A huge portion of the popular reaction against “public” schools arises from clashes over values: i.e., moral and ethical principles for living that undergird all other decisions. All education of any kind must be founded upon some set of values, because literally everything involved in human life is founded thus. It’s literally impossible to teach without reference to some set of moral-ethical principles.
It started when state education bureaucrats decided to force “hygiene” into the high-school classroom. The rationale was, of course, venereal disease, how it’s transmitted, how to avoid contracting it, and what to do if you do. It didn’t take long for “hygiene” to morph into the broader subject of “sex education,” and for the “education” to permeate ever lower grades. Today “sex education” curricula embrace the ever-expanding realm of “alternative lifestyles,” because after all, it’s vital for fifth-graders to have comprehensive knowledge of polyamory, homosexuality, bisexuality, bestiality, S&M, pedophilia, paraphilia, “puppy” and “pony” play, et cetera ad nauseam infinitam.
These “subjects” cannot be “taught” without reference to moral and ethical principles. And many parents are horrified at the principles that accompany them.
Before we can make sense of the development, we must address another subject of even greater importance: the secularization of American life. Today, even though about three-quarters of Americans describe themselves as Christians of some denomination, the application of Christian principles to daily life is at an all-time low. The Ten Commandments still receive lip service, but little more – and to mention them, or to make any reference to the teachings of Christ in a “public” school classroom, is to invite discipline, dismissal, and lawsuits both civil and criminal.
But one cannot remove the dominant set of principles from an educational system and leave a vacuum. Another set will flow in within an eyeblink. This is what has occurred.
“Public” schooling, once rationalized as an Americanization mechanism for the children of immigrant families, has become the transmission medium for the principles of the dominant religious creed of our time: hedonism. Its doctrines are reinforced by the messages from the entertainment media. And American parents, inhibited by social pressures and heavily burdened by economic factors, often find themselves unable to counter it.
Yes, I mean the above exactly as it seems: “public” schools now practice religious indoctrination, though in a form that pretends to be “objective” and “nonjudgmental.” They promulgate a creed our great-grandparents would not recognize. Which calls to mind this passage from Isabel Paterson’s masterwork The God of the Machine:
There can be no greater stretch of arbitrary power than is required to seize children from their parents, teach them whatever the authorities decree they shall be taught, and expropriate from the parents the funds to pay for the procedure. If this principle really is not understood, let any parent holding a positive religious faith consider how it would seem to him if his children were taken by force and taught an opposite creed. Would he not recognize tyranny naked?
Indeed. Keep this in mind as the educrats strive to forbid homeschooling de facto through the imposition of curricular requirements and regulations.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and a group of 14 other attorneys general penned a letter to Target CEO Brian Cornell this week expressing concern about the store’s removal of some of its Pride products.
Target lit a media firestorm last month when it announced it pulled an unspecified number of products from its shelves after the company faced “confrontational behavior” at its stores as well as threats of violence on its customer hotline.
While Ellison and AGs from California, New York, Maryland and more offered support for Target’s intention to keep its workers safe, they questioned if Target gave in to threats.
“While we understand the basis for this action, we are also concerned it sends a message that those who engage in hateful and disruptive conduct can cause even large corporations to succumb to their bullying,” the AGs wrote, “and that they have the power to determine when LGBTQIA+ consumers will feel comfortable in Target stores or anywhere in society.”
Of course, neither Target’s workers nor its (remaining) customers are in any danger. They have no objective reason to feel “unsafe,” regardless of their sexual and political alignments. That’s not the point. The point is to keep the LGBTQ “pride” pressure at the maximum.
The above shows us three important things about the Left:
Agenda: Forcing LGBTQ “pride” crap upon normal Americans.
Priority: Worth involving high law enforcement officials and veiled threats.
Method: Redefining normal Americans’ reactions to “pride” marketing as bullying.
The agenda is plain enough: thrusts by the LGBTQ promoters, particularly the promotion of transgenderism, are very much in the Left’s interest. The priority takes a moment to discern; state attorneys-general are far more significant players in public affairs than most suppose, as the law enforcers of their states answer to them. The method, as it so often is, is the redefining of entirely legitimate consumer behavior – i.e., the choice not to shop at Target – as “bullying,” a prosecutable offense in most states. While it’s rather difficult to prosecute persons whose identities are unknown, that’s a mere detail. The attack rhetoric of the attorneys-general is what matters.
There’s a ball-under-the-shirt aspect to this. Those attorneys-general aren’t aiming at prosecuting consumers for not shopping at Target, an absurd undertaking. Their concern is Target’s response to the loss of consumer traffic. They want the LGBTQ “pride” campaign “out loud and proud,” represented conspicuously in as many retail establishments as possible. Forcing arrant abnormality on normal people requires a massive full-court press.
Normalizing abnormality is the whole point. It’s been so effective an entering wedge that the Left has come to depend on it. Homosexuality, S&M, transgenderism, pedophilia, paraphilia, and all the other “alternative lifestyles” are confined to small minorities of the American populace. They’re most definitely not normal. Moreover, when they act out publicly, they offend and frighten the normal majority. This is especially so among parents with minor children.
I doubt those left-wing attorneys-general can do anything to reverse the boycotts. Consumers have too many alternatives from which to choose. Wise marketing executives have already noticed the reactions against the “pride” campaigns. Few of them are so strongly Left-aligned that they’ll enlist their companies in the cause, only to see what’s happened to Anheuser-Busch and Target happen to them. So what do those attorneys-general expect from their marshaled expressions of “concern?”
This is a development that deserves ongoing attention.
