Back in Durham after an extended stay in Wilmington. Had some electrical problems in the house, with one circuit breaker continually tripping and plunging me into an eerie internet-free world. Salvation came in the form of a very clever, cheap, and resourceful local electrician who figured it all out, and tracked down the evil device that threatened to convert my house into a socialist wonderland of darkness. For $25--yes, you read that correctly--he came out on a Saturday morning, did all sorts of magical tests with some yellow gizmo--I believe that is the correct term--found and replaced the bad piece of gear, i.e., an outside electrical socket.
Existing without internet for a couple of days led me into mischief, as you would expect. While the Diplowife went off with her little friends to the local gym, I Jeeped to my favorite local gun store, Backwater Guns, and bought a very nice Liberty gun safe, which they promptly delivered. Sitting in my basement, the safe, however, looked cavernous, sad, and (sorta) empty--and we all know that violates the Constitution's right to bear arms, and the Declaration of Independence's pursuit of happiness. Can't have that.
I, therefore, returned to Backwater and bought a Ruger PC 9 carbine. As its name reveals, it comes chambered in 9 mm. It uses ordinary Glock or Ruger pistol mags, and it can shoot! I am not a huge fan of the 9 mm--just a little fan--but the Euro slug has certain virtues: fast, accurate, light, and, of course, relatively cheap when compared to God's caliber, the tank-stopping, All-American .45 cal--"Stand up and take your hat off when I mention the .45, son!"
After running some Bore Bright through the barrel, I took this little gem to the local range in Wilmington. Put 200 rounds of 115 grain and 124 grain through it very quickly without a single jam or misfire. At 20 yards, I was Annie Oakley. The Ruger would not let me leave the X ring: I tried, but no, some sort of Elon Musk self-aiming mechanism must have taken over and forced me to become a good shot, for that day, at least. Anyhow, a lot of fun, and seems it would serve as a pretty good home defense weapon. With the sling I will put on it, this little carbine definitely also has the cool factor--an essential feature in any gun, naturally.
On the not so fun side of life, I see that the crazy progs continue their efforts to destroy the country. The situation at the border has become insane; it is an invasion, no other word fits. I long ago recommended (February 17, 2017, for example) the need to build the wall, of course, and shut down the border and start closing at least some of Mexico's fifty-two consular and diplomatic offices in the US as a way to pressure Mexico's rulers into doing what they must do. I have heard progs say shutting down the border won't do anything, because the migrants will still cross. Yes, but it will put huge financial pressure on powerful Mexican exporters--and the US companies who make stuff in Mexico--to get their government to start putting an end to this madness.
The Russian Collusion stuff should be dead and gone, but some progs just can't let it go. They continue with their efforts to pull a coup. They cooked up the Collusion story, and, as FBI officials have admitted under oath, without the salacious nonsense of the DNC-bought Steele Dossier, they would not have gotten the FISA warrants. That doesn't stop inveterate liars such as Adam Schiff from prattling on and on. This is a man who should be forced off the Intel Committee, if not Congress; at a minimum he should lose his security clearances. He is a liar and a dangerous national security loon. Be gone!
OK, off to help my son buy a BBQ.
Sunday, March 31, 2019
Friday, March 29, 2019
Russian Collusion Delusion as Plan B? What were They Thinking?
Forgive me some random thoughts. I ask your help in formulating a coherent argument here.
The Putin-Trump collusion hoax has ended exactly as any reasonable observer would have predicted. With the end of the turtle-paced Mueller inquiry, we found out what most sane people already knew, that, to steal from Gertrude Stein, "There is no there there." This collusion story almost certainly constitutes the second biggest hoax in American political history; second only to the Climate Change hoax. Charles Dawson, father of the Piltdown Man hoax, would doff his cap to the creators of the Putin-Trump tale.
I don't want (again) to go into all the facets of this incredible lie. More details will emerge in coming weeks, as the Republicans begin to probe its origins and, I hope, hold accountable the many Charles Dawsons who participated in it. And, yes, Barack Obama, I am looking at you.
Today's little post comprises a thinking aloud piece. As noted, please help me flesh out the ideas and get more clarity on this disaster.
The first thoughts that come to mind: What were they thinking? How did the promoters of this lie think it would end? What exit plan did they have?
The collusion lie originated, it seems, in the run-up to the 2016 election, and formed a key part of the Clinton strategy to ensure Trump's defeat--please note, the word ensure. That strategy, of course, depended on the support of Obama and his key staff, e.g., Rice, Power, Kerry, Brennan, Comey, Lynch, Clapper, McCabe, and so on. Obama, in effect, offered the intelligence and law enforcement agencies and capabilities of the United States to the Hillary Clinton campaign. The Clinton campaign cooked up the collusion lie as a way not only to smear Trump, but to provide cover for the use of those agencies and capabilities to spy upon and tamper with the Trump campaign. Watergate on steroids? Much, much worse.
Let's run over this very quickly and with broad brush strokes--I am leaving out a lot of details: the Hillary campaign, through its lawyers, bought some shoddy and salacious oppo research from a shoddy and shady firm, Fusion GPS, that contracted a hack former British spy, Christopher Steele, to write it up. The material, put together in a "dossier," proved absurd, poorly sourced and researched, and laughable on its face. That, however, was irrelevant. This flimsy dossier, apparently at CIA Director John Brennan's urging, circulated within the top echelons of the US government and to select Congressmen--including John McCain--and then circled back to the FBI. The FBI then used it as primary "evidence" in seeking FISA warrants to conduct surveillance operations on the Trump campaign. The FBI, it seems, did not tell the FISA judges from whence came the "intel," to wit, from an unverified piece of opposition "research" paid for by Trump's political rivals. Certain details of the dossier got leaked to friendly journalists by Brennan, Comey, and others, and given the imprimatur of official intel.
The Dems assumed all along, clearly, that Hillary would beat the Donald like a rented mule. Nearly all the polls and pundits had declared this a scientific certainty. This dossier and the Russian collusion story served, in the words of a disgraced FBI attorney to her lover, as "an insurance policy." Once Hillary won, of course, the story would, I assume, just become some sort of vague political lore that would permanently stain Trump, and prove the source of endless Hollywood movies.
The cooked up collusion story encountered a big problem on November 8, 2016: Clinton lost. The unthinkable happened: Trump won. The Dems, US government agencies, and, yes, Obama, went into high gear to develop a plan, some kind of "Hail Mary Pass" to keep Trump from taking office and cover up the grotesque malfeasance involved in the Collusion story. They attempted a number of strategies, e.g., pressing the electoral college not to recognize Trump's victory, talking impeachment, hinting at a military coup, demanding recounts, unleashing street thugs, etc. The collusion story was modified to place heavy emphasis on Russian "hacking of the election," trying to give the impression that the Russians had tampered with the voting machines themselves. Progs, who never cared about American security when the USSR strode the stage or our sovereignty or about the meddling in our elections by hundreds-of-thousands if not millions of illegal aliens, now wrapped themselves in the flag, proclaiming themselves great patriots fighting a foreign power seeking to take over our White House.
Trump, President! What to do with the Great Collusion lie? Just as ordinary criminals and congenital liars do, the Obama folks, the DNC, and the prog echo chamber in the media and Hollywood, doubled down on their criminal activities and lies. The story would, must survive. The Russia collusion story, a campaign stunt, gained a life of its own; Frankenstein's monster lived! In order to terrorize the deplorable villagers, the mad political scientists insisted on and got themselves a Special Counsel to "investigate" the non-existing crimes of Trump. They even managed to mau-mau Trump's new Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, into recusing himself, and turning over the whole investigatory process to the pro-Obama prog swamp creatures that controlled the DOJ and the FBI. James Comey's buddy, Robert Mueller, got the assignment as Special Counsel, with almost unfettered power to pick staff and even define the extent of his mission; he, furthermore, had no apparent budgetary or time restrictions. All the money and the time in the world, dear Robbie. Do your thing! Get us a scalp!
Mueller would keep the story alive! And that he did! His investigation not only would create a huge cloud for the Trump people, but plunged many of them into legal and financial jeopardy as they faced interrogation and prosecution/persecution for alleged sins and "crimes" having nothing to do with Collusion. Investigators used slimy Beria-type tactics against innocent people, threatening them with crippling legal costs and long prison terms for unspecified crimes and errors, to force them to confess and name others. As the story had no substance, of course, they sought to push people, including President Trump, into committing procedural transgressions, into falling into perjury traps, into "obstructing." (Please note: The fake FBI investigation into Hillary, of course, did none of those: she was not even put under oath.) Accompanying the investigation, we had an almost daily supply of leaks from "anonymous" sources relating, in breathless terms, that the "noose was tightening," "the walls were closing in on Trump," that soon "another bombshell" would drop, that Mueller and the intel services had verified key "portions of the Dossier," that evil Trump was about to fire Mueller--Save Mueller! Soon, they told us, soon, yes, soon, we would see a "hard, hard rain" (h/t Bob Dylan) of indictments fall on the White House: Trump and his whole family would exit 1600 Pennsylvania Ave in hand-cuffs! In addition, lest we forget, former bosses of the intel services got lucrative gigs on mainstream media outlets assuring us that Collusion was real, and proven beyond a doubt. Hollywood stars, late-night comics, and once-minor prog TV personalities rode the story to fame and fortune hyping daily "revelations." Journalists won Pulitzer Prizes for reporting fantasy.
Stand by! Impeachment is Imminent! Stand by! Stand by!
