Tuesday, May 3, 2022

What Overturning Roe Means

I've gotten several emails (three actually) asking me to talk about what overturning Roe will mean. So here goes.

Let's start with the legal part first because that's causing the most confusion.

Whatever your views on abortion, Roe was a terrible legal decision. It was premised on nothing more than the desire of the court to find a new right. They relied on social science data and politics in the decision, rather than legal precedent, and they invented the right not from anything written in the constitution itself (like "Congress shall not...") but from the "penumbra" of the constitution -- the glow of the whole thing. It's true. Not making that up. Total bullship, legally speaking.

So what happens if they strike Roe down? Does abortion become legal or illegal? Yes, but not like you think.

What Roe does now is create a legal right to abortion requiring that it remain legal to some extent. That means the states and/or Congress cannot flat out ban it. To what extent it can be blocked or regulated is what all the cases since Roe have been about. You can do this, but not that, etc. etc. If you remove Roe, that right disappears and abortion becomes a question for the legislature. Until the legislature speaks, however, it actually becomes legal because things are not presumptively outlawed in our system until they are made illegal.

But then it can be made illegal, right? Sure.

Buuuut, if you want to know how this plays out, it's not going to be made illegal. First, there are only a couple southern states which will actually ban abortion. I count Mississippi and Alabama. Georgia and Texas (maybe a couple more) will probably add some regulations, but that's about it. Places like California and Maryland, on the other hand, will allow abortion on demand until birth. Most every other state will most likely pass laws keeping things as they are right now. So expect illegal in two states, legal in 48 with a couple SUPER legal. As for the people in the illegal states, they will be able to travel to any number of other states to get the procedure done. Stopping them will violation equal protection laws. So realistically, no one will be stopped.

Then it gets ugly. The next time the Democrats hold the Congress and the White House (like now), they will be able to pass an abortion law that prevents the states from passing their own laws -- undoing every state's laws. When Congress speaks, the states cannot. What will they pass? Well, odds are good they would pass the California version of unrestricted abortion on demand and impose it on every state. Is there a valid 10th Amendment argument against allowing that? No.

Could Republicans ban it if they got the White House and Congress? Possibly but I doubt it. The government cannot just ban things, and there are several rights in the constitution which I doubt they can overcome. They can try though.
[+]

Monday, May 2, 2022


So I'm looking at the upcoming election and I'm thinking, things are going surprisingly well. Biden's administration has destroyed the economy, as their policies inevitably would, and people are pissed. The left's pro-criminal policies have been exposed so badly that even the liberals are thinking of voting to the right to keep from getting robbed or raped. In fact, we're looking at a rightward sweep probably larger than anything we've seen since Reagan changed the country.

Hispanics are drifting right both for economic reasons and because they don't like the Democratic embrace of communism and they don't like having a neutered language pushed on them by liberal race-baiting whites. This could potentially allow the GOP to attain permanent majority status. Blacks are even turning on the Democrats, and that's like your mom saying she doesn't love you anymore.

The wokes are going broke. GOP governors are doing well. Democratic governors are getting buried in the consequences of their actions. The GOP smartly has been working to get their whackadoddle problem under control and the Trumpatics, the vaxxers, and the Russian agents are all being shoved out. At the same time, the left is embracing crazier and crazier ideas which are turning off anyone not part of the problem.

Wow. What could possibly go wrong?

Oh yeah. The Supreme Court. There is a leaked draft decision under which the conservative justices of the court apparently intend to overturn Roe v. Wade. Shoot me now. This is an invitation to a whole different set of crazies to compete to make the GOP as unelectable as possible. Congratulations, Mr. Biden, your opponents are about to morph into a f**** cult. This is what destroyed the GOP in Colorado... and Virginia. It gave the suburbs to the left. It's what made the national brand toxic in the 2000s. And. we're. about. to. do. it. again. Paging Rick Santorum.

Good times.
[+]

Saturday, April 9, 2022

Will Smith and Wipsaw Liberalism

As you knew it would, sigh, the Will Smith bitchslap youtubed around the world has become a race issue. Indeed, if you look around at liberal and black twitter and the such, you will see that Will Smith's suspension is 100% about race. Is it really?

For anyone who doesn't know, Will Smith walked on stage at the Oscars and slapped (giggle giggle) Chris Rock because Rock just isn't that funny anymore. The joke that set Smith off was a really weak joke about Smith's wife shaving her head. It set Will off because she has a condition which causes her hair to fall out... join the club, lady. What's been interesting about that event, other than the speculation that the whole thing was staged (probably), is watching the liberal whipsaw at work.

First, the crowd applauded Smith for... ug, slapping... Rock. Dudes punch Will, they don't slap.

But then the liberal thought machine kicked in. First, the everything-must-follow-procedure section of liberalism and the nebulous-forces-are-always-to-blame section ("society did it!") screamed about the failure of the Academy to prevent this, to protect Rock, and to kick Will Smith out of the auditorium after he did this. The Academy lied and said it tried, and then issued a corporate apology, saying it would form a distraction committee to determine what course(s) of action to take.

But the ball had started rolling. Now that Chris Rock was identified as the victim, the liberal hags who bloviate on day time television declared this the outrage of the century. "You sir, are worse than Donald Trump, which is worse that being worse than Hitler!" And like that, liberal opinion shifted.

Encouraged by this, hoards of liberal celebrities exploited the event went on the air to make this about themselves to virtue signal to tell us that they were still "traumatized". Seriously? From watching one man slap another man from a great distance? Really? Sadly, that makes sense though as the current driving force of celebrity culture is claiming victimization no matter how fake or petty. Yup. To their collection of fake eating disorders, pretend bully experience, exaggerated mental health issues, fake phobias designed to make them seem not quite as arrogant and unlikable ("I've always felt ugly, which is why I rushed to become a model"), histories of being abused by spouses, dates and parents, they now proudly held their heads up high and declared that they were all the victims of one man's desire for unheard of savage, PTSD-inducing revenge. Booyah!

Liberals screamed that he should be fired from movies. His awards should be revoked. They demanded (and naturally then rejected) his public apology. CANCEL HIM!!!

Then the Academy decided to jump in and ride this wave. It banned Will Smith for career life! 10 years of not being allowed to come to the Oscars without an invite from another member. Damn that's harsh!!

That's racist!!! You only did that to Will because he's black! You would never ban a white man! And that's where we are now.

Here's what comes next, if liberal history is any judge: the same people who demanded that he be cancelled will rush to the other end of the spectrum and scream that it's only the white, racist Trump-lovers who run the Motion Picture Academy who punished him so harshly because they hate black people. In fact, punishing Will Smith at all is racist, you monsters! Then the Academy will relent, Will Smith will tearfully do the hag circuit talking about what it feels like to be a black man in racist America, and the same people who called for his head without trial will pat themselves on the back for being genuine civil rights heroes who saved Will Smith from the mob.

Does anybody remember Ray Rice? He was an NFL running back who knocked his girlfriend cold in an elevator (note: not slapped, Mr. Smith). The liberal sports media wrung their hands about violence against women, but talked about him being talented and suggested that he be traded to another team for a fresh start (in the NFL, you get as many second chances as you need as long as you have talent). Then a video appeared of him clocking her. The public reacted angrily. The same liberal sports machine writers raced to post articles and twits saying that Rice needed to be destroyed: kick him out of the NFL right now without giving him any chance to explain or justify himself. A crime like this deserves no process! So the NFL did. They banned him. Then someone screamed racism because another white player (a kicker) hadn't been kicked out for the same thing. And like some giant dying beast laying on its side in the burning sun, the sports liberal media machine turned 180 degrees on its other side and declared that "the NFL" was racist for kicking him out. You read that right: They literally were on both extreme ends of the same argument: "kill him without letting him speak!" and "how dare you ban this poor soul?" and they screamed that the NFL was racist for not doing whatever they were demanding at the time. Will Smith's situation is the same. Liberals are flip flopping from one extreme to the next and accusing everyone else of racism or sexism for not being with them at each turn.

The reality is that those pushing injustice in this instance, whatever that may actually be, are liberals. The Academy is run by liberals. The media is dominated by liberals. The hags are liberals. The exploitive celebrities are liberals. There isn't a conservative in the bunch, just like with the Ray Rice situation. This is what happen when you let liberal emotions make policy.

[+]

Friday, March 25, 2022

Bidenisms En Mass

We used to have a list of Bidenisms, like when he told the wheelchair bound guy to "stand up" or he said you had to speak Indian to visit a 7-11. Remember when he stole Neil Kinnock's life story as his own? Those were the days. These days, the Bidenisms come so fast and furiously we could never keep up. In just the past few days alone, Biden has said...