HUNTER BIDEN: I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father
Those of us who chose to actually look at what was going on knew that Hunter Biden was collecting cash for his father in China. The stripper-banging crackhead son of a corrupt pedophile was flying on AIR FORCE TWO in order to get the cash from the ChiComs in the Biden pay-to-play deal. Remember, ten percent for the Big Guy!
Although he was probably capable of doing so, Hunter Biden wasn’t smoking $50,000 of crack cocaine a month while on the board of Burisma. No, that money was going home to daddy.
As a side note, part of the reason I’m so ambivalent about the Russia-Ukraine conflict is that I see two corrupt oligarchies going at each other. Ukraine has been the US government’s money-laundering country for a decade if not more. Biden’s son wasn’t the only politician’s kid to bring home millions of dollars from the Kraine. Pelosi’s kid. Romney’s kid. Who knows how many more were getting filthy rich from the laundered US taxpayer dollars. We’ll never know.
Back to the deadbead dad dopefiend. We all know he’ll never face punishment on this earth for his crimes, and there are so many that offend God that we can’t count them all. We know that Drooling Joe the Chinese Hand Puppet will never face any consequences, because even if DeSantis or Trump wins in 2024 they can’t clear out all the rot in the Fascist Bureau of Intimidation or the Department of Injustice fast enough to get Drooling Joe persecuted for his corruption. The only satisfaction we can have is the knowledge that Drooling Joe and his dirtbag son will reap their eternal reward in Hell.
The Christian in me says that should be enough. The man in me wants to pull the lever on the gallows after their trials.
While alternately working to improve my mobility, and swearing and putting ice on my poor tortured limbs, I’ve been getting caught up on some blog posts, particularly on Substack.
If you have children/grandchildren who haven’t a clue about Actual History – as opposed to that promoted by The Woke and Dictatorial – check this out. While I’m on the subject, is there anyone who can recommend a general modern US History book that we can hand the kids? Something that is factual, backed up by contemporary reports, and not conspiracy-minded (not that the conspiracies didn’t exist, but, for newbs to the non-Woke truth, it needs to be soft-pedaled).
Wander around Visayas Outpost; there is a lot in that Substack worth reading.
I’d like to spend some more time on this post, but I had my first post-healing PT appointment, and I’m pooped. I’m going to take a quick nap, before I head out to get my – and my dog’s – nails done.
Almost forgot! I made my first trip as a driver since the accident. It went fine, and I’ll be working on getting out more often over the next few weeks.
It strikes me that today, after the fulminations of the previous few days, it’s time for something a bit less…well, less like the past few days! So this will be a ramble of sorts, and as divorced from the most recent national news as I can make it.
***
Among the things I watch for vigilantly are any signs that someone is trying to exploit my good nature, or that of the C.S.O. Beth is an unusually generous sort – she’d have to be, to endure me for several decades – which makes her susceptible to being used by persons of weaker ethics.
This morning, my almost-retired wife will get into her buggy at 6:15 AM EDT, drive approximately twenty miles, and perform unpaid babysitting duties for the entire day. The focus of those duties is a three-year-old boy with the energy level typical of such creatures. Beth will come home exhausted and seriously undernourished. I’ll have to feed and nurse her through what remains of the evening.
Yes, of course the kid is a relative! Her grandson, in fact. But that doesn’t quite justify asking a seventy year old woman still convalescing from cancer surgery to travel a considerable distance to provide free labor. Especially since the boy’s mother and father significantly out-earn what Beth and I were making when we were both working full time.
***
Every now and then I get a phone call from the sort of parasite that preys on indie writers. Yesterday was such a day. The usual appeal is “we love your book, now here’s what we can do for you.” In the sonic background is a “boiler room” full of minimum-wage types making the same fraudulent appeal to other writers.
When I first got such calls, I merely said “not interested” and disconnected. After a while they became a source of amusement. These days, I make an effort to keep the minimum-wage type on the line for as long as possible. I ask all sorts of detailed questions, answers to which would be difficult to prescript, to plumb both the ingenuity and the endurance of the caller. As it keeps such persons from harassing other writers for at least a little while, I consider it my contribution to the well-being of the indie community.
Yesterday’s caller set a record: 34 minutes on the phone with me. I quizzed her about her organization, what it does for writers, how long it’s been doing it, what other writers it’s served, what benefits they’ve derived, how long she has been doing this sort of work, how she stumbled upon my book, how it compared to the other books in its series, what she thought were its high points, how the style resembles various works by such luminaries as David Foster Wallace, Arthur C. Clarke, Agatha Christie, Anne Rice, Frank McCourt, Joyce Carol Oates…
When I realized that the poor lady had hung in there for a world-record interval, I said, as sadly as I could through the giggles, “I’m sorry, I have to perform open-heart surgery now,” and disconnected as she keened out a despairing “But wait…!”
What’s that? You think I was cruel? An underappreciated indie writer has to get his jollies where he can, you know. Besides, consider what the caller’s paymasters were trying to do to me. Oh, did I mention the origin point of the call? Kolkata, India. Think about it.
***
While we’re on the subject of indie writers: Yes, you’re correct. I haven’t released a new novel since late 2021. Call it a sabbatical, if you like. That’s kinder than what I call it.
There’s such a thing as storyteller burnout. I might not be there yet, but I got a foretaste of it after finishing The Discovery Phase. The characters I’d grown to love seemed tired. I had all sorts of ideas for them, but they didn’t want to come out and play. Worse, my beloved Onteora County, perhaps the most absurd fictional locale ever conceived, had begun to seem over-exploited. I had to step back for a bit, think seriously about possible changes of direction.
