Style Sheet, Peeps, Style Sheet

One of the advantages of the collectivists is that they organize like nobody’s business, while we liberty minded…. Well — pats heads all around — well, you guys are adorable, but the individualists failed to organize, okay.

Now,while many of you translate this to a paramilitary clash and panic, don’t. most of their supporters aren’t nor will they commit violence, unless the can do it when no one is looking, sneakily, and against someone old, disabled, frail or very young.

Most of their supporters are in fact the “go alongs to get along” who just want to be “nice people” by siding with lunatics who want to put a boot on their necks. Oh, they also want to be smart because their college professors told them every “very smart” person believes in Marxism. This is why at the back of their brains every single one of the infantile “activists” thinks he or she will be in charge and not one of the lumpenpoletariat. No, they have never looked at actual communist countries, and if they did, as their panic at the xi-flu proved, they don’t get statistics or numbers at all.

So, yeah, the people they are using and weaponized– and paid — psychopaths, whom they bus from city to city. They’re armed and well organized partly because they do this all time and are given weapons and training. They’re very fearsome FOR ONE CITY AT A TIME.

In other words they are a potemkin army, raging across the country to intimidate the citizens. Which is why they have to punish Kyle Rittenhouse, because he pierced the paper silhouette. And why blue states refuse to arrest the rioters. They have very few of them. They’re the precious.

It does work on corporations and — apparently — Supreme Court Judges who, being in a highly social profession just buy what the news tell them and don’t investigate anything for themselves.

Look, I don’t think this bullshit will hold. And it’s part of the reason I think we’re going to have a brief, intense, localized clash.

This is not the seventies. They really had a majority of the indoctrinated youth then, and the youth then were a majority. With the attendant side effect that the youth then hadn’t been raised as little emperors, because they were the all-too-precious single offspring.

Those were the real Marxist riots. This is the Memorex. And like Chinese troops clashing with Indian troops, their rank and file are more likely to cry for their mommies, if they meet real opposition.

They have the psychos they train and bus around and which have a rap sheet long as their arm, and then they have the daft survivals of the sixties, at protests with their oxygen bottles and walkers.

And they have the get alongs. Who are useless in battle, but quite good at coordinated action on other fronts.

Listen to me on this if on nothing else: do not adopt their style sheet.

Because pixabay gave me images ranging from wallpaper to sheet music for style sheet, I assume that this is not a widely disseminated term.

So, a style sheet is used by publishing houses, to determine, say, how things should be punctuated. For instance, Baen uses more punctuation than other houses, who are on a war with commas even when they’re needed. Whether you hyphenate certain phrases or sentences is also a style sheet. It is, in other other words how they keep things uniform across all their books.

For writers, it usually goes by series. Each series will have a style sheet that determines which words you use for what. So, for instance, Athena is Thena, not Ena. And dimatough is one word.

The left is really good at style sheets and the right, unconsciously, adopts it. Which, I hate to tell you, is a bit problem.

Take for instance how even right wing sites are referring to the 6th of January as riots. There were no riots. Yes, there were some broken windows, but that seems to have been a minor element. There was nothing set on fire, and all their other claims have come up hollow. Even the theft of Nancy Pelosi’s laptop was probably faked to get rid of embarrassing (to her) data. The only person killed was a Trump Supporter murdered by the police (Ashli Babbit — say her name! — #Justiceforashlibabbit!)

So the sixth should be called a demonstration, a patriotic protest, or if you prefer “the glorious sixth” and my friend Bill Reader objects strenuously to my calling it “the forlorn hope.” thought it obviously was.

The left for instance refers to past presidents differently. President Obama, but Mr. Bush. Hell, they did that while the were in power, too.

What I want you to do is notice these things. And start countering them. Don’t call Occasional Cortex AOC. Her name is Occasional Cortex, first of her derpitude.

Don’t call the four bints of the Marxist apocalypse ‘the squad’. Call them “the squat.” because that and diddly is all they know about anything.

Don’t talk about privileged (unless you’re talking about liberals) because that means they were given something for nothing. Talk about rich. Or well connected. Or smart. Or whatever the crazy people mean when they talk of privilege. (Yes, they are actually privileged. Because they have a private law that favors them.)

Look, half of the way you think is bounded in by words. And half of the way other people think too. By using the leftist chosen terms, you’re lending them your unwitting support.

Don’t lose the war of words. Come up with more accurate terms, and think about what you’re saying.

Suggesting terms in the comments is perfectly all right. It’s early morning, I’m uncaffeinated and I can’t think of any others. However, you can go forth and think of a lot of them (failing to organize is an advantage sometime.) Try to keep it non-profane.


770 thoughts on “Style Sheet, Peeps, Style Sheet

    1. WHILE all you guys are trying to figure out new ways to be funny,THE RUSSIANS,CHINESE,NORTH KOREANS,AND UN MILITARY,AND A DOZEN other nations are quitley moving into position for the ATTACK on this country,YOU WON’T SEE IT COMING TILL THEIR ON YOU,and then what are you going to do,SLAVE LABOR CAMPS HERE WE COME,with out a shot fired…

      1. Oh, for the love of heaven. Are you simple?
        Sure, The Russians the Chinese and the North Korean, all tied in a sack are worth spit. China is having trouble enough conquering CHINA. Russia is indeed a paper tiger now. And the North Koreans….. Yeah, wait while I check if I’m shaking in my boots… Weirdly I’m not.
        Who in hell is going to put us in labor camps? Americans can’t do it, and America can’t only be conquered by America.
        You’ve been watching too many movies and have no idea how large this land is, not in fact.
        Put out the fire in your hair and get a grip. It’s going to get bad, but it’s strictly entre-nous. okay?
        If we stop feeding the world, they’ll have trouble enough.

        1. I’m just trying to figure out how what NK is going to use for combat rations, given they can’t even feed peacetime troops.

              1. Well there are certain sections of New York, Major, that I wouldn’t advise you to invade…

                1. Newark. My husband used to fantasize about Russian tanks rolling into Newark and ending up on blocks.

            1. The South Korean defense plan is to have a series of ramen and BBQ shacks along the Nork’s axes of advance, a few hundred yards away from the road with large fans directing the kitchen exhaust towards the road. By the time they get to Seoul the North Korean army will consist of a dozen political officers grimly keeping their eyes straight ahead lest they become tempted.

              1. Honestly, may be a sensible plan, to counter a NORK invasion of South Korea. I talked about this with some very worldly South Korean friends, when I had a part-time outside job at Korea Broadcasting, working to edit and coach the multi-lingual Koreans doing the simulcast of the evening broadcast news. We didn’t think that any invading NORK force could have made it past the first couple of fully-stocked grocery stores in their path, let alone the shops along Electronic Row in Seoul…

                1. I saw a video of a North Korean soldier who defected to the South opening a care package from an American Airman. She was reduced to tears not only by the quantity and quality of the foods in the box, but that some random American would send something like that to someone she didn’t even know.

                  1. Mmm. That might actually work here, should the Chinese be foolish enough to invade. “Hey, boys, we can kill you in increasingly creative and horrible ways, or you can come to our side and we’ll feed you.”

                    If the reports from the skirmishes with India are remotely true, they ain’t gonna exactly be THRILLED to be sent over here to die, either.

                    1. “You’re in America now,” I said. “Our idea of diplomacy is showing up with a gun in one hand and a sandwich in the other and asking which you’d prefer.”

                    2. We do have a major carp problem in the US, and, unlike China, you can actually safely eat fish pulled out of note water ways. I know from personal experience that carp toe is *fantastic* stuff, and I have heard that Chinese cuisine has some fantastic things you can do with the fish :yum:

                2. There was a colonel who defected from North Korea.

                  What instigated was the time at sea where his radio picked up a comedy depicting two young women fighting over a parking space.

                  Whatever he told himself about comic exaggeration, he finally could not fight off the conclusion that South Korea had to have so many cars that it was a problem finding a place to put them all.

            2. *cackles* thanks to “just in time” inventory, good luck to them FINDING the food supply. Grocery stores don’t exactly have much beyond a day or three on hand…and not in amounts of use to an army.

              All the other places that hold the food are, I suspect (not being an expert in shipping logistics) scattered. To put it mildly…

        2. Hum,hum, hum, hum hum. AZ seems a bit too sure but, in my opinion Sarah, not an impossibility.

          Say, for instance, democrats might even get our military to implement a Standdown for all branches wherein it’s explained to all service personnel that 6 January was the lowest point in our history and each and every solider, sailor, etc., must fight against and report extremism, and BLM good, Republicans bad!

          Hey I know that could never happen but just sayin’ (Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.).

          Also the military and the alphabet agencies are vigorously recruiting the ‘Woke’, folks likely to support ‘social justice’, whatever that means at the time, but not the Constitution and rule of law.

          OK, say some attack the razor wire protected citadel from which our beloved masters rule, or say some just general strike, no food, etc. delivered to the masters. I kind of suspect China and others (Shucky darn Canada already offered so send troops here.) will politely offer to send military aid to help Sleazy Joe save the Republic. I think Sleazy would graciously accept said aid in a New York minute.

          Another scenario; if a civil war Americans fighting Americans in the streets, hence our country dangerously weakened, think China, et al are gonna just sit back and watch? I think it’s rather more likely that the et als and China would rush boots on the ground, fight us and each other seeing who can grab what American booty to take home.

          1. Another scenario; if a civil war Americans fighting Americans in the streets, hence our country dangerously weakened, think China, et al are gonna just sit back and watch? I think it’s rather more likely that the et als and China would rush boots on the ground, fight us and each other seeing who can grab what American booty to take home.

            The only way they can get here is if they have extensive local support to get into the country. The US is the only country with expeditionary capability; a couple others sort of have it as long as the US is supporting them. Chyna doesn’t even have enough to pose a threat to Taiwan yet. And you can’t just load troops into a container ship and expect them to be combat capable on the other side.

            Given recent news the logical “beachhead” would be Canada. And that just gets them on the same continent. Then they have to deal with moving into a population that has been fantasizing about shooting blue helmets for decades.

            1. “The only way they can get here is if they have extensive local support to get into the country.”

              Not necessarily true if our country is in chaos.

              1. That doesn’t mean they can handle logistics, chaos or no. How are they going to feed themselves? Fuel their equipment? Get from point A to point B without all the pissed off locals noticing and shooting them all? THAT is what they mean “can’t do it without significant local support.” Which they won’t have. Because while a number of our so-called elites might be in the various hostile powers’ pockets…they don’t control the people who grow the food/make the fuel/ship the stuff. And a whole lot of those? Not gonna be cooperative.

                1. Also just getting off the ship. And then recovering from the journey. In WWII armies could be moved around with ocean liners. We don’t have those now.

                  It gets worse with planes.

              2. I’m not talking about them getting in against defenses. I mean them getting in at all.

                You don’t just move the troop icon from one part of the map to the other and call it a day. And Chyna doesn’t have any of the equipment that allows landing without support from shore.

                1. On the other hand Iran has been positioning Hezbollah operatives in the USA by getting them in through the southern border for years.

                  1. Is it bad that I kind of hope they try something, using their usual lousy targeting?

                    The reaction from you guys would be… epic.

                  2. There’s a difference between a few scumbag terrorists and an army that can conquer and hold territory.

                    The United States was invaded twice. We made both enemies regret it.

            2. Has Blaine, WA become the next Fulda Gap? I’m ready. For something. 🙂

            3. China has more expeditionary capability than people think, or than they want people to think they have. Not enough to invade something the size of the US, certainly. But, they’ve also got an extensive network of state-owned businesses and industries that are heavily involved in logistics around the world. Many of which are closer to home than we might like.

              1. There’s more to expiditionary capability than simple logistics. China would need a large port in the US, which pretty much leaves them with Seattle, Portland, Oakland, LA, or San Diego. The latter is chock full of US military who aren’t going to be terribly keen on the Chinese just waltzing in. LA is a non-starter since one of the first things that will go in the Boog is the aqueducts supplying LA. That area has around 40 times as many people as the natural environment can support, it will be a humanitarian disaster of historic proportions. There’s no way you’re basing a significant combat force out of there. Oakland requires navigating San Francisco Bay, which has plenty of opportunities for a small force to completely block the channel. Similar problems exist for Portland and Seattle. While Puget Sound is easier to navigate than the Columbia River or San Francisco Bay, there’s a large Navy presence and Seattle isn’t terrible convenient to the rest of the country. You’re only a dozen or so miles west of significant mountains and a few hundred miles north of a range that’s almost as bad. It wouldn’t take much black powder to cut off any force from their base of supply.

                1. Not to mention, LA is full of black people, and China is notoriously and openly racist. Even if most of the black folks in LA aren’t aware of this, they would soon become so, and many of them are heavily armed and not shy about using their weapons.

                  Not to mention I don’t think the cartels operating in LA would look kindly upon China disrupting their business.

                  And the fact that there’s all those heavily armed Korean small business owners who already proved their mettle during the King riots 😀

                    1. Oooh yeah.

                      Not to mention, last I heard, the LAPD is still one of the most heavily-armed (in terms of military style Big Stuff) departments in the country…

                    2. Heh. And come to think of it, I’d bet most special effects companies out there have an astonishing amount of explosive things in stock…not to mention the know-how to make it hurt. (Because you have to know how to make it hurt, to AVOID making it hurt in special effects shots)

                  1. I’m ashamed to admit that I completely forgot about Roof Koreans. On the other hand, they’ll probably be one of the first to evacuate when the aqueducts go boom.

                    1. Heck, they’ll probably be first in line to make the aqueducts go boom, and then booby trap the roads out of the city on their way out. Because they are gonna be PISSED about having to abandon those businesses they worked so hard to build.

                      (But also, LA is an object lesson as to why that part of the world WAS NOT DESIGNED to support that many people…)

                2. Heck. Blocking the Columbia Channel is nothing, even a mountain can do it (Helen in ’80).

                  It isn’t trivial to move across the Oregon Coast Range, let alone the Cascades. Think about it. There are only four passes over the coast range, and only 5 across the Cascades in Oregon. Washington is worse. Just saying …

                  1. And after the Cascades come the Rockies. Or you have to go around them. And not much in the way of water…anywhere, really…

                    1. Rockies. Tetons. Sierras. Desert. Of the first 3 only one or two ways across for each state found, if that. (Tetons one goes around, not up and over.)

                      There is a lot of nothing between Cascades and Rockies/Tetons. Sorry Idaho. But there is a reason I 84 is 80 MPH … Blow a bridge or two on I-84/20/26/30 … ALL the same road FYI, and it isn’t trivial to get across the high plateau sagebrush desert. Doable. Pioneers did it in covered wagons pulled by oxen or horse. But those canyons that are encountered aren’t trivial or quick to navigate.

                      They may think they are invading from the west coast. Good luck, they’ll need it.

                    2. ::cackles:: And if they invade from the East coast–and somehow survive New Jersey. (Or Florida. Or the Southeast. Or the SOUTH, period) they have the Big Empty of the Plains…and THEN the Rockies. And the Tetons. And the deserts. And then the Cascades. And then…

                      I knew an exchange student from China in my university days. I figured it was down to them not being able to travel freely within their own huge country, but…she was flabbergasted by the size of the US. (And she came to WYOMING for school, so she saw a goodly chunk of that whole lotta nothing whatever direction she came from.)

                      Yep. Now try walking across it.

                    3. Yep. Now try walking across it.


                      I may think driving 80 MPH is too fast. Walking is too slow.

                    4. Even just in the Puget Sound area, blow a couple bridges and you can’t get from north to south anymore to be able to get at the pass entrances.

                    5. That’s daily life around here. If the drawbridges are actually working, if the floating bridges haven’t sunk….

                    6. The SHTF/Big One emergency route to get from the house to the Mason County property without using any freeways or ferries relies crossing the Nisqually River* on one of only two non-freeway bridges.

                      * (That’s the river between Tacoma and Olympia, for the non-WA people.)

                    7. Oh, dude, yeah.

                      I’m shaking my head right now, trying to think of something other than “I’m praying I get enough advance notice to get out before the crowd,” but I can’t think of anything.

                      I’m studying up all the routes across the Cascades, with an eye to hiking many of them. This is for fun, and escape plans.

                    8. That’s why I never seriously looked for property in Eastern WA, unless I were to decide to just outright move there permanently. Because I don’t really want to be one of several hundred thousand people simultaneously trying to flee over one of four passes, potentially in the middle of winter. That sounds like a good way to end up dead in a ditch.

                    9. I think your wisdom is going to pay off big for you sooner rather than later.

                    10. Well, I hope not, if you know what I mean, but also in the interim a 90-minute drive to the vacation cabin is a lot more palatable than a 6-hour drive.

            4. Oooh, ooh, how about cruise ships?

              “Economic support” via a flock of bought-up cruise ships, which are allowed to dockand then turn out to be full of INVADING FORCES!

              It was all part of their master plot, that’s why the cruise ships were shut down with COVID, muwahahhaha!

              1. From what I understand cruise ships are Not Fun in the open ocean. Which feeds back into “and then what do your troops do once they get there?”.

              2. LOL. That miiiight work…once. After that, it would be pretty hilarious is a horrific-train-wreck/slasher movie kind of way to see what creative defenders do to any cruise ships attempting to dock!

              3. Rebecca Meluch’s Merrimack series has a bunch of Roman “tourists” being the invading force. Given how much Canadian real estate is already owned by China…

                China does this thing where they want their military prowess to be respected at the SAME TIME as they want to underplay that prowess so they can pretend to not be a threat/threatening. It’s interesting to watch which people believe which version of PRC lies (it’s all lies. Pretty sure they don’t know what their actual capabilities are. Same issue as the Soviets; they all lie to supervisors and up it goes.)

                1. I think most of that real estate is a way for individual wealthy Chinese to get some of their wealth out of the reach of the CCP.

                  The thing to remember about the PLA is that they haven’t fought a real war since they marched 10 miles into Vietnam and stopped. They’re two generations removed from actual combat.

                  1. Yeah, I keep seeing journalists (alas, of the “conservative” bent–they are not immune to the fearmongering bent) howling about how Xi has BILLIONS, I tell you, BILLIONS of possible footsoldiers at his beck and call. And I’m over here going “But not one word about how those billions are going to be moved about, trained and–oh yeah, are they even fit for anything, or are they half-starved peasants.” Sure, the numbers are indeed overwhelming…and likewise overwhelming to move…well, anywhere in any kind fashion that would be of use to the would-be conqueror. They can’t feed their population NOW, how are they supposed to feed that population as a moving army…? Keep them supplied with weapons…? Hell, even all pointed in the correct directions?

                    Sure, it doesn’t mean that Winnie-the-Pooh wouldn’t make life hellish somewhere at some point, outside of China…but given the few reports I’ve seen trickling out of the border skirmish with India…I am skeptical. That One Child policy is proving to have soooooo many unforeseen* consequences.

                    (*But only unforseen by those with not even a nodding acquaintance with reality and How Things Work.)

                    1. The PLA is a potent threat…to any place it can walk.

                      About a year ago my boss’ boss’ boss gave us a talk about how we need to become more flexible in our approach to requirements so we can get ships out faster. As part of it he showed us a PLAN motivational video on YouTube. A lot of the video focused on flight ops on their new carrier. What struck me as someone who has seen real flight ops is how…off it looked. It was like watching kids mimic their parents. They were going through the motions without the understanding that carries you through the situations that aren’t exactly like the book.

              4. Honestly, last I heard, China was grinding up all the furloughed cruise ships to make railroads.

                Steel just rusts when you leave it in the ocean.

      2. First they have to get here. Then they have to get here in numbers that mater. A few thousand or a few 100k ain’t going to hack it. None of them have the capability for projecting power. They just don’t have it.

        Then they have to get their supplies here. (They cannot use ours, our bullets don’t fit their guns.)
        Where are they going to land, how are they going to have a beach head? THEN what are they going to do??? They make a beach head in Texas, most likely a lot of Texians are going to just go down there for some long range target practice. Others are going to be a little more active. Us old farts can’t be to active but long range shooting, I could use some practice and that would be good practice. They going to waste big guns on us scattered shooters or send patrols out to get us??? I don’t think so. BTW I will NOT be shooting troops, I will be shooting Trucks and stuff, much easier to hit and hurts them a lot more. When they come out, then they are really in trouble. How long will their trucks keep rolling. No trucks no movement.
        And ALL this without the Army or Air Force getting involved. The Navy would also have to ignore the landing fleet and LET them land and continue to let supplies be landed. Without the Military involved just how many troops are they going to need to not only take but HOLD Texas???? Does even China have enough PLA troops to do that, plus MOVE them here???? Also they must move them here FASTER then they are being killed.

        YOU need to THINK about these things before you worry to much about them. Now if China starts taking over Mexico and replacing Mexicans with Chinese. Might be time to help out Mexico and put a stop to such things but baring that not much to worry about.