• "I'm Irish, but I'm not stupid." Because Irish people are stupid.

• "If the Russians use chemical weapons, so will we." Uh... no. That's not something we do. We talk about appropriate responses.

• To keep us calm and avoid a general panic, he told there are food shortages coming and "it's going to be real." Make sure you snap up 15 packages of toilet paper RIGHT NOW!

• Today he said US troops would be sent to the Ukraine. He even told them the horrors they were going to see, like old women standing in front of tanks with machine guns, like in Tienanmen Square. His PR team is scrambling to tell everyone we are NOT repeat NOT sending troops to Ukraine.

• Of the Declaration of Independence, he said: "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all women and men are created equal. Sounds corny, it's the truth of who we are." So the idea that men and women are equal is "corny." Feminists must love that.

• He told the 89th Airborne "Don't jump. You guys are used to jumping. Don't jump." Might I offer, "Don't gaffe"?

• He couldn't remember the name of his Secretary of Defense: "I want to thank Sec-, the former general, I keep calling him 'General.' My - the guy who runs that outfit over there. I want to make sure we thank the secretary for all he's done." That would be Lloyd Austin and that outfit is called the Defense Department. But then, he also has called Kamala Harris the President Harris... a couple of times. You'd think he'd know who the President is, right? Of course, he's also called her "the First Lady," which is someone else he probably should know.

• In his State of the Union he said Putin would never win the hearts of the "Iranian people" by invading Ukraine... that one was even written for him and he blew it... he. just. needed. to. read. it.

We are in capable hands indeed.
[+]

Thursday, March 17, 2022

I'm Still Here!

Howdy folks. I'm still here. I got locked out of my account because it didn't recognize my password. But now I'm back. I will post articles this weekend. In the meantime... here are some impossible things your liberal neighbors now believe.

There is no crime wave. All those murders, attempted murders, robberies and looting you saw in all those woke cities DID. NOT. HAPPEN. All those racist white supremacists looking to recall woke District Attorneys in hate-filled conservative places like San Francisco, Phili and NYC, are just white supremacists. The real crime wave is in white Republican suburbs.

Inflation did not exist until Putin/Trump invaded the Ukraine. There was no inflation before that. Forget that last year was the worst inflation since 1981. It's all Putin's fault.

Joe Biden is not down in the polls. His numbers are perfectly normal for Presidents... just look at Trump, Obama, and Carter. He's almost as popular as each of them was.

Only Republicans gerrymander. Illinois just naturally goes 14-3 Democrat. Maryland naturally goes 8-0 Democratic. New York naturally swings 22-5 Dem. Then there's Oregon at 5-1 Dem and New Mexico 3-0 Dem. Funny how that happens. Yet, a 24-14 Republican advantage in Texas is the greatest threat to Democracy ever... EVER

Big tech had no choice but to do the bidding of Putin, just as they are forced to do the bidding of China now. They are blameless and holy.

Harris is not hysterically stupid. Everybody laughs at refuge crises... and out of control inflation... and tells poor people suffering from gas prices to "let them buy Teslas." Nor is she bleeding staff. It's historically normal to be down to one original staffer at this point.

Ok, that's enough. I can't take any more. Anyways, I will write more this weekend. Believe it or not, we are at war with China, but Ukraine just postponed the shooting. And I'm working on some fun articles about the lack of self awareness of Democrats and progressivism being a false religion premised on provably wrong idea.

How are you all doing?
[+]

Sunday, March 6, 2022

Quick Update

A couple quick updates...

● First, on Ukraine. I'm reading some fascinating things about Russian lack of competence:
● The Russian Air Force should easily have gained air superiority and should be targeting the Ukrainians with impunity. Instead, the RusAF is barely there. Why? I've read lots of theories, but the most interesting comes from a British think tank, which credibly shot down (no pun intended) all the other theories and then explained that the Russians simply have no experience with complex air operations. They've fought in twos or sometimes fours wherever they've fought. They've never done a large air operation. They get few practice hours (flight time) and when they do, they practice in very sterile environments usually involving small choreographed engagements and not involving ground support, they don't have ground simulators to train on, and they don't have structured air command centers like NATO does to coordinate. Said differently, they don't know how to conduct an air war except to send in small sorties, which is what they are doing... and that cannot control the skies. Fascinating. The already paper tiger RusAF turned out to be tissue paper.

● The big 40-mile convoy (should be code named "5 Eminem", for those in the know) is apparently stopped because they are out of fuel and food. Their logistics are a joke. Even worse, the troops have started leaving their vehicles because it's too risky to sit there and are camping in the woods... meaning they are effectively disbanded. What an indictment of their military.

● I don't understand how people don't get that imposing a no-fly zone would start World War III, which we would win easily, causing Putin to fire missiles. Some lines you can't cross. Biden is honestly showing the correct restraint here.

● I'm seeing a fascinating assortment of important people starting to walk away (resignations, letters of protest, civil disobedience) in Russia and Belarus. Some of these are VIPs, like Oligarchs, government ministers, and generals. This feels like dominoes starting to tip. I guess we'll see.

● If you're going to take a celebrity captive to hold as a hostage, Mr. Putin, might I recommend NOT picking a WNBA player. No one is going to miss a WNBA player. Take a Kardashian next time. As an aside, Madame Pothead is not the first such hostage either. Putin is holding two Marines for over a year now.

● So much for Russia's new tanks being a "wake up" call for the American military. I love how analysts always build up Russian hardware... until someone actually tries to use that garbage.

● Question to Google: will you still be helping the Chinese censor the internet?

● Yeah, it's technically a war crime to parade enemy soldiers before a camera, but Ukraine is pretty brilliantly mixing it with letting them call home. That's a first in war, I believe. Hilariously, they established a hotline for Russian mothers to call to ask if their sons have been captured. That's going to cause CHAOS in Russia. It's also a huge intelligence source. These Ukrainians are wily!
● Secondly, the "People's Convoy" is making a mistake going through with their protest. In times of war, especially one as anxious as this, you don't throw up an unrelated protest. The optics are terrible. Also, this is old news -- too late to resonate. Moreover, add in that pretty much everyone is switching sides on Covid and this feels like petulance. It will play well on Fox though.

● Larsa Pippen (which sounds like a skin condition) did not have a butt lift. What a relief. Thank you national news for sharing that with us.

● I have a treat coming for you this week. I read this hilarious schadenfreude article about liberals living in rural America. I'll dissect it for you in a few days.

● Heady days in Denver. A box of human heads have been stolen. Words fail me. I wonder where they were headed when the box was stolen and who gave the thieves the heads up about the box. I also wonder how they got it in their heads to steal this box. One thing is for sure, heads are gonna rule.
Hopefully, the cops at headquarters make some headway on this fast... some people are going to need those back.

Good luck to us all.
[+]

Thursday, March 3, 2022

The Lessons of Texas

Texas just had a primary and some interesting things have come out of it.

● The MAGA people got beat. This is significant. The Texas Republican Party aims right, yee haw! And yet, the MAGA people lost to the establishment. One guy, Dan Crenshaw had accused some on the right of being grifters, but won easily. Another who was endorsed by jackass Marjorie Greene couldn't even force a runoff. This is a hint that Trump's power is waning and crazy is on the way out... except at CPAC.

● Some will argue that some of Trump's endorsees did win, but those are actually people who were going to win anyways -- like the Governor. So Trump just front-ran his endorsements.

● There has been a seismic shift going on with Hispanics leaving the Democrats. There are lots of reasons for this, which I will explain in another article. For now, suffice it to say that the left-Media has refused to believe this until Trump scored more Hispanics his second time than his first. They were flabbergasted. How could this be? Republicans are... racists! Well, the great migration continues. There are vast numbers of Hispanics suddenly switching to the Republican Party in rural areas, even elected officials. What's more, depending on how the runoffs go, there could be as many as 8 female Hispanics running as Republicans for the House in Texas this year. That would be earth shattering if it happened.

● Speaking of Hispanics, the core problem Democrats have with Hispanics is that they see them as illegals who want welfare but these people see themselves as Americans who want the American dream. Even worse, a lot of conservative ideology comes naturally to Hispanics. Yet, in a couple key races, it looks like hard-core progressives are replacing conservative Hispanic democrats (like Cisneros possibly beating Cuellar). That's the sort of thing which makes the transplant white San Franciscans in those areas all giddy in their Teslas but will accelerate the brown-flight problem the Democrats are having.

