I Will Post Later

Right now conflicted on what to post about, but I found that Nicki Kenyon has a brilliant post entitled STOP SCARING YOUR CHILDREN.

I posted this on Facebook yesterday, and of course, this means I want to fry gay kids in oil, as you know.  A close friend asked I just not serve him over arugula, or he’ll haunt me.

Okay, let’s posit Mike Pence is an actual homophobe (he’s not. He considers homosexuality a sin as do pretty much all evangelicals. OTOH evangelical Christianity doesn’t want them stoned or thrown from buildings. They’re entitled to think what they want if they don’t act on it. And he also thinks you have the right to live as you wish. Which, btw, fifty years ago was considered amazingly enlightened. Even thirty.)
So, let’s assume he finds homosexuals disgusting or scary or whatever the heck. He wears protective gear around gay people (I don’t know what. Let’s say a space suit because it’s funny.) And he leads people in rousing choruses of “Men should only marry women,” in the privacy of his own living room.
What do you actually think the VPOTUS is going to do? Make everyone wear protective gear?
NO ONE IS GOING TO ROUND UP GAY PEOPLE AND PUT THEM IN CAMPS. That only happens in lovely places like Cuba. No, it can’t happen here, unless we’re all disarmed. Do you think gay people have no friends, neighbors, family?
Stop the fear mongering. It makes young gay people, who don’t have the range of experience to realize this is crazy, sound like hysterics. And that feeds all sorts of nasty stereotypes when in reality they’re just young and stupid as we all were at one time.
The kids are all right. Stop gaslighting them in the service of your own power hunger.

Some snowflakes felt the need to PM me to tell me what a horrible person I am, because I want them to stop scaring gay kids and hurting the image of gay people for years.  Yep, that’s the kind of bitch I am.

I went from schadenfreude to raging white hot anger.  And then I heard Leonard Cohen died.  I know you guys don’t get my Cohen thing, and later I’ll write a post to try to explain it.

BUT Nicki pretty much wrote the post I meant to write.   A quote from it:

You know why your children are scared, you whining ignorami? Because YOU are scaring them. Yes. You.

It’s YOUR refusal to be a grownup and a parent and provide rational guidance rather than foolish histrionics that is scaring them, and will eventually facilitate their development into swooning members of participation trophy-hoarding Generation Cupcake!

It’s YOUR failure as a parent and as a role model that’s frightening them, and YOUR refusal to provide objective direction that’s giving them angst, because apparently you’d rather impose your irrational hatred of your fellow Americans on them, rather than guide them through challenging times.

It’s YOUR inability to provide impartial, balanced narrative, because you’re so busy projecting your utter hatred, that is scaring your gay kids, who thanks to your histrionics about Trump’s alleged “homophobia and transphobia,” don’t even know that despite Trump’s significant faults, he was vocal in his support of transgender individuals using whatever bathrooms they felt appropriate during a time when the issue was at its contentious height, and put his money where his mouth was.

It’s YOUR inability to discuss real issues, rather than focusing on vagina politics, it’s YOUR ineptitude at objectivity and failure to admit that it wasn’t sexism or misogyny that tanked Hillary Clinton, but rather the fact that she was a venal, corrupt, entitled, dishonest cheater who looked down her nose for years at the same people who handed Trump his victory.

If you want to know why your children are scared, upset, and angry, you have only to look in the mirror and your failure to adult as the reason.

Go read the whole thing, and give her some love, because, unless I miss my guess she’ll also be accused of wanting to boil gays — and women, and minorities — in oil.

I don’t think that people on the left get that their casual assumption that if they lose then EVIL reigns in the world is inviting a backlash the likes of which will consume them and me and everyone who is not what they think we all are.

I wish they’d all shut up and grow up, and realize sometimes you don’t get your way.  Then we could figure out what we CAN do and how we can solve the problems that need solving (and leave alone imaginary problems.)

I wish they’d realize confusing politics with religion just brings on tyranny and horror.

I wish they’d stop thinking “I disagree” means you want to kill them.

And I fear, just a little, that what they’re doing is projecting their own plans, had they won, onto us.

It can’t be true, right?  Please reassure me, because I’m starting to get very scared.

353 thoughts on “I Will Post Later

    1. “wish they’d stop thinking “I disagree” means you want to kill them. And I fear, just a little, that what they’re doing is projecting their own plans, had they won, onto us.”

      We’ve both read Don Camillo, so we know that our neighbours don’t want to do that. But it’s really an open question whether or not they hide us in the basement when the party bosses show up to take care of us. Honestly, what is there in their ideology or beliefs that would inspire them to stand up for us, or for anyone?

      1. Yes. I have found reading Dom Camillo very helpful (I shall be forever thankful to the ones who first shared them with me). We all need grace. Those stories don’t let you forget the question comes equally, would we hide our mislead neighbors when they become the target of the party bosses?

  1. Yes, they’re projecting, as they always do. But they’re not confusing politics and religion. For them their ostensible politics are in fact their religion; it occupies the same place in their psyches as religion does in better-adjusted folks.

      1. Been up since 10:30 last night, so I’m not sure – but isn’t that word you want “confounding”?

        (Had an amusing time with a public-school product, or Harvard maybe come to think of it – never heard of the word “discomfited.” Kept insisting that no such word existed… only discomfiting himself further, of course.)

    1. Yeah, they’re projecting. I think Anne Coulter said once, if you want to know what the left is doing, look at what they’re accusing the right of.

    2. It’s intentional. From the very first, Dewey and others described their Progressive movement as a secular religion.

    3. They’re projecting, alright, just as they always do. I also agree with Laurie that what they accuse their opponents of is their own agenda. Kind of like an inoculation: if we accuse you first then you can’t credibly accuse us. The really big trouble with the Marxist religion is that they are big believers in human sacrifice. *THAT* scares me.

        1. With Bush it was “A chill wind” freezing speech and ,lo and behold what have we had the last few years but speech codes. Amazing how fast it went from “Trump’s losing voters will riot” to *actual* riots by progressives so I definitely find their fixation on camps to be concerning.

      1. Kind of like an inoculation: if we accuse you first then you can’t credibly accuse us.

        While I would not put it past some of the organizers using such tactics as inoculation, I suspect that for most are projecting are simply projecting. They reason that, as they think in this way, doesn’t everybody?

        1. Dang, dang, dang, dang, double-dang-dang!

          Should be: ‘for most who are projecting they are simply projecting.’

  2. Unfortunately Sarah, I’m getting into the mood of “they expect evil things from us so let’s do evil things to them”.

    Don’t like that mood of course. 😦

    1. I know. Yesterday night I almost answered them “Shut up, if I want your opinion, I’ll open you up and read your entrails.” For context, this is what I used to tell the kids when they threw irrational fits.

        1. I don’t… but I don’t need to. If you like it, as long as you aren’t harming anyone else’s rights with it, go enjoy it all you want!

          I also don’t get all those people who think they should have the right to approve or disapprove the likes/dislikes of others.

          1. Yeah, I also don’t get all those people who think they should have the right to approve or disapprove the likes/dislikes of others. People like that ought to be eliminated.

            1. Well, I think it matters how the person expresses said disapproval.

              IE You can disagree without being disagreeable.

              1. Some people act as if it’s perfectly OK to say something awful about a person (you’re a racist, sexist, ignorant redneck) as long as you’re not loud while doing it.

                But dare get upset or stern, and why, how could you, it’s awful, why are you so ANGRY(?!)

                1. Call me a “racist, sexist, ignorant redneck” even in a “calm voice” and you’ve become “disagreeable”. 😦

              2. I believe that any such message should be hand delivered to the intended on engraved cards which read:

                Dear sir: You are without any doubt a rogue, a rascal, a villain, a thief, a scoundrel, and a mean, dirty, stinking, sniveling, sneaking, pimping, pocket-picking, thrice double-damned, no good son-of-a-bitch.

      1. I suspect if you got to their liver (which probably vaporized while they were venting their spleen, thus explaining their biliousness), it will say ‘This space for rent” or “This space left intentionally blank,” if it doesn’t say “Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum”.

        1. Ah yes, “lorem ispsum.” I have a very slightly amusing tale that relates. Years ago I was assigned to complete development of an application, which at the header at the top of the screen contained an extensive sampling of the lorem ipsum corpus. I completed the development, and it was approved by the IT manager in charge, went through internal IT testing, user acceptance testing, and was in production use for about a week before somebody finally asked: “What’s this lorem ipsum junk, and why is it there?” The (limited) specification document was silent on the subject, and nobody could tell me why it was there, so finally it was removed.

      2. There’s actually some kids that should be scared, but they aren’t the children of Hillary supporters:

        ““These boys decided to ask the classroom, ‘Who voted for Donald Trump?’ And then I said, ‘I did.’ And then they come over here and jerked me out of my seat,” said the student. “Before I could get up they started kicking me and punching me.”

        The student’s name was protected by request of his parents. But he told us the classroom did have a teacher present.”


    2. There’s a reason that “hit them back first” is supposed to be a joke– there are some, few, very extreme situations where it’s applicable. For the rest, lack of charity is a freaking sin, people, it DOES NOT TURN OUT WELL.

      You don’t have to assume that the guy running at you wearing a clown mask and carrying a blood covered knife means well, but the jump from “they don’t agree with me on specifics of what we should do” and “they are evil which must be purged” is way too long.

      1. If you’ve spent a LONG time studying violence you start to see patterns of behavior that tell you you are about to be attacked. This is when “hit them back first” is applicable.

        Go look at the Eric Garner video. You can *watch* him engaging in the pre-fight ritual. At some point he will have mentally prepped himself to attack the police. They, being NYC police know this (at some level of know) and “hit back first”.

        Right now the left in this country is puffing themselves up, waving their arms to “get big”.

        The problem is that with an individual you can gauge when to attack, you can bring overwhelming force in quickly to shut it down (which is what the police attempted to do in Garner’s case) before things get too far.

        The left right now doesn’t have a pressure point we can press on. It’s all organized, but too loosely to have much C&C.

        1. Yeah.

          Part of why I want video when folks start on the “the cops attacked him, he was just standing there” stuff.

          Even I can read “gonna attack right now” and “threat” bodylanguage, although some levels of loom/threat escape me.

  3. And I fear, just a little, that what they’re doing is projecting their own plans, had they won, onto us.

    It can’t be true, right? Please reassure me, because I’m starting to get very scared.

