How to Fight Back

fire-and-water-2354583_1920

I always find it hilarious when I’m told I’m not in favor of fighting back, and that I think everything is all right.

This is sort of like when I get accused of being an optimist and a pessimist for the exact same post. Or when my most apolitical books get flagged as political. Or…

Sometimes people are reading hieroglyphs written on the inside of their eyelids.  Kind of like people who decide I want open borders. Or you know, that I run around twitter threatening people (My twitter account might be suspended. I recently clicked a link a friend sent me, with something funny about Portugal, and I tried to answer but the comments never showed and it said something about my account being suspended. Which frankly affects me not at all. I mean, it echoes these posts, is about it.)

But guys, what we’re engaged in is a fight to reclaim the culture.  That precious artifact who followed me here after I blocked him on facebook for instance thinks it is a sign that we’re LOSING the culture war that there was massive outrage about The Last Temptation of Christ in the eighties, but nothing about this Brazilian movie about a gay Christ.
Um…. to level set: I only found out about that movie because I was avoiding work as hard as I could, and found it in a sidebar of a blog I read.  The short version: it’s imported bullshit that won a lot of prizes. The chances of more than a couple thousand people seeing it are nill. And the chances that anyone who would be outraged even knows it exists is even less.

Yeah, sure, the left keeps trying to gin up outrage, because they mistake offensiveness for relevance. And Christians are an easy target because they don’t chop people’s heads.

However, Christians outlasted people trying to chop off their heads. And if you think the Romans didn’t make obscene parodies of Christianity, you haven’t read first century graphite.

I do understand being outraged at the things these people do. I don’t understand deciding everything is lost because of it.

If you think attacks on Christianity are “Marxism” you’re crediting the artists with way too much thinking and AN ideology. Most artists are doing things are doing them to get shock and outrage. In the eighties it was said that the best way to sell a million books was to get fundamentalist sects burning them.

The Last Temptation of Christ benefited from that effect, as did Piss Christ and other bullshit that is not in any way “art.” Because the left loves outraging the Christians.

All the media jumped up on the demonstrations and how outraged people were, which in turn helped sell the blasphemy and abomination.

So, running around with your hair on fire, screaming all is lost because the new outrage isn’t ginning up outrage? You’re either a false flag or a softhead (which doesn’t mean stupid, btw. Some of the smartest people I know are looking for “a simple theory of everything.”)

And what does it accomplish? It gives the left the notoriety they so dearly crave, and makes them feel edgy and important again.

That ain’t no way to fight the culture war.

So, how do you fight the culture war?

1- Be aware of false flags and soft-heads.

Look, we all do this. We all forget people lied to us or about us in the past (okay, not me. I’m a resentful bitch) and want to think “they’re right on this, now.”

We also all have depressive times and despair. The left is MAYBE 25% of the population, but due to the crawl through the institutions, they have loud megaphones. It’s easy to believe you’re surrounded.

One way to identify false flags and soft-heads who repeat them is to consider who they’re trying to appeal to. If they are talking to the left’s idea of a right winger: uneducated, untraveled, xenophobic, racist, anti-semitic, etc, they are probably one of those.

So, people screaming about the inherent evilness of being able to tan? they’re just appealing to who they think the right is. Chances are they’re not of us.  Or they’re soft-heads.

Same way, signs of disrespect to Christians? Not the end times. Except for very short times in history, unbelievers have always made fun of Christians, but this is okay because we also make fun of each other. But the left doesn’t get that. So they think they can spin it to us as signs of the apocalypse.

Another good sign of a false flag or a soft head are people trying to push you do exactly what the left wants you to do: bomb buildings. Shoot up people.

Why do they want us to do that? Because they can no longer control the flow of information. But this would get us demonized everywhere.  Yes, they tried to gin up something like that a number of times, but the story keeps falling apart.

Do you want to give them a story that doesn’t fall apart? Why? So they can make “right wing” (aka to the right of Lenin) a dirty word for a generation and take us all the way to Venezuela? WHY?

TWO of the people calling for violence in the comments — and the ones being the most vocal and explicit? — one was from Turkey and the other one is a …. uh…. known agent provocateur. Perhaps paid.

You guys have been on the internet long enough. SURELY you know that the people presenting themselves as American and outraged aren’t necessarily so.

BTW both of those people comment on instapundit and other places. Our enemies — both ideological and national — are trying their best to make sure we go down hard and the one thing they were always good at was dizinformazia. Remember that. If you can’t tell them by their weird use of English (and they’re getting better) you can tell them by their weird ideas of what Americans are.

These people are everywhere, and multiplying. It will get worse before the election. They’re testing topics to divide us. One hint of a “non-natural” topic was the whole porn thing which came out of nowhere, and was suddenly everywhere in the form of conservatives who should know better yelling we needed government control of speech.

Several tells it was manufactured: a) it came out of nowhere, with no provocation. b) it plays exactly into what the left thinks the right is: prudes (same reason they tried to spin us with stories of how Trump has affairs with porn stars) c) It’s naturally divisive, because which of us can say we APPROVE of porn taken to the extreme, or of porn-addiction? None, right? And the false flags were really good at calling those who opposed government control “porn supporters” (that’s another sign, btw, the massive, ridiculous accusations. Particularly since government has never been any good at stopping that sort of thing.) c) if it had succeeded — doesn’t seem to have — as they expected, they could slide in an anti-porn candidate at the last minute, a paragon of virtue who would pull enough votes away from Trump their margin of fraud would do the rest.

Beware of any of these spins that takes support away from what has been a pretty decent president (better than I expected) while pretending to support him, particularly.  Beware of incitement to purity spirals. (Yes, I know, yes. Some people are… Rockefeller republicans. And when they start insisting we vote for the leftists to save America from Trump, that’s when you know they were false-flags all along. And damn it, I was a soft head for too long where some of them were concerned. Anyone who says the outright commies are better than our flawed president? Yeah, no. But I’m seeing a lot of misrepresentation and dividing of people who aren’t those — yes, myself included — and it’s time to take a long hard look at those promoting it.)

IOW as in Puppet Masters, stay alert. A man with an ideological overcoat just might be an enemy.

2- Don’t look away

Please, please, please, be aware of how outrageous the left is.  No, I don’t mean things like Piss Christ, or stupid movies suggesting that Christ was gay (for the love of Bob, that has been a ridiculous attack since the second century at least) because that just gives these pseudo artists the attention they crave.

Instead be aware of the things they don’t want you to know how outrageous they are:

Yes, sure, the shampeachment.
But also things like Guam tipping over. Things that reveal their utter inability to comprehend and process reality.  And I know you’re going “But that’s a day that ends with y”

Of course it is, and there are reasons for it, including the fact that they hire for ideology ONLY and that they’ve had cover from the press for so long.

But the majority of the public doesn’t know how incredibly, ridiculously incompetent they are.

To the public at large — though less and less as they drop their masks and lose the advantages of a complicit press (now making itself irrelevant) — this is still the party of the “educated” and “smart” people.

Someone was shouting about why we don’t have the money the left does.  Well two reasons: first they hire for the really plum jobs by ideology. Second because magnates make their money then turn left.

This is because leftism is a positional good, and “high class.”  This is what we need to puncture. Show their incompetence, their ignorance, their utter stupidity. It’s not hard. The masks are coming off.

3- Engage.

No, don’t go an buy rings.

Engage in discussions. Dare to be contrary. Yes, both when you see false flags and soft heads, and when you see outright Marxists and socialists, protest. Refute.

Be polite and clear. And talk sense. With examples. You won’t convince the person, but you might convince spectators. And even if not, you give an example of talking back.

TRY not to sound like their stereotype of a right winger. They will try to spin it as you’re clutching a gun and a bible. Don’t play into it. Even if you are religious, nothing is gained by going all religious on them.  Attack them on the sanity and sense fronts, instead, and on their APPALLING lack of knowledge of history.

Yes, this means you probably are going to have to read a lot and study a lot. And filter out the obvious bias. I remember an otherwise excellent mini-series on Washington that kept telling us he only joined the revolutionaries because he was so vain. (Rolls eyes.)

If you an do it, though, learning is its own reward and makes you more resistant to false flags and soft heads. It also gives you insight into how they think and their image of us — from the stuff they add to otherwise factual accounts. That’s priceless. It’s like getting a picture of their heads.

If you’re rural, they’ll try to wind you up as part of that. Don’t fall for it. Instead turn it on its head and defend city living and point out that there are many of us living among them (there are) and arguably the most productive ones.

Be prepared to be reviled and attacked.

Be prepared to have insanity spewed all over you.

The attacks will increase the more effective you are. It’s just the way it is.

Believe it or not, I’m actually extremely conflict averse. I had to learn to overcome that. In another world, I’m quietly writing my books, probably getting all “intellectual” and stuff, which is one of my defects and tendencies. Not making a lot of money — because too intellectual — but happy enough.  That’s not the world we live in. Sorry.

You need to stay aware and you need to fight back. Their overreach and insanity is becoming massive, as they feel their influence waning.

Light them up. Disprove their pet theories. Make them look ridiculous.

Most of the time, honestly, “When did you become psychic” suffices. For instance, yesterday on facebook, a person was insisting all Republicans secretly hated the poor and were greedy.  It’s just a ridiculous idea, that only illusions of being psychic can bolster it.

