Instapun***K.com Archive Listing
InstaPunk.Com

Archive Listing
April 24, 2013 - April 17, 2013

Monday, April 22, 2013


Killing the Old White Guys

50 years. Start with him. And then me. So I'll know to get my trench knife.

CROSS-POLLINATION. 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 other bills.

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 opposed. Period.

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 shit.

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 observation.

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 sheepskin clothing.




Thursday, April 18, 2013


The Gosnell Trial

[A girl in a death camp calling out to her mother. Another sparrow.]

DOORWAYS. 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. Ruthlessly.

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 bad. Simple.

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 "female troubles."

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 describe it.

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 deficient.

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 flushed away.

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 Sparrows?



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:

King 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.




Back to Archive Index

Amazon Honor System Contribute to InstaPunk.com Learn More