        1. A rifle behind every blade of grass and all that, even if Yamamoto didn’t really say it.

        2. No, we are doomy doom doomed.

          Andorra, Monaco and Lichtenstein could roll over us easy.

          Conquering and occupying the third largest population in the world is totally what various nations have trained and equipped their militaries to do. They absolutely have developed the leadership to pull that off.

          In all seriousness and charity…

          If they had reliably suborned the US military, that would be a good start. And while American defense communities are much too chummy with the foreigners, they don’t seem to be reliably suborned.

          As the guy who says we should exterminate the Canadians as a precaution, current regime there really is of dubious reliability, and could have something in the works with China. Mexico is likewise concerning.

          Thing is, I’m not sure Canada and Mexico run to the necessary level of agricultural surpluses. Especially not now.

          You need food and equipment in place for a time to prep your troops. This is expensive, and I’m not persuaded Canada/Mexico + international shippers really have what it takes.

          Could it be done with the US military, refurbished US military stockpiles, Canada, Mexico, and the overseas folks working together? I absolutely don’t have the background to study the question properly.

          1. Andorra, Monaco and Lichtenstein could roll over us easy.

            I’m more worried about the Duchy of Grand Fenwick.

        3. Exactly right. We are a long way from these countries. They don’t have lift capacity.
          Nuclear weapons are a much greater concern . We need to upgrade ours s add some much more powerful hydrogen bombs to counter Russia’s stated pursuit of costal sterilizing monster bombs . Our coastal populations hostage, our move to smaller pinpoint weapons leaves us no equivalent response.
          Still, our greatest risk is the demarxist party here in the US.

        4. Hah. Not to mention I’m pretty sure the cartels in Mexico would have something to say about a Chinese invasion. (Hey, they might finally be good for something other than murdering their own people! And I’m not sure Chinese invaders would be smart enough to form an alliance with the cartels…but you never know.)

              1. Was pointing to the smart enough to ally with the cartels thing.

                Then there’s the issue of “which cartel”, if they were smart enough to try to BUY an alliance……

                1. Yes, got it mixed up with the LA comment above.

                  But yeah, enough money…Ick. Speaking of things that need to be wiped off the planet asap, the cartels really ought to be VERY HIGH on the list. Very high. For the many of the same reasons the Aztecs/Mayans needed to be wiped off the planet, and in fact the Spaniards probably did the world a favor on that front…

              1. And that worked out SO WELL for them, they cooperated SO WELL that they WON THE WAR…oh, wait, no they didn’t. Emphatically did not.

                Dude, SERIOUSLY. Get a reality check.

              2. *eyebrow raise*
                You seriously cannot see the difference between a military alliance where you’re waaaaay apart, and dragging those dirty (whatever slur) right through the middle of YOUR turf?

                That’s before the issue of Ehrenarier and that even the American Southerners considered the Japanese “white.”

                1. I think it’s safe to say that this guy is only here to try and get us all to take the black pill, with zero regards to either reality or the nature of most of the folks here.

                  Also, he’s getting boring.

                  1. DEFINITELY. He’s a white supremacist — a real one — telling us to abandon all hope.
                    Look, I’ll ban him when I am back home. Meawhile feel free to bat around

        5. Right Mexico being taken over by its criminal elements and sold down the river to Chyna, or if our neighbors to the North lose it totally and invite Chynese in for maneuvers then maybe (though We know how Red Dawn ends 🙂 ). But without it heck no, particularly if there is even token US military opposition. They have IL-76 and Y-20, but ranges are 4000 and 7000 NM but you need 9-10K so airhead is likely out unless we’re like in Kurt Schlichter’s universe. As noted they have no blue ocean transport, and no logistics hardware unless they appropriate Container ships, and after the initial drops Virginia and LA class subs would make mincemeat of those. They’re doing far better buying politicians although they’re likely regretting buying Larry, Moe, Curly, and Shemp
          Along with the Marx Brothers (Groucho et alia).

        1. I do wonder if they’re calling it “Mormon Switzerland” because the REASON no one has tried to invade Switzerland in forever (or, at least, before they got their mitts on all the various shady peoples’ money, and are holding it hostage, heh) is because they are heavily armed. 😀

          One thing Mormons are NOT is pacifists… (Something the Fallout games surprisingly got right.)

          1. Well some of the leftwing Mormons are but I don’t usually talk to them so …

              1. Ugh. HIM. Alas, barring some really, really egregious crap, being a RINO does not preclude one being a “good Mormon.” (Well. Lying isn’t okay. But it won’t get you excommunicated, heh.) Since the qualifications for being a good Mormon tend to deal solely with the spiritual side of things, and only touch on temporal stuff insofar as major sins are concerned… Mittens throwing in openly with the abortion crowd would disqualify him, but just being a whiny, dying-fish-flopping politician does not.

                Or if it does, it’s on the level of “between him and God” rather than “between him and his bishop and God.”

                heh. Although there is a lady in my ward who has started SO MANY FEUDS because she is of the firm opinion that the church leaders should add “Are you a republican?” to all the temple recommend interview question lists, and if the answer is ‘no’ it should be automatic excommunication. She will NOT get it through her head that the general policy of the church is politics-neutral, barring things that involve serious sin (but they still aren’t gonna tell you you can’t vote for dude that supports abortion. They aren’t gonna tell you who/what to vote for, period. I can’t tell you how many people are upset about the fact that one of the apostles and his family allegedly supported Biden. Which is their right, to vote how they please–though I rather think that as he, in particular, grew up in East Germany, he really ought to know better, but…)

                I hope Utah is learning it’s lesson (again) about “Why you don’t vote for someone (*cough* Mittens *cough*) just because he shares your religion…

                1. Ugh that’s just awful. I can get not liking the democrats but that’s taking it way too far.

                  1. Yeah, she’s…difficult. But then, we have quite a few, of varying strips of “difficult” in my tiny little ward, lol.

                    Me, I’m probably going back to driving 3 hours to go to the “local” mid-singles ward, heh. (Though it’s in Colorado, and Colorado is still insane…)

            1. “More than liberals and fishermen here.”

              Need to sight in the Savage, but have a bunch of .30-’06, much of which isn;t suitable for deer.

              BTW, was that a black-pill bot?

              1. Well, and as ILOH likes to point out from time to time…look at how long we’ve been bogged down in Afghanistan. 2-plus decades. And that’s against MAYBE a few thousand dudes with crappy weapons.

                Multiply that into a few MILLION dudes with not crappy weapons, and a whole lot more countryside…just getting to the bits where the urban warfare happens (or, if they land in the urbs, getting OUT and into said countryside) wouldn’t be pretty.

                And we’ve got much better farmland than the sandbox does, overall…

                1. And the Soviets were bogged down and losing there from 1979-1989. And Russia is still somewhat bogged down in Chechnya.

                  1. And the British Empire in the mid-to-late 1800s before that.

                    There’s a reason that area is known as the “death of empires.”

                    1. The only time in my life I heard my maternal grandfather curse was when I overheard him discussing Afghanistan with my father. He, my grandfather, was an officer in the Frontier Force and spent 1919 running around in the mountains, He said it was worse than WWI, and since he went through France 1914, Gallipoli,Salonica, and Palestine is saying something. I’m fairly sure that what made him leave the Army in 1922, that, Irish Independence, and the buyout anyway.

                    2. The British didn’t get bogged down, they didn’t want the place. The last thing either the British or Russian Empires wanted was a shared border, especially in a place as poorly surveyed (and surveyable) as Afghanistan. That’s why Afghanistan has that dangly bit pointing to the east. Both sides just stayed involved enough to make sure the other side didn’t take over. The “graveyard of empires” thing was created as an excuse to explain to the British public why the glorious British Army wasn’t stomping all over those heathens. The reality is that the region we call Afghanistan was conquered by a dozen or so empires going back to the Persian Empire. There were around 8 Alexandrias in the area when the Macedonian was done with the place.

                    3. They did suffer a major defeat at Kandahar during that period, though. (I only know this, because a neighbor had a father or grandfather who had been in the British Navy, and they apparently name ships after defeats as well as victories, and so he’d served on the HMS Kandahar, and the neighbor’s little boy had also been named Kandahar in honor of relative’s service, poor kid)

                    4. “And when you’re left bloody and dying on the Afghani plains,
                      Jest roll to yer rifle and blow out yer brains,
                      Before the women and children cut up what remains.
                      And go to yer god like a soldier,
                      Soldier of the queen!”

                    5. The British wanted to keep the Russians out and the Pathans in. The vast majority of the fighting was punitive expeditions against tribes who came over the border.

                      The British lost in the first Afghan War back in 1831, rather disastrously. They did much better in the subsequent ones. They won the battle of Kandahar in the second afghan war in1880 rather decisively after Robert’s March from Kabul, which followed the British loss at “Maiwand, My God, Maiwand,” which was where Doctor Watson was wounded. One of my great grandfathers fought at Kandahar in the old 4th Gurkha Rifles and my grandfather’s regiment the. 52nd Sikhs, (2nd FF) which was in typical British fashion made up mostly of Dogras, fought there also but before his time.

                      We have diaries from both of them, neither had much good to say about the place. The best was my grandfather commenting that things are hard on the frontier. You have to keep in mind that the Pathans wiped their bums with sharp stones and wore flowers behind their ears. The march of the old 40th Pathans, which was a fine fighting regiment, translate as “there’s a boy across the river with a bottom like a peach but alas I cannot swim.

            1. I kinda like the KSG conceptually (I don’t own one yet). I like the idea of a short weapon that won’t catch on furniture or doorways. Same for the RDB.

              1. Most of the Kel Tec bullpup 12 ga shotguns seem to be running a bit over a $1000. Probably the best thing for home defense; although Fish and Wildlife would probably have a heart attack if you tried using these for duck hunting (before their eyes lit up over the number of rounds held violation.) I spotted the Diablo double barrel 12 ga pistol which is nice (a pair are nicer.) The pistols are too slow for a gang invasion situation.

                1. There is a point someone brought up last year during the initial buying panic: while a semiauto shotgun may be more reliable in theory, if you have to hand a shotgun who isn’t familiar with how much you have to abuse them when racking the pump action has a higher chance of short stroking.

                  1. a semiauto shotgun may be more reliable in theory

                    I’m having trouble parsing your statement. Either the caffeine hasn’t kicked in or there’s a glitch.

                    I *think* what you meant was “a *pump* shotgun may be more reliable in theory, but”

                    So working on that, a semi-auto could be more suitable for a newbie, in that there’s no chance of short-stroking the beast. (I do recall somebody having trouble with his shotgun at Gunsite. Somehow, he got a round in backwards with the obvious failure to feed. It was in another class, so I’m going from a distant memory of his verbal description.)

                    OTOH, if the closest to fool-proof is called for, the double might be the trick. Not good if you have three targets, though.

                    1. I accidentally the sentence…..

                      But you got the rough meaning. A pump introduces extra actions that a newbie (or someone with arm strength issues) may have difficulties with, expecially under duress.

                      And like everything else guns, semiauto shotguns are more reliable than they used to be. So long as you aren’t trying to run a mouse fart birdshot load at the same time as 00000000 mega-buck.

                    2. Of course in the modern context the correct answer may just be “hand them an AR”. Because ARs are damn good at being easy to use and light enough to be used by people lacking in the Gorilla Nature.

                      (see the case a year or two ago of a pregnant woman defending her husband and kids with one)

            2. I’m told the best bang for buck is a used Remington 870 Wingmaster.

              Basically, you get the gun cheap, and swap the barrel to a shorter on and add a magazine extension.

              Also. I’ve read for home defense, that low recoil, played #1 Buck is more effective than 00 buck. Apparently it meets the penetration depth of plated, has a lot more pellets per shell, and the shells are shorter so you have more capacity for the same magazine length.

        2. Oregon and Oklahoma, from the labels, sound like the best chances. Maybe also Hawaii, now that I realize the label isn’t necessarily talking about a base with nukes ready if it is in danger of being overrun.

        3. I got a pretty good laugh out of this. I’m sitting here somewhere between “pissed ‘Muricans with shotguns” and “Hey, where is everyone?” My deer hunting shotgun is not even my most effective anti-personnel weapon, but it would certainly do in a pinch.

          1. I dare you move a tank through this says ‘allo.
            Hell, our stoner libertarian corps might be able to take out the Russians.
            Pot heads versus drunkards. Go.

            1. Tanks work well in some situations; others can leave them very vulnerable. A good tank commander knows the difference. Country strewn with large boulders, karst topography, very steep mountain sides with little level ground, heavily forested country, country with a lot of bogs, or very deep muddy soil are bad places for tanks.

          2. I’m in the “lots of land to cover and pissed off ‘murricans with guns”, digital section.
            (Seriously, I adore Iowa’s road system. It’s a giant graph paper…..)

          3. One of my favorite local tales is about the POW camp they had up in a tiny logging town not far from where I live (which is in “I dare you to move a tank through this” and not all that far from “Pissed ‘Murricans with Shotguns”). The Italian soldiers LOVED it, made friends with the locals, got jobs in the forest, made cool stuff they sold, and some allegedly even came back–at least to the States–after the war. The German captives (rumor has it they were some of the more hardcore types, including a few SS) were less, ahem, gregarious. To the point that a couple of the supposedly-SS dudes decided they were gonna escape. They got thirty miles to the “local” rodeo grounds, and there they were found, sitting on the bleachers and waiting for the authorities. See, they’d gotten through thirty miles of trackless nothing to the next nearest town, and discovered that the NEXT nearest towns were either 60 miles of trackless nothing in one direction, or 90 miles of trackless nothing in the other. (With a smattering of other very tiny towns maybe in between, but still with a whole lotta trackless nothing surrounding them.) And no water and no food to be found anywhere BUT the towns.

            And it was 400 some miles to Denver. Over trackless nothing.

            There’s a reason they a.) posted a POW camp out in this area, and b.) didn’t bother with a ton of security. There really wasn’t any point.

            1. We have all the advantages the Russia has with Siberia, but without the disadvantages.

              Even if you heat it up Siberia is worthless. Outside one or two small patches we can still use that trackless waste if we want to.

              1. True. Although unless very desperate, no one wants to try large-scale farming out here. (Small scale is headache enough, because the soils are crap. That, and the terrain is why it’s mostly cows out here…)

              2. (Although mind you, I’m referring to my state. You don’t have to go very far south (Colorado) OR west (Utah) to get to some very fine farming land indeed.)

            2. Italians generally seem to have enjoyed POW camp life in America. I mean, we fed ’em good, we encouraged art, they got access to Catholic chapels and chaplains, we usually let them do gardening and other activities… “Cruddy Nissen huts” or “cruddy shacks” were not so great in the winter, but usually things were okay.

            3. Camp Atterbury, Indiana? We camped there last year. And yes, some of the Italians came back, married American girls and settled down to produce bambinos and businesses.
              No, can’t have been Atterbury, but they had Italians and later Germans and no escapes. The Italians were allowed to build a tiny, exquisite chapel from “leftover,” building materials.
              It’s now a National Guard camp.

              1. Nah. Ryan’s Park, Wyoming.

                So take the emptiness of large parts of Idaho, and add more trees, mountains, snow, and even pissier bears, cougars, and MOOSE. 😀

        4. Because I set them on the counter when I was eating pancakes for breakfast before I stuck them in my shirt pocket. Cleaning caramelized sugar off our guns is a routine problem for New England gun owners.

            1. I have a co-worker from Astoria who has enough freedom planters that two large safes aren’t enough.

              And I’m from the Applegate.

              1. I’m in flyover land, where the Modoc Indian war isn’t necessarily over. Weekend nights can be interesting, and I suspect if any of last year’s arsonists got caught, they’d never be found. Trying to burn out towns that used to be reservation is a Really Bad Idea, Dude.

        5. “So hot it almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter….” ROTFLMAO…

        6. How about, “You thought the Mujahedeen were tough, wait ’till you get on the wrong side of a Moonshine clan!”

  1. I wish I could figure out some way to create a pun where Falchi and his obsession with masks can be tied into Imelda Marcos and her obsession with shoes…whole closets full of masks in their original packaging…

      1. Make sure Fauci is wearing a brown shirt. Weefreeirish might know why a leinte gorma would work too.

      2. Damn, I was thinking of head on a pike. But I’m old-fashioned that way.

        FWIW, folks are noting that Fauci seems to be getting hypovehiculated, especially after the Gain-of-function releases.

        1. Works okay 2257, too.

          Mr. Morden: “What do you want?”

          Vir: “I’d like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I would look up at your lifeless eyes and wave like this.” [makes little finger-flip wave]

          1. Vir was probably my favorite character in that show. Because of that line, and also Abrahamo Lincolni.

            And, as is the way of the Shadows…he did in fact get what he wanted. Though I’m sure Mr. Morden wasn’t thrilled about that part…

            1. Everyone who was asked that question got what they asked for.

              Vir was really about the only one who enjoyed getting it, though.

              1. Actually, Vir was very lucky he DIDN’T get exactly what he asked for. His exact words were “I would like to live *JUST* long enough.” Remember what almost happened to the planet he was standing on right after he got to do his little wave?

        1. The carpet thing is actually a really good use for those “I have scrubbed it 30 times, this thing still smells like dog…stuff” rugs.

          We have two under the kids’ swing set.

    1. Imelda grew up dirt poor and barefoot. Maybe Fauci was teased too much for his ugly mug too many times? Especially since he takes the mask off when cameras aren’t rolling…

      1. Imelda Marcos also got a reputation as someone who liked shoes, which caused people to give her shoes as a gift. And since her husband was powerful, a lot of people gave her gifts.

      2. Or, a fear that if Fauci’s mouth is exposed, people will stuff things into it…
        (He was one of the biggest “we’ll find a vaccine Any Day Now!” people when HIV/AIDS first showed up.)

        1. WHY has nobody asked Fauci: “WHERE is that AIDS vaccine you promised 35 years ago?”

      3. Also, shoe manufacturing is/was a thing in the Philippines. So every shop would send her shoes so they could advertise, “As worn by the First Lady”.

  2. I see red every time the term “our governing elites” is used. The last time I read the constitution I didn’t see a provision for monarchs or nobility. The constitution requires people elected to represent people.

    1. Never call them “governing.” Call them “attempted-controlling,” or “authoritarian.” And “elite” isn’t accurate either. Perhaps “nomenklatura.” For those who are familiar with the term it will be clearly accurate. For those who aren’t and look it up, perhaps the scales will fall from their eyes.

        1. As is “puerile panjandrum”.

          Or you could call the more educated variety a modern major-general.

          Or, if you want to flex, call them the Malebolge Destined.

        2. Yeah, but when I try to say it it’s like Ash trying to say “Klaatu, Barada, Nikto…” O_o;;

          1. “Did you say the words?”

            “Well, OK, I might not have gotten every little syllable exactly right but, basically, I said ’em.”

            “Stranger, you have doomed us all!”

      1. Nomenklatura is nice. On some blog someone coined brahmandarin a portmanteau of brahmin and mandarin really describes how they think of themselves.

    2. The phrase “those in need of a noose” is so much more appropriate.

  3. Chuck the Cuck and Nancy Palsi, Camel Toe, and Fascist Fauci.

    I’ve called the NJ governor der Gauleiter since the beginning and give the finger to every flipping mask sign, executive order, and “we’re all in this together” lie. The wife laughs at that and still lets me play hopscotch on the six foot apart stickers. She won’t let me give the fascist salute of goos step around though. I was able to sing my Bucktooth McMurphy song until she discovered it was set to the Horst Wessel lied, I’m still annoyed at #1 son for letting that cat out of the bag.

    Phil Murphy’s teeth, illegal orders signing

  4. I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. I was reminded of it looking at some FB memories. It’s end of semester grading season and somebody had posted a cartoon on my wall where a student asks repetitive questions about how they can improve their grade. Anyway, a college friend who’s also an academic commented that she loved it and would like to use it but she was afraid that she’d be reported for microaggressions.

    Reading that comment again, along with this post made me realize that we are (or I am for sure) guilty of self-censorship in the name of not only protecting jobs (important and for many of us absolutely necessary), but also in the name of not making waves. Not only do we need to avoid using their terms and create our own, we need to go out into the world (in person, in writing, however) and USE those terms and use them consistently.

    To that end I propose:
    – COVID-19 become Wuhan Flu (yes, here we say that. But I’m thinking along the lines of Lyme disease, Legionaire’s disease, etc. Name it in such a way that can’t really be challenged easily and use the term consistently).

    – Critical Race Theory becomes race based actions. As in “Well, the race based activity that is currently taught in schools…” When challenged or questioned, then answer with “Critical Race Theory…you know, that theory that holds that all decisions and actions are based on the race of the actor.”

    – microagression or triggered become “tears of a clown.”