The prog machine strung out this absurd story for over two years; it ran prominently during the 2018 midterm elections, and, possibly, could have contributed to GOP losses in the House. As with anything, however, there comes a time when even the mightiest machine can no longer block an outcome. The Mueller report went to the new AG. Mueller's vast team had spent two years investigating, and produced not one indictment for "collusion". . . fizzle, fizzle, fizzle. "There is no there there," as Mueller and the creators of this scam knew all along.
Now, of course, the cry is to release the whole report. There must be something in those hundreds of pages that we can use to impeach or smear Trump and the deplorables! The fat lady hasn't REALLY sung yet, right? Right? Please! Warm up the band, she still has some air in her lungs!
OK. Like I said, these are thoughts. We are still left with one big question about all this. What were THEY thinking? What were they thinking would happen at the end? There are lots of possible scenarios but they all depend on one basic assumption.
What were they thinking? Simple, it was that the rest us were not.
The Putin-Trump collusion hoax has ended exactly as any reasonable observer would have predicted. With the end of the turtle-paced Mueller inquiry, we found out what most sane people already knew, that, to steal from Gertrude Stein, "There is no there there." This collusion story almost certainly constitutes the second biggest hoax in American political history; second only to the Climate Change hoax. Charles Dawson, father of the Piltdown Man hoax, would doff his cap to the creators of the Putin-Trump tale.
I don't want (again) to go into all the facets of this incredible lie. More details will emerge in coming weeks, as the Republicans begin to probe its origins and, I hope, hold accountable the many Charles Dawsons who participated in it. And, yes, Barack Obama, I am looking at you.
Today's little post comprises a thinking aloud piece. As noted, please help me flesh out the ideas and get more clarity on this disaster.
The first thoughts that come to mind: What were they thinking? How did the promoters of this lie think it would end? What exit plan did they have?
The collusion lie originated, it seems, in the run-up to the 2016 election, and formed a key part of the Clinton strategy to ensure Trump's defeat--please note, the word ensure. That strategy, of course, depended on the support of Obama and his key staff, e.g., Rice, Power, Kerry, Brennan, Comey, Lynch, Clapper, McCabe, and so on. Obama, in effect, offered the intelligence and law enforcement agencies and capabilities of the United States to the Hillary Clinton campaign. The Clinton campaign cooked up the collusion lie as a way not only to smear Trump, but to provide cover for the use of those agencies and capabilities to spy upon and tamper with the Trump campaign. Watergate on steroids? Much, much worse.
Let's run over this very quickly and with broad brush strokes--I am leaving out a lot of details: the Hillary campaign, through its lawyers, bought some shoddy and salacious oppo research from a shoddy and shady firm, Fusion GPS, that contracted a hack former British spy, Christopher Steele, to write it up. The material, put together in a "dossier," proved absurd, poorly sourced and researched, and laughable on its face. That, however, was irrelevant. This flimsy dossier, apparently at CIA Director John Brennan's urging, circulated within the top echelons of the US government and to select Congressmen--including John McCain--and then circled back to the FBI. The FBI then used it as primary "evidence" in seeking FISA warrants to conduct surveillance operations on the Trump campaign. The FBI, it seems, did not tell the FISA judges from whence came the "intel," to wit, from an unverified piece of opposition "research" paid for by Trump's political rivals. Certain details of the dossier got leaked to friendly journalists by Brennan, Comey, and others, and given the imprimatur of official intel.
The Dems assumed all along, clearly, that Hillary would beat the Donald like a rented mule. Nearly all the polls and pundits had declared this a scientific certainty. This dossier and the Russian collusion story served, in the words of a disgraced FBI attorney to her lover, as "an insurance policy." Once Hillary won, of course, the story would, I assume, just become some sort of vague political lore that would permanently stain Trump, and prove the source of endless Hollywood movies.
The cooked up collusion story encountered a big problem on November 8, 2016: Clinton lost. The unthinkable happened: Trump won. The Dems, US government agencies, and, yes, Obama, went into high gear to develop a plan, some kind of "Hail Mary Pass" to keep Trump from taking office and cover up the grotesque malfeasance involved in the Collusion story. They attempted a number of strategies, e.g., pressing the electoral college not to recognize Trump's victory, talking impeachment, hinting at a military coup, demanding recounts, unleashing street thugs, etc. The collusion story was modified to place heavy emphasis on Russian "hacking of the election," trying to give the impression that the Russians had tampered with the voting machines themselves. Progs, who never cared about American security when the USSR strode the stage or our sovereignty or about the meddling in our elections by hundreds-of-thousands if not millions of illegal aliens, now wrapped themselves in the flag, proclaiming themselves great patriots fighting a foreign power seeking to take over our White House.
Trump, President! What to do with the Great Collusion lie? Just as ordinary criminals and congenital liars do, the Obama folks, the DNC, and the prog echo chamber in the media and Hollywood, doubled down on their criminal activities and lies. The story would, must survive. The Russia collusion story, a campaign stunt, gained a life of its own; Frankenstein's monster lived! In order to terrorize the deplorable villagers, the mad political scientists insisted on and got themselves a Special Counsel to "investigate" the non-existing crimes of Trump. They even managed to mau-mau Trump's new Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, into recusing himself, and turning over the whole investigatory process to the pro-Obama prog swamp creatures that controlled the DOJ and the FBI. James Comey's buddy, Robert Mueller, got the assignment as Special Counsel, with almost unfettered power to pick staff and even define the extent of his mission; he, furthermore, had no apparent budgetary or time restrictions. All the money and the time in the world, dear Robbie. Do your thing! Get us a scalp!
Mueller would keep the story alive! And that he did! His investigation not only would create a huge cloud for the Trump people, but plunged many of them into legal and financial jeopardy as they faced interrogation and prosecution/persecution for alleged sins and "crimes" having nothing to do with Collusion. Investigators used slimy Beria-type tactics against innocent people, threatening them with crippling legal costs and long prison terms for unspecified crimes and errors, to force them to confess and name others. As the story had no substance, of course, they sought to push people, including President Trump, into committing procedural transgressions, into falling into perjury traps, into "obstructing." (Please note: The fake FBI investigation into Hillary, of course, did none of those: she was not even put under oath.) Accompanying the investigation, we had an almost daily supply of leaks from "anonymous" sources relating, in breathless terms, that the "noose was tightening," "the walls were closing in on Trump," that soon "another bombshell" would drop, that Mueller and the intel services had verified key "portions of the Dossier," that evil Trump was about to fire Mueller--Save Mueller! Soon, they told us, soon, yes, soon, we would see a "hard, hard rain" (h/t Bob Dylan) of indictments fall on the White House: Trump and his whole family would exit 1600 Pennsylvania Ave in hand-cuffs! In addition, lest we forget, former bosses of the intel services got lucrative gigs on mainstream media outlets assuring us that Collusion was real, and proven beyond a doubt. Hollywood stars, late-night comics, and once-minor prog TV personalities rode the story to fame and fortune hyping daily "revelations." Journalists won Pulitzer Prizes for reporting fantasy.
Stand by! Impeachment is Imminent! Stand by! Stand by!
The prog machine strung out this absurd story for over two years; it ran prominently during the 2018 midterm elections, and, possibly, could have contributed to GOP losses in the House. As with anything, however, there comes a time when even the mightiest machine can no longer block an outcome. The Mueller report went to the new AG. Mueller's vast team had spent two years investigating, and produced not one indictment for "collusion". . . fizzle, fizzle, fizzle. "There is no there there," as Mueller and the creators of this scam knew all along.
Now, of course, the cry is to release the whole report. There must be something in those hundreds of pages that we can use to impeach or smear Trump and the deplorables! The fat lady hasn't REALLY sung yet, right? Right? Please! Warm up the band, she still has some air in her lungs!
OK. Like I said, these are thoughts. We are still left with one big question about all this. What were THEY thinking? What were they thinking would happen at the end? There are lots of possible scenarios but they all depend on one basic assumption.
What were they thinking? Simple, it was that the rest us were not.
Monday, March 25, 2019
Collusion Hoax, Part Three Billion: Head Chopped Off, the Reptile Still Slithers & Squirms
OK. We're starting to get a glimpse into the Mueller report, turned over to AG Barr last Friday. The AG put out a tight, well-written summary of said report in a letter to Congressional leadership. Barr's missive, though not quite four pages long, contains a lot of information. Read it. Don't be a journalist, read it. Now, of course, only a handful of people have seen the full report, well, aside from the 13,567 Russian, Romanian, Chinese, Iranian, and Israeli hackers--and Julian Assange--who have it . . .
Let's start with the least interesting stuff and move our way up the scale.
According to Barr, Mueller found that Russian intelligence services mounted an effort to meddle in our 2016 elections. This meddling, in its mildest version, took various forms, such as fake Twitter accounts, other internet postings by "Russian bots," and some purchases of ads in social media. The object was "to sow social discord" with the hope of impacting the election in some unstated way. (Note: We know from other reports that the Russian effort seemed to work for and against both candidates.) The Russian intel effort also included a more severe version which involved hacking into computers and getting emails from Clinton staff and the DNC.
Obstruction of justice. Per Barr's summary, the Special Counsel looked into actions by the President--most of them public--"as potentially raising obstruction of justice concerns." The Special Counsel, however, declined to make a judgement one way or the other and left it up to the AG. In other words, Mueller didn't have the goods but decided to smear Trump anyhow, even though he acknowledges no underlying crime existed. My last post sorta predicted he would do this,
Now to the key portion: collusion.
