50 years. Start
with him. And then me. So I'll know to get my trench knife.
The liberals are having their moment. They haven't had one of their
own in the White House for 50 years, not since Lyndon Johnson.
Carter was a pipsqueak (wake'em up in the middle of the night and
ask -- they'll admit it) and Clinton was just a whoring deal maker,
proof that policy and personal conduct go hand in hand, regardless
of the laborious exception carved out for Teddy Kennedy.
Why what's happening now isn't a conspiracy. It's a tantrum. The
dominoes were supposed to fall in the pattern they had in their
heads. When the smart people were finally in charge, the rest of us
were supposed to see how smart, how right, how good they all are.
With liberals in charge, the nation should begin to gleam again.
Everyone would be equal, the world would breathe a sigh of relief,
and the downtrodden would become the, uh, uptrodden. Or something.
The only fly in the ointment? The inertia of the past. The momentum
of idiots who keep on believing bad things. Because the one thing
liberals can agree on despite their sectarian differences on
everything else is that people in general are fucking stupid.
Ironically, the pseudoscience made up by liberals, sociology, has
diagnosed their own ailment by postulating a difference between
intellectual and emotional IQ. Liberals pride themselves on their
Intellectual Quotients. So much higher than us dumb-asses (loosely
defined as everybody who doesn't think they're geniuses).
Emotionally, though, they're all college freshmen psychology majors.
You know who I'm talking about. A little knowledge is a dangerous
thing. That kid who suddenly starts psychoanalyzing everybody based
on the last lecture he heard in Psych 101. He's in the know now.
He's more perceptive than you, plainly superior to the Great
Unwashed, and much much smarter than his parents. Who are
unrepentant fools even if they are paying the tuition and all the
It's a case of arrested development. Bill Maher is an archetype.
Smart, glib, self-satisfied, logical within his universe of one, and
dumb as a fucking rock. Only a fool could behold him and not see
that he -- despite his chronological status of late middle age -- is
still grappling frantically with both mommy issues and daddy issues (one Jewish, one Catholic, fuck'em both!).
What's the term sociology types have for this kind of behavior? Um,
er, uh, yeah! Acting Out.
The emotional IQ of a two year old. Informed by the half-assed
education of an Ivy League major in Comic Book Truth.
The shame of the nation is that we did finally put the kids in
charge. Because the permanent kids in the universities and the media
told us how smart they were for so long that we started to believe
it. Look at the world adults gave us. It sucks. We kids can fix
everything. While smoking pot and screwing everything that stands
still long enough. That's how gifted we are.
Except that they didn't fix everything by just showing up at the
inauguration. In fact, they fixed nothing. Everything's worse. The
economy. The state of the world. The lives of the disadvantaged
masses who don't have Ivy League degrees in Comic Book Truth. Whose
fault is that?
Aha! The Parents. Who have always been responsible for absolutely
everything in life that stands in the way of a life spent happily
smoking pot and screwing everything that stands still long enough.
Which brings us to the Constitution. The nation's parents. That
outmoded, obsolete, piece of shit document nobody with any sense
would use for any higher purpose than cutting it up into rolling
papers. It's gotta go.
As I said, it's not a conspiracy. They're not actually trying to
kill the country. It's just that in their blind, reactive
buffoonery, everything they do kind of looks that way.
The pundits keep trying to parse their policies as if reason were
involved. They tie themselves up in knots trying to explain the
myriad contradictions. (Christians are evil, Jews are worse, and muslims are inexcusably victimized because they happen to hate women, gays, and Christians and Jews to the point of needing to kill absolutely everybody indiscriminately, including their own. Yeah, that makes sense. If you're a 21st century romcom.) But reason isn't involved. The emotional
calculus couldn't be any simpler. What the Parents told us must be
Unfortunately, cumulatively, ominously, we are looking at an
accidental full-on assault on the Constitution of the United States
of America. Because, you know, the Parents suck.
Religion? We don't like that shit. The Parents made us go to
Sunday school. Why we're getting our revenge in Sex-Ed class,
teaching 12 year olds how to suck cock and get abortions without
telling the Parents. We just want to fuck. Make them pay for our
pills, condoms, morning after pills, AND abortions. Even the
churches. Especially the churches. First Amendment? What? Where in
the Bill of Rights does it spell out our right to be sluts of all
genders? Nowhere. Fuck that.