    Um… Sure. Everything will be okay. Oh, and there is a Santa Claus, Sarah and he won’t leave you a lump of coal in your stocking if your naughty. 😉

    For the past couple of decades I have been noticing quite a few progs (SJZs nowadays) who definitely do seem to want those who disagree with them to die. If it makes you feel any better I’ve noticed most of them are impotent cowards who would never take any steps to try since that would involve personal risk on their part. They’d have the government do it for them. Which is why they’re terrified: They think those they hate would do the same if they had power.

      1. Future son-in-law says he’ll be extra naughty, if Santa will just leave extra coal.

        (Blacksmithing hobby – at a buck a pound for quality coal in smaller quantities, he doesn’t get to indulge nearly as much as he would like.)

        1. There was a meme running around a while back that spoke on that issue. Santa grousing out the blacksmiths. “I’m onto you! You’re being naughty just to get the free coal!” Then telling them to knock it off or instead of coal, he was going to give them the worst quality of iron he could find, the stuff that’s almost unuseable.

          Alas I don’t remember the exact wording, nor the proper name of that lousy quality of iron. (Google fails me today.)

          1. What, bog iron? Farriers around here would grouse about “bog iron” rods they couldn’t make naught but nails and lantern hooks with, and crappy ones at that.

              1. No – but it was mined up and down most of New England. Southwest New Hampshire, various small workings (not the big ones that were actually the main source of iron in those days).

                Get up into that region, and you just know there has to be bog iron around there – the water, unless treated heavily, is absolutely loaded with iron.

    1. They are acting precisely as cowardly bullies always do when they see the balance of power shift against them. They were delighted to have the various alphabet agencies under Obama’s direction lord it over conservative groups with tax audits and denials of tax exemption for charitable organizations. And threats of physical violence by federally directed SWAT teams against some while turning a blind eye towards blatant abuse of the law by others.
      They naturally assume that now we have the catbird seat we will abuse and mistreat them in equal fashion.
      To them I say, you set the rules of engagement buttercup, be afraid, be very afraid. Knowing full well that we will treat them fairly and honestly in spite of all that. Still gives great satisfaction to see them quiver in their sweat stained skivvies.

      1. When we, acting in accordance with our principles, refrain from abusing our power they will assume it is because their displays of righteous outrage have deterred us and thus they will ramp the tantrums up to 12

          1. “Which is what I’m terrified of.”
            That’s totally understandable, but looking at a map of the election results, it is almost entirely conservative, 90% of the libs living in the core of cities. The Usaians own the guns, farms and trucks and know how to use them, extreme libs not so much.
            The scary thing would be the electors caving, in which case we’re in Matt Bracken territory for sure.

    2. Patrick, you have not heard of the naughty girl theory.
      Good boys get presents
      Naughty boys get a lump of coal
      Good girls get presents
      Naughty girls get much better presents

  4. Funny how the people who decried Trump’s presumed refusal to heed the election results are taking to the streets, violently refusing to heed the election results.

    As Nat Hentoff once put it: Free speech for me but not for thee.

    1. After Trump’s experience with taking the pledge that he would support whoever the party nominated why would he have wanted to make another pledge of that sort?

      1. He did say he wouldn’t keep that pledge– because he didn’t feel like he was getting enough support– *before* anybody else talked about not supporting him if he won. And after he said he wouldn’t feel the need to be bound by it, he started being rather insanely nasty as if he were trying to make everybody else refuse to be bound, too.

    2. Because Al Gore totally went with the election results and there was never a case in Florida. Riiiiiight.

      They need to stop thinking their opponents are as dumb as they like to say their opponents are. The problem with telling lies is eventually the liar starts to believe them.

  5. They desperately want a revolution. They want to do what Lenin, Castro, and Mao did. They see it as the only way to achieve their utopia – all those “communist” nations failed, not due to the inherent flaws in communism, but because America interfered. If they can bring us low they know they can win.

    But they also know that they don’t stand a (special) snowflake’s chance in Hell of actually winning a revolution, especially if they can’t control the government’s ability to deploy force. Hence, their temper tantrums.

            1. I like the Roof Koreans because they were just…. people.

              Whose stuff was on the line, so they protected it.

              Oathkeepers, sadly, plays into both the ‘someone do something’ and ‘but *trained*’ mindset.

          1. There’s a lot of video of those guys on YouTube. Watching some of those videos makes me proud of my country…

    1. They really should read up on what happened to most of Lenin et al.’s supporters.

      I’m feeling fairly charitable today, so I won’t repeat my usual wish that they someday find themselves in the middle of the revolution they claim to want.

      1. I don’t want their revolution around me, and if they get any on me I will be most displeased.

    2. Those who do not accurately learn History are condemned.

      You say you want a revolution
      Well, you know
      We all want to change the world
      You tell me that it’s evolution
      Well, you know
      We all want to change the world
      But when you talk about destruction
      Don’t you know that you can count me out
      Don’t you know it’s gonna be
      All right, all right, all right
      You say you got a real solution
      Well, you know
      We’d all love to see the plan
      You ask me for a contribution
      Well, you know
      We’re doing what we can
      But if you want money for people with minds that hate
      All I can tell is brother you have to wait
      Don’t you know it’s gonna be
      All right, all right, all right
      You say you’ll change the constitution
      Well, you know
      We all want to change your head
      You tell me it’s the institution
      Well, you know
      You better free you mind instead
      But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
      You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow
      Don’t you know it’s gonna be
      All right, all right, all right
      All right, all right, all right
      All right, all right, all right
      All right, all right

      We’ll be fighting in the streets
      With our children at our feet
      And the morals that they worship will be gone
      And the men who spurred us on
      Sit in judgement of all wrong
      They decide and the shotgun sings the song

      I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
      Take a bow for the new revolution
      Smile and grin at the change all around
      Pick up my guitar and play
      Just like yesterday
      Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
      We don’t get fooled again

      The change, it had to come
      We knew it all along
      We were liberated from the fold, that’s all
      And the world looks just the same
      And history ain’t changed
      ‘Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war

      I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
      Take a bow for the new revolution
      Smile and grin at the change all around
      Pick up my guitar and play
      Just like yesterday
      Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
      We don’t get fooled again
      No, no!

      I’ll move myself and my family aside
      If we happen to be left half alive
      I’ll get all my papers and smile at the sky
      Though I know that the hypnotized never lie
      Do ya?

      There’s nothing in the streets
      Looks any different to me
      And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
      And the parting on the left
      Are now parting on the right
      And the beards have all grown longer overnight

      I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
      Take a bow for the new revolution
      Smile and grin at the change all around
      Pick up my guitar and play
      Just like yesterday
      Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
      We don’t get fooled again
      Don’t get fooled again
      No, no!


      Meet the new boss
      Same as the old boss

      1. Long as I remember, rain been coming down
        Clouds of mystery pouring confusion on the ground
        Good men through the ages trying to find the sun
        And I wonder, still I wonder, who’ll stop the rain?

        I went down Virginia, seeking shelter from the storm.
        Caught up in the fable, I watched the tower grow.
        Five-year plans and New Deals, wrapped in golden chains,
        And I wonder, still I wonder, who’ll stop the rain?

        Heard the singers playing, how we cheered for more.
        The crowd had rushed together, trying to keep warm.
        Still the rain kept falling, falling on my ears
        And I wonder, still I wonder, who’ll stop the rain?

        (Creedence Clearwater)

    3. If you look at some of the detailed election maps, you’ll notice that all the Mao lovers are in the big cities. I think we should offer them what they want–Mao’s cultural revolution, or perhaps Pol Pot’s. One could drop the former city dwellers in one of the current President’s new national monuments with an axe, a knife, and some flint, and tell them to feel free to build their environmentally sustainable paradise. The rest of us could get on with our evil free enterprise nonsense.

      1. No, no. They don’t want to live in Mao’s Worker’s Paradise. They want to live the Monaco lifestyle.
        It’s the rest of us, the flyover people that they want to put into Mao’s Worker’s Paradise.

        1. And I say again, they forget that the Elites want a world of maybe 10,000 elites and 100 million slaves. And 7 billion bodies turned to compost for the rest of them.
          The crybullies may think they’ll be on top of that food chain, but they have no skills to govern and no utility as slaves (unless they are particularly humorous gender studies teachers). That leaves them only one place in the planned pecking order, once the revolution is completed.
          Historians tend to forget to teach about the Night of the Long Knives and the Kristallnacht.

  6. Actually, this fear of theirs is useful. Sure, it’s based on a load of raw chicken manure, but think what can be done with it: A restoration of constitutional limits of power in the name of protection from Trump. All we have to do is plant the seed that states are states, with protections guaranteed in the constitution to prevent the Federal government from running over them. Then we sell it as making Trump irrelevant in their little corner of the world, or, at least, less relevant.

    Sure, this is straight up American civics and history, but from their reactions I think they used those classes for quality snooze time. All we have to get them to do is to pressure their elected officials to grow a spine and insist on following what the constitution and amendments actually say.

    Then the precious little snowflakes are happy because they think they’re telling Trump and Pence to pound sand, and we’re happy because we’ve back to a strict interpretation of the constitution. We’ll just won’t let on we’re happy, lest it spoil everyone’s fun.

      1. Judging by my college classmates back during the turn of the century, this is entirely correct. One of my history tutoring classes turned into an impromptu civics lesson around 2000 or so, if I recollect right. Poor souls, their teachers just skipped over the Federalist/Anti-Federalist Papers, and great swathes of early American history by jumping straight to the Civil War (slavery! Eeeeevil Southern slaver people!), then a smidge on WWII, and ended right about there.

        Those folks are in their thirties about now, with kids of their own. Or teaching said kids. Do you wonder what they’ll be teaching then now? This may be one driving force behind how there are so many more resources for home schooling now. The teachers often enough weren’t all that good students, then.

        1. The Department of Education in North Carolina had proposed at one point not to require any U.S. History before Reconstruction at the High School level. There was a public uproar, how could they do this skipping the revolution and early years of our nation? The department replied that this was amply covered in earlier grades.

          For those of us who knew the scope and sequence at the time knew this meant that they believed that our children did not need more than a elementary understanding of our foundation.

          1. It also side-stepped what can be contentious in class, particularly in the South where it isn’t just history, it’s family, and that goes for all involved. The kids school tackled it head-on, and to my surprise that just go one faction going, and they were so obnoxious one of the kids’ friends said “Yes, it happened, but it didn’t happen to you.” Maybe that made an impression because she could have easily been with that same faction.