    – liberal voter becomes “useful idiot”

    I’ll think some more on this today and see what else I can come up with. I am enjoying this exercise! 😀

      1. That works too. But I like to try to think up terms that are actually descriptive of the twaddle. That allows me to tie them up in knots and eventually force them to see the contradictions. Doesn’t mean they’ll give up on it, but does mean that I’ve at least planted a seed of doubt AND let them know that really, truly, not everybody agrees.

    1. I like the Race Based Actions term a lot. It cuts to the heart of “Critical Race Theory” in a way that can’t be refuted without also rejecting it’s prescriptions.

      1. Well, yeah. But we’re in a war. We can’t sit back and expect to win it without getting wounded. If more people start using the proper terms, the woke mob realizes that they are a minority. And, obviously, everybody has to consider their own cost/benefit situation before acting in any one particular way.

        1. Absolutely correct. Just realize that you won’t be able to protect anything of your present life.

          And if you’re going to have your life ruined anyway, might as well make it count.

    2. My “N Lecture” (the origin and history of the “N word”) served this purpose for many years. (In 2007 my eastern european students in Lithuana ROARED with laughter!) But in 2008 the complaints began. I retired. Even my boss was unable to use “the designation that must not be uttered” during my disciplinary hearing. The power point included a TV show clip illustrating this exact disorder.

      In today’s inStitutIOns of HIghER LeARniNg there would be an urgent call to campus security to drag me off the stage before I had finished the lecture; fired the next day. I can’t even write the word here….. Censorbots.

      1. My first “n-conversation” was with a bunch of black guys in the Army. We laughed and laughed and laughed.

      2. The online censors at WP won’t let you write the word “n̰͒ǐ̡g̘͖g̉͘e͖͚r̄̃” without them exploding into brain-melting rage and shrieking? Diacritics to the rescue!

        Honestly, as long as “whitey,” “cracker,” “redneck,” “honkey,” et alia are in general circulation, I see no inherent reason why we shouldn’t stroll around all day with random exclamations of, “Yo, you see that n̰͒ǐ̡g̘͖g̉͘e͖͚r̄̃?” Or perhaps, “My n̰͒ǐ̡g̘͖g̉͘e͖͚r̄̃, what you been?”

        The whole scene with making a simple word taboo is ridiculous, absurd, offensive, and anti-human. :/

        1. It’s a part of the grammar in Black English. Even when it’s used as an epithet, what message does it really send? That the speaker doesn’t care for Blacks and that the recipient is Black? I would hope the latter isn’t a surprise and struggle to see how the former is a problem for anyone but the speaker. It’s not like the Democrat South where Blacks were seen as slightly less valuable than livestock and anyone who did go on trial for murdering them would not only be acquitted, the judge would likely buy them a beer to apologize for the inconvenience.

      1. I thought MMT was Multiple Mirror Telescope.

        An experimental telescope run by the UofA in the Santa Rita mountains.

              1. Are you saying Beorn’s Market habits were the opposite of our Orvan?

      1. Lung Pow Sicken, WuFlu, WuhanRS (respiratory syndrome, just SARS and MERS). WuFlu, or with a select group, Winnie The Flu.

          1. I got asked last year by a college acquaintance if I was being serious (when I used that phrase in an IG Story) because there was so much anti-Asian racisms happening. I nivir responded.

          2. I have been officially informed I may no longer call it Kung Flu at work. Well, they pay me, so they get to make the rules at work.

            I’m not calling It Kung Flu anymore. But there are so many other options!

      1. That happened about ten years ago. It’s just that the jihad finally converted the ruling class away from the old civic religion.

        1. Marxism has always been a religion. The only difference is that the current version has melded the Nation of Islam’s “white people are the devil” to it and incorporated it into their sermons.

    3. I thought of these a bit ago:

      A murder of crows
      A parliament of owls
      A swamp of bureaucrats
      A whorehouse of congressmen
      A sewer of senators
      A comintern of Democrats
      A sedition of federal agents
      A craven of justices
      A tyranny of governors
      An indoctrination of teachers
      A self-indulgence of teachers unions
      A corruption of union officials
      A thuggery of BLM
      A pestilence of Antifa
      A lobby of former government officials
      A useful idiocy of Democrat voters
      A cesspool of globalists
      A Karen of college students
      A wank of wokesters
      A fellatio of Harrises
      A theft of Bidens
      An asylum of experts
      A lie of journalists

  5. I call what happened on January 6 2021 ‘the unguided walking tour of the Capitol building’.

    That is OUR House. Congresscritters are just the help. They have no right to keep us out at gunpoint. If they fear us that much, it’s because they KNOW what a shitty job they’re doing.

    But then, they’re afraid of everything. They even fear each other enough to put up metal detectors inside the building.
    Most days, I suspect that we could get a better government by picking 535 people at random. On bad days, I’m certain we’d get a better government by picking 535 people at random from lunatic asylums.

    1. isn’t that kinda what we do anyway? Pick them from the asylum that is, or the sex offenders unit of the state pen.

    2. ‘the unguided walking tour of the Capitol building’.

      No. It was a guided tour. Literally a frigging guided tour, where the cops let them in and everything, and they stayed between the guide ropes like proper tourists. The people breaking the windows were Antifa.

  6. In a similar vein, gun owners (well, except the ones who were posting pics of their ARs with Biden/Harris stickers on them) have been fighting this for years. Unfortunately, all too often, falling into the habit of using the terms the lefties / antigunners use…

    “Assault” rifle or the new hotness of “assault weapon” for ARs / AR-pattern rifles (Armalite Rifle DAMN IT)
    “High capacity” magazine for your bog-standard except in certain freedom hating states magazines
    Those are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.

    I don’t get into too many conversations anywhere with lefties (OK, fine a couple nephews / neices, but I only see them occasionally and keep it civil by not bringing up politics (they bring it up? Game ON!)) but I do try to avoid referring to Jan-6 as a “riot,” at least.

    1. I think it was Crenshaw who said it, “an AR-15 is a civilian design of the M-16.”


      I just want to take an old fashioned typewriter and type that across every gun banner’s forehead; while hitting the keys as hard as possible.


        False: the original AR-15 was select fire, and thus an assault rifle. The definition has nothing to do with whether it has been adopted by a military or not. And the differences between the original AR-15 and an M-16 are far greater than the differences between a modern AR-15 and modern M-16.

        Besides it is accepting their premise that an assault rifle is something that every Tom, Dick, and Harry shouldn’t have.

        1. Even so, I like his idea about the typewriter. Though I am willing to modernize to a LASER printer. Say, something in the 10 to 20 Watt range…. for the LASER alone, mind.

          “What’s that?”
          “A laser.”
          “What’s it do?”
          “Nothing. Just lays-there.”

        2. You’re not helping. That plays right back into the leftist screed. While you are technically correct in the original ArmaLite Rifle was designed in 1956 for the military and had select fire; the models produced after sale to Colt in 1959 and since are purely semi-automatic civilian design. Ergo, If it’s a civilian design, then it can not be an assault rifle!
          And good luck finding an original ArmaLife that still functions that isn’t in some collector’s vault.

          1. You’re not helping. That plays right back into the leftist screed.

            Truth doesn’t give a shit.

            The ten million variants of the AR-15 and the ten million variants of the M-16 have fewer differences between the categories than within the categories. In that the grabbers are telling a truth, though in distorted form. You will never escape this fact no matter what contortions you make to appease the grabbers.

            1. “Truth doesn’t give a shit.”

              I don’t either, not anymore. Use whatever terms you like, Ian.

            2. Hit the bastards with a dose of cognitive dissonance, in relationship to BLM.
              When they call for anti-gun legislation, call them out on their “White Privilege.”

              Of course Gabby Giffords can support “sensible gun control” because she can call the cops without worrying they’ll shoot her instead of the perps, ‘cause she’s an affluent white woman. Doesn’t matter if you believe the BLM line, what matters is they do.

              1. One of the more retarded leftist attempts at an argument is to post a picture of an armed black family with a caption along the lines of “still want 2A?”.

                Everyone who isn’t a leftist enthusiastically says “Yes!”. Leftist has cognitive dissonance and leaves in a huff.

                1. “Yes! Because there’s a racist in this conversation, and it’s not me.”

      2. It’s just a word salad which intrinsically means nothing, but originally polled as a “scary thing’ with the uninformed.

        In CA they originally banned by product name (so manufacturers changed names) and then they went back and added bans by generic features. The current ban law law covers such widespread threats as shotguns with revolving cylinders, pistols featuring a heat shroud, and for self-loading rifles the definition is:

        12276.1 (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, “assault weapon” shall also mean any of the following:
        1. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
        A. A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
        B. A thumbhole stock.
        C. A folding or telescoping stock.
        D. A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
        E. A flash suppressor.
        F. A forward pistol grip.
        2. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
        3. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.


        So in the Glorious Bear Flag Peoples Republic we’re protected against the widespread scourges that y’all in the rest of the country suffer under of thumbhole stocks and grenade launchers, and from flash suppressors but not compensators, and from the inordinately scary forward pistol grip.

        Can you say arbitrary and capricious? I knew you could.

        It’s not actually relevant what they ban after they say they are banning “Impactful Smokesticks” or “Clever Muskets” or “Assault Weapons” – just that they can ban, and through regulation and future amendment of the law, can expand the ban, and instantly criminalize the previously law-abiding.

    2. THIS. There is no such thing as an assault rifle, nor high capacity magazine. They are fiction and I won’t use the terms.

      1. You mean “assault weapon”. Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapon across most of the planet.

        And careful about getting so focused on the words that you inadvertently accept the premise of “peons shouldn’t have assault rifles”.

        1. Where do you (or anyone else) find a legal definition or requisition definition for “assault weapon?” I ask in all seriousness, because separating rifles from other weapons, if they are used by combat infantry or for assault purposes, seems a tautology.

          1. For “Assault weapon”? Look no further than the various assault weapons bans. The definition comes down to “we flipped through a gun magazine and picked out anything scary”.

            I’m not kidding.

            separating rifles from other weapons, if they are used by combat infantry or for assault purposes, seems a tautology.

            For “assault rifle”, you are talking about a specific set of traits, with the generally known first example (though there were attempts before it) being the Sturmgewehr 44, literally “storm rifle”.

            The key features of an assault rifle are that it is select-fire, uses an intermediate caliber (between full power rifle, and pistol), and feeds from a detachable magazine.

            Assault rifles are what come out of the realization that having a precise 800yd rifle that is heavy, large, and uses ammunition to match kinda sucks on a real battlefield.

        2. How about we agree not to use words the enemy uses. That way we don’t have to engage in some sort of verbal jiujitsu when we try to clarify what “assault” means.

            1. I can get BEEhind that one! As in we could BEEt their butts with this weapon.

          1. Because “assault rifle” is not the word the enemy uses. It has a specific meaning. The enemy uses “assault weapon” deliberately to conflate with “assault rifle”

            “Assault Rifle” means a magazine fed select fire rifle chambered in an intermediate caliber.

            “Assault Weapon” means ooooh scary.

          2. Assault Rifle is a term that describes something specific, and distinguishes it from the Battle Rifle.

            There’s not much getting away from it. Trying to change the terms is destined to fail, and makes you look guilty.

            Leave slippery definitions to the Left. They don’t suit us.

            1. I don’t like Assault Rifles. It is the “in an intermediate caliber”. I prefer a Battle Rifle Caliber. Mainly 8mm Mauser. I have had to settle for 7.62X54R for now. I really want a reproduction FG42 a semiauto. Full auto is almost NEVER needed or useful and not worth the bother.

              1. As the owner of a machine gun, I can truthfully say it is an extremely efficient way of turning money into noise.

                Heaps of fun, but not really much use for hitting anything specific.

            2. Everyone knows it’s not an assault-something unless it has “the shoulder thing that goes up.”

        3. Heh, and I think *I* can be pedantic! 😉

          I think the gun grabbers switched the terms when the pro-gum side kept pointing out that the term they kept using to describe scary black rifles had a specific meaning in the military which did NOT match the rifles they were describing (the whole select fire thing.)
          So they changed up the terms to the even more mushy, squishy, mealy-mouthed “assault weapon.” Which, by a strict dictionary definition includes any object used to assault a person.
          Baseball bat? It fits
          Shovel? Sure, it can be a weapon
          Sledgehammer? Yep
          Knives of any type? Absolutely
          Rocks? Yeppers

          Start making that argument, though, and the first thing they pull out is the hoary old chestnut “bUt ThOSe aREn’t MAde to KILL!!!1!1!!” (tell that to Abel, before he goes to have a chat w/his brother Cain) And then they block you on social media of choice or play the “I don’t want to talk about this anymore,” either of which pretty much shows that they know they lost the argument.

          1. The invention of “assault weapon” goes back decades. I don’t know the exact point, but the latest possible time would be the run up to the — wait for it — Assault Weapons Ban.

            There is no news here; only gun owners who haven’t been practicing mental hygiene.

            1. It just seems to me, though, that it’s been in the last 10-12-ish years that the grabbers have pretty much switched over completely to “assault weapon” and dropped the “assault rifle” term.

              1. Don’t know, but a-rifle is specific enough and has enough history behind it that it would be almost as bad as refusing to use the word “shotgun” if they started trying to corrupt it.

                And half the reason to try to corrupt the terms is to get gun owners to surrender the conceptual territory of machineguns in private hands. Nope. Not doing it.

                Part of the reason I refuse to budge on this is because the grabbers are telling a half truth: in today’s market the differences in parts between an off the shelf M4 vs. an off the shelf commercial AR are trivial. Literally just a third hole and a couple different fire control parts. Everything already ships with a full-auto bolt carrier.

                1. Using the term in the proper context, you’re correct, use it.

                  The grabbers, as you pointed out, are striving to corrupt the terms so they can use them to mean whatever they want. Todays “standard capacity magazine (10rds or less)” per the grabbers becomes tomorrows “high capacity assault clipazine and must be banned.”

                  And if the pro-gun side gives a millimeter on the terms, the antis WILL take a light year…

                  1. And if the pro-gun side gives a millimeter on the terms, the antis WILL take a light year…


                    (in fact there have been recent pushes to anchor typical magazines as “standard capacity”, as a counter to the high-cap bs)

          2. Basically the gun control/grabber side of things will label anything up to and including a water pistol as an “assault ” because it sounds scarier and more out of control that way. It doesn’t matter what the weapon (or wannabe weapon) really is or does. They want to make sure that Joe and Josephine Sixpack are without defenses.

      2. Kathy, there is, in fact such a thing. There is an accepted military definition of an assault rifle. Importantly, one of the requirements is select fire, that is, the capability of firing more than one round per trigger activation. NO semiautomatic rifle qualifies as an assault rifle.

      3. ‘Assault Rifle’ is a technical term that means ‘a rifle with selective fire capability’. Or in other words, it’s a rifle that allows the operator to pick whether a single trigger pull can fire one shot, or multiple shots.

        Assault Weapon is the made-up term used by gun-grabbers.

        1. And arguing the distinction means we lose our 2A rights. Every. Single. Time.

          We aren’t arguing with people who argue in good faith. We’re arguing with communist tyrants who reject nuance.

          1. You’re correct in that they don’t argue in good faith (the goalposts don’t just move, they teleport) but if you give up ground by using their terminology (however they choose to define what a term means at any given moment,) you’re losing.

            Use the correct terms, don’t bother trying to define the term for them, but don’t give an inch. They say “we must ban scary assault rifles,” tell them no one owns assault rifles. When they point screeching at a picture of a typical AR, screaming “those horrible death machines,” calmly reply “oh, you want to ban semi-automatic rifles? Why didn’t you say so? Also, no, there’s no good reason to ban them.” Even better is if the rifle, while being an AR-pattern, isn’t branded as an AR (say, S&W MP-15s)

            Otherwise, you’re giving them the choice of the field of battle and the terms of engagement and they WILL stack the deck (*cough*Election2020*cough*) any way they have to to “win” the argument, that you won’t stand a chance. Force them to the field of YOUR choice, your terminology.

            (bonus points, drive their blood pressure up by putting all your replies in a “such a shame you don’t even know the proper terminology,” like you were arguing with a toddler about something)

            1. tell them no one owns assault rifles


              There are somewhere around two hundred thousand registered machineguns in the US. A decent fraction of those are assault rifles.

              (yes I know this is way beyond the cognitive capabilities of the grabbers, but Duty Calls)

              1. I looked up “tenacity” in the OED and it read “IAN BRUENE”. 🙂

              2. Oh I know there’s legally registered MGs out there, I just wish I could afford one…

                Safe queens that get taken out once a year as a “flex” at the range by the person who could afford it (or bought before the NFA shut the door.)

                  1. Last select fire M-14 that I saw for sale on the civilian marketplace was in excess of $30,000. I did get to fire one once. Not particularly useful but damn…

              3. Out of how many guns? I’d say that qualifies as “no one” to at least a third-order approximation.

            2. I understand your point, and Ian’s points as well. I do not disagree.

              I think using terminology that is technically correct as a persuasive device is suicide for our side. The truth does not persuade a communist–it gives him ammunition to use against me. That’s my only point.

              1. To be honest, it doesn’t really matter what terms you use, because if you even seem to be starting to win the discussion, they’ll change the rules.

                They’re the little kid playing Monopoly with friends, and making everyone ELSE follow the rules as written while simultaneously giving themselves loans from the bank and ignoring things like having to have 4 houses on every property in a group before being able to hotel up…

                Me, I’ll keep pinning them down on every mis-use of a term, every incorrect / mistaken assumption (even if I have to pull up things like FBI homicide statistics then-and-there.) Most times? I think they get pissed at me and end the discussion (“FINE! I’M TAKING MY TOYS AND GOING HOME!”)

                1. To be honest, it doesn’t really matter what terms you use, because if you even seem to be starting to win the discussion, they’ll change the rules.


                2. But the terms DO matter to the average person who isn’t a raging liberal. My father, never a fan of guns, is now convinced that there is no reason to ban “assault weapons” because he finally realized that the term is meaningless. I know because he asked me one day about it (knowing I am a “gun” guy) after watching a program where they were talking about the definitions. One more person who will never own a gun but will no longer reflexively support gun bans.

                  We will never get the raging liberal on our side, but we don’t need them. We just need the average person.

          2. And arguing the distinction means we lose our 2A rights. Every. Single. Time.

            Which is why trying to pretend there is zero relation between an AR-15 and an M-16 is so ridiculous.

            Besides; the incessant, LOUD, chanting of “Repeal the NFA!” from the 2A community has now reached the point where GOP scumbags are pretending to care when there is no chance of it going through.

            We are winning the battle of the Overton window. It is slow, and it creaks as it moves. But it is moving in our direction.

            1. Ian, I love you and your persistence. You’re one of the people who is capable and willing to move the Overton window. Thank you for that.

              I… I’m shaking my head because I can’t seem to make my point in a way that seems anything other than “ridiculous.”

              So thanks to you for the considered replies.

              1. I… I’m shaking my head because I can’t seem to make my point in a way that seems anything other than “ridiculous.”

                I don’t mean to call you ridiculous. It’s… perhaps a different example will be clear:

                There is a common term “Modern Sporting Rifle” (MSR).

                This is a very accurate term on several levels. AR type rifles are the sporting rifles of today in the same way that Wood & Steel was 50 years ago. “you can’t hunt with an AR!” is a completely wrong statement now. Also the definition of “sporting” has broadened to include things that are for all intents and purposes civilianized shoothouse training.

                Having said that I refuse to use the term. Because it accepts the premise that 2A is for “sporting purposes”, not shooting tyrants in the face.

                For another point; I can’t determine this for you, but I submit that you may be unaware of the state of the second due to being deep behind enemy lines. I wasn’t kidding in my other post about “Repeal the NFA!” being a generally agreed on position. And we just had a YUGE increase in the number of gun owners in 2020. They didn’t buy granpappy’s hunting rifle; they bought EBRs* and tactical shotguns.

                It is in this context that I don’t fear grabbers. At most they might be able to shove something through for a couple years while everyone ignores it. And they can’t even seem to manage that much.

                * Evil Black Rifles

                1. I keep wanting to put together a graphic showing a Scary Black Rifle on top and a “normal”-looking hunting rifle that happens to be semi-automatic on the bottom with the question “please describe for me in functional (not appearance) terms exactly how these are different?”

                  • One shot per trigger pull
                  • Multiple rounds in magazine
                  • Can attach a “sniper” scope
                  • Has a grip shaped to the hand
                  • Fires a cartridge originally developed for the military

                  Of course, that would just prompt them to screech that they need to take away traditional hunting arms as well. Because “we’re not looking to take away your right to hunt” was always a bad-faith lie.

                    1. It is because the AR is Black isn’t it??? They are RACIST.
                      Instead of the Black one use a Hello Kitty one in the example. See what they say then.