Guns? We don't like guns. Make them go away. Because then people
wouldn't kill people, the way the Parents always do. Second
Amendment? Fuck that.
War? We don't like that shit either. Somebody might want us to
fight. Drones are good. It's okay if you read our texts and emails
and listen in on our conversations and video everything we do in
public. We don't mind. We do everything in public anyway and send
our own videos of us doing it to everybody else. Like, isn't that
what Facebook's for? Fourth Amendment? Who the fuck even knows what
that is and who the fuck cares anyway?
Same sex marriage? Hey, I either hate my parents for getting
divorced or hate them for not getting divorced. That shit has fucked
me for life. What I want is to like totally blow up marriage
forever. That would be so cool. I want to see a woman marry her
dildo, a man marry a sheep, Jenna Jameson marry the Oakland Raiders,
and, well, sure, Donald Trump marry Mayor Bloomberg. Who wouldn't?
The Constitution doesn't even mention marriage. Fuck that shit.
Illegal Aliens? Illegal to who? What? The Constitution? What's this
Rule of Law bullshit? Nobody asked me. I hate most of the laws I break.
Pisses me off that I have to prosecute pot smokers and put them in
jail before I go home and smoke some pot with my main squeeze. And
if you deport my gardener, where am I going to get my pot? Fuck that
Seriously. Are you really telling me that the Senate can stop us
from getting the guns? Some dudes in Montana and Wyoming and South
Dakota have as much clout as New York and LA? Hello?! Really?! Who
thought that shit up? Ah. Yeah. Of course. The Parents. And their
Constitution. Tear that shit up.
I know. You'll find very, uh, learned arguments that turn my
reductions into highly polished turds. But turds they are. Why we
have a Supreme Court justice (Ruth Bader-Ginsberg) who thinks the
brand new and voluminously untested South African constitution is
superior to the one she's actually sworn to uphold. Hell. Did Thomas
Jefferson snub her at the prom? May be. She's damn sure old
enough. To know better at least. More likely, though, nobody invited her to the
prom. And the nation must be made to suffer for that sleight.
The proof of liberals as emotionally retarded brats is in their
choice of heroes. They're all still in high school. Still in
cliques. Still more about cool than substance. Conservatives have
near intellectual fits trying to explain why libs adore Castro, Che
Guevara, Mao, Stalin, Chavez (Cesar), and Chavez (Hugo). It's
not complicated. They got to fuck all the girls they wanted and they
killed their parents the moment they got in the way. They were, are, way COOL. Fuck the uncool who
try to make the cool ones look bad. Basic high school sociology.
Why the pundits don't link me. They make their living by thinking
about things that don't actually require thought but only
Old white men wrote the Constitution. Old white men are still in
charge of everything. Maybe that's because old white men are, by and
large, the only ones anybody really trusts. Sure, they're assholes.
Maybe one of them pinched you once (or didn't when he should've) or
didn't slow down when you were strolling passive-aggressively across
the street. But everybody else is an asshole with a grudge, a
vendetta, an axe to grind, or some sorry-ass melodrama to inflict on
the rest of us. Still. By all means, kill all the old white guys and
the scrap of paper that kept us free for a couple hundred years. Who
counts years anymore? (I'll text you the answer after I look it up
on Ax Yahoo.) We. Know. Better.
Show me a liberal. Any liberal. And I'll show you a crybaby wolf in
Thursday, April 18, 2013
[A girl in a
death camp calling out to her mother. Another sparrow.]
Yes, I've referenced it a few times, but I haven't gone all in. I
was reading what people were saying. Many have made good points,
picked out parts of the enigma of no MSM coverage that made sense.
But now I'm ready to offer my own opinion because nobody else has
been willing to take a big enough cut at it. I am.
Abortion is the primary moral issue of our times. I think I can
prove it. A life issue in a far grander sense than the legal parsing
of the difference between a clump of fertilized cells and a baby. An
existential issue of the highest order.
People love to romanticize mob movies. We're all familiar with the
character of The Cleaner. After things go wrong and get too messy,
he rolls in to make it all go away, the crime scene, the
inconvenient witnesses, the principals who made wrong decisions...
you know, he ties up all the loose ends of a bad situation.
Since Roe v. Wade, abortion has become The Cleaner of so many
misbegotten policies that it has become the unspeakable centerpiece
of the left-wing utopian legacy.
