You Are Not Alone A Blast From The Past From December 2019

279 thoughts on “You Are Not Alone A Blast From The Past From December 2019”

1. “I keep hearing that our Republican party is now to the left of the Dems in the sixties, and I want to line up the people who say it and hit them on the head with actual history of the time till they quit it. ”

   Hum, I did and do say JFK’s democrat party was far to the right of today’s Republican party.

   Hit me on the head all you want Sarah, I was there and that’s the way I saw it. I am here and that’s still the way I see it.

   1. The answer is “it depends”. Regarding religion and personal behavior, JFK’s Democrat party was well to the right of today’s Establishment Republican party.

      Regarding the proper place of government in society, they’re about the same.

      Trump’s Republicans, on the other hand, are definitely farther to the right regarding government’s place in society, but on religion and personal behavior, may actually be a little to the left of JFK’s Democrats.

   2. On PATRIOTISM? Sure.
      On anything else? Oh, heil no.
      It’s just that you, like everyone else back then thought that price and wage controls were necessary, etc.
      Thank Reagan for exploding THAT bullshit.

      1. I lean toward agreement with you. But back in JFK’s time the entire envelope/window was more to the right. I mean, I went to public school and, blue jeans weren’t even allowed!
         We know a bit more about shenanigans in politics now with the web. Back then there was more trust, as we were blind to a lot of the goings on. TV media was already fairly polluted.
         Strange that the JFK assassination and the “Warren Report” was one of the first things that woke people (that are still alive today) up to growing suspicions about their government.

         1. ….what on earth do blue jeans have to do with being right wing?

            It’s like saying that pamphlets are inherently right wing. It’s a technique, the content of which can be most any flavor, though some aspects favor different statements.

            Fashion isn’t a political value. Using fashion to make a statement, sure– but that’s the statement, not the method. The point of wearing blue jeans was to poke folks in the nose, same as long hair, same as tackle-box piercings, same as various other body mutilation things. That’s the point of the bicycle missionaries wearing very nice office attire– they’re making a statement.

            Problem with fashion is, it kinda sucks for “making a statement” beyond the short term, because unless you do something really stupid and ugly people will pick it up– and if you do something really stupid and ugly, it never really catches on that well. So while having incredibly unnaturally colored hair in the 70s and 80s (depending on area) or so was a fairly effective Issues warning sign, now there are ladies who manage to get their waist-length hair all in peacock blues and greens because it’s really pretty. It’s not weird anymore.

            Jeans and t-shirts became common because they’re comfortable, inexpensive and decent with minimal care. They can be washed every day, without it eating up most of your day working on it.

            1. Oh, I really am Laughing Out Loud! Maybe I shouldn’t have mentioned Jeans.
               I’m just saying that times were WAY different when JFK was around. My high school wouldn’t let you in if you had jeans on. Too casual. This was public school, in NY! Expectations and actions were much more sheltered and conservative than they have become. (I was just in my sr. year when JFK was shot, and yes, I’m still alive and in great shape, but no jeans anymore since FL!)
               This was just a top of the head thought related to there being some mental time warping when you have different people, of different ages, comparing politicians from different times. They were talking JFK vs today’s average Republicans.
               .

               1. The problem is that right wing =/= “wears fashion of the 1950s.”

                  Yes, it’s a different landscape– that is for looking at tactics. Not philosophical standards.

                  1. Proposals for school uniforms have tended to come from the Right, not the Left.

                     1. Not out here. Uniforms here were a response to two things – the one-upsmanship arms race of $250 sneakers, and gang colors enforcement on campus moving down the grade ladder.

                        The class warfare and gang stuff together made it an easy sell to parents – along with the shopping benefit of “buy THIS COLOR ONLY” making things much simpler.

                     2. Usually from the left where I’ve been, except in the cases that got attacked by the news because they were in response to local fashions of questionable legality, re: public nudity.
                        Which was reported as prudery, not idiot children being idiots.

                  2. The problem is that right wing =/= “wears fashion of the 1950s.”

                     Most folk on the Left would consider me “right wing” (as they consider anything non-left).

                     ‘Nuff said on that topic?

                     1. “Obama is center to center right,” nuff said.

                        1. Precisely.
                           If you go by my attire — I work from home and tend to forget to have my hair cut — I would be extreme left. I’m not. Nuff said.
                           Also for f*ck’s sake, in whose head were the fifties some kind of right wing paradise? They were far more left leaning in many ways than we are.
                           PFUI.

                           1. They were far more left leaning in many ways than we are.

                              Been chewing on it (of course).

                              *waggles hand* I think part of it is that the right-wing restraints were cultural.

                              Which would fit with the Left very deliberately violating them in public for tactical advantage (Rules for Radicals, though it was honestly kinda late to the whole we-get-to-be-rude-you-don’t thing), and promoting violation of them in private for recruiting advantage. (You have now done Unforgivable Thing, those people will never accept you back. You must be with us, forever.)

                              You don’t need shall-issue carry laws when there is a reasonable expectation a sheriff would only deny one to the guy everybody knows is absolutely nuts, for an example.

                        2. My point there was about the right wing and “50’s dress”.

                           1. Actually forcing people to dress a certain way to enter a building paid for with their parents’ taxes MIGHT be European right wing. it certainly AIN’T American.

                           2. My right-wingedness (as they see it) and my mode of dress should certainly put paid to any necessary connection here. Oh, you know, folk like John Ringo and MadMike in kilts. That sort of thing. 😉

                           3. Bleep no is “we pay for the place you get a service but you get to dress in a manner counter “Hey I am not a threat” an American thing.

                              One of the big, unspoken American things is “don’t be a f*ing c*sucking bastard, especially not if you then demand other suck c*k after you.”

                              And “wear clothing” is mega low on demands.

                           4. DUH. As I said, past a certain basic standard. Like, you know “no shirt, no shoes no service.”

                           5. Yep.

                              Which does indeed go into the common culture aspect of “right wing,” but mostly because “figure out what will piss people off and do that” not “what people want to do naturally.”

                           6. ONLY if they pissed me off would I resort to a bikini. (To be fair, I’ve had fantasies of wearing one through TSA. And would have if I were 30 years younger.)

                           7. *giggles in chain mail bikini*

               2. Conservative in personal or societal behavioral expectations, in terms of appropriate attire, formality, etc do not equate to conservative in political beliefs. This is a common misconception which leads to a lot of side argumentation when people try to argue the appearance of conservatism vs the actuality of conservative thought.

                  1. THIS.

            2. > Fashion isn’t a political value.

               While you’re correct in the context of the discussion, *sometimes* fashion and politics intersect. The Roundheads are probably the best example fo that.

               1. TRX, you are NOT IMPROVING YOUR POSITION by taking monday friday cheep shots on stuff that I EXPLICITLY SPELLED OUT in the original post.

                  My level of being OK with some monday friday taking cheep shots at me is very, very low.

                  The main reason I’m not ripping you a new one is that I know you are not completely worthless.

         2. Like Foxfier I’m in complete confusion over what blue jeans have to do with the price of potatoes. Yes, I also went to a school with stupid rules. It was run by commies, mostly.
            So?

            1. Oh Lord. Why did I have to say Jeans. My original comment was not meant to have anything to do with jeans specifically. I was only trying to illustrate that times have changed, so when people make personal opinion comments about who was further left/right, JFK or an average current day Republican, there can be a lot of background noise in their heads from various things, depending on their age/background perspective. JFK was shot in Nov ’63, almost 58 yrs ago. Lots of water under the bridge. Maybe I could have said most everyone I came in contact with at that time (not just friends and family) was a church goer. But, being the wise-ass I am, I’d have to add that no one at that time would even think about wearing jeans to any church! Oops. Sorry.

               1. Being forced to wear a certain type of clothing to enter a building paid for by taxes is in fact the opposite of “freedom” which is what the “right wing” of the US is for today.
                  Sure, there were different societal standards and people might be glared at for falling under those. But being forced to wear certain clothes? That’s authoritarian. And should be set on fire.
                  This right winger who didn’t wear a pair of jeans till sixteen (and then only on informal occasions) would have been going in in a bikini or worse. Because no. You don’t use my parents’ money to build a school you tell me I have to wear certain clothes to enter. (And yes, I get not indecent, etc. But once those standards are me. NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS.)
                  That is training for authoritarian robots, not living of free men.

                  1. Um, I understand. I’m still saying my comments were not about rules on clothing per se, but about changing times/norms and how they can influence a person’s subjective judgement on political comparisons over 58 years. Having been around a long time, I’d say my comparative thoughts may likely be different than someone that is 40 years younger than I. I think Herbn’s approach cuts some of that out.

                  2. Lots of public schools are requiring uniforms now, or have dress codes so strict they might as well be.

                     Can’t have the little buggers showing any individualism, you know.

                     1. Yep.

                        1. Actually, most of the uniform craze really was an attempt to keep the gangs from wearing colors and to keep those not in one from getting mistakenly assaulted…..

                           Instead of adopting the actual solution, which would have been to throw the gang members out and then have them arrested when they broke the law. Meanwhile, the kids who actually want an education could have tried to get one.

                           But establishing and enforcing standards of behavior was too much like work.

                           1. Cue up “Gee, Officer Krupke”…

               2. Why did I have to say Jeans. My original comment was not meant to have anything to do with jeans specifically

                  Well, no, but it does have to do with your idea of “what conservative is.”

                  Those monday friday stupid “gosh what is the first thing you think of” quizzes aren’t bad because of tactics, it’s because they put waaaaayyyy too much weight on the result.

                  Look, yeah, first born, gonna be big for actions. Only thing for actions, F NO.

                  You mentioned jeans because they meant something…and you’re not WRONG.

                  Just..gotta think like a geek.

      2. There is a way to test that.

         Here is the 1960 Democrat platform: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1960-democratic-party-platform

         We had a completely GOP-controlled government from 2017 to 2019. It is reasonable to argue that if we compare the two we could answer the question.

         This looks promising, given the GOP is the party of deterrence:

         Continuous modernization of these forces through intensified research and development, including essential programs now slowed down, terminated, suspended, or neglected for lack of budgetary support.

         What modernization of the US military was done by the GOP Congresses of 2017-2019? Was the Navy put on track to a sufficient number of ships for the commitments the GOP is happy to maintain (hint, there are more now than the Navy had in 1988 with a Navy half the size and, Obama snark notwithstanding, we have yet to invent the ship that can be in two places at once). The largest increase in readiness is only 3 nuclear submarines lack dive certs compared to 15 in 2017, but I suspect a Kennedy administration had none (although they did have one of the two worst US submarine disasters).

         Hard to say the GOP is to the right of Kennedy on defense, a GOP bread, and butter issue.

         On Immigration:

         The revision of immigration and nationality laws we seek will implement our belief that enlightened immigration, naturalization and refugee policies and humane administration of them are important aspects of our foreign policy.

         and

         We must remove the distinctions between native-born and naturalized citizens to assure full protection of our laws to all. There is no place in the United States for “second-class citizenship.”