Per Barr, Mueller directly states, "the Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election." Bam! Game. Over. Rug. Pulled. Out. From. Under. Dems. Adam Schiff please turn in your resignation letter.
Trump wins. America wins. The progs and their insane enablers and followers lose another one. The Russia Collusion story joins the Fake Narrative Club of Christine Blakely Ford, Jussie Smollet, Fast and Furious, Mattress Girl, UVA Rape Victim, Hands up Don't Shoot, Racist Covington High School kids, etc.
Let's have some fun:
Russian espionage and political meddling.
OK, anybody surprised? This humble blog wrote a long time ago (for example, here and here) about Russian interference in our political processes. This has been a long, long, long standing effort by Moscow, both as the capital of Russia and of the late-USSR. Moscow, please note, was doing it when Bernie Sanders went there on his honeymoon. The Soviets/Russians did and do this a lot, and not just in the USA. They have ample espionage, influence, and sabotage operations throughout the West. Did it prove effective in altering the election results? Please. Russia did not make Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Florida, Pennsylvania go for Trump. Russia did not make Clinton take a three day break in the final phase of the election, and so on. All of that you can assign to Hillary Clinton's very bad campaign and to Donald Trump's very good campaign.
Let us also never cease to remind the Demo/Progos that the 2016 Russian interference took place on Obama's watch. What did he do about it? Not much. In fact, as it turns out, Obama and Clinton used the excuse of Russian interference to justify spying on Trump's campaign and to have the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc.--not to mention the media--serve as extensions of the Democrat Party.
I have written before about another country's meddling in our politics, a meddling which far outweighs any by Russia. One guess. Yes, Mexico! See posts here and here. Not only do Mexican senior officials, all the way up to the Mexican presidency, openly encourage their citizens to vote in the US and tell them how, but our own President Obama made clear he would not prosecute foreigners voting; the Dems continue that policy by encouraging aliens to vote and making it easier and easier for them to do so. Time to build the wall and to shut down some of Mexico's fifty-two diplomatic and consular offices in the US.
Another observation I have made before: If Putin wanted and worked to get Trump elected, he got conned. Putin got a bad deal. What did Putin receive for his supposed efforts? He got more sanctions; a reborn US military budget; a reborn US energy sector killing his number one export; and a resurgent US economy. He also got a couple of hundred of his prized Wagner Group mercs pounded into the sand by US artillery and airpower. A bad deal, Vlad. Real bad.
Don't make Putin your stock broker.
The whole Russia collusion investigation hoax formed a major component of the ongoing Demo/Progo effort to undo the 2016 elections, in other words, to engineer an American coup (here and here). This attempt involved getting foreigners to vote (noted above), insisting on no voter id requirements, use of vote harvesting, calling on electors of the Electoral College not to vote for Trump, incessant recount demands, a faked up dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign, calling for a military coup, misuse of the FISA process, the weaponizing of the IRS, EPA, and our law enforcement/intel agencies for use against American citizens, trying to fill the streets with violent ANTIFA thugs, and more. The progos sought and seek to destroy our core institutions in order to gain and keep power.
Back in October 2017, I wrote,
While everybody has grown sick of investigations, for our country's sake, however, we need to investigate and hold accountable those who ginned up and perpetuated this colossal hoax. Heads must roll: Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Strozk, Page, and others of that ilk must face justice. The list goes on: Rice, Power, Yates, Lynch, Clinton, Podesta, and, yes, Obama need to appear before investigators to explain their reptilian actions, their effort to do nothing less than rip up and flush away the Constitution. The fake news journalists and those "experts," including former officials, who appeared day after day pushing this bogus story, citing non-existent evidence need to be shamed and fired. Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi, to name just two in Congress, who almost daily told us of the "mountain of stone cold evidence" of Trump-Putin collusion, need to be reprimanded and forced out. We need justice for the people falsely accused and smeared, some of whom have gone bankrupt with legal fees trying to defend themselves against the Lord High Inquisitor.
Not in the mood for mercy or for moving on. Get'em all! Dig out, expose, and punish the snakes in our system who sought to pull off this coup.
MAGA!
Let's start with the least interesting stuff and move our way up the scale.
According to Barr, Mueller found that Russian intelligence services mounted an effort to meddle in our 2016 elections. This meddling, in its mildest version, took various forms, such as fake Twitter accounts, other internet postings by "Russian bots," and some purchases of ads in social media. The object was "to sow social discord" with the hope of impacting the election in some unstated way. (Note: We know from other reports that the Russian effort seemed to work for and against both candidates.) The Russian intel effort also included a more severe version which involved hacking into computers and getting emails from Clinton staff and the DNC.
Obstruction of justice. Per Barr's summary, the Special Counsel looked into actions by the President--most of them public--"as potentially raising obstruction of justice concerns." The Special Counsel, however, declined to make a judgement one way or the other and left it up to the AG. In other words, Mueller didn't have the goods but decided to smear Trump anyhow, even though he acknowledges no underlying crime existed. My last post sorta predicted he would do this,
[Mueller] might say, that well, he has no ability to go further with the investigation for this or that reason, and recommends handing off portions of it to other prosecutors. He might also go full reptile and state that there was collusion but it does not rise to the level of prosecution, but maybe Congress should consider impeachment, or any number of variations on that theme.He, inserted in other words, a poison pill into the report in the hopes of causing the President political damage by giving Dems a justification to continue their insane investigation/impeachment effort. Mueller, in highly technical legal jargon, went full reptile, and led to headlines that the report "does not exonerate Trump!" What rubbish. A prosecutor does not convict or exonerate. He indicts and lets the courts do the rest. If he doesn't have the goods to indict, he shuts up. Totally outrageous for a prosecutor to smear an innocent person in this manner, not unlike what Comey did to Clinton in July 2016, and which this blog criticized (also here and here) (Note: One big difference between what Comey did and what Mueller did: AG Lynch already had told the FBI and Bill Clinton that she would not prosecute Hillary Clinton before the investigation had run its course.) The AG, rightly, in the Trump case has declined to pursue the matter.
Now to the key portion: collusion.
Per Barr, Mueller directly states, "the Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election." Bam! Game. Over. Rug. Pulled. Out. From. Under. Dems. Adam Schiff please turn in your resignation letter.
Trump wins. America wins. The progs and their insane enablers and followers lose another one. The Russia Collusion story joins the Fake Narrative Club of Christine Blakely Ford, Jussie Smollet, Fast and Furious, Mattress Girl, UVA Rape Victim, Hands up Don't Shoot, Racist Covington High School kids, etc.
Let's have some fun:
Russian espionage and political meddling.
OK, anybody surprised? This humble blog wrote a long time ago (for example, here and here) about Russian interference in our political processes. This has been a long, long, long standing effort by Moscow, both as the capital of Russia and of the late-USSR. Moscow, please note, was doing it when Bernie Sanders went there on his honeymoon. The Soviets/Russians did and do this a lot, and not just in the USA. They have ample espionage, influence, and sabotage operations throughout the West. Did it prove effective in altering the election results? Please. Russia did not make Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Florida, Pennsylvania go for Trump. Russia did not make Clinton take a three day break in the final phase of the election, and so on. All of that you can assign to Hillary Clinton's very bad campaign and to Donald Trump's very good campaign.
Let us also never cease to remind the Demo/Progos that the 2016 Russian interference took place on Obama's watch. What did he do about it? Not much. In fact, as it turns out, Obama and Clinton used the excuse of Russian interference to justify spying on Trump's campaign and to have the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc.--not to mention the media--serve as extensions of the Democrat Party.
I have written before about another country's meddling in our politics, a meddling which far outweighs any by Russia. One guess. Yes, Mexico! See posts here and here. Not only do Mexican senior officials, all the way up to the Mexican presidency, openly encourage their citizens to vote in the US and tell them how, but our own President Obama made clear he would not prosecute foreigners voting; the Dems continue that policy by encouraging aliens to vote and making it easier and easier for them to do so. Time to build the wall and to shut down some of Mexico's fifty-two diplomatic and consular offices in the US.
Another observation I have made before: If Putin wanted and worked to get Trump elected, he got conned. Putin got a bad deal. What did Putin receive for his supposed efforts? He got more sanctions; a reborn US military budget; a reborn US energy sector killing his number one export; and a resurgent US economy. He also got a couple of hundred of his prized Wagner Group mercs pounded into the sand by US artillery and airpower. A bad deal, Vlad. Real bad.
Don't make Putin your stock broker.
The whole Russia collusion investigation hoax formed a major component of the ongoing Demo/Progo effort to undo the 2016 elections, in other words, to engineer an American coup (here and here). This attempt involved getting foreigners to vote (noted above), insisting on no voter id requirements, use of vote harvesting, calling on electors of the Electoral College not to vote for Trump, incessant recount demands, a faked up dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign, calling for a military coup, misuse of the FISA process, the weaponizing of the IRS, EPA, and our law enforcement/intel agencies for use against American citizens, trying to fill the streets with violent ANTIFA thugs, and more. The progos sought and seek to destroy our core institutions in order to gain and keep power.
Back in October 2017, I wrote,
When all the spinning, talking points, and bad/fake news reporting ends, one is left with the irrefutable fact that the Democrats lied about Trump's links to Russia. They lied BECAUSE, in fact, they were the ones in cahoots with the Russians. Bill and Hillary aided Vlad's effort to corner the world's uranium market in exchange for, (drumroll, shocked face) money! Lots of it. Some (around $145 million or so) funneled to the odious criminal organization known as the Clinton Foundation, and other large amounts handed directly to Bill as "speaking fees."
