26 July 2016

Unguided missiles.

Americans, that is.

At least the nation is not guided by anything resembling rationality. Our political class just can't get enough of "Heal the world," "Transform the world," and "Invade the world."

Yes, we are the indispensable people. The world yearns for our leadership. The key to human happiness is known to us. America is but one nation among many. Global interests must be pursued. American interests are of no consequence in the larger scheme. Our resources know no limits. Let the world contemplate our "exceptionalism."

Outside of the leadership of France, Germany, Sweden, and the E.U., people around the world must think we've lost our minds. Gaddafi's got to go. Assad, too. We know these things. Vladimir Putin is a thug and Russia must be made to back down. From what, it isn't clear. We judge and we judge with unerring accuracy.

Our insufferable arrogance must stimulate white-hot fury, though that of the northern Europeans and the joke known as the E.U. differs but little from our own.

As some wit of something particularly nauseating, "It's enough even to make Rod McKuen throw up." Except the people of Serbia, Iraq, Ukraine, Libya, and Syria, our dead and wounded troops and their the families, and the families of those left to die in Benghazi are the only ones paying the dearest price in wasted and shattered lives for our arrogance.

To internationlists/globalists, Trump's nation-centric program summed up as "America First" is the abyss. It spells "retreat" from global interests and multi-national organizations (more abyss). Their own notions of American interests are collectively, yea, utopianly and even zealously conceived, something a la George W. Bush's. The anti-democratic European Union is their idea of an ally, not the sovereign states attempting to be reborn from it. They seem never to be happier than when some "US-led NATO" action is underway, attempting to create global/U.S.-led utopia, the one that always fails to take root while killing tens of thousands of people along the way. It is this worldview that has in recent years led to thousands of American troops losing their lives and their limbs deep in the Islamic world, but, hey, anything for utopia.[1]
[1] "The PCE, Pt. 25: In the (Russian) Tank for Hillary." By Diana West, 7/25/16.

25 July 2016

"Conservatives" unmasked.

One of the great, great side benefits of the rise of Trump is the slipping of the mask of the smug, lilly-livered, lying, sneaky, conniving, useless, posturing, sellout oxygen thieves of the "right" who have cried mighty rivers of tears over the lost greatness of the American republic, limited government, and constitutionalism but done bugger all to reverse our slide into being a nation that is nothing more than a formless, brown, third-world glop.

On one of the most fundamental aspects of our Western tradition, Kevin Williamson had this to say:

As National Review #NeverTrump-er Kevin Williamson has suggested, “"the Democratic party and its undemocratic ‘superdelegate’ system sure is looking smart right about now."[1]
Nothing vexes these latte-drinking grandees than to have the unwashed citizens of fly-over country actually decide to change the political and social course of the country. They're perfectly comfortable with any measure that debases the Constitution so long as it can be squeezed under the heading of "market-based" and "meritocratic." An efficient, meritocratic tyranny is just the ticket. They will bow down before some pale, flaccid abstraction and spit on actual flesh-and-blood fellow citizens and the plain wording of the Constitution.

I think American politicians accrued a lot of trust and credibility in the long struggle with Stalinism and other forms of communist terror even though they were incapable of putting their finger on what exactly it was about communist theory that guaranteed the disasters their governments effected. To this day, communism is no more threatening than Christian Science or Mormonism to the smart set. Nonetheless, the general competence and patriotism visible in most of the major actors of those times was appreciated and we knew the general course of the nation was a correct one.

However, that trust and credibility spilled over into the politics that ensued after the fall of the Soviet Union and the morons and traitors who rose to prominence busily concerned themselves with locating and combating chimeras and will-o'-the-wisps like badness, un-Chinese dictators (brutal), "Islamism," "terror," "radical fundamentalist, Islamic Jihad," and the ghost of Josef Stalin risen from the grave to re-occupy the Kremlin in the person of the most evil man on the planet, Vladimir Putin. Not counting Bashar Assad of Syria. Words cannot describe the evil nature of that man.