         With its ongoing support for amnesty, refusal to close the border, and obstruction of a president elected in part on a controlled immigration platform it is hard to not see a more radical version of Kennedy’s views in GOP action from 2017-2019. In fact, with their fetishization of amnesty for illegals, they have reversed Kennedy’s dictum about equalizing birth citizens and naturalized ones adding in the distinct of placing illegal residents over either.

         But the point that makes it all clear is here:

         To the rulers of the Communist World: We confidently accept your challenge to competition in every field of human effort.

         We recognize this contest as one between two radically different approaches to the meaning of life—our open society which places its highest value upon individual dignity, and your closed society in which the rights of men are sacrificed to the state.

         The GOP has plenty of members, many in leadership, whose message to the PRC is “how much you got because here’s the menu.”

         Look, I get wanting to pep talk us. I get wanting to not suffer from despair, but the fact is pretending the GOP, at least its elected officials on the national level taken as a whole, give a rat’s ass about anything beyond lining their own pockets runs straight beyond Pollyanna to blowing smoke up our ass.

         Perhaps the problem isn’t they are on the left of Kennedy. I’ll give you because that requires they give a damn about anything outside of their cocktail party invites, numbered bank accounts, and what piece of tail they can use the two to get.

         But given Kennedy’s Democrat party in 1960 or the feckless idiots of the modern GOP, give me Kennedy and his tax policy and foreign policy and ability to actually get a damned bill he promised passed.

      3. I’ve been pondering this, and I realized something. Something that makes the establishment GOP more understandable.

         Remember all those times that the GOP establishment said “he’s not electable” when their voters wanted somebody other than the establishment pick? Well, they were probably telling the truth–not because populist conservatives wouldn’t get enough voter support to be elected, but because there would be enough “votes” to make sure they didn’t get elected, and they knew it.

         The implication is that they were and are horribly corrupt–otherwise, they would have blown the whole vote fraud thing (which has been a factor in national elections since at least 1960) sky-high simply from self-interest. That they didn’t means that they couldn’t–which means something was being held over their heads, something worse than losing elections.

         The whole time, the electorate kept getting more and more conservative, less and less satisfied with the available choices.

         Things look bleak now because everybody, not just cranks, has suddenly woken up to what has been right under our noses all along, and the powers that be have had to wield openly tools that only work in secrecy.

         1. Why do you think most Republican primaries are open? So Democrats can be recruited by the GOPe.

            Vichy Mitchy and crew made that REAL explicit in the 2014 MS Senate race.

            1. Because the big-city political machines have essentially held a veto over all state-wide races for…how long?

   3. I was going to comment that, generally, the statement downs to a question of if folks are looking at cultural signals, or political-philosophy signals.

      There are some Democrats right now that actually talk as if they are not completely opposed to Western Civilization, especially if it’s connected to Christianity or functional behavior; back then, pretty much all of them acted like “oh well of course that’s bad, but we need to be kind.”

      For the political-philosophy type stuff like what kind of laws should we have, what kind of restrictions are acceptable, on the other hand… you can look at stuff like homeschooling. Which the left loaths, and the right mostly accepts.

      1. I’d say look at actions, because the modern GOP has twice been given the chance, by controlling all the elective branches, to advance the causes it has run on my entire adult life.

         The first time we got the first post-Johnson entitlement, moving the Overton Window enough for Obamacare five years later.

         The second time we watched them sandbag a president of their own party and desert his strongest supporters to solitary confinement without trial or bail as our hostess covered last night.

         Kennedy cut taxes and stood up to communists.

         Maybe the GOP isn’t to his left. Being to the left or right would require a commitment to more than cashing their grift checks.

         1. I do not agree with your notion about the attempt to head off Clinton Care being the reason that Obamacare happened, nor am I going to join in the “assume anything good they did was only our due, assume any failures are malice and must be punished.”

            For starters, it requires ignoring the good things that have happened– in homeschooling, gun rights, land rights, blocking flatout illegal junk the Left has done, etc.

            Which we’ve gone round and round about on this blog, and I seem to remember even went over on the original post.

            1. There are limits to how far you can stretch that.

               Particularly in cases where 95% of the heavy lifting is done by little guys — likely as not fighting against their alleged representatives — and then the Great Conservative Juggernauts in the official organizations take all the credit.

               1. Almost everything in anywhere is mostly done by the “little guys.” Because we’re a republic, not some sort of royalty thing.

                  And there have been some epic meltdowns of the “little guys” who blamed it on the “big guy” who didn’t do enough– ignoring that the rest of the group gets a say, and they couldn’t get a buy-in from the rest of “their” side. (You can most often find this in philosophical libertarians who want the Big Guys to be major FiCons, and dump all those SoCons and their irrational beliefs…which happen to line up with whatever the upset person doesn’t agree with. ;D Example chosen because philosophical libertarians are more likely to write out what they are saying, so there’s no insight check required. )

                  1. Almost everything in anywhere is mostly done by the “little guys.”

                     Then what, pray tell, is the point of the big guys. Since they apparently fulfill none of the functions one would desire of them, and plenty of the functions one wishes they would not.

                     1. Then what, pray tell, is the point of the big guys.

                        Herding cats. They’re only “big” in that they’re somewhat known over a fairly wide area.

                        As I alluded to, a lot of the little guys are very enthusiastic in the thing they’re working for– but flat suck both at getting anybody else to buy in, or accepting that anybody gets to disagree with them on anything, up to and including tactics.

                        1. Yes. That is the theoretical point, and why you would want them.

                           In the real world our current Big Guys (complete with their ten percent in some cases!) do not perform this function. Because people have to organize without their help, often against roadblocks set up by the herders.

                           1. When you have to draft the FICUS to make a point that started out against the GOP congressional leadership, the point may be somewhat weaker than you thought.

                           2. Um, wat?

                              The FICUS reference was a joke, not part of the point.

                              The ur-example of this in my head is the NRA and its “leadership”.

                              The next individual example would be Paul Ryan.

                           3. Short form, the problem is you are alluding to objections– which means I have to go find them, THEN go find out what the other things going on at the time where, and THEN it’s usually pretty obvious what the complicating factors were, and a large part of the time it ends up being “didn’t get all that I wanted so they clearly are evil.”

                              I get enough of that from the left, not going into it from the right.

                           4. I’d like to see someone try to come up with a way for the two examples I threw out to be justified, without being ten times worse.

                           5. First, as I said, you didn’t actually give examples, you alluded to them.

                              Second– instantaneous and obvious for the corrupt leader of the NRA is Coalition for Responsible Home Education, which doesn’t even have corruption to justify itself. Catholics for Choice, for another. Loooooong list.

                           6. Coalition for Responsible Home Education, which doesn’t even have corruption to justify itself. Catholics for Choice, for another. Loooooong list.

                              Why is The Enemy’s bad behavior relevant? The behavior of our side’s elites would be bad whether the Enemy were saints, or demons.

                              And small point: the NRA’s corruption goes far beyond WLP. At bare minimum it is the entirety of the current board; anyone who wasn’t corrupt got out or was kicked out.

                           7. Why is The Enemy’s bad behavior relevant?

                              Those two are examples of people who are supposedly supporting, respectively, homeschooling and Catholicism, and which are ten times worse.

                              Which is what you asked for.

                           8. Ah. I am not familiar with either of those organizations; I guessed from the names that they were solidly on the side of the Enemy.

                              You realize that them pretending to be on our side and accepted as such just makes my point, right?

                           9. No, it doesn’t, but your response makes it clear you’re not going to bother to build your point and then defend it.

                           10. Look, this is important because you have no right to the support of others.

                               If you can’t even build your case, state it, and then support it in a place where folks are largely in agreement with you– how the heck are you going to manage to sway, say, a gal who has “always” been a feminist, but the demand that she pretend a fully intact guy in a dress is just as feminine as herself was a bridge too far?

                               You’re not going to do it by handing her an entirely different package of demand that she has to accept on your word.

                               One of our biggest strengths is also why the progressives have such an easier time getting everyone to pull together. We recognize that we have to earn folks’ support. It doesn’t belong to us because they’re, for an example we’ve seen from the left, female or a designated minority.

                               A lot of people on our side don’t bother, and I’m tired of cleaning up their messes.

                           11. how the heck are you going to manage to sway, say, a gal who has “always” been a feminist, but the demand that she pretend a fully intact guy in a dress is just as feminine as herself was a bridge too far?

                               Strictly speaking nobody ever argues anyone in or out of a position. At best they might unwittingly give the person some useful search terms for when they decide to sway themselves.

                               Anyway, I do *not* have time to deal with this right now. Maybe later.

                           12. > The behavior of our side’s elites

                               *My* side doesn’t have any ‘elites’.

                               Well, there’s me, but that should be intuitively obvious to everyone.

                               I’m so far past ‘extremist’ that I actually think our elected, appointed, and salaried officials work for *us*, not themselves.

            2. My only question is how was Medicare Part D heading off HillaryCare? HillaryCare was dead and buried a decade earlier.

               1. Because it was a problem, which WAS heading straight at them, and while I wish HillaryCare was dead it was definitely not dead among the activists.

                  They were doing the usual “feed the news sad stories with important parts missing” tactic, and the net wasn’t quite far enough along to get widespread better information out.

                  As with most problems, people did not agree on what part of the situation was the problem, nor what caused it, and thus they didn’t agree on how to fix it.

                  A big part of the problem is the reporting being done by Progressive activists with bylines, to paraphrase Insty.

                  Look at how many things on this blog boil down to “right now is uniquely bad! This has never happened before!”
                  “No, you’ve never heard about this happening before.”

                  1. Nothing ever dies among the activists. The Left was campaigning for nationalize health care since the end of WW2, yet in 1993, despite the Democrats having all the elective branches they couldn’t pass it.

                     I see no reason why the GOP needed to give half a loaf in 2003 when they controlled all the elective branches, especially when they could have spent the energy on things they’d been campaigning on like Social Security Reform.

                     Hell, they couldn’t even get Democrat votes because it didn’t go far enough.

                     It was a strategy for a party which cared more about have a nice quiet time at the trough than anything else.

                     1. Why did they have to show they were Doing Something?

                        Because EMTALA was killing medical care, just when the Boomers were getting up to where they needed it. And the healthcare system wasn’t in wonderful condition before that.

                        (I had to look up the name, it’s the thing that made it so the illegals can do chew’n’screw for hospitals.)

                     2. Socialist Security reform was dead on arrival. Everybody with a clue knows it’s about to implode, but nobody dares to be the first one to say the Emperor is stumbling around butt-naked. It’s the universally acknowledged Third Rail of U.S. politics, that will burn anybody touching it to a crispy cinder. 70 million old folks are dependent on the government, the money has already been spent, and any attempt to fix the problems will be met with torches and pitchforks.

                        When it does implode, MAYBE a few people will wake up?

                        1. President GW Bush tried to get people talking about the Social Security bankruptcy, and get something done. It was probably the one time during the eight years that he was in office that he could make the attempt, since he’d just won his second election, and didn’t have to worry about accidentally torpedoing his reelection prospects. The most he got done was to say, “I’ve got a plan, and it won’t affect those already on Social Security.” Nobody outside the President’s inner circle had even seen the plan yet. We don’t even know for a fact that it was written down. So quite literally, the only thing that we had to go on at that point were the promises that the president had made.