The Clintons and Obama were dead certain Hillary would win the election, and all this grotesque corruption and selling out of the nation's interests would be buried and ignored. Hillary's campaign and the Democratic Party leadership paid millions to a shady outfit (Fusion GPS) to develop a narrative about Trump being the Ruskies' Pet Poodle. In violation of US election laws, the Dems paid millions to foreigners, including Russians, to cook up the salacious but very fake "dossier" on Trump and help ensure the election would go Hillary's way.
It's all coming apart now, a massive train wreck.That analysis holds up, and there you have the real scandal.
While everybody has grown sick of investigations, for our country's sake, however, we need to investigate and hold accountable those who ginned up and perpetuated this colossal hoax. Heads must roll: Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Strozk, Page, and others of that ilk must face justice. The list goes on: Rice, Power, Yates, Lynch, Clinton, Podesta, and, yes, Obama need to appear before investigators to explain their reptilian actions, their effort to do nothing less than rip up and flush away the Constitution. The fake news journalists and those "experts," including former officials, who appeared day after day pushing this bogus story, citing non-existent evidence need to be shamed and fired. Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi, to name just two in Congress, who almost daily told us of the "mountain of stone cold evidence" of Trump-Putin collusion, need to be reprimanded and forced out. We need justice for the people falsely accused and smeared, some of whom have gone bankrupt with legal fees trying to defend themselves against the Lord High Inquisitor.
Not in the mood for mercy or for moving on. Get'em all! Dig out, expose, and punish the snakes in our system who sought to pull off this coup.
MAGA!
Saturday, March 23, 2019
Russia Hoax: Coming to an End
At long last, Mueller has submitted his report to the AG on his 22-month investigation into the nonsensical Trump-Putin collusion story--a story the DNC and the Clinton campaign invented with the support of senior Obama officials, as this little blog said oh so long ago, e.g., here and here.
In the second of those referenced ancient posts (March 17, 2017) I noted,
Other Diploposts noted that the nonsensical Trump-Putin story would and did prevent us from cooperating with Russia where we could, e.g., here and here, making our fight against Islamic terror and countering the rise of the PRC all that more difficult.
It appears that Mueller has recommended no further indictments. Many on the right have taken that to mean Trump's vindicated, that the left must throw in the towel. Victory!
I urge a little more caution. The left seeks to undermine this presidency, destroy Trump and his family, and completely discredit anybody who has supported him, regardless of what that does to the country. That determination remains a constant.
Furthermore, none of us has seen the report, or knows how Mueller will phrase his conclusions/recommendations. Will he say, as he should, that he undertook a massive waste of time, for which we spent nearly $26 million, and tore apart the country for nothing? I doubt that very much. He might say, that well, he has no ability to go further with the investigation for this or that reason, and recommends handing off portions of it to other prosecutors. He might also go full reptile and state that there was collusion but it does not rise to the level of prosecution, but maybe Congress should consider impeachment, or any number of variations on that theme.
I don't see the effort at destruction, of canceling the 2016 election results, coming to an end.
Let's wait before we do the touchdown victory dance.
In the second of those referenced ancient posts (March 17, 2017) I noted,
The Dems claim that Trump is in bed with the Russians; Trump denies it and countercharges that the Dems had him under surveillance. We have here a problem. If the Dems have official intel on Trump's connections with Russia, how did they get it? Presumably from the official intel services which then it would appear were monitoring Russian contacts with Trump's people. If there was no surveillance order given to US intel, from where did the intel on Russian contacts come? The British is apparently the Trump answer. I have a more plausible one. I think there was surveillance of Russian activity, probably by the NSA, and it found nothing to show that Trump had contacts with the Russians; the Obamistas and the Clintonistas then made up the accounts of Russian interference. In other words, they lied. That's the most charitable explanation I can develop. There, of course, are harsher ones which I hope are not accurate, ones that would show, once again, Obama's misuse of the nation's intel and enforcement capabilities.That pretty much covered it.
Other Diploposts noted that the nonsensical Trump-Putin story would and did prevent us from cooperating with Russia where we could, e.g., here and here, making our fight against Islamic terror and countering the rise of the PRC all that more difficult.
It appears that Mueller has recommended no further indictments. Many on the right have taken that to mean Trump's vindicated, that the left must throw in the towel. Victory!
I urge a little more caution. The left seeks to undermine this presidency, destroy Trump and his family, and completely discredit anybody who has supported him, regardless of what that does to the country. That determination remains a constant.
Furthermore, none of us has seen the report, or knows how Mueller will phrase his conclusions/recommendations. Will he say, as he should, that he undertook a massive waste of time, for which we spent nearly $26 million, and tore apart the country for nothing? I doubt that very much. He might say, that well, he has no ability to go further with the investigation for this or that reason, and recommends handing off portions of it to other prosecutors. He might also go full reptile and state that there was collusion but it does not rise to the level of prosecution, but maybe Congress should consider impeachment, or any number of variations on that theme.
I don't see the effort at destruction, of canceling the 2016 election results, coming to an end.
Let's wait before we do the touchdown victory dance.
Monday, March 18, 2019
Lazy & Malicious: Journalists on Christchurch Massacre
We, the great unwashed public, do not yet have all the facts in the horrific Christchurch massacre of worshippers in two mosques. All we really know (I think) is that an Australian citizen shot up the mosques killing at least fifty people and, apparently, injuring another equivalent number. We also know that the cops reacted quickly and bravely, and captured the alleged shooter (I will not state his name), who now faces, most likely, two or three decades in the slammer. We know those facts, or think we do, oh, and that he "issued" a "manifesto" seeking to explain/justify his act of mass murder.
I usually do not pay attention to drivel from mass shooters or other criminals, e.g, the Unabomber, but in this case, I read his "manifesto." Why? My BS detector pinged loudly as I took in media accounts of the shootings, and their description of the shooter and his motives. I found striking the overt attempt by much American media, and some foreign, e.g., the Daily Mail, to blame President Trump for the action of a disturbed Australian in New Zealand, and label him a "right-wing Trump supporter." That, of course, proves the sort of typical lefty nonsense we see as progs seek to shape a narrative to support their socio-political goals.
Before turning to the "manifesto," let's briefly raise a few other matters that the press has not covered well, if at all, or insists on misreporting in that special way that they do.
First, do the words of the President of the USA have such power that people all over the world do his alleged bidding? If the answer is, "Yes," then "Wow!" Have we got power or what? Seems odd, however, that this power only appears when a Republican, especially Trump, holds office. I heard no journalists blame Obama's words or actions for the Norway mass shooting in 2011, or for the multiple massacres carried out by ISIS and other Jihadis in the USA and around the world during the Obama presidency. Do the words of CAIR, or Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, or those of renowned anti-semite Linda Sarsour, provoke Jihadis into a murderous frenzy? Just a thought. Might be worth a "national conversation."
Second, guns in New Zealand. Turns out our Kiwi cousins have a lot of them. Almost 300, 000 people (out of an age-eligible population of under 3.9 million) legally own firearms. An estimated 1.1 to 1.5 million firearms, legal and illegal, rest in private hands; getting a gun license seems relatively easy with over 99% of applications approved by the police. Must be a murderous hell, no? Well, no. NZ has a homicide rate of not quite 1 per 100, 000, about the same as Australia with its much tighter gun laws. Not clear, therefore, that restricting gun rights really does much. Despite their fearsome military and rugby reputations, Kiwis don't kill each other much, either with guns or anything else, and crime remains low compared to most other countries in the world. A pretty safe place, even with/because of those guns. Oh, and let us not forget that this alleged mass killer was a foreigner.
Third, the guns used in this case. What weapons did the unmentioned one use? Some journalists have written about a "lever action" rifle, various shotguns, and "military-style semi-auto rifles." In the wake of the murders, we hear the usual cacophony of outraged voices demanding tighter gun laws, and lots of garbled accounts of the weapons purchased by killer-boy. I went to the website of the gun store in NZ that, per the press, sold guns to this alleged shooter, whether the ones used in the massacre or others is not clear; I don't see any exotic or modern military-style weapons for sale--certainly nothing automatic. They seem to have a nice selection of standard hunting rifles and a pretty good choice of European and American handguns--not bad prices, actually. My advice, totally worth the price paid, to Kiwi gun grabbers: figure out the issues before you start seizing guns from law-abiding citizens and writing new laws. No? Guess not. Facts don't matter when it comes to gun hysteria, here or there.
Fourth, while, of course, we should condemn and discuss the NZ horror, we should not forget the ongoing massacre of thousands of Christians in Nigeria by Muslim Jihadis--a story about which we hear little from the MSM. Will the Muslim world condemn that atrocity in the same way that all of us condemn the one in Christchurch? I kinda doubt it . . . in addition, I notice that the same media so unable to find the motives for Jihadi murderers have no trouble attributing them to this guy.
Fifth, the name of the city where this massacre at the mosques happened: Christchurch. Yes, Christchurch. Does that tell you anything about the sort of demographic changes we see even in remote New Zealand? A possible tip-off about social stresses? Ask Aussie Senator Anning what happens when you state this obvious truth: the outrage mob comes after you. He wrote a perfectly valid letter on the issue--a letter now hard to find--and, wham, the lynch mob comes for him. His note reads like some past Diplomad post (and here).