            I think the kids got a better education of it than we did. Sure, we covered it, but at best history classes are like a see Europe in a week tour. “Okay, class. Fort Sumter, Bull Run, Atlanta, Appomattox. There: we’ve covered the Civil War.” Okay, so it was a little more in depth than this, but it had a rushed, don’t look too close, feel. Ditto Reconstruction.

    1. Yes, we are about to see 4 years of every Trump hater becoming an expert on the checks to executive power. Only 8 (actually 15) years too late.

      1. I have literally seen a post saying “Calm down. This is terrible, but the exact same mechanisms that kept Obama from just fixing everything will keep Trump from ruining everything.”

      2. I hope we do. Because my first response when so-called House and Senate Republicans do it will be “Thank you very much. You have just confirmed what I’ve been saying for eight years: That the GOPe could have stymied Obama, but was either too spineless or too corrupt to do so.”

      3. Just fifteen years? Some could argue that we could go all the way back to the time of Washington! (And I personally would at *least* go back to Wilson, or maybe Teddy Roosevelt…)

    2. I don’t think it’s as much that they slept through civics or history classes as much as it is that what they got in them was revisionist crap like Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, leavened with other “America Worst” (vice First) materials.

      I also doubt that they even want democratic procedures. They talk about “equality”, “your vote counts”, and so forth, but when you listen to all that they say (especially if it’s said somewhere they think others aren’t listening) it’s clear that at heart they’re authoritarians who believe that “come the revolution” they’ll be the ones in charge.

      Unfortunately for them, as demonstrated by the early history of the Soviet Union and other totalitarian dictatorships, the thing they’ll be most likely in charge of is watching the underside of six feet of dirt.

      1. I also doubt that they even want democratic procedures. They talk about “equality” …

        Well, some votes are more equal than others. And the votes of enlightened, intelligent, tolerant people should count more than the votes of slope-browed, cud-chewing neanderthals.

      2. yep, that accursed book was used as one of the textbooks for my Western Civ class in college. I bought it used and have retained it until i find a good incendiary firearm round that i can be sure will set it on fire enough that it will be immolated.

    3. I like this idea (something like it is why I didn’t mind voting for him [too much]). I shall pass it along.

    4. I have myself seen them having vapors at the notion of eliminating the Department of Education on the grounds that the red states will instantly start teaching nonsense.

        1. No, no — it is a valid consideration. Look at how poorly home-schooled kids do in college and jobs. Those people have absolutely no pedagogical training and just buy their curricula from catalogs and dealer rooms at Home School Fairs.

          Hell, they even use Saxon Math, and not the new, improved, updated version available since his heirs sold the brand to Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

          1. Yes. The kid I homeschooled after years of his floundering and no one noticing he had serious hearing issues is only taking three types of engineering, inventing new machines, leading three clubs….

  7. To our esteemed hostess:

    You will post later? This looks like a post, reads like a post and is being responded to as if it were a post. Therefore I believe you have already posted. But maybe I shouldn’t say anything, having two posts in a day would be an embarrassment of riches I will happily accept.

    On the other hand, I could be responsible and tell you that, as it is apparent that you have already posted, you should invest your writing time to that which will bring you income.

  8. Yeah, they still think they can insult people into agreeing with them.

    How’s that working out for them these days?

    1. They are behaving like spoiled children and bullies. If they do not succeed at getting people to agree with them, they hope to get them to keep quiet so as to avoid the discomfort of their making a scene.

    2. Well, it’s not. Turns out you can ‘silence’ people on-line, but you can’t control how they vote.

      And the more insults, the less liked they are. That rant by Jonathan Pie is an EPIC disembowling of the whole mess.

      1. Being “offended” is rapidly become the modern version of crying wolf.

        Correct me if I am wrong, but I was told the entire purpose, the entire raison d’effingêtre for “diversity” was to reduce the harm of group think, the harm of suppressing dissident voices, the negative effects of “living in a b-yew-ubble.

    3. I wonder who thought up the idea that the “Hectoring, Nagging Shrewish Wife” model the best to follow?

      1. Along those lines, this brief musical interlude:

        I found it earlier today while looking up something quite different, but that’s Serengeti for you, right?

          1. My parents laid flowers on my brother’s (USMC, Purple Heart, Bronze Star with V Device) grave this morning and forgot to take a picture. I’m adopting this one for the day. Thanks.

          2. Home-Thoughts, from the Sea
            By Robert Browning
            Nobly, nobly Cape Saint Vincent to the North-West died away;
            Sunset ran, one glorious blood-red, reeking into Cadiz Bay;
            Bluish ‘mid the burning water, full in face Trafalgar lay;
            In the dimmest North-East distance, dawned Gibraltar grand and gray;
            “Here and here did England help me: how can I help England?”—say,
            Whoso turns as I, this evening, turn to God to praise and pray,
            While Jove’s planet rises yonder, silent over Africa.

    1. And what about the Sad Veterans, eh? Screw them, I suppose? Or is that just for the Angry Veterans?

      One local grocery chain has parking spaces designated Reserved Veterans Parking, meaning extroverted veterans can walk?

      1. There was an anime described as sad girls in snow.

        I’ve recently found out about something called Highschool Fleet, which suggests an anime fad that will burn itself out in absurdity. (Or the nefarious machinations of Shinso Abe.)

        Sad veteran girls in snow.

  9. Kenyon already has someone doing the whole ‘endangered gay me’ routine.

    Trump backed the pedophile enabling that was a recent priority for the political LGBT agenda. He stands ready to mainstream that in the Republican Party. The gays have no evidence specifically to fear from him.

    Pence has a long reputation of not having the courage of his convictions, and he is somehow going to make Trump rubberstamp things? The Vice President has very little formal power, and Trump can replace him if Pence persists in trying to slip things Trump dislikes past Trump. Especially if those things are as illegal as mass murder is. Trump at least appears to have been correct about the election, and that is likely to embolden against the GOP establishment.

    The routine just makes the self identified gays who use it look like willing political tools.

    1. Word to the wise simple: if you are endangered it is not because you are gay, it is because you are doing the headless chicken dance.

      Imagine the head-splodey wonderfulness if Trump announces he, under present circumstances, is compelled to delay appointing a Justice from the list (which is a wonderful list, truly great judges, believe me!) and reassure Americans by nominating to replace Justice Scalia’s the noted philanthropist, Stanford Law graduate Peter Thiel. At 49 years of age we could expect the libertarian-minded Thiel to represent gay-Americans, just as justice Thomas has represented African-Americans, for a long time.

      Besides, it is past time we broke up the Harvard-Yale axis and added a Stanford Law grad in the tradition of Sandra Day O’Connor and William Rehnquist.

      1. But he’s not really gay, at least as they see it (see “no true Scotsman”), so I doubt appointing Thiel would change their minds on anything.

        1. The object is not to change their minds, which evidence indicates are made up just like quick dry cement and just about as open, but rather it is to make their heads explode.

      2. This reminds me: I need to call my Senator (Mike Lee, in this case), and give two requests.

        First, to implement Glenn Reynolds’ “advice and consent” suggestion, to provide the President with a list of nominees that, if the President chooses, would be fast-tracked through the confirmation process. If the President chooses someone not on that list, standard confirmation hearings will be held.

        Second, to kill the filibuster: the Democrats have been flirting with it for years, and have been whittling it down. Might as well do away with it altogether. If we really want it (and I do: I like the ability of minorities to prevent the majority from running them over rough-shod), we need to establish it as a Constitutional Amendment.

        1. Just pass it as an actual law.

          Yes, that would mean that if they can overturn a fillibuster, they can overturn the law, and the most dangerous time that would be is if all of congress and the president were all for getting rid of resistance.

          Name it “The Canary Bill.”

    2. makes the self identified gays who use it look like willing political tools.
      No. It makes them look like idiots, not even particularly useful ones.

      3rd Saturday is going to be interesting (monthly gay-friends party). Many have said on the book of face, “if you voted for Trump, I don’t want to be around you.” I shall not volunteer, but if asked, my response will be “if you find it that important, don’t let the door hit you on the way out.”

      Why is everything so political? Going to the bathroom is neither politics nor about you. It’s a biological need that many people feel uncomfortable with. You should use the bathroom that makes OTHERS the least uncomfortable.

      1. This is the most disturbing thing about the election. Idgaf what you do but there is an increasing otherization in the world.

    3. Ah yes, the Vice President will use his vast executive powers….

      Er, what can a pitcher of warm spit do exactly?

      1. I’m tempted to claim that I saw a request for contracts over the evil republican dark net, and started to put together the bid, but it just isn’t logistically possible to send both gays and women to the death camps. I cannot get the manpower.

  10. Last night I was told by a friend that her niece is dating a man from India. The niece is sure that he will be picked up and shipped back to India, and she will never see him again. I didn’t get a chance to pursue the subject, as we were interrupted.

    My first reaction — ask if he is legally in the country, and then why is she worried? But in the back of my mind I found myself thinking, ‘Expletive deleted the Democrats and the media did a number on the country…I hope we can recover.’

    1. Considering our historic illegal immigrant First Lady…

      (It turns out that there is an apparent visa violations. Working on a non-working visa.)

        1. For or against Trump?

          In defense of Trump, we have a historic first illegal* alien** First Lady, everyone who has a problem with him are nativists, and nativism makes you subhuman.

          To attack Trump, his marriage pattern shows that he is a xenophile soft on immigration and illegals, and Ivana and Melania may be running him for Russian intelligence.

          *There are pictures of a photoshoot with another model, which allegedly happened when her visa did not permit her to work in the United States.

          **Her background is a matter of public record. The last immigrant first lady was in the late 1800s. I want to say the quote was 189-something.

    1. That will then be the post-post. It will be newer, thus more modern, but thankfully will not be post-modern. And if warm enough, might be toasty. Though I doubt it should be treated like Post Toasties.

    2. She doesn’t claim this is a not post, she promises to post later. Later could be Saturday, Sunday or even Friday, January 20, 2017.

  11. I’ve been watching with my jaw on the floor the complete utterly stupid melt down the left is having on your facebook page in response to this. They want to lecture others others and don’t want to listen or pay attention in turn when confronted about their error filled claims.

  12. “NO ONE IS GOING TO ROUND UP GAY PEOPLE AND PUT THEM IN CAMPS. That only happens in lovely places like Cuba.” In Iran they never make it to a camp.


    What I wish these people could understand is, in spite of constantly being derided as racist sexist homophobes, there are a lot of us out here who wouldn’t put up with that kind of behavior from our country…. And a lot of us are fairly well armed (In spite of these same people).