I’m still struggling over it all. The intended novel for which this was a teaser has been fighting me. I’m having trouble contriving a credible path to the critical tragedy and resolution. I’ll manage it eventually, I suppose. However, several other projects are hanging fire while I grind my teeth over it.
If you’ve been waiting for fresh fiction from me, consider this a status report.
***
There’s a downside to everything. Loyalty is no exception.
If there’s an artisan you call upon for everything in his field of endeavor, he can come to feel that he owns you. If you’ve done a lot of business with him over a long spell of years, then beware should he find out that you’ve patronized one of his competitors.
There’s a general contractor with whom I’ve done business for more than thirty years. He’s a good fellow, he treats me well, and he and his people are generally reliable. Indeed, I’ve come to rely on him even for things nominally outside his sphere. When there’s a problem with the house that I can’t fix myself, “call Tony” is my immediate reaction. That pleases him.
Tony installed the roof on the Fortress back in 1995. It’s been showing its age recently, and recently I decided that the dump needed a new one. It was partly an impulse decision, and partly the discovery that one of my ceiling light fixtures had (ulp) filled with water. As it happened, a major national renovations company was doing work nearby, so I asked their representative to stop by for an inspection and an estimate.
The estimate was a lot more than I was prepared to hear. Apparently the cost of roofing has…well…gone through the roof in recent years. But the product I was pitched was dazzling: a space-age roof, new down to the plywood, with special anti-leak, anti-fungus, anti-mold, and anti-vermin properties, and special protections around the chimney and other protrusions. Moreover, it came with new soffets, improved ventilation for the attic, new gutters and leaders, and a lifetime zero-cost guarantee. It went well beyond what Tony had done for me thirty years ago.
I signed the purchase order. I had a premonition that I hadn’t thought the matter through adequately…that there would be unpleasant consequences. However, the company’s performance not only fulfilled all its representative’s promises in every detail, it exceeded all my expectations.
But Tony wasn’t happy when he found out about it. “Why the hell didn’t you call me?” was his reaction. And I had no answer. None that would please him, at any rate.
There may be some benefit in not being so loyal to a service vendor that it evokes such a reaction.
***
That’s all I have for the moment. It seems I did manage not to vent about anything political for a change. I hope my Gentle Readers are not too disappointed. Anyway, it’s time for Mass, so to close, here are Ellie, Joel, and a giraffe from Sony’s best-ever video game, The Last of Us:
No matter how hard you try. Now, anyone who knows me knows that I hate hippies. But you can disapprove of someone and still acknowledge some good things, such as the whole natural foods movement. I’m a huge believer in eating as naturally as you can. Processed foods are the devil. And no matter how many times someone makes a zero-calorie sweetener, it will always be worse for you than plain old sugar.
A byproduct of sucralose, a chemical found in the popular zero-calorie sweetener Splenda, has been shown to cause damage to DNA, raise the risk of cancer and cause leaks in the gut lining, according to a new study from North Carolina State University.
Splenda is used as a sugar substitute in thousands of foods, beverages, desserts and candies. The product contains 1.10% sucralose. The sucralose ingredient is manufactured by Tate & Lyle in the U.K. and the Splenda brand is owned by Heartland Food Products Group in Indianapolis, Indiana.
The study, published in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, found that a metabolite of sucralose, called sucralose-6-acetate, is “genotoxic.”
Quite honestly if it doesn’t come from nature, it’s not going to be good for you. And even if it DID come from nature there might be a chance it’ll kill you. But un-natural sweeteners are some of the worst. Your body can’t really handle them, and many of them still produce an insulin response even though there’s no sugar. It’s just bad news all around.
The thing is, sugar is ADDICTIVE. Try going without it cold turkey and see how you feel. The wife and I have pretty much cut sugar out of our diet to the point where when she adds carrots and red onions to a soup, we can taste the sweetness. We still enjoy sweets, but not in the quantities that we enjoyed as young pups. I tend towards dark chocolate, less sugar and more flavor.
So yeah, I hate hippies but I love natural food. I think processed carbohydrates are killing Americans. And if more people ate grass fed beef, the world would be a better place.
“We’re up against a side and a force that doesn’t play by the rules – refuses to play by the rules,” he said, adding of conservatives: “We get excited, and we get emotional; that’s it. They break the law; they do the things they need to do to ensure their agenda is driven forward – and we’re watching them gut our nation from the inside out, and I don’t know where the rubber’s gonna meet the road.”
[…]
“[The American revolutionaries] sacrificed everything to come out from under a tyrannical government and, then, eventually, at some point, there was a man at Concord who decided he was gonna pull the trigger.”
[…]
“And I feel like we’re getting back to a point where somebody’s gonna have to pull a trigger, because everything we hold dear – everything this country was founded on – is being just dragged through the mud and mocked and made fun of,” he said. “This country was founded on Godly principles – no matter how offensive that is to the left, it’s true.”
Those statements are from an interview of Schilling by Jesse Watters. Watters gave Schilling a chance to walk back the “pull a trigger” rhetoric:
“I’m going to assume you mean ‘pull’ the trigger metaphorically?” Jesse Watters asked.
“Absolutely, well, no,” Schilling replied. “I mean, it doesn’t matter if I say metaphorically because they’re going to run with that quote no matter how I put it. I could have phrased it in any possible way saying, Stand up and fight and blah blah blah and I would be inciting a riot while Maxine Waters says, Get in their face and beat the hell out of them, publicly.”
Every word is Gospel truth. A conservative cannot say anything that the Left won’t screech and rave about. Moreover, Leftists characterize their own rampages of violence and destruction as peaceful protests.
They’ve killed and brutalized.