The manifesto? Well, best read it yourselves. I doubt that most of the journalists writing about this matter have gone through it. You will find it hardly "right-wing." It comes off as a solidly leftist document by an intelligent, half-educated, sociopath. The writing style is, at times, disjointed and definitely narcissistic. He clearly thinks this action will gain him fame, just like that of his idol the Norwegian mass killer of 2011. All or most of his knowledge (will discuss further below) seems to come from the internet and some limited traveling, much of it, it apparently, to Muslim countries using money from some bit coin scam/transaction. He, overwhelmingly, uses ludicrous fascist/communist language with a heavy dose of classic authoritarian "ecofascism" of the sort promoted by the US Democrat party in the "Green New Deal."
Yes, killer-boy is an environmentalist.
He declares himself an "ecofascist," and hankers back to a mythical time of green pastures; he hates corporations and urban sprawl. He's all yours, Greenies and Reds. You broke him; you bought him; you own him! As stated in the manifesto, he is,
What does manifesto-boy say about President Trump?
It's absurd to claim he is a supporter of Trump or inspired by anything Trump said--BTW, Trump supports large-scale legal migration, hardly a "racist" stance, and hardly in line with manifesto-boy's main concern (see below).
He can't hide his hatred for America, except for a weird fascination with the US Marine Corps. He wants the United States destroyed and "balkanized" into racially warring components. He hopes that his actions will provoke a destruction of Second Amendment rights in the USA, and an effort by the government to seize arms from the citizens, hence, provoking a cataclysmic civil war.
His main issue, of course, is immigration into the West from non-European lands. With the attack on the mosques, he vows to
I usually do not pay attention to drivel from mass shooters or other criminals, e.g, the Unabomber, but in this case, I read his "manifesto." Why? My BS detector pinged loudly as I took in media accounts of the shootings, and their description of the shooter and his motives. I found striking the overt attempt by much American media, and some foreign, e.g., the Daily Mail, to blame President Trump for the action of a disturbed Australian in New Zealand, and label him a "right-wing Trump supporter." That, of course, proves the sort of typical lefty nonsense we see as progs seek to shape a narrative to support their socio-political goals.
Before turning to the "manifesto," let's briefly raise a few other matters that the press has not covered well, if at all, or insists on misreporting in that special way that they do.
First, do the words of the President of the USA have such power that people all over the world do his alleged bidding? If the answer is, "Yes," then "Wow!" Have we got power or what? Seems odd, however, that this power only appears when a Republican, especially Trump, holds office. I heard no journalists blame Obama's words or actions for the Norway mass shooting in 2011, or for the multiple massacres carried out by ISIS and other Jihadis in the USA and around the world during the Obama presidency. Do the words of CAIR, or Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, or those of renowned anti-semite Linda Sarsour, provoke Jihadis into a murderous frenzy? Just a thought. Might be worth a "national conversation."
Second, guns in New Zealand. Turns out our Kiwi cousins have a lot of them. Almost 300, 000 people (out of an age-eligible population of under 3.9 million) legally own firearms. An estimated 1.1 to 1.5 million firearms, legal and illegal, rest in private hands; getting a gun license seems relatively easy with over 99% of applications approved by the police. Must be a murderous hell, no? Well, no. NZ has a homicide rate of not quite 1 per 100, 000, about the same as Australia with its much tighter gun laws. Not clear, therefore, that restricting gun rights really does much. Despite their fearsome military and rugby reputations, Kiwis don't kill each other much, either with guns or anything else, and crime remains low compared to most other countries in the world. A pretty safe place, even with/because of those guns. Oh, and let us not forget that this alleged mass killer was a foreigner.
Third, the guns used in this case. What weapons did the unmentioned one use? Some journalists have written about a "lever action" rifle, various shotguns, and "military-style semi-auto rifles." In the wake of the murders, we hear the usual cacophony of outraged voices demanding tighter gun laws, and lots of garbled accounts of the weapons purchased by killer-boy. I went to the website of the gun store in NZ that, per the press, sold guns to this alleged shooter, whether the ones used in the massacre or others is not clear; I don't see any exotic or modern military-style weapons for sale--certainly nothing automatic. They seem to have a nice selection of standard hunting rifles and a pretty good choice of European and American handguns--not bad prices, actually. My advice, totally worth the price paid, to Kiwi gun grabbers: figure out the issues before you start seizing guns from law-abiding citizens and writing new laws. No? Guess not. Facts don't matter when it comes to gun hysteria, here or there.
Fourth, while, of course, we should condemn and discuss the NZ horror, we should not forget the ongoing massacre of thousands of Christians in Nigeria by Muslim Jihadis--a story about which we hear little from the MSM. Will the Muslim world condemn that atrocity in the same way that all of us condemn the one in Christchurch? I kinda doubt it . . . in addition, I notice that the same media so unable to find the motives for Jihadi murderers have no trouble attributing them to this guy.
Fifth, the name of the city where this massacre at the mosques happened: Christchurch. Yes, Christchurch. Does that tell you anything about the sort of demographic changes we see even in remote New Zealand? A possible tip-off about social stresses? Ask Aussie Senator Anning what happens when you state this obvious truth: the outrage mob comes after you. He wrote a perfectly valid letter on the issue--a letter now hard to find--and, wham, the lynch mob comes for him. His note reads like some past Diplomad post (and here).
The manifesto? Well, best read it yourselves. I doubt that most of the journalists writing about this matter have gone through it. You will find it hardly "right-wing." It comes off as a solidly leftist document by an intelligent, half-educated, sociopath. The writing style is, at times, disjointed and definitely narcissistic. He clearly thinks this action will gain him fame, just like that of his idol the Norwegian mass killer of 2011. All or most of his knowledge (will discuss further below) seems to come from the internet and some limited traveling, much of it, it apparently, to Muslim countries using money from some bit coin scam/transaction. He, overwhelmingly, uses ludicrous fascist/communist language with a heavy dose of classic authoritarian "ecofascism" of the sort promoted by the US Democrat party in the "Green New Deal."
Yes, killer-boy is an environmentalist.
He declares himself an "ecofascist," and hankers back to a mythical time of green pastures; he hates corporations and urban sprawl. He's all yours, Greenies and Reds. You broke him; you bought him; you own him! As stated in the manifesto, he is,
Eco-fascist by nature. The nation with the closest political and social values to my own is the People’s Republic of China.
Oh, so RIGHT WING, eh? A white supremacist environmentalist who loves non-white Red China, eh?
He also goes on to express admiration for long-dead, and pretty much forgotten, British fascist Sir Oswald Mosley, who held hardly right-wing views on the economy and social structure.
What does manifesto-boy say about President Trump?
a supporter of Donald Trump? As a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose? Sure. As a policy maker and leader? Dear god no.That's it. That's all he says about Trump. Nice ringing endorsement, eh?
It's absurd to claim he is a supporter of Trump or inspired by anything Trump said--BTW, Trump supports large-scale legal migration, hardly a "racist" stance, and hardly in line with manifesto-boy's main concern (see below).
He can't hide his hatred for America, except for a weird fascination with the US Marine Corps. He wants the United States destroyed and "balkanized" into racially warring components. He hopes that his actions will provoke a destruction of Second Amendment rights in the USA, and an effort by the government to seize arms from the citizens, hence, provoking a cataclysmic civil war.
The US is torn into many factions by its second amendment, along state, social, cultural and, most importantly, racial lines. With enough pressure the left wing within the United states will seek to abolish the second amendment, and the right wing within the US will see this as an attack on their very freedom and liberty. This attempted abolishment of rights by the left will result in a dramatic polarization of the people in the United States and eventually a fracturing to create conflict between the two ideologies within the United States on the ownership of firearms in order to further the social, cultural, political and racial divide within the United states. This conflict over the 2nd amendment and the attempted removal of firearms rights will ultimately result in a civil war that will eventually balkanize the US along political, cultural and, most importantly, racial lines. This balkanization of the US will not only result in the racial separation of the people within the United States ensuring the future of the White race on the North American continent, but also ensuring the death of the “melting pot” pipe dream. Furthermore this balkanization will also reduce the USA’s ability to project power globally, and thereby ensure that never again can such a situation as the US involvement in Kosovo ever occur again(where US/NATO forces fought beside muslims and slaughtered Christian Europeans attempting to remove these Islamic occupiers from Europe).Thanks for the good wishes, jackass.
His main issue, of course, is immigration into the West from non-European lands. With the attack on the mosques, he vows to
show the invaders that our lands will never be their lands, our homelands are our own and that, as long as a white man still lives, they will NEVER conquer our lands and they will never replace our people. To take revenge on the invaders for the hundreds of thousands of deaths caused by foreign invaders in European lands throughout history. To take revenge for the enslavement of millions of Europeans taken from their lands by the Islamic slavers. To take revenge for the thousands of European lives lost to terror attacks throughout European lands. To take revenge for Ebba Akerlund. To directly reduce immigration rates to European lands by intimidating and physically removing the invaders themselves. To agitate the political enemies of my people into action, to cause them to overextend their own hand and experience the eventual and inevitable backlash as a result.OK. I think you got it.
To incite violence, retaliation and further divide between the European people and the invaders currently occupying European soil. To avenge those European men and women lost in the constant and never ending wars of European history who died for their lands, died for their people only to have their lands given away to any foreign scum that bother to show up. To agitate the political enemies of my people into action, to over extend their own hand and experience the eventual backlash. To show the effect of direct action, lighting a path forward for those that wish to follow.A path for those that wish to free their ancestors lands from the invaders grasp and to be a beacon for those that wish to create a lasting culture, to tell them they are not alone. To create an atmosphere of fear and change in which drastic,powerful and revolutionary action can occur. To add momentum to the pendulum swings of history, further destabilizing and polarizing Western society in order to eventually destroy the current nihilistic, hedonistic, individualistic insanity that has taken control of Western thought. To drive a wedge between the nations of NATO that are European and the Turks that also make a part of the NATO forces, thereby turning NATO once more into a united European army . . .