    Just sayin…

    1. Didn’t Hillary say something about needing camps for adults?

      Of course, she also talked about a national dance party after the election. Didn’t realize just what kind of dancing they had in mind.

      1. Dancing the Danny Deever?

        (Sorry, but when I get to feeling biblical it’s “Old Testament”, and I start thinking of “Simple Man” by the Charlie Daniels Band. “I’d take a big tall tree and a short piece of rope/I’d hang ’em up high and let ’em swing ’til the sun goes down.” Intellectually I know why this is not something that should be encouraged, but as Heinlein noted Man is not a rational animal.)

        1. as Heinlein noted Man is not a rational animal.

          Heinlein, as usual, got Aristotle wrong. ‘Rational animal’ does not mean an animal that is always rational. It means an animal that is capable of being rational. I have long observed how those who wish to pretend that there is no distinction between man and the other animals are nearly always found among those who despise rationality and refuse to learn how to use it.

              1. I figured he just liked the “equivocate to make a clever quip” trick to establish characters as not being bound by common wisdom.

                Kind of like a better version of the “why do we drive on parkways and park on driveways” joke.

          1. It means an animal that is capable of being rational.

            Which capability, unfortunately, is so often left unexercised.

            1. Perhaps Heinlein understood (though his preceptor, Korzybski, certainly did not). But thousands of Heinlein fans don’t understand, and quote that would-be witticism as if it were all the proof anyone needed that human beings are fundamentally incapable of reasoning.

          2. I haven’t yet read enough of Heinlein to know in what context he made this quote, but whether he was refuting Aristotle or not, I think a strong case can be made that it is folly to assume that humans are rational.

            Yes, we are capable of reasoning, and while I would observe that other animals are certainly capable of reasoning, we and do it at a level no other animal does, a strong case can be made that (1) too many people don’t use reason when they should, and (2) too often, even reasonable people often resort to reason to justify their emotions, rather than use to reason to drill down to the truth of the matter.

            Having said that, I’ve also noticed a tendency to try to convince us that humans are no more than animals by observing that certain animals communicate, certain animals use tools, certain animals can reason, etc…but I’ve also noticed that while other animals can do these things, humans can do *all* of them, and humans do them at a level above and beyond what any other animal can do.

            I should also add that Heinlein was NOT someone who despised rationality. Indeed, in several of his books, he has expressed the notion that someone who doesn’t learn mathematics is almost less than human. It makes me wonder in what context he said “Man is not a rational animal”, because it wouldn’t surprise me if his context was “C’mon, it’s natural not to be rational: you’re better than that!”

            1. I suspect Heinlein was using the terms in much the same way Scott Adams has recently been explaining (visit his website for explanation) in his series of posts on persuasion. Having the capacity for reasoning is not quite the same as exercising that facility, any more than having a home gym means you routinely work out.

              While humans are capable of rational thought, much of what we think is only rationalized retrospectively. Accepting this effect and learning to recognize its operation is critical to mental happiness.

              As for humans being no different from animals … well, perhaps you are, but I have yet to hear of an animal acting from abstract moral principles of fairness, honor, integrity or dedication to a cause.

    2. If it’s illegal, or immoral, I won’t stand for it. Trump’s supporters at that point will be few, and his efforts will come to naught. We didn’t give Hillary the boot just so we could get *another* Obama-lite. There are enough angry voters who gritted their teeth and voted for that fool, more than this enthusiastic supporters by far.

      If he’s smart he’ll leave that box alone. The left won’t stand for it, they’re already too afraid of what they imagine he *might* do… and are scared he will. The sane will not stand for it, because we have morals, and the spine to stand up when folks try to pull that sh*t. He’ll be outnumbered before he even starts.

      1. That would greatly depend on the act itself, and then the context of the act.
        I certainly won’t make a firm commitment to that standard in a day and age when it can be convincingly argued that everybody commits at least three felonies a day.

        Lots of things are illegal without being immoral, lots of things are immoral without being illegal. And some are both, without being a dealbreaker to any but the most idealistic.
        It is illegal to make applejack by putting a jug of hard cider in a snowbank for a couple of days. Baptists, Mormons, Muslims, etc. would also argue that doing so is immoral.
        That doesn’t imply that I’d turn against a politician who had done so at some point in his youth.

        There are many historical examples of moral decisions made by leaders which have absolutely screwed over their populace.
        There are as many historical examples of flagrantly immoral decisions richly rewarding the leader and his country.
        Stephen I was morally scrupulous. And England suffered terribly for it. (Or, more recently, Bush II. Who expended much blood and treasure to bring popular rule to the Middle East. It didn’t work to our favor.)
        Edward I was an utter bastard. And England benefited greatly. (In more recent terms, we could bring up Kissinger and Baker. I’d badly want to wash my hands if I ever had to shake theirs, but they were good for the country, and accomplished quite a lot of good in the world despite themselves.)
        Our leaders don’t have a blank check, but especially with respect to foreign policy, they’ve got a lot of latitude.

        Granted, the example of loading gays into cattle cars is laughable on its face. If the line was crossed to that extent, Trump would find himself fired in very short order.
        But the line *is* fuzzy. And for the most part, that’s a good thing.

        1. Edward VII was a pretty immoral person, but not that bad of a king. Tsar Nicholas II was a very moral person, but totally blew it.

        2. Yes, it is a fuzzy line, and good. *grin* If the moral/illegal line gave you the idea I’d be hard line on stupid but illegal things, I gave you the wrong idea.

          More what I referring to was this (Takimag link). Think of all the insane stuff that Clinton voters are now afraid will happen, now their candidate has lost. Cattle cars rounding up folks whose only “crime” is being gay, muslim, or non-white? They totally believe this. That violence towards women will suddenly become legal (and more stupidly, morally accepted I suppose)? Yup, they believe that, too.

          As our host mentioned, a lot of the things they fear are things that many liberals have expressed a desire for, if only they happened from *their* side to *us.* Things we worry over, like gun confiscation, being targeted by the state simply for political affiliation (IRS, anyone?), the erosion of religious liberty, restriction of free speech, and delivering us disarmed to our foes (if you’ve checked the ROE’s lately, you already know this all too well)- these things they gleefully went after with a will. They expect us to do the same, save with their loony version of what they think we want, rather than what we’ve said all along we want.

          1. That violence towards women will suddenly become legal (and more stupidly, morally accepted I suppose)? Yup, they believe that, too.

            Well, they probably overlap pretty significantly, were one to draw a Venn diagram, with those who truly believe there is a “rape culture” in the west, so believing that such would become morally accepted isn’t that much of a stretch.

            It’s still bull droppings, of course. 😛

    3. And after Orlando, a number of those armed folks volunteered to teach the members of the gay community how to shoot and otherwise defend themselves. That’s on top of the members of that community which were armed to start with. Let’s hear it for a little enlightened self-defense! The involuntary camps thing was never going to happen.

      1. It is an obscured historical fact that significant support of the Fifties’ Civil Rights movement in the South came from the NRA, who provided weapons and training in their use to the activists which resulted in an unanticipated (by some) reduction in the number of drive-by shootings of activists’ homes.

    4. “What I wish these people could understand is, in spite of constantly being derided as racist sexist homophobes, there are a lot of us out here who wouldn’t put up with that kind of behavior from our country…. And a lot of us are fairly well armed (In spite of these same people).”

      Oh, I dunno about that…

      Frankly, I have to be completely honest with you: My desire to defend these people lessens by the day, and I’m starting to think that there may be a good reason why no nation in history has “normalized” homosexuality and its attendant constellation of neuroses and mental aberrations. All you have to do is look around you at the displayed behavior, and you start to seriously question whether or not those “old white homophobes” might not have had a better grasp on these matters than we do. It is an unpleasant thought, but it’s also a conclusion that you can’t avoid the necessity of considering, given the spectacle we’re being treated to.

      Because, believe me, there’s this thing called “projection”, and it is a real thing–You can observe it in everyday life, all around you, as you deal with the mentally ill and the just plain vile. Everything these people are talking about being afraid of? Baby, that’s precisely what they would do, if they could get away with it. And, they’ve been working on “getting away with it” for the last few generations, as they’ve steadily sought to normalize their behavior. So, when they talk about camps, listen carefully: You can hear the whispers of what they’d do, to you and yours, were they able. If you’re not listening and watching what they are doing right now, and realizing what that represents, you need to wake the hell up.

      I’ve done extensive reading in what literature exists in English from the Weimar-era German political sphere. One of the really striking things is to read through what the proto-Nazis and Nazis were saying about what the Jews meant to do to the German “Volk”, which was pretty much everything the Nazis later did themselves to the Jews. There was a memorable pamplet/broadside I remember seeing that claimed that “International Jewry” meant to round up ethnic Germans and put them into Boer War-style concentration camps, just as the cats-paws of International Jewry, the English, did to the good Aryan Boer farmers…

      Purest projection, but you can see and hear them egging themselves into doing unto the “other” while they did that, and witness what it eventually turned into, which was the Holocaust. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that this crap we’re witnessing right now isn’t a potential precursor, because it is. This is a necessary preliminary step, a deliberate one, that is being taken to prepare the mental ground for convincing these people of the necessity and rightness of their actions, when they start up their own versions of the death camps.

      I’m not sure how to go about defusing this crap, or stopping it, but the facts are unfortunately here in front of us–And, I really have to start speculating about the source of a lot of this shit, and who is paying for it. George Soros wasn’t just a Nazi sympathizer and quisling: I think he did extensive study of their methodology and technique, and it’s really amazing to witness the way he’s been utilizing so much of their same tactics.

      And, yes, I’m aware that conflating the current lot of SJW types into “all gays are f**ked in the head…” isn’t particularly “fair”, whatever the hell that means. But, it’s an observable, objective fact that an awful lot of that subset of the population is an enemy of civilization as we know it, and have been steadily working like termites in the substructure to destroy it, all in the name of “social justice”. The fact that “women’s rights” and “LBTQWTFBBQ rights” have morphed into these monstrosities which are in the process of turning normal human behavior into thought-crimes isn’t accidental, nor is it something that has “just happened”. There’s been a lot of hard work, planning, and actual malice going on behind the scenes, and if you think it’s just going to go away, now that they’ve had a minor setback? Try again; they’re going to regroup and keep right on coming back. Right this moment, connections are being made, networking is happening, and the roots of future horrors are being seeded as we speak. There are men like William Ayres and women like Bernadine Dohrn out there, right now, who are meeting and feeding off of each other, egging themselves on to commit eventual atrocity in the name of “Social Justice”.