They’ve tried to assassinate Republican legislators.
They’ve destroyed billions of dollars’ worth of property.
They’ve marshaled thugs to invade and shut down free-speech rallies.
They routinely intimidate and threaten conservative figures scheduled to give talks.
But let Curt Schilling talk about the years of the American Revolution and the similarities to our time! Let Sarah Palin post crosshairs on a map to indicate Republican electoral opportunities – remember the Gabby Gifford shooting? Suddenly Leftist politicians and their allies in the media scream that the Right is one huge gaggle of terrorists just slavering to commit mass murder!
In this connection, an arrogant sort who thinks himself wise commented insultingly on this recent piece to the effect that the “musket time” question at the end is “irresponsible.” I consigned it to the trash, as you’d expect. He was back this morning with this:
So just out of curiosity why is it you decided not to publish my post? Is it because you only want posts that agree with your silly armed rebellion against the government? What a small man you are…
I wonder where his line in the sand might lie…or whether he has one. There are persons who’d watch men with badges rape their wives and daughters, shrug, and say, “You can’t fight City Hall.” Perhaps he’s one such. At any rate, people’s opinions will vary, as will their manners.
Yes, I’m one who feels it’s literally time for a whole lot of trigger-pulling. Therefore I’m heartened by Schilling’s forthrightness, even though he probably was speaking metaphorically. He may be only an admired sports figure, but a lot of people listen to him. Perhaps the Left will now take note of how close to disaster they’ve come. The next step might be into the abyss.
Anyone who follows the storms of political commentary will be aware that the Left is angry that the Supreme Court of the United States is currently moderately conservative. (I make it roughly 5.33 conservatives to 3.67 left-liberals, as Chief Justice John Roberts has proved that he cannot be trusted.) This morning, John Hinderaker comments to that effect:
Why is the Court suddenly controversial? Obviously because it is, at the moment, in the hands of relatively conservative justices. Democrats revere the Court when it is ruling their way. When they lose a few cases, they stir up bogus “ethics” controversies. Not because they have any merit, or because any knowledgeable person takes them seriously, but so that they can generate endless headlines in Democratic Party news outlets about the “controversial” Court that supposedly is dogged by ethics charges. This will undermine the Court’s stature in the eyes of the uninformed, and perhaps cause justices to take a more liberal turn in order to turn off the heat.
The Supreme Court, in the midst of a run of decisions that have stress-tested the core principles of US democracy, has rarely been so aggressive in using its powers — or been viewed with more skepticism by Americans.
There’s that word “democracy” again. While I generally approve of the presidency of Andrew Jackson, I sorely wish he hadn’t popularized the notion that our nation is a “democracy.” It is not, has never been, and was not intended to be any such thing. But I digress. My focus this morning is on the notion that the Supreme Court is “powerful.”
When civics education was deemed important, among the things children were taught is that the judicial branch is considered the “least dangerous” of the three branches of the federal government, and that it was made so by the Framers’ intent. The courts, all the way to SCOTUS, have no enforcement power. They issue opinions; that’s all. Enforcement lies in the hands of the executive branch, which possesses the armed men and the funding with which to act. Therefore all the actual power lies in the executive – beyond the reach of the courts.
The executive branch has declined to enforce SCOTUS’s opinions on several; memorable occasions. The first and best known was in the McCulloch v. Maryland case, where SCOTUS ruled that Congress had an “implied power” with which President Jackson disagreed: i.e., the power to establish a national bank. This is the case which gave rise to the (apocryphal) Jackson statement “John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it!” And indeed, Chief Justice Marshall could do nothing of the sort.
The “power” of the federal courts lies in their ability to sway opinions: those of the other branches of the federal government, and of Americans generally. As influence over opinion sometimes does translate into influence over action, in the scheme of things this is not inconsiderable. However, it only exists when respect for the courts is high. As Hinderaker notes above, the Left is working furiously to degrade that respect.
Unfortunately, judges, including Supreme Court Justices, are as sensitive to what the media say as any elected politician. Just as they can influence the opinions and actions of others, they can be counter-influenced by a campaign of criticism and calumny against them. When the media are aligned against them, the pressure is strong. When the Left’s activists are permitted to besiege them, their families, and their homes, it nears a critical level.
It’s not that long ago that two Supreme Court Justices were savagely attacked by Democrat legislators and media columnists over the Dobbs decision, which returned authority over the legality of abortion to the state governments. Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home was besieged by Leftist activists for several days – and no enforcement power was deployed against them, despite the illegality of the act. SCOTUS had issued its opinion, and a strong one at that…but the Left was determined that it should not prevail. The counter-influencing emboldened several Democrat governors to defy Republican-controlled legislatures’ enactments limiting abortion in their states.
I’ve said it before: what matters isn’t the law, but whether the law is enforced, to what extent, and against what or whom. Indeed, enforcement holds all the trumps even when the law points in the opposite direction. If you doubt that, ponder what’s currently being done in the cases of Hunter Biden and Donald Trump.
Yes, it’s been going on for quite a while now. Many are asking whether it’s genuinely important or one of the Establishment’s diversions. I’m no longer sure. But of this I am certain: developments are telling us in the plainest possible manner that the American ideal of classlessness has been overthrown. There is now an American aristocracy, and it appears to be as hereditary as the monarchies of medieval Europe.
Lawyer and activist Kash Patel deposeth and sayeth:
This underscores the sweetheart-of-all-sweethearts deal Justice has made with Hunter Biden. As a former Justice Department employee, Patel would have a closer view of such things than an outsider like myself. But I will add this: were Hunter Biden’s name and lineage removed from the chronicle of his misdeeds, would we not be justified in terming their perpetrator a career criminal?