As part of this, I ENJOIN you to have what I haven’t done so far: have a a set of files, where you keep facts. Label them: Economy, religion, relations between sexes, etc.
Dispassionate facts are the best way to show the ignorance of the other side.

It might be easier if you get together with friends with different expertise. Make sure they are people you trust absolutely. And keep shared folders. I’m in the process of getting this together with some friends. Hint, keep a copy in each of your computers, if you can. The cloud is another name for “other people’s servers.”

4- And this is perhaps the most important, and it’s hard to see:

It’s not just the masks that are coming off. The wheels are too.

Like Obama, the left has the mierdas touch.  Every industry they take over turns to crap. Yes that includes government. No, a big central government is never EFFICIENT. But it can be more efficient than it is right now.

The left has several problems when in charge. One is that they BELIEVE everyone is corrupt. It’s part of their set of beliefs. So they think if they’re corrupt it’s fine. It’s just the done thing. (That’s the reason they believe that a strong government is needed. Apparently people in government aren’t humans and corrupt, but angels. Never mind.)

Second is that the left is mostly ideology over all. Which doesn’t only mean they HIRE for ideology. It means everything they do is for ideology. What to sell? The idea is to pull ideology. How to establish economic policy? Ideology. Purging the office of undesirables Those are never the ones who don’t work, but the ones who oppose you ideologically?  This means ideology becomes the mission, and the real mission, whether selling or creating or governing? It is forgotten and ignored.

So EVERYTHING the left does turns to shit. It’s been accelerating over the last 40 years. And now, the only thing keeping the entire economy from coming apart, while the left plays f*ck-f*ck games is the few of us still doggedly working at the thing we’re supposed to do AND the fact we’ve had some spectacular innovations in medicine, information technology and other stuff.

But even so, the wheels are coming off.

You want to win this culture war, and preserve civilization?

Sure, keep a preparedness supply, be good with weapons and get in as good a shape as you can. That’s just SENSE. No matter how you fight, winning is never assured and things COULD drop in the pot. Better be prepared.

But more importantly, build redundant industries, structures, organizations of our own.

Are you worried about Amazon? Well, running around screaming just bolsters the left’s claim we need to all go back to the paddock of traditional publishing… which they control.

Come up with an alternative, one that can survive now, because it’s just to the side of Amazon, but can change fast and take over if the wheels come off. (And btw, yeah, we’re trying to work on it. But tax regulations requiring you to collect taxes across states and be informed of what’s due in each state, for every 2.99 purchase are hampering efforts.  But you should try. And think through all the ramifications. And be ready.) I have several friends testing out alternate-news ideas. And dear Lord, there must be other areas you can start building against the crash NOW.  Consider, please. It doesn’t take one person with a lot of money and time. It takes millions of us with a little money, a little time, a little expertise, each working his own little niche.  Connecting can come later, or through ad hoc organizations.

But you should be doing something. Consider, learn, work, and start.

Because the hardest part of preserving Western Civilization is going to be replacing the collapsing dinos.

The meteor has already struck. They are already dying. And yes, most of their functions are harmful or not needed. But not all. So for those that are needed? Be prepared to be the little mammal who comes out of his burrow and starts doing what needs to be done.

It’s not glamorous. Heaven knows it’s not easy. But it needs to be done.

Be not afraid.

 

 

257 thoughts on “How to Fight Back

  1. Tell It Like It Is And Send Them To Deep Pink!

    Huh? Where did that Deep Pink come from? [Puzzled Grin]

      1. >> “WHERE is it? My search can’t find it.”

        Pretty sure Deep Pink is down the hall from Deep 13. Just ask the mad scientists for directions.

          1. Free on Kindle. Hmph. You’re determined to make me spend money for digital books and I don’t want to. I do not want to depend on batteries, hard drives and dancing electrons for my reading. I want to hold the cold dead corpses of trees while I read.

  2. Well, y’know, there’s fighting back stupid and then there’s fighting back smart. Fighting back stupid is just another way of rolling over. Fighting back smart is using their own playbook against them — it isn’t as if it has all that many plays in it, or that the plays are particularly clever, it’s just that they depend upon us fighting back Romney-style stupid.

    1. When you start turning their arguments against them, it’s kind of funny. Internet arguing is a spectator sport. Less spittle flying, more popcorn.

      Well, there might be some spit flying somewhere. But not from where I am sitting. *grin*

    2. All of my fellows on the local Tea Party board read and internalized Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. And just because the Tea Party looks to have gone underground, doesn’t mean what we have all forgotten those Rules.

      Frankly, I think that a lot of people are turning those Rules against the bleating progressives. Look at Sabo, the guerrilla artist. Look at those weaponized autistics at 4Chan, goading all those prog-idiots into believing that the Circle Game and the OK sign are White Power signals.
      And the Babylon Bee for Pete’s sake – now being the paper of record? And Titania McGrath, bless her pointy little head.
      Yes, we can have fun, making fun of them. Go forth and do likewise…

      1. Laughter will be our best weapon.
        It is a social bonding tool, and far better one than scowling and sneering

      2. All of my fellows on the local Tea Party board read and internalized Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.

        I’m glad to hear that. Conservatives all too often refuse to entertain “tainted” ideas. One would think RfR was the One Ring to hear some talk of it.

        Gotta be that better (losing) man.

    3. Fighting stupid can sometimes win. Long after you should have win, and at enormous cost in casualties. But sometimes it wins.

  3. “a simple theory of everything.”

    I like the idea, but like the chart showing assorted ‘elementary’ particles it usually more a list than anything else. Mendelev’s Periodic Table grouped things in way that provided “Aha!” moments (“Oh, everything in this column acts this way, moreso as you go up/down!”) and even made predictions (Hey, we’ve missed some elements – but now we have an idea how they might be behave).

    Really, a few simple theories of most things would be nice. A complicated theory of everything might also be. What is nice and what we are likely to get.. not the same. It’s sometimes all we can do to be able to see a few inches more through the fogs.

    1. Some time in the early 60’s Enrico Fermi was quoted as saying
      “If I could remember the names of all these particles, I’d be a botanist.”
      The particle beastiary has GREATLY increased since then…

  4. Don’t forget that the goal is not to convince the… er… committed. It’s to demonstrate to the bystanders just how far from reality your quasi-opponents are.

  5. Being prepared for trouble is always good. Floods (local, regional, national), tornadoes, ice storms, blizzards, accidents that constrict major transportation arteries (driver had heart attack, crashed truck full of used tires into bridge pillars and supports. Truck burned. I-40 partly closed for several days until they could shore up the bridge, then again when they replaced it. Baked concrete doesn’t do well.), financial set-back that reduces shopping, local or regional power outage for various reasons . . . The less you need to depend on others, the more you can do for others, and the less stress you’ll be under.

    1. Or as the Latter-Day Saints like to say, get enough for three days. Then build it up to two weeks. Then get the year’s supply. And don’t forget the water (which you’ll likely need for more than just drinking).

      1. Yes on the water. I suspect that if the pumps fail, the local water system has two, possibly three days before things get Interesting. (I could be way off, as my knowledge of the system is based on documents from at least a decade ago.)

        1. 28 gallons of potable water for the two of us. 30 gallons non-potable (in a plastic garbage can) for the toilet. Non potable I can fill from the rill next to the house (150 feet), or from the river 1000 feet away (long way to carry), or dig a well.

          Can boil water in pots by the fireplace, or even outdoors if necessary, after the propane runs out.

        2. 2003? The rest of town was out of power for five days. We were out for eight. The towers held enough for five days.

          A friend down in Texarkana said the water stopped on Day 7, I think.

          After a couple more >3-day outages, I started stocking up on water and bought an inverter and a generator.

          I don’t remember an outage of more than an half hour or so from 1969 when we moved here, until the mid ’90s, when we’d get several hour outages every few months. The power company shut down all its local maintenance depots and contracts linemen from other utilities, some apparently quite some distance away.

  6. WP Reader is still acting funky, but in a different way now. ATH is showing in my feed, but is also giving me the entire post in my ‘notifications’.

  7. The Simplified Theory of Everything:

    Everything is Complicated.

    Some things more so, some less so, in accordance with a wide variety of factors.

    Which are complicated.

    So the best you can do is the best you can do. And don’t get bent out of shape when your best estimate comes less close that you desired – just watch the rates, adjust your fudge factors and keep moving forward.

    1. The Simplified Theory of Everything?

      G-D created Everything, it operates according to the logic of His Rules, and it is maintained by His Will. Try not to distract Him.

      Can’t get much simpler than that. Now, working out the details of His Rules is a poser.

      1. “G-D created Everything, it operates according to the logic of His Rules, and it is maintained by His Will. Try not to distract Him.”

        Mankind developed two systems that led to their golden age. One was controlled, clean, easily portable, limitless energy easy to use for power, not easy to turn into a weapon of mass destruction. The second, was a means of faster than light travel that opened up not just our own galaxy, also all the nearby ones to easy, two-way access, for colonization and commerce. Both systems were 100% dependent on the Godless Box, a device that ran off a 9 volt battery, that created a singularity that apparently distracted God long enough to run machines that violated His Rules and Will on a local basis.

        The down side? Demons, devils, and other minions of The Adversary frequently found their way into our universe wherever the Godless Box was used.

        1. … Fast-forward about 40,000 years, and the Godless Box is responsible for everything that lives in the Immaterium.

      2. “Everything starts somewhere, though many physicists disagree.”

        – Terry Pratchett, “Hogfather”

  8. > you can tell them by their weird ideas of what Americans are.