The single most important technological innovation of the Baby Boom
generation was the pill. That it was also a societal catastrophe has
gone unremarked. Before that, cultural norms enforced by centuries
of religious orthodoxy had little in the way of rivals. Men and
women both desire sex, babies frequently result from sex, babies are
a life-changing responsibility, and so it follows that young people
should get married before they have sex so that babies will be taken
care of as we all know they should be.
I know. How quaint. People keep forgetting that the tradition of
marriage long predates Christianity and even Judaism. There is no
commandment, "Thou shalt not be promiscuous." The one that was more
necessary was "Thou shalt not commit adultery." The difference
between the two being the assumption of marriage.
Which highlights a key point so often overlooked in the current
frenzy for bashing religion. The original ten commandments were not
arbitrary pronouncements of a psychotic deity. They were common
sense bases for minimizing the kind of civil discord that can
destroy a society or a civilization from within. The ones early on
about God himself are not egomaniacal self-promotion. The God
referred to is the giver of the laws that bind people together by
these commandments. In this sense they are a civics lesson. There is
something bigger than you which you must respect, and it has to do
with right and wrong. And by the way, absolutely everyone is
accountable to that standard, even your king. Which is both humbling
and empowering. You can be right when your king is wrong, because he
too must follow the law. In short, the commandments are the first
constitution. The express prohibitions all have to do with reducing
the possibility of discord. Scorning the parents who raised you is
bad. Stealing is bad. Murder is bad. Lying is bad. Stepping out on
your wife is bad. Coveting what someone else has and you can't is
Christianity boiled the ten down to two, hopefully asserting that
people might actually be starting to grow up but preserving the two
pillars of the social contract: There's something bigger than you,
and other people are just as important as you are.
Cut to the pill. Women are suddenly free to ignore, transcend, or
flaunt their own biology. They could indulge themselves the way men
always have. And they did.
Time to accept a fact that will be terribly unpleasant to liberals
of most every stripe. The real beneficiaries of the sixties drive
toward egalitarianism were not black people, who have suffered one
version of Jim Crow after another, even unto the the present day.
The ones who really kicked over the traces and ran like hell toward
utopia were women. Certainly not all women, but enough. Their
freedom to prevent unwanted conception permitted them to be wantonly
promiscuous, to postpone marriage indefinitely, to have careers
never previously possible, and to aspire, almost unthinkably, to
true legal superiority over men, thus ensuring long-term cultural
dominance. Heady stuff.
I'm not blaming or villainizing women. They got the vote before they
got the pill. They were on a roll. What happened is understandable.
I don't believe they meant to destroy the social contract and modern
civilization. But they did.
The road to perdition is, as they say, paved with good intentions.
Women learned from the civil rights movement they entirely
preempted, by the way, and discovered that the federal government
was the most direct route to feminist utopia. As a voting bloc,
they're what (?) 52 percent, hardly a minority. And they had learned
that the best defense is a good offense, especially in the courts.
Problem. The pill + exponentially increasing promiscuity found the
pill deficient. Unwanted pregnancies skyrocketed, particularly among
the poor, who acquired the new cultural norms but not the discipline
to get that prescription and take it every single day. They needed
to call The Cleaner. And liberals who had discovered the most
important voting bloc of all time, and the courts, enabled them to
make that call.
What's most pernicious here is that for all the talk of equality
women have been playing both ends against the middle. Having their
cake and eating it too. Thereby covering up one of the greatest
long-term crimes in recorded human history.
In Victorian days, men's deference to women was so absolute that
nothing anatomical with relation to women could even be mentioned
except in terms of the most absurd euphemisms. Women weren't
pregnant; they were "in confinement." During childbirth men
comically stalked the waiting room while the miracle unfolded behind
closed doors. Women didn't even fart; they had an attack of "the
vapors" and withdrew to their boudoirs. Medical gynecological
problems were described only in the briefest of hushed terms as
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Today, women
text nude pictures of themselves to boyfriends, are happy to be
photographed emerging from cars without underwear, and they more or
less insist on having their men on hand to "coach" them during
childbirth. Hollywood stars leak sex tapes of themselves
performing every imaginable act to promote their careers(?). And every October, NFL football
players wear pink shoes, gloves, and armbands to highlight the
female trouble called breast cancer to audiences of millions, BUT...