When your prosecutors are the persons most determined to see to it that you “get off,” you’re well protected from legal hazard. Why, you might even say you’re privileged. And once again I am moved to cite a piece of fiction, though not one of mine:
“Mr. Brooks has been removed as your court-appointed attorney. He was unable and unwilling to continue to represent you. My name is Dennis Howard. I’ve reviewed all the recordings of your conversations with Mr. Brooks.”
“Then you are aware I didn’t accept him as my attorney. You may assume I regard you the same. Just the fact that there are recordings shows how farcical this whole matter is.”
“I hear your objection, but the fact is I am charged with developing your defense if not directly representing you in court. I’ll be doing that even over your objections.”
[…]
“Well if you are preparing a defense, they must at least have a judge who is going to hear my case,” Irwin deduced.
“Not exactly,” Howard hedged. “They are still having trouble finding someone who will sit for the case, and I’m more in a caretaker position collecting the evidence piling up and keeping it organized so when you do have new official counsel appointed I can assist him in discovery without any delay for him to become familiar with the case.”
“Then who do you work for?” Irwin asked, puzzled.
“I’m on detached duty from the Federal prosecutor’s office,” Howard revealed.
Irwin started laughing and proceeded to completely lose control, hooting, and snorting.
Howard just let him go, grim-faced, seeing it was pointless to try to interrupt his fit until he ran down on his own.
“Detached? That is priceless,” Irwin finally said, wiping the tears from his eyes. “You couldn’t make this stuff up. My defense is being assembled by the prosecution? What could possibly go wrong?”
Violence broke out again in Glendale, CA, after Antifa showed up to a school board meeting at which parents were protesting the school’s promotion of “pride month” and gender ideology.
Videos showed police on the scene in riot gear as well as temporary barriers being set up. Things escalated from there, with multiple fights breaking out and arrests being made.
Please read it all.
What is the connection between the “Pride” agenda – an open attempt to indoctrinate children with transgenderism and sexual fluidity against the will of their parents – and Antifa? The only connection I can see between them is their hatred of normality. Yet they appear to have allied.
Of course, Antifa is the paramilitary arm of the Left’s coalition. Their appearances to date have been attempts to disrupt appearances by conservative figures and gatherings in support of such things as freedom of speech. The implication of the above incident is that any and every effort to defend American norms will be violently attacked.
To the best of my knowledge, the Glendale school board has not said anything about the Antifa attack: nothing for, but nothing against. In such a situation, to stay silent is to consent to the disruption – to declare it implicitly in support of the policy the parents oppose. If parents’ right to speak to school boards in opposition to some policy can be attacked by Antifa, with the unspoken approval of the board, then not only are the schools irremediably lost to us, nothing is exempt.
If you have children in the public schools, get them out at once.
…The Big Based Book Sale is underway! A large number of ebooks of all kinds, written from a pro-freedom, pro-reality perspective, are available for $0.99 or absolutely free, and are guaranteed to remain so through June 27. (Yes, my crap is in there again.) If your reading stack is getting short, surf on over and have a gander. Pick up some entertainment while it’s cheap!
If you’ve never visited the Baseline Essays collection, I exhort you to spend a couple of minutes there perusing what’s on offer. Yes, it’s all old blather from one of the wordiest people ever to infest the Web. Still, some of those pieces are actually…ahem…interesting. My focus today is on the wildly popular Dictionary of Government Doublespeak, an invaluable collection of translations of Washington euphemisms and circumlocutions into plain English. It’s essential armament for anyone who wants to spout his opinions to the general public.
This morning, I have a new entry for it:
“Our Democracy:” The way things are now, which is how the political Establishment likes them (and will fight like mad dogs to preserve).
When you see “our democracy” in print, or hear it from the lips of some politician, unpack it at once. President Trump has been condemned interminably for being “a threat to our democracy.” Meaning what? Why, that he threatened the cushy inside arrangements of a whole lot of Establishment politicians and their clients in the corporate world. Rice bowls were tottering throughout the corridors of power. Politicians and lobbyists faced the prospect of having to get actual jobs. Can’t have that!
When an entrant to the national scene threatens some aspect of the Establishmentarian Order, you can expect to see references to the protection of “our democracy.” Here’s a recent example:
Column: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a threat to your health — and our democracy
The focus of the article is on Kennedy’s questioning of vaccine safety. It’s a common subject these days, what with the COVID-19 “vaccines” being provably more dangerous than the COVID-19 virus. There’s quite a lot of money tied up in vaccines, you know. Especially the mandatory administration of vaccines to very young children – in some cases, soon after birth. Some of that money is paid to the LA Times by its advertisers. So we can’t have anyone questioning the safety or efficacy of vaccines. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
Columnist Michael Hiltzik may not have been told to crank the hysteria up to 11, but he did it. “Our democracy,” indeed.
Now, this is absurd on its face and an insult to the intelligence of the handful of remaining Los Angeles Times readers. The Left has now become so divorced from reality that Times writer Michael Hiltzik would have us believe that a contested Democrat party primary is bad for “our democracy.” But a full-out coronation of Old Joe to serve another four years as the figurehead for the shadowy individuals who are really running things? Why, that would be “our democracy” personified. One candidate, inevitable outcome? Good democracy! Two candidates, unclear outcome? Bad democracy!
Indeed squared!
Gentle Reader, if you’ve never reflected on the penchant political columnists possess for bending, folding, stapling, and mutilating our sacred language into shapes unimagined by the greatest origamists in human history, now would not be a bad time to start. And for a bonus dollop of illumination: that phrase “would not be a bad time to start” is called a periphrasis. It’s a technique for using negatives to convey a positive suggestion. Paradoxically, this underscores the positive notion. It has the side benefit of making the user sound like W. Somerset Maugham.