    Well… the American Left doesn’t seem to have a good grip on that either. They only see themselves and fellow-travelers, and everyone outside the circle of wagons are Deplorables, Nazis, or hillbillies.

      1. The Left in general don’t seem to have a good grip of reality, or much self-awareness, or how things are supposed to work, or what rules are in place. The only thing that they work off of is ‘rules for thee, not for me’ and alternately or at the same time, “MUH FEELS.”

        Over here there was much bleating about how the PM went on a week break and holiday with his family overseas, ignoring the reality that the PM doesn’t have anything to do with the handling on fires (they’re handled at a state and local level), there’s a Deputy PM who’s SUPPOSED to take over when the PM is not available, and the guy who started the whining, a Green MP who lives in the bloody city of Sydney, said in an interview that *he* wasn’t giving up HIS family vacation, and the guy was basically looking for yet another way to pressure the PM towards the whole Climate Catastrophe waaaaah (Scott Morrison is refusing to implement more changes no matter how hysterical the high school dropout from the North shrieks and wails.)

    1. I suspect they don’t understand when we all wear labels like “deplorable,” “redneck,” or “hillbilly” as badges of honor, either. It must chafe them no end when we chuckle at them and adopt their epithets to describe ourselves. Not “Nazi,” of course. We just point out that that’s not a term of art but an actual politico/social concept that they fit much more closely than anyone not believing their unique misconceptions.

      1. In their little conformist lockstep world, the wrong label will ruin them.
        One snap of disapproval, and they step to the party line, toot sweet.
        We don’t, and they don’t understand that.

      2. I don’t know why they wouldn’t–it’s the exact same thing as embracing “nasty woman.”

        (They don’t–I’ve been well amused by a thread or two of insisting that IT’S TOTALLY DIFFERENT GUYS HOW DARE YOU–but I still don’t know why. >.>)

      3. There’s a reason why Jeff Foxworthy is a popular comedian.

        I’ve had a few of the “you might be a redneck” lines be true. More of them, lately…

      4. In your list of labels they apply (we call them badges of honor) you omitted one of my favourites: Yankee Doodle.

        As for the N-word, he who said it, let it. Fascist is as fascist does and we’re not the party of people dressing up to hide our faces and terrorizing dissident voices.

      1. Actually, I’ve noticed that many of the things that were meant to be a parody back in the 70’s/80’s/90’s are passing as “normal” theses days.

  9. A couple of years ago I was in a FB conversation with someone I know in real life who made a comment about envisioning me holed up in my house with my guns peaking out the windows waiting for the government to come get them/me. Someone I know in real life that apparently thinks me saying online that not trusting the government (hey, I’ve worked for two levels of government and have had close relatives working at other levels) is some a more defining look into our relationship than what we do with each other in person.

    That is why progressives can’t have nice things. Their grasp of the real world is tentative at best, possibly psychotic on most days.

    1. After 25 years of Federal civil service I fully agree with your assessment about being reluctant to place any degree of trust in government.
      Would also note that your “friend’s” attitude is one of the reasons that the new Red Flag regulations scare the bejebbers out of me.

      1. Yup. We put chains on the government to keep it contained. But still it grows. The idea was to leave individuals mostly free- a terrifying concept, to be sure, but an amazing one- and keep the government contained.

        Now the government is mostly free to do as it wants. Time to prune that bonzai hydra back to a few skinny twigs.

        Vote NO! On everything. We don’t need it. We can’t afford it.

        Saw a sign like that once. I like that sign. *grin*

        1. Remember a (very bad) movie called “Americathon?”

          They want “social programs” or “foreign aid” or “light rail”, let ’em beg for donations…

          I imagine quite a lot of the Federal and state spending would suddenly be reduced if the citizenry had the option of saying “oh, hell no!” to what the vietcongress wants to do.

          1. A proposal: when we fill out our income tax forms, we also designate what part of the government gets what percentage.

      2. I was glad to see that our county is a 2A sanctuary one. Oregon is not solely defined by Portlandia.

    2. They misapprehend what is meant when we say, “I don’t trust the government.” It isn’t expression of paranoia, it is recognition of how government functions.

      Do any of these “government trustees” believe that our police, our prosecutors, our judges, our juries never make mistakes? Do they trust the government to always calculate taxes accurately and assess penalties fairly? Do they imagine there are no government employees reaching policy decisions corruptly, perhaps hoping to get post-government jobs in the pharmaceutical or banking industries? Do they carefully adhere to FDA dietary guidelines, confident there are no unreported agendas driving the studies? Do they trust that government construction projects are always awarded to the least expensive competent bids, that roads and highways are routed according to engineering decisions and not which interests will be affected? Are they confident our military is always careful to avoid excessive force and to employ the best strategies (as well as avoiding bias or favoritism in selection of military materiel providers?)

      I trust the government to be human, to make errors and try to cover them up. I do not trust government to be immaculate, unbiased or even fair.

      The real question is why would anybody trust government? Half the time it is run by the opposition party.

      1. Why do leftists trust a government run by the same people they don’t trust to run those Eeeevil Corporations?

        1. Because they have turned profit motive into the Devil- nothing new for aristocrats to disdain commerce and sordid gain- but not enough to stop from taking a sinecure on a corporate board if the money is right.

        1. There’s been a lot of criticism about local governments using council rates to do stupid shite like put bronze statues of dogs and then have a birthday party for it a year later, instead of fixing roads and potholes, and then stupid punitive fines on households and people to raise more money.

          1. And now we’re seeing democrats in VA trying to outlaw single family housing by taking over zoning, because single family housing is racist apparently. Trust the government? To try and make us all serfs maybe, but not to do anything positive.

      2. The opposition party may be in figurehead roles but the power of govt is no longer invested in those we elect but in those we pay.

  10. > If you’re rural, they’ll try to wind you up as part of that.

    Fat chance.

    “We’re trapped in an urban hellhole, and you should envy us.”

    And the eventual addendum when I start laughing:

    “We hate you, and you should be *forced* to move into the city with us!

    Um, yeah…

    1. I always use their own arguments against them.

      “Sorry, your carbon footprint is too large for my tastes.”

      And when they object with a poor study (that they don’t understand) on relative carbon “footprints” of urban vs rural, I inform them that they’re not accounting for the carbon footprint it took to build that high rise, or the carbon consumed by the common areas, or their little sup-tropical heat island.

  11. > The cloud is another name for “other people’s servers.”

    And where is “the cloud”?

    Interestingly, almost nobody seems to agree, probably since they’re defining “cloud” differently. But Amazon, Microsoft, and Google are always in the top five. And all three are declared enemies of the present administration and anyone to the right of Lenin.

    Just the people you want to hand over your business files to, and why they’re working so hard to get business from the Fed.

    “Hi! We’re the Central Intelligence Agency, and we’ve outsourced our classified data storage to Amazon!”

    It is to weep…

  12. “(And btw, yeah, we’re trying to work on it. But tax regulations requiring you to collect taxes across states and be informed of what’s due in each state, for every 2.99 purchase are hampering efforts. But you should try. And think through all the ramifications. And be ready.) I have several friends testing out alternate-news ideas. And dear Lord, there must be other areas you can start building against the crash NOW. Consider, please. It doesn’t take one person with a lot of money and time. It takes millions of us with a little money, a little time, a little expertise, each working his own little niche. Connecting can come later, or through ad hoc organizations.”

    This is the sort of stuff that strikes me as most effective. Where is this? To whom can I direct what little spare money I’m able? How can I direct my energy to support this? I see and know a lot of like-minded people asking the same. If I’m on the Left, I know precisely whom to go to, and am pleased at the variety and volume of options.

    I’m tired of reading article after article in conservative/libertarian circles for over 20 years that are saying the same thing about the insanity and overreach of the left. For heaven’s sake that’s not to suggest abandoning the tactic, or to stop arguing. Starting from the mid-90s, I’ve probably written a couple of doorstop novels worth of well-reasoned and sourced arguments on the internet. and read even more. That energy could better be directed toward finishing my WIP. So I’m long past ready to direct my efforts to something more productive.

    1. For the past two decades we’ve been trying various things. I’ve been trying a lot of things.
      Why aren’t you?
      The right is lousy at organizing, but we can do things individually. Try it.

      1. And if nothing personally comes to mind, then find a few folks doing things that make sense then figure out ways to support them.
        I myself support a number of libertarian authors with purchases, patreon donations, or pro bono beta reads and copy edits.
        One of the few left wing ideas that does make a bit of sense is their “think globally, act locally” meme. Thousands of small things grow into a movement.

        1. find a few folks doing things that make sense then figure out ways to support them.

          This is very a important practice. One of the ways I like to do this is by crying, “All is lost, all is lost! We’re doomed, doomed I say! We must burn it all down and hope we can rebuild!” Then I encourage our fighters to waste no time organizing but throw themselves onto the enemies’ shield wall without delay.

          1. Good old RES, just brimming with the type of reason and common sense one would expect from a drunken wallaby.

            1. *Cough* I strongly suggest eschewing any discussion of with what I might brim. Once down that path lie horrors beyond the casual imagination.

      2. You assume I haven’t. I shouldn’t have to post a resume on comments whose general thrust is ‘what can we do.

        It’s time to get unlousy at organizing.

          1. Not in the slightest. You quite clearly alluded to some organization/s beyond something local, or at least something like-minded folks can get behind from a distance. We need more of it. Beyond what I list below.