      And, like I said, I’m increasingly unwilling to intervene to prevent the course of nature from taking place. You want the Holocaust, baby? That’s how you get one, and the desire to protect these people from the natural consequence of their actions is what leads to them being able to pull it off. The Nazis were once a bunch of immature jackasses running in the streets, who were protected and nurtured by the establishment because they were useful tools against the Communists. It didn’t take a hell of a lot before they became the tail that wagged the dog, and there were a lot of people who later regretted enabling their early misbehavior. You can’t help but note the parallels, here, or miss what the various actors behind the scenes are doing with the willing idiots.

      1. “I’m not sure how to go about defusing this crap, or stopping it,”

        No, Kirk, we’re all perfectly sure how to stop it; it’s just that no one really wants to go there. Unfortunately, it’s human nature to shrink from something unpleasant even though it’s obviously necessary.

        “Leaving the world ruthlessly alone” is only a viable option if the world will return the favor.

          1. The question, Sarah, is how many Leftists want to kill you, and how many times do you want to let them try and hope they don’t get lucky. You (and everyone around you) have to be lucky every time. They only have to be lucky once.

      2. Hillary’s “irredemables” and “basket of deplorables” comments were precisely that sort of “egging on.” Every speech she gave was an enemies list of all the Americans she hated, and her supporters just ate it up.

        Especially her supporters in the media, who were too busy obsessing over Donald Trump “hating immigrants” and saying “pussy” when they weren’t actually cheerleading for tyranny. They’ve done more than a little “egging on” of attacks on whites and Republicans in general, and police and Trump supporters in particular, in pursuit of Hillary’s perfect Amerika.

        As I said back down the thread: I didn’t vote for Trump out of a desire for fascism; I voted for Trump to put a stop to it. Because this election was perhaps the last chance to do so by using the ballot box, as opposed to the cartridge box. Although the Left is making it clear that sooner or later they’re going to make us open up that cartridge box up.

      3. Kirk, you’ve made a category error. Most people having hysterics on facebook are not gay. They are mothers, sisters, friends or complete strangers to gay people, using gay people as emotional human shields. In fact in my thread, the gay people were the voice of reason, some of them rolling their eyes so loudly I could hear it. The only “gay” people acting like this are kids whom their moms have convinced they’re gay, and who have no experience of life to know better, either about their own sexuality or politics.
        What you’re displaying is exactly what I told these idiots would happen, but see, I THINK that’s their intention. Right now they get to preen as defending gay people, and once other people turn on gay people because they’re disgusted by the “defenders” attitudes, then they can get gay people even more dependent on them.
        As for “collections of neurosis” yes, Kirk, well done, but which of us can throw the first stone? (Looks over glasses at Kirk.) We grew up under the threat of instant death, lived through the unbelievable growth of statism after, saw statists ruin our economy and turn our children into indoctrinated zombies, work in places where saying a word that was perfectly fine next week will get you branded sexist or racist and fired…
        If you ain’t neurotic, you ain’t been paying attention.

        1. Reading back what I wrote last night in a state of mental tiredness, I see that I wasn’t clear about which group I was discussing, which I did not mean to solely define by sexual choice.

          There is, as a gay friend of mine once put it, gay, and “crazy gay”. He meant the sub-section of the population of gays that make up most of the activist population, the ones who refer to the rest of us as “breeders”. That’s the part of the category “gay” that I meant to address as having lost my sympathy and “urge to protect”. These people have, along with their natural confederates in the insane sector of the “feminist” population, declared themselves my enemy in the actual absence of anything I’ve ever done to women, gays, or blacks. So, what’s really happening here is not that I’m suddenly coming down on all gays, everywhere and everywhen, I’m simply acknowledging the facts they’ve created on the ground. They want to destroy me, my works, and everything I believe in–Despite any actual existing factual animosity or hatred on my part.

          I’ve had war declared against me in the public sphere. Simply because I’m a “white male”, I’m automatically a racist, woman-hating, homophobic freak to these people. So be it. You accuse, you behave towards me as though I’m discarded relic of a disgusting past history, as though I were some Nazi concentration camp guard…? I’m no longer on your side, or tolerant of your bullshit. I’m tired of these people running the game; I’m tired of the unthinking nasty projection written into everything I read, everything I see in the media. This didn’t happen by accident; it didn’t happen because I did anything, either–What I’m coming to see is that excess, and the evils of “revolution” don’t happen during the periods of repression that lead up to them, they happen mostly when the “ancien regime” take their foot off the necks of the oppressed. And, metaphorically, that’s what has happened in the media, academia, and the public sphere in general–We in my generation “un-repressed” the gay, the feminist, and the ethnic minority. Instead of those groups saying to themselves “Oh, cool… We finally have some reasonable people to work with, who are willing to forego the oppression, so let’s all work together for a better world…”, what we got was triumphalism and an attempt to destroy those of us who never had a damn thing to do with any of the old school BS.

          As a friend of mine, another “obsolete old white male” observed: “Hey, ya know what? I never “oppressed” a black man, beat up a queer, or abused a woman in my life… Yet all I hear about is how I’m a bad guy for doing all that crap. I’m tired of this shit; they’re going to treat me like I did all that, fine–I’m gonna go take me some slaves, smear some queers, and find some woman to keep down in the kitchen. I mean, hell… I’m gonna do the time for some shit I never did, by God, I might as well do the crimes, right?”.

          There are a bunch of these people, across all the subsets of these groups, who are not “OK” with simply being treated like any other human being; they want special privileges, special rights, and to lord it over those of us who they perceive as their “enemy”. They want our destruction, utter and terrible–And, for what? Did I personally engage in abusing any gays? Did I take or own slaves? Did I ever beat a woman because she was a woman?

          No, and yet I’m charged with and automatically found guilty of these crimes, simply because I’m a “white male”. And, the more I think about it, the more I’m becoming convinced that these groups of “activists” across these populations are the natural outgrowth of what those populations want–I see very few Milo Yiannopoulos types speaking out, and the ones I do see are shouted down by their “peers”. The same thing can be observed across the BLM movement, and a large number of the insane feministas who’ve insinuated themselves into power in our society.

          Maybe it’s throwing the baby out with the bath water, but I’m coming to the conclusion that peace with these people is impossible, as a group. Enable the one thing, normalize it, and the natural consequence is getting the nutters. Since the groups who’ve declared themselves my enemies don’t seem interested in policing their own, the next conclusion I see needing to be reached is what to do about it. This isn’t going to end well, and if this crap came out of the Pandora’s Box of normalizing all these things society suppressed for generations, well… The follow-on is that we need to shut that box after we stuff all that shit back in it. Repression of the outre, the transgressive may be an ugly thing, but it may also be necessary for a society to function.

          Couple of things about the whole thing that strike me as being illustrative, here: First was the confederation of the “German gay community” in Germany with the early Nazis. Ernst Rohm actually believed in what he was doing, and that the Nazis would be “good for the gays”, making a place for them in society through revolutionary work with the Nazis. We know how that ended up, and the spectacle we’re witnessing right now has some rather disturbing parallels with the Weimar Republic, in terms of social dislocation.

          The other thing that I see offering illustrative parallel is the way that the court eunuchs in Byzantium, Ottoman Turkey, and China became such inimical influences on their civilizations. A lot of their behavioral tics and patterns can be seen in what is going on in the SJW realm, and I wonder just how much continuity there is between the people who voluntarily became eunuchs, and the nutters we have in the SJW community.

          This behavior has been with us for a long, long time, and while it’s a part of the human condition, I’m reaching the conclusion that the ancients weren’t complete fools for suppressing it the way they did. Successful human societies don’t do things that aren’t absolutely necessary for survival over the course of thousands of years simply because those societies have a majority population of intolerant dicks, and we probably want to start acknowledging that fact.

        2. That’s really interesting. The usual fuss hasn’t change my feelings, since those are nil, one way or the other, but it’s a good data point to know. To be blunt, I expected some trouble either way, because that’s what Democrats have done for over a century.

          What I find heartening is that both Republicans and Democrats in this part of the world see the protesters as “spoiled brats” as one liberal put it. Even those about the same age who went for Hillary are disgusted.

        3. … in my thread, the gay people were the voice of reason, some of them rolling their eyes so loudly I could hear it.


          The stereotyping of Leftists is different from that of Conservatives, because they are enlightened.

        4. “I’ve had war declared against me in the public sphere. Simply because I’m a “white male”, I’m automatically a racist, woman-hating, homophobic freak to these people. So be it. You accuse, you behave towards me as though I’m discarded relic of a disgusting past history, as though I were some Nazi concentration camp guard…? I’m no longer on your side, or tolerant of your bullshit.”


          Except that as a SOUTHERNER white male, I (and my family, friends, and neighbors) have been getting this ration of shit for over 100 years. ENOUGH.

          Frankly, if I can’t be left alone out of goodness, or charity, I’ll just have to settle for being left alone because they’re hose messing scared of what I and mine will do to them if they DON’T. That seems to be the only course left.

        5. As for the hysterics mostly coming from friends and relatives – yep. My wife put one of those “I’m so afraid for my son right now” posts up. To which he (the one she obviously meant) responded, “Which one?” and proceeded to tell her that she was overreacting.

      4. And, yes, I’m aware that conflating the current lot of SJW types into “all gays are f**ked in the head…” isn’t particularly “fair”, whatever the hell that means.

        No, fair has nothing to do with it. You should not do it because it isn’t correct. Conflating the entire homosexual community with the very vocal attention grabbing activists you highlight here is inaccurate.

        It is no more true then it would be to point to Kent State and Colombia and say that everyone who went to college in the late 1960s were radicalized free love hippie anti-war activists.

        1. I will point out to you that that is precisely what they are doing to me, and all who are of like gender and ethnicity.

          Apparently, that point escapes you and the rest of the people who have had their “tolerance and understanding” weaponized and used against them. I’m not quite through with that,either–But, I can feel the death of any urge towards that thinking in the depths of my soul.

          You can only take so much BS, and still be able to think tolerant things. After a point, it becomes increasingly clear that such toleration is survival-negative behavior, and the obverse course of action, that of intolerance, is the only real solution at hand.

          1. You have no idea of who I am, what I have experienced or what I am experiencing. Your apparent assumptions about me prove that you do not know me. I have not let them bully me into believing that tolerance and understanding means I should not exercise my best judgement and discernment or that it should be equivalent to licence of any and all actions.