● Speaking of those progressives, progressives did rather well in the primaries. Some of these will translate into progressives getting more House seats because the districts are nearly pure blue. This is a problem for Democrats. The Democrats have been two parties for some time now. They have a veneer of moderates who are often "safe" white guys, like Biden or Harry Reid, who try to come across as not-at-all socialist, race-obsessed, gender-obsessed crazies ("how could a gun-owning, Mormon farmer like Harry Reid be anything but moderate?"). But underneath, the party has become the party of angry single women and angry blacks who are tired of hiding in the shadows. The more female and minority progressives they get into power, the greater the demand will be to cast off the veneer. When that happens, the Democrats are doomed. But it's coming, and elections like this bring it closer.

● There's another Bush. F*CK

● Beto O'Rourke is back. Ha ha. His campaigns have flamed out because he's lazy, undisciplined, and just doesn't understand that trying to be hip does not a candidate make.

● With Texas Republicans merging with the KKK and passing the Kill Any Minority Who Tries To Vote Law (I think that's what the New York Times called it), it was expected that only whites would vote this time and, thus, voter numbers would drop. But Hispanics proved wily and found a way to present identification. Comparable voter turnout increased by around 300,000 votes. Imagine that.

Thoughts, pardner?
[+]

Tuesday, March 1, 2022

State of Biden's Union

As an aside, I didn't watch the State of the Union address. I don't like listening to liars and fools. From what I've seen though:

1. He's planning to cut costs... which is beyond his power. Pretend fix.

2. He's going to cut costs by having us buy American products, which would actually increase costs... and can't be done because the things we buy aren't made here. Pretend fix.

3. He's renamed his failed BBB bill.

4. He's "coming for Putin and the Oligarchs" - the kind hyperbolic not-true rhetoric which sets off crazy people... like Putin who is sitting in a cave fingering the big red button. Nice move, fool.

5. He's got the back of trans-kids. He does seem to like sniffing from the back, so I guess that's true. Gross.

6. RACISM. 'nuff said. Spread hate!

7. And he's not Trump... or is that the dementia talking?

Did I miss anything?
[+]

More Ukraine Thoughts

I'll get off the Ukraine topic soon, but I find myself amazed. The Ukrainian people are just inspired. Every time I turn around, there is some group of them standing in front of a tank, a soldier sacrificing his life for his colleagues, or a group stoically flipping the bird at impossible odds. They've called them the DIY army because everyone is helping out in every way they can. This is the human spirit at its highest point. I am thankful I have been alive to witness this.

That said, there are others...
● A "star" from Dancing With The Stars is in the Ukraine. The big b*tch has been updating people by twitter as he flees with the women and children, telling us how traumatized he is. What a shameful display of narcissism and cowardice. If you're going to run away as women and children and old men defend your country, at least have the good taste not to whine about how hard it's been on you. And maybe step on a mine or something.

● Our political class look like a bunch of spoiled children as they sling mud at each other and squeal how all the others are sissies... just sissies. "Do you know what I do with Putin if I were in charge?" I don't know, does it involve knee pads? Now is not the time for politics, and yet we have Trumpers slapping at everyone, Bernie's commune blaming the US, the race baiters looking for racism, and Biden doing his fake tough-guy squint. I hate that. It shows he thinks this is all a game. Apparently, the fact that good people are needlessly dying and the world is threatened isn't reason enough for this group to stop bickering and whining about pet peeves. It's kind of surreal and sickening.

● All the celebrities claiming they "stand with Ukraine" remind me how eagerly celebrities exploit crises with empty gestures.

● Guilty companies are now virtue signalling by loudly dropping the investments they made in Putin's war machine.
Elon Musk impresses me though. Yes, I hate Tesla drivers. But Musk seems to be a practical guy willing to do what's right. In this case, he's helping keep the internet running in the Ukraine at the request of the Ukrainian government. Canada stepped up too. While the rest of the world was trying to figure out how to sanction Russia without it costing them anything, Canada flat out cancelled all exports (in particular including $720 million in minerals and aircraft parts) and banned Russian planes from their airspace. Good for them! There are a lot of brave people in Russia too. Officials signing letters of opposition. People protesting. Apparently some military officers have been shot for opposing the plan. These people have taken real risks to do this because Putin is a monster. That is speaking truth to real power. Let's not forget them.

I think now, this war is turning against Putin. I think his army and band of hired thugs will be defeated on the ground because they lack supplies, munitions and morale. There are some things that worry me though:
● I am worried that Putin is considering a nuclear strike. It fits his worldview, especially with reports that the Russian security forces are betraying him in increasing numbers -- apparently Russian security has been feeding information to the Ukrainians. For a definitional-paranoid like a dictator, to feel that he's surrounded by disloyalty has historically led to apocalyptic actions. And the mere fact Putin has made the threat of using nuclear weapons is so far beyond what is acceptable that I think we can no longer know his limits or assume he is rational.

● Even if we get through this unscathed, I worry that "the establishment" will now have a fetish for using sanctions against people it doesn't like. Forget that Putin is as close to Hitler as you can get, making this a truly special case, these people will see the usefulness of this and will start aiming for leaders who don't submit to their peeves.

● I also think this has proven that American hardware and American soldiers are in such a special class (Russia was supposedly pretty close to our level after 10 years of modernization and training) that this will make China rethink its strategy. A rational China would move toward conciliation. But that's not China. I think they look for something evil and more effective to stand up to us. That worries me.
[+]

Friday, February 25, 2022

The Establishment Is Stupid

I saw this quote in an article which actually admitted that Biden misunderstood Putin. Before you think I'm praising the author though, the author had no idea how to fix the problem because, you know, Putin's just not normal. And that's the problem with establishment thinking: "everyone thinks like we do or they're mental and you can't predict mental." The reality is establishment thinking is aberrational. Let me demonstrate.

Here's the quote:
[Putin] also proved resistant to many traditional tools of diplomacy and deterrence.

Biden’s appeals to Putin’s geopolitical ego didn’t work. Neither did threats of sanctions, words of condemnation, emotional appeals on human rights grounds, deployments of U.S. troops to NATO countries and weapons to Ukraine, or the relatively united front put forth by the United States and its allies. Even an unusual tactic employed by the Biden administration — publicizing significant amounts of intelligence about Putin’s plans — didn’t stop the dictator.

And actions that might have — maybe — changed Putin’s calculus, such as deploying U.S. troops to Ukraine itself, were not ones Biden would consider.

For Biden and his team, it is a deeply frustrating moment. Their strategy toward Russia has largely failed, despite their effort to adjust it over time to account for Putin’s stubborn moves.

Got it? We tried everything except the one which seems risky and uncertain to work -- actual threat of force -- and none of it worked. Shocking! Who could possibly have seen this coming? And now poor Mr. Biden is in a bad spot because of this inexplicable madman!!!

Does this make any sense though? Consider each "tool":

(1) Biden’s appeals to Putin’s geopolitical ego didn’t work. This is stupid. Even the most vain, need-the-public-to-love-me-to-validate-my-life people (usually actors) put economics and power over vanity. Why? Because as a species we have wants and needs and they can only be achieved through gathering wealth and power. What person in their right mind would sacrifice their ability to control or earn in favor of a fleeting bit of public adulation? It doesn't happen. This type of "tool" would never work even on an average manager of a McDonalds, and it definitely doesn't work on billionaires, so why should Putin fall for it?

(2) Neither did threats of sanctions. Sanctions have never stopped anyone, relying on those is silly. Why? Well, the problem is the West never does sanctions that really hurt. Even now, with Biden promising to swing as hard as his soft little stick can hit, he didn't hit Putin personally, didn't hit Russia's oil and gas sector at all, and would never touch things like food or medicine or the things that make people panic when they disappear. In other words, the way the West sanctions by definition excludes the things that make sanctions painful and effective.

(3) words of condemnation Same as geopolitical ego. Words are a harmless sanction unless they are tied to a specific threat, and then it's the threat that works, not the words. Sticks and stones, yes. Words, no.

(4) emotional appeals on human rights grounds We don't even agree what human rights are or how far they extend. What's more appeals to human rights are just the modern version of appeals to morality. Morality is an internal barrier. If someone has shown they don't have that barrier, then appealing to them not to cross that barrier is as stupid as expecting pot heads to stop doing pot after telling them "it's wrong." Dave's not here, man.

(5) deployments of U.S. troops to NATO countries Ooooooh scary. That would be troops you said won't be used in this conflict. How exactly is that a threat?