            I’ve knocked on doors. I’ve served my country. I’ve gone to meetings, gatherings, rallies, and licked envelopes. I’ve done this in many different parts of the country and seen how ineffective they are (for a number of reasons).

            1. I’ve done this in many different parts of the country and seen how ineffective they are (for a number of reasons).

              Define “effective.”

              Seriously.

              The first step to solving a problem is figuring out what the solved state would look like– and the instinctive one isn’t it.

              1. Effective as in achieving results. From the smallest organizational detail to the larger mission (be it a ballot measure or getting the vote out). It could be the complete lack of ability or desire to even try to measure results in most cases.

                Most efforts resemble the TEA Party writ small. No vetting, no accountability, no discipline. Our hostess is right that the Right sucks at organizing. We have to fix that, not accept it. Are there successful local organizing efforts? Absolutely. My point is not about local efforts, but large scale, or even national efforts. We just don’t compete, at least right now, with the Left.

                I’m no fool; here. I understand what’s effective and what’s not. This is neither jack nor squat to do with “instinct”, thanks.

                1. WHICH results?

                  It’s like discussing freedom– freedom to? Freedom from? Freedom of? What?

                  It could be the complete lack of ability or desire to even try to measure results in most cases.

                  *dryly* Well, given your demonstrated ability to identify objective measures….

                  More to the point, this one keeps popping up. It’s like only the fights we lose that count.

                  Am I hallucinating that my property taxes dropped? Hey, that’s a local measure where the county auditor took the radical step of actually accessing based on sales value and market forces, rather than “something in the same county sold for an insane amount that’s a little similar.”

                  Did I imagine homeschooling my kids? Trust me, it’s gotten easier in the last twenty years, and not just on the logistics side.

                  Hell, is Hillary in the White House?

                  1. “WHICH results?”

                    The results I’ve mentioned.

                    “*dryly* Well, given your demonstrated ability to identify objective measures….”

                    Perhaps you should try reading what I’ve written instead of whatever it is you’re wanting to respond to. Allow me to help you. My point was about doing more of the things that our esteemed hostess mentioned in her original post. I even expressed interest in supporting those things, or at least more information about them. and I’m treated to…what? Do more locally? I’ve done that. I’ve mentioned, briefly and with examples here and in this subthread (because I have no desire to launch into a detailed explanation that really has no place here) things you’re claiming don’t exist. I’m not even arguing against doing things locally.

                    I’m glad your local measures have worked. That wasn’t the bleeding point.

                    1. Perhaps you should try reading what I’ve written instead of whatever it is you’re wanting to respond to.

                      You might note that I used quotes.

                      Beam, eye, you know the drill.

                      You can insist on declaring defeat if you want, just stop trying to insist that I join you.

            2. If you had said, “inefficient” I’d have agreed with you. yes, it’s horribly inefficient in effort to results. But you do get results, small though they might be, so it is effective. You have to look at it with the same sort of view as the long tail when it comes to book and music sales.

        1. Actually, how should anyone know you aren’t on the other side? Go forth and network. Build relationships, and information will follow.

            1. There’s an old bit about how you tell which person in your anti-government group is the FBI infiltrator? He’s the one suggesting you actually go out and break the law. Bonus points if he “knows a guy” for getting illegal weapons or explosives.

              To you it may be obvious that you are utterly sincere but to others, infiltrators and agents provocateur also look like they’re utterly sincere. They also get in a huff when one suggests that they might actually be infiltrators or agents provocateur.

              So your implied eyeroll is not really very telling, nor is repeating how really sincere you are. Not recognizing that this is real issue that folk on our “side(s)” have to deal with, however? Well, folk can make of that what they will.

              1. He’s been around a while and not been a problem. Which to me — I don’t have time to deep search everyone when they post here — means he’s probably okay.
                But yeah, on the internet no one can tell if you’re a dog.

              2. My eyeroll wasn’t meant to be telling, nor did I repeat my sincerity. I could say the same sort of nonsense to you. It’s not like I haven’t been a commenter (however infrequent) here for years.

                Perhaps I’ll just keep my mouth shut and not make any more waves, however slight.

                1. gmmay, I think you’re making two mistakes:
                  Staying in the fight when people have the dander up because of trolls. Let it go for a day or two, okay?
                  Two- WHY organization
                  Sure, the left has centralized organization. Sure it does … things. But the way the tech is going it’s not working so well for us.
                  I don’t think you’re an agent provocateur. I just think you’re not thinking for the 21st century.
                  Think Hong Kong, a headless revolt. Would they be better with centralized organization? Why?

                  1. One nasty Roman Emperor was said to have said “I wish the mob had one head that I could chop off”. 😈

                  2. “Staying in the fight when people have the dander up because of trolls. Let it go for a day or two, okay?”

                    It’s your place and I’ll certainly respect that. I’m was just a bit flummoxed that I can express interest in some nascent organization or burgeoning parallel structures from the Right and that’s somehow met with either “How do I know you’re not a troll” or “You’re calling for the destruction of all that is good”. I mean, whiskey tango…?

                    As to organization, I think we may disagree on that, perhaps mightily; and I’m perfectly fine with disagreeing. I will take your advice and let it go.

                    1. An organization gives them something they can actually fight, while giving us something that can replace their old boss with our very similar new boss.
                      It’s one of those Lefty things that’s snuck into our belief system.

              3. Sorry, this got left out of my other response, but I just want to make sure I’m getting this right. I could be an agent provocateur because I’m saying the Right needs more/better organization? Is that what we’re going with here?

                1. No, she was using the general you, you took it as a personal one, and responded accordingly. Things escalated from there.

            2. You may or may not be a good guy, gmmay70. You don’t know me from Adam, and I don’t know you.

              Anyone could be anyone on the internet. Do you have the trust level to have exchanged real world info with me? (If you do, you didn’t associate this handle with it.)

              1. Anyone could be anyone on the internet

                Surely you do not mean to suggest I might be other than a wallaby of wondrous wit and whimsy?

                1. Of course I don’t mean to suggest that. I mean to suggest that you are a wallaby of walloping wonder and winsomeness.

              2. I absolutely don’t trust anyone enough to organize any sort of contingency for unfortunate events of this sort.

                There are people here I’ve trusted enough to contact with some information about my legal identity. I’ve worried if even that is a mistake.

                There are two good options, and one utterly terrible one.

                Option one is organizing with utterly trustworthy persons via completely secure means. Under a Graveyard Sky level, if even that lax.

                Option two is look at your personal contingencies, but plan to compromise with a self organizing structure after something bad happens. ‘Go join the self assembling organization’ is a viable plan for helping after minor natural disasters. May or may not be in a boog. It does come at the cost of not being able to expect to be able to repay a lot of old grudges, but frankly those are probably bits of myself I need to conquer anyway.

                Option three is I think what the left is hoping for, and might be physically possible. The whole memetically organized collection of lone wolf terror soldiers thing. The left is prepared for it, so they would probably win, but there is a minute chance that it might only be everyone losing and we decivilize, perhaps to a point predating western civilization. So, as strategies go, it is much too far into self-destructive crazy, even for me.

                Comes to mind that there is an option four. Get out of politics, and focus on the church. This morning I was grumpy, and contemplated raving at a relative about my issues with recycling, and whining about the example of the martyrs. If I care that much, why don’t I try to meet theologically educated people in RL, and try to get answers to some of my questions. In absence of Christianity, what reason do I have to care about any of this stuff?

    2. In some ways, the most effective thing we can do is just live our normal lives, and try to make ourselves and our offspring better off.
      Remember, it’s not there for the Left- their forces are mostly paper mache and noismakers and manikins pretending to be a vast army.

      1. Yes, I firmly believe in the power of raising better people into the world. Done it with two and have a couple more working their way to adulthood.

        That said, the Left is far more than a paper tiger. There are legions of them and they wield enormous power. I’m encouraged by the level of pushback they’re getting right now, but it’s whistling past the graveyard to think they’re even close to defeat.

        1. Left is more of a paper Komodo dragon. Slow moving, not very bright, but if it gets ahold of you you’re in trouble and even if you get away the infection from the bite will ultimately take you down.

        2. The left, in particular the socialist progressive arm we currently see on the rise here in the US, is much like any invasive species. It slips in when you aren’t paying attention and gradually takes over until it covers your institutions just like a kudzu vine. You are faced with three options, as regards kudzu, keep chopping it back, nuke it with fire and chemicals, or stand back and watch while it strangles every living thing it creeps in and covers over. Do keep in mind that with the nuclear option you wind up with bare scorched earth, still good soil, actually well fertilized with ash, but barren. Healthy viable plant life must be introduced gradually to build a new sustainable landscape. Same holds for our most precious institutions as goes the nuclear option when applied to the left. We go that route and we pretty much will have to rebuild the American dream from the piles of smoking ash that were our once hallowed halls and professions.
          Biggest difference is that unlike kudzu the left ultimately strangles itself as it’s unable to sustain itself once it has robbed the structures it infests of all vitality.

          1. Yeah, but unlike most invasive species, when you suggest spraying them you get called a Nazi.

        3. Follow the money. It’s not really there for them.
          If they were that numerous and that powerful, “Get Woke, Go Broke” would not be a saying.
          If they were that influential, woke reboots of beloved film franchises would be massive successes.
          If they were that influential, Clickbait Listicle Farms and legacy MSM outfits wouldn’t be laying people off.