                           But the Dems *immediately* went on the offensive, claiming (without any proof, of course, since we still hadn’t actually seen the plan) that Bush’s plan would take those Social Security checks away from seniors. In the end, the public reaction against it was so strong that Bush shelved the idea, and never did reveal the details of his plan.

                           IIRC, during Obama’s administration, the Dems were publicly stating that Social Security is in no danger whatsoever of going bankrupt anytime soon.

                           1. And COVID19 is a totally natural virus that was spread by people eating bats, and paper masks saved a billion lives, and Cuomo was the bestest public leader EVAH, and…

2. I’m slightly salty and out of it today.

   Question: Why doesn’t the Magnitsky Act apply to Congress, Obama and Biden?

   1. What would it take to make it apply to them?

      Serious question. I don’t see they have an incentive to follow the law unless we find ways to make it stick to them.

   2. (D)

      1. 😦

   3. Good question Bob. Stop making sense.

      1. I…Who took the money?
         Who took the money away?

         …..

         As we get older and stop making sense
         You won’t find her waiting long
         Stop making sense, stop making sense…stop making sense, making sense
         I got a girlfriend that’s better than that
         And nothing is better than this
         Oh, is it?

         Talking Heads, 1984

   4. Because Democrats have power and aren’t afraid to exercise it, often in excess of what they have.

      Republicans are afraid of their own shadows and can only advance new entitlements when they control all of the elective branches, assuming they advance anything at all.

      1. Republicans to me for years seemed to think that, “the media will crucify us, we’ll be utterly mocked and ridiculed, and we’ll lose anyway. Let’s save what power we have for something Really Important.” And of course that Really Important thing never seems to come.
         Trump doesn’t like unmerited criticism, but he does the old, “Any publicity is good publicity,” schtick. Which is probably the only way to get anything done.

      2. Also, the Democrats – at least in the last couple of decades – seem to do a better job of keeping their members in line. The current brouhaha over Senators Sinema and Manchin refusing to join the rest of their party in doing away with the filibuster is wonderful to behold, if only because it’s about time that the Dems had to deal with even a little of what the Republicans put up with on a regular basis.

      3. can only advance new entitlements when they control all of the elective branches

         T’would be lovely if that were true.

         Sadly having complete control means they slam on the brakes.

         1. *derp*

            Just noticed the word “entitlements”, which I apparently skimmed over……

3. I don’t know if we’re winning the culture war or if we’re just talking/listening to the chorus.
   If we are winning, as Patricia McCarthy says over at American Thinker; “Please, complacent GOP, go to bat for those people in the D.C. version of a Soviet labor camp. Rescue them. Stand and deliver. Now is the time.”

   https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/06/hundreds_still_are_incarcerated_for_being_in_dc_on_january_6_why_is_the_gop_so_afraid_to_stand_up_for_what_is_right_.html

   1. If they can’t stand up for what is right, could they at least stand up against what is wrong?

      1. Depends, have you give a max donation for their latest 4x matching?

   2. “I don’t know if we’re winning the culture war or if we’re just talking/listening to the chorus.”

      I think like most stupid evil (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StupidEvil) the left got greedy and impatient and decided to boil the frog as soon as possible. We went from, “let gays get married to the people they love” to “BAKE THE CAKE OR WE’LL DESTROY YOU BIGOT” to all the current transgender madness in like less then a decade, and it’s causing a real backlash. Whether that backlash has a lasting impact remains to be seen.

      1. Hope you’re right, hope it does. Meanwhile I’ll avoid crowds, look both ways, as well as up and down when crossing the street.

   3. On a similar vein, a look at who *wasn’t* incarcerated, and suspicions of heavy Fed involvement. (Like the worst actors seemed to have gotten a pass, while the tourists got solitary. Hell, even the ACLU is getting upset about it.)

      https://www.revolver.news/2021/06/federal-foreknowledge-jan-6-unindicted-co-conspirators-raise-disturbing-questions/

   4. If the Party of Stupid had ever given a damn about the people who were arrested on 1/6, they’d have done something long before now.

      1. You’d have to assume they cared about anything but spitting on their constituents.

      2. Yep, which is why a think we need start a second party to counter the democrats and their Republic auxillary.

   5. The “fact-checkers” have leapt into action to deny Carlson’s accusations, which is not exactly reassuring considering they’re the ones who said it was crazy conspiracy talk to even consider the possibility of COVID-19 having escaped from he Wuhan lab.

   6. Because those people were for DJT, not the Republican Party, which never wanted him, barely tolerated him, stabbed him in the back when they had the oppportunity, and generally threw a collective tantrum because he rolled over their designated candidate *and* got elected *and* was popular. Those voters that thought *their* opinions mattered must be taught a lesson.

      They might do something about those wrongful arrests and detentions now… but only because they see some political advantage to it. Otherwise, they’ve been happy to not say a damned thing about it. They were DJT people, not GOP people, therefore unreliable at best, traitors at worst.

4. So, thoughts on organizing at a local level?

   I’ve been advised to occupy the local school boards and start steering them into some semblance of sanity. Preferably before our kids are in it…

   1. I don’t think there’s time before things explode, but it doesn’t hurt.

      1. And it gives me something to keep me busy in the mean time 🙂

         1. You’ll either meet people who can help you keep things together through the storm, or you’ll be well-acquainted with the other people in your cargo container on your way to the concentration camp…

            1. And I have no interest in “keeping the children calm” on their ways to the cars

   2. If we took over all the school boards, it might take a generation but we could potentially reverse this madness, even without doing much else, if only because kids would grow up with a different outlook.

      1. I don’t think taking over the school boards will be enough. The teachers themselves have been steeped in this nonsense. Even my elder daughter educated at an Evangelical Christian School and growing up with me as a Dad falls for some of the absolute nonsense. Her cowrokers from far more liberal schools are unsurprisingly even MORE liberal. I think part of it is that those that chose to be teachers have a heart for the children and REALLY desire to help initially. It’s just that the political nonsense that is ANY group of working humans mixed with the strange controlling and Kafkaesque hierarchy that is their upper management makes the workplace toxic and over time they withdraw and just move to survival mode.

         1. “those that chose to be teachers have a heart for the children and REALLY desire to help initially.”

            Plus love their subject.

            But put them in the system long enough … beat down is an understatement, no matter how much they love the concept of teaching.

         2. ” those that chose to be teachers have a heart for the children and REALLY desire to help initially.”

            You are a lot more optimistic and kind than I am when it comes to teachers….

            1. Dr. J. Biden, Ped. D

            2. I am perhaps biased as I am married to one (College Prof in Chemistry) and sired another (elder daughter is 8th Grade Math teacher at a school with 40% plus students that get no cost lunch/breakfast). I am familiar with most of my wife’s colleagues and many of my daughter’s. At least in this small subset of teachers most of them really want to help the students learn. Burn out is definitely a factor. Particularly hard is when feedback to the students is made very limited for fear of offending people. If you can’t praise someone for fear of offending one group or correct another for the same fear it is frustrating as the students lose any motivation.

               Are there bad (unskilled, or even downright evil) teachers out there? You betcha. I’ve had some, my daughters have had some, odds on nearly everyone here has had some to one degree or another. Teaching is NOT easy as some would think. There is a knack to it and having some native talent goes a long way. In the lower grades it is important to figure out what works/captures different students to get them interested lest they just tune out. Poor teachers don’t detect that issue and ruin many folks who otherwise might be engaged with the various subjects.

               Many teachers seem to have ended up in teaching either because they chose a subject with limited application outside education (e.g. English, History) or chose a pursuit which is so full of excellent practitioners that mere very good folks are a glut on the market (art,music). So they take up teaching unenthusiastically and with little or no natural talent.

               Last of all there are also a few REALLY bad apples who like the control aspect of being a teacher. They torment or abuse students verbally (physically usually no longer being tolerated). Some don’t even comprehend their misbehavior. I remember a youngish (2-3 years out of college) teacher who was essentially having a relationship with one of the students, this was destructive to the student and to the classmates who started to feel the student was being favored for many things due to the teachers affections to that student. I don’t think that teacher really understood how much trouble the relationship was causing and didn’t care as the teacher seemed to fell the “love” trumps everything.

               1. “They torment or abuse students verbally (physically usually no longer being tolerated).”

                  …Boy, I wish I could introduce you to my old teachers. I think you’d be shocked how much is not only tolerated, but actively encouraged.

                  1. 10-4.

                     “Why, no, incarceration in the public school system was *not* ‘the best years of my life!’ “

                     1. Indeed. *Dry*

                  2. Indeed when I attended grammar mid ’60s the use of a ruler or yard stick to rap hands was still permissible if not common (and I’ll note if I had received corporal punishment what I got from my Mom when I got home would have been far worse). My understanding is that today if my elder daughter were to do that she would be charged with assault and likely suspended without pay until either tried or cleared. They are told to not even try to break up a fight. They call in the principal and if available the on site police officer if absolutely necessary. Discipline is VERY poor, and in this pandemic the consequences for the students are 0, no one will be held back, sitting in “detention” with a chrome book or similar is not particularly painful, suspension means you sit at home and don’t have to join the zoom call. This years students (who started this last year in march) are particularly hard boiled an nasty. There is going to be a HUGE petty crime wave in the next few years as these folks drop out/ graduate with no prospects.

                     1. They won’t be petty crimes.

                     2. The crime wave is already here.

                     3. mid ’60s the use of a ruler or yard stick to rap hands was still permissible if not common

                        –
                        Mid-60’s I got my tush swatted … Normally consequences at home would have been as bad with double the swats. But, in this case, I wasn’t wrong. Only consequence, to me, was “they were the parents, they’d handle any disagreements with the teachers. They were the parents.” There was an implied line I was entitled to take matters in my own hands, right or not, the situation in question, wasn’t it.

                        My husband talks about Mr. Paddleopulus which was inscribed on the paddle of the Math, and also boys PE teacher. Mess up in Math. The paddle came into play when one was in the showers after PE. Early ’60s. San Diego outlier area. Were discussing this discussion somewhere, brought this story up, someone commented “was this a Greek Mr. X at Z HS?” Probably, didn’t know all the details. Turns out this person was probably in hubby’s older brother’s class. We are a lonnnnng way from the San Diego metro area. It is a small world. Guess I don’t have to say where the paddle is in today teachers arsenal.

                        The other story hubby tells is when he started HS, each and every teacher “Mr. P?”, “Here”, pause, “Is S.P. your older brother?”, sigh (by 2nd time), “Yes”, “I don’t want any trouble out of you!” Which didn’t help since he’d already done most (all) the work helping his, 4 years, older brother (a great mechanic, no so much math or writing). Even THIS would be considered inappropriate.

                        charged with assault and likely suspended without pay until either tried or cleared. They are told to not even try to break up a fight.

                        –
                        Teachers can not even defend themselves or ward off an attacking child. If they do, they are looking at suspension and being fired, at minimum. Whether they actually are prosecuted, no matter how unwarranted, depends …

                        1. I’ve mentioned before that I was looking into the Troops To Teachers thing.

                           When I looked at the “how horrible, this teacher assaulted a student” stuff and discovered it was uniformly in response to direct attack with a deadly weapon– not even just threat, but actual attack– and that’s why they needed to replace the teacher…. nope, nope, nope. I went through school dealing with people who thought there was no right to self defense, because we were on school property, I am NOT going to do that when I am responsible for the kids.