(6) and weapons to Ukraine This is the only one that had the potential to matter. This one changes the calculus because it means the cost of invasion goes up. The problem is that Putin has shown he's willing to bear that cost. He started bloody wars in Chechnya and Georgia... and Syria without a care. What's more, he's sure his military can handle Ukraine. And he has some plan we don't understand yet to gain control at what he considers an acceptable cost. Also, like most dictators, Putin does not care about his soldiers or public opinion. So while this can work, it wasn't enough here.

(7) or the relatively united front put forth by the United States and its allies. Twice zero is still zero. A hundred zeroes is still zero. None of the above offered the slightest reason for Putin to stop, so everyone agreeing to do them also means nothing.

(8) Even an unusual tactic employed by the Biden administration — publicizing significant amounts of intelligence about Putin’s plans — didn’t stop the dictator. Again, so what? Biden can tell the world everything, but if no one is willing to step in, then it doesn't really matter does it?

What's interesting here to me is that, of this list, only one even had the chance to affect things. Yet, our establishment and the West generally seem to think they are meaningful deterrents. It's clear that they have no understanding of the human mind outside of their little bubble world. Add the fact that they don't seem to understand that Putin is playing with a different definition of right and wrong, and it's shocking that anyone would think any of this even might have worked. This is the same logic the establishment uses to fail to solve bullying. I'm seeing a trend.

[+]

Wednesday, February 23, 2022


My thoughts.

First, I want no part of a war. Russia has nuclear missiles and we don't want a war between countries with nuclear weapons. There is just too high of a chance of mistake.

Second, we need to stop Putin. You can't have a thug who is willing to start wars in the face of worldwide opposition running around freely. A creature like him has no limits.

How do we stop Putin? The only weapon we have is sanctions. But we need real sanctions, not crap like we usually do. (1) Ban travel for every senior Russian official. (2) Invalidate the Russian passport. (3) Issue worldwide arrest warrants for Putin and his top military brass. (4) Seize their bank accounts throughout the world. (4) Remove Russia from the money exchange system. (5) Cut the internet to Russia. (6) Ban all exports/imports with Russia.

Third, this is the fault of...
(1) Biden for being weak. He spoke in extra harsh terms the last couple weeks which suggest he's all talk and no action and then he kept making winking asides ensuring the world he would not do anything really. That's a green light to a guy like Putin. So much for a "small incursion."

(2) Conservatives for flirting with Putin. Trump included. We used to know better than to encourage monsters.

(3) The Democrats for treating Russia as a political game rather than treating it like a genuine threat. You proved yourselves to be a joke.

(4) Western liberals for still not understanding that the threat of stern letters only tells bullies like Putin that you won't do anything. If I may quote Biden and then respond: "The World will hold Russia responsible." Really? With harsh language?

(5) The corporate world for helping Russia modernize without asking whether they should have helped this thug-ocracy. The tech firms in particular are to blame here.
My best to the people of Ukraine.
[+]

There are Times The World Seems Upside Down

It's been a surreal couple of weeks in the world of human stupidity.

Before I get into some of the recent crazy, check out this article: LINK. This is an article about some of the more "crazy" critics of Trump. Ostensibly, this is a lighthearted look back at the clownshow that attacked Trump repeatedly, and what happened to them after. This is people like Tom Arnold and Michael Avenatti. The article makes a couple mentions of some respectable "journalists" not exactly falling for them, but wanting to see if what they had was real (good journalistic instincts... beats chest proudly) and it mentions that some were indeed fooled... temporarily... in minor ways (tut tut), but it assures us this was always a sideshow
(oh my ha ha... we always knew they were fools). What the article fails to see, after all self-awareness is hard, is just how much the left -- journalists, news organizations, bloggers, politicians, and average dingdongs -- completely bought into all of this. None of them saw the signs of crazy at the time. They KNEW this was all true and would finally bring down Orange Man! This was the relentless press of journalist after journalist for the four years of Trump and even continues today. Indeed, as the Ukraine is sliced up like a turkey, as inflation crushes poor and working class families, as Canada goes Gestapo, and as our big cities sink into a dystopia of murder, rape, drugs and shoplifting, this same journalistic left obsesses over anything they think can lead to Trump being jailed. Read this article and recall how crazy obsessed the left was and how they believed everything about Trump, and see what happened to their false messiahs.

In other news...

● Some actress whose name I won't bother to learn is complaining that people didn't respect her after she posed nude. Shocking. When I posed nude, offers to run major corporations just poured right in. It must be sexism.

● It turns out Hugh Hefner was quite the monster. Drug pusher, rapist, animal molester, and not equal opportunity employer. So someone in the business of selling sex isn't as reputable as leftists thought when he was their hero for attacking societies boundaries? I never would have guessed. At least Larry Flynt was upstanding... what? Too soon?

● AOC tells us that the massive spike in crime in New York City after instituting woke policies is a myth. I'm sure the 6 people stabbed this weekend on the subway will be relieved to hear what happened to them never happened. I wonder if she knows she's lying or if she's really as stupid as she seems?

● Hillary apparently hacked the White House. If true, that makes Watergate nothing by comparison. That's genuine espionage. Yet, every major leftist news organization ignored it. I wonder if liberals understand that they are being lied to by their masters and are only being told what they want them to know? How does that feel to put your faith in someone who so openly treats you with contempt and condescension?

● Disney is remaking Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, continuing its raping of its old properties. The kicker is, it's decided not to use any little people for fear of perpetuating bad stereotypes. Uh, the Dwarves aren't little people. They're dwarves, like in the "Lord of the Rings," they're mythical people. This is as stupid as banning horses from Westerns for fear of offending Bronies. Apparently, Willy Wonka won't use little people for Umpalumpas either for the same reason. Give me a break! This is fake wokery... imagined outrage. "That might upset people who see Klingons as metaphors for
themselves!" What's really dumb about this is that when liberals decide to protect someone, they make them disappear. To protect Native Americans from imagined insults, they demand they be removed from team names, product names, and geographic points. To protect blacks from bad publicity, they've been removed from brand names liberals don't like and film roles as villains or criminals. Now they want to protect little people by expunging them from films. Don't worry children, in a generation or so no one will know you exist! You can thank us later.

● Finally, women's soccer settled their unfair pay dispute for $24 million and woke sportswriters are celebrating. This bugs me on so many levels. For starters, it's bullshit. They were offered a choice of two contracts, just like the boys, and they chose the one which paid more per game than the men got but less overall, i.e. they chose the less risky contract. It paid them less but had better guarantees. Now they are screaming about it. That's your own damn fault, girls. Are you a big girl, Megan or do we need to protect you from your own decisions? Apparently, you need sheltering. Secondly, the idea they are entitled to equal amounts is ridiculous. Women's sports bring in 10% of the eyes of men's sports. Equal pay for equal results... 10% for 10% results. In fact, try making it any real world job where 10% success gets you fired. Third, I think it's bizarre that this is a situation of the woke suing the woke over something they both claim to agree upon. That strikes me as a scam. Lastly, if we assume there is some validity to this -- a stretch indeed -- then how is a $24 million settlement in any way a victory? There are 23 women on the team now. They're fighting over a decade of pay. So let's assume turnover means there have been 50 women on the team? Maybe double that? So the pay out is only $500,000 per player... or far less. In fact, takeout legal fees and you're looking at a maximum of $250,000 with a likely payout in the $100,000 range for ten years. That means you got a yearly payout of... uh... aim high, girls. Nice "victory."

[+]

Wednesday, February 16, 2022

Biden's Giving Me Gas

Despite the media going all out to bury Biden's scandals, make his screw-ups sound like brilliance, and spin bad news into Trumpian schemes or unavoidable fate, Biden's popularity continues to crash. Almost every week the media declares some "reset" which will finally turn things around with the public, yet the trend continues. Right now, Biden's about as popular as herpes. But never fear, Team Biden has a plan to win your love: he's going to buy it by eliminating the federal gas tax! Uh... yay?

This is your fault, by the way. The Democrats try to pander to you, but you just won't give them your love. They gave you free money during the pandemic (even as they took your freedoms, your jobs, and your dignity) but you won't credit them for it. They gave you money for your kids, but you never even sent a thank you card. They stopped landlords from kicking out the lazy and crooked, but that didn't endear you to them in the least. When landlords freaked (since many are not corporations but are hardworking people using homes as investments) they sent those same lazy crooks money to give to you landlords with nary a thank you... no doubt you got every penny. They sparked inflation to punish the rich, but all you do now is complain how expensive poor people things are... like milk and eggs and gas. They made sure covid costs were free, except where they weren't. They gave billions of dollars in welfare to covid-struck small businesses like Burger King and Hollywood, and yet all you did was complain. You are impossible to please!

But now, now they know how to win your hearts: suspend the gas tax.

But will it work?