      1. Well, you know, let us know you’re all right now and again, huh?

        Yeah, you’re a Fed, but you’re OUR Fed, you know?

        (Idahoan. It’s not personal, it’s just being a kid during Ruby Ridge.)

        1. Tell you a little secret.

          I’m not a Fed and I’m not a Fred.

          I “stole” the name from Sarah (and she knows it) as a gag. 😉

            1. He’s really Ingold Inglorian and he’s merely popping into our universe to pick up a few pallets of MREs, medical supplies, and more hydroponics parts to take back to Darwath. They’re currently dealing with a few decades without much in the way of summer from an alien induced ice age.

          1. Sure, Fed, that’s what they all say. You probably are actually the gal I graduated from music school from who works in the FBI data center here in town!

        2. Malheur County isn’t that far from where we live. Trusting government isn’t a popular concept around here.

            1. According to Wikipedia, named after the river that flows through it. Apparently some French Canadian trappers were upset that they lost some beaver furs they had cached nearby.

  13. > big central government

    Frank Herbert’s “Whipping Star” had a fix for that…

    Archive.org has the original magazine version, which is the same length as the published novel. Worlds of IF, January 1970: https://archive.org/details/1970-01_IF

    “Governnient had become a great destructive wheel without a governor, whirling with such frantic speed that it spread chaos wherever it touched.

    In desperation a handful of sentients had conceived the Sabotage
    Corps to slow that wheel.”

      1. Never heard of “Line Star Planet”.

        Is it by the same author as “Lone Star Planet”/”A Planet For Texans”? 😈

  14. Another tactic is to do end runs around the talking points. Goldwater and Friedman weren’t the first to run with the idea of individual liberty and all that jazz. Libs have a long history of coming up with cute little ideas that sound good, but suck in practice (as in, they create a vacuum of competent people when in control, and fill it up with moron signal repeaters. Minds out of the gutter, and all that). Don’t hit them where they expect.

    Most people are averse to really thinking, habitually. So when you say something that makes them think, the record stutters a bit.
    “Tax the rich!”
    “But I want to be rich someday, so why would I do that?”
    “Free healthcare!”
    “But I thought we abolished slavery?”

    And so on. Be entertaining. Folks might lose interest when the same old song and dance between Rs and Ds comes around.

  15. That precious artifact who followed me here after I blocked him on facebook for instance thinks it is a sign that we’re LOSING the culture war that there was massive outrage about The Last Temptation of Christ in the eighties, but nothing about this Brazilian movie about a gay Christ.

    *eyeroll* Hadn’t heard about it, and the premise is lame. Good grief, we’re nearly 20 years past that actor who couldn’t understand Bilbo and Frodo’s relationship EXCEPT via it being sexual, they’ve been trying to make any two dudes who are in the same room without a supervisor out to be gay, and then mocking guys who AREN’T in the same room as being repressed gays, they made it really, really obvious that they’re just sex obcessed.

    Did he sleep through the attention-beggers marrying buildings, etc?

    They’re just trying to shock the squares. The Onion called this process out back in the late 90s, an article about Ozzy Ozborne being sad because folks just shrug and go “oh, it’s him doing his shock jock shtick” and ignoring it.

    1. The problem with the avant-garde’s MO of epater les bourgeois is that les bourgeois tends to get over things pretty quick.

    2. >> “that actor who couldn’t understand Bilbo and Frodo’s relationship EXCEPT via it being sexual”

      1) I don’t recall which actor you’re talking about, but I assume you mean SAM and Frodo?

      2) To be fair, I think the Frodo/Sam thing has been around a lot longer than 20 years. I recall at least one nod to it in Bored of the Rings, and that was published in 1969.

      1. Yeah, had a derp; was the guy who played Sam. (did a great job, too)

        The Kirk/Spock thing, and IIRC the Sherlock slash-fic, is around that time as well.
        Mostly it’s only notable for folks who can’t see it otherwise, not folks reading it in.

      2. Oh, I would be quite unsurprised if anybody claimed Bilbo was grooming Sam in a homosexual pedophilic relationship … well, what would surprise me about it was the recognition of such grooming occurring.

  16. Not like the Brazilian TV thing is new. There was a play about Jesus and John the Apostle (AKA the Beloved Apostle) being Gay from like the late ’80s (Contemporary with Last Temptation). I give even odds there’s some crazy ass Gnostic Gospel from the 4th or 5th century that does the same thing. The Opponent is not particularly clever and keeps coming up with new flavors of the same dumb idea. And yeah it was let’s shock the rubes. If you want to do that go to Saudi Arabia and complain about Mohammed. Tell me how that turns out why don’t you? And in any case someone that would assault the nature of the Incarnation can have at it for all I care. Go ahead make fun of the power that created the universe and stands outside of it. Just do it far away from me as I am not impervious to high voltages or large masses at high velocities.

    1. Actually there was a gay “Secret Gospel of Mark”, but it turned out to have been a modern scholarly hoax.

      Opinion differs on whether it was a purposefully bad imitation created by Morton Smith as a joke which his fellow scholars did not get, or a pitiful job by a scholar who thought he was smarter than he was. Either way, the hoaxer was the same guy who “predicted” it by wishing for a certain tenor of Gnostic gospel to be discovered, then “discovered” it and wrote articles about it. It had a moment of notoriety and then faded away, and there were articles about its fakeness when the discoverer died. Some people still believe it was real, but the ancient manuscript that he “found” it attached to has magically disappeared. (Which is what really frosts people’s tookies, because that is adding destruction of theft that denies scholarship.)

      Basically, though, anything real of that sort from ancient Gnostics would involve a boy or a very young youth, not a guy who was John or Mark’s age. Ew, but true.

      1. Suburbanbanshee you said
        Basically, though, anything real of that sort from ancient Gnostics would involve a boy or a very young youth, not a guy who was John or Mark’s age. Ew, but true.

        Yes indeed you are correct, the middle eastern culture tended to ignore young men (barely pubescent) behaving as what used to be referred to as “catamites”. To some degree it was part of the expectation of their introduction to male culture (double eewww) and considered part of mentoring (triple eeewww). If you want details there is an excellent book Slaves, Women & Homosexuals (https://www.amazon.com/Slaves-Women-Homosexuals-Exploring-Hermeneutics/dp/0830815619) that goes into why the current Liberal Christian view that Christianity’s opposition to Homosexuality is based on a cultural hang up of Paul/Saul. The book pretty much thouroughly shreds that thesis in detail. Two warnings about that book. One it is incredibly information dense filled with references to modern scholarship on middle eastern cultures and religions of the early first century making it a bit of slog to read. Second when you are done you will realize how nasty the middle eastern cultures and religions are, even though the author avoids the lurid details you may still need brain bleach afterwards.

        I will note that it is possible that John was in his mid to late teens in the time period of Jesus’ ministry (early 30’s AD best guess). He was a man working with his father and brother. But in 1st century Judaism being a man starts at 13. Unmarried and still working for the family hints at youth too (20’s at the eldest). And he is widely thought to be the author of the Revelation (written late 90’s AD) and to be John The Presbyter referenced by some of the Pre Nicene Fathers. Meaning he lived well into AD 95 and likely into the early 2nd century. being born somewhere in the early 10’s of the first century makes john a late teen and keeps John from needing to be too old to fill those tasks.

  17. I’m fond of using Alinsky against them, especially the part about making them live up to their own rules.
    Happily, I’m not the only one.

      1. Can we start a gofundme to send Trump some hookers. (Riffing on when someone complained about Grant’s drinking, the suggestion was to send him more of whatever it was he drank. as Lincoln said “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”)

          1. Something good happened to the Senate in the past few years. My belief is that they found a box of spines in John McCain’s personal effects.

              1. Well, here’s a small clue.
                https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/26/ig-report-reveals-steele-funneled-claims-through-john-mccain-after-fbi-dropped-him/

                “States the IG report:

                Several weeks later, on December 9, 2016, Senator John McCain provided Comney with a collection of 16 Steele election reports, 5 of which Steele had not given the FBI. McCain had obtained these reports from a staff member at the McCain Institute. The McCain Institute staff member had met with Steele and later acquired the reports from Simpson.

                The unnamed McCain staff member is known to be David J. Kramer, who also infamously provided BuzzFeed with the Steele dossier.”

                John McCain was a slime bucket.

                  1. Who knew how much other dirt he was willing to find… or invent? And his GOP opponents knew that the MSM would cover for the “Maverick”.

                    1. Yep. The amazing thing is the asshole — like Pierre Delecto, btw, didn’t figure it out from how they treated him during the run for presidency that the media were not his friends.
                      OR perhaps people at the time were right, and those two weren’t REAL runs.
                      Which is what I mean by I can be a prize softhead, myself.
                      The scary thing is that Obama might have been the best option those years. (shudder.)

        1. Ahem. When you’re a billionaire you don’t hire hookers.

          You send a flunky to find one or more amenable women who meet your requirements, buy them the requisite certification, and then consult them as sex therapists.

          And then you send their bills on to your insurance company, because you don’t stay a billionaire if you don’t watch expenses…

        2. Methinks Melania might have something to say about that – and I don’t imagine it will be “Yes”.

        3. I doubt Trump, notoriously germophobic, would put his willy in a rental squeeze box.

          Some might cite Stormy Daniels but her profession was not ambulatory fleshlight, it was professional performer in a genre where routine medical examination is a standard procedure.