There's one realm where Victorian female modesty is as strict
as it was a century and a half ago. Which is what happens between a
woman and her abortionist. As good liberal feminists, we don't even
like the word abortion anymore. It's the new "Vapors." We are
pro-choice, as opposed to anti-choice, as if the physical act of
exercising that choice is as antiseptic as the terminology we use to
It isn't. Abortion isn't a medical procedure. Medicine is governed
since the Greeks by the Hippocratic Oath, which includes the
commandment, Do no harm.
Harm is the whole point of abortion, at every stage of pregnancy.
There's a thing in there that if not stopped will become a baby. The
practitioners -- I won't call them doctors -- have to go in there
and scoop it out. The longer the thing is in there, the messier it
gets. At some point, relatively soon, there is something very like a
human body in there, and sometimes it has to be dismantled piecemeal
to get it out. It is always
an act of violence. Always sickening to behold and comprehend. It's
been done, by some estimates, 50 million times since Roe v. Wade.
Nobody wants to see it. What the liberals and their feminist allies
are counting on. It's not a semantic turn of phrase. It's butchery.
Here's the rub. All the arguments for why this is a defensible
social necessity are a direct result of liberal policies designed to
empower women that have instead destroyed the institution of
marriage and the family. In the United States, most babies are born
out of wedlock. This is supposed to make it okay that the more
economically stressed choose abortion as an alternative to having
children they can't care for. By our welfare policies, we have made
single moms a massive subsidized constituency. What you subsidize
you get more of. Liberal utopian rationalism has created the current huge market
for abortions, which are overwhelmingly a resort of minority women.
For DC socialites, Roe v. Wade is a convenience. For most of the
people who avail themselves of the abortion option it is eugenics in
action. Which is precisely the purpose of the founder of Planned
Parenthood, a way of eliminating the useless and genetically
There used to be black families. Remember Motown? About love and
fealty and hope for romantic happy endings. The liberals have
transformed that with their deluded "idealism" into rappers who brag
about their ho's and their baby mothers. And they dare to lecture
traditional Christians about the absolutes of right and wrong.
Why liberals are so shrieky, hysterical, and monolithic on the
subject. They are in denial. They have fed a creature with food that
shits out unwanted babies at an alarming rate, and places like the
Gosnell clinic are the bedpans that catch the shit. They don't care
about the unwashed masses whose shit it is. They just want the shit
There's a moment when stark truth appears on the scene that causes
people to freeze in their tracks. The Gosnell trial is one of those.
Despite the recent flurry of mea culpas, they won't cover it. They
can't. They're all accomplices in a eugenics genocide they did
everything to bring about. They're worse than the Nazis. 50 million
souls who never had a chance to live, and countless of the unaborted
who are doomed by policy to end their lives in prison or, yes, by
gunfire on city streets. Because as fanatically obsessed as they are about choice, the prospect of school choice is less important than their ties to teachers unions. As I said, the Gosnells are their bedpan for every rotten, corrupt bargain they've made.
No gun control law can replace an absent father or give you a
competent mother after the fact. The liberal experiment in hedonism
has failed utterly. Nothing will save them. Not gun control. Not
same sex marriage. Not the banning of God from the public square.
Nobody can tell me what Leonardo da Vinci has been flushed down the
toilet at the Gosnell clinic. But they wouldn't anyway. They just don't want to know.
Finally, a thought experiment. A gunman (yes, we always want to connect the dots of current events) enters an abortion clinic and shoots a woman in the abdomen who is waiting for an abortion. She survives. The fetus doesn't. Is he guilty of murder?
The point about female superiority to the law and therefore men. We prosecute for murder when the mother wanted "the baby." But if she doesn't want the baby, it's just a thing in her body, neither human nor endowed with rights. So if the gunman kills that thing, is the nature of his crime determined by the woman's point of view? Or something more, shall we say, eternal?
The Lady or the Tiger becomes The Baby or the Clump of Inconvenient Cells. Progress or Barbarian Reversion. Who are we? You decide.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Who are the
AMBIGUITY. Nothing much, right? Or PETA would have told us
when they weren't busy killing 95 percent of the dogs and cats they
were supposed to be rescuing with their great love of all things
nonhuman. Matthew 10.29:
James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? And one of them shall
not fall on the ground without your Father.
Oh think about it. Just little clusters of cells wrapped in
feathers. Nothing compared to a woman in full cry.
Who are the sparrows? You? Nah. You don't sing like that. Do you?
What's it like to be less than a sparrow? Without even a union card. You have less than a
lifetime to find out.