Let's think about this. This one maintains the roads, which are crap around here, so it's kind of important that this money actually gets collected and spent. So I don't mind paying it. But hey, who needs roads if we get relief right? How much relief? Wellllllll..... it costs $0.18 a gallon. So gas will go from $3.55 today to $3.37. Huh. I am oddly underwhelmed. If I buy 15 gallons a week, that works out to $2.70 a week. Hmm. What do you think? If I came to you and said, "I'm going to give you $2.70 a week for the rest of the year!" are you going to jump up and down and ask to do my bidding? Or are you going to look at me like this is some kind of joke? Wanna bet most people get pissed and tell me to shove my offer? And yet, Biden thinks this will give people comfort. Can you say, out of touch?

Maybe if you hadn't shut down pipelines to start your administration, that would have helped. Not taking $2.70 from me every week... that's not helping.

Oh sure, it will be great for big companies with massive fleets, but no one else is going to even notice. Do they really think this will win them votes?

Hilariously, they are also scratching their heads wondering why people aren't giving them credit for paying out money each month as the child tax credit. Could it be that the amount wasn't high enough? Or was it this: this wasn't new money, it was money you get on your taxes each year. So by paying it each month, people got the money early, but they didn't really get anything they didn't already feel entitled to. Even worse, now that people are paying their taxes, a huge number are shocked to learn that they won't be getting that deduction because they already got it. Terrible strategy. Did the Democrats not understand this?

Of course, then there's the student loan forgiveness plan. The left campaigned on eliminating student loans. Biden, ever the voice of responsibility and dementia, said he could only agree to $10,000. So what has he done in office? He's wiped out student loan debts for a handful of people who were defrauded and made it easier for some government workers to discharge their debts after a lifetime of service. This has helped around 550,000 people out of the 47 million with student loans. Damn, Mr. Biden! You. Are. On. Fire. I can't imagine why this hasn't helped him.

It's no wonder they want to give out free crack pipes, because you have to be on crack to think this helps you.

I swear the Democrats didn't used to be so terrible at handouts.
[+]

Saturday, February 12, 2022

How To Understand Covid Like A Liberal

Let me help you get this straight. This is what liberals think today (statement does not apply to tomorrow).

It is true that... Republicans are evil and stupid and want brown people to die because they oppose safety measures against Covid. They killed millions of Americans in red states like New York and California and Michigan with their policies. Florida is a nightmare of slightly below average Covid numbers, showing they handled this worse than anyone in the country... for shame. We should round them up and kill them all because they are harming our democracy.

It is true that... if you aren't vaccinated, we need to ban you from jobs, take your children away in divorces, ridicule you if you die, and if you spread your lies, whether they are true or not, remove you from any platform from which you operate.

It is true that... Blue State governors are brave for understanding that the public is DONE WITH COVID. Indeed, they are heroes for eliminating safety restrictions. It's about time! We need to crush all who stand in the way of freedom.

It is true that... Biden is a hero for opposing anyone who wants to reduce protections against Covid. We need to crush all who stand in the way of safety.

It is true that... in Canada, they allow all forms of freedom of speech, no matter how oppressive. Just like we allowed the good members of AntifaBLM to occupy sections of cities in places like Seattle and Portland where they definitely did not shoot young black men and cover it up, terrorize citizens, burn down buildings and generally destroy local economies. That was the Proud Boys. You just can't interfere with freedom of speech and the right to protest regardless of the cost to society!

It is true that... in Canada, those truckers peacefully blocking some streets and a bridge to Detroit are hurting jobs and it's heroic to call in the military to end their terroristic reign. We need to crush all who stand in the way of jobs.

It is true that... even if those truckers didn't waive swastikas as Premier Turdo says, they wanted to. You just know it. We need to shut them up in the name of freedom.

Simple, right?

And before anyone misunderstands, I'm not an anti-vaxer. I just don't think society should be trying to destroy people just because they disagree with us. But I'm kind of alone in that, apparently.
[+]

Friday, February 11, 2022

Random Thoughts

Howdy everyone! Busy week, so I haven't had a chance to write anything. I do have some thoughts though.

● On the Joe Rogan issue, I saw something that should raise eyebrows, but the world no longer thinks. It's along the lines of Joy Behar saying she didn't want Joe Rogan canceled, she just wants people to complain about him to Spotify... to get him cancelled. Note that her dishonest formulation lets her have it both ways in her head: she's not a Nazi, she just wants people to do Nazi things at her command.

Now we have India Arie, one of the handful of artists who has tried to remove her work from Spotify to censor Joe Rogan. Arie is the one who dug through Rogan's prior tapes to find that he had used the "N" word in the past. What does this have to do with vaccine misinformation? Nothing, actually. This is personality assassination. This is how the woke work. Once you are an enemy of the people, they will research all your crimes to justify making you a nonperson. That's just par for the course though, on the left. What bothered me was this quote from her afterward: "I don't think Joe Rogan is racist."


So why are you hanging on his use of the "N" word in the past and trying to kill him for it? Think about that. She's either saying that she doesn't think he's actually guilty of what she accused him of, but let's get him anyways... or she's saying that even if you are a good person, the use of the "N" word at some point in the past means you should be forever second class... destroyable. Both positions are truly evil. And keep in mind, these are the same people who want to forgive criminals everything in the name of justice. Maybe Joe should have killed someone instead?

● Inflation is a disaster and growing. The fact they say it's 7% means its actually much worse. The government lies about inflation to keep its budget under control because trillions of dollars (salaries and pensions) are indexed to inflation. Biden still doesn't seem to get how this is killing poor and middle class families. His press secretary even dismissed inflation as a rich concern a few months back (ridiculous) and Biden claims it's "transitory."

Interestingly, Biden's newest tactic in interviews, as demonstrated by his attack on leftist Lestor Holt who asked what transitory means, is to attack the questioner. When Trump did that, the left squealed. Now they purr.

● The Olympics are being killed in the ratings. Lowest ratings ever, by far. The (leftist) sports media is blaming this on China and suddenly learning that the Chinese oppress a Muslim minority -- something they condescendingly dismissed when the issue was raised against the NBA's hypocrisy. According to truth-fluid writers at Yahoo, the public knows this and is outraged at China. Plus, the covid restrictions are so horrible the public has just given up. Boo hoo.

The reality, I suspect, is that the Olympics have become (1) woke and (2) a festival of spoiled rich people complaining about their lack of luxury while blasting average Americans as ignorant racists. I would say the Olympics lost the public, just as the Hollywood masterbatthon of award shows lost the public, just as the leftist-pimping NBA lost the public last year, just at the woke media lost the public. The left can keep coming up with excuses, but the common element for the public walking away is wokeness and elitism. Uyghurs my ass. The public doesn't even know who they are.

I actually think a lot of our issues lately are not left versus right, but elite versus peons. I'll try to gather my thoughts on that and present them soon.

● As an aside, on elitism versus the unwashed, Elon Musk made an interesting point. Biden's infrastructure plans include 500,000 charging stations for electric cars even though only a tiny percentage (6% or something like that) of people have electric cars, and they are generally owned by the rich or corporate fleets. Why are we spending tax dollars to support those people? To support his point, Musk pointed out that Tesla has built 200,000 charging stations without federal cash. This joins a disturbing trend of using massive amounts of taxpayer cash to pay for the hobbies and self-righteousnesses of the rich and powerful.

● This Ukraine thing is making my head spin. Biden says war is coming. In fact, almost every day, there is some leaked intelligence telling us how the Russians are about to invade. Russia says it won't invade. I don't trust Russia, but ok. France and Germany want to cut a deal. They say Russia won't invade either. But of course, they are chickens. But then... Ukraine says Russia won't invade. Huh? They're the target, why would they say that? Ukraine says we are causing problems and need to tone down the rhetoric. //eyes cross I'm not a Putin person. He's a loser and a tyrant. But what is going on here? Why does it seem Biden is pushing for a war? What is his game?

[+]

Thursday, February 3, 2022

Racism gets (another) upgrade

Today we have an article from tryanmax. Thanks for contributing!

by tryanmax

While you weren’t looking, the ADL has been quietly changing the definition of racism. So, while you may not have been racist before, you could be now. How can you be sure to stay always up-to-date on the latest racism? Don’t worry, Commentarama can help.

A new racism just dropped and you’re going to want to pick it up. But stay tuned! The ADL is giving signs that further revisions are in the works. First, some background on why it’s time to Redefine Racism… again.

Lots of people were caught unawares over the last update, so don’t feel bad if you missed it. A couple of years ago, the ADL definition of racism was the always popular but, let’s face it, kind of old "belief that a particular race is superior or inferior to another."