                           Does explain a lot of the criminals who think they have a right to attack without consequences, though, no?

                           1. Yep.

                              I do not know how teachers stay in teaching. The last year, teachers had to be elated. Color me surprised (NOT) that teachers do not want to go back to the classroom, until every child is vaccinated. Some not even then. Especially in some locals.

               2. elder daughter is 8th Grade Math teacher at a school with 40% plus students that get no cost lunch/breakfast

                  K, graduated in ’01, and from 98 on we were no lunch.

                  Because they WOULD NOT stop signing us up for free lunch.

                  When we showed up DAYS EARLY to pay for lunch, because “no cost meals” mean big benefits.

                  I spent HOURS at the office going “No, really, we don’t want this stuff.” I eventually stopped eating lunch because they wouldn’t listen.

                  It takes real EFFORT in teh wrong district to NOT be “no cost.”

                  Not sure if relevant, but is IMPORTANT.

               3. “Many teachers seem to have ended up in teaching either because they chose a subject with limited application outside education (e.g. English, History)”

                  Pardon me, but English is a subject that is in woeful need of being taught thoroughly and comprehensively. Maybe it’s the fact that I have two decades of experience working for small regional newspapers, but knowing how to write a complete sentence is damn important. Witness the average person trying to write something on social media, that is, if they are even aware of subjects and verbs and especially(!) punctuation and spelling. If I wrote like that, I would expect my mid-70s era English teachers to slap me upside the head for coming across as illiterate.

         3. *Can* you take over the school boards? In some areas, they’re appointed, and no outsider can get in.

   3. Make the lists of people who aren’t 100% compromise and are competent on acid-free paper, seal them in plastic, and bury them in your yard, along with a lot of books on the basics of building institutions.

      It’s well past too late to save the ones we have and during the coming troubles, the leftists will try to destroy the knowledge of how to create new ones.

      Have the knowledge and be ready to hit the ground running if there is enough left after to make creating new ones viable. Our biggest risk is a great forgetting and needing the luck to repeat the odd rebuilding from the Black Death that set Europe on the way to the modern age instead of the typical pullback and crushing of anything “new” after a disaster that was the norm throughout the world and history.

5. I know the “Get woke, go broke” meme. I’ve also heard that it’s just as likely to go the other way, businesses that are going down the toobs might go woke in a last-ditch effort to save themselves. Doesn’t work, of course.

   Considering what happened when Carbonite stopped sponsoring Rush Limbaugh, I put at least a little bit of credence to that. A lot of people were crowing that their stock prices plummeted when they stopped sponsoring Rush. I looked into it, and saw that their stock prices (which hadn’t been publicly traded for all that long) were plummeting well before they stopped sponsoring Rush. So that made me think, they thought that the plummeting prices were because they sponsored Rush, so if they wait until he said something outrageous (considering who it was, they’d have to wait, maybe two weeks at most), then loudly announce they were no longer supporting him, that might stop the drop.

   Didn’t work, of course.

   1. I just think it’s already a lose-lose situation, a souless multi-billion corporation does some woke virtue signaling and sane customers are immediately turned off/start boycotting and leftists don’t really care because they hate all big rich companies anyway/or they get outraged by how superficial it all is.

      It’s like a combover to hide a half spot, it’s ridiculous. We all see it’s ridiculous, a lot of us are not saying out of simple politeness, some are more rude and openly mock it, but the guy continues to wear a bad combover every day because he doesn’t know what else to do.

      1. *bald spot

      2. It is not for the company itself, but for the people in it and running it. It has worked d beautifully for Dr. “Mengele” Faucci

   2. Speaking of, Victoria’s Secret is the latest company to be taken over by the Pod People. They’ve decided that women being attractive to men is a bad thing: https://twitter.com/sapna/status/1405270760994709505

      1. Wait, wut?

         Haven’t they realized that the women who shop there want to feel sexy that way? Idiots. They won’t gain enough customers to get back the ones who are insulted by this.

         1. Helping women look sexy was literally the whole reason the company existed.

      2. Looks like Victoria Secret has been going down for years, so it might be an example of what I was talking about above. (Go broke, get woke)

         1. The feminist left has this weird hang up about (straight) female sexuality and sexiness that they often project onto the religious right. Remember that awful bizarre cover of Wonder Woman where she’s about as shapely as a potato and has purple skin to boot? The explanation I read at the time is that they “didn’t want to enable the Male Gaze”, or something. Because if women are sexy and make men happy by looking at them that’s…sexist and evil somehow? Just put the words temptation, sin and hell in their speech and you’d have a religious zealot Stephen King would hesitate to use for fear of being too over the top and ridiculous.

         2. I suspect it’s blackmail. Wexner, their owner, was great friends with Epstein and rumors have been floating for many years. He. gave the company up to a new guy who brought in a bunch of high profile feminazis — that vulgar “lady” soccer player is one of them. It’s a pity really, since L Brands, the parent, made me a lot of money over the years. To me, they sold, mostly to men, women’s underwear that wasn’t designed to be worn for very long, but several women I know told me that they wore VS because it fit add that it was good value and I bought a block of it. The fantasy side of the business is what brought in the profit while the underwear part covered the costs. Now the fantasy side is gone and I suspect they’ll disappear. Bath and Bodyworks will probably still have value as long as women like smelly, overpriced, candles — by that I mean as long as there are women.

            1. Yeah…I don’t care much about the fantasy side of VS, but I would be a bit sorry otherwise–I can find stuff that fits decently and while expensive isn’t insanely so.

               But if they do…well, it’s their own damn fault.

6. On demons and angels: Me, too.

7. GOPe is just a strand of Republicanism that has existed for decades. The difference between then and now is that back then, Reagan ran against it. Now it tries to co-opt Reagan. And forty years from now, it will be trying to co-opt Trump.

   I don’t think you can ever completely kill it, because people are human. A lot of it is built on certain conservative ideas mixed with the eternal temptation to let an elite take charge. And there will *always* be ambitious politicians who think they should be part of that elite. So it will continue to exist. But now we have the examples of people like Reagan and Trump to push back with, which gives strength to those who argue against this particular strain of thought

   1. The difference between then and now was under Reagan they saw value in working with him while trying to cut off his more radical ideas. One of their own even joined Reagan’s ticket.

      Under Trump, they sandbagged a president of their own party who did something that even Reagan did do, enter office with both Houses of Congress controlled by his party. They boycotted his convention and some even called on him to step down in October of 2016.

      Based on that, without evidence to the contrary, I consider the current GOPe a very different, and dangerous, beast compared to its 70s/80s counterparty.

8. I’m on the board of my HOA, the smallest and potentially most fascist form of government. You hear the stories of veterans being fined for flying an American flag at their home? Not on my watch. We need freedom loving and indomitable people at every level of government. Watching parents take on school boards is a start — now we need parents replacing school board members.

   The fascist’s pandemic rules woke up citizens all over the country. School boards, mayors — all could step into our lives and dictate behavior to us. Now that we know this, we’re fighting back.

   1. Have any suggestions on getting involved and putting together groups to deal with those?

      I’m thinking I need to start getting involved in my local school board before our kids are in it, but not sure how to get started.

      1. Here’s a suggestion. As well as trying direct action like getting elected to the school board or pressuring them to be sane, look into running for your local precinct Republican party representative. I’m sure it differs from place to place, but in many places these positions are elected in primary elections, and very often they’re held by people who haven’t been opposed in years, or even decades. You might be able to win such an election with just a handful of votes.

         I also make sure to email my local sheriff, my state senator and representative, and any other non-federal office holder who can influence conditions locally, about any issue of importance to me. For example, I sent copies of the Missouri 2nd Amendment Preservation Act, recently passed, to my state reps here in Tennessee, yesterday. Today, I sent my county sheriff a copy of the Utah Sheriffs’ Association statement refusing to enforce unconstitutional gun laws, regulations, or orders. I also sent that to the Tennessee Sheriffs Association. Will any of that do any good? Dunno. But it won’t hurt, for sure.

9. No you are not alone.
   We are not alone.
   I always have been and will always be a conservative.
   Why do you think they put day care centers in federal buildings?

   1. Because a whole lot of single mothers work for the government?

      1. Not necessarily. May depend on the agency. My office in DoD had some single moms, but it had a ton of male retired veterans, too.

      2. Daycare at work is a standard benefit in places that hire from dual-income trained households.

         That’s why my pediatrician was horrified we didn’t have any plans to put our first born in daycare at 6 weeks. That was normal, among her served population, because both parents were working full time.

         1. And now a lot of women, or lower-paid men, are staying home with their kids instead of going to work. Not having daycare taught them that they might as well stay home as spend all that money on daycare.

            1. Yep.

               Which my husband has been patiently explaining to people since we were expecting the Princess– but we were talking to people who hold as an article of faith that a woman must work outside of the home and be 100% financially independent before she’s allowed to consider actually raising her own children.

10. It has been heartening to watch those with the most to lose come out:

    * Against CRT, and win. Parents rally against CRT.

    * Fight attempt to be cancelled. No apologizing. Summary … sucks to be you. And has gotten support for this attitude!

    * Those working from home fleeing the deep blue cities, who are now refusing to go back. Either forcing the issue, quitting, or retiring.

    * Employers who decided this not having to pay for desk space for an employee who is more effective working from their preferred self provided workspace.

    * Latin America Country leaders saying “We know election fraud. 2020 US Election was fraught with Fraud. Biden isn’t the legit president. You (Harris) aren’t the legit vice president.” Subtext “whatever you say means squat”. And parts of America, who til now were saying “no, otherwise the supreme court would have intervened”, are now going “ummmmm”. Not loudly. Not yet.

    * The panic over the vote audit in progress.

    * The panic over the vote audit spreading to other states, where Biden won. Not where Trump won. Just Biden.

    I was slightly disappointed on members of the Five on Fox take on the need to head back to the office. Don’t disagree with their assessment for Their Profession, be pure reporter, investigating, or commentary, but disappointed they didn’t (appear to) grasp that this isn’t universal for all professions that require meeting, discussions, between people. (Watch a recording, doing so as background noise, or not fully engaged in listening, so might have missed one of the panelists pushing back.)

    1000 little inroads that are showing in the cracks that I’m missing. Definite signs of they are losing. Yes, they will are pulling stunts to push back that will get ugly. We just have to pray that it is their side that pulls the super stupid stuff. That even when push comes to shove, that no matter how they scream and point, whatever disappears off the radar because what they say is 100% false (self defense, Jan 6, etc.).

    1. They’re already doing super-stupid stuff. “Mostly peaceful, but fiery” protests. Defunding police plus refusing to prosecute crime.

       Their control over the major institutions of communication means that they get away with it, at least in part. Take the recent serial killer in Georgia–if the races were reversed, there would be no talk of anything else for a year.

       1. Or, in PDX’s case, prosecuting a cop who acted completely professionally beating a rioter on the head with a baton (held by all to be fully within regs, save the DA) and letting all ANTIFA walk, no charges, etc.