            So you want to lash out? Understandable. Still, didn’t your momma ever teach you that two wrongs do not make a right?

            1. My momma is a naive and foolish woman who would be dead were it not for people like me; she trusts in the goodwill and intent of other human beings, automatically and without second thought.

              It is not survival-positive behavior, a fact I have to constantly watch out for and guard against with her. She’s the sort who will park her car in a bad neighborhood, and blithely spend thirty minutes sorting through a carload of purchases in front of a mob of gang-bangers, trusting that they’ll behave. She’s gotten away with that a number of times, but one of these days, her luck is going to run out, and I’m likely going to have to deal with the consequences.

              You’ll also note that I said nothing at all about you, or your life condition in that post. You created that imputation out of whole cloth, likely so that you can make yourself feel a moment of moral superiority.

              And, I’m going to ask you this: What, precisely, has all of your moral superiority, magnanimity, and good intent gotten for you? I once bought into that crap, myself, because I was convinced by many of my elders and “betters” that it was the correct and proper way to behave and conduct myself.

              Only thing is, long sad experience has taught me that the only thing that tolerance and understanding has bought for me is a position in society at the back of the queue, and abuse as one of the “oppressor class”. So, you know what? Screw that. I’m done with “tolerance and understanding”, because the real story of the last fifty f**king years is that the so-called “oppressed” have been engaged in a program of enacting every single stereotype and canard ever pronounced against them, and making those accusations of the old-school “racists” a reality. Shocking, isn’t it?

              Disbelieve me? Care to examine the roots of “gangsta rap”, and the insidious impact that it has had on modern black culture? Surprisingly enough, the real history of it all reads like some Nazi polemic, inveighing against the evils of jazz music–You find names like Lyor Cohen, Rick Rubin, and Jimmy Iovine running the industry in the background, while the various “thug life” fronts are out there doing their thing running down “acting white” and glorifying gangster culture. Things that haven’t exactly had an uplifting effect on inner-city culture, I might point out.

              That’s one of a huge number of examples, where the old “conventional wisdom” has literally been brought to life before us. Black-on-white crime? Black men assaulting white women? Wasn’t that a justification for much of the old-time racism? There was supposed to be “no basis” for any of that shit, but… Look up “gorilla pimping”, Britannee Drexel, and ask yourself if this was what you thought you were going to get, when the civil rights movement kicked off. There’s a whole black subculture based on taking advantage of young, dumb white girls they find accessible, and then work to turn into drug-addicted prostitutes–Drexel was probably a victim of it. Her killers certainly had the DVDs telling them what to do, and how to do it. And, they did it to her. How much of that do you need to see and experience before you start asking questions about where all this “tolerance and understanding” is getting all of us? Who form the majority of the victims for black criminality, to the profit of all these record executives and glorified by an entire industry? Other blacks, mostly–Who are also told by many of these same people that “snitches get stitches”, and that supporting law and order is for chumps.

              I don’t know what the answer is to all this, and I hope against hope that these social effects are merely the pendulum damping out, but I have the suspicion that the old timers I was taught to ignore and mock may have had more right than any of us want to think. About a whole host of things we have changed because some dipshit activist thought it was a good idea, and that it empowered them.

              1. And, I’m going to ask you this: What, precisely, has all of your moral superiority, magnanimity, and good intent gotten for you?

                The fact that your mother fails to operate good judgement or discernment is sad.

                I am so sorry that the world has kicked you in the proverbials, leaving you so bitter and jaded.

                Who said I thought I was morally superior, exercised magnanimity and good intent? Not I. There you have created that imputation out of whole cloth. Do you mean that because I exercise restraint on what I will do to others and I expect other to do the same towards me? (Even when I know they won’t always do so.) Survival at all costs is not my bottom line. I will not become what I abhor. If I loose I will loose on my terms. I can live with myself.

          1. You’ve my sympathies. I’ve lived my entire life bearing the burden of being a Boomer.

            Those people are not my friends, not my allies, not my comrades. We just happened to arrive in the same stork-flight.

      5. I have thought that way at times. Then I remember that the only reason that I know that these people are gay is that they have screamed it from the rooftops as part of their rabid sociopathy. Gays that just quietly live their lives like the rest of us, we never know about unless they are personal friends.

        1. White knights and socjus zealots; aye. Rather obviously demonstrated by the ready othering and demunanization of those they consider inferior or mere servants whilst they imagine themselves as aristo rulers.

          Very quickly do they shed the screen of tolerance and equality when those perceived lesser castes do not obey.

  14. And I fear, just a little, that what they’re doing is projecting their own plans, had they won, onto us.

    Of course they were.

    Look at the ongoing riots. They have no intention of tolerating or coexisting with anyone who doesn’t think approved thoughts.

    Talk to Brendan Eich, or that asteroid lander guy, or the professor who lost his job over a lame joke.

    The second in the third debate they asked if Trump would calmly accept the election results at first glance, I knew they wouldn’t.

  15. “And I fear, just a little, that what they’re doing is projecting their own plans, had they won, onto us.”

    Yeah I don’t plan on stooping to your level anytime soon.

    1. Chica, we’re unlikely to forget you came in here with guns blazing, managing to be nasty and proud of being irrational, making false accusations, and are at best known for occasional flashes of sanity and ability to speak like someone who was at least once introduced to manners, briefly.

      You’d need a freaking space ladder and a free ticket before you’d be in a position to “stoop” to RES on his most cranky day.

      1. But you are just mansplainin’ away the magic powers School-Uncle RES has, which let him cause cancer.

        How do I know this? I attended the same Republican evil kung fu training grounds.

        1. Have I been complimented? Usually, I can tell when I’ve been complimented.

          To quote Aunt Taminella, “Compliments make me blush.”

    2. I have just one question for you, which you’re not going to want to answer honestly, because an honest answer wouldn’t be comfortable for you. But I challenge you to think about it and give an honest answer anyway.

      Would it be okay for the President of the United States to use the IRS as a political weapon to target his/her political enemies? Let’s put aside, for the moment, the question of whether this has actually happened; I’m interested in whether you think that would be okay or not.

      I’ll tell you straight up that I don’t expect you to have the courage to give me a straight answer, because you know I’ll mention Lois Lerner next. But I dare you to prove me wrong — my next reply just might surprise you.

    3. Ah: There you are. You never told us what reasons had greater importance than Hillary’s scandals that would lead someone to vote for Hillary or against Trump. Of course, you don’t have to tell us anything, but it always helps to see a different point of view.

    4. Just more evidence of your psychosis. Well, no one expects you could actually reach our level of tolerance for those we disagree with anyway. After all, it’s not us who riot and destroy things when we don’t get our way, it’s you children.

  16. I listen to one of these “cupcakes” and responded with some targeted reason that calmed them down. But I left them with some bones of truth to chew on…

    The Left has been projecting their own hatred and desire for genocide against their foes. The forces that fund them are playing a dangerous game with billions of lives.

    The folks that voted against the Left didn’t lash out before or after the election. They were calm and collected and used the election to send a message. They understood that the ballot box comes before the ammo box.

    The same calm, collected people that voted against the Left may have prevented or delayed a civil war. Maybe the Left doesn’t understand that the same folks that voted against their wishes, may have saved their lives. For now…

    1. I have used, perhaps sparingly, the soapbox.
      I have been in, if only briefly, the jury box.
      I have used the ballot box.
      And I have used that one to avoid using that other box.

      I hope it’s enough. I really do.

      1. It’s more than hope. We had enough of that these last eight years, remember? *grin*

        It’s a job. A dirty, nasty, unpleasant little job- keeping an eye on those in power. The government, the media, the rest. One man no matter how mighty does not fix a nation. It takes vigilance from the rest of us that liberty remain for all, even those who’d take it from us if they but could. As long as they abide by the laws that govern all men, they are our brothers and sisters.

        Hope, if you must. But prepare for what may yet come, and teach those children well. Be a good example to all you meet as you carry through your day. We’ve voted out a sure and certain danger to the country. Best we see to it the possible danger does not grow to become actual.

        We can do that. And we will.

    2. Example:
      A gun shop down in Olympia was vandalized. Rather elaborately– he used rubber cement on the doors and locks, then took his time doing a two-tone vandalism job on their windows, and did some glass damage.

      A gun shop.

      Alright, assume that he figured it was closed, so he was safe. Well, he was reported to the police by some supporters… did they shoot him? They support a gun store, at least in as much as thinking vandalizing it is a Bad Thing, so that would make sense, right?


      They called the police, and then trailed him as far as they could, giving updates.


      Either that guy is certifiably insane or he’s suicidal, if he’s willing to attack someone he claims to believe is violent.

      1. If those they tar as psychotic and bloodthirsty were 1/10th as much as they say there would be some very bloody streets.

  17. If the Trump campaign has any money left in the bank, now would be a good time to compile a one minute TV ad of Hillary, Obama and others denouncing the idea of not accepting election results.

  18. This was my response to the pantswetting lefty that commented over at Nicki’s place, and I’ll just leave this here as well:

    The Democrats’ brownshirt behavior is one of the biggest reasons why I voted for Trump on Tuesday, with glee. And no, I didn’t vote for him in the primaries (I voted for Cruz, and would have been happy with Rick Perry or Scott Walker).

    I’m not interested in hearing about Trump’s alleged fascism while Democrats are attacking Republicans in the streets; engaging in nationwide arson, vandalism and rioting; sending the IRS after the Tea Party, the EPA after Gibson Guitars and SWAT teams after Scott Walker’s voters in Wisconsin, and the rest of it.

    You have Democrat politicians and their media allies openly inciting and defending race riots and attacks on police officers, and senior Democrat political operatives directly linked to both the current White House administration and Hillary Clinton’s campaign caught on tape (!) openly bragging about organizing violent disruptions of Trump’s rallies and getting Republicans beaten down in the streets.

    Simply displaying a conservative or GOP bumper sticker on your car is an invitation to have it vandalized or – as just happened in Chicago – an invitation to have yourself dragged out of it and curbstomped by a pack of animals.

    Based solely on their behavior of the past eight years – and, for that matter, some of the crap they pulled during George W. Bush’s Presidency – I fully expected the Democrats to throw themselves an infantile Kristallnacht should Trump win. And sadly, I haven’t been disappointed.
    I didn’t vote for Trump because I wanted to see fascism in America. I voted for Trump to put a stop to it.