                    2. There are few things that make a grabber freak like seeing a little girl with her own rifle. Goes double for a pink one.

                      Given the incidence rate of rapists and pedos among the woke this is probably telling.

                2. Behind enemy lines on the other coast (though… to be fair, I’m in Deepest Redville, Upstate, not Manhattan, which changes things), I’d like to give a hopeful note even here. The SAFE act was passed, and was a Big Scary Action a few years back, right? And the full result…

                  …was that within about a week, the stores had all the same kinds of guns as before, but with modified grips, and there is a *booming* business in 80% Lowers. (like, websites for local shops will have the link for lowers at the top of the menu, before ammo or ready-to-fire guns.)

                  (and pretty much no one registered their pre-existing rifles that they were totally required to)

                  And yet I get the distinct impression that the Movers and Shakers think that this act–passed in the middle of the night under dubious circumstances–was successful in every particular.

                  Seriously. Even when they do manage to shove something through, in a friendly state, they screw it up. It is to lol

                  1. I saw something about either SAFE or some similar alleged law, that the Governor wanted the police to start going after people, and then was presented with the uncomfortable fact that they would be arresting most of the first responders in the state.

                  1. Even if that were a hard line (it isn’t; 5.56 is entirely capable of ethically taking a deer), AR-15s come in many calibers.

                    1. Or 6.5 Grendel. Or .450 Bushmaster. Or .458 SOCOM. Or .50 Beowulf. Or .350 Legend.

                      Most of those work amazingly well out of short barrels as well, some even at long ranges (you can easily smack steel at 800yds with a 12″ 6.5 grendel). No good reason to lug around a 20+ inch barrel through the woods.

                    2. Banshee, 300 blackout is just another flavor of .30 caliber, with IIRC a smaller powder load to handle close quarters better with less muzzle flash.

                    3. .300 Blackout is just a 5.56 case blown out to .30 caliber. It’s primary advantage is easy subsonics without changing anything but the barrel.

                      Of course that parts compatibility has the disadvantage that you have to maintain strict ammo handling discipline. Otherwise you might discover the joys of trying to ram a .30 bullet down a .223 barrel.

                    4. Hmm, back in the ’80x, Thompson-Center chambered pistol and carbine barrels in a variety of wildcat cartridges based on the .223, I had the 7mm TCU (Wes Ugalde, if memory serves) but here was also a 6mm and a .30TCU. I ran into a financial crunch and had to sell off most of my collection, but the TCU was fun. Have to see what my older manuals have on the TCU series, and compare to the Blackout.

                3. Oh dear. EBR stands for Enhanced Battle Rifle. In case you didn’t know. We need a dictionary of already used abbreviations. 😎

            2. “We are winning the battle of the Overton window”

              It helps that when the holophobes are actually asked “what IS a (scary gun feature X they want to ban) exactly anyway? What does it do?” you get answers like “it’s a shoulder thing that goes up, and we need to ban it because of Reasons”

          3. No, arguing it got the gun grabbers to start saying “assault weapons” instead of “assault rifles”. And now the gun grabbers get mocked by 2A proponents who quite accurately point out that “assault weapon” is a meaningless term that even the gun grabbers can’t define. We lose when the other side is allowed to twist the meaning of existing terms into something other than the accepted usage.

            The other side lives in part because the things they say are hidden and cloaked using words and phrases that sound like good things. It is important to publicly pin them down on their meanings whenever possible, as they will evade and obfuscate forever if you don’t force them to provide definitions, which they are then forced to defend against your attacks.

        2. Also, intermediate caliber.

          We could add something about length, but bullpups make that fuzzy.

    3. If anyone says “assault rifle,” correct them immediately. An assault rifle is well-defined as a rifle capable of being fired semi-automatically, or in small-number-of-rounds (usually 3) bursts, or full auto. Any rifle only capable of semi-automatic fire is by definition not an assault rifle.

      And ARs are basically .223 rifles, a small caliber suitable for plinking and light hunting, but not especially powerful.

      1. Good point. Every assault rifle is a machine gun and tracked as such.

        The things people keep calling “assault weapons” are small caliber semi-auto rifles.

        It is no step at all to go from banning civilian AR-15’s to banning shotguns and bolt actions.

        1. That’s the point. They want to ban private citizens from owning guns and want to disarm the entirety of the law abiding public by taking away people’s guns. The criminals who already illegally possess and use guns-not so much.

  7. I’m a big fan of Blue Anon. It mocks the attempt by the left to declare that Q is a terrorist organization that we all follow. “Oh, are you a Blue Anon person? I didn’t realize you were one of those folks.”

    Another is the Branch Covidians. They are a cult, they act like a cult, so I call them a cult.

    1. Governor Diaperface’s mask edict expired April 1. Six weeks later, I’m still seeing ~50% of people wandering around with face-diapers… on the sidewalk, in their cars, mowing the lawn, and a few times, riding motorcycles.


      1. Gnat and cottonwood fluff season has begun, so I could understand a mask on a motorcycle, just to keep from inhaling something non-breathable.

      2. Oregon Health Authority seems to have been leaning to masks forever, and OR-OSHA made the temporary mask requirements for businesses “Permanent until the Pandemic is Over (as we define the terms)”.

        OTOH, even Despicable Kate Brown is figuring that she’s losing the argument, (the trick of moving a bunch of counties into “Extreme” after 300 cases (statewide!) got hospitalized backfired in a big way, with a bunch of blue counties up in arms along with us Deplorables in Flyoverland). She let her flying monkeys at OHA and OR-OSHA do that crap for her, but that inhuman shield isn’t working any more.

        Recall attempts haven’t worked, but she might be noticing that there are boxes beyond the Ballot Box.

        1. I “wore” my mask today. Around my neck, except for restaurants, the Phys Therapy place, and where I got asked. One store asked, but Kroger and the big independent grocer didn’t bother. (Nor Home Depot, the regional club store, and the restaurant supply.) Lots of unmasked people, considerably more than in February.

  8. I have no pithy AND new term suggestions. I’ve borrowed, copied, and cloned from others.
    But I CAN say, “Hie thee to the coffee pot!”

  9. For print Not the Bee (my personal news source) dOeS ThiS to add another LayEr of huMorEUs contempt for our RoOlrS.

  10. Off on a tangent. Last night I did an experiment of putting the first 30 pages of my yet unpublished book into Grammarly (the free version). It found some errors, but what it mostly did was take out commas where I had them, and put them in where I didn’t. I don’t think I’ll try that again. 😆

    Now, I don’t necessarily need all the commas I had, but as for the ones it kept trying to put in, I assert that:
    “Of course he did that.”
    has a completely different tone than:
    “Of course, he did that.”

    1. Yes. When Word’s grammar checker wants to add or delete a comma, I read the sentence out loud as I know the character would and then comma as necessary or not. Commas indicate brief pauses in the sentence or delineate a brief explanation (my sister, Beth, said…)

        1. earlier I saw your reply but no notification, and it would not post replies (to you and others) so I gave over and went back to work. Now an orange dot is upon me bell and lo, I am notified of your reply.

    2. It’s interesting they’re trying to deprecate use of commas now, particularly after a large court case hinged on that recently.

      I guess the schoolbooks I was taught from used Chicago style; we were encouraged to use them liberally. Apparently AP style discourages the use of commas. So sentences conforming to AP style are less precise unless reworded where they sound clumsy.

      Of course, I’ve seen English losing precision all my life. Eventually it may devolve down to various inflections of “uh.”

      1. I had to use APA/MLS in high school. It was a relief to use Chicago after that. I like the Oxford comma, thank you.

          1. Non use of the Oxford comma is barbarism.

            Commies gonna commie. They want to do to English what they did to Russian and Chinese, dumb them down and make them as ugly as they can.

            1. A number of Russian expatriates noted that the Russian of the Soviet Union was a coarse hillbilly ghetto cant, and claimed it wasn’t the same thing as the “proper” Russian of the boyars and merchant class.

              I dunno, I doubt Tsarist Russian was any less ugly than the modern type. Russian combines the worst of both English and German, and probably some all its own.

              1. Oh, I can believe it. Imagine a revolution in Britain that drew all its shock troops from East End chavs, and then promoted them to power positions. After 20 years, everybody would be saying “oi bruv, innit” whether they went to Oxford or not.

              2. It’s a real thing. Both the Chinese and the Russian communists “simplified” the language. Russia eliminated some inflected forms and China simplified the characters.

                1. Destruction of language is part and parcel of totalitarian systems as shown so ably by Orwell in 1984.

                  1. Control of language is a key part of colonialism. That’s why I refuse to acknowledge new pronouns or that “man” is necessarily gendered.

              1. Ok Precisely which one of you clowns replace or Foxfier with a Warcraft Orc? Put her back that’s NOT funny.

            2. Oh but for a Peter the Great type in English to fix things, though. Eliminate the “c” (or make it the “ch” diphthong). All imperfect past is “ed”. All plurals are “s” (I _might_ compromise on “s ore es”). All the spelling is normalized. Granted that it wouldn’t last, but it would (why is there an “l” in wood?!?!) be most welcome (why the final “e”; it’s not well-comb, which should have the “e” not that ridiculous “b”; welkum it is!).

              1. The problem with spelling “normalization” is that it instantly renders all prior written material indecipherable to anyone but experts. You could just maybe get away with it in a largely illiterate society, but IIRC Noah Webster tried it in his first dictionary and it fell completely flat.

          2. So am I. My late partner in the Teeny Publishing Bidness was also an Oxford Comma fan. And to the Chicago Manual of Style. We used to joke that she had been married three times – twice to mere mortals and once to the Chicago Manual of Style.

        1. Search “Oakhurst Dairy Oxford comma”. Cost them five million bucks plus legal fees and incidental expenses.

    3. > It found some errors

      According to whom?

      One thing I learned going to schools in many states was, “correct” depended on what set of English books the school system was using. And the other textbooks in the sets definitely not written to the standards put forth in the English texts. At least, we never studied “third person academic” that I remember…

      1. The errors? According to me.

        Some things were obvious typos, or things where I had intended to say something different than what came out.

        I’m not counting the comma discrepancies as errors, nor am I counting phrases that it thought should be hyphenated, or the hyphenated phrases that it thought should be one word.

    4. Grammar checkers hate you and want you to look like an idiot. They are worse than both spell check and the thesaurus. They have their uses if you remember that.

  11. We’ve let the enemy control the language and it stymies us. So much time and energy wasted debatin’ who’s who and what’s what. Libraries of books, all explainin’ and dissectin’ the ‘isms’ and the ‘ists’, ultimately just obfuscatin’. Bottomline, they’re slavers, would-be, wanna-be, and — sometimes — actual. It’s that simple. The war we’re in, it’s the same as it’s always been since before Man fell out of the trees: The Free Man vs the Slaver. It’s that simple. Seen thru that lens, it’s clear who’s on which side. Equally clear: there can be no compromise, no accommodation, no agreement, between free men and slavers. We need to stop lettin’ them hoodwink us with descriptors of their choosin’ and supposedly reasonable calls to find middle ground. They’re slavers, the enemy, and we ought to treat them as such. ‘No’, we ought to say, ‘we’re not doin’ that, and that’s the end of it.’ We have no cause to debate them, to entertain conversation: they will not move and neither should we. No one wants the war to go hot: not them (they want to leash us peaceably), not us (we just wanna be left alone), but it will go hot. We’ll all suffer. In many ways, no one will win. All that matters, in the end, is who’s leashed and who isn’t. Henry

  12. Something Tim Pool said recently made me go (ahhh… he is so young) because he said the CRT stuff started with Gamer Gate. Seriously? That was when they tried to gut and wear the skin of the Gaming industry… it had been going on longer than that in other industries like the sci-fi and fantasy genres.

    1. That’s just where some finally NOTICED it. I had a conversation (online) with someone and watched it dawn on them that that got its name as a derivation from Watergate. He hadn’t previously made that connection. Of course, for him Watergate was History and not Current Events.

      1. It’s been alive and kicking in SF/F for as long as I’ve been involved in it as a careerist. Back in the late ’90s I was getting stories rejected for not being feminist enough. (Not exaggerating, the rejection letters were explicit.)

          1. I remember the one I got for a very traditional fairy-tale-like fantasy where the woman overcomes a set number of obstacles in order to win the prince and was told that it was misogynist to have the woman performing tricks like a dog to get a man’s attention.

            I was pretty ‘…’ about that.

            1. I got that on a book that was supposed to be sort of a reverse Orpheus, I got that the “Widow” (they weren’t married, just engaged) was mourning her lost fiance too much. er…. uh.
              And it was supposed to be urban fantasy, orpheus, where she reclaims him because she loves him so much. BUT it made her “dependent.” — 2003

              1. Brian: “There’s no pleasing some people.”
                Ex-Leper: “That’s just what Jesus said, sir!”

              2. You can’t win. If she chases the prince, you’re implying she needs a man to be fulfilled.
                If the prince chases her, you’re implying that traditional male/female relationships are OKAY.

                And now, of course, if she chases a princess, she’s transphobic.

                    1. This is why protestors should be allowed at the first Orion Drive launch.

                      You can allow them at subsequent launches, but there won’t be any volunteers.

                    2. Hell I’d take having them all under a Suborbital strike, or a boatload of anvils with ACME on the side. Whatever it takes.

              3. I have literally seen people saying that women are passive if what they do meets society’s approval. It has to defy that to be active. So a woman who lolls about and orders her slaves to poison the hero is active, and a woman who quests across thrice ten kingdoms to find the antidote is passive.

                Then they complain that all active women are portrayed as evil.

        1. I started seeing the change in SF/F and fantasy stories in the 80s. You couldn’t just read everything about 82. You had to be selective. By the late 80s if I didn’t recognize the author’s name, then I didn’t read it. By the 90s I was reading mysteries. I came back to sci-fi and fantasy about 2005.

      1. That works in written form but not spoken. Pretender also comes with it’s own song for anybody who’s heard it.

    1. I usually use either “FICUS” or if I have to spell it out, “Fraudulent in Chief”.

      OTOH, I’ve seen “President asterisk”, thus implying that Kneepads is “President half-asterisk”.

  13. When you’re editing a research paper for someone who works in an obstetrics ward, and find consistent, awkward references to “postpartum individuals” or “persons who have given birth” — THAT is the power of the style sheet. I want to ask “How many babies have you delivered to persons with testicles?” but I need to get paid. Such phrases may have been quietly changed to “women,” however…

  14. This is so perfect, Sarah. The enemy will try to force us to use their new language words like “new normal”.


    My favorite is “mask”. I won’t use the word. It’s a slave muzzle and that’s how I refer to it.

    My call to the vet this morning will ask them if they are still forcing us to muzzle, or can I get my kittens looked at? (Actually, the vets went completely insane. Curbside pickup? Kittens whisked into the facility without family? F THAT.)

    1. Speaking of which, last night I went into a restaurant to pick up take out. I didn’t wear a muzzle. They were busy, so I had to wait a bit, along with other people not wearing muzzles. Then, when things finally quieted down for a moment, the nice guy at the counter, also not wearing a muzzle, gave us our big bag of food. The entire thing was so completely 100% normal that it was like a dream.

      1. I almost can’t imagine what you just described. It feels ethereal.

        I’m so glad you got to be there!

        1. Sanity is (slowly) manifesting in MN. I suspect it was not CDC or WuFlu numbers or vax… I suspect Gov. Vidkun saw poll numbers about pitchforks and torches. And, for once, managed to put 2 with 2 and actually something approximating 4.

          1. Rumor has it that Oregon might (maybe) be heading that way. Despicable Kate is making noises about following CDC guidelines, but she’s fond of moving the goalposts. Her first, loudly trumpeted effort at “opening” the state, curiously had the opposite effect in counties with populations greather than 4 figures.

            I find myself wondering if she’s getting nervous about Deplorables with rope.

            1. Arggh. The latest news is now that Oregon is going to force businesses to do the vaccine passport. If you can prove you’ve had the not-vaccine shot(s), you may be permitted to go maskless, peasant. If the entity declines to participate in checking, (Seine Papiere, bitte!), masks must be worn. Any liability associated with this is being generously pawned off on the business involved in checking.

              All this crap has just come out as the CDC guidelines have been revised to loosen things.

              In other, not quite unrelated news, 5 counties voted for secession and joining as Greater Idaho. My county hasn’t had that on the ballot. Yet.

      2. I got a big “normal rush” the other day because I used cash at a store. I’m resolved to do that more often.

      3. I think Publix is giving up the muzzle mandate now, but people will still use them. (haven’t been there lately)

        Was in a BJ’s Wholesale Club on Friday. Noticed the mask sign at the door was gone, but the 6ft distance sign was still there. Just inside, the usual masked trooper was staring at all entering. I went up to him and asked if I had to wear a mask and he just shrugged his shoulders, so I didn’t put it on. To my only slight surprise, every other shopper in there was muzzled.

        1. As of last week Costco still requires face diapers, tho my state dropped it, and so did everyone else far as I’ve seen.

          Well, perhaps they know themselves best, and suffer from verbal incontinence.

          1. Over the weekend, Costco included a link in their weekly email to their new policy…
            If your state / local has no guidelines or says they’re not required, there you go. If there are state / local guidelines, they’ll follow those.

            Which here is going to be interesting, because the new state guidance from Friday is “if you’ve gotten the shots, you don’t need to mask up, if you’ve not volunteered to be a guinea pig you still need to mask up.” (paraphrasing.) How did our illustrious HHS tell business how to deal with the problem of who’s been shot and not?
            Make a “good faith effort,” such as by putting signs at the entrance telling people they need to mask up if they haven’t taken the shots, or have staff inform / ask people who are unmasked about the policy (HAHAHAHAHAHA,) or just say everyone must still wear the diaper of the face.”

            And suddenly over the weekend, everyone in the state was vaccinated, who’d a thunk it?

            1. I like the word “Transvaxxite”. Someone who identifies as being vaccinated without getting the not-vaccine.

                1. Insty had a note this morning that those who *had* the Kung Flu are as immune as those who had the not-vaccine. Clever how TPTB like it ignore those, since they act like it had 1000% mortality. (Can somebody fetch my eyes? I think they’re under that chair.)

                  1. Immunity gained by recovering from the disease is BETTER. Vaccination injects a fixed dose of viral proteins in an attempt to stimulate an immune response. If you get the virus, it keeps multiplying until your immune system gets good enough to whack it down.
                    A good Zombie Apocalypse novel is at least as believable as anything we’ve heard out of the ‘Publick Health Authoriteez’ over the last year.

                  2. I’m almost certain that my daughter and I had the Commie Covid Crud a year ago September, based on talks that we have had with medical people … There has been speculation that the Crud was in the US, sporadically, way before the earliest reported dates. I came down with it first, the Daughter Unit about four or five days later. Just sudden enervation. loss of appetite (which went on for weeks!), a miserable low-grade temperature, sinuses producing fountains of snot … and in all the time since, we have not been sick with anything like it, or like any other flu. In spite of the Commie Crud being – like Chicken Man — everywhere!

                    1. Same, but in February 2020. Week-long low grade fever, could barely lever myself off the couch to go nibble on something. And then I had zero side effects on the second vaccine shot that’s supposed to activate your immune system or something, as if it was already aware of the protein markers.

          2. Local walmart & City Market still have the ‘mask required’ signs up, the announcements over the PA,etc (and walmart even has a poor soul stationed at the door asking anyone without one if they want a mask), but they aren’t stupid enough to try and enforce it. People who want to wear the masks wear ’em, the rest of us don’t bother.

            1. Just now, Costco and Trader Joes corporate dropped the mask mandate. And the Daughter Unit and I did a run through the local Sprouts yesterday, where we were interested to note that the sign on the door said that masks were suggested and encouraged … but not mandatory. So we didn’t wear them going in. Noted half a dozen other shoppers not wearing the face diaper.
              But no one gave us any grief for not wearing the damned things. The same at the local HEB where we like to shop. A good few – although not most – are skipping the face diaper.
              Later on this month, we’ll go to a local Costco and see how it goes.

              1. Interesting. I noted how class-based (and infantilizing) the Trader Joe’s mask sign was: “Your mask protects me! My mask protects you!” As if the clientele were children to be coaxed i to “doing the right thing.”

                1. I heard earlier today that TJ’s (at least in California) had rescinded their own mask mandate.

                  1. “How did the pandemic end, daddy?”

                    “Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”

                    I predict that in six months people will be denying that they ever wanted to wear masks after the CDC said they didn’t have to.

                    1. I agree. And all those people claiming they’re going to wear masks for another six months will quietly stop doing so when they realize they’re the ONLY one in the store/park/DMV wherever, wearing one.

        2. Kroger keeps running announcements over the PA that face diapers are required for all staff and customers, but I’ve ignored those from the beginning and I’ll seeing more and more folks doing the same these days.