          1. You misspelled persecuting

    2. Definitely this.

    3. yes–

    4. I think the big issue is having completely defeated their nominal opponents in the GOP and Conservative, Inc., and demonstrated that said opponents never really cared about their nominal charge, lots of people in lots of places are realizing no one is coming to save them and doing it themselves.

       Oddly, all my complaints about how useless the GOP and how they have now gone beyond a controlled and loyal opposition to spitting on the people they were supposed to keep in line may be the real failure that ends the leftists.

       When you thought “if we just elect Republicans they’ll put an end to this” it was easy to let them do it. When they didn’t people elected Trump and instead of reading the tea leaves and at least putting on a good show of working with him they sat on their hands at best and stood behind him with knives at worst.

       Seeing that people decided it was time for them to fight and a huge centralized monolith can’t maneuver enough to fight 1,000 little strikes. Sure, the one it turns on will get crush, but meanwhile, the 999 remaining stab it, and 2 more pop up to join them.

       1. and 2 more pop up to join them.

          Hail Lobster.

       2. The thing is, people are scary.

          An angry crowd will tear you to shreds.

          We’ve been cheerfully pretending to peace and civilization for a very long time, because it is the best business.

          But, we are being prevented from minding our own business.

          And we can tell that it is afraid.

          But not anywhere near afraid enough.

          1. Ought to clarify the comment on fear.

             Fear and pain can be good things. Pain can stop you from repeating a stupid act. Fear can cause you to avoid doing something stupid that you don’t have painful experience with.

             The vicious morons have been doing some dangerous things, and their level of fear is much lower than appropriate for the risk.

             1. Fear can cause you to act, or forever cower.

       3. That was the thing that floored me about the way the left went total HAM on Trump.

          He’s a negotiator for a living! If they’d given him half a loaf, they could have sold it for pretty much anything they wanted. He stuck to most of his campaign promises, true, but there was a lot do stuff he didn’t promise that the left said they wanted, that, if they bothered, they could have gotten. Heck Kim Kardasian managed to get favorable deals from Trump.

          Except, no, they had to light their hair on fire and run around screaming like psychos instead.

          All I can think is, what they’ve been up too is so bad that they figured if they didn’t do that, a lot of them were going to prison for a very long time. Given what they have done in the last few months, that now seems like a low ball.

          1. That wasn’t my calculation at the time, but right now it definitely seems so.

          2. The irony is in 2016 that was my big fear in voting for him. I’m used to the GOP surrendering to get a deal and here was someone who wrote the book “The Art of the Deal”

             Maybe that was it. Maybe they realized until other Republicans he’d actually get a half a loaf and then some. They realized they couldn’t risk negotiating with him.

             1. Trump remembered (like Reagan in Iceland) that the first skill of the negotiator is the ability to recognize a bad deal or bad faith and WALK AWAY.

          3. I’ve been saying all along that Trump was still a democrat at heart. If they hadn’t kept shoving him to the right, they could have had nearly everything they wanted.

             1. Except that what communists really want is to break people by asking extremes of them beyond what people can do and stay intact.

                1. This.

             2. He’s a New England Democrat of the period of around when he was twenty. It is just that this means that he is much less homicidally insane than the current bunch.

                The Democrats of 1860, the beginning of segregation, and the 1920s might be less murderous and crazy than the current bunch.

             3. ” If they hadn’t kept shoving him to the right”…
                they’re shoving EVERYONE to the right, and those they can’t shove they eat. Remember when Bush II was the worst kind of right wing fascist imaginable. Worse than Hitler and Franco put together? Now we laugh out asses off at that notion, he was moderate eunuch who took pretty much every hit and smear the left threw at him with a compromise and “let’s be friends because we both love America don’t we?” attitude because he though it made him look like the better man when all it did was signal to the left that he was weak. The Tea Party was formed in the wake of his failure was bullied harassed and smeared and eventually subjected unfair lawfare by the IRS. Trump was the comeback from that and was effective against all smears and the entire MSM from CNN down to the lamest Seth MacFarlane cartoon trying to take him down, and when that didn’t work they stole the election. It’ll keep ratcheting until we reach Pinochet and all the leftists are dead or fled and the survivors will still think none of it is there fault.

          4. Your original error was, of course, taking at face value what the left *said* they wanted.

             An example: If the left actually wanted gay marriage to become a normal part of American society, they would have addressed it in the state legislatures. Maybe eventually in a Constitutional amendment. But they didn’t–they rammed it through the courts, because that was the only way to get what they actually wanted: married gay couples in fear of losing what they gained merely because of a few judicial appointments, and mentally ready to be shock troops for the left. Also, the power to persecute through the courts anyone who publicly deviates from the latest left-wing beliefs.

             Sure, the left could have gotten a lot of what they *said* they wanted by negotiating with Trump. But he was taking *everything* from them that they actually need–including the power to deliver for some very…unforgiving…patrons of theirs.

          5. Reasonable human beings: Everyone has something that they want, which, if it isn’t totally inimical to our goals, means we can deal with them for the things that we want. Exchange, and civilization happens.

             Demons from hell: What we want, fundamentally, is to hurt you. It’ll be funny watching you try to find a schelling point for that!

          6. One of the things he did early on was to offer the Dems a deal. They’d give him the wall, and he’d give TWICE the number of so-called “Dreamers” that Obama had offered protection for a path to citizenship.

             The Dems rebuffed him, and didn’t even try to pretend negotiate with him.

             So he shrugged his shoulders, said “Okay,” and found another way to get the wall financed.

             What too many people fail to realize is that Trump was never the cause. He was (and still is) a symptom. He’s a symptom of a group of people who have been very loudly making their voices heard in very much legal ways, and getting heaped with abuse and scorn in return. And meanwhile, those people were watching their counterpart protestors from the other side of the political divide flagrantly break laws, and get lauded and awarded for it. Trump was what happens when those people get frustrated enough to try and ratchet up the pressure in a controlled fashion.

             Trump didn’t create his movement. He correctly identified it, corralled it, managed it, and rode it into the White House.

          7. “Given what they have done in the last few months, that now seems like a low ball.”

             You mean like selling military secrets to the Communists and getting paid with under-age sex slaves? That’s been my suspicion for quite some time, and lately I’ve been thinking that I’m thinking -way- too small.

             1. Which is why I’ve never been able to make my hopes extend to a legal or peaceful resolution since roughly 2003.

                1. Right? Like when we finally find out what’s been going on, hanging them won’t be enough?

                   Given the way they act, that’s a good possibility.

                   1. As I’ve been saying all along, the way the Founders treated the Tories will be our precedent: Leave, stay here and be actual Americans, or die. And the Founders weren’t dealing with an opposition they couldn’t trust to keep any word, which kind of rules out option 2.

                   2. This, yes.

       4. I am thinking more about the local gummints where an R or a D might mean something, and left or right might mean something, but the [Name of Locale] First, M[NoL] GA is critical.

          Related read: https://theworthyhouse.com/2020/06/27/the-moral-basis-of-a-backward-society-edward-c-banfield/

          TL’DR : that is the goal. It is profoundly anti-USAian. Resisting it is within all our capabilities, even bottom-of-the totem pole sperg-y freaks.

11. This has the weird feel of watching a criticality accident about to happen. That is, we *KNOW* there is enough for things to go critical, but SO FAR the arrangement hasn’t allowed it to happen. Like a solution of stuff all in nicely separated long, thin tubes, but there are too many in the same room and they’re being moved closer to each other. And it’s just a matter of time before some “bright spark” (awful pun fully intended) decides the long tubes are too fiddly and starts pouring a few in a squat bucket… and there’s the blue-white flash of “OH [*GARBLED*].”

    (And now I ponder the ‘sea salt’ thing as conspiracy to get people away from a trivially easy source of iodine…)

    1. Definitely this too.

    2. We intuit that the yet unknown ‘failure’ mechanism is of the ‘first slow, then fast’ type.

       And some of what we are seeing might be the weird motions of a structure stressed around the failure point.

    3. The pink stuff does taste better. But, valid point on the utility of handy iodine.

       One more thing to stock up on.

       I wonder how long peppercorns keep?

       1. Alton Brown, i think, was one of the ones who started the sea salt trend back when–he liked it because the larger flakes somehow distribute flavor better, etc etc. In his recent revisits to old episodes and new episodes of Good Eats, (and via other sources in years past) I hear he’s admitted he hadn’t actually stopped to think about the iodine problem, and now recommends that for most salt purposes, used the iodized stuff and save sea salt for fancy fancy things 😀 (He’s also stopped hating on other things he hated on in the past–because part of the reason he started Good Eats to begin with was he didn’t like the overt snobbery of most cooking shows, but also recognizes he has his own snobby views on some foods that he’s trying to admit to, heh.)

          The push toward veganism and other crap, though? Especially the “we MUST force everyone to eat bugs!” Yeah, that IS deliberate crap.

          1. but also recognizes he has his own snobby views on some foods that he’s trying to admit to
             Thus:
             FANGIRL!!!!!!

             1. Same. I *looooove* that his approach overall is “This is about what you do with basics, and here’s why these things work.” He goes into the general science, and is more interested in giving people ideas about what to do with the stuff that’s probably already IN their pantries/fridges/freezers 😀

                (I was overjoyed to find that Discovery + has ALL the Good Eats stuff, past and present.)

                1. *puts Discovery on the “someday” list*

    4. Also veganism, and not eating eggs…

       https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/iodine-deficiency-symptoms

       1. And the credibility lost with the headline of the “Next Article”:

          ‘Everything You Need to Know About HPV in Vulva Owners’

          Oy…

          1. I did not scroll down that far! I just grabbed tge first one w/familiar info. (But we’d better get used it it: These terms are becoming the norm in U.S. medicine.)

             But until then:
             newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/mayo-clinic-q-and-a-sea-salt-and-sufficient-iodine-intake/

             newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/mayo-clinic-q-and-a-sea-salt-and-sufficient-iodine-intake/

             mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hypothyroidism/symptoms-causes/syc-20350284

             same/same.

    5. “God has a special providence for fools, drunkards, and the United States of America.”
       — Otto Von Bismark

       The quote is apocryphal, but might be more prescient than would immediately be apparent.

12. Paul Krugman sounds like he is running scared and applying motive to that amorphous white mass that really belongs to him and his side. I’ve noted the riots, arson, and killings by the “approved” groups and it sounds like he truly believes that someone somewhere is going to push back. What I find interesting is that he has no idea who or why. Why? because we love freedom. Who? Anyone who believes in the American Constitution.

13. Victors don’t have to try to imprison everyone in order to govern.

    Maybe not, but as I work my way through The Gulag Archipelago, I note that imprisoning everyone can come along with a long dark time to follow. Consider that three generations* grew up under the threat of the Gulag where, to a certain extent, it was little more than a dark lottery over whether you would get a “tenner” or a “imprisoned without right of correspondence” (usually a euphemism for “shot”).

    *Using the definition of “time required for children born to grow up to have children of their own”, generally 20-25 years on average (birth to first child).

    1. It is, however, important to note that we are not the Soviet Union. Nor are we Tsarist Russia. The “model” of the USSR does not apply to us. This just simply provides a marker for how bad things might be and what we need to be working to avoid.

