoming Director of Policy Planning at the State Department, have been contending for years—decades, really—that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause does not provide automatic citizenship for everyone born on U.S. soil, no matter the circumstances. Other prominent scholars, such as the late University of Texas law Professor Lino Graglia, University of Pennsylvania Professor Rogers Smith, and Yale Law Professor Emeritus Peter Schuck, have come to the same conclusion based on their own extensive scholarly research.

Claremont scholars have made the argument in books, law review articles, congressional testimony, and legal briefs. President Ronald Reagan’s Attorney General, Edwin Meese, even joined one of those briefs, in which we argued against treating enemy combatant Yaser Esam Hamdi as a citizen merely because he had been born in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, while his father was working in the U.S. on a temporary work visa. Perhaps as a result of our brief in that case, the late Justice Antonin Scalia referred to Hamdi as a “presumed citizen” in his dissenting opinion.

Our argument is straightforward. The text of the 14th Amendment contains two requirements for acquiring automatic citizenship by birth: one must be born in the United States and be subject to its jurisdiction. The proper understanding of the Citizenship Clause therefore turns on what the drafters of the amendment, and those who ratified it, meant by “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Was it merely a partial, temporary jurisdiction, such as applies to anyone (except for diplomats) who are subject to our laws while they are within our borders? Or does it instead apply only to those who are subject to a more complete jurisdiction, one which manifests itself as owing allegiance to the United States and not to any foreign power?

Think of it this way. Someone from Great Britain visiting the United States is subject to our laws while here, which is to say subject to our partial or territorial jurisdiction. He must drive on the right-hand side of the road rather than the left, for example. But he does not thereby owe allegiance to the United States; he is not subject to being drafted into our army; and he cannot be prosecuted for treason (as opposed to ordinary violations of law) if he takes up arms against the United States, for he has breached no oath of allegiance.

So which understanding of “subject to the jurisdiction” did the drafters of the 14th Amendment have in mind?

Happily, we don’t need to speculate, as they were asked that very question. They unambiguously stated that it meant “complete” jurisdiction, such as existed under the law at the time, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which excluded from citizenship those born on U.S. soil who were “subject to a foreign power.”

Covers the bases pretty well, I should think, although there are still plenty more indisputable proofs perusable at the link. Which, of course, doesn’t by any means suggest that shitlibs are going to cease and desist soiling their Underoos, wailing and weeping, and waving their chubby fists around demanding that saner sorts recognize this nonexistent “right” immediately. Not anytime soon, they ain’t. It’s an approach Real Americans would do well to adopt for themselves: no discussion, no debate, no controversy is truly concluded until the Left has gotten its way.

Apropos of nothing: if you check the date on the article (1/28/25), you’ll see that this one has just about got to be the all-time record holder in the Most Consecutive Days Spent Languishing In An Open Tab Waiting For Ye Aulde Blogghoste To Finally Get Around To Posting On It™ category.

Q: Do these people know ANYTHING AT ALL about history?

Posted on February 16, 2025 by Mike

Or do they prefer to just make it all up as they go along, in whatever willy-nilly fashion that suits them?

Never mind, probably best not to answer that one.

Marco Rubio Leaves CBS News’ Margaret Brennan Speechless After She Claimed Nazis ‘Weaponized’ Free Speech
CBS News anchor Margaret Brennan had nothing to say after Secretary of State Marco Rubio brutally countered her weak argument that the Nazis somehow “weaponized” free speech to conduct a genocide.

The “Face the Nation” exchange came Sunday morning during a discussion about Vice President JD Vance’s incredible speech in Munich, Germany on Friday, in which he roasted European leaders to their faces for their horrible positions on unchecked immigration and free speech.

The speech predictably drew howls of protest from Europeans who for the past four years were doubtless unused to being criticized by an American administration. German president Olaf Scholz called Vance’s words “not appropriate,” and German defense minister Boris Pistorius called them “unacceptable.”

Well, bless their hearts.

Bless their hearts, hell. Y’know, for people who in fact are themselves fascists, you’d think shitlib “journalismists” like Brennan would know one when they saw one without too much trouble. And yet.

Brennan interrupted Rubio with the claim that Vance was “standing in a country where free speech was weaponized to conduct a genocide.” She then went on to criticize the vice president for meeting with Germany’s “far right” Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party, despite the fact that he also met with leaders of other major German political parties. There is also the fact that Europeans consider any party that doesn’t want to invite the entire world “far right.” Even more disturbing, Brennan defended the censorship by claiming it was “specifically about the right.”