Unlike the false prog media nonsense re Muslim radicalization on the internet, in this case radicalization did take place on the internet. Throughout his manifesto, we see Martel-boy citing Wikipedia and other stuff he picked up online. He obviously spent a lot of time playing video games, and cruising the political and social commentary on the net. I have run into a fair number of young men similar to this fellow. In their mid-to-late twenties or even thirties, frustrated and despairing of ever achieving much, they see no future other than living with their parents or room mates, and, at best, working dead-end jobs. As white males, they feel alienated, insulted, and basically spat upon by the bien pensants. Academia, the media, politics, much of the modern work force, even popular entertainment is increasingly anti-white male--the malignant "toxic white male."
Don't believe me?
Read the stuff on diversity and inclusiveness put out by major corporations. Read the stuff by the Democrat party or any other leftist party in the Western world. Watch just about any TV show or movie and see the depiction of the white male. The good jobs, these white guys feel, are lost to women and favored ethnic groups, to the politically and socially well-connected, and to the unceasing waves of immigrants who get preferences and public support unlike what they get, to wit, lectures on white male privilege. They retreat to a delusional overwhelmingly male world of video games--and even there the feminazis make inroads and give them no respite--and to secretive and conspiratorial chat rooms where all sorts of fact and fiction get blended into a dangerous mix.
We will see more of these drifting manifesto-boys if the relentless war on men and on traditional Western culture and values does not cease.
Read the stuff on diversity and inclusiveness put out by major corporations. Read the stuff by the Democrat party or any other leftist party in the Western world. Watch just about any TV show or movie and see the depiction of the white male. The good jobs, these white guys feel, are lost to women and favored ethnic groups, to the politically and socially well-connected, and to the unceasing waves of immigrants who get preferences and public support unlike what they get, to wit, lectures on white male privilege. They retreat to a delusional overwhelmingly male world of video games--and even there the feminazis make inroads and give them no respite--and to secretive and conspiratorial chat rooms where all sorts of fact and fiction get blended into a dangerous mix.
We will see more of these drifting manifesto-boys if the relentless war on men and on traditional Western culture and values does not cease.
Friday, March 15, 2019
Dog Whistles, Steam Whistles & Hoaxes: The Left at Work
I have put aside doing taxes, cleaning guns, and getting cars inspected. I haven't bought a gun in several days. I, instead, want to share a few thoughts on one, two, or maybe three issues with the steadfast six or seven who still read this little blog.
Let's talk about dog whistles, steam whistles, and hoaxes--in other words, about how the progs pretend to hear the first, feign deafness to the second, and rely on the third to move their agenda forward. While we live in wondrous times, at the same time we remain prisoners to the "dead hand of the past" as some things don't change: the progressive movement's ceaseless and cynical drive for political power over and destruction of the individual is one of those constants. The progs seek the destruction of the individual and of the traditional "We," the "We" which has made the West the best place for the individual to live.
Dog whistles. There are so many out there that . . . well, let's just look at, er, listen to, a few. The left hears dog whistles when the President says "America First." That's obviously a racist dog whistle! According to progism, therefore, clearly no non-white American could or would want his politicians to take care of our country first. Obviously only white people want that. I guess in prog land there are limits to patriotism set by skin color? POC want us to put some other country first? Seems like dual loyalty to me . . .
Cultural appropriation. Another dog whistle! Clearly women in yoga classes are imperialist appropriators of other cultures. We in the West can use nothing from any other culture without being accused of cultural appropriation. Apparently the only thing we are allowed to take from other cultures is millions of immigrants and refugees and illegal squatters.
And you can find dozens, scores, hundreds, thousands more of examples of such dog whistles, e.g, Halloween costumes.
It, for example, should come as no surprise that the same people who can find the right to unregulated abortion in the U.S. Constitution but not the right to bear arms, can hear emanating from even the faintest right-wing speech piercing racist dog whistles, but cannot hear the ear-shattering racist and antisemitic steam whistles on loud display within leftist speech.
The progs aim at sowing confusion, doubt, self-censorhsip and, if that fails, state or corporate censorship and control: Hate Speech! No Twitter/YouTube for you! They strive to make the average person unsure of just about everything, to instill fear in him so he won't speak or write for fear of giving offense, and then suffering disastrous financial and career consequences; to allow all he knows as true--e.g., two human sexes, national borders are important to defend, Western civilization is the best--come not only under question but held as contemptible. The only solution to the "crisis," naturally, comes from a powerful state controlled by the anointed Mandarins of Progolandia with their lawyers, professors, journalists, and, when needed, street thugs and armed agents of the state to ensure that all of us drink from the same bowl of mind-numbing Kool-Aid, and that we never doubt that any questioning of the new revealed wisdom is PURE HATE.
Let's look at a couple of leftist steam whistles which the progs just cannot hear.
Let's start with leftist antisemitism, an old characteristic of that side of the political equation.
Go right to Marx and find it there.
Yes, Karl Marx, born Jewish and baptized Lutheran, spent his whole life running from the Jew label. His writings reek of the antisemitic tropes of the era, and, quite clearly, equate Judaism with capitalism and call for the liberation of man from Judaism. I don't want to hear the standard BS responses from Marxists defending their saint by arguing that the ol' bearded boy was waxing ironic, or sarcastic, or some other "you have to see the context" argument. I have read all that stuff. It's nonsense: he was a Jew-hating Jew. Period. Not the first and, certainly, not the last, e.g., George "I worked with the Nazis, so?" Soros, Bernie "Honeymoon in USSR" Sanders. The left has been and remains full of them and of other antisemites of all ethnic brands: Socialism, a.k.a. Communism, inevitably goes full antisemitic--e.g., Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Chavez--anti-American, and, eventually, also anti-Christian. Recall that the Nazis, the poster boys for antisemitism, arose from the German left, and had great regard for the writings of Marx. No surprise then that the modern totalitarian anti-American left, a.k.a progressivism, is virulently anti-Israel and seeks a Molotov-Von Ribbentrop alliance with the hoax "Palestinian" cause and other antisemitic "social justice" warriors, e.g. a couple of our women Congress reps, Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton. They immediately go for the "dual loyalty" charge against Jews because progs are just so patriotic they don't want people "loyal" to Israel, just as they oppose "Russian interference" . . . but they are all for illegal aliens voting and importing fake refugees from the Middle East and North Africa, don't mind if their candidate uses an insecure email server, if a prog Congresswoman opens up the Congressional email system to Pakistani agents, and a prog Senator with a known Chinese spy on her staff for years.
Simply put: Disregard the "I oppose Israel but not Jews" argument we hear from the left. Sure, one can criticize this or that action by Israel, but that's not what we are discussing here. The left and other antisemites want Israel to undertake actions, e.g., defensible borders, take "back" the fake Palestinian refugees, that would lead to the destruction of the state, and to the elimination, either through exile, dhimmitude, or death of the roughly six million Jews who live there. Six million seems to be a popular number for the left when it comes to Jews.
I am sure readers can come up with more steam whistles which the left just "cannot" hear. A hint: the anti-Western ideology of Islam, and the massive corruption of Hollywood, the media, and the education system, all bastions of prog thought.
As noted, the left has mastered the art of the hoax, of the widely broadcast lie, of the fake news item aimed at establishing the validity of the prog narrative. In a post (here) from over four years ago I discussed the use of several big lies by the left; they had in common one theme, to wit, "It is all for the greater good. The lie serves the truth, don't you know?" It's all gotten so much worse than when I wrote that piece in 2014. It doesn't matter if something is true, it could be true, because it should be true, because some times you have to lie to serve the greater Truth.
We are awash with prog lies and hoaxes. In the name of saving us from ourselves, the progs promote the most vile and destructive hoaxes in our history, e.g., Russian collusion, diversity is our strength, Socialism is good, and, of course, the innate evil of the white race and its civilization. Other hoaxes range from fake rape scandals at fraternities, fake assaults on the streets of Chicago by MAGA supporters, fake outrage over Rebel flags, fake voter suppression tales, the fake devastation of Brexit, to the most fake story of all, man-made global climate change.
Hoax is the word increasingly associated with the left. Again, these hoaxes have a common theme: create fear turmoil and justify the need for more government control of our lives. Keep us looking to prog-controlled government to save us.
Let's talk about dog whistles, steam whistles, and hoaxes--in other words, about how the progs pretend to hear the first, feign deafness to the second, and rely on the third to move their agenda forward. While we live in wondrous times, at the same time we remain prisoners to the "dead hand of the past" as some things don't change: the progressive movement's ceaseless and cynical drive for political power over and destruction of the individual is one of those constants. The progs seek the destruction of the individual and of the traditional "We," the "We" which has made the West the best place for the individual to live.
Dog whistles. There are so many out there that . . . well, let's just look at, er, listen to, a few. The left hears dog whistles when the President says "America First." That's obviously a racist dog whistle! According to progism, therefore, clearly no non-white American could or would want his politicians to take care of our country first. Obviously only white people want that. I guess in prog land there are limits to patriotism set by skin color? POC want us to put some other country first? Seems like dual loyalty to me . . .