    And it’s a safe bet that should Trump give in to whatever authoritarian impulses he might possess, the media, Congress, the federal bureaucracy and the judiciary will be far more willing to put a stop to it than they ever were under Obama . . . or would have been under a President Hillary Clinton.

    1. Given America’s historic first illegal immigrant First Lady, all criticism of and opposition to Trump is only due to nativism. We need to have a national conversation about nativism, and how nativists are all subhuman.

        1. Well, presumably there are other Komodo Dragons that don’t think they’re ugly, or else the species would be extinct. 😛

  19. Ms. Hoyt-

    I try up my homosexuals in sesame oil with curry and garlic, then serve over shredded cabbage and carrots and topped with raisins, coconut, and heaps of chutney.

    Preparing them this way hides the bitterness.

    1. Can you get the sesame oil hot enough? It has a very low smoke point. I would probably use peanut oil, then add the sesame oil at the very end for flavoring.

  20. Through this whole thing I’ve been reminded of the lead up to the election of 1980. I was about 8 then, and was utterly terrified of Ronald Reagan getting elected, as I was told by teachers, adults in church and around the neighborhood, and read in the press that he was a crazy, stupid, delusional cowboy who was going to start a nuclear war because he didn’t know any better. I remeber going around town pleading with people to be sure to vote for Carter because he was such a great man and our country was in such great peril, making up my own “Vote Carter” posters and posting them anywhere I could, and so forth.

    I also remember, to my shame, being told of the “Zero Year Curse” by a teacher, which some Indian leader or other had laid on America after we had reneged on a treaty, that every President elected in a year ending with zero would die in office, and then going and telling everyone that they had to vote for Reagan so he would be the one to die, and then Carter could take back over, because Carter was too great a man to lose.

    I got better once I grew up. I hope that the children of these lefties these days can afford the thearpy that they are clearly going to need when they grow up.

    1. The effects of the supposed curse were actually correct (for whatever reason) up until Reagan. And there was an assassination attempt on him.

      Every president elected in a year ending in zero from 1840 to 1960 died while in office. Not all of them died violently. For instance, Harrison, the first to die, died of pneumonia after 32 days in office. But every last one of them died while in office. And off the top of my head, I think *only* those presidents died while in office.

      Reagan finally broke the streak when he survived his two terms (including the assassination attempt) after winning the election in 1980. And there’s a lot of progs who wish that the 2000 election winner, George W. Bush, had died in office.

    2. I’m sad to report that, despite being 14 years older than you at the time, as a several-generation yellow-dog Democrat and surrounded by liberal friends at college, I felt much the same way.
      I got better, but not until it was too late to have any chances to vote for Reagan.
      Having a more mature perspective on Carter’s incompetence, a conservative upbringing despite the congenital party loyalty, and several readings of Heinlein, E. E. Smith, and L. Neil Smith under my belt didn’t hurt.

      1. Being a young idiot I actually voted libertarian. One of the Kock brothers was the VP. Quite happy Reagan won though. He was my second choice. I spent soooo much time explaining that the Laffer curve was not voodoo economics.

  21. Nikki, thanks for posting the link to the fake police report article. My mom has been freaking out that my kids and her students (international, university, ESL) are in danger. Hopefully finding out that one of the reports she sent me are total lies will calm her down a little.

    Seriously, this is Idaho. Anybody starts any physical nonsense outside the public schools is likely to get five concealed weapons pointed at them and held for the cops (inside the public schools, well, they’re ‘gun free’, so I guess bullying is a-okay, but we don’t do public schools and the university is not gun-free).

    1. Was that article about the student in Lafayette who claimed she’d been attacked by Islamophobic Trump voters?

  22. The gay rights advocates have been proclaiming for years that if you don’t embrace their agenda, you are full of hate. Since they have latched on the Democrat party to gain political power, a Democrat loss is a real threat. So people have the notion that political conservatives and libertarians are vicious haters and expect brutal retaliation.
    They were lied to in the first place, and they swallowed it.

      1. Over the years I’ve come to the conclusion that “gay” is as much a political platform as a sexual orientation…

          1. Not at all. If you don’t spout the party line you are a straight white male (even if you have a great rack). If you just didn’t exist, they would have no-one to hate and would have to hate themselves.

      2. Same thing with women and blacks. I’ve heard tell that Sarah Palin, for example, isn’t a woman and Clarence Thomas, for example, isn’t black. To me, that’s a tell that someone is using a cause for political power and doesn’t really give a spit for the people they are claiming to represent.

          1. And if you ain’t white, you’re a race traitor, an oreo, or “acting white.” *spits* More fine young men have been wasted on such infantile twaddle than I care to think on.

            On the other hand, the ones who stand against the tide of -isms and hate? Those are the kind of folks who truly do make this country great. We need more men and women like that.

            1. This is why I have been stating for years that the white supremacy movement is alive and well. It is just that almost all of the membership is black.

        1. We’re not paying Clarence Thomas to be black. When he assumed the bench, his species and race became “judge.”

  23. OK, I am going to post something as an evangelical, which I usually don’t do. Yes, I am one of “them”. An Evangelical Christian. I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and all the rest of it. Yes, I believe homosexuality to be a sin. God teaches us to hate sin. Does this imply in any way that I hate homosexuals? Of course not. God also teaches us to love the sinner Period Dot. No caveats. I have a brother and a nephew who are gay. Do you think I love them less? No, I love them and pray for them. My brother has a gay partner. Do I hate him? No, I love him and pray for him. I I simultaneously happy and sad they have each other, because without each other they would still be miserable, which I know both were before. But with each other I fear they will never find their way out of their lifestyle, and will never find their way to salvation and that personal relationship with Jesus I spoke of.
    I don’t want to take their right to make decisions for each other away from them. I am happy they have their legal gay union, because if the government is going to force it’s way into personal life,then they deserve the same rights as married couples. Do I call what they have marriage? No, because marriage already has a certain meaning to Christians, including the church (and by the church I am referring to the people of Christ, not any specific demonination or sect) being the bride of Christ, and they do not get to force me to change the meaning of what I have so they can feel validated. They have both been posting crap on Facebook about being afraid for themselves and their illegal alien friends and Moslem friends, and I have refrained from telling them that their illegal alien friends are welcome to go back to their own country and apply to come here legally, at which point I will welcome them, and that if they really think that as gay men they have Muslim friends to let those Muslim friends get control of the country and see just how friendly they will be when their coreligionists come for them.
    End of rant.

    1. I don’t hate muslims. There are many things about their religion that I find admirable. However, if they think that Christians, Jews, and unbelievers in a predominantly non-muslim country should be subject to Islamic law, or that those who convert to from Islam to another faith should be put to death, or that it is acceptable to lie to unbelievers in order to advance Islam, they don’t belong in this country.

      1. Yeah.

        1) Why am I supposed to have a hate-on for one type of sexual promiscuity over, say, the drunken hook-up culture. There are lots of types of sexuality promiscuity. I was disapproving of sexual promiscuity before I knew that the one type was something that even happened.
        2) I have long realized that I’m a bloody minded angry jerk, and that this was something that would lead me into sin. Those who are being true to Christ’s teachings aren’t exactly giving me the thumbs up and telling me I’m sin free when I’m filled with passion for some wicked scheme I’ve cooked up. Maybe they aren’t telling me I need to find Christ, but they don’t say I’m being Christlike.
        3) I have made so poor a use of my time that I don’t exactly have lots of stones to throw when it comes to self-destructive choices.

        1. Not all sexual sins are the same– sex without being married, being promiscuous, onanism, homosexuality, sex as a tool, sex with involuntary partners of various types….

          Theft and murder are both sins, doesn’t mean they’re identical. Just means they’re both bad, an offense against That Which Should Be.

          If you’re interested in the philosophy of it, you might look up Courage International, or Catholic dot com.

          A bit more to the point– a lot of the “they’re pissy about teh gayz, but not sluts!” junk is what is technically known as a lie. Kind of like the “abortion opponents don’t care about the kids once they’re born” junk, which requires totally ignoring everything from the Sisters of Life through the vast number of support groups.
          “Keep the kid from being killed” is just a slightly higher priority, and when someone has a gun against a kid’s head it’s moronic to fuss about the kid’s college fund instead of getting the gun pointed somewhere else.

          1. Onanism does belong on the list, but it’s a very peculiar sin. It’s not masturbation, despite the usual association. It’s also not contraception by withdrawal. Driven by hatred of his brother, Onan denied his brother’s widow a child to be heir to his brother (the custom of the time for women who were widowed childless) by engaging her in sex, then withdrawing to deny her a chance at conception. It’s a combination of fraud, hatred, using a woman as a sexual plaything without regard for her feelings, and what would be called today denial of social security benefits. Since the relevant custom has died out, at least in the West, I’m not sure that anyone could engage in onanism today.

            1. Oh, gads, now I have to touchscreen type this without coffee…..

              Like descimate doesn’t require a Roman legion beating one in ten of its members to death, ‘onanism’ likewise doesn’t require the need to give your dead brother an heir.

              There are a few more things that made Onan’s thing sinful, too, but folks interested in that can check some of the theological sources of their choice. Catholic.com has some decent popular level stuff, main reason I keep pointing non-catholics to it.

    2. That’s well said, Tim. Unfortunately, it will fall on blind eyes. Been there; done that. It’s the exact same mindset I saw from bigots who made Archie Bunker look like a liberal: Nothing will change their bias. At best they’ll claim you are an exception. At worst they’ll call you a liar. Usually they’ll just claim you don’t know. They will do everything but admit they could be wrong.

      If you want a more recent example, you can look at the bigotry against Sad Puppies. Doesn’t matter how much you point out they are wrong. They don’t believe you.

      At least they can’t say they were never told the truth.

    3. I think you may like this:

      What is tolerance? Tolerance is an attitude of reasoned patience towards evil, and a forbearance that restrains us from showing anger or inflicting punishment. But what is more important than the definition is the field of its application. The important point here is this: Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons. Tolerance applies to the erring; intolerance to the error….
      Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles. About these things we must be intolerant, and for this kind of intolerance, so much needed to rouse us from sentimental gush, I make a plea. Intolerance of this kind is the foundation of all stability. The government must be intolerant about malicious propaganda, and during the World War it made an index of forbidden books to defend national stability, as the Church, who is in constant warfare with error, made her index of forbidden books to defend the permanency of Christʹs life in the souls of men. The government during the war was intolerant about the national heretics who refused to accept her principles concerning the necessity of democratic institutions, and took physical means to enforce such principles. The soldiers who went to war were intolerant about the principles they were fighting for, in the same way that a gardener must be intolerant about the weeds that grow in his garden. The Supreme Court of the United States is intolerant about any private interpretation of the first principle of the Constitution that every man is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and the particular citizen who would interpret ʺlibertyʺ in even such a small way as meaning the privilege to ʺgoʺ on a red traffic‐light, would find himself very soon in a cell where there were no lights, not even the yellow — the color of the timid souls who know not whether to stop or go. Architects are as intolerant about sand as foundations for skyscrapers as doctors are intolerant about germs in their laboratories, and as all of us are intolerant of a particularly broad‐minded, ʺtolerant,ʺ and good‐natured grocer who, in making our bills, adds seven and ten to make twenty.