[NB: For those who were confused by my neologism: Bigamists practice bigamy; origamists practice…?]
Perhaps I’ll be back later with something else. At any rate, it would not be unprecedented.
Derrick Thompson was clocked at 95 to 100 mph on Highway 35W, probably the Twin Cities’ busiest highway. Before the Highway Patrol could pursue him, he exited the highway off a down ramp to Lake Street and immediately ran a red light, essentially vaporizing a car containing the five innocent young women. You almost have to see the video to believe it:
WARNING: Disturbing video shows moment of impact from reckless driver speeding & running a red light before killing five people and fleeing the scene. Sources have identified the driver as Derrick John Thompson, the son of former DFL state Rep. John Thompson. pic.twitter.com/JVvNDwuaOV
Twin Cities media outlets are focusing on the less than vital question of how that video leaked to the press. That seems to be of more moment, in their eyes, than the five lives that were lost, and the left-wing criminal justice system that made the whole thing possible.
The miscreant has been involved in 13 other criminal acts, mostly vehicle-related.
Doesn’t Derrick Thompson belong in prison? At age 27, he’s old enough to know better, as the saying goes. A few years behind bars might wise him up. But wait: he’s the son of a politically powerful former state legislator. Are we allowed to incarcerate the children of the powerful?
If you’re muttering “Hunter Biden” under your breath, you’re not alone. But as outrageous as it is that Hunter Biden and Derrick Thompson are still running around loose, children of power and privilege who run amok are relatively few. They can’t account for the surge of crime all by themselves.
By and large, we have a great deal of crime these days because those with weak morals and ethics have become aware that they can do a whole lot of harm to others and never be brought to book for it. There are enough “natural” criminals to overload the justice system we had before the insane took over the country – i.e., before the recent “Defund the police! / The courts are racist!” chants got started. Add the huge number who were previously deterred solely by the possibility of detection and punishment, and we arrive at our current condition.
There are particularly egregious instances of our loss of will. The “shoplift if you like” attitudes of San Francisco and New York City come to mind at once. Law enforcers’ greatly intensified aversion to risk factors powerfully into the problem. The swiftness and ferocity with which “victimist” activists rain down condemnations upon the police, even after a fully justified arrest, must be figured in, too.
Still…has our nation ever had quite this many residents who had no internal constraints against lawbreaking? Internal constraints are those that make it possible for police forces to do the job at all. Historically, those constraints were supplied by one’s religion. Hearken to Clay Christensen on the subject:
The real protection of life and property, always and everywhere, is the general recognition of the brotherhood of man. How much of the time is any American within sight of a policeman? Our lives and property are protected by the way nearly everyone feels about another person’s life and property.
With religion in decline – the aging of congregations everywhere would convince a man from Mars that it’s strictly for the nursing-home set – internal constraints are declining as well. The predominant ethical question is no longer “Is it wrong?” but “Can I get away with it?”
Atop that, the dearly departed and deeply missed Ol’ Remus has told us, more than once and in big letters, to stay away from cities and other sources of crowds. People’s inhibitions against violence and predation tend to weaken when immersed in a crowd. And these days, because of other social and economic trends that deserve an essay or two of their own, crowds are more difficult to avoid than ever before.
Last for today, we’ve permitted ingress to these shores by millions of savages. Yes, I mean that as it appears: hordes of persons with no conception of right and wrong. Many of them don’t even ask “Can I get away with it?” They see; they want; they take – and woe betide the decent citizen who uses force against them. The “authorities” are nearly always on the savages’ side.
Given all that, is it really surprising that America is awash in crime of every variety? Indeed, wouldn’t it be far more surprising if the nation were as peaceful and law-abiding today as it was in, say, 1950? You know, back when we had actual men.
I think the point has been established. There is no safety for person or property at this time. Current trends continuing, matters will get worse, not better. Therefore, whenever you leave your home for any reason, even for a quick trip to the corner store, go armed. Your personal weapon might be the only thing that saves a life – and not necessarily your own.
And I found it a little hard to breathe. It has been all assholes and elbows here since his death. There was a bunch of stuff that was planned prior to his passing, and that still had to be attended to. Such as the removal of several trees around the property that were either dying or at risk of falling and hitting the house. Since we use wood heat in the winter, that means they left the trees where they fell and it was my job to try to clean it up. Three days of moving wood and downed limbs, and I’ve barely put a scratch on the piles. It’ll be an all-summer event.
Helping Mom with the administrative stuff that happens when a retired service member dies. There’s a lot of people you have to contact and inform of the passing. Pay stuff. He was getting disability on top of the retirement, and since his death was related to his disability Mom gets a portion of it. Social Security, and dear Lord how I hate dealing with government offices.
So I’ve been busy. Hell, I might have had one day off since I retired, because people need to be taken care of and things need to be accomplished, and I’m the able-bodied (somewhat) man of the house, and so I just kept putting one foot in front of the other. Until yesterday.
Dad had a lot of mementos from his service. Lots of stuff that had importance to him personally, but other than that has real little value. I have the same from my service. I daresay that all of you, if you’re of my age or older, have the same from whatever occupation you had, a lifetime of memories from a career that are dear to you, but memories only matter to the person who has them. And so I have bundles of things, stuff, odds and ends that Dad cared about that are not only impractical but have very little use in the world, and I’m finding it rather hard to dispose of them. Anything that can be used or reused will be, because my father didn’t raise a wasteful man. But things such as the embroidered insignia from his first tour in Viet Nam, that not only means little to me but that I can’t even relate to, is still hanging on the wall. All of his sailing books that I’ll never use, because I already have hobbies that suck up my time and cash. The challenge coins… I have my own collection, and it’s considered uncouth to keep challenge coins that weren’t given to you directly. Dad got those coins for the things that HE did, just as I received mine for my own actions.