          1. I’ve been ignoring the signs for months. It’s rare that I get called on it.

        3. I went to Publix and Sam’s Club yesterday. About 60% of shoppers were still wearing masks. Roughly the same at a Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market today – where the mask sign is still up, probably because nobody has been tasked to take it down.
          At Lowes everybody was masked because they had a lot person telling everybody who came in that it was required.
          It’s Florida, but the local county government over the past year has scared a lot of folk into an overabundance of caution…

      4. I’ve been in five states over the nine days. Most of the chain places that still have signs up have them up only because corporate/management required them. Maybe 10% of customers were wearing masks, and nobody was hassling them. Staff were all wearing masks, but few were making any effort to wear them “correctly.” About the only exception were supermarkets, where compliance with tyrants was closer to 95%, but still nobody was hassling those who refused to bow down.

        1. Today was my second shot + 2 weeks so I treated myself to dinner out. The brewpub restaurant where I like to go had a sign more or less saying “masks aren’t required for vaccinated people but we recommend them for the comfort of others”. In Seattle. Our alles klar day isn’t for another six weeks according to Gauleiter Inslee.

          Signs of hope. Naturally I walked right in without even reaching for my mask. Because I’m all out of f***s to give.

        2. The two grocery stores in town were running maybe 15% non-masked. Considering that Oregon OSHA and the Health(hah!) Authority(BS!) demand that everybody wear them, it’s getting a lot looser. Used to be maybe 1-2% last year.

          FWIW, Home Depot was running maybe 30%. Same rules apply. The store where I got asked to put it on had a statement in the window that they were waiting on definitive word (as if *that’s* coming soon) from the Governor’s Orifice.

            1. Not to mention the law that says you cannot force someone to take a drug that is only out on an emergency use authorization. I think the lawyers are going to have a field day.

              FWIW, the stores that were 15% maskless last week are now at 30%. Lots of middle fingers in use, it seems.

              1. OSHA made a statement today that said they will no longer enforce the law that says employers must record side effects from the vaccine.

                L&I in WA today issued a statement today: If an employer wants to remove the mask and distancing mandates, employers must obtain private medical information on all employees, daily, and report same to the State. If an employee refuses to provide the information, that employee is required to wear a mask. Oh, and the employer is required to create a system to identify vaccinated employees.

                Link for the OSHA statement:

                Link to the L&I statement:

                1. Washington is just bound and determined to keep this going forever, aren’t they? [spit]

                  1. Or, for the more general case:

                    Liberals: We follow The Science™!

                    CDC: It’s been a tough year, but our scientists say that people can start taking their masks off now.

                    Liberals: Not THAT science!

                    1. It’s laughable because the commies have lied themselves into a corner.

                      The “science” they must enforce is the one that says the ‘Rona is the Black Plague, the muzzle is a golden safety glove for viruses, the death rate is 99% for everyone, and it’s so contagious it has an R0 of 22.

                  2. I spit in solidarity.

                    My HR woman yesterday said yes, if you wish to keep medical info private, you must muzzle. And since I’m on a leave of absence because I can’t breathe and I get violent wearing the mask, I’ll be on the dole through probably September.

                    In.Sane. But it gives me plenty of time to work on my outdoor videos and find a means of earning a living as a communicator/artist, whatever that looks like.

      5. Remember, when they ask if you’ve even vaccinated, most can truthfully reply, “O yes, of course!”

        Smallpox, tetanus, measles…

        When they ask if you’ve gotten the experimental covid19 / CCPox harm-reduction jab, you can tell them, “Are you nuts? My risk of getting full-blown Wuhan Gurgling death is much smaller than getting a serious VAE from this thing.”

        When they tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but, you can too.

        1. All a vaccine does is present antigens to your immune system to develop memory T and B cells. You know what else presents antigens to your immune system and develops memory T and B cells? The disease. So if you’ve had it and recovered you’re vaccinated.

    2. Lord Pritzker technically hasn’t lifted the mandate yet. But masks are slipping off fast since the CDC did their latest about-face.

      1. Same here. At least outside. And that was big here. I was talking to the bartender at our small river front cafe and she said that Philly still requires retail/restaurant employees to wear masks, so even though she’s standing at an outdoor bar, she has to wear a mask. I was just poking around and the city isn’t going to follow the state and release control on 5/31/ Oh, no. Kenney the Coward is waiting for some unspecified moment in time to do that. Oh, and PA won’t remove the mask mandate until 70% of the state is vaccinated. Which is a number Wolf picked out of thin air.

        1. I think employees still have to wear masks here in Ohio, but the number I see actually wearing them “properly” has declined from around 95% to around 40% in the past five days. Most have it covering their mouth only, some only the chin, a smaller number are fully compliant with the tyrants.

  15. My post seems to have gotten stuck in moderation. I must have been profane or miss typed something, who knows?

    Let’s call them what they are: Cuomo the killer, Gauleiter Murphy, and the dear leader: the dead guy.

    1. I prefer Don Corleone (and “Fredo” for his brother), Obergruppenfuehrer Murphy/Wittmer/Wolf (depending on the Mini-Tyrant-In-Chief in question), and Houseplant-In-Chief, respectively.

      1. I wouldn’t insult Don Vito or Don Michael that way. the Cuomos are just arrogant, incompetent princelings so Fredo and his other brother Fredo. That said, having grown up with the actual mob and, very peripherally, the Cuomos, I can tell you that the Cuomos are just as stupid, just as dishonest, just as narcissistic, just as criminal, and just as violent as the real mob. What they lack is the mob’s fashion sense and honesty. The mob doesn’t pretend they’re doing it for your own good.

        1. The mob also understands that you can sheer a sheep many times but only slaughter it once.

      2. Imhave seen the governor of New Mexico referred to as, “Wuhan Luhan.”

    2. Ya know, if they can convict a cop of $MurderCrimeSpree when some perp decides to expire of an overdose, surely Cuomo can be convicted of $MassMurderCrimeSpree for being at least as culpable when he arranges for lots of nursing home residents to expire of the CCP virus. Goose, gander, a nice sauce.

      1. Dave Rubin today minced no words: called him Cuomo the Murderer.

        Also had some related advice: take the clown pill, and laugh at all the idiots. Make fun of ’em every way you can think of. Laugh some more.

  16. Ruby Ridge.
    Kyle Rittenhouse now, Elián González back then.
    Feds raiding a house in Homer, Alaska looking for Nancy’s laptop, seizing phones, non-Pelosi computers and a copy of the Constitution as ‘evidence’.

    The trouble with the mob, be it BLM, FBI or jackbooted SS, they pick us off one at a time until 2021 is 1984.

    They came for.. but I wasn’t…, I did nothing.

    Calling a spade a spade, Occasional Cortex, Bad Chinese Cold, Lame Stream Media, using only truly proper pronouns; she/it/he, is the right thing to do, of course, but ain’t gonna save you, me, civilization.

    No we don’t need no (their) stinkin’ style sheet but we do need a blueprint, a playbook, a bible, the first words therein; United We Stand, Divided We Fall….

  17. SImilarly I have seen other appellations, but I always refer to the usurper as China Joe, or long-form the China Joe Muppet Show with special guest Dot not Black, to emphasize his preferred pronoun of Xi.

      1. Second kind of see Rutherfraud B. Hayes ( Actually a republican, but fellow republicans made a deal with democrats for contested electoral votes which put him in the presidency but essentially gutted Reconstruction. I suspect he is less fraudulent than the current VIC (Vegetable in Chief), as they actually used constitutionally valid means (albeit rather sketchy) to put Hayes in office.

        1. The issue with 1876 is that there were a lot of irregularities surrounding Tilden’s “win.” The three disputed southern states certainly committed fraud to get Tilden elected, South Carolina counted more votes than registered voters, and in Oregon the Democrat governor arbitrarily disqualified a Republican elector and unilaterally named a Democrat to replace him.

          Hayes won the election and should have been declared the winner without any compromise on Reconstruction. But that might have reignited the Civil War.

      2. JFK was cheated in, at a minimum.

        I recall that one of FDR’s elections was particularly suspicious.

        1. The Democrats even admit it now. Fraud flipped Chicago, Chicago flipped Illinois, Illinois flipped the Electoral College. Nixon was not amused, but had enough integrity not to instigate a Constitutional crisis in the middle of the Cold War.

          1. Yep, and the Chicago outfit was subsequently enraged when JFK’s AG, Bobby Kennedy went after them and all the other members of La Familia. They thought their businesses would be “protected” by virtue of their helping fix Chicago so that JFK would become President.

        2. That’s why I get so frustrated by the “the elections are compromised, there’s no point in voting” crowd. This isn’t the first time cheating swung an election, and the Democrats would love nothing more than for Republicans to stay home on election day because it’s hopeless.

          The more we vote the more they have to cheat to win, the more they cheat the more ordinary people see their cheating. Eventually they either have to stop cheating and lose or people stop caring about who won the elections.

          1. Elections won’t get us out, but we can at least use fair election policy for propaganda as we try to prepare for the real fight, and make the bastards work to keep the collaborationist establishment GOP in place.

            1. They might. Take a look at the shenanigans surrounding the 1876 election.

          2. There are two broad categories of election fraud: suppressing votes for your candidate, and ‘creating’ votes for their candidate. If you let them discourage you from voting for your candidate, you’ve done half of their dirty work for them.
            My grandpa voted Republican until the day he died — but he’s been voting Democrat ever since.

          3. ” people stop caring about who won the elections.”

            But as long as you keep paying the taxes and fees, the Democrats don’t care if you care. If you stop paying, then you can be crushed, “legally”.

    1. Being easily amused, I’ve noted that Xi is “the company formerly known as Blackwater.”

  18. On an off topic, the hazard of thinking the file is the thing, is one can forget what the thing actually is, and just buy the paper…

    1. Free Market Economics, also known as “Artisinal Free-Range Economics.”

  19. The word that always gets me is “controversial”. It’s used by the media to describe whatever it is that conservatives want or support. It’s never used to describe a leftists proposal or idea.

    1. What the photon?!?

      Ages ago I saw the statement that seems to hold, “Reporters/Anchors say ‘controversial’ when they have no clue about something.” And thus almost everything is controversial.

  20. The editors of the Associated Press (AP) Stylebook are responsible for most of the corruption of the language we hear on a daily basis. (Read that again. It’s important.)

    If you wonder why you always hear “migrant” and never “illegal alien” on the news, it’s because that’s “AP Style”. If you wonder why the hours-long impromptu tourism in the US Capitol was an “insurrection”, but the weeks-long occupation of the Wisconsin State Capitol was a “demonstration”, that’s “AP Style.”

    Any given “journalist”, anywhere in the country, can get a free pass on this Orwellian warping of language by merely claiming (generally correctly) that “the organization I work for follows AP Style.”

    Wiki describes it here (with a link to the official website):

    You can find a copy in the reference section of most libraries. It is mostly a very boring book. The Orwellian stuff is scattered throughout a dictionary-like section in the middle. It’s generally in snippets like this:

    illegal alien do not use. See migrant

    and then the entry for “migrant” will have some language about how any other term (in a long list) is derogatory and must be avoided except in direct quotes (and even then, the reporter should try to paraphrase the offensive bits). The people who write this stuff know exactly what they’re doing.

    And for our own Style Sheet:

    Antifa => neo-fascists

    “Anti-racists” => neo-racists

    CRT => racial discrimination

    Wuhan Flu => Xi’s Disease (it’s personal)

    COVID-19 => “That name is literally paid Chinese Communist propaganda. Are the Communists paying you to spread their propaganda? No? Then why are you doing it for free?”

    Red China, ChiComs (these go back to the Korean War, but they’re still valid)

    1. I think you need to add a few terms making the essentially religious nature of the left more overt.

      Antifa > Wokist Inquisition
      “Anti-racists” > Wokist fundamentalists
      CRT > Wokist religious dogma

  21. Federal Bureau Insurgents
    Burn Loot Murder
    I substitute Moving Toward Destruction for Progressive.

  22. My new favorite is trans-vaxxer. Vaccination is a spectrum i identify as vaccinated therefore I’m vaccinated. Don’t question me or you’re a bigot.

    1. Ugh sorry I misremembered. The term was transvaxxite. Urban Dictionary recently deleted it for being too on the nose.

  23. Dueling style sheets is never a good thing anywhere.

    But, stuck involuntarily watching CNN on a regular basis (I swear, if it wasn’t going to perhaps be the straw that broke the camel’s back, I’d be buying a folding screen of some kind), I think they don’t quite know what to do now that Trump isn’t President anymore. I mean, they had two shows on in one day-different shows!-about how Trump is merely the expression of radicalization of the Republican Party and how terrible that someone as bipartisan as Liz Cheney got turned out from being in charge…

    And, that 1/9 was an “insurrection.”

    And, Kyle Rittenhouse was a murderer, but BLM “protests” were peaceful.

    And, how we still need to wear masks everywhere…

    But, I think we’re seeing a lot of bottom-level pushback. GamerGate was one of the biggest ones, especially considering how they were demonized. Throw in what’s going on with Disney-there’s every possibility that the MCU is going to crash and burn, that Kathleen Kennedy has been given a “permanent vacation” until Indy 5 comes out, and how their CRT-based training program was leaked as well. I suspect that a lot of the investors in Hollywood are making those “stop creating s(YAY)t stuff that nobody buys, because we want a return on on our investment” phone calls to various studio heads.

    Doesn’t mean we have to stop pushing, but I suspect that Joe Biden is going to sell things like national infrastructure security, guns, anti-CRT, and a whole lot of other things in the next two years. Combined with a lot of attention being paid to the 2020 elections…most people are wondering why all the networks are still saying that the election wasn’t fraudulent, over and over again…

    It’s not going to be a “fun” two to four years, but Rome wasn’t burnt in a day, either. And, we have all these people with all this time on their hands…

    Build over, around, under, and through. Create new franchises and IPs if the “big names” are going to slaughter the golden geese. And, don’t quit. We won’t see it on CNN, MSNBC, or the Big Three networks until it’s probably 90%+ done. But, keep fighting.

    1. There is general agreement from various sources and channels of rumor, both from the investing world and the fandom world, that major DIS investors are Very Much Not Happy about how the House of the Mouse has been making decisions, from sinking insane amounts of money into bombs like John Carter, to the politicization of ESPN, to the way ABC is being run, to the whole Lucasfilm train wreck, and now the Marvel properties initiating a hard-left roll maneuver, and that these major investors are Making Themselves Very Clear to the Board and Chapek.

      Bob Chapek came from the Parks side, so one would think he has a have a better feel for serving the public what it wants than Bob Iger, his predecessor as CEO, who came up through ABC and so was from the more woke side already, so one might hope the new guy can make some corrections.

      Given the “disappointment” in the latest results, with the left-lurching Disney+ properties resulting in that streaming wunderkind falling notably short at the bottom line, I’m betting those investors will be again revisiting the Disney Executive Suites, wielding a now uncased clue-bat.

      I hope so – the popular common cultural context is important in wielding together society. Using the popular media as a cultural maul to split us apart is a generally bad idea from a societal point of view.

      1. As someone that liked “John Carter” and wanted to see a third “Tron” movie, I’m not happy with how they handed those stories. In addition, there’s reports that Disney+ subscription rates have been dropping like a stone. Bob Chapek got blind-sided at a shareholder’s meeting about the Gina Carrano firing, and had a Forbes hit-piece published about him-two things that should never happen to an exec at his level.

        Doesn’t also help that two of the latest MCU movies aren’t going to get Chinese releases (AFAIK), “Black Widow” keeps seeming like a dud, “Loki” was now just used by Thanos (controlled by the Mind Stone) and probably whacked to set up the “A-Force” movie coming up with a female Loki, and the reports that a number of the “high-value” directors on MCU movies have been marque-only or B-unit directors at best…

        Yea, Disney is NOT doing well. Which makes this feeling of “a rerun of the ’70s” feel all the more vivid.

        1. John Carter needed a better title (ie, “of Mars” with no gimmick) and better editing and plotting. It needed to have been produced without all the “let’s figure things out on the set while shooting!” nonsense. But the basic movie inside the crud was pretty solid, and reflected the appeal of the original books.

          It should be released (at least on Disney Plus) with a new cut — ie, cut out all the stupid stuff that didn’t move the plot along.

          1. We can only hope and dream. What’s worse is that they had a good idea with “Tomrrowland” but they baked in a massive elitist and environmentalist message in it as well.

        2. I also liked John Carter AND TRON: Legacy, and am still angry that they killed the 3rd film, and that they marketed John Carter so badly that it will never get a sequel.

          1. TRON:Legacy was a fun movie and a great sequel that brought the story forward. Hell, I could even figure out what the next movie was going to be and had some great plot bits for it as well.

            1. I take some comfort in that there are definitely fanfics out there that are better than anything Disney could have dreamt up for further adventures in the TRON universe. (Also: I was not looking forward to the forced-Sam/Quorra romance that would have inevitably occurred in the third film. I found myself, in watching Legacy, more on the side of “If you want to get technical about it, they’re almost more siblings than anything else.” And I was actually kind of glad they either didn’t write in a romance in Legacy, or cut out the bits that had it–I thought the actors had good chemistry, but not romantic chemistry, heh.)

              1. I can understand why, and I definitely wouldn’t have done a Sam/Quora ship for the third movie. Mind you, the way I kept writing the third movie started turning into a Disney+ series to justify going into the Internet proper…

        3. Heh. Though I still don’t have high hopes for the 2nd Captain Marvel film (I only really liked the first one for Nick Fury and the Cat, and the Skrull leader who stole every scene he was in–usually with Samuel Jackson’s able assistance) I note that they aren’t having HER be the focus. They’re bringing in…others. (Including Monica Rambeau, who they set up nicely as a superhero in WandaVision.)

          I’m still holding out hope that the Loki series is good. I mean, it’s hard NOT to like anything with Tom Hiddleston in it (and I should point out that “Loki was being mind-controlled by Thanos” is a very old fan theory–to make up for the fact that Joss Whedon took an interesting, complicated antagonist and turned him into just a boring villain in the Avengers film. Much like Captain America, Whedon couldn’t figure out how to write Loki correctly, either.) But hopefully the combination of Hiddleston and Owens isn’t the ONLY reason to like it.

          1. They’ve changed the 2nd Captain Marvel movie to “The Marvels” (I think) and it might be a “passing the torch” movie to bring Ms Marvel from Disney+ to the big screen. And, I am annoyed at how they brought Monica into the MCU as Photon (but, then again, I thought “WandaVision” started out strong but massively screwed up at the midpoint and could have been much better…)

            My nasty suspicion is that they’ll kill off the Hiddleston Loki in the series, and put a female Loki in place as the “new” Loki. Who will be a “heroic” version of Loki.

            1. That would be irritating (the killing off of Loki). For one thing…I should think it would be MORE effective to their worldview to keep him as he is: genderfluid when he wants to be 😀 I mean, come ON that’s how it was in the myths! And there’s no reason to not have TWO Lokis cast (Hiddleston and a female Loki.) If they go that route, I’m cool with it–again, because that’s true to the myths.

              (I kept hoping for a crack, or a nod to the fact that Loki is a mom in the films, but alas no. Then again they seem to be implying that both Thor and Loki are still very young, in Asgardian terms, in the MCU.)

              1. They’ve killed off Loki several times already.

                Nameless Minion: “Thor! Thor! They killed Loki!”
                Thor: “What, again?”

                1. Yeah. I mean, it was even given a nod in Endgame where Thor is speculating that MAYBE Loki isn’t actually dead. Sure, that might have been the grief talking, but…it IS Loki, and he’s faked his death at least twice in the MCU so far…

            2. Also: though I found WandaVision overall to be meh (although not bad in terms of “how does a reality-altering being deal with grief? Answer: badly” but not something I will re-watch, and you could smell the “villain” coming a mile away), I actually quite liked Falcon/Winter Soldier, as it turned out to be not nearly so wokey-woke as I feared. Yeah, it dealt with racial issues, but I felt that it was a good deal more even-handed than I thought they would be. The “bad” Captain America replacement wasn’t actually portrayed as evil, just in way over his head, the very bitter Isaiah Bradley’s bitterness/hate was shown as understandable, but ultimately neither healthy nor a way to move forward. I didn’t agree with the whole “America will never accept a black Captain America”, especially as they patently proved that wrong in-series (and out–how can you not like Falcon? He’s fun.). Bucky was well done, and the villain was sympathetic, but not shown to be correct in her methods. (And the ultimate villain took a blah character that they’d bungled and made that character…well, certainly more interesting. And let us not forget the whole thing was probably worth Baron Zemo dancing the whitest of white man dances in a club, and that was hilarious.)

              1. WandaVision and Falcon/Winter Soldier were both just tedious and not fun at all. WandaVision fell apart half-way through (and, this is your strong female protagonist? No, this is terrible writing), and I had to force myself to watch Falcon/Winter Soldier past the second episode.