      Old Errors and New Labels by Fr. Fulton Sheen 

      1. Someone tell me when the Trump Derangement Syndrome folks discover his Jewish connections so I can do a “I didn’t leave Trump Derangement Syndrome, Trump Derangement Syndrome left me”. In truth, in my case the actual in hindsight apparent insanity seems to have gone away once there was no longer a chance of handing the presidency to Clinton.

  24. For obvious reasons, the Electoral College is once again a target of the left. Just had to point out to someone on Facebook that the analogy they’d posted was, in fact, inverted. They’d posted a quote by someone who tried to liken the popular vote to the World Series system of awarding wins based on the total number of games won, while claiming that the electoral college system was like awarding the series win based on the total number of runs scored over the course of the entire series.

    Um… no.

    1. It’s their defense mechanism. (We were CHEATED) The EC Helps to keep the less populated states from the rule of the larger ones most/some of the time.

      1. They have zero grasp of history. If they did, they’d know why how choosing electors for the President of the United States is left up to the states, and why our first president was not George Washington. Technically, Washington was our fifteenth president, not our first, though he was the first President of the United States. Understanding who and what those first fourteen presidents were does much to explain what the title President of the United States actually means.

        They probably don’t know that nearly half of the states in 1788 didn’t have a general election to choose pledged electors, It would be the 1850s before all states held general elections. And the US Constitution is absolutely cool with the state legislatures choosing electors, with no general election for president at all.

        In calling for tossing the electoral college, they betray that they see states as provinces instead of full fledged states. They also betray they haven’t done the math, or they’d realize that presidential campaigns would be concentrated in high population states to the exclusion of the rest. Or perhaps that’s what they really want.

        1. Most of the European countries the left admires soooo much does not allow the people to vote on the Chief Executive.
          The PM is typically picked by a majority of parliament.

        2. Q: What do you have without the EC?
          A: War.

          Maybe not right off hot, but it seems likelier sooner that way. Or… “then the Presidency is decided by a handful of nuclear targets. The ‘solution’ to that is simple. Ugly and evil, but simple.” Not something many wish to hear.

      2. Yes, and if you don’t do that you have a unitary state, not a federal one. So their position seems to be that all federal states are morally illegitimate, though I doubt they’ve thought it through.

    2. Why do they think if we lacked the Electoral College the vote would be the same. The campaigns in that case would have been very different and thus we have no idea of the results.

      1. This is the biggest reason why I thought that Bruce Scheiner’s attempt to determine what the outcome of the votes for the Hugo would be, based on WorldCon data, to determine if slates would still have affected the outcome, was deeply flawed: he’s assuming that people who voted on the basis of “slates” would still have voted in that way, had a new system of voting been in place.

        If your purpose is to manipulate the vote, you can do that, no matter *how* the vote is organized.

    3. They were flipping out about that one Democrat elector in Washington State who said no way could he vote for Clinton even though he was pledged to do just that. How dare he be faithless!
      Now they want pledged electors to be faithless by the dozen? So it’s okay only if it’s in their preferred candidate’s favor. Not impressed.
      (I suggested we take all the Presidential candidates’ names and all the party affiliations off the ballot and just vote on the electors.)

      1. They are paragons of intellectual consistency … if you consider “Heads I win, Tails you lose” consistent.

        Remember, they are turning the screws of history.

        1. I recently argued online with someone who said that “Who, whom?” was a good idea and was deeply indignant when I said he had a double-standard.

      2. And I couldn’t help but notice that the same people who were calling for the cancellation of the Electoral College in 2000 because Bush lost the popular vote were waiting with bated breath over Ohio, hoping against hope that they would win that State (and make Kerry be the President-elect), even though it was clear that Bush had won the popular vote.

        The only thing consistent with these people is “That which gives me power, let me have it!”.

        And sometimes their machinations backfire, and they get bitten bad. (I still remember, for example, Republican Scott Walker winning a provisional election because the Powers that Be didn’t want a Republican filling Ted Kennedy’s seat…and knew that if Mitt Romney were still governor, that would be exactly what happened…except that when Ted died, a *Democrat* was the governor, and the voters *chose* a Republican!)

  25. Of course they have plans. And those plans have no place for us unless they decide they need the faceless despairing ranks to fill the factories a la Metropolis.

  26. “I wish they’d stop thinking “I disagree” means you want to kill them.” Projection. It’s what THEY would do, or want to.

  27. My experience, by the way, has been that any moral disapproval of homosexual acts or relationships is called “homophobia.” There is no commonly used neutral way of saying “X regards sexual relations between two people of the same sex as morally wrong.” The same word is used to describe the fact and to condemn it.

    1. More precisely, “moral disapproval of homosexual activities” is equated with “wanting to murder gays”. 😦

      1. Their revealed preferences say otherwise. I would never, under any circumstances whatsoever, voluntarily eat something baked by someone who wanted me dead. And I would never compel someone to bake for me and then eat it unless I knew this person was an angelic paragon of goodness, patience, and forbearance.

        So that’s what they REALLY think of Christians.

        1. You know, it would be much simpler and less expensive for everyone if they’d give the compliment straight. This back handed stuff is way to circuitous.

  28. “And I fear, just a little, that what they’re doing is projecting their own plans, had they won, onto us.” Afraid so. There is a meme circulating on FB along the lines of:

    “If the Democrats REALLY had the elections rigged, then there would be single-payer healthcare, solar cars, and NO FOX NEWS” (emphasis added)

    Pretty much a flat-out admission that the author of this meme and its circulators would like to use the power of the state to crush dissenting opinion sources.

    1. Solar cars? I don’t even want to *think* about how expensive those would be…

      As for Fox News… the rumor is that now that Ailes is out, Fox is going to start drifting to the left.

    2. And the immediate response should be “Just because Democrats are incompetent doesn’t mean they’re not tyranny lovers.”

    1. If it wasn’t for the fact they intend to chain themselves to us before doing it I would say screw talking them down and let them jump.

      As in if Caxit and Orexit get on the ballot I will donate money.

      1. Being deficient in a sense of humor about such things, I seriously doubt the Secretary of the Navy (for one) would agree with you. The last time a state or few decided to exit the Union because their leading citizens didn’t like the outcome of a presidential election was around 1860.

        1. Actually, history shows that the process of secession was closer to ratification of the constitution and other events in American history in that delegates pledged one way or the other cast votes at secession conventions. In most cases, the votes at these conventions weren’t unanimous. What it came down to is that states that left did so because the majority of voters wanted it.

          To say more gets into a forbidden topic. It all breaks down during Reconstruction, anyway, where you have things like the Camila Massacre, and Democrats adopting techniques of intimidation they are still trying to use in 2016. That said, there was considerably more honor in walking than protesting the choice of voters in states like Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

          That’s why I don’t object to the idea of Calexit. Unlike the South in 1860, I don’t think many see California as worth keeping.

          1. The Central Valley in California is an important part of the country’s agriculture. Losing that would hurt.

            Of course, the US Senate started the process (back in the ’90s) that’s slowly destroying the Central Valley as a source of food. And Sacramento is actively helping that along, as are the courts. So that might not be a concern for much longer.

            And Caxit wouldn’t happen anyway. Even if there was a serious push for it, the state has enough people who aren’t interested in it that the attempt isn’t going to go anywhere. My estimate is that out of roughly nine million voters, six million voted for Hillary, and three million voted for Trump.

            1. Losing that would hurt

              We could share the pain by cutting off the water Cali gets from …Hoover Dam?

              Then there wouldn’t be any agriculture there and it could return to the desert it was originally, which ought to please the Sierra Club.

              1. If California (and Oregon and Washington) secede, certain questions arise. How large a vote margin is needed? Two-thirds? Fifty percent plus One?

                Is there any reason to retain current state boundaries? Looking at the R/B County maps it seems likely large portions of each state would likely prefer to remain American. Certainly the electorate East of the Cascades in Washington, East of Oregon’s Willamette Valley and California’s Northeastern counties (which went on average nearly 60% Trump http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president/california/) might object to be shanghaied from American citizenship and forced to entrust their Civil Rights to the beneficent mercies of those dwellers in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and the Silicon Valley.

                No guarantee they can keep their present borders, is there? I am sure Idaho would welcome annexing those portions of Washington and Oregon who do not want to leave.

                1. Significant chunks of the wet side of all three states would rather stick with the US, come to that.

                  Have to break it down smaller than county level.

                2. “If California (and Oregon and Washington) secede, certain questions arise. How large a vote margin is needed? Two-thirds? Fifty percent plus One?”

                  What we do is invade, split off all the cooperative parts a la West Virginia, and reconstruct the rest.

  29. Sarah, did you take the plunger to the Comment Trap a little before 2100 EST? I see a lot of apparent sludge coming through at about that time.

    1. I FOUND the d*mn comments everyone, including David Burkhead had been missing. Stupid wordpress had created a new “waiting for approval” folder, besides the normal one.
      Wordpress delenda est.

      1. WordPress is “telling” me I’m signed up for new posts. Actually delivering them….. not so much.

  30. Projection is more than a way to show movies. Their fears tell us what they would do with total control. ObamaCare tell us what they can accomplish controlling three branches of government. Memories Pizza tells us what they can accomplish with just the media.

  31. There was a group back in the 1930s that was very clear about what they intended to do when they came to power. The take away from the ensuing unpleasantness is that such people should be listened to carefully.

    In the US there is a group that is OK with the People being armed, and another group that opposes it. The latter’s stated reasons are nonsense on stilts, which forces us to speculate about their real reasons. To listen to them, as it were, carefully.

    If you are just now becoming afraid of them, you have not been listening carefully.

      1. A lot of people find it easier to go with the flow. There is reassurance in belonging and protection in numbers. That is until you discover how the pack turns on you if you step out of bounds.

Comments are closed.