          1. In case it needs to be pointed out, my comment was snark, using a historical allusion to point out why I really don’t care about Trump’s personal habits provided he does the job I want him to do. (Nor do his personal habits get him a pass when he doesn’t do the job I want him to do see “war on pain meds” and “bump stocks” as two examples.)

          2. I had vague memories of reading somewhere that Trump was germaphobic, which had me skeptical of Stormy,and especially the claims of the Steele ‘dossier’ that had him hire people to piss on a bed. The latter seemed to me the kind of bizzare kink that the hard Left tend to find exciting. But since I didn’t really care enough to look it up…

    1. I’d go with Prose. I don’t think they’d get the Poetic. (Just finished Jackson Crawford’s new translation and notes on “The Wanderer’s Havamal.” Excellent stuff.)

      1. *Waggles hand* I don’t consider Snorri particularly reliable. Well, I don’t consider any of the authors of the Eddic tales (as they have come down to us) particularly reliable since they were writing centuries after the actual beliefs had been supplanted by Christianity. But Snorri, in particular with that whole thing about the Germanic/Norse tales myths being corrupted retellings of the Trojan War. (What? I mean, seriously. What?) Snorri’s the one who gave us that bit that those who fall in battle go to Valhalla and all others go to Helheim (Hel’s abode in Nifleheim). Other sources suggest that it was a lot more complicated than that.

        1. Actually… That isn’t historically implausible. Remember that a lot of the “ancient heroes” were actually real historical people of known lineage, who were alive in Attila’s time or during the Fall of the Western Roman Empire.

          So yeah, of course the skalds composed songs influenced by the Troy story, just like their predecessor Virgil. Even the Irish were influenced by Troy, and they had a lot less trade involvement with Romans and Greeks than the Norse did.

        2. Are you suggesting an author might stoop to cribbing elements from other popular tales with which he could be confident his intended audience was unfamiliar?

          No. Way.

    2. I prefer a more secular approach, especially as my Bible advises turning the other cheek (although it is quite silent on what to do after the other cheek is struck; I cannot believe He who advised pawning spare cloaks for swords meant to dictate an infinite loop.)

      Therefore I cling to guns and a list — and I’ve checked it twice.

  18. “I always find it hilarious when I’m told I’m not in favor of fighting back, and that I think everything is all right.”

    This is that troll from yesterday, right? That guy wasn’t even coherent.

    I see this with the Canadian Right sometimes. There are some people who comment at Small Dead Animals who simply don’t have a clue. They think a bible verse is an entire rebuttal of pretty much anything. Drop a Corinthians 10:12 on it and call it done. (I don’t know what Corinthians 10:12 says, but then neither do the geniuses quoting half the time.

    Or the other extreme, the ones agitating for blowing up women and children as they were yesterday, and saying Sarah Hoyt is an ostrich because she’s not baying for blood.

    Fighting back in a culture war isn’t like any of those things. Half the comments I leave here are for Sarah to cheer up, nothing bad happened, we’re all good. Because if we get angry at every outrage, we will get tired, and then apathetic.

    Culture wars last generations. We didn’t get here where we are inn an afternoon, you know. The foundations of the current fashion we’re all complaining about were set before I was born. It won’t finish dying until our kids are old.

    I’d say the way to fight is to be unfashionable. By which I don’t mean clinging to old, tired ways of dress and speech. I mean to think and act with care and integrity, regardless of what current fashion is.

    1. *curious*
      *goes to look*

      It’s roughly “don’t get cocky.”
      Therefore, whoever thinks he is standing secure should take care not to fall.

      Immediately followed by roughly “be not afraid, God won’t let you face more than you can handle.”
      (Which tends to make me steal Mother Angelica’s sally about how I wish He didn’t have such faith in me!)

      1. Isn’t that a Mother Teresa quote? If not, then one of the products I make needs to be changed or removed.

      2. That is hilarious! I completely made that up you know, I didn’t even know if there was a Corinthians 10:12. Serendipity!

        I will take the divine scolding to heart, and check my footing. ~:D

        1. It’s technically 1st Corinthians, and I guessed you’d randomly chucked out numbers, which is part of why I went to look!

          He really has a sense of humor.

          1. 2nd Corinthians 10:12 does not entirely lack entertainment value here either. 😀

            “Not that we venture to class or compare ourselves with some of those who commend themselves. But when they measure themselves by one another, and compare themselves with one another, they are without understanding.”

        2. Would that our troll would follow Paul’s advice of Galatians 5:12 about folks requiring circumcision for Christians:

          Now, brothers and sisters, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed. 12I wish those agitators would go so far as to castrate themselves!
          (NET translation)

          You didn’t muck with the Apostle Paul, he was a tough cookie…

    2. This is that troll from yesterday, right? That guy wasn’t even coherent.

      The fundamental problem they have trying to pass themselves off as “one of us” is that it is extremely difficult for the illogical and unreasonable to fake being logical and reasonable.

      It is similar to a problem observed when casting actors to portray intelligent persons: few (I suspect none) actors can play “up” their intelligence — you simply cannot play smarter than you are. There are tricks, such as use of ornate polysyllabic language but those are “tells” for people seeking to impress others with their intellect, people fundamentally insecure about their own intelligence.

      Curiously, it is possible to play wiser than you are — if given the lines in the script.

      Thus trollish efforts to pass as one of us are about as effective as midgets trying to pass themselves off as NBA players.

      1. The polysyllabic problem is that for smart people, those are just plain old words. Actors can’t read them as if they were native vocabulary.

        And our actual fault — pronouncing them phonetically because we learned them reading — doesn’t communicate properly.

  19. Second is that the left is mostly ideology over all. Which doesn’t only mean they HIRE for ideology. It means everything they do is for ideology. What to sell? The idea is to pull ideology. How to establish economic policy? Ideology. Purging the office of undesirables Those are never the ones who don’t work, but the ones who oppose you ideologically? This means ideology becomes the mission, and the real mission, whether selling or creating or governing? It is forgotten and ignored.

    This is the very definition of totalitarianism. It’s not now brutal the regime is, but by how all-encompassing its scope, and the level of political micromanagement of people’s lives. “All within the state. Nothing outside the State. Nothing against the State.” Benito Mussolini.

  20. “TRY not to sound like their stereotype of a right winger. ”

    To which I would add: when debating/arguing on-line, don’t support your case by linking to a site like liberalssuck.com or progressiveswellgotohell.org….very often, one can find a source which will provide the same data and will be viewed as more objective, with a couple of minutes of binging. (not binging)

    1. They really get upset when I use Snopes to show them a “fact” they cited is not, in act, a fact.

      All while pointing out “The liberal leaning site Snopes……”

      1. Oh my, yes. The number of people who state that an accepted (by them) interpretation of an event is a fact, and REFUSE TO BELIEVE that it is an interpretation of said event, not a fact at all, would drive me to despair if I let it.

        It’s like they never learned how to distinguish fact from opinion. Primarily, of course, because they didn’t.

    2. When possible knot them up in the inherent contradictions of their own positions.

      See my argument elsewhere this page (3:12 am) about the kinds of things you must believe if you “trust” the government — and which nobody arguing Black Lives Matter of Fascist Trump can coherently believe.

      Our greatest weapon against them is their lack of coherence, that and their emotionalism. Our two greatest weapons against them are their lack of coherence, emotionalism, and their lack of underlying facts. Our three greatest weapons against them are …

  21. Don’t forget to avoid feeding them financially. Just like with indie books, the future of movies, tv, education, etc., is going to have a much stronger indie component. Feeding Darth Mouse and Hollyweird only prolongs their influence.

    -Albert

    1. This, exactly. I follow the Ace of Spades Sunday Morning book thread – and I swear, just about every book recommended there which I have read for pleasure over the last couple of years has been an indy-published one for $3-5 … or a trad-published book that I bought in print on the ‘used’ market. There was a book mentioned last weekend that I was interested in – and it was a trad-pubbed one: the Kindle version was on sale for $17 on Amazon. Yeah, f**k that, and the horse it rode in on. I wasn’t even interested enough to opt for a used copy. Trad Pub are slitting their own throats with this kind of pricing scheme.

  22. I stumbled across what I thought was a very funny LGBT decal. It’s rather boring in text. Over the L is the Statue of Liberty. Over the G is a gun. Over the B is beer. Over the T is a Trump profile. I bought a couple. I was asked about something (don’t recall what) and got one out at a gay party (party of gays? whatever). I was VERY surprised at the positive reaction.

    Things are changing in strange ways.

    1. A lot of people were really, really pissed at the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando. So pissed in fact that the Pink Pistols and things like it are quietly gaining members.

      Tell you something else, every lesbian and bi woman out there is watching Martina Navratilova and J.K. Rowling getting shirt-stormed for daring suggest you can’t make a man into a woman, and they are thinking about what to do when Antifa comes to -their- event to punch -them- out.

      1. A lot of more traditional gays & lesbians have ‘gentrified’ themselves- settled down with steady middle class jobs and families in bourgeois middle class fashion. So, they aren’t as hip & edgy anymore. Under the bus they go, along with the bourgeois blacks.

  23. Been trying to pull out of a slump, so reading Chesterton– ran into a phrase in this that seemed very important; put enough context in to get the idea across, but honestly the whole All Things Considered collection is worth reading.