                1. Eh. I mostly enjoyed both, so different strokes 🙂 (Though I did like Falcon/Winter Soldier more than WandaVision, but largely because Wanda was depressing and sad and about a woman dealing with grief in all the wrong ways, heh.)

                    1. I think in part it’s because after the disappointment of the Thirteenth Doctor, they were fun and interesting by comparison. (ie, the part where the Who writers are then SO AFRAID to take risks in writing after the radical move of making the Doctor regenerate into a woman–nevermind that the ability to do so has been semi-implicit in the show from the beginning–that it becomes utterly bland pap to the point that even an entertaining and charismatic actress and companion-castmates–who should otherwise have been AWESOME in the role–couldn’t save it.)

                      Compared to that (and the disappointment of all the Star Wars films recently except for Rogue One), I’m somewhat easy to please, lol!

                    2. It didn’t help that the writing quality of the show had been in a definite down-turn in the Matt Smith era, only doing well because Peter Capaldi could make reading a box of Corn Flakes dramatic, and they chose an utterly gormless actress to play the Thirteenth Doctor.

                      Don’t get me wrong, I wanted a good female Doctor. But, the actress wasn’t it, the scripts weren’t it, and the general show wasn’t it.

                      Then…then they did “The Timeless Children” and utterly screwed up the continuity and history and general back-story…

                      Yea, I was not happy with the Thirteenth Doctor. Or the production staff. Or the BBC.

                    3. See, I liked the Matt Smith era. Almost all Doctor Who episodes are disconnected bottle stories with Humans Behaving Badly™ in which the Doctor saves the day and serves up a Moral Lesson™. (And usually the bottle scenario is one they’ve used half a hundred times by now.) At least with Smith we got to see Pissed-Off!Doctor taking the fight to the enemy across an entire couple of seasons. All while being neither angry all the time like Eccleston nor, well, constipated like Tennant. I barely watched one season of Capaldi and stopped entirely thereafter. The Moral Lessons™ just got to be too clangy.

                      (Also Karen Gillan was super hot.)

                    4. I actually adored Capaldi–Twelve ended up becoming my favorite Doctor. But, as with Tennant, that is as much/more to do with the actor’s charisma and skill than the writers, heh. That, and their love for the character was so intense that they could have made crap (and they both got some utter crap, though they also both got some very very good episodes) likable, because they loved being the Doctor SO MUCH.

                      I watched the first of 13’s seasons, and that’s been it. I only liked one episode–Rosa–but even it was awfully heavy handed and clunky. I think the actress could have done a lot better if given something other than bland gruel to act with, but the other problem is that she hasn’t got the passion for it that her four predecessors in NuWho had, or at least she doesn’t seem to. Again, though…I mostly put the blame on the writers. I mean, one can’t deny that, in this instance,the person playing the Doctor gets more than the usual share of blame–because they’re trying something so wildly new/different to before. (It’s not particularly fair–all the other Doctors had to live with crappy episodes, after all.) The problem, of course, is that the writers *should* have said “screw that, we’re going to treat the new Doctor same as we have the others, and throw in all the passion we previously put into writing episodes, though of course it means that some of them are going to suck” and instead have been so very, very cautious that it’s all just terribly boring. (Like Author in Charge noted, Capaldi probably could have saved it, but that’s because he’s just that awesome and amazing an actor. Jodi Whittaker is a decent actress, but she doesn’t have his chops.) And it’s so obvious it’s because She is a WOMAN(tm) that I find it offensive and sexist.

                      Also, frankly, they should have realized after the calibre of actress they cast to play Missy, they should have gotten an actress at LEAST that talented–and scenery-chewingly awesome–to play a female Doctor. (I adored Missy, she was so delightfully, evilly fun and interesting in a way the Master hasn’t been in a very, very long time. And you actually kind of wanted her to redeem herself–though I think they copped out on that at the end.) But I think, as with the writing, they went with a “safe” choice, and the results have been boring. (I liked her fine in Broadchurch…but she wasn’t particularly memorable other than doing angst quite well.)

                    5. I liked the Matt Smith era as well, and I liked Capaldi and how he played the role. But, we were seeing the signs of the New Scum BBC showing up in the early days of the Matt Smith run.

                      And, everybody that I’ve pointed this out agrees with me-the late Smith/early Capaldi run was just Clara Oswald using the Doctor as her simp.

                    6. Yeah, I liked the idea of Clara, and the actress was perfectly fine in the role, but the final season of Smith episodes kinda went straight downhill. (And really, Victorian!Clara was the best Clara.)

                    7. Heh. Yeah, if ever there was born a woman made to look AMAZING in corsets and bustles, it was Jenna Coleman…

                      And I really quite loved the Paternoster Gang, and have always been disappointed that they vanished after Capaldi’s first episode (I suppose they decided the costuming/makeup budget whenever they showed up was just too expensive or something, sigh.) I’d have loved seeing them get their own spinoff, even if it was just a limited run. (And surely they were more fun and less depressing than Torchwood ended up being.)

                    8. Yeah. I mean, I didn’t hate Clara, not at all, but she and the Doctor were NOT good for each other (which, I must say, they did a decent job of acknowledging in how they wrapped up Clara’s storyline. )I found Bill and Nardol to be far better. (And not so damn toxic.)

                      Bill, in particular, was I felt the way to do a “minority” character (in her case black and lesbian) and NOT make her minority features the most important things about her. And I really loved the father/daughter (or, much to Twelve’s indignation when people took a look at him, and her, and went “Granddad?”) relationship they had going on, especially while he was “stuck” at the university she worked at and decided to take over her education (and made her work her butt off for it, too.)

                      And Nardol went from being a joke character to quite a fun little guy. Really weird, but brave.

                    9. I didn’t really care for Bill. I did like the fact that neither one of them was in love with the other, and that he could act in an avuncular manner towards her. (Really, I saw him more as a crazy old uncle rather than father or grandfather.)

                      I didn’t like the fact that her ending was essentially the same as Clara’s.

                    10. Yeah, I didn’t like her ending, either. At that point it was becoming kind of clear that the Who writers were running out of steam/ideas, and I think they’d gotten so caught up in the whole Missy ending as well as Twelve’s pending regeneration that they half-assed it. Sadly. And we don’t even know what happened to Nardole–presumably he lived out the rest of his life fairly happily with the colonists on the other part of the ship after they stopped the Cybermen.

                  1. AND YES SAME. I have NEVER forgiven them for Donna. She remains my favorite companion (with Rory–RORY, mind you, NOT Amy, who I thought was a snot in need of a good hard slap most of the time–a close second.)

                    I was really pissed when Twelve had that little speech about how it was time for him to fix some things…and they DID NOT INCLUDE DONNA IN THAT. Grr.

            3. Yeah, WandaVision started off really great, but SPOILERS “Agnes flew into the town no problems barely an inconvenience where Supreme Wizard Dude Dr. Strange somehow couldn’t be bothered to show up” (it’s since come out those weird commercials were supposed to feature Strange trying to use the sitcom format to send messages in to Wanda and convince her to knock it off, but in real life they could not get Cumberbatch in front of a camera due to the Oohgahboogahbug travel restrictions and all the greenscreen cameras in the UK being broken or something).

              Based on the Marvel D+ stuff to date, they will not have any changes in these series as significant as killing Hiddleston Loki – besides the premise seems to be he’s off in transdimensional jail anyway, so they could just throwaway-line him out of a movie due to “time works differently there” .

              My thought is their theory of D+ Marvel stuff is kinda Agents of Shield with bigger budget, ending up showing flashy teevee that either yields only upcoming-movie-lead-in impacts at all on characters or story – see Wanda MOSPOILERS with the finale’s imaginary-Vision making albino-Vision remember who he was, but he just jets away and does not do anything about the then-current crisis, and then Wanda’s imaginary twin offspring being heard offscreen by scary-magic-book-study-Wanda, being dropped into the last ep as big lead-ins to the next Dr.Strange movie. I also think they would be happy implementing what viewers would have reasonably thought had already been established after a brief dip into “Wait; What?” doubt (see Falcon as New Cap – I sure thought this has already at least been heavily foreshadowed in prior movie post-credit scenes).

              It’s not like the Picard thing where they bring back beloved characters like Hugh so they can kill them. Marvel has not allowed JJ Abrams to play in their sandbox.

              1. I thought the reason why they didn’t have Dr. Strange in WandaVision was that they didn’t want their Strong Wamen Protagonist needing to learn anything from any man about how to do things. Saw a few articles and videos that the production staff were saying this, and that the entire show was about Wanda’s grief (in which case, that makes it worse…).

                And, the show just went bad half-way through. Didn’t help that the creative staff didn’t have any clues about what the fans were thinking about or asking. The fan theories were turning out better than the show and there were hints that they should have been dropping for the next shows in the MCU/MSU and didn’t.

                (Case in point-now that Disney has the Fox X-Men license, they will want to start putting mutants in the MCU and that they used the actor who played Quicksilver in the X-Men movies vs. the AAoS actor was thought by a lot of people that this was going to be the start. Wasn’t, they just wanted to…troll, I think?)

                And, I watched Falcon/Winter Soldier and I know about the Churchill comment about “hitting somebody in the head” on some things. The series was just sad, predictable, and didn’t even take any real risks.

                I’m just tired of crappy shows, period, And nobody seems to know how to make good movies or programming any more.

                1. I do agree that the WandaVision director being somehow confused that people were irked that faux-Quicksilver wasn’t actually the mutant-verse version of him, and I was going “WOMAN. Did you not do ANY RESEARCH? Idiot.” Because clearly she didn’t, and neither did the House of Mouse. Also idiots.

                  1. If they wanted it to be Some Other Random Dude, they should have cast Some Other Random Actor, not the actor who played that specific character in the X-Men movies. The “Wait – She recast her Brother?!” line would still make perfect sense. If they wanted to be edgy they could have cast some recognizable actor from the world of sitcoms.

                    I think someone wanted to troll the drooling fans with that casting choice, and if the poor director was confused, then I suppose they trolled her too.

                2. That “No Mansplaining!” story is ex post facto.

                  The commiebug shutdowns meant they had all the commercial scenes that were supposed to be Strange trying to sneak messages into the format to get Wanda to just stop it already, and there was a scene written for the last couple eps where he manifested somehow inside the hex once Agnes was revealed to ‘splain to completely untrained Wanda how that chaos magic thingee worked.

                  Because Cumberbatch was stuck in the locked down and fully bug-panicked UK, they had that “who the heck is that guy?” actor shoot all the commercials instead, cut out the Strange’splaining scene, and added the scene where Agnes monologues ‘splaining it all to Wanda instead, because immortal witch ‘splaining is allowed because it’s all guuuurls.

                  1. I’ve heard it both ways, and which is true?

                    That they were having technical difficulties cutting people in because of the Crow Flu?
                    Or that they didn’t want to have any mansplaining to a strong female protagonist?

                    I’m not sure what it says about the industry and the people in it that I can believe the second (i.e. nothing to degrade “strong female characters”) much more easily than the first.

        4. I actually liked John Carter too – it was a bit bloated and wandered around a bunch, but behind that it was a massive disaster of an out-of-control production, with simply massive reshoots on stuff that should have been changed at script review, and it was edited together to include stuff because it had been rendered rather than did anything to advance the story. It could be recut to a much better pace and probably lose 20 minutes.

          Disney productions doing massive reshoots (the last Star Wars was still shooting pickups a week or so before the premiere) are indicative that Disney does not actually retain corporate knowledge on how to preproduce films.

          1. Huh. I didn’t know it had had such a troubled production! But yeah, given Disney’s track record the last decade or so, it’s not really a surprise. Their OTHER flop that same year–the Lone Ranger movie–truly was a dumpster fire.

          2. I don’t think anyone knows how to do movie pre-production these days. I can’t think of a movie that didn’t have serious problems behind the scenes since 2014-15 or so.

      2. Disney has utterly corrupted copyright law. It needs to go down; fracturing in a hundred different companies.

      3. I doubt “John Carter” would have been such a bomb if they’d done a decent job marketing it – or spent less money on such a bad marketing job. I liked the movie, but if I didn’t know it was based on Burroughs’ “A Princess of Mars” I probably wouldn’t have gone to see it, and if I had I would have have written it off as hopelessly cliched and derivative.

        1. This actually happened: Youngins without any knowledge of the source called it too derivative of Star Wars – it even used some of the same names! – not realizing it was George Lucas who was intentionally being derivative.

          1. Heh. Youngest Brother had decided to read the original books in the runup to the film–he loved Tarzan (as do I, though I haven’t yet read the Barsoom books). As a result, he LOVED the movie, felt they did a pretty good job overall of sticking to the book. Though we all made snarky comments about the fact that Dejah wore a good many more clothes in the film than she did in the books, lol.

  24. Oddly enough, I had some thoughts along those lines that I was thinking of sharing here, wrt BLM.

    Aside from that, I strongly believe that Joe Biden’s Body can be filked to John Brown’s Body. I refer to Commie LaWhorish as Kam Harris, because it scans the same as Jeff Davis.

    When a black criminal is killed by a police officer, criminals get to burn black neighborhoods.

    When a black police officer is killed by a criminal, can police officers burn down black neighborhoods? Why not?

    If criminals can burn down the buildings of the law-abiding in reprisal for the death of a criminal, does this mean that law men can burn down buildings used by junkies, agitators, and squatters in reprisal for the death of a law man?

    Back in 1920, when they burned down a bunch of black neighborhoods, those acts are now understood as white supremacist.

    In 2020, when they burned down a bunch of black neighborhoods, those acts are now ‘understood’ as ‘fighting against white supremacism’.

    Dear Sir, can you please tell me what difference there is between Black Live Matter (c) and Jim Crow?

    Asking these questions for a friend, purely hypothetically.

    1. Black Lives Matter definitely needs a new name, given that I’m pretty sure that they are almost certainly responsible for ending more black lives than the police. (Directly, I mean, not even counting the black murder victims that might have been saved if they hadn’t been pushing this “defund the police” nonsense). I haven’t thought of a good one for them, though. Any ideas?

      1. Well, Boche Lives Matter is obviously the organization that would have protested the Nuremberg trials, and the hanging of Eichmann.

        Hmm. White Supremacist Criminal Lives Matter.

        Take Sarah’s conclusions about the families of the figure heads being messed up. In circumstances post Martin or Brown, a black man who commits crimes does so with callous disregard for the possibility that being killed in the commission of a crime will be used as an excuse for riots, and arson of black neighborhoods.

        These arsons of black neighborhoods are acts of white supremacist terrorism.

        Therefore, Barack Obama, Ben Crump, Marilyn Mosby, Shuan King, /and/ George Floyd are white supremacists.

      2. *Only* Black Lives Matter… at least, the moonbats scream that “All Lives Matter” is hate speech…

  25. I do not refer to the PRC satrapy as an ‘administration’. I often use the term ‘regime’.

  26. And then there are the parts that don’t get said because the style sheet specifies that those things be assumed rather than argued. Which are all of those basic Marxist things. The lens through which everything else is viewed. Collective identity, collective status, collective power, collective oppression, collective guilt. So that no matter how profoundly UN-oppressed I am, I still own the oppression that my grandmother and greatgrandmother experienced. No matter how unfortunate my birth conditions, I still own the privilege of someone I’ve never met and never will meet. No matter how I treat people, I still own the guilt of people I don’t know, have never met, am not related to, and have nothing in common with other than my race.

    And that the current definition of racism is any objection to that.

    By the way, Sarah, thanks for linking me on Instapundit. I wasn’t expecting that.

    1. “You’re living on stolen land.” Okay, fine. Where is my home, then? “It’s where your ancestors come from.” On my mom’s side, they’ve been in North America since the early 1600s. “What about your dad’s side?” Well, Poland—but only after the Napoleonic Wars, so only two centuries as opposed to four. And Poland kept getting partitioned out, so it only existed as a country for about half that time. “But you’re living on stolen land!” So—what’s the statute of limitations on that again? Shall we talk about Israel? Because if we have to go back centuries, why not go back before the Bablyonian occupation…

      (Seriously, though, if we’re talking about ancestral crimes, nobody would have a home. Nobody.)

      1. The “Native Americans” and Canuckistanis’ “First Nations.” Uh, no… they’re the third or fourth wave out of Siberia, depending on which archeological theory you’re following. That group having mostly exterminated their predecessors.

        > Nobody.

        “And in this week’s news, the Neanderthal Returnists, being anyone with more than three percent of Neanderthal DNA, are demanding the return of the British Islands and Europe, which they assert were their ancestral homeland before the attempted racial extermination by the sapiens….”

        1. Indeed. Every time I read about Kennewick Man, I want to ask, “Do you really think there has been a continuous history of a tribe currently called the Umatilla in that one place for 10,000 years? Seriously? Because we know tribes moved around and frequently changed their territory just in the 500 years post-Columbus.”

          Of course, I’ve known various Indians who denied that their distant ancestors came from Siberia. “We have always been here” is an article of dogma.

          1. My professional mentor was an Ojibwe chief. He spoke of his grandmother’s grandmother being a child during the flight from Canada (which then meant more or less Quebec) to Minnesota, to escape the Iroquois genocides.

            Yesterday was looking up genealogy for a friend, and in the back row of the family tombstones discovered an Ojibwe woman who was an infant in 1800, roughly the time of that flight westward, and was born in “Canada” but first recorded in Minnesota.

            I wonder if they knew each other.

            1. Remember that Europeans reintroduced horses to the Americas as they had gone extinct here. Thus, the entire “great horse culture” of the Plains only came into existence because of the horses that Europeans introduced.

              1. True, and as some have pointed out… absent horses and guns, life on the dry plains was (as many a European settler learned) so hard that … well, the only “Plains Indians” were scattered unfortunates who’d been driven out of the softer lands to the east, and otherwise the “Plains Indian” really didn’t exist.

          2. Funny how leftists will endlessly mock creationists and other people who believe the Bible is literally true but Amerindians who demand their oral traditions and legends be considered as evidence in a court of law over the custody of ancient remains are treated with the utmost of sympathy.

            1. Some religions are deemed more equal than others. Compare the left’s response to criticism of Islam as compared to their praising “Piss Christ” and “The Book of Mormon”.

          3. BTW cynical voices have opined that the real reason the feather-Indians have been up in arms every time anyone wants to do DNA analysis of the scarce North American archeological remains is… because they know damn well that would conclusively negate any claim they might have to ancestral and/or sacred lands, since said remains would prove to be no relation to present Indians.

            1. Pretty much this … the fight for territory was as violent as it was fluid. The Comanche roared out of their original territory in the foothills of the Sierras, once they adapted to a roving horse culture. They shoved the Lipan Apache, the Tonkawa, and other southwestern tribes out of the way … the Sioux fought with the Crow and the Pawnee. And why were those various tribes interested in making alliances with the various whites on various fronts?
              Hmm. It is a puzzlement, so it is.

              1. The Spanish encouraged the Comanche to push out the Apache, because they thought they Comanche would be easier to deal with. They were, after one New Mexican governor put serious hurt on them. The people in Texas were still fair game.

                The Apaches either pushed out the Antelope Creek peoples of the Texas Panhandle, or moved into recently abandoned land after climate shifts forced the Antelope Creek peoples to leave. (Archaeological theory is still not 100% certain about the sequence.)

        2. And per the latest DNA analysis I heard about… looks like those Siberians were at least partly regionally-adapted early Europeans. Which makes the American Indians, of whichever wave… the earliest European settlers.

          I quite like the idea of “Neanderthal Returnist”. Don’t forget that it includes that swath through Turkey, the Middle East, and all the way to Persia and the southern parts of west Siberia.

          1. >> “I quite like the idea of “Neanderthal Returnist”.”

            I just did a search for that term and the only hit I got was your comment. What are you referring to?

        3. And of course while the groups of that, after getting the heck out of Africa, went both left to Europe and right to Asia both decided Neander girls were hot, only the specific group of that turned right after getting the heck out of Africa and ended up settling all the way at the end of as far as you can walk across Melanesia were the ones that figured out that Denisovan girls were hot.

      2. “We all are living on land somebody took at some point in time. Just, some people were better at taking-and keeping-that land than other.”

        Mark my words, “stolen land apologies” are going to be the next “insert your pronouns here” thing for the Woke Faithful to demonstrate that they’re maintaining their cant in the faith.

          1. In some US universities as well. I sat there and mentally recited all the OTHER groups who had been shoved out, and in what order, by whom. If you’re gonna play the game, play it all the way back to the end of the dinosaurs.

            1. Well, there’s your problem. We need to get people to stand up and make their group’s claim for the land (no need to actually be a part of the group! Just identify as one!), and loudly insult each other and remember all the known massacres. Also maybe make some up. Just keep going back. Any genuine evidence of human sacrifice cultures (such as at some Cahokian sites, yuck) should be brought up in gory detail.