Rubio not only vehemently disagreed with the CBS anchor, but countered with facts:

“I have to disagree with you,” he responded. “Free speech was not used to conduct a genocide. The genocide was conducted by an authoritarian Nazi regime that happened to also be genocidal because they hated Jews and they hated minorities … There was no free speech in Nazi Germany. There was none. There was also no opposition in Nazi Germany. They were the sole and only party that governed that country, and so that’s not an accurate reflection of history.”

Rubio defended Vance’s point about the “erosion in free speech and intolerance for opposing points of view” in Europe.

When the secretary of state was finished, Brennan had nothing to say except that they were out of time. How convenient.

Funny how it always seems to work out sooooo conveniently for these morons, innit?

SOS

Posted on January 30, 2025 by Mike

Say it with me, people: they won’t stop. They will never stop. They will have to BE stopped.

The Mean Girls of liberal media
A New York magazine hit-piece on the alleged ‘cruelty’ of Trump supporters has backfired spectacularly.

Since Donald Trump’s inauguration last week, there has been much coping and seething in progressive media outlets, and among the smattering of people who still pay attention to them.

New York magazine really took the biscuit with an article this week entitled, ‘The Cruel Kids’ Table’, illustrated by a cover photo of young revellers at an exclusive Trump inauguration party in Washington, DC. The people in the photo are dressed to the nines in tuxedos and evening gowns, with glowy tanned skin and big smiles. Also, everyone in the picture is white.

The title and the photo together are clearly meant to invoke horrible memories in readers of being stuffed into lockers by the high-school jock because you – a pathetic loser – looked at his pretty, blonde, cheerleader girlfriend. The implication is crystal clear: look at these horrible, white bullies! Look how cruel they are, celebrating this new racist, homophobic regime!

Notably, the article twice references a supposed lack of non-white guests at different pro-Trump parties. However, it has since transpired that the magazine cropped out several black party-goers from the cover photograph. Black Republican CJ Pearson posted on X that he actually hosted the event in the photo. He says that New York magazine ‘intentionally left me out of their story because it would have undermined [its] narrative that MAGA is some racist cult’.

Even more damning, Pearson said that the New York article purposefully neglects to mention some of the party’s high-profile black attendees. Waka Flocka Flame, a black rapper with almost two million followers on X, gets only a fleeting mention. Gervonta Davis, a black professional boxer with eight million Instagram followers, isn’t mentioned at all. These oversights were not simply careless. This is bad faith.

Which of course is exactly what it was, and is. I repeat: who they are, what they do. I refer you yet again to Mike’s Iron Laws for further details, specifically #’s 873 and 4296-54E, addendum 67. Also #462, just for good measure. The genuinely hilarious part is, having gotten away with their shit scot-free for so very long now, Jurassic Media shitlibs think it a given that they’re always gonna. Hence the look of stunned amazement on their smug faces when that unfounded assumption whirls around and bites ’em on the ass. UNEXPECTED!!!©

Note: the above link is to Instapundit, where you’ll find a link to the excerpted article; it’s paywalled, but 12Ft.io worked nicely for me. For whatever reason, as time has gone by 12Ft has become unreliable enough that it’s slipped from being my go-to option to being replaced by Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. In this particular instance, though, it was vice the versa: Internet Archive shit the bed, but 12Ft came through like a champ. I haven’t the vaguest clue why that might be, but…well, there it is.

The Donald steps up to the plate

Posted on December 7, 2024December 7, 2024 by Mike

Going to bat for his unfairly-beleaguered and -beslimed SecDef nominee, which right-on-time show of fighting spirit, will to win, and steely resolve I’m mighty damned happy to see. If it holds up, I’d consider that a highly encouraging indicator of the shape of things to come.

Trump confident Pete Hegseth will be confirmed as defense secretary: ‘Senators call me up saying he’s fantastic’
President-elect Donald Trump said Friday that he’s been hearing rave reviews from senators about Defense Secretary-designate Pete Hegseth and is confident he will be confirmed.

“It looks like Pete is doing well now,” Trump told “Meet the Press” moderator Kristen Welker, in a clip from her interview with the president-elect that will air Sunday.

“I mean, people were a little bit concerned,” Trump continued. “He’s a young guy, with a tremendous track record actually. He went to Princeton and went to Harvard. He was a good student at both. But he loves the military and I think people are starting to see it so we’ll be working on his nomination along with a lot of others.”