    So, long quote from Cockneys and Their Jokes

    Mr. Max Beerbohm, I remember, professed to understand the first two forms of popular wit, but said that the third quite stumped him. He could not see why there should be anything funny about bad cheese. I can tell him at once. He has missed the idea because it is subtle and philosophical, and he was looking for something ignorant and foolish. Bad cheese is funny because it is (like the foreigner or the man fallen on the pavement) the type of the transition or transgression across a great mystical boundary. Bad cheese symbolises the change from the inorganic to the organic. Bad cheese symbolises the startling prodigy of matter taking on vitality. It symbolises the origin of life itself. And it is only about such solemn matters as the origin of life that the democracy condescends to joke. Thus, for instance, the democracy jokes about marriage, because marriage is a part of mankind. But the democracy would never deign to joke about Free Love, because Free Love is a piece of priggishness.
    As a matter of fact, it will be generally found that the popular joke is not true to the letter, but is true to the spirit. The vulgar joke is generally in the oddest way the truth and yet not the fact. For instance, it is not in the least true that mothers-in-law are as a class oppressive and intolerable; most of them are both devoted and useful. All the mothers-in-law I have ever had were admirable. Yet the legend of the comic papers is profoundly true. It draws attention to the fact that it is much harder to be a nice mother-in-law than to be nice in any other conceivable relation of life. The caricatures have drawn the worst mother-in-law a monster, by way of expressing the fact that the best mother-in-law is a problem. The same is true of the perpetual jokes in comic papers about shrewish wives and henpecked husbands. It is all a frantic exaggeration, but it is an exaggeration of a truth; whereas all the modern mouthings about oppressed women are the exaggerations of a falsehood. If you read even the best of the intellectuals of to-day you will find them saying that in the mass of the democracy the woman is the chattel of her lord, like his bath or his bed. But if you read the comic literature of the democracy you will find that the lord hides under the bed to escape from the wrath of his chattel. This is not the fact, but it is much nearer the truth. Every man who is married knows quite well, not only that he does not regard his wife as a chattel, but that no man can conceivably ever have done so. The joke stands for an ultimate truth, and that is a subtle truth. It is one not very easy to state correctly. It can, perhaps, be most correctly stated by saying that, even if the man is the head of the house, he knows he is the figurehead.
    But the vulgar comic papers are so subtle and true that they are even prophetic. If you really want to know what is going to happen to the future of our democracy, do not read the modern sociological prophecies, do not read even Mr. Wells’s Utopias for this purpose, though you should certainly read them if you are fond of good honesty and good English. If you want to know what will happen, study the pages of Snaps or Patchy Bits as if they were the dark tablets graven with the oracles of the gods. For, mean and gross as they are, in all seriousness, they contain what is entirely absent from all Utopias and all the sociological conjectures of our time: they contain some hint of the actual habits and manifest desires of the English people. If we are really to find out what the democracy will ultimately do with itself, we shall surely find it, not in the literature which studies the people, but in the literature which the people studies.

    End Quote

    1. Ooof, that’s ugly.

      Again:
      Mr. Max Beerbohm, I remember, professed to understand the first two forms of popular wit, but said that the third quite stumped him. He could not see why there should be anything funny about bad cheese. I can tell him at once. He has missed the idea because it is subtle and philosophical, and he was looking for something ignorant and foolish. Bad cheese is funny because it is (like the foreigner or the man fallen on the pavement) the type of the transition or transgression across a great mystical boundary. Bad cheese symbolises the change from the inorganic to the organic. Bad cheese symbolises the startling prodigy of matter taking on vitality. It symbolises the origin of life itself. And it is only about such solemn matters as the origin of life that the democracy condescends to joke. Thus, for instance, the democracy jokes about marriage, because marriage is a part of mankind. But the democracy would never deign to joke about Free Love, because Free Love is a piece of priggishness.

      As a matter of fact, it will be generally found that the popular joke is not true to the letter, but is true to the spirit. The vulgar joke is generally in the oddest way the truth and yet not the fact. For instance, it is not in the least true that mothers-in-law are as a class oppressive and intolerable; most of them are both devoted and useful. All the mothers-in-law I have ever had were admirable. Yet the legend of the comic papers is profoundly true. It draws attention to the fact that it is much harder to be a nice mother-in-law than to be nice in any other conceivable relation of life. The caricatures have drawn the worst mother-in-law a monster, by way of expressing the fact that the best mother-in-law is a problem. The same is true of the perpetual jokes in comic papers about shrewish wives and henpecked husbands. It is all a frantic exaggeration, but it is an exaggeration of a truth; whereas all the modern mouthings about oppressed women are the exaggerations of a falsehood. If you read even the best of the intellectuals of to-day you will find them saying that in the mass of the democracy the woman is the chattel of her lord, like his bath or his bed. But if you read the comic literature of the democracy you will find that the lord hides under the bed to escape from the wrath of his chattel. This is not the fact, but it is much nearer the truth. Every man who is married knows quite well, not only that he does not regard his wife as a chattel, but that no man can conceivably ever have done so. The joke stands for an ultimate truth, and that is a subtle truth. It is one not very easy to state correctly. It can, perhaps, be most correctly stated by saying that, even if the man is the head of the house, he knows he is the figurehead.

      But the vulgar comic papers are so subtle and true that they are even prophetic. If you really want to know what is going to happen to the future of our democracy, do not read the modern sociological prophecies, do not read even Mr. Wells’s Utopias for this purpose, though you should certainly read them if you are fond of good honesty and good English. If you want to know what will happen, study the pages of Snaps or Patchy Bits as if they were the dark tablets graven with the oracles of the gods. For, mean and gross as they are, in all seriousness, they contain what is entirely absent from all Utopias and all the sociological conjectures of our time: they contain some hint of the actual habits and manifest desires of the English people. If we are really to find out what the democracy will ultimately do with itself, we shall surely find it, not in the literature which studies the people, but in the literature which the people studies.

      1. So I have Chesterton in support of my decision to skip the news and just read the Babylon Bee.

        1. Which I only figured out after I’d linked the quote and then went and re-read the whole thing. 😀

          I literally opened the book, it said I’d read up to X point would I like to go there, and the part about henpecked husbands was there. Seemed important. 😀

    2. I’m not sure Chesterton was entirely right, just as I’m not sure the intellectuals of his day were right about sociology or pyschology when it comes to human interactions. At a certain level, women are considered chattel by men, just as at a certain level a woman considers a man to be her possession. It’s one of the reasons why “free love” and “open relationships” don’t seem to work well for long-term. We are not Bonobos, we are more like wolves. That framework works well in explaining why we have abuse, murders and murder-suicides in many cases of infidelity. (Although the abuse may be what led to the infidelity in the first place.) Point is, humans are complicated. And as Sarah said, there is no simple theory of everything.

      1. Ancient Rome was dominated by men, but I’m pretty sure it was a Roman consul or Emperor who noted that his child was the most powerful person in Rome, being the one who controlled his wife, who in turn controlled him. We men tend to be instinctively prone to sentimentality about our long-term lovers (albeit this often meant the mistress among the wealthy/powerful, if the marriage was arranged and no love developed there; and of course the whole point of prostitution and one-night stands is to leave her before that sentimentality can begin to develop), and when cultivated under traditional Christian or Jewish theology, the love that can develop is both blessed and everlasting.

        Contrawise, post-Sexual-Revolution secular relations between men and women might as well come right out of how Screwtape thinks marriage and whatnot ought to work, per chapters 18 and onward: Each trying to extract the most value out of a partner, rather than giving everything to support the partnership as part of becoming ever more perfect companions.

        -Albert

        1. In more measurable terms, one reason why paganism lost and Christianity won was that the first skewed male and the second female. The children of a male pagan and a female Christian were Christian — no matter that, at law, the pagan could have had them all executed at will.

  24. One thing to mention… Please stop funding the opposition when possible.

    There’s not much we can do about certain necessities and you can’t be moralistically “pure” all of the time, but it’s idiotic to bitch about their culture then go see their movies, yada, yada, yada…

    We do have some choices.

        1. Doesn’t seem like much of a sacrifice. Even the Baen-associated socialists have the quality of their stories suffer from warping the narrative to support Marxist theories of humanity.

          -Albert

  25. Top o’ the season to y’all.

    r maybe this is a bit more middle o’ the season, I leave it for you to decide.

  26. Something a bit more traditional …

    As well as offering a reminder of why this coming mass has its name.

  27. There is a different yet similar miracle of His blessing of Light in this world at this time of year …

    Happy second night.

  28. “ If you think attacks on Christianity are “Marxism” you’re crediting the artists with way too much thinking and AN ideology. Most artists are doing things are doing them to get shock and outrage. In the eighties it was said that the best way to sell a million books was to get fundamentalist sects burning them.”

    The Art World has, since the early 20th century, if not earlier, defined itself as “whatever the Proles Don’t Get”. They have seldom been Marxist, save for the brief period in the 1930’s when Socialist Realism ruled the World, and they dropped it like a recruit getting rid of a live grenade as soon as they could.

    But since ‘realism’ and popularity are verboten, they have descended into a series of trendy in-jokes, the vast majority of which age as quickly and as badly as fresh unpasteurized milk. What is needed against THEM is not Outrage, but dismissal. Piss Christ isn’t important enough to be blasphemous. It’s vulgar.