       1. Somehow ended up watching a lot of Masha and Bear lately, and my siblings playthrough of the Metro series and one of the things we’ve noticed about Russian culture is, it does not have a concept of self-governence or cooperation at a larger than family level.

          In Metro Exodus, they’ve all got their own tribes, and they don’t bother each other unless they have too, but they have no concept at all of mutual defense treaties between the tribes. They are all autonomous units.

          In Masha and Bear, the Bear has built this house in the woods made out of all sorts of stuff, but when the rabbit is always stealing his carrots, the only thing they have a concept of is, he’ll bob the rabbit if he catches them doing it, but that’s all there is. No concept of theft or police reminding the rabbit not to steal from their neighbor.

          Reduce the US to Fallout 64 status and you’ll have wasteland diplomats traveling the deserts for tribes to negotiate everything from trade agreements to cultural exchanges with about two days after the dust settles.

          1. …and another settlement needs our help. 😉

             1. “YES PRESTON DAMMIT I KNOW BUT I AM TRYING TO FIND MY KIDNAPPED CHILD!!” 😀 (Have I managed that part yet? No. Because another settlement needs our help, sigh.)

                Which would be why the mod that makes it so Preston isn’t quiiiiiiite as obnoxious with those quests is so popular, lol.

                1. There’s a mod that lets you recruit a squad to do the Minuteman radiant quests for you. I’m sticking to just using the mod that limits it to one at a time.

                2. Though I’ve been playing various “StartMeUp” campaigns, which is an alternate start mod that allows you an option to not be the Sole Survivor main character. So you may not have a child to find.

                   Though you still need to find Vault 111 and open it before talking to Preston or the quest scripting breaks something and you can’t open the Vault door afterwards. So you probably know about the kidnapping at that point if you went into the Vault first.

          2. Russia in general has a bleak outlook on life. I’ve observed on multiple occasions that “War and Peace” has one character who quite literally dies (he was wounded in battle, but the book explicitly notes that he was recovering) because he decides that things are going too well for him. So he essentially turns to the wall, and wills himself dead.

             AND THIS IS CONSIDERED AN UPBEAT RUSSIAN NOVEL!

             1. Chinese Cinema is like that.

                You can tell it’s a tragedy because the main characters get married and everybody dies at the end.
                You can tell it’s a comedy, because it’s mostly only the bad guys that are dead by the end, and the main characters don’t get married.

       2. You know, Canada is not the USSR either. You’d think it would be different, right? However, things here seem to be sliding along with a disturbing similarity. We might need to step pretty freakin’ far out of our comfort zones.

          1. The observation wasn’t in terms of the depth of the slide but that it took three generations to climb out of it.

             I will also note that the US is not Canada either. Canada doesn’t have more guns in private hands than people, as just one somewhat relevant difference.

             1. Canada is interesting that way. There are a lot more guns in Canada than people think. They haven’t been turned in or destroyed, they’re all still out there and more are bought every year. There’s more than enough to arm every adult male in the country, that’s for sure.

                I guess we’ll have to wait for the Fimbulwinter famine before they see any use. Canadians are starting to stage illegal demonstrations, but it isn’t making much change in the government’s attitude so far.

                On a positive note, I did finally see some biker chick tell the McDonalds staff to stuff their mask BS where the sun don’t shine. Even in Canada some people are willing to fight Big Karen.

                1. Over on a blog I follow, some idiot suggested that this lady spend her time protesting to establish socialized medicine because of a 200$ bill. (I think protesting to change that policy in the US is something with no return on investment. Feds are going to do what the feds are going to do. The really noisy protests have ensured that no other protests will be visible, and that people are less inclined to treat protestors as if they have something worth saying.)

                   I think protests in Canada may actually make a certain amount of sense. Not because I think Canadian officials are persuadable. I think other Canadians may be persuadable. Especially if the officials visit atrocity on the protestors.

                   Like everywhere else, government in Canada is fragile. The reality is a lot more consent and trust than these morons think when they judge from appearances.

                2. I dunno, I wouldn’t underestimate how much out of the norm it is for *Canadians* to be protesting.

                   Especially in progressive provinces like Ontario . . . we might have gotten some protests about Indian reservations and such, but nothing large / widespread.

                   There is a lot of unrest going on under the covers with regards to religious freedoms — when you end up with whole churches getting barricaded by dozens of police.. it becomes an issue. And there is a lot of discussion happening in my own church federation as to where to draw the line in terms of ‘be a good obedient citizen’ and ‘God comes first’.

                   Which seems like an easy question, but when everything is couched in terms like ‘care for and show love to your neighbour by listening to the Science and Health directives’ it’s more difficult to get people to push back against that.

                   1. A political opposition leader just got arrested in Canada because he participated in a rally against health restrictions. Now admittedly, based on the name of this guy’s party, I’m guessing that he and I don’t have much in common politically. But the fact that something like this happened…

                      https://www.westernjournal.com/canadian-opposition-leader-arrested-holding-rally-prime-minister-attends-g-7-conference/

                      1. Yeah, he’s a “conservative” these days. That’s the “Wild-Eyed Far Right Wing” there that the papers are all worried about.

                         Kinda weak sauce, isn’t it?

                         1. The “People’s Party” is a *conservative* party!?

                            Wow. I stand edumacated.

                            Usually, a name like that means run as far and as fast away from it as you can.

                            1. .@MaximeBernier joins @TuckerCarlson to talk about his arrest in Manitoba, Canada for holding an outdoor political rally.

                               PREVIOUS STORY: https://t.co/12xjDjoZle pic.twitter.com/ZpC2DlQJ7U

                               — Rebel News (@RebelNewsOnline) June 17, 2021

                               Here’s the man himself on Tucker Carlson. Because the CBC won’t talk to him.

                            2. The Commie Broadcasting Collective! 😛

                      2. People’s Party is probably as libertarianish as we get here in Canada

          2. I do wonder how much is.. lingering… cultural result of “We’re staying with the Royalty system, even if generally in name only” vs. “They might be fun to look at, but we’ll hang the bastards if they show up and try anything.”

       3. Finished both The Gulag and A Day in the Life recently. IIRC Solzhenitsyn said that one of the things allowing these atrocities to happen to so many was that not enough people reacted to fight against it quickly enough.
          People here need to wake up and fight. UN, WEF, WHO, Tech, Pharma, et. al. are trying to work plans world wide, where freedom loving people have looked to the US as the last bastion.

          1. This.

             With the Biden administration now openly asking friends and family to turn in “radicals” (https://thepostmillennial.com/biden-admin-proposes-americans-snitch-on-family-and-friends-who-are-potential-domestic-terrorists) people need to be ready to fight back when the boots come. Do not go quietly or without an honor guard.

             And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat.

          2. The Black Marias rolled up in the late night, people disappeared. Sometomes one would come back, broken. It became “the new normal.” You kept your head down and prayed the knock wouldn’t be at your own door next. People will put up with a lot, if they have some hope that it won’t get worse.

          3. I was amused this morning to hear that Roger Waters (NOT someone noted for getting it right…) told Herr Lord Zuckerberg “F.U.” when the MudderZucker wanted to use some tune and then mused on “How did we let him become one of the most powerful idiots on earth?”

14. Will some may argue that illegal immigrants are not really immigrants, but are unlawful invaders of this country, that’s not apropos to this argument. Instead, let’s assume that all Immigrants in this country are comprised of a combination of legal immigrants, and illegal immigrants.

    According to the Migration Policy Institute, the U.S. has typically admitted about 1.2 million people legally each year for the past 30 years. Immigration Road.com, citing VISA data, claims that the annual limit for total number of legal immigrants is 675,000. Obviously they can’t both be right. The number of legal immigrants is probably somewhere in the middle of those two figures, or about 900,000 per year.

    Based on estimated rates of assimilation of various immigrant populations, the U.S. at its current population level can assimilate approximately 1 million TOTAL new immigrants each year without causing major disruptions in our society. This works out well with the legal limits set.

    The problem is that illegal immigration destroys all the careful planning of legal immigration. Congress never funds for the entire immigration population; and why should they? Illegal immigrants are criminal invaders we are not equipped to handle. We don’t have the resources to get them started properly. We don’t have the communities to spread them about to be assimilated into. They bring uncontrolled diseases into our population. They import criminal gangs into our population. Their starting premise in this country is disregard for our laws. Worse, it appears the volume of illegal immigrants exceeds the volume of legal ones each year.

    Small wonder that there’s a number of people who say that all immigration is bad. Who wants any apples when 60% of them are bad already?

    1. According to the Migration Policy Institute, the U.S. has typically admitted about 1.2 million people legally each year for the past 30 years. Immigration Road.com, citing VISA data, claims that the annual limit for total number of legal immigrants is 675,000. Obviously they can’t both be right.

       The difference is usually actual immigration stats, vs immigration+ refugee+ various other programs that are not intended to be immigration, sometimes including folks who make a persecution claim even if they are removed shortly thereafter.

       1. H1-B visas.

          The oroblem is not “immigration” (though if you bring in enough foreigners -Swedes in tbe case of Washington State)- such that they end up 30% of your local population – there are going to be knock-on effects. I am utterly neutral on Swedes qua Swedes, btw.

          It is “who has a stake in the future” and who does not. Plan on marrying into the gen pop, and your kids, ditto? You have a stake. Life might intervene, but, eh: life.

          Not so planning?

          Tourist, coloniser, or invader. Only one deserves to be greeted with smiles.

    2. Look, I have SERIOUS issues with illegal immigration. You know that. BUT…. even then it’s no reason to GIVE UP.

15. OT, but interesting: we entered New Mexico from wide-open Texas and found the welcome center closed, “in accordance with the state of emergency dated March 13, 2020.” (Someone is cleaning the restrooms, though).
    However, stopped at a truck stop and no one was wearing a mask. Guidance on the door was, after the mandatory ” in accordance with CDC guidelines,” bit was if you’re vaccinated, you don’t need a mask. If you’re not, you “should,” wear a mask.
    So basically they’re doing, “Don’t ask, don’t tell…”

    1. Same in NY at service stops.

    2. I recall a Capitol Steps bit on Mr. Clinton…

       o/` Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell….
       Clinton – thinks it’s swell…
       It works for his…
       Vietnam\ draft record as well! o/`

16. It’s like the breaking of a dam, first it happens slow, then it happens fast, and the violence of the rushing water is so powerful it’s almost incomprehensible.

17. Couple of things on point from furrin country, Canada.

    1) I just watched a Jordan Peterson video where he interviewed Yeonmi Park. She escaped North Korea as a teen, lived through slavery in China and Mongolia to end up in South Korea. She just graduated Columbia in the last year or so. The video is -harrowing- I must say, and I skipped most of the harrowing parts. She suffered, is about all that needs to be said. I did hear her description of North Korean hospitals. I also saw that the only thing that made that girl cry in a two hour tour of Hell with Peterson was Animal Farm. How the young pigs grew up not knowing what was coming, because the old pigs wouldn’t talk. That’s North Korea.