              If it gets really obnoxious, the “land acknowledgements” will probably go away.

              1. Mound 72 is what I’m thinking of.

       Newish info about the people’s bones found at the center of the big human sacrifice tomb.

       Newish info about the people who were found all beat to heck and decapitated, instead of neatly sacrificed.

       Newish info about how a few of the human sacrifices were men, instead of all being young women.

                1. Akshully, I’ve been been rereading a story about that.

                  Epic fantasy xianxia with mythosy dungeon crawls. Epic fantasy=loads of characters, historical background is important. Xianxia means immortal kung fu wizards.

                  Getting dragon themed powers isn’t rare for kung fu wizards in the xianxia genre.

                  One of the major viewpoint characters, a kung fu wizard girl, has gotten some powers that are partly dragon but mostly dinosaur. Bunch of voices in her head, inherited from immortal dinosaurs, I suspect perhaps entirely deceased ones. Some of the dinosaurs are pretty calm about things, but some of them are pretty salty. Don’t like meteors, and the complaints about monkeys, elves, etc. are a bit lengthy.

                  Their interpretation of some of the deep history is interestingly nuts compared to some of the other lunatics who were around when it happened.

                  The influence of the Yellow King has shown up, and something else that I’ve vaguely associated with the crawling chaos. I’m not up on my Lovecraft timelines, so I may be wrong to suspect that a Shoggoth or a Flying Polyp could show up and start bitching about how the Dinosaurs stole their land, ruined their civilization, incurred a great enmity, etc.

                    1. King In Yellow, Yellow Sign, pallid mask, Carcosa, etc.

                      I’m guessing you are still working on the first thirty-forty chapters then?

                      On the other hand, there are a lot of subtle clues in that, easily missed in the pace of reading it for the first time.

                      It seems like every update, there is a new detail that shows the falsehood of one of my theories from reading too much between the lines.

            2. There have been bar association meetings (the legal bar, not the drinking one) that open with such recitals now. The same people demanding these recitals of course do not apply their own logic to Jews, who have lived in what is now modern Israel for at least 2500 years, and whose absence has only occurred when they have been forcibly removed, the most recent being when Jordan illegally occupied the areas in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem in 1948.

              Jordanian law to this day bans Jews from owning property, as do the laws in most Muslim countries. The so-called Palestinians (who only started calling themselves that in the 1960s after their efforts to destroy Israel and kill all the Jews had failed) insist that they are entitled to a Judenfrei state, i.e. a state that is completely free of Jews. They actively rewrite history to erase Jewish presence from history, Indeed, Hamas, Hezbollah and other such groups are very open in their goal of WORLDWIDE GENOCIDE of Jews. Yet Israel, when it defends itself from those who openly desire to kill them all, are the ones condemned by the global left and by an increasing portion of the Democratic Party.

              The Democratic Party’s “solution” to the Mideast becomes more and more like Nazi Germany’s “solution” every day.

              Our feckless press of course never asks such questions of the Democrats.

            1. Just like Mao’s Cultural Revolution did. Thus, the current insanity is Mao’s Cultural Revolution Redux.

              Some of us warned that this was going to happen.

      3. I have literally seen a leftist say that all land should be handed over to the last non-white occupant. Immediately after I pointed out that the Seminoles had invaded Florida and forced out other tribes from the land they now claim, and got angry with Spaniards who bought it from those tribes, disregarding their right of conquest.

        1. I have literally seen a leftist say that all land should be handed over to the last non-white occupant.

          “You first.”

          1. What they are really saying is that their “solution” is the same as Nazi Germany’s final solution; ultimately their ideology requires the murder of all of those in the racial identity groups they have decreed to be illegitimate.

        2. Technically, some of those Spaniards weren’t white. They were persons of color because some of them had some Arabic, Jewish, Moorish, Basque, or general Mediterranean/Asia Minor genes in them. And discriminating against tribal Visigoths on the basis of outmoded standards of non-tribal persons is just RAYCIST.

          I can play this game all day.

          1. That’s why race is such a useless concept. It’s completely arbitrary, the answers to “How many races are there? What are they?” will vary wildly depending on where and when you ask them.

            Race was invented by ignorant people to rationalize their immoral behavior.

            1. Well, race mattering, yes.

              It’s useful to describe appearances– but “white” is not very useful, for an example, especially when they keep being confused if that is actually People Of Pallor or just “not black.” The gal I knew in A school who had the same first and last name was obviously a German (last name), not a UK (last name). It’s hard to describe the exact things, but…. I look Irish. And she looked German. My dad looks Scottish. (Well, he looks like a clone of his great grandfather. But anyways….)

              1. The thing is, all the other “races” can say the exact same thing. Chinese, Korean, and Japanese all look different if you know what to look for. And trying to assign a higher meaning to looks is just silly. It’s like trying to claim that hair color says anything about personality.

                1. Chinese, Korean, and Japanese all look different if you know what to look for.

                  ::glees:: and you cannot… well, actually , you probably can…. see how happy I was to figure out SOME of those, and be able to SEE it.

                  It’s a real thing, it’s just not a morally meaningful thing. It’s a shorthand for “what do they look like”.

                  1. But given the loaded nature of the word “race” we should use another term for the suite of appearance traits associated with a region.

                    And then there’s the fact that while there are people who look Irish, it’s not everyone who is Irish. And some of the people who look Irish aren’t going to be Irish at all. It a heuristic, not an algorithm.

                    1. Why?

                      They hijacked the last one to make it loaded– so why assume they won’t keep with it?

                      And no, not everybody who is “Irish” looks “Irish,” I’m MAYBE a quarter and half of that is “we don’t actually know he just jumped ship from the Patrick.”

                      But it is an accurate way to describe me in a manner that folks could find me in a crowd.

                    2. No, the last one was born loaded, it was about far more than just appearance. All kinds of social and moral traits were assumed to be linked to things like nose shape and skin color.

                      I’m not saying we should eschew saying “She’s the Irish-looking woman over there.” But we should realize that Black, White, Asian, and Hispanic don’t actually contain much meaningful information.

                    3. mom’s mom: pale skin like peaches and cream. I mean, she never even wrinkled. Intense blue eyes. Pitch black straight hair, and that weird facial structure that says “Irish.” Yeah, some Irish blood (probably) but mostly Portuguese.

                    4. Yeah. I dunno what it is about the facial structure, but I was once informed–by someone who spent a LOT of time in Ireland–that even if I didn’t have the intensely red hair, I’d be marked as a Celt just by my face alone.

                      There seem to be two types: one is the snub-nosed Celt, the other is the forbidding looking Celt. I seem to be the latter…

                      (everyone I met in Eastern Europe also always assumed I was either German or British, for the same reasons–and I was told it was only partly because of the hair color. My accent wasn’t specific enough for them to be sure, but they were SURE I was either German or Brit, lol.)

                    5. In Greece and all across Europe, I was most usually taken for English. Because I spoke English, and I looked … really, rather English. Pale skin, blue eyes, light brown hair. But if my daughter (who was white-blond as a toddler/school age) was with me, then we were assumed to be German. And if those locals got an eye of the car that I was driving (a Volvo sedan) they they assumed we were Swedish.
                      Curiously enough, once when on a street in Germany, I was approached by some American tourists who thought by the looks of me, in a khaki skirt and LLBean sweater, if I spoke English and could direct them to someplace. I assumed by this that my native camouflage had been enormously successful…

      4. It’s morally retarded to feel shame, or pride, for something over which you have no responsibility.

        1. They work to conflate admiration and … not sure what the right word would be, not disgust, revulsion is a bit too visceral… with “pride” and “shame.”

          “I wish to emulate this” and “I wish no-one would emulate this” aren’t pride and shame, but they get classed in there a lot.

          1. They want Whites to be ashamed for slavery while Blacks should be proud that their ancestors were oppressed. The new ritual of acknowledging “stolen land” is part of the same moral depravity.

            1. Isn’t the implication of the “We Was Kings” narrative that once upon a time back in Africa they were themselves the oppressors? “King” implies a power differential, and any power differential means oppression. So (tongue firmly in cheek) wasn’t slavery and transportation the socially just punishment that prior oppression? Asking for a friend.

              1. “My ancestors were enslaved and oppressed.”

                – Every human on the planet

                “My ancestors were oppressive slaveowners.”


          2. >> “not sure what the right word would be, not disgust, revulsion is a bit too visceral…”


            Or maybe “disdain” if even that’s too much?

    2. Collective identity, collective status, collective power, collective oppression, collective guilt.

      Leftist: All narratives are just a cover for one group oppressing another.
      Me: What about the narrative that says “all narratives are just a cover for one group oppressing another”?
      Leftist: …

  27. As I replied just this morning to a person on PJM chiding me for saying that Zucker is an Atheist Hebrew – not a Jew. He used the “Jew is a colloquial description for any member of the Hebrew tribes.”

    Quite aware of that, @Gary. It is a bad use of language, nevertheless.

    Colloquially, “Jew” is also used to describe converts to the religion of Judaism – converts that have no more connection to the Hebrew tribes than I do.*

    The word, like others (such as “Catholic” or “Black”), is commonly used for evil purpose by both sides. If you dislike and oppose the actions of Biden, Pelosi, the Obamas – for justified reasons, you are called out as a religious or racial bigot, your evidence and arguments therefore to be discarded. On the other side, describing them as typical examples of “those people” tars the entire religion or race with the same brush.

    I don’t believe in playing either of those games, thank you.

    *That is, I have no Hebraic “blood” when one does not subscribe to the fantastic theory that the Irish are descended from the “lost tribes” of Israel. Which I do not.

  28. One new usage that particularly bugs me is “enslaved person.” I know that the people of the Good Intentions Paving Company are avoiding “slave” to avoid the implication of slavery ever having been legitimate. But it strikes me as a worse insult to deny the reality of slavery, to imply that the various “enslaved men,” “enslaved women,” and “enslaved children” were only playing socially-constructed parts, rather than suffering the actually-imposed legal and social status of slavery.

    1. The other justification for not just saying “slave” is that slavery was a condition, not a race or ethnicity. [Tell that to some modern cultures!] So in theory slavery was temporary, and the person had a different identity besides slave. This falls apart when you start looking at slavery outside the North American colonies and US.

    2. Ah, but you are denying their PERSONHOOD. Really. Seen it in the last week.

      Me, I chiefly notice they use their iPads while wearing Nikes to say it.

      1. Ah, but those slave labor manufacturers, just like those John Effing Kerry admitted build all those “Chinese” solar panels, are not slaveholding slaves of greater melanin, so that’s totally different.

      2. Are there non-person slaves? In this context, rather than slave drives or slave cylinders.

          1. Not at all. I find that the Socratic Method is very useful to expose the ignorance of those with more certainty than knowledge.

            I should probably work on my tolerance for hemlock.

          1. …have they met a cat? Pretty sure it’s the biped that’s enslaved there

            1. Not to mention my mother’s dog, Maggie, also known as “The Princess.” I’m pretty sure SHE considers the humans to be her staff as well. (She’s actually a really sweet little dog, but OH MY does she grasp how being appallingly adorable gets the humans to do whatever she wants. And the Look she gives you if you tell her to get her smelly little self off the pillow–see, she prefers to sleep/sit ON a pillow–would leave smoking piles of ashes if only she could manage it, lol.)

  29. I have one I’ve used for the covid nonsense … Opience … its when some talking head Dr. gets on TV and spouts some obviously non scientific nonsense … he/she is simply stating a misinformed opinion but cloaking it in their “science” credentials to mask the obvious nonsense … its Opience (opinion masquerading as science)

  30. I think what is grinding me down is the ever broader push by the administration and business to violate my conscience.

    They won’t be satisfied with my coexistence. I must be as they are, or else.

    I don’t know when it will hit, but I feel it in the air.

    1. I feel it, too. It’s like a vague unease, as if I need to be very, very vigilant. About something I can’t see.

    2. “They won’t be satisfied with my coexistence. I must be as they are, or else.”
      So the left is just basically The Borg. Got it.

      1. It was ever thus. It’s never been enough to just do your job and get by and even mouth the Party slogans; you must love Big Brother. The only difference is that they have the power to enforce it in this country now.

          1. Of course, what they intend and what actually happens aren’t always too similar.

    3. Cost of putting a senile pedophile in power over others.

      As sexual predators, pedophiles tend to have a strongly developed appetite for pushing others to compromise their own integrity.

      Senile people don’t have the judgement any longer not to push noticeably against the people they can’t budge.

      Throw in the communism, the idiocy, and the lack of actual leadership, the result you describe is almost certain.

    4. The most alarming lately was word of a new division in DHS that is specifically tasked with countering “domestic terrorism and extremism” (which as we know means pretty much anyone who is white, patriot, or Trump supporter).

      Also, this push for 5G… which (per some who’ve been studying it) would be better named the CCP’s mass surveillance scheme.

      There’s an intersection made in hell…

      1. There’s nothing wrong with 5G as such, it’s just a protocol. The problem is that CCP fronts like Huawei were first off the mark in designing the equipment for it and have been pushing it onto the unwary and the quislings. And we can’t trust that their equipment doesn’t have surveillance and malicious backdoors built in because, well, CCP.

        1. I believe there are some issues with 5G interfering with existing signals for other things that make it potentially hazardous to things like navigation.

          1. I understand that some of the sprectrums used were previously more monopolized by radar, etc.

            Radar are of some military utility, and can be really messed with with other signals sharing the same bandwidth.

            Big Tech has a suspicious pattern of ties to the PRC, and behavior advantaging the PRC. However, it is possible that some avenues of speculation are purely paranoid nutjobbery.

            1. The problem as I vaguely recall it has to do with where all that data gets schlepped through on its way not only to cellphones but also to the Internet of Things, frex those self-driving smart cars and critical infrastructure. Whose servers, whose backdoored hardware, and how much control do you have over that? There’s a guy Newt has interviewed a few times (and I can’t catch his name, dammit) who laid out a lot of pros and cons, and what we’d need to do to make it secure instead of merely the world’s largest automated surveillance network, conveniently available to the CCP.

              1. I just wrote a long comment on another blog regarding how achievable IT security is. (Central question had already been addressed by other people, much more competent in the issue than I am.)

                There are some deep issues in software, that mean that, as a result of the human side, there is a tendency to design software that has deep security flaws.

                What big tech does in the ordinary course of usual stupidity means that conspiracy is not a necessary explanation.

                Yes, PRC influence in California makes the long term tendencies of Silicon Valley something that could have been orchestrated as sabotage.

                However, the PRC bureaucracies are broken and overconfident when it comes to managing domestic matters. How likely is it that their foreign affairs and foreign policy bureaucrats understand enough of human reality to understand that this behavior would be sabotage, and that they should encourage it?

  31. The youth vote in the ‘60s wasn’t nearly as split as claimed. The Left was just concentrated and visible. (And the media was pushing the narrative with all its might.)

    1. Bernie Sanders already said that yes, he’s a nationalist socialist (as opposed to internationalist socialist). And then he couldn’t understand why everyone Over A Certain Age was wincing and facepalming.

  32. It doesn’t work.

    No one knows what you’re saying and they just call you nuts and a babbling Q-follower. The get alongs (and I’m beginning to hate them worse than the activists) won’t understand until the beast turns on them. Or maybe not even then.

  33. Fellow conspiracy minded madmen.

    I have a theory about Amazon I would like feedback on.

    Suppose that the most vital tech workers understand that computers do not “just work”, and that reliability and security require visibility and traceability.

    Then, perhaps a company that goes all in on woke worship of state power and censorship will tend to drive off or stress the people who are doing subtle little things to keep software defects from exploding.

    Sure, the standard model is that tech workers are all left. It seems that if that were entirely true, that it would be unlikely that Biden’s campaign would have needed to cheat so heavily.

    I think the quality of work done by tech workers may be suffering as a result of concern over the Biden regime.

    I think woke leaders, now, are toxic jackasses driving off the people their companies need. If for no other reason than that if you make a living from advanced programming, your future income depends partly on your reputation for producing trustworthy work that delivers on promises made.

    I think that even supposing that the whole tech workforce is MOSS officers on H1B visas, they might be a little stressed at the possibility of the boog going badly for them.

    1. As I’ve said before, I work in tech for A Very Large Company You’ve Definitely Heard Of. While the trendy CRT/DIE crap has been coming down from Above and is a big deal at the upper corporate levels, our divisional leadership has been pretty light-handed with us.

      One possibility is that our upper divisional leadership is mostly east Indian immigrant, and therefore not as steeped in guilt as American whites would be, so the divisional line is “we should actively mentor and recruit more smart black kids”, not “we should hire unqualified black kids to make our quotas”. (We don’t have a lot of black engineers; the ones we did were very good and got quickly promoted to out of engineering and into management, just like our also-very-good female engineers.)

      But I think the more likely possibility is that they are aware that we are valuable assets who could easily take our expertise down the street at any time.

      1. A tech company whose founder took marital advice from Jeffrey Epstein, who didn’t kill himself? No need to answer, I’m in the belly of another beast.

    2. You aren’t wrong.

      Consider Basecamp’s desperation move to get rid of their infection as an example of how bad it is.

      We also have another problem that has been mentioned here before: the entire industry is going to suffer for a few years because of the lack of conferences in 2020/2021 where people can swap ideas off the record and put faces to names.

      1. Yeah, that is not an organization that needs a monopoly on medical education.

        I’ve been thinking of writing an anonymous letter to some politicians. It comes to mind that changes to medical accreditation may also be in order for that.

  34. Mrs. Hoyt, Daughter-in law of Liberty, if I may, I surely do like the cut of your jib. THANK YOU for bringing everyone’s attention to the careful selection & use of terms. Words. Language!

    Language controls thought, thought controls will, & will controls actions. Allowing our enemies to control our language allows them to influence our thoughts, & hence our will & our actions.

    The continued use of the enemies preferred terms is, how shall we say, downright maddening, perhaps insane even, totally bat s… well, cuckoo for cocoa puffs crazy, anyway. It’s the work of those who cannot wait to wear chains & board railcars. Ok, maybe that last one is a bridge too far. But it’s definitely a bad thing. Winning total war starts with winning the battle for language.

    The enemy can have their own dictionary when they’ve done something to actually build civilization, rather than just try to tear it down. (Which will never happen, btw, or we would have never gotten to where we are now in the first place.)

  35. Ever since the day itself, I’ve been calling January 6th a peaceful protest. If you compare it to what they call by that name, it was almost a pro-government lovefest.

      1. far more so than the “Fiery but peaceful” one in Minneapolis, and much of the not peaceful 6th stuff was false flag or from the fed side of things.

  36. Leftist Linguistic Legerdemain

    A few years ago I was living just South of Santa Fe, New Mexico, and by default reading the Santa Fe New Mexican, the staff of which obviously thought that either coast was beyond human ken. Provincial, limited, and in desperate need of a literate editor, still it was words on paper, and I was and am an addict.
    However, Santa Fe has as many eco-nazis and politically “correct” idiots as Santa Barbara or Davis. Occasionally I got mad. I sent this in response to one severe case of recto-cranial insertion:

    In response to S_’s letter of the 30th of Jan.:
    So no one can be racist who is not white and no one can be sexist who is not a man? And if one thinks otherwise one is disrespectful or unintelligent?
    This sounds to me like the leftist semantic/linguistic conditioning of the sixties; if you called a communist a communist you were a McCarthyite. Those folks were liberals, or better still, progressives. You couldn’t say Property Owner, that betrayed you as failing to understand that property was theft; but Landlord was good, because it made them sound evil. America was always wrong, and anyone who said otherwise was ignorant of history. If you owned more than one shirt while you disagreed with them you were an exploiter. A noted philosopher defined the tactic as the “Argument from Intimidation”. “Oh, only a brute or a racist would suggest someone non-white and non-male could be a racist!”
    This is the same use of language to condition thought.
    Attribute a capability for evil based solely on race or sex, and mask it with political correctness and the urge Not To Offend. Tie it up with the ribbon of linguistic nicety.
    In my mind, it is still the disgusting error of attributing evil based on race or sex.
    Argue that bigotry and prejudice do not constitute racism but require the empowerment of institutional dominance? Tell that to the Anglo kid being gang-beaten because of his parentage. The argument is essentially a sophistry. Racism is defined by S_ as acting out prejudice successfully and commonly. So have you stopped beating your wife? Use the word after accepting that definition and you accept a premise of racial guilt.
    Mr. S_ and his politically correct ilk need to drop some of their self-righteousness and self hatred and start thinking.

    I sent off the letter, the paper edited it to take out most of the sting I had endeavored to put into it, and I steamed a bit.