Cultural appropriation. Another dog whistle! Clearly women in yoga classes are imperialist appropriators of other cultures. We in the West can use nothing from any other culture without being accused of cultural appropriation. Apparently the only thing we are allowed to take from other cultures is millions of immigrants and refugees and illegal squatters.
And you can find dozens, scores, hundreds, thousands more of examples of such dog whistles, e.g, Halloween costumes.
The progs aim at sowing confusion, doubt, self-censorhsip and, if that fails, state or corporate censorship and control: Hate Speech! No Twitter/YouTube for you! They strive to make the average person unsure of just about everything, to instill fear in him so he won't speak or write for fear of giving offense, and then suffering disastrous financial and career consequences; to allow all he knows as true--e.g., two human sexes, national borders are important to defend, Western civilization is the best--come not only under question but held as contemptible. The only solution to the "crisis," naturally, comes from a powerful state controlled by the anointed Mandarins of Progolandia with their lawyers, professors, journalists, and, when needed, street thugs and armed agents of the state to ensure that all of us drink from the same bowl of mind-numbing Kool-Aid, and that we never doubt that any questioning of the new revealed wisdom is PURE HATE.
Let's look at a couple of leftist steam whistles which the progs just cannot hear.
Let's start with leftist antisemitism, an old characteristic of that side of the political equation.
Go right to Marx and find it there.
Yes, Karl Marx, born Jewish and baptized Lutheran, spent his whole life running from the Jew label. His writings reek of the antisemitic tropes of the era, and, quite clearly, equate Judaism with capitalism and call for the liberation of man from Judaism. I don't want to hear the standard BS responses from Marxists defending their saint by arguing that the ol' bearded boy was waxing ironic, or sarcastic, or some other "you have to see the context" argument. I have read all that stuff. It's nonsense: he was a Jew-hating Jew. Period. Not the first and, certainly, not the last, e.g., George "I worked with the Nazis, so?" Soros, Bernie "Honeymoon in USSR" Sanders. The left has been and remains full of them and of other antisemites of all ethnic brands: Socialism, a.k.a. Communism, inevitably goes full antisemitic--e.g., Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Chavez--anti-American, and, eventually, also anti-Christian. Recall that the Nazis, the poster boys for antisemitism, arose from the German left, and had great regard for the writings of Marx. No surprise then that the modern totalitarian anti-American left, a.k.a progressivism, is virulently anti-Israel and seeks a Molotov-Von Ribbentrop alliance with the hoax "Palestinian" cause and other antisemitic "social justice" warriors, e.g. a couple of our women Congress reps, Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton. They immediately go for the "dual loyalty" charge against Jews because progs are just so patriotic they don't want people "loyal" to Israel, just as they oppose "Russian interference" . . . but they are all for illegal aliens voting and importing fake refugees from the Middle East and North Africa, don't mind if their candidate uses an insecure email server, if a prog Congresswoman opens up the Congressional email system to Pakistani agents, and a prog Senator with a known Chinese spy on her staff for years.
Simply put: Disregard the "I oppose Israel but not Jews" argument we hear from the left. Sure, one can criticize this or that action by Israel, but that's not what we are discussing here. The left and other antisemites want Israel to undertake actions, e.g., defensible borders, take "back" the fake Palestinian refugees, that would lead to the destruction of the state, and to the elimination, either through exile, dhimmitude, or death of the roughly six million Jews who live there. Six million seems to be a popular number for the left when it comes to Jews.
I am sure readers can come up with more steam whistles which the left just "cannot" hear. A hint: the anti-Western ideology of Islam, and the massive corruption of Hollywood, the media, and the education system, all bastions of prog thought.
As noted, the left has mastered the art of the hoax, of the widely broadcast lie, of the fake news item aimed at establishing the validity of the prog narrative. In a post (here) from over four years ago I discussed the use of several big lies by the left; they had in common one theme, to wit, "It is all for the greater good. The lie serves the truth, don't you know?" It's all gotten so much worse than when I wrote that piece in 2014. It doesn't matter if something is true, it could be true, because it should be true, because some times you have to lie to serve the greater Truth.
We are awash with prog lies and hoaxes. In the name of saving us from ourselves, the progs promote the most vile and destructive hoaxes in our history, e.g., Russian collusion, diversity is our strength, Socialism is good, and, of course, the innate evil of the white race and its civilization. Other hoaxes range from fake rape scandals at fraternities, fake assaults on the streets of Chicago by MAGA supporters, fake outrage over Rebel flags, fake voter suppression tales, the fake devastation of Brexit, to the most fake story of all, man-made global climate change.
Hoax is the word increasingly associated with the left. Again, these hoaxes have a common theme: create fear turmoil and justify the need for more government control of our lives. Keep us looking to prog-controlled government to save us.
Christchurch Massacre
As this is being written it appears that some imbecile(s) "white supremacist(s)/ecofascist(s)" has/have carried out an inexcusable and horrific act of terror in New Zealand. Press reports indicate that somewhere around 100 innocent people have been shot at two mosques, with about half of those fatally so.
I am sure the details will change, and the facts we have now might not be the facts we have later, but there is no justification for this sort of action; based on what we know so far, it is terrorism just as would be a similar act by some lunatic jihadi.
Terror is terror. Stamp it out.
I am sure the details will change, and the facts we have now might not be the facts we have later, but there is no justification for this sort of action; based on what we know so far, it is terrorism just as would be a similar act by some lunatic jihadi.
Terror is terror. Stamp it out.
Tuesday, March 12, 2019
Havin' A Laugh
Ah, yes. Life is good.
I am thoroughly enjoying the YUUUUGE scandal now sweeping through the "elite" prog universities and, of course, I love the revelation of prog Hollywood's involvement in the affair.
I won't try to link to all the stories out there on the scandal. Let's just say that the prog claim to moral superiority over the rest of us just took yet another Long Lance torpedo amidships. We have the prog elite paying tens-of-thousands, nay even millions of dollars, to corrupt administrators and other staff of prog universities and to SAT/ACT test-givers to get their not-so-bright little darlings into "prestige" universities to learn, I guess, all about "social justice."
Getting woke ain't cheap! The little darlings now will learn about how white wealthy people are evil, and how to use approved SJW language and virtue signaling. Gotta be up-to-date on those hashtag campaigns. Gotta proclaim the virtues of diversity.
They will have that credential! They will have it no matter what it costs. These folks strike me to being akin to those rich American women who would troll the European aristocracy hoping to marry some poor soul with a title. Gotta have that title!
This is the ultimate gaming of the system. Some progs game it by claiming to be a Native American woman, others by claiming to be a Kenyan student, some dispense with all that and just open up the wallet and buy the stairway to wokeness and prog status. Must have that degree! So what if I kick to the kerb some poor hardworking sod!
A couple of leftoid A-list actresses, one of them Felicity Huffman always full of advice for the rest of us (and here), have been arrested by the FBI for their parts in this new version of the old payola scandal. College personnel also have felt the coolness of stainless steel cuffs on their wrists.
The FBI begins to redeem itself! Bravo!
I laugh myself to sleep . . .
I am thoroughly enjoying the YUUUUGE scandal now sweeping through the "elite" prog universities and, of course, I love the revelation of prog Hollywood's involvement in the affair.
I won't try to link to all the stories out there on the scandal. Let's just say that the prog claim to moral superiority over the rest of us just took yet another Long Lance torpedo amidships. We have the prog elite paying tens-of-thousands, nay even millions of dollars, to corrupt administrators and other staff of prog universities and to SAT/ACT test-givers to get their not-so-bright little darlings into "prestige" universities to learn, I guess, all about "social justice."
Getting woke ain't cheap! The little darlings now will learn about how white wealthy people are evil, and how to use approved SJW language and virtue signaling. Gotta be up-to-date on those hashtag campaigns. Gotta proclaim the virtues of diversity.
They will have that credential! They will have it no matter what it costs. These folks strike me to being akin to those rich American women who would troll the European aristocracy hoping to marry some poor soul with a title. Gotta have that title!
This is the ultimate gaming of the system. Some progs game it by claiming to be a Native American woman, others by claiming to be a Kenyan student, some dispense with all that and just open up the wallet and buy the stairway to wokeness and prog status. Must have that degree! So what if I kick to the kerb some poor hardworking sod!
A couple of leftoid A-list actresses, one of them Felicity Huffman always full of advice for the rest of us (and here), have been arrested by the FBI for their parts in this new version of the old payola scandal. College personnel also have felt the coolness of stainless steel cuffs on their wrists.
The FBI begins to redeem itself! Bravo!
I laugh myself to sleep . . .
Saturday, March 9, 2019
Carry On! A Diversion in .45 Cal
OK. I am back in Wilmington, now hanging drapes (Me! The worst handyman in the world!) and moving furniture and art work from where we had previously put it; the Diplowife had a new vision of where it all should be. Oh, Sisyphus, stop your whining! We will head back to Durham later today.
I wanted to write something on Democrats and dog whistles vs. steam whistles, but will have to put it off until tomorrow or so. The topic won't go away. Instead I will post about something much more fun.
Yes, joining our family this week is a new Smith & Wesson E-Series 1911SC chambered in God's caliber, good ol' American .45ACP. Be gone ye little 9mm!