It was during the crazy hectic Summer of Floyd that the ADL realized it was time for a new, sexy, woke upgrade. The new definition of racism at that time was "the marginalization and/or oppression of people of color based on a socially constructed racial hierarchy that privileges white people.” Pretty woke, right?

Unfortunately, so much was going on in 2020 that ADL’s hot new update hardly got noticed. Not until a few weeks ago, when some right-wing trolls got ahold of it and started passing it around for the LULZ, as the kids say.

In a completely unrelated event, host of The View, Whoopi Goldberg recently said some things about race and the Holocaust that were confusing and unclear. The ADL does not condone clumsy remarks about race and the Holocaust. However, the next day, the CEO of the ADL proclaimed that Whoopi should not be cancelled for her remarks. The day after—again, totally unrelated—the ADL CEO also took the privilege of announcing their latest new definition of racism.

The new definition states that “Racism occurs when individuals or institutions show more favorable evaluation or treatment of an individual or group based on race or ethnicity.” The new definition comes with a citation to Prof. Robert Livingston, so blame him if you don’t like it. (Already, I think the affirmative action people are going to have something to say.) Also, this is only an “interim definition,” so keep checking back for more updates to come!

While the ADL continues to work diligently to figure out what exactly racism is, maybe someone could launch an app that would send a notification to people’s phones every time there’s an update?
[+]

Tuesday, February 1, 2022

Updated Supreme Thougths

Some interesting developments in the Supreme Court process.

First, Susan Collins of Maine, noted liberal Republican, criticized Biden for saying he would pick a black woman. I find this fascinating because of all the Republicans, Collins is the one I would think would have been cool with the idea. What's more, polls show that 3 in 10 Americans don't like the idea of limiting his choices that way. That's significant because it confirms what I'm seeing about the summer of race baiting coming to a very hard end. This is not Ted Cruz, Sean Hannity and 4/10 angry white conservatives critizing Biden, this is basically average Americans. Black Lives Matter's support has dried up with the public.

This is also bad news for Biden who just keeps sinking.

Secondly, the Republicans are playing this right in my opinion. Trump aside, the Republicans in the Senate are being cordial, cooperative and saying they are happy to vote for a black woman. All of that flies in the face of the left's racism push and it has prevented any mainstream headlines accusing them of racism.

Third, beause of the way the Republicans are acting, Biden is being backed into a corner. He can either pick a fight and get a 50-50 controversial nomination needing a VP tie breaker vote, or he can get a genuinely bipartisan nomination. In a rational world, the bipartisan vote makes the most sense. The public likes cooperation and the nominee would get more credibility if they are confirmed in a bipartisan manner.

BUT... Biden may be looking to pick a fight to fire up his base. His disengenuous attack on the Fox News Reporter ("dumb son of a bitch") suggests he thinks it's more important to fire up his base than try to win over the public at large -- Biden called to apologize right after the bizare attack and strangely said, "It's nothing personal," which I read as "this was meant to fire up my base and wasn't really aimed at you personally." So he may try to pick someone the GOP hates as bait to cause a fight.

BUT... there are two problems with that. First, he might have another Manchin problem. The GOP has been pushing a sitting judge from South Carolina. Biden's base is pushing more for non-judges like Law School professors and "civil rights activists," who are usually more screwball-ish than active judges. But Joe Manchin, who Biden needs, said tonight that picking someone who was previously confirmed would speed everything up, i.e. a judge. I read that as: dump these weirdos and pick a sitting judge. There are three on Biden's list, but only two went through the Senate. So I think Manchin just limited Biden's picks to those judges.

AND... a new problem happened tonight - a big one. A Senator from New Mexico had a stroke. He's alive, but may be out some time. While he's out, the Senate is actually 49-50 in favor of the GOP. It's the democratic nightmare scenario they've been worried about, and it kills their agenda even if they win over Sinema and Manchin. Bascially, Biden needs the GOP now if he wants to seat a judge because he can't win at 49-50.

Biden may still try to get a nominee shot down and then try to make a deal, but the danger is that Manchin may have just told Biden how it's going to be and Biden runs the risk of an intra-party feud if he does that. What's more, a chunk of GOP Senators is talking to the Senate Democrats about joining them on this vote - they did not make the offer to Biden, but to the Senate. And the Senate is not going to like Biden lobbing a partisan bomb into the chamber on this.

One more thought. The Democrats are making a mistake trying to rush this. Manchin and the others are talking about speed and the media is wrongly talking about getting her on the bench as quickly as possible. This is actually pointless as she will just be joining the losing side and there is no difference between 6-3 and 6-2. If anything, going 6-2 lets you argue later that a decision never had the full court's consideration and should be reconsidered. Reopening a 6-3 case is more purely political. So why rush it? Maybe that's the wrong question... let's flip it and ask: why delay it?

If she's confirmed in March, she's on the court long before the election and the energy of the issue is gone. If she's still hanging in October, then her nomination becomes a hot button issue. But here's the thing, GOP voters don't care because they know Biden gets someone no matter what, so this doesn't influence their desire to turn out. If anything, this can sow discord in the primaries as challengers squeal about them RINOs who are failing to hold out three more years. On the other hand, the left might turn out to do their best to support Senate Democrats to make sure the GOP can't force a conservative on weak-spined Biden. Or alternatively, they could use a recent victory to advertise the need to keep the Senate for the next nominee. If the victory is in October the issue is fresh and angry. If it's in March, no one remembers. Honestly, I would delay this into the election season and accuse the GOP of obstruction if I were the left.
[+]

Sunday, January 30, 2022

Artists for Censorship!

Unlike we evil oppressive conservatives, the left believes that freedom of speech is sacrosanct.

Neil Young doesn't though. See, Neil Young learned that Spotify hosts Joe Rogan's podcast. Joe says stupid things about Covid. So in a huff, Neil threatened to pull his music from Spotify if they didn't ban Joe's podcast. You know... censor him. When Spotify chose freedom of speech, Neil boycotted away. This has since brought other leftist cranks out the woodwork like Joni Mitchell, the smarmy Harry and Meghan Sussex to join the demand for censorship, and "freedom champion" Apple (statement does not apply in China) is exploiting it to try to gain customers from Spotify.

I find it disturbing that an actual artist who I'm pretty sure has repeatedly used the idea of freedom of speech to justify all sorts of rotten things would now be pushing for censorship. I seem to remember him ranting about the evil "Republicans" (led by Joe Biden) when they put labels on music, for example - they called it censorship even though it didn't ban anything. Well, Neil defends himself by claiming that Rogan is spreading "disinformation" and thus should be stopped. But that's how freedom of speech works. Freedom of speech isn't about defending only popular speech or accurate speech or approved speech. It protects speech. And it sure as heck isn't about allowing only speech with which Neil agrees.

And don't get me wrong, I don't like Rogan and I think he's a menace. But so is Neil Young and so are so many other people. Movies promote gun violence and I think are responsible for why so many dumbasses use guns to settle disputes. Progressives are pushing hugely damaging lies about race and discrimination, gender and climate. Should we start banning those?

Some leftists, like Joy Behar know that freedom of speech is dogma but aren't going to stay out of a good pogrom, so she claims that while she doesn't believe Spotify should ban (read: censor) Joe Rogan, she encourages people to contact Spotify and let them know they are angry that they would host Rogan. To what purpose? To lead to his being banned. See her mental gymnastics? I don't support killing, but I encourage people to throw lots of stones.

It's always funny to me how the left wants to shut down debate. They talk about freedom and claim that freedom of speech is our most fundamental right. In fact, they still use the idea of "silencing" fill-in-the-blank as the most evil crime that conservatives commit (apart from "racism" and, Heaven help you, actual racism). But they never extend that right to people they don't like.

Look at cancel culture. Say the wrong thing and the left wants you erased. Or consider political correctness, the father of cancel culture. It was premised on the idea that if you could keep people from expressing ideas, those ideas would vanish. Thus, it sought to make it unacceptable to express politically incorrect thoughts. Mention that a suspect was black and you were racist. Mention that girls are different from boys and you're a sexist. There were a vast number of truths that were suddenly verboten. Then you had speech codes on colleges (bastions of freedom of speech) to silence "triggering thoughts" in the twisted name of "promoting" free speech by limiting it to only acceptable thoughts. You have the (re)invention of thought crimes where the prosecutor's view of your motive somehow makes the crime you commit a whole new crime. Better say smile during you next beatdown. Of course, there are the classic thought police of the Soviet and Chinese systems as well, and the secret police of "Democratic Socialist" states. The banning of books with the wrong words and wrong ideas. And so on... and so on.