If I ask how did we come to be ruled by such dweebs, twinks, and twits, the answer is that we either inherited them or they poured out of the woodwork of trusted institutions like cockroaches in the dark. We thought that today is like yesterday and there must have been some logical laying on of hands.

The full extent of the populist fury that's been fermenting and boiling up is not yet known but you can be sure that a lot of regular Americans are wide awake to the betrayals of the elites and the contempt they have for us.

[1] "If Trump Loses, a “Transformed” GOP Might Not Get a Second Chance." By Jim Jatras, Chronicles, 7/25/16.

We stymied.

The familiar explanation for black failure – repeated endlessly in motion pictures, newspapers, magazines, and by political and educational leaders – is lingering white racism. As Taylor stresses:

"Americans are so accustomed to hearing – and repeating – this view that they scarcely bother to think what it means. It means, essentially, that white people, not blacks, are responsible for black behavior. It implies that blacks are helpless and cannot make progress unless whites transform themselves.

"Do blacks drop out of school? Teachers are insensitive to their needs. Do black women have children out of wedlock? Slavery broke up the black family. Are blacks more likely than whites to commit crimes? Oppression and poverty explain it. Are ghetto blacks unemployed? White businesses are prejudiced against them. Are blacks more likely to be drug addicts? They are frustrated by white society… There is scarcely any form of failure that cannot, in some way, be laid at the feet of racist white people."
"A Powerful Indictment of America’s Failed Racial Policy." Review of Paved with Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America, by Jared Taylor by Charles Stanwood, The Journal of Historical Review, March-April 1993.

Hillary's health.

Does this look normal, staged, or tampered with in any way? Pay attention to the reaction of the woman with pink nail polish:

Don't look for this to be on the MSM anytime soon.

H/t: John (magnum) at mrc Newsbusters.


Great article. I may make my students read this when the semester start next month. Reminds me of the following joke (I live in California):

Q: What’s the difference between California and the Titanic?

A. The passengers on the Titanic didn’t vote to hit the iceberg.

Comment by Macesays on "No Lifeboats." By Robert Gore, The Burning Platform, 7/24/16.

22 July 2016

The Times delivers the slime.

The execrable New York Times writes of the increasingly important role that Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner plays in Trump's campaign and inserts a greasy insinuation at the end:
A 35-year-old real estate developer, investor and newspaper publisher, Mr. [Jared] Kushner derives his authority in the campaign not from a traditional resume but from a marital vow. He is Mr. Trump's son-in-law. Yet in a gradual but unmistakable fashion, Mr. Kushner has become involved in virtually every facet of the Trump presidential operation, so much so that many inside and out of it increasingly see him as a de facto campaign manager ... Much about the Trump candidacy seems at odds with Mr. Kushner's personality and biography: An Orthodox Jew and grandson of Holocaust survivors, Mr. Kushner is now at the center of a campaign that has been embraced by white nationalists and anti-Semites.[1]
Where is Robert "Have you no sense of decency, Senator" Welch when you need him?

We already went through this over what Trump was supposed to do because David Duke allegedly supported his candidacy. Politicians can't be tagged with the views of any of the millions of people who support them. If the New Black Panther Party and the Nation of Islam support Hillary, I suppose we'll read how her campaign has "been embraced by black nationalists and screwballs who believe there are invisible space ships circling the earth." Don't anyone hold their breath if that happens, however.

Where Trump is concerned, the Times sullied what's left of its reputation by insinuating that the Trump campaign is characterized by white nationalists and anti-Semites.

So, it's beyond fortunate Times didn't get hold of this confidential rough draft of the seating chart for the Republican convention that one of our sources was kind enough to pass on the Intergalactic Source of Truth. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed and the Convention proceeded to seat merely the state delegates. But you see here a good example of what Republicans mean when we say we're a "big tent" party:

Little did the Times realize how close they came to putting their finger on the true nature of the Republican Party.