I can’t keep it all. But I’m struggling to part with it. I already have lot of mementos of my father. His service pistol, a 1911 he purchased when he first reported to his unit and was issued a pistol that rattled when you held it. Back when I first held his pistol, he told me that he had asked for something that wouldn’t blow up in his hand, and the armorer informed him that he could buy his own if he wanted. So he did. Books about forestry, which I think I’ll find more and more useful as the years go on. Pictures and memories framed on the wall. I know that I can’t keep everything. But I feel like it’s going to be several months before I can pare it down.
I told my Mom that when everything was done and put away, I was going to walk out into the woods and have myself a good long cry. And I think that when I let go of the last of Dad’s stuff, that is when it will happen.
Donald Trump is today the most popular political figure in the United States, and one of the most popular this century past. The Usurpers are aware that unless they put him behind bars, come November next year he’ll wipe the floor with whoever they nominate. So they’re denying him a fair trial:
Joe Biden’s Justice Department on Friday harassed President Trump with another court filing in the classified documents case.
The Justice Department filed a motion seeking to block Trump from releasing classified documents that will be shared with his lawyers.
Magistrate judge Bruce Reinhart, who approved the initial FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, sided with Biden’s DOJ and issued a protective order barring Trump from disclosing certain evidence in Jack Smith’s classified documents case.
Trump’s access to the documents will also be limited.
In case you haven’t heard, the judge also decreed that if Trump’s lawyers want to see any of the classified documents, they must get security clearances…but the Department of Defense has denied them clearances.
There are no masks, no makeup, and no pretenses left. They know we know, and they no longer care. They intend to have their way with us, and they will use whatever methods are available to ensure it.
Yes, Gentle Readers, they walk among us. Really. Co-Conspirator Pascal provided the following image in a comment to this piece, and it struck me so powerfully that I decided to promote it:
Appalling.
Time was, we spoke of “the gift of life.” Not all of us, of course; Sophocles is noted for having said that the greatest blessing of all is never to have been born:
Never to be born is the best thing. To have seen the daylight / And be swept instantly back into dark oblivion comes second. [from Oedipus at Colonus]
…but then, he was a sour old coot. To anyone who agrees with him: You’re a strange sort of reader to have come to this blog. Perhaps you’d find this site more to your tastes.
With this article and others like it, it’s become impossible for the eco-Nazis to hide their true agenda any longer. They hate Mankind and want us gone. If we won’t cooperate by ceasing to exist entirely, they’ll make our lives as miserable as they can. What other objective could lie behind all their hairshirted prescriptions and proscriptions?
Don’t eat meat.
Don’t use fossil fuels.
Don’t have dogs or cats.
Don’t make or use plastics.
Don’t make or use fertilizers.
And above all, don’t reproduce!
Could the tie-in with the pro-abortion and pro-euthanasia movements be any clearer?
Of course they say “it’s for the planet.” Really? “The planet,” in some mystical sense, is of greater importance than Mankind? “The planet” has a claim superior to the emergence of intelligent self-awareness? “The planet” trumps the human mind, soul, and all the works of Man?
Great God in heaven! How could any assertion be more absurd? Yet there are…persons who spout this bilge, this utter sewage, and get not only a respectful hearing but billions of dollars in donations and the eager attention of lawmakers. Well, we know what the lawmakers want: more power. Any pretext will do for them. But what about all the private persons engaged in this madness? What’s their angle?
The apostles of mass death have been raking it in for several decades. All their cons are founded on the same ridiculous premise: “Save the planet!” From what? Why, from us, of course: Mankind. But ask them “What for?” and they start to spout obscene denunciations and foam at the mouth. It’s the only thing they can do to refrain from giving the game away totally.
They hate you. They hate Mankind. They even hate themselves.
They’re resolved upon death, and they want the biggest honor guard in history.
Every last element of their campaign is a complete canard. False-to-fact and anti-human at its core. But they who hate are concerned solely with destruction. They want you to hate yourself as they hate themselves. If you decline, dissent, or disdain them, you’re Number One on their hate parade.
I could go on. I’ve done so in the past. Instead, I’ll merely remind you about this essay from 2012. Things haven’t changed since then.
I fancy I can hear the mutterings of “The shortage? Which one?” from the back rows. Yes, there are a few, properly understood. But I have a particular one in mind this morning. It’s not peculiar to America, either. The whole First World, and quite a bit of the rest, appears to be afflicted by it.
On this Fathers’ Day in the Year of Our Lord 2023, it is both striking and ironic that we should suffer a shortage of fathers…but we do.
***
Mark Steyn’s critically important 2008 book America Alone alerted readers to the collapse of human reproduction, essentially worldwide. Well developed nations – i.e., those that enjoy a general level of prosperity greater than or equal to that of Europe – are all experiencing reproduction rates well below the “ZPG level” of 2.1 children per couple. Those nations in which people are still having children at that rate or higher are, sad to say, not well developed. While it’s been known for some time that reproduction rates decline as social and technological advances increase general prosperity, until Steyn’s book few saw the decline as evidence of a depopulated future. Indeed, there were many who hailed the news as a good thing for “our overpopulated planet.”