It never seems to end, just the intensity and what is being suppressed. Welcome to the thought police Neil. Old man, look at you now.
[+]

Thursday, January 27, 2022

Supreme Thoughts

I was finishing an article on Biden's terrible, horrible, no good, very bad first year when the news hit that Supreme Court Justice Breyer intends to retire. So it made sense to share some thoughts on that instead.

● First, stay calm. Talk radio will tell you about the end of the world, but looking at the possibilities, the GOP can't lose and the Democrats can't win. Breyer is the court's strongest intellectual leftist, so if they find the perfect replacement, nothing changes. But anything less than a perfect replacement hurts the left. Why?

● The problem the left is facing is that Breyer was the intellectual driving the court's left. He was smart and clever -- top notch. And he knew how to justify his views and how to trip up the conservative justices when they overreached. The other leftists remaining on the court just aren't that bright. Sotomayer, for example, plays well to leftist journalists because she speaks like they think, but she's a legal lightweight. If they replace Breyer with another lightweight like Sotomayer, the left loses its intellectual motor on the court and its ideology will get run over time and again.

● Unfortunately for them, finding someone of his caliber will be incredibly hard. There just aren't that many heavyweight justices out there. What's more, limiting the talent pool to black women makes it even harder. And that's before the other problem: the Democrats are looking for a partisan, not a thinker. In other words, they are looking for the very thing they should not be looking for.

● In fact, the black women already being mentioned lack intellectual prowess. That's bad for the left. They may pound the table with the best of them -- who knows -- but none of the ones mentioned will ever write the kind of scathing technocratic takedowns that swung a guy like Roberts from time to time and justified leftist thought in terms that made it hard to challenge.

● As an aside, forget Harris. Everything I see tells me that team Biden despises her, and I'm not surprised. She has a history of being seen as worthless by allies all the way from the beginning (she's the Peter Principle on steroids), and I don't see anyone on the left wanting to risk putting her on the court. Also, as I've said before, she lacks an ideological core and dances to the tune of corporate backers, making her a terrible choice for anyone wanting to defend an ideology.

● NBC tonight said that this was a chance for Biden to prove himself to blacks and shore up the support of an important (vital) constituency before the election. Indeed, recent polls show Biden's support among blacks slipping from 90% to 60%. Take that with a grain of salt, but Biden clearly has a problem and needs to energize his black base. Will this do it? Nope. Why?
● For one thing, this will happen before the election. That makes it a fait accompli when it comes time to vote. People don't tend to reward politicians for favors already done. Machiavelli tells us this, in fact. He says to inflict pain right away and all at once, because people will forget, but spread out rewards because people are fickle and hold off delivering until you get what you want. By the time the election rolls around, blacks will see this as "what have you done for me lately." And if she puts her foot in her mouth, she becomes an embarrassment. This only way this energizes blacks is if the Republicans step in it and come across as actual racists.

● Secondly, I'm not convinced that black men are all that excited about rewards given to black women. There seems to be a real disconnect there.
● I actually think this is aimed at energizing "women." I think Biden thinks that "women" are a collective. But they aren't. White women and black women have suffered a disconnect with a lot of anger aimed at white women by black women (think back on the "hey, white woman" articles), so picking a partisan (i.e. a yeller rather than an ideologue thinker) black woman could further alienate white women. Also, the angry white women faction is notoriously self-centered and tramples over their allies to get their share. Giving this seat to a black woman will not be seen as giving them their share.

● Ultimately, I think black and white female support goes up at first on principle -- more with blacks than with whites, and some black male support as well. But the bounce fades quickly and their support will depend on other issues in the election cycle.

● So how should Republicans handle this? I would float some names right now of qualified but moderate-left black women, Hispanic women, a Muslim, and a lesbian or two, and I would say these women are quite acceptable and we would support them. Then explain what kinds of qualifications you think they need. This prevents a charge of racism and obstruction because the GOP identified several qualified leftist women and what they think is important. Biden and the media, however, will respond by going insane and tearing these women apart, which is really bad optics. It also creates the opportunity that they may invent reasons these women aren't acceptable which ultimately trap the candidates the left want... "hey, you said they needed this! Now you're changing your mind??"

● I said we can't lose, but we will lose if we come across as racists. Censure anyone who goes that route.

● You could also argue that the left wins by replacing an expiring (older) judge with a younger judge, but it's unrealistic to think we can block appointments for three more years. That would make us look terrible. So name some good ones and let them pick a bad one who isn't up to Breyer's intellectual level and in-fight.

● That said, we all need to brace for more hero worship from the left regardless of who they pick. Watch for sycophantic documentaries, fainting legal groupies and Democrats going to therapy with sex fantasies involving their new crush. See The Notorious RGB for reference (LINK and LINK).

Those are my thoughts. As long as we don't act like racist obstructionists, this cannot hurt us, but it is a very delicate balancing act for the left, one I don't think they can manage because they've lost their minds and want the wrong things now.

Your thoughts?
[+]

Sunday, January 16, 2022

Dominos Pizza's Cynical Ad

Just a quick thought on cynicism... and Domino's Pizza.

I believe the real national crisis we face today is cynicism. The age of cynicism actually started in the 1950's (I've discussed that before). That led to the destruction of many of the institutions needed to hold society together in the 1960's and 1970's. The 1980's were a brief reverse of that trend, but by the 1990's we were back at it hard. Today, we live so deeply in the culture of cynicism that we "question" everything, we mistake cynicism for wisdom, we mistake snark for reasoned debate and we pride ourselves in our ignorance. It allows people to dismiss objective fact as a subjective point of view, to think truth is relative, and to dismiss anything because the "wrong" person espouses it. It poisons relationships. It poisons society. It poisons learning. We have reached a point where we know nothing, believe nothing, trust nothing, and can achieve nothing.

How does this relate to Dominos?


There has long been a debate as to whether or not disclosing an act of charity invalidates the act. We all agree it is a good thing, for example, to help people in need (well, most agree, some are too cynical to understand this). But many think that advertising the fact you acted charitably invalidates your charitable act because, by telling people, you convert the intent of your act of charity from a selfless act of kindness into a selfish act of self-promotion. And naturally, cynical people are masters at rhetorically finding self-interest to negate good deeds.

Are they right?

No. The charitable act is still a charitable act. The person helped is still better off, and the act was done without requirement. These are good things and should not be dismissed cynically. We should be encouraging them regardless of motive.

That said, I would offer one caveat. This is when the act of charity was itself done cynically. How can we tell? Famous people often do some charitable acts before a camera when they are in trouble and need good PR. Companies do this too. Or how about when the effort spent advertising the charitable act far exceeds the act of charity itself? I would consider that cynically exploiting the goodwill of people because the effort was not in the charitable act, but in exploiting the charitable act. While I would not criticize the act of charity itself, I would criticize the exploitation. In fact, I think this type of behavior only adds to the culture of cynicism because it confirms the false idea that charity is something people do to virtue signal.

And that brings me to Dominos.

Dominos is running an ad during NFL games (and more). In this ad, they talk about how delivery fees are killing small business restaurants and how they decided to help. They bought $100,000 worth of delivery fee cards "and no one paid for delivery fees." And then some small business people praise Dominos for their efforts. Angelic, right?

Or is it?

Let's do the math. Start with the $100,000 spent. Divide it by 50 states... you get $2,000 per state. Divide that by, let's say, two major cities per state. We're down to $1,000 per major city. If Dominos advertised, "We just spent $1,000 in your city on small business's delivery fees," would you be impressed? Hardly. Dominos gave these out as $50 cards. So basically, they gave $50 gift cards to 20 businesses in the two biggest cities in each state. Still impressed? I'm not, but it's charity and I will commend it. I'm glad they did it. Nice.

BUT... then they advertised it. It's in heavy rotation too, so they've probably spent $10 million advertising this fact (Dominos spends about $40 million a year on advertising). That means they spent about $100 advertising every dollar they actually spent helping. I would call that cynical exploitation. You?

Here's the ad: LINK. Tell me it doesn't suggest that they bought a TON of these.


As an aside, all the cynicism about people only acting out of self-interest comes from a deeply cynical and wrong philosophical argument. The argument comes from an apocryphal story involving Lincoln and another passenger arguing on a coach about whether or not altruism (a truly selfless act) exists. As they argue, they come upon a pig stuck in the mud. It's squealing in pain. Lincoln jumps out and saves the pig, ruining his suit. He then notes to the other passenger, if there was no such thing as altruism, then why would I ruin my suit to help the pig? The other passenger retorts: you did it out of self-interest because you could no longer stand to hear the suffering, so you ultimately were only doing this to make yourself feel better. Cynics latch onto this and argue it means there is no such thing as a selfless act.