[1] "Quiet Fixer in Donald Trump's Campaign: His Son-in-Law, Jared Kushner." By Michael Barbaro and Jonathan Mahler, The New York Times, 7/4/16 (emphasis added). Good job, Michael and Jonathan. Your future at the NYT is assured.

UPDATE 7/23/16:

CNN contributes its own slime:

That black gentleman is awesome.

More pearls of expression.

I'm confused. Did Romney and McCain represent authentic true conservatism? If so then that is redefining the term. What is laughable to me is the outrage against Trump when the Party hasn't elected a true conservative since Reagan. And boy did Reagan have a mixed past. This is just personal and that is okay, just say so. But stop making this a true conservative argument because that is a joke.
Comment by Unqualified? on "I Choose Ted." By Jonah Goldberg, National Review, 7/21/16.

21 July 2016

Pearls of expression.

This gave birth to “Black Lives Matter”, which started as a banal cliché and then grew into a radical protest movement. The movement is founded upon the idea that the United States of the present day is a white supremacist country in which black lives are devalued and the police, the agents of white supremacism, systematically target blacks with violence causing a disproportionate number of black deaths. This idea is, of course, completely contra factual, although every smug, snarky, self-assured, progressive on the planet seems to be convinced of its truth.
At the beginning of his presidency, Obama’s administration asked for a national conversation on race, and at the end of it, what he has given America is a race war. This will be all that history will remember him for.
"Obama's Legacy." By Gerry T. Neal, Throne, Altar, Liberty, 7/20/16.

The real agenda of the climate hysterics.

In recent years we've documented the true motivations that are driving the global warming scare.

Christiana Figueres, the executive secretary of United Nation's Framework Convention on Climate Change, who aspires to be U.N. secretary general, has admitted that the goal of environmental activists is to destroy capitalism.

* * * *

Ottmar Edenhofer, who co-chaired the IPCC working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015, has conceded that the climate crusade is an effort to shackle capitalism and establish a global welfare state.[1]

Milton Friedman stated it simply: Capitalism has done more than anything else in history to lift people out of poverty.

[1] "Global Warming: One More Official Exposes Real Goal Of Climate Scare." By Kerry Jackson, Investor's Business Daily, 7/19/16 (emphasis added).

19 July 2016

Absurd. Protect American interests.

A brief summary of what the U.S. foreign policy establishment won't touch with a ten-foot pole:
If defeating the Islamic State really were the desired outcome [of Obama's policy in Iraq and Syria], the pieces are in place for an advance on Aleppo, Raqqa, and Mosul by the Syrian Army, the Kurds, and the Iraqi Army, backed by massive American and Russian air support.

* * * *

. . . It’s past time that U.S. foreign policy served the interests of Americans, not those of neocons and theocratic Sheikhs.[1]

This excerpt actually makes reference to the interests of the American people, which are in stark contrast to the mysterious, illogical, and unannounced purpose behind "U.S." foreign policy in Iraq and Syria. Assad is by far the best alternative for Syria yet the U.S. approach is one for which "success" would be measured, in part, by the takeover of Syria by:
  • ISIS,
  • al Nusra, or whatever the elusive al Qaida is called these days, and/or
  • a fanciful bunch of "moderate" Syrian "rebels" with unknown plans for a Syria without Assad and a demonstrated willingness to cooperate with the two former groups.
So that's the official U.S. policy now: Remove the obvious decent choice for Syria, wage a pretend air war against (and arm and train) scum, and lay the groundwork for it to take over a whole country.

However, the American people have no interest whatsoever in effecting a takeover of a sovereign country by our mortal enemies -- who are absolute animals.

A united front with Russia, Syria, and Iraq is the only strategy that will serve our true interests, one of which is disengaging militarily from where we're not needed and where we are doing immense damage, not least of all to ourselves.

[1] "Kerry in Moscow: What is more important for America: Defeating ISIS or overthrowing Assad?" By Edward Lozansky and Jim Jatras, Washington Times, 7/19/16 (emphasis added).

H/t: Russia Insider.