    2) http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2021/06/16/treatment/ This is a blog post at Kate McMillan’s Small Dead Animals, regarding what the standard of care is at Canadian hospitals for Covid-19 patients who get very sick. The post quotes court documents from a current court case. From the documents:

    “To date, this [standard treatment in Canadian hospitals] has consisted of keeping patients alive while they build up their own immunity to the disease. Health Canada has not authorized any drugs to prevent, treat or cure COVID-19 in patients, except for Veklury (remdesivir) from Gilead Sciences Canada Inc., to treat COVID-19 in patients with pneumonia requiring supplemental oxygen61.”

    Use of HCQ is specifically banned. Use of Ivermectin is specifically banned. Remdesivir is not effective, as shown in India who released their findings on the drug. HCQ and Ivermectin have both proven -remarkably- effective in US studies and hospitals, as well as India. Please note that a large percentage of practicing physicians in Canadian hospitals are foreign medical graduates from India and Pakistan.

    That sounds exactly like what Yeonmi Park said about North Korean hospitals. Medical treatment is now POLITICAL. The regime doesn’t like HCQ and Ivermectin, so you don’t get any. The regime does like Remdesivir, too bad for you it doesn’t work. They also like the mad science project mRNA genetic interference they are pleased to call a “vaccine”, so you better f-ing well line up to get it and say thank you.

    And if you make a fuss where the cops can see you, you go to jail. That’s how it is. People really are going to jail. Maxime Bernier the leader of the People’s Party of Canada, a member of parliament, went to jail.

    Why do Americans care what happens in Canada? I’ll tell you why.

    Canada is the test tube for the left wing of the DemocRat Party. They’ve managed to f- over our political and civil service system to the point where they use it to run tests on policy. Single payer national health care is a DemocRat Party goal. They want to be able to do what Canada is doing right now. In states like New York and California they already can.

    Okay? You get the picture? Socialism is not a solution. It is enemy action. Kill it, before it kills you. Because it really will kill you.

    1. I love Small Dead Animals, but they I think the assume too much the good stuff is banned simply because Orange Man Bad likes it and says it works, and the left is knee jerk anti-Trump. That’s just the excuse, not the reason, numbers of Covid deaths were deliberately pushed upwards, either through the nursing home slaughter in blue states or through simple math torture of “this guy who died falling off a ladder, or crashing his motorcycle tested positive in the morgue for the virus, ergo he died of covid” not using the drugs that actually work is a part of that.

       1. “…I think they assume too much the good stuff is banned simply because Orange Man Bad likes it and says it works, and the left is knee jerk anti-Trump. That’s just the excuse, not the reason…”

          Health Canada has been acting like Big Brother’s Ministry of Truth since December 2019. Trump talked about HCQ and HC banned it very soon after that, but Trump never talked about Ivermectin. There’s something else going on, and they’re f-ing well letting people die nursing homes and hospitals who would otherwise live.

          Tell you something else, Canadian doctors can prescribe medications off label. They have that power. They do it all the time, for all kinds of diseases and medical issues. Cannabis, for example, is completely off-label for everything but still gets prescribed.

          But Ivermectin and HCQ are specifically banned for use. They will pull your license. Pharmacies are not dispensing it, in case the pharmacist loses their license. Vets are not giving it out either, somebody threatened them too.

          In Canada.

          And you know what pisses me off the most? I said this would happen. I’ve been telling people this would happen since Kim Friggin’ Campbell brought in her gun ban, Bill C-17, in 1991. Why would the government want to ban guns? So they can let old ladies die in hospital because it’s cheaper, or for some f-cked up political reason, and get away with it. That’s why.

          1. Hell, Obama’s coalition-based election strategy from 2012 was basically a copy of Chretien’s from the 1990s.

          2. “But Ivermectin and HCQ are specifically banned for use. They will pull your license. Pharmacies are not dispensing it, in case the pharmacist loses their license. Vets are not giving it out either, somebody threatened them too”

             God damn that is awful. I mean you can normally get Ivermectin at farm supply stores, it’s not some radical rare new treatment. Yeah something else is going on. They need the numbers to be high to stampede the herd and shame the skeptics, I’ve had this done to me personally.

             1. #metoo.

                1. My friggin’ -brother- tried to shame me into getting the vaccine. I told him about a couple of things, you can be sure. Bounced off him like a tennis ball off a Sherman tank.

                   There are a lot of people who are clinging harder to the comfort of “following the Rules” as the evidence mounts that Big Brother is at best a major screw-up and may in fact have sold out to the enemy. They simply can’t hear evidence that Health Canada would deliberately ban useful medications, and they certainly will not hear anything bad about the Savior Vaccines. They get extremely agitated and hostile, because you are threatening the foundation all their hope is resting on. I mean, if you can’t trust the government, who can you trust?!

                   Propaganda really works, you know? It really does.

                   There’s already mounting evidence that Health Canada screwed the pooch big time on HCQ and Ivermectin. That will bubble along off the front pages and heads will quietly roll behind the scenes. Same with lockdowns and masks, that reckoning will come. But it will come slowly, where it does not change the propaganda response.

                   Where things are going to get interesting is if it is shown that the vaccine really is as dangerous as I’m afraid it might be. As much fun as it would be to say “TOLD YOU SO!!!” I’m hoping to be wrong. But if I’m not wrong, and kids start getting myocarditis from it like we’re afraid they will, at some point all those people clinging to their hope by following the rules will turn on a dime. They will all realize they’ve been gulled pretty much at the same time, and that’ll be the day I’ll be glad I live out in the boondocks with long sight lines.

                   What happens the day after that, when government offices are smoldering rubble, nobody really thinks about that do they?

          3. The bizarre way they’ve treated people who discuss HCQ and Ivermectin is the key fact that puts their motives under the microscope. OK, sure, it’s reasonable to think there was doubt as to their effectiveness, but they’ve both been around for ages and are about as safe as medicines get. There was no good reason to question the licenses of doctors who prescribe them. There was REALLY no good reason to censor studies that found they were effective.

             No GOOD reason. But that means we would be foolish not to look for OTHER reasons.

          4. Probably been plenty of prescriptions for Marijuana as “covid treatment”

             1. Why not? It probably works at least as well as the Official COVID19 Treatments.

                Of course, doing nothing is often better than the Official COVID19 Treatments.

                1. An atheist doctor once explained that the best medieval treatment for wounds was to find the weapon that inflicted it, pray over, and destroy it. And it worked.

                   Because it kept you too busy to futz with the wound and keep it from healing!

             2. CBD and THC bind to ACE2. Just like the spike protein. So, if all the ACE2 sites have CBD sitting on them, spike proteins might have a hard time getting in. Worth looking into, right?

                I have yet to see a licensed medical professional mention this in public though. CBD as “treatment” is one of those “we don’t talk about that or I will lose my license” kind of things.

                Which of course ensures that no science will be done on the subject.

                Fortunately, in Canada individuals don’t have to have a prescription for weed the way they do for Ivermectin and HCQ, so they can perform the experiment themselves at home.

                Just think about how bass ackwards that is for a second.

    2. That sounds exactly like what Yeonmi Park said about North Korean hospitals. Medical treatment is now POLITICAL.

       Why, it’s almost as though if the government directly controls the entire medical establishment their politics become “settled science” when it comes to treatment.

    3. > Medical treatment is now POLITICAL.

       “Socialized medicine” is *always* political. It’s just that now they’re not even bothering to hide it.

18. Conformity, collectivism, and the presumption that central government is the means and agent of prosperity is NOT on the right in the US.

    I am always darkly amused by people using Nixon (Mr. Wage and Price Controls Phase 438 himself) as some kind of example of arch-conservatism. Somebody should beat such people about the head and shoulders with a copy of Goldwater’s “The Conscience of a Conservative.”

19. I think things are both coming to a boiling point and slowly returning to normal. There are more people out and about without masks every day (I think a portion of the population will continue to wear masks regardless). Here in PA, the two constitutional amendments we voted into law are now law and that means that as of today, Wolf’s pandemic declarations are no longer in force (that along with general non-compliance is the return to normal). At the same time, some militant maskers are still trying to force the world to their view, like the story of a guy at an Ace Hardware in Seattle trying to keep an unmasked customer out of the store (boiling point).

    In the end, I see all actions as indicative of broad mistrust in government and institutions. Those of us that have been fighting this for a year plus, don’t trust because we see the fraud and the insider dealing. Those that want to continue the pandemic behavior demonstrate lack of trust (I think) in their refusal to back down from masks. They have heard the conflicting info from Fauci, but they’ve come down on the side of “it’s still out there and killing everybody so I’m still wearing a mask, I don’t care what these ‘experts’ say.” They no longer trust the institutions either.

    I’m with you Sarah, in the “be not afraid” mindset. We will win in the end, but I’m certain we’re in for a bumpy ride.

    1. I got out today in Day Two of California’s unmasking (I’m not taking the vaccine, but broke the “mandate” and didn’t wear one).

       The major chain stores don’t require them, but two small businesses I went to required the mask to be on everyone. Somebody asked one of the owners about it and it was similar to what you said. He didn’t trust the experts who said it was safe and so was going to wait at least a month.

       The saddest thing was that most people 25 and younger still wore them. They are following the rules, but it seemed very wrong to see an unmasked mother sitting with two masked 10-year-olds.

       1. Until said Mandating officials and their corporate lackeys stop lying and dtartcalling it what it is: An experimental Covid-19 therapy shot, designed to prevent the disrase from.maiming or killing you, you are NOT violating any “vaccine” mandates.

          You are not obligated to help relieve the useful idiots of their ignorance, either.

          Go ahead and tell the truth: “I’m fully vaccinated”

          1. *start calling.
             *disease

       2. Oh, THAT’S why I saw four whole unmasked faces at the store yesterday, out of at least 100 people. And here I thought it might be an outbreak of backbones.

       3. ” He didn’t trust the experts who said it was safe and so was going to wait at least a month.”

          And unlike the big chain stores, he can be sued into bankruptcy by any employee or customer who’s Karen enough to claim he’s not “taking enough precautions” to prevent the spread of WuFlu.

          1. This too. I would hope that the Karens out there do not resort to this kind of low tactic, but then, there’s a reason they’re Karens.

20. One reason we will probably stay out of Rhode Island now is the last time we worked there the minister at the local Methodist church urged the congregation from the pulpit to contact their local authorities and tell them to “do something to help people.” The fact RI was massively in debt was irrelevant.
    What drove me buggy was the reason she said this was she’d been approached by a guy living in his fishing boat, and aside from running around to local agencies she had to tap the Pastor’s Discretionary Fund. Oh, the humanity!

    1. Isn’t that part of her job?? Help the poor *herself* and through her church as opposed to asking the government?

21. Apologies if this has already been brought up.
    I watch Tucker Carlson fairly regularly. Mostly like what he has to say, or at least his willingness to bring up subjects verboten to the rest of the media.
    Tucker is reporting that the FBI is listing something like 20 unindicted co-conspirators heavily involved in the January 6th protest at the capitol. They also have arrested a bunch of folks and are holding them in isolation simply because of their supposed involvement that day.
    The only rational reason for a decision not to indict certain participants is that they are in fact undercover agents of the government inserted into the crowd to foment acts of insurrection. That, or these unnamed persons have some arrangement with the authorities that gives them a free pass.
    Tucker is also asking pointed questions concerning the facts behind the shooting death of an unarmed protestor by a capitol police officer the authorities refuse to identify. Ashli Babbitt was a veteran, a business owner, and at most was guilty of trespass in the capitol building yet her what some would consider murder has been swept aside with no questions allowed.