But they forget Lincoln's reply. He said, if there is no such thing as altruism, where does the impulse to stop others from suffering come from in the first place? And he is right. Altruism exists. To argue otherwise falsely devalues the human spirit.

[+]

Tuesday, January 11, 2022

More Congratulations Are In Order!

Congratulations to Maya Angelou. The Mint has announced that it's putting out a series of quarters with women on them... and one of them is Maya Angelou! Naturally, the media is treating Maya's encoinment as an "historic" and "groundbreaking" achievement. But what ground did she break?

Oh, I know. She's the first black person on our currency, right? Well, no. That would be George Washington Carver, Booker T. Washington and Jackie Robinson. So, not the first black. Then she must be the first woman, right?! No, not that either. That would be Martha Washington, Pocahontas, Susan B. Anthony, Helen Keller and Sacagawea, plus of course Lady Liberty. So she's the 7th woman and the 4th black. So what exactly does the media think is so groundbreaking then? Well, she's the first black woman. //rolls eyes That is how identity politics works: if you can carve out a favored category, then your achievements -- no matter how many came before you, suddenly are supposedly unique. It's kind like the way dog shows pretend there are two types of Beagles below 13 inches tall and 13-15 inches tall. And where pushing race and gender are concerned, there is no hair small enough that you can't split another Beagle.

At least she's part of a veritable rainbow of women on these coins, right?! A broad coalition of women of all shapes and sizes and colors, right? Uh, no. The Mint will be minting quarters with a white woman, a black woman, an Hispanic woman and a Chinese-American woman. It will not be minting any lesbians, Trans-women, India-Indians, non-Chinese Asians, Arabs, Jews, Muslims, or handicapped women, not to mention the portly, the shortly and the tall. Sorry suckerettes, but when it comes to identity politics some Beagles are more equal than others.

They did choose the best black woman they could find though, right? You tell me. Are people in a hundred years going to wonder who the hell this obscure writer was? Do you think they would struggle more or less to remember Rosa Parks or Harriet Tubman. Even among modern women, who is more likely to be remembered? This friend of the Clintons or Oprah, Condoleezza Rice, or Serena Williams.

You tell me.
[+]

Saturday, January 8, 2022

Covid Was A Chinese Biological Attack on Foreign Militaries

I'm not paranoid. You know this. But sometimes, facts lead to a conclusion that sounds paranoid. In this case, I've long known a series of facts which suggest that Covid was intentionally released by the Chinese military as an attempt to cripple foreign militaries before some sort of Part B which never came. Observe.

As you know, I pay attention to the world. I gather facts. I don't believe conclusions or treat theories as fact until I am thoroughly convinced. In the case of Covid, the facts have never fit the narrative. The "facts" we're supposed to believe are this:
1. The first Covid case was found in Wuhan China in December 2019.

2. The first case was a man who worked in a "wet market" where bats were eaten.

2a. Alternate fact: China ran a lab in the area which was investigating bat-infested Covid and it escaped.

3. Covid spread to the outside world in January 2020.

Here's the thing. The first fact is false. There are recorded cases of Covid in China in November 2019 and stories of unconfirmed (not tested) Covid in massive numbers of very sick people in China in October 2019. That means the first case was possibly as early as October 2019. That means the first case is not the first case. Nor would it rationally be the first case anyway. In fact, even if batguy is the first known case, batguy still is not the first case... he's the first confirmed case. This is because Covid looks like the flu, which tells us logically that hundreds of prior cases existed along with many deaths before someone decided "Hey, this one's kind of strange, let's look into it." So we don't know when it really started.  But we do know that if batguy is not Patient Zero then where batguy got it isn't relevant because he's not the guy who started it. So the bat theory is a distraction. The escape argument also happens too late to be the true cause.

So the real facts we know are:
1. Covid was around somewhere between October and November 2019 at least.

2. The origin is otherwise unknown, except it appears in Wuhan - disease spread theory tells us this... diseases spread in the golden spiral pattern, meaning they cluster at ground zero and then thin out from there. The cluster is at Wuhan.
More facts you have not heard** (see below):
3. October 2019, the City of Wuhan held the World Military Games. That's right. Thousands of soldiers from the militaries of 100 countries went to China to compete. (This has never been considered as part of the Covid story as far as I can tell.)

4. When the soldiers got there, they found Wuhan to be a ghost town. No one was on the streets, most things were closed. The Chinese claimed this was for the soldiers' benefit, but that makes no sense.

5. Hundreds of these soldiers got very sick. They returned home and spread it.

6. They reported these illnesses. They were told it was probably just the flu, even if it wasn't limited to flu symptoms. Subsequent complaints were dismissed on the basis this couldn't be Covid because it happened before batguy, but we know batguy is a false fact, so the dismissals are false.

7. The soldiers were told not to talk about it, which is only done with soldiers for security reasons.

8. The military has not publicly investigated this.
One more speculative-'fact' to add. I am not a biological scientist so I can't say this for sure, but there is a lot of talk about Covid being man made. It's also the first disease I've heard of which covers its track for two days so it can spread unchecked and it's unusually infectious. If it actually killed, it would be the perfect biological weapon.

Now put this together.

Think about how hyper-aggressive the Chinese have been in recent years. It makes sense given Chinese thinking to infect these soldiers intentionally, i.e. to use this biological weapon against a perfect target which will carry Covid home and infect their militaries and command structures, crippling over 100 of the militaries of the world. That would leave everyone incapable of stopping China from doing whatever else they had planned, e.g. the Marines are not coming to save Taiwan if half of them are dead or too sick to fight. What would China do with a free hand? Don't know, that part never happened. It didn't happen because Covid turned out to be a dud. It killed old people and some sick people, but wasn't very deadly in the wild compared to what it looked like in the lab, which is often the case.

I think the military knows this because they supposedly haven't investigated. It makes no sense that the military would not investigate so many illnesses coming from one event, that's not how the military works. They investigate eveything. I think the truth is they did investigate and know the truth, but have decided to stay silent (even silencing soldiers to hush it up). Why be silent? Fear that it will outrage the public. Think about how angry people are at China over the batguy theory, which looks like an accident. Imagine the rage if it was announced that Covid was actually an intentional attack on our soldiers and now grandma is dead. The public would want war.

So why was Wuhan empty? Was it really because Covid had escaped into Wuhan before the soldiers got there as the Daily Mail suggests (see below)? No. The time that took to develop meant it would have hit the news as people got sick and posted about it online. It would have taken time to see what was happening and cut the internet and shut the city down. That could not be done without getting out. Instead, the ghost town had to be intentional. The Chinese sent everyone home because they didn't want their weapon spreading into the Chinese population. They told everyone to stay home to avoid this army of soldiers or else and people quietly bought it. I guarantee you that everyone who came into contact with the soldiers was immediately isolated thereafter.

Interestingly, none of this ever hit the news, even as a theory.  Why?  That's actually our fault:  left and right bought the cover story and turned on each other over it... "damn Chinese bat eaters" vs. "you're racist."  No one bothered to use their brains.

** Then this. Today, for the first time ever, I've seen this theory appear in the news... sort of. The Daily Mail has it. It's a small story, not front page, and it's focus is wrong -- it treats it like the soldiers stumbled upon the disaster rather than being aimed at them, but the facts I mention above are confirmed. Here's the article. Read it all the way through: Canadian Military.

[+]

Wednesday, January 5, 2022

A Date We're Gonna Make Live In Infamy

Hi all. First, let me say that for some reason, I'm having a hard time posting comments. I'm not ignoring you, I just can't seem to post them.
Secondly, tomorrow is the anniversary of January 6?? What a ridiculous thought. We're going to have an anniversary for the day a couple hundred douchebags vandalized the capital building? Really? Why? Oh yeah, because the Democrats want to pretend this was an attempted coupe and (Heavens) it might have succeeded? Riiiiiight. The United States was going to fall because a couple hundred retards broke into a building? Laughable. At least when they burned the Reichstag, they destroyed the building. All they had to do here was hose off the beer smell. But leave it to the Democrats to exploit anything. Pathetic.  They really should change their name to the Propaganda Party.
[+]

Sunday, January 2, 2022


Congratuations to Chicago for winning the Murder Capital of the Year award over stiff competition (no pun intended) from other woke cities. Chicago had 797 murders. New York, Philly, pot-headed Portland, Minnesota, etc. etc. All over the country, people are dead to satisfy the smugness of the politically stupid. Wokeness kills.
[+]