    And in the meanwhile genuine artists with talent and style are doing their own thing and letting the Art World go hang. Look at the careers of men like LeRoy Neiman or Frederick Hart. Hell, the LEAST of Neiman’s creations, the Femlin, is clearly more artistically important than anything the Art World has praised in the last fifty years,

    And they know it. And HATE it.

    1. The only restriction is that they must shock the correct people. In that way much modern art is the equivalent of back of the room adolescents cracking themselves up by mocking the teacher and any kids trying to learn.

      Technical skill is an acknowledgement that such skill matters and is this rejected.

  29. Because the hardest part of preserving Western Civilization is going to be replacing the collapsing dinos.

    I’d rather have to replace them than have to bury them. Wouldn’t you? (:-)

    Don’t let your sense of humor get ripped out of you. Remember that humor, especially in defense of what’s right and valuable, is the absolute weapon. There’s no countermeasure against it.

    Have a Merry and Blessed Christmas and a joyous New Year.

  30. Last night I saw a piece on the news about how Democrats are ‘concerned’ that Kalifornia will be ‘cheated’ out of its ‘fair share’ of ‘Federal money’ if next year’s census fails to count every last illegal alien.

    NONE of them should be counted!

    Allocating representatives (and electoral votes!) by counting illegal aliens is another form of election fraud — as if they’re not doing enough of that already. Spending our money on illegal aliens is a minor affront compared to that.

    What part of ‘illegal’ do they not understand?
    ———————————
    Then, on dark deserted worlds where there should be no life, where no living thing has walked in over a thousand years, something…is moving, gathering its forces quietly, quietly, hoping to go unnoticed. We must warn the others, Na’Toth. After a thousand years the darkness has come again.

    1. Here is a place that an amendment would be useful.
      The original text is (article 1 section 1 clause 1)
      Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
      This involves the hated 3/5’s clause which is modified by amendment XIV part 2 to this.
      Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed.

      In The Federalist No. 54 Madison opines: “The States should feel as little bias as possible to swell or to reduce the amount of their numbers….By extending the rule to both [taxation and representation], the States will have opposite interests which will control and balance each other and produce the requisite impartiality.”

      What we have here is States like California and NY doing exactly what Mr. Madison feared and padding their numbers.

      I would say an amendment stating:

      Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting only the whole number of persons in each state able to vote in a federal election. All counts must be verified by direct enumeration either by personal contact or physical verifiable form (i.e a physical signed returned census form)

      That change might help to keep this nonsense to a minimum. Please feel to substitute “persons of verified United States Citizenship” for “persons in each state able to vote in a federal election”. It would swell the numbers slightly from the original formula. Of course either form hasn’t a paper dogs chance in hell of ratification.

      My goal is twofold 1) Stop counting illegals, right now that rewards poor behavior and foolish choices, 2) Stop using “estimated” counts of cities trying to account for transients which inflates the blue regions (just another form of cheating). The whole point of this is to make sure representation is balanced (i.e. you don’t get Englands rotten Boroughs). Seems reasonable to ONLY count those being represented.
      But as I said it would never be ratified and would probably be almost impossible to get passed in congress.

      1. You would be instantly drowned out by the screams of RACIST!!!! RACIST!!!!!

        Because, of course, expecting laws to be enforced is RACIST!!!

        1. According to the clickbait farms, everything is already “RACIST!” and “Problematic” anyway.
          Most people are just tuning that noise out now.

  31. Mike, I am not Ingold and definitely not as wise as him.

    On the other hand, I have visited Darwath (bringing in helpful supplies) and according the scholars the current Ice Age is at least partially natural (although some non-humans attempted to worsen it).

    As for grain (for beer & other uses), the vats of the Keeps are being used to grow it. Admittedly, they are having problems in that regard.

    So bringing good beer is helpful (especially in term of good relations with the Church). The Current Head of the Church enjoys his beer. 😉

    As for Budweiser, that was all a certain college student could afford at the time and she enjoys the good stuff. 😀

  32. “If you think attacks on Christianity are ‘Marxism’ you’re crediting the artists with way too much thinking and AN ideology.”

    I think you underestimate the forces that have already accomplished their Long March through the institutions. I don’t know about the latest brooha re the Christians, but the post-modernists and the Marxists have aligned to attack those things that compete for loyalty to the State. It’s not a coincidence that Family and Religion are often the targets.

    As for the trolls, I wish you would name the people you are talking about. I haven’t called for shooting Leftists in the streets,
    1) but I’ve discussed how punching bullies in the nose usually works.
    2) and how if two men are contesting something, and only one is willing to escalate to violence, he is usually the one who will win.
    3) and asked people what their Red Line, or if they even have one, that would cause them to pick up a rifle.
    4) and complained routinely that I think a fatal flaw of conservatism is that it’s adherents lack the will to act. They just want to be left alone.
    5) and joked that our destiny is to write 500 essays lamenting the Fall of The Republic. Haven’t we all read Solzhenitsyn’s “How we burned in the camps…” https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/34738-and-how-we-burned-in-the-camps-later-thinking-what

    I think you also have to take into account that for 2(?) decades, we have been told to be patient, to keep our powder dry, “not this fight, not this hill, we don’t have the votes, we don’t want to risk our majority so we won’t pass anything of the things we promised” by the likes of McCain and Romney. It’s only natural that we not trust those voicing caution and restraint, again.

    Do you have an issue with any of that? Or anything else I have posted here or over at Insty? Please let me know.

    1. Wait. What are you doing here?
      ALL your posts are calling for blood, everywhere, and your other blogs are bullshit ones.
      You were blocked. Uh Uh. Okay. Unusual measures being taken.
      Tell your paymasters NO SALE.

    2. People seem to think that the American Revolution happened suddenly. It didn’t. Indeed, the first seeds of discontent for British rule among the British colonies, chiefly in New England, started with the English Civil War (1642). The colonies were mostly (mostly) insulated from it so when Charles I was deposed (and beheaded) and Cromwell’s government started making its own weight felt, the colonists were like “wait a minute.” Then the monarchy was restored under Charles II, but… Along came James II who was a Catholic of all things while New England was most decidedly Protestant (and remained so until well after the Revolution–see what Sam Adams had to say about “Papists”).

      That’s 133 years before Lexington and Concord, 134 before the Declaration of Independence. But the seeds for American Independence were sowed then.

    3. Do you have an issue with any of that?

      “I wasn’t saying we need to get violent, now. Here’s a five point list of why we need to be violent or we’re all gonna die, and an immediate switch to saying we’ve been all gonna die for 20 years so we need to do what I say without a good reason at all. Now declare you’re against me so I can strawman you as solidly as I have history.”

    4. Although you are a troll (and as Sarah points out, probably a paid one) some of your points do need to be answered for the benefit of other reading this blog.

      Taking your last and main point first—you complain of decades of being asked to be patient and accept gradual surrender. (Your use of “we” is disingenuous since you’re provably not American, but I’m addressing the point.)

      The attentive reader might notice that recent elections (most notably in 2016, but going back to the early TEA Party days) have taken a rather different path, and small-government/conservative/libertarian types have actually begun to push back in ways that have had real effect.

      To quote a chap who thought violent revolutions would be needed on a semi-regular basis to preserve liberty:

      Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

      While the evils are within limits, and while the system still allows for their correction without overturning the system, the meme “The Founding Fathers would already have been stacking bodies” is demonstrably wrong. The modern reformulation still holds: “There are four boxes protecting liberty: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box; open in that order.”

      As for defining “red lines”—to what end? There is no wordsmith so careful that the leftist press could not twist his reasonable red-line statement into “Look! Right Wingers are calling for violent revolution in this totally-reasonable scenario!” And conversely, there is no statement so complete that the enemies of liberty would not find a loophole, some actually intolerable infringement not specifically covered by the red-line statement, which they would point to and weaken the needed resolve of those ready to oppose them. The demand for “red lines” comes from what Sarah called softheads and false-flag trolls—and it has been demonstrated which you are.

    1. An interesting insight that may have passed its use by date.

      Are things like Streaming movies, Kindles, iPhones and Der Kloud conditioning us to merely rent rather than own DVDs, Books, CDs, our Data?

      1. Eh. What people own and what people don’t changes. Alvin York wanted to own a bit of bottomland (or so the movie would have us believe). I want to own a responsive, nimble-handling car that drives like an extension of my own will.

        That we don’t all want the same things is why economics works and is yet another reason why communism fails.

      2. Yet people will still line up to buy the latest IPhone, even if it doesn’t really offer that much more than the last one.
        The thing people are buying with digital media is convenience. They don’t want to have to carry around 100lbs of records or DVD’s or books when a couple of clicks on a device gets them the same experience without having to wait for delivery, or drive to the mall, or take up house space.
        And most people don’t see digital media as a rental deal at all.

        1. “most people don’t see digital media as a rental deal at all.”

          Heck no. I bought the story/song/picture, it is mine!!!!

  33. Someone may have already said this–I don’t have the energy to wade through 250+ comments to find out–but my way of dealing with these folks is just to engage with their /a prioris/.

    All it takes is a few simple, innocent questions to reduce most of them to incoherence and rage:

    “Really? That’s interesting…can you show me how that works?”
    “Huh…who knew? Can you show me where the underlying data is?”

    And perhaps the simplest is the best:

    “Why is that?”

    Nothing aggressive, nothing “in-their-face”…just you, Mr. Softie, innocently trying to understand…

  34. Pingback: JUST A FEW IDEAS:  How to Fight Back…. – The usa report

Comments are closed.