Yeah, well, we all know who those concerned “people” were, and fuck them right in the liver with a sparking cattle prod. May every man Jack of them die screaming, then burn in Hell for a thousand years. Such as:

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), who on Thursday suggested that she wasn’t quite yet a “yes” on Hegseth, met with the nominee on Friday and plans to continue the conversation next week.

“I just had another substantive conversation with Senator Ernst,” Hegseth wrote on X. “I appreciate her sincere commitment to defense policy, and I look forward to meeting with her again next week.”

On the meeting, Ernst tweeted, “At a minimum, we agree that he deserves the opportunity to lay out his vision for our warfighters at a fair hearing.”

Sleazy, slimy, Swamp-stinking rat. As I already said, Punch ‘Em Out Pete knows the score.

Earlier this week, Hegseth slammed the onslaught of anonymously sourced media reports that have imperiled his confirmation.

“It’s a textbook manufactured media takedown,” he wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

Yessir, that is precisely what it is, with the usual assist from dirty Vichy GOPe RINOs like Ernst. A testimonial to Hegseth’s fitness for the position which is more than good enough for me.

Will Cain, one of Hegseth’s former co-hosts at “Fox & Friends Weekend,” came to his ex-colleague’s defense Friday after the Washington Post downplayed the significance of Hegseth’s two Bronze Stars.

“Was just hanging out in [Hegseth’s] office (with his permission) and found this. Is this cool? I don’t know can someone ask [the Washington Post]?” Cain wrote in a tweet which included a photo of an Army Commendation Medal awarded to Hegseth in 2005.

The citation on the commendation noted that Hegseth’s “leadership and initiative directly resulted in the capture of two high value targets with ties to Al Qaeda in Iraq and effectively marked the end of an insurgent mortar cell.”

Gee, hire a warrior with battlefield skills and experience for a job best suited to a warrior with battlefield skills and experience—what could possibly be more appropriate, more sensible, more just plain old right than that, prithee tell?

Alternatively, we could just rely on the simon pure, reliably honest, fair, and trustworthy WaPo’s advice on this matter, I suppose. *spit*

3

2

3

Knobs

Posted on December 4, 2024December 4, 2024 by Mike

For many years now, we’ve had a category yclept “Liberals lie,” which just happens to be one of the most densely-populated categories of all. Turns out, there’s a very good reason for that.

Woodrow Wilson pardoned his brother-in-law, Hunter deButts.

Bill Clinton pardoned his brother, Roger.

Donald Trump pardoned his daughter’s father-in-law, Charlie Kushner. And just appointed him Ambassador to France.

But tell me again how Joe Biden “is setting precedent”? 🤣🤣

— Ana Navarro-Cárdenas (@ananavarro)

December 2, 2024

Much like Hunter deButts, neither of these alleged pardons actually happened. https://t.co/jp9hi9Xqz8

— Damin Toell (@damintoell)

December 4, 2024

They lie reflexively, automatically, without ever once imagining there might actually be another alternative. As my Grandma always said, they’d rather climb a tree and tell a lie than stand flatfooted on the ground and tell the truth. Or, as I always say: if they couldn’t lie, they wouldn’t be able to speak at all. I’m sure they didn’t mean to, but Blaine Cartwright of Nashville Pussy put it perfectly in the second verse of this blistering rip from their blistering first album, Let Them Eat Pussy.

“Nuttin’ you ever say is true.” A-yup. One minute twenty-nine seconds of pure hate, right there.

Update! Ace hilariously quips:

A man with the unlikely name of, get this, “Hunter deButts.”

I’m pretty sure that was my old CinemaJuggs sign-in.

Hunter deButts is a made-up name like Heywood Jablowmie. This man never existed. Apparently she used ChatGTP for her “research” for The View and ChatGTP is known to sometimes “hallucinate” fictions.

Next up…oh, God only knows what these cretinous curs are going to come up with next.

1

CF Search

Login, RSS, &c

CF Archives

Categories

2A/Mostly Guns

Alt-American

Big Dogs

Essayists

Mil

Nuttin’ But News

Odds Bodkins

Overseas/Non-US

Portals

Pure Bloggery

REAL Journalism

Substack Scalawags

The Funny Pages

Comments policy

CF Glossary

Subscribe to CF!

Shameless begging

Correspondence

Allied territory

Notable Quotes

RSS feed

.