    Then I got to thinking; always a perilous course. And I found myself contemplating how thoroughly the Left has preempted the positive ground in language. It reminds me of the George Carlin routine about the differing terminologies of baseball and football; Baseball is played in a park by men who wear caps and who pitch balls…football on a gridiron, by men who wear helmets and who throw bullet passes.” I paraphrase him, but you get the idea.
    A tax which penalizes industry, productivity, enterprise, a willingness to work long hours or multiple jobs, is called a “progressive” tax, because it takes more from those who receive more. Of course it completely ignores the concepts of earning and just deserts. Tax relief which expresses as a percentage of income is excoriated by the Left as “benefiting the rich disproportionately”, which phrase is inherently contradictory but which activates the syndrome of reflexive envy that is at the redistributionist core of liberal non-thought.
    And there is the central linguistic-positioning-to-deceive! Using “Liberal” in reference to policies which militate, with penalties for income, investment, forethought, and frugality, against any class mobility. Move from lower-class financial status by one’s own efforts? Once, in a much earlier America, maybe. Try that shift now; climb that slope with Sysiphus’ burden of income tax, social security tax, sales tax, capital gains tax, inventory tax, added value tax…and you deserve to join the pantheon of extraordinary achievers.
    When “Socially Conscious” is the term used to refer to a business that positions itself for failure by locating in economically depressed or stagnated areas, or by preferentially hiring the less well educated, or those with a felonious background, Social Consciousness becomes a farce. The truly socially conscious succeed, do well at business, increase the society’s store of capital goods and efficiency and even of good examples. Socially conscious people hire the best qualified employees they can engage, do business with the most dependable community they can locate in, and when they engage in loss-causing behaviors, call it what it is… either misjudgment or charity.
    People must employ language in the process of thinking. When the meaning of words is distorted to reflect an inverted and self-defeating value system, thinking becomes less efficient. It becomes necessary for independent thinkers to tediously prune and reorder their vocabularies to gain or to retain clarity of cognition.
    Remember “Reactionary”? That was the Soviet term of denunciation for anyone even daring to suggest that not all change in the direction of Socialist control is beneficial or necessary; anyone who thought force of arms was not a cogent argument; in short, anyone whose opinion differed from that of the controlling elite. Conservative thought became, by applying the term “Reactionary”, something to be ashamed of; a state of mind of the most backward thinkers.
    If you think that the little tricks of the left with language are accidental, please think again. The tricks are deliberate, sophisticated, and constitute a mature tactic of polemics.
    The sounds, the connotations of words, are important in that realm of argument which addresses the underlying emotional conditioning of the audience.
    Be very aware of the professionalism of the Left in this aspect of manipulating perception and thought.

  37. A bit of positive news:

    Supreme Court Blocks Police From Entering Homes Without A Warrant For ‘Caretaking’—Siding Against Biden, Law Enforcement

    The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that law enforcement cannot legally enter homes without a warrant even in cases where doing so may benefit the public interest, striking down the suggestion from law enforcement and the Biden administration that doing so under a “community caretaking” exception would be justified.

    Details and links:

    1. As I said over on MeWe, the Rhode Island argument was so pathetic and so open to abuse that I can see why all nine justices said “No!” Firearms, pot, unapproved books, pirated movies, halal food, what couldn’t be taken if a local constabulary decided it required their “community caretaking” concern?

    2. See, and this is why, despite my general support of law enforcement, I have no patience with those who blindly support all police behavior. Because as with any such profession that has power over others, it attracts more than its share of would-be tinpot dictators, petty tyrants, and psychopaths. Note that it wasn’t just the Biden pseudo-admin suggesting it, but also law enforcement…”Of COURSE we shouldn’t have to deal with pesky things like warrants when COMMUNITY GOOD is at stake!”

      Watching a true crime documentary last night about a case (Oakland County Child Killer) where there was more than a few indicators that police corruption and/or covering up of major screwups were involved in some way, and watching a police spokeswoman disingenuously assuring the audience that any thought that police would EVER cover up to hide their mistakes, etc did make me sneer. I respect the police–or at least, the IDEA of police–but I don’t necessarily trust them any more than I do any other group that accrues power over the lives of others. :/

      1. I’m with you completely. I “back the blue” with a lot less intensity than I used to. I watch first, then decide. Too many of the “blue” have turned into the good Germans.

        1. #MeToo, a point I’m no longer shy about making when I get fundraising e-mails and calls.

          “If you’re not going to arrest BLM/Antifa, you better not arrest us. Equal treatment, or no support. Your choice.”

          1. Yes. Exactly. If these guys want to haul us out of the store because we won’t wear the muzzle, they don’t get my support.

        2. And frankly, however much large cities have a reputation for police corruption, I’m not sure they’ve got a *patch* on small-town cop corruption. It just doesn’t get noticed as much because it generally doesn’t escalate to murders in small towns–but that doesn’t mean the corruption isn’t there, and isn’t just as smelly.

          And my state is ALL small town.

          1. This has been my experience with small town police as well. I want to live in a rural area, so I don’t mean to slam on everyone. But….

            The only time I know I met an honest one was when my Dad introduced me to a friend of his who was a small town cop.

            1. When I build the Stage 1 vacation cabin on the property I’m buying, I plan to go visit the county sheriff’s department with a box of cookies (not donuts) and introduce myself.

              1. Depending on their trust level/your skill, homemade cookies might get you even MOAR brownie points. 😀

                Our town cop retired years ago and has never really been replaced. I always liked the guy, though some of my younger misbehaving-teen siblings did not. Because he was the bane of misbehaving-teens existence (there not being a lot to do in our extremely-tiny town, crime-wise, other than bust misbehaving-teens for underage drinking/smoking of illicit substances.)

                1. OpSec problem– there’s been cases of folks bringing in nasty stuff with home baked things.

                  But Danish Butter cookies, still in the tin, are quite safe.

                  We did Easter baskets when we were in El Paso. Both of us have been on duty on a Family day, and wanted to make sure they knew we were thinking about who would be scraping the inevitable idiots off of the road.

              2. 🙂 Wise man. You will never be ticketed, and anything you need help with, the police will be right there.

            2. Well, the advantages of rural do outweigh most of the disadvantages. And corruption in most small towns usually is forced to remain on the petty-scale if only because there just aren’t enough PEOPLE (and even fewer cops) to really make a serious go of it. So if you are by and large law abiding, and have law abiding friends (or are near hermits like my lot) you’re not likely to need the cops much. And when you do, as you aren’t likely to be of use to any corrupt ones, they’re just as likely to do their jobs properly. (The one and only time we’ve needed one was when one of my younger brothers was still drinking, and he got somewhat violent when asked to please stop singing at the top of his voice in the parents’ home at 3am. That was his first stint in jail. Arguably, his second and third stints werethe result of lazy and/or corrupt cops, but…at least it seemed to have got him to stop bloody well using alcohol as anxiety medication And that first time, the cop did do his job. The drawback, of course, is that he was 20 minutes away. So dad–who was the injured party in that altercation, but also outweighed younger brother by a good 180 pounds at the time–just sort of laid on top of him until the cop showed up, heh. If it had been a stranger getting violent with us, likely he would have been shot before cops were ever called–in this case, well, we love younger brother dearly although he was a huge idiot at the time, and so we didn’t actually want him injured/killed.)

              Other disadvantages include: you’re probably in a food desert unless you can grow most of your own (super fun in a place w/9 month winters) so fuel prices/time spent can hurt, and also ambulances can take awhile to get to you, so make sure you have plans in place in case of health conditions that make that likely. Or make sure to live rural-but-closer-to-the-emts. (Ours, like the cop, is usually about 20 mintues away. Less if they’re driving really fast. Which, in emergencies, they usually are.)

              1. I think rural, with all its uniquenesses, is the only way to go for me.

                Small town partisanship pleases me. It’s a system that makes sense, and I can get behind it and take part.

                I didn’t mean to imply otherwise at all.

        3. Too many of the Blue were already Good Germans for decades. You don’t get the effective nullification of the 4th from a principled law enforcement class.

          Well…. I suppose it depends on exactly what principles we are talking about.

          1. Hell, watching the egregious violations of all manner of rights–civil and otherwise–in the average fictional cop show, that I have no doubt a worrying number of people think is “that’s just how law enforcement works”…and it does make me wonder how much of that was hollywood “skipping the boring bits for drama” and how much was “let’s make people think this is normal and okay.”

            You want to see a good cop in action, watch Joe Kenda’s Homicide Hunter. Many, many times, it comes up: the suspect asks for a lawyer, and the conversation ends right there. Suspect gets a lawyer, and the good cops gotta make sure they can build a case without a “confession.” (I mean, this is a guy who retired when he nearly strangled a pedophile who had raped his 5 year old grandson–and whose excuse was “he was asking for it”–because he didn’t want to be that kind of cop or person.) I fear, though, that cops like him are rarer than not–much like really good teachers.

          2. Doesn’t it feel like everything that’s come up in the last few years has unearthed decades-long corruption? Education. Police. Elected officials. Government workers.

            1. I don’t know if it’s ‘unearthed’ (well, maybe for the willfully-not-paying attention folks–alas, there’s a lot of them) so much as “got things to the point that it can no longer be ignored,” heh.

      2. Also, being a true crime junkie, I’ve read far too many cases where cops–and DAs, who are probably even worse–take “close the case” to mean “just get anyone to confess, nevermind who actually did it.” Not to mention the horrors that occur in relation to family court in the States. (And yeah, ours is probably a better justice system than most places in the world…but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a mess and could do with a thorough house-clean and reformation.)

        1. Oh, man. Just look at what’s been going on in Missouri with the family courts and the guardian ad litem. It’s disgusting.

          1. Holy cow, no kidding. With 4 of the 7 kids in my family adopted (8 if you count the unofficially adopted one) we had our brushes with family court, and they were horrifying enough as it was. I will absolutely guarantee that Missouri is barely scratching the SURFACE of the corruption in family courts in this country. (And PJ Media has already extended its series to another state. Yikes.)

        2. Having work in the legal system for a (too) long time, a common refrain was “cops lie.”

  38. “Don’t lose the war of words. Come up with more accurate terms, and think about what you’re saying”

    Aaah, at long last, the Rectification of Names. It’s time to abandon niceness.

    The nuspik can be defeated and destroyed by a sustained, consistent program of cruel, relentless mockery of each and every moronic repetition of their bizarre shibboleths.
    Butchering babies is not “reproductive health care” and never was.

    Call them out.
    In public.
    With an audience.
    Every time.

    Point. and laugh, harHARHAR! Make wokeism a socially costly stance,

  39. How about marriage?

    It’s been so thoroughly erased nobody even thinks about it anymore. Of COURSE marriage is whatever they say it is, whenever they say it. 2, 3,5, man, woman, dolphin, sex doll. Whatever.
    Can’t have a civil union, must call it marriage.

    The modern trends of word destruction just follow on from the very successful campaign by the LGBT lobby to remove the meaning of marriage. Which, if I think about it, perhaps marked the first successful mass-social media manipulation of language in our time.

    1. “What do you mean by marriage? Are you talking about the relationship status, the religious rite, or the government license?”

  40. Look, half of the way you think is bounded in by words. And half of the way other people think too. By using the leftist chosen terms, you’re lending them your unwitting support.

    This. THIS. A thousand times THIS.

    Just for starters, my pronoun is Mrs., climate-stasis is a stupid cult and there are three genders in English: he, she, and it.

  41. Dear Sarah, you make an important and incisive point. What we need is a “rectification of the names”. I think we need that something other than our own set of neologisms. We don’t undistort the language by twisting it in a different direction.
    For instance, when referring to groups of Americans, we should use “group” rather than “class”. The idea of America is that we are all peers. There is no upper class, just an upper income group.
    In most positions of government, we don’t have “leaders”. We have “representatives” and “public servants”.
    We are “citizens”, not “subjects”.
    The American language is rich and robust. It doesn’t need neologisms, however clever they may be.
    One is reminded of the story from Tolkien’s childhood, when he used the word “manure” in class. The teacher came back at him. “Manure? It’s muck. Call it muck, boy. Muck, muck, muck!”
    At the same time, we can and should modulate our discourse. The objective of language is communication. When one uses words that offend others, communication is at best delayed, as the lithe party works through the offense. At worst, communication ceases. If one person is offended by a term, common sense and common courtesy would call for not using that term in that person’s presence. If many are offended, the term should be avoided altogether.
    Was it La Rochefoucauld who said a gentleman never insults another by accident?
    So, our style sheet should perhaps be something like this: use the language with precision and compassion.

    1. What you are missing, dear sir, is that the left uses “offense” as a weapon to prevent the discussion of philosophies. (Or perhaps you don’t miss it at all given your comment name and are part of it.)
      In a situation such as this everyone to the right of Lenin is silenced by “I’m offended” and “How dare you” by people advocating a philosophy/religion that has put over 100 million human beings in the ground in the last 100 years.
      It is time to say “You don’t have a right not to be offended” and continue laying into them.

      Yes, indeed, the objective of language IS communication and not the avoiding of injury to “feelings.”

      1. Exactly! They are ‘Offended!’ by anything they don’t want to hear. Particularly when it’s the proof that they’re full of shit.
        “The plaintiffs are full of shit!” should be an affirmative defense in some cases.

    2. If many are offended, the term should be avoided altogether.

      That misses the last…. many generations… of weaponized claims of offense.

      Was it La Rochefoucauld who said a gentleman never insults another by accident?

      Not sure who he is.

      If he was not far younger than my grandmother (or heck, my mother), then “insult” had a rather different meaning than “they scream that it upset them.”

      If he isn’t at least my grandmother’s age, then he’s in the context of the manners version of the infamous EU soccer player over-acting. “Oh, oh, you were six feet from me! I shall never walk again!”

      The weaponization depends on admitting being offended being cost-free; somewhere around the Boomers, that became a thing.

      It’s not a unique sin. It’s called abuse of charity.

      1. Was it La Rochefoucauld who said a gentleman never insults another by accident?

        François de La Rochefoucauld was a 17th-century writer known for his maxims. en.wikipedia dot org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_de_La_Rochefoucauld_(writer)

        The quote, however, is much later and seems to have no particular attribution. quoteinvestigator dot com/2015/01/21/offense/

        The meaning, of course, is summed up in the version from that page from Christopher Hitchens:

        “An old definition of a gentleman: someone who is never rude except on purpose.”

        Or, attributed to John Wayne:

        His philosophy in short: “I try to live my life to the fullest without hurting anybody else. I try not to unintentionally hurt anybody’s feelings. If I do hurt anybody’s feelings, I had all intention of hurting them.”

        I don’t mind being that sort of gentleman at all.

        1. The last gentleman would quite surely offer to give someone a sense of proportion if they announced offense at something he’d done. 😀 The manipulation tactic would likely fall out of favor.

    3. “At the same time, we can and should modulate our discourse. The objective of language is communication. When one uses words that offend others, communication is at best delayed, as the lithe party works through the offense. At worst, communication ceases. If one person is offended by a term, common sense and common courtesy would call for not using that term in that person’s presence. If many are offended, the term should be avoided altogether.”

      I had a boss that used to think telling me which words to use and when was a good idea. I told him the same thing I will tell you, though in abbreviated form: FOAD.

    4. There are cultural or religious barriers across which communication becomes difficult enough that it may not be a practical option.

      “Please, Mr. Aztec high priest, you don’t need to cut my heart out.”

      Taking captives and sacrificing them served the official religious goals, the alliance’s strategy of regional power politics, and possibly or probably personal appetites. It was not a policy that they could be negotiated out of.

      The policy could be ended by killing those Mexica nobles.

      The lies and other crimes of our current opposition likewise are in the service of religion, power politics, and personal appetite. They largely did not reason themselves into those positions, and will not be reasoned out. Efforts at verbal communication with them are largely pointless.

      It is largely true that telling you, off the bat, to go frell yourself would not persuade you.

      However, persuading you intellectually is only worthwhile if you are in truth essentially already aligned against the left. If you are a determined leftist shill, a go along to get along, or simply gullible, unobservant and thoughtless, speaking with you is for the purpose of a persuadable audience.

      The thing which the mushies must be persuaded of is coercing, killing, shunning or exiling the leftists. Killing is a serious business, and not one which most can be persuaded to rationally. Verbal communication serves a point in service of this goal, but not the most important one. The big thing is the actions of the left, which viscerally communicate the truth that you cannot obtain peace from them by any form of accommodation.

      If you cannot steel yourself to offend, you may have a hard time maintaining the resolution to kill leftists. The will and ability to offend are fundamental qualities to develop.

      That said, they are also tools to be used deliberately and carefully. Some people don’t need killing, and do not need to be unnecessarily dragged in to the fighting.

      1. One of the great mysteries of the Aztecs is that many sacrificial victims had parts to play in the sacrifice that would have required their cooperation and precluded the use of any but the mildest drugs.

  42. Autumn’s Armory

    going over ARs, pistols 556, 22, 9mm, Browning M1919
    Take a look she is cute and knows what she is doing.
    About 7yo.

  43. So, what you’re saying is that they’re Boggies. Referencing Bored of the Rings: any small, slow, and stupid beast that turned its back on a crowd of boggies was looking for a stomping.

  44. Dennis Prager has the following excellent piece over at PJ Media:

    I note that Marxists, especially those of the Critical Race Theory variety, share the same desire to end the existence of those who they view as “enemies”, just as those who hate Jews want to “solve” their problem by ridding the world of Jews. It is why the left is so sympathetic to Hamas and the genocidal Mullahs of Iran, and why Marxist regimes always engage in mass murder. For them, getting rid of the people they don’t like is simply part and parcel of their game plan. I note that the same people condemning Israel for defending itself from thousands of rocket attacks aimed at a nation the size of New Jersey, are utterly silent about the CCP concentration camps and mass murder of Muslim Uyghurs-are note those Muslims part of the “ummah” that they claim is united?.

    1. Oh, that’s awesome … (scribbling down notes for local dissemination)
      We have nothing to lose but our chains, y’all. And masks.

  45. While I don’t buy into Arizona’s Red Dawn scenario, I think it is fairly likely that Chinese troops will be in America soon. Yes, it would be a logistical nightmare to invade the US, but it would have been a logistical nightmare for the US to invade Great Britain in 1942. We didn’t invade it; we were invited in. Our troops remain in Britain to this day. And the junta will most likely invite the Chinese in.

    1. Yes, but please note that the population of Britain in 1942 was not (and is still by and large not) hostile to the US troops invited in.

      That will not be the case if the junta invites Chinese troops in.

      1. Do you seriously think that most young people would oppose Chinese occupiers? The forced abortions alone would be enough to get them to support them. Orgy all month long, with just the one monthly trip to the clinic!

        1. Yeah, I do think a good deal more young people would oppose them than you apparently think would. And most of the ones who wouldn’t would start to do so right fast. The noisy ones, the reee-ing screamers? Actually a minority.

          I mean, just how old do you THINK the vast majority of our millitary is…? Hint: most of them are under thirty.

          Seriously, what’s your endgame here? For us all to throw up our hands and go “Oh, you’re right, we should just give up in despair and die?” Not gonna happen. That way lies madness and defeat.

          1. Will to battle is a sane madness.

            Defeat is not always avoidable.

            What we can avoid is are the disgraces of refusing to pay any cost, and of not fighting until the end.

            This fight may well be one that we can win.

        2. Your connection with reality is even less solid than usual….

          Although given that sort of a view on “young people,” I would not be in the least shocked that no-one under 50 wishes to let on what they actually think. It is tiring to be verbally abused for not conforming to someone’s bad opinion of yourself.

        3. “Millennial”, and “Boomer” are a state of mind, distinguishable only by the direction of the person’s blame for everything.

          And you are determined to exemplify the state aren’t you.

  46. Also, I don’t doubt that the junta will be willing to use nuclear weapons to devastate the American heartland in the case of resistance. Yes, I know that is where our food comes from. But they don’t need to feed us; they just need to feed themselves. They can do that with imports.

    1. Sorry, but…no. No, they can’t feed themselves with imports. Not when America largely feeds most of the rest of the world with OUR surplus. Getting enough food, and the money to pay for it from…where, exactly? By magic? And the “goodwill” of those other nations, who have just seen them nuke their own? China sure as hell isn’t going to feed them. So, sure, they can TRY nuking us (and then what happens when all the red-pill folks on the coasts find out that they have precisely nothing to lose? Also–you can’t nuke everyone in the American heartland. Good luck with that. You might nuke the cities, sure, but after that…? I’d also note that a good number of the actual nukes are stored IN THE HEARTLAND. Set off one bunch of those, and you’d better believe the other military bases are going to be going HELL NO and aiming the ones they’ve got right back. Or sabotaging them. Because, you know, the junta just nuked their buddies or friends/family.) but if you think that’s somehow a “they win” scenario, you are smoking some seriously ridiculous stuff.

      Nice try with the attempt at black-pilling, dude, but no dice.