Look, I am an old fart, OK? In my 30-plus years overseas, I carried a variety of handguns. I started with my beloved 4 inch S&W .357 revolver. My colleagues shamed me into moving to semi-autos that carried a bazillion rounds, but my heart always hankered for the beauty and simplicity of the S&W revolver . . . until, of course, I discovered the 1911--yes, I discovered it; you didn't know that, did you? The 1911 has to be among the most if not the most iconic and cool handguns in the world. I carried regular-size 1911s, as well as 1911 Commanders and similar. Again, my colleagues laughed at my paltry seven, eight or nine rounds, and I ended up, again, for a time porting some 9mm pistols that had, well, a bazillion rounds. Yet, just as I still buy manual transmission cars, I hankered for the old-time icons. Now retired and with no judgmental colleagues, I can return to indulging my guilty pleasures of revolvers and 1911s.
I have several 1911s, and other .45 pistols, but when I read up on this offering from my favorite gun manufacturer, I knew I had to have it.
And, friends, have it, I do!
To start, it has a wonderful retro look. It's beautifully made, that's the first thing that strikes the objective observer--and if you don't agree, then in classic prog argument style, you not only are not an objective observer, you are a morally inferior being sold out to Russian and European interests and are a racist, to boot.
It has a 4.25 inch barrel, a steel slide, comes with a seven-round and an eight-round magazine, and has a light-weight receiver made of a super secret material called (switch to Homer Simpson voice) Scandium--which I understand S&W gets from secret mines on Mars. The thing is light, compact, and very smooth.
Does it shoot? Why, yes it does. I took it straight out of the box to a little family-owned range here in Wilmington, and ran 200 rounds through it. Look, I am not the world's best shot, and still have to concentrate on my grip, but it performed flawlessly. The gun, at first, felt smaller than it really is. I know it is being compared to a Commander, but feels smaller and lighter--But of course! It's the super secret Scandium--and took me a bit to get used to it. Once, I did, however, I got those groupings nice and tight.
I do most of my handgun shooting in the four-to-seven yard range. "Wimp," you anti-semitic racists say? Per the FBI, back when the FBI was the FBI, over 90% of all shootings take place at about ten feet, or three meters for the Euros in my paltry audience. A friend of mine in the FBI, back when the FBI was the FBI, told me some years ago that if you shoot somebody at a range greater than those distances, you run an increased risk of some over eager prosecutor, especially in a blue jurisdiction, coming after you--no imminent threat, you could have retreated, etc. I don't know if that's still true, but it makes sense. Let's face it, if you're defending yourself with a gun, it's probably in your house, on the sidewalk, or getting into your car as you come out of a whorehouse with your wife, in other words, relatively short distances. Might as well get good at those. These smaller handguns--such as the beauty pictured above--are easy to carry and quite good at that range, and not so good if you go too far beyond it.
There you have it, my totally unqualified and useless opinion--but it's free and worth every penny.
Anyhow, buy this gun.
I wanted to write something on Democrats and dog whistles vs. steam whistles, but will have to put it off until tomorrow or so. The topic won't go away. Instead I will post about something much more fun.
This!
Yes, joining our family this week is a new Smith & Wesson E-Series 1911SC chambered in God's caliber, good ol' American .45ACP. Be gone ye little 9mm!
Look, I am an old fart, OK? In my 30-plus years overseas, I carried a variety of handguns. I started with my beloved 4 inch S&W .357 revolver. My colleagues shamed me into moving to semi-autos that carried a bazillion rounds, but my heart always hankered for the beauty and simplicity of the S&W revolver . . . until, of course, I discovered the 1911--yes, I discovered it; you didn't know that, did you? The 1911 has to be among the most if not the most iconic and cool handguns in the world. I carried regular-size 1911s, as well as 1911 Commanders and similar. Again, my colleagues laughed at my paltry seven, eight or nine rounds, and I ended up, again, for a time porting some 9mm pistols that had, well, a bazillion rounds. Yet, just as I still buy manual transmission cars, I hankered for the old-time icons. Now retired and with no judgmental colleagues, I can return to indulging my guilty pleasures of revolvers and 1911s.
I have several 1911s, and other .45 pistols, but when I read up on this offering from my favorite gun manufacturer, I knew I had to have it.
And, friends, have it, I do!
To start, it has a wonderful retro look. It's beautifully made, that's the first thing that strikes the objective observer--and if you don't agree, then in classic prog argument style, you not only are not an objective observer, you are a morally inferior being sold out to Russian and European interests and are a racist, to boot.
It has a 4.25 inch barrel, a steel slide, comes with a seven-round and an eight-round magazine, and has a light-weight receiver made of a super secret material called (switch to Homer Simpson voice) Scandium--which I understand S&W gets from secret mines on Mars. The thing is light, compact, and very smooth.
Does it shoot? Why, yes it does. I took it straight out of the box to a little family-owned range here in Wilmington, and ran 200 rounds through it. Look, I am not the world's best shot, and still have to concentrate on my grip, but it performed flawlessly. The gun, at first, felt smaller than it really is. I know it is being compared to a Commander, but feels smaller and lighter--But of course! It's the super secret Scandium--and took me a bit to get used to it. Once, I did, however, I got those groupings nice and tight.
I do most of my handgun shooting in the four-to-seven yard range. "Wimp," you anti-semitic racists say? Per the FBI, back when the FBI was the FBI, over 90% of all shootings take place at about ten feet, or three meters for the Euros in my paltry audience. A friend of mine in the FBI, back when the FBI was the FBI, told me some years ago that if you shoot somebody at a range greater than those distances, you run an increased risk of some over eager prosecutor, especially in a blue jurisdiction, coming after you--no imminent threat, you could have retreated, etc. I don't know if that's still true, but it makes sense. Let's face it, if you're defending yourself with a gun, it's probably in your house, on the sidewalk, or getting into your car as you come out of a whorehouse with your wife, in other words, relatively short distances. Might as well get good at those. These smaller handguns--such as the beauty pictured above--are easy to carry and quite good at that range, and not so good if you go too far beyond it.
There you have it, my totally unqualified and useless opinion--but it's free and worth every penny.
Anyhow, buy this gun.
Monday, March 4, 2019
Progracism
This will be short as I need to start working on my taxes (UGH!) This is more of a thinking aloud piece, you know, just sorta wondering . . . .
Let me start with what I have stated on many occasions: I am bored by and outright detest conversations, debates, arguments, etc., about race. Race certainly competes for the title of the world's most boring and, simultaneously, dangerous topic.
No good at all can come of arguing over whether one race is "better" than another, or that one race or another is the devil incarnate. You get nowhere; everybody ends up angry; and violence lurks and, quite often, emerges. I, therefore, revile those who make a living from race-baiting and race-slanging, e.g., the KKK, the Nazis, the Black Panthers, the SPLC, and--the topic of this little post--the increasingly loud progressive racists who dominate the West's social and legacy media, public bureaucracies, entertainment business, educational institutions, and, increasingly, the private corporate world.
We are told that "diversity is our strength." Not much further explanation is offered except that such "diversity" only applies to matters of race and gender. Diversity of opinion, especially on college campuses and in the media, is not sought--no, just diversity of superficial characteristics. Why? Not clear, really.
We are told on the one hand that men and women are equal in capabilities, and that skin color or ethnicity--however defined--does not determine the talent level of an individual. If that's so, for example, and we have a firm building a bridge across a river, it should make no difference whether we take on white or black engineers. We should look for whomever is the best at the job for what we pay. But, then the prog argument gets even more murky: it seems that, yes, well, after all, men and women are somehow different, that blacks and whites have different approaches to problems and tasks; that it is this difference that makes our enterprise, whatever it is, better. Really? So does a black engineer calculate load limits for a bridge differently than does a white one? Does 1+1 mean something different for a woman than for a man? If it does, then we as bridge builders are entitled--are we not?--to discriminate on the basis of race and gender . . .
But then we also are told there is no gender and no race, that male and female, black and white are just "social constructs," except when demanding reparations for past injustices . . . it's all too bewildering, which is exactly what the progs want.
Let me start with what I have stated on many occasions: I am bored by and outright detest conversations, debates, arguments, etc., about race. Race certainly competes for the title of the world's most boring and, simultaneously, dangerous topic.
No good at all can come of arguing over whether one race is "better" than another, or that one race or another is the devil incarnate. You get nowhere; everybody ends up angry; and violence lurks and, quite often, emerges. I, therefore, revile those who make a living from race-baiting and race-slanging, e.g., the KKK, the Nazis, the Black Panthers, the SPLC, and--the topic of this little post--the increasingly loud progressive racists who dominate the West's social and legacy media, public bureaucracies, entertainment business, educational institutions, and, increasingly, the private corporate world.
We are told that "diversity is our strength." Not much further explanation is offered except that such "diversity" only applies to matters of race and gender. Diversity of opinion, especially on college campuses and in the media, is not sought--no, just diversity of superficial characteristics. Why? Not clear, really.
We are told on the one hand that men and women are equal in capabilities, and that skin color or ethnicity--however defined--does not determine the talent level of an individual. If that's so, for example, and we have a firm building a bridge across a river, it should make no difference whether we take on white or black engineers. We should look for whomever is the best at the job for what we pay. But, then the prog argument gets even more murky: it seems that, yes, well, after all, men and women are somehow different, that blacks and whites have different approaches to problems and tasks; that it is this difference that makes our enterprise, whatever it is, better. Really? So does a black engineer calculate load limits for a bridge differently than does a white one? Does 1+1 mean something different for a woman than for a man? If it does, then we as bridge builders are entitled--are we not?--to discriminate on the basis of race and gender . . .
But then we also are told there is no gender and no race, that male and female, black and white are just "social constructs," except when demanding reparations for past injustices . . . it's all too bewildering, which is exactly what the progs want.