    1. Secret police gonna secret police. One defund the police move I could get behind is eliminate the FBI.

       1. Except the rank and file blue are just as happy to enforce unjust laws as long as they get theirs. And even corruption doesn’t alleviate as in normal countries because govt has more leverage. Think pension/food/a future for kids vs getting an extra few hundred dollars for ignoring the church meeting down the street.

          1. “Normal countries”? You mean like the Soviet Union, or Communist China today?

             Totalitarian governments breed corruption, and CAN’T eliminate it.

             1. There needs to be some benefit that outweighs risk, though. You don’t have the Russian case of wanting western goods or currency or Chinese where the corrupt can get hard assets outside country. All a jackboot who took payments from populace would get in near term would be cash and maybe some trinkets but high risk of losing everything if found out. Plus the omnipresent surveillance makes using that cash difficult until a true underground economy grows.

       2. And salt the Earth.

    2. It’s sad when the only reason Ashli Babbit is being highlighted is because Putin questioned Biden about it.

       1. It’s worse when your self-appointed guardians of true conservatism get all upset because obviously the death of Ashli Babbit is totally different from Putin killing his enemies via assassination. On one level they are correct, but there’s an undertone (perhaps it’s my imagination, remembering how hard it is to judge tone from a written message) of, “and besides, Babbitt deserved it,” that makes me angry.

          1. Yes

          2. Thing is, Putin can be murdering scum, and still be correct that applying the Magnitsky Act to him, and then not applying it to Congress wrt Babbit and the 1/6/2021 fraudulent prosecutions is ‘one rule for me, and one rule for thee’.

             Congress made that rule, willingly, and should have it enforced against them if they are in violation.

             Really, he wants the congressional carve out to be extended to him. I would much prefer eliminating the congressional carve out to expanding it.

             On the other hand, Magnitsky is an example of the legal authority granted to security organizations and the federal government, perhaps unwisely.

       2. And when his responses are accurate. Navalny et al have western allies and governments asking questions. We have only us subhuman vermin asking them. Much as prior to 16 I just wanted a republican run government just so there would be investigative reporting on dumb government published, pootypoot’s abuses are more constrained than bidens options.

    3. We’ve been TOLD Ashli Babbitt was shot by a Capitol Police officer they STILL refuse to identify six months later. Why?

       I’ve seen the videos. The arm holding that gun was wearing a suit, not a police uniform. Why?

       There are some 14,000 hours of video from those events which the Democrats won’t allow anybody to see, not even Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee. Why?

       When a cop shoots a violent criminal, his name is all over the evening news. Officers and their families have been threatened and attacked, mobs have rioted in the streets, again and again, and that has never stopped left-wing politicians from identifying the next cop when he does his job.

       Could it be she was shot by somebody’s private security goon? One with a…questionable history, might we say?

       Tucker Carlson showed a statement from CNN, about how government agents and snitches can’t be prosecuted. Why would CNN make such a statement?
       ———————————
       The U.S. Capitol is the People’s house. Congresscritters are just the help.

       1. or Secret service

       2. #JusticeforAshleyBabbit
          #Sayhername

       3. There is a name/identity out there for the person that shot Babbitt, but the TPTB and MSM are not making it public. The guy’s social media has been scrubbed, but there are supposedly preserved shots of it showing his support for BLM. Jan 6 was a perfect opportunity for an orchestrated plan to make “patriots” the bad guys and continue the narrative that they are “the real terrorists”. The loose ends are the Babbitt shooting, the phony story about the death by fire extinguisher, and the suicides of 2(?) park police.

          1. It didn’t work. It still doesn’t.

       4. > statement from CNN, about how government agents and snitches can’t be prosecuted

          No problem. We have no shortage of rope. The District of Columbia has about 75,000 street lights(*); if we run out, some people will have to double up.

          (*) it took less than 5 seconds to get that number and paste it in. There might be something to this “web” thing after all…

22. It’s worse when your self-appointed guardians of true conservatism get all upset because obviously the death of Ashli Babbit is totally different from Putin killing his enemies via assassination. On one level they are correct, but there’s an undertone (perhaps it’s my imagination, remembering how hard it is to judge tone from a written message) of, “and besides, Babbitt deserved it,” that makes me angry.

    1. What conservatives are you talking to who are saying that? All the ones I hear are quite angry about her death, and even more angry because no one seems to be talking about it or being held responsible.

       1. Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin “WaPoconservative”, David French, and there are MANY more.

          1. Everyone you named is a NeverTrumper, and therefore completely irrational on any matter related to Trump.

             1. Also, I’m not sure they qualify as “conservative” given what enthusiastic statists they seem to be.

                1. THIS.

                   1. Here’s a touchstone for anyone who wants to call themselves conservative. Get Goldwater’s “The Conscience of a Conservative” Read it. If you’re not at least largely in agreement with it, you’re not a conservative.

             2. That’s because Trump exposed them for the ineffectual “conservatives” and absolute grifters they always have been.

       2. Jonah Goldberg, for one. Again, he was talking about “false equivalences,” not directly excusing Babbit’s death. Which is why I may be overreacting.

       3. She means “Conservative inc.” who used to be “Never Trump, inc”

       4. Dorothy should have said “true conservatism” because that is how the spineless types mentioned (Boot, Rubin, Krystal, et al) view themselves.

          1. THIS.

          2. Ahh, yes. Not us wrong-fans (or wrong-voters as the case may be).

          3. Basically, they are a combination of grifters and mediocre intellectuals.

             The intellectual strain learned some academic theory that is classified as conservative, and they very well sneer at everyone outside that flavor as not being conservative. Basic problem, human theory about humans is only ever reliably correct for observing past behavior. We have a lot of theories based on past observations, but rote recitation of theory is bankrupt when not matched with tests of observation and feeling.

             Some folks are doing scholarly work in conservative theory, thinking of it as a way to match the ‘scholarly’ work done in left theory. This is a mistake. Life of the mind is all well and good for those bent that way, but it is wrong to pursue the regard of those who are so unsound in such a profound way. Populist voters from outside academia are at least potentially part of an American and Christian civilization. Sure, people with tastes in common are often more fun to talk with. ‘Fun to talk with’ is not the same as ‘should keep company with’, as every teen who has fallen in with bad crowd demonstrates.

             Buckley, in hindsight, may have been an influence for the worse. The John Birch society was wrong, but in hindsight appears to have been least wrong of the major schools.

             Political services are a business, or a bunch of businesses. Some of the businessmen who serve that market have learned the words of conservative theory, and use it for competitive advantage. A change in fashions of conservative theory is not what they would prefer. If experts dictate theory to the masses, then they need only curate the experts, and will ensure that their business environment will remain as expected. Problem is, this is a matter of them having rocks in their head, and is failing catastrophically in practice.

             The ones who are also lawyers have it worse. They have the investment in the political business, and do not want to throw it away and start again from scratch. They also have an investment, perhaps even a vocation level investment, in the practice of law.

             1. > The John Birch society was wrong

                About what?

                1. Taxonomy was subtly wrong.

                   Everything I’ve seen (which is probably very little) says that they were not viewing communism as a religious behavior.

                   They seem to have more or less described the behavior of communists, but apparently were bad at explaining the reasons why the behavior occurred and developed. If you cannot see the animism, the magical thinking and feeling, and the qualities fundamentally alien to civilization, your ability to strike it in the vitals is limited.

                   For all the good that it did, it appears to have also been a missed opportunity to fight them on the theological battleground.

    2. Because to them she did have it coming. She was getting in their way and hurting cloud people like them. Not just executing a subject of theirs here or there and burning down city blocks.

       1. Tactically speaking, “don’t stand next to someone doing stupid stuff” would be the rule I’d invoke.

          It’s not fair, in the sense of equitable treatment before the law, because f’ing damage far beyond that waaaaay long beyond that, but _IF_ they had treated it like any of the psychotic A-holes shot during other protests, it would be sad but … rational.

          Instead it is treated as better than the guy who shot several folks, then was killed by a cop trying to attack another group.

          Minor shooting monday friday PEDOPHILE trying to kill him, gets plastered all over TV.

          Law enforcement shooting gal next to people being dumb, who turn out to be known criminals… crickets.

          1. There is a difference between tactically stupid and deserving of summary punishment.

             And I don’t remember any officer involved shootings at protests. Doesn’t matter how out of control or unlawful, the tools broke out were less lethal. The issue isn’t whether it was deserved but that the tools used were so different. And we can go back to the Wisconsin state house takeover for another example as well as the Portland courthouse. The reaction was vastly different and its not something to be treated as fair or rational except to admit that LE can kill right wingers with almost any provocation.

             1. There is a difference between tactically stupid and deserving of summary punishment.

                Aacid, stop for a moment and write out how exactly that statement is different than the guy stating that robbery is not a capital offense.

                *********
                And I don’t remember any officer involved shootings at protests.
                Then go look again, because the go back into … what, when was the Kent State thing?

                The gal was doing something– at least appearing to go through a broken window– which in a home invasion situation would justify being shot.

                However.

                By the standards of public building protest established over the prior year, she was not objectionable.

                And was further egged on by someone who HAD ESTABLISHED THOSE NORMS. On video. And charged.

                You have home invasion standards against the right, and “literally firing f’ing fireworks into windows is no reason to even object” for the left, and THAT is the difference.

                If the lady had been at MY window doing what she did, I would’ve shot her.

                HOWEVER.

                She wasn’t at my window. She was at a place where it had been PUBLICLY ESTABLISHED that X behavior was acceptable, engaging in sub-X behavior.

23. Least I be called 100% doom 100$ of the time, there was good news yesterday:

    https://www.dietdoctor.com/warnings-about-processed-meat-fail-the-test-of-science

    Warnings about processed meat fail the test of science

    Another rigorous analysis of the science on processed meat shows evidence is weak and uncertain.

    A new re-analysis of the science concerning links between processed meat and chronic disease indicates that studies showing a relationship between the two are very low quality and suffer from, as the authors put it, “serious risk of bias and imprecision.”

    This conclusion is unsurprising, as it follows a recent set of analyses that rocked the nutrition world. That earlier set of studies, published in Annals of Internal Medicine earlier this month, concluded that guidelines warning us to consume less red and processed meat are based on evidence with very low certainty. The researchers who performed those analyses asserted there is no way to determine, for any given individual, what the risks or benefits of eating meat might be.

    I intend to celebrate by having bacon-wrapped chili-dogs with SPAM fries.

24. Since I was in the mood for titles:

    A long and winding Rhodes
    Forever Rhodes
    Where the Rhodes go
    Rhodes to faraway places

    1. The Rhodes go ever on and on.

    2. Already have the first two.

       1. lol

       2. Any Rhodes in a storm?

       3. A Rhode too far

25. It’s probably been used before, but:

    “I woke up dead, and the day went downhill from there.”

Comments are closed.