Well, if you truly believe there are “too many of us,” you’ll be untroubled by the news that there’ll soon be fewer. But such a belief isn’t important to the “birth dearth.” People have kids for reasons closer to their hearts. Inversely, they refrain from having kids for reasons close to their hearts as well…though in many cases those reasons are not things they’d care to discuss with others.
I am not a father. Things being as they are, I’ll never be one. But the reasons for which millions of men are averting fatherhood are things I can discuss with a certain degree of authority.
***
Supposedly, evolution has hard-wired us to want to reproduce. At least, I’ve heard that quite a few times from others, these seven decades past. But if it’s so, evolution is being resisted pretty effectively by a whole lot of people, especially the men of our nation.
American men face a social, economic, and legal environment unprecedented in human history. That environment faces us with a huge mass of powerful disincentives to reproduce. Those disincentives have caused the reproduction rate among natural-born Americans to fall to about 1.7 children per couple. Were it not for immigration, our population would be shrinking, as is observably the case in Japan.
I could go into gruesome detail about those disincentives, but I’ll spare you this morning. At any rate, they tend to point in two dominant emotional directions: selfishness and fear. If you review what I and others have written about the stresses on families in our time, I think you’ll come to that conclusion at once.
***
Life in our time discourages a young man from seeking or accepting the responsibilities of fatherhood. We’ve seen too many broken homes, too much marital misery, and too many damaged children. Some of us are or were damaged by our upbringings; the condition is more common than I like to think about. Add to that the highly biased legal environment, which reliably ruins a man with kids should his wife decide to divorce him, and you have a constellation of fear factors that require an unusual degree of courage to beat.
Along with that goes the group of inducements to selfishness our socioeconomic milieu presents us. You’ve heard it before! “Why buy a cow when milk is cheap?” And it is cheap, Gentle Reader. During my years of singlehood I was offered “free” sex (“Invariably the most expensive sort” – Robert A. Heinlein) by many women, on many occasions. I should add that I’m no prize for looks and never have been – see my Amazon bio if you simply must have the details — so there was something going on there that operates independently of such considerations.
Even many men who overcome their fears sufficiently to marry strive to avert fatherhood. Children are expensive. They put sharp limits on their parents’ options. In these days of the “two income family,” the childless couple can usually live much better, materially speaking, than a couple that elects to bear children. Plus, there are all those questions about which parent is to be responsible for what and when. Life is stressful enough; who needs more stress?
Are these things all continuously on the minds of young men in their prime fatherhood years? I doubt it…but I don’t doubt that some or all of them will rise to the forefront of consciousness when they confront the possibility of childbearing. We’re not exactly taught to put the human future ahead of our own “needs” these days, are we?
***
Yes, selfishness and fear are also inhibitors to motherhood. However, the urge to have children is stronger in women than in men, for reasons both obvious and obscure. In many families, she wants to have kids and is willing to embrace the consequences, whereas he does not and would do anything short of murder to avoid it. Indeed, there have been many cases – some of them widely known – in which he has had himself sterilized, possibly even before the nuptials, and never thereafter has his wife learned of it.
To close, this morning at Mass the celebrant concluded the service by asking the fathers in the pews to rise and accept a special blessing. It warmed me greatly that nearly all the men present stood to be blessed. I was also a bit ashamed that in obedience to my conscience, I could not join them. For the shortage of fathers – men courageous enough and charitable enough to embrace the estate open-eyed, resolved to fulfill it to the best of their ability – is among the worst that afflict us today. Such men are rich in God’s grace. They deserve the admiration they receive, this day and every day.
One rule that used to be in place was that you didn’t hurt kids. War was hell, but you weren’t supposed to target kids deliberately.
The Left has violated that rule. Hell, they’ve tossed that rule into the trash as they try to trans and groom every kid they can get their hands on. That’s part of why we’ve seen any kind of push back at all from parents who’ve been sleeping through the past decade, especially once the Covidiacy hit and they saw the classrooms with their own eyes through Zoom or other online learning. What is being done to America’s kids in the classroom is criminal, and in a just world, the criminals would be getting hauled into court.
A hospital and doctors in California are facing a new lawsuit for removing the breasts of a 13-year-old girl after she claimed she was a boy.
The defendants carried out “ideological and profit-driven medical abuse” when they prescribed her puberty blockers and hormones and, later, performed a double mastectomy, Charles LiMandri, one of the lawyers representing the plaintiff, Layla Jane, said in a statement.
Jane, now 18, was influenced by people online when she was just 11 and told her parents that she was a boy, prompting them to ask for guidance from doctors.
While three doctors said Jane was too young for cross-sex hormones, she was eventually referred to several other doctors who prescribed her puberty blockers and hormones. Within six months, they removed her breasts.
From “Hey mom I think I’m a boy” to breast removal in SIX MONTHS? ON A THIRTEEN YEAR OLD GIRL? Yeah, that’s abandoning all the rules, and if you read Mr. Porretto’s post below you should be able to infer that we are in combat with the groomers and trans-ers. It’s about damn time that we started fighting back. And when you fight back, remember once again that in combat there are no rules. If you want your children to be able to live happy, healthy, normal lives you need to fight like hell against the evil people trying to pollute and distort your kids. To quote RA Heinlein, you’d better fight like you’re the third monkey on the ramp to Noah’s Ark, and brother, there’s a storm coming.
The left will try to use your own goodness against you. That’s what evil does. Hell, that’s almost a classic definition of evil. It’s like the AIDS virus of humanity. “Oh, how can you say such- mean things about me!” they will cry, as they label you a phobic-hater-nazi-bigot-racist. “How DARE you attack me for being who I am!” they will shout, as they destroy everything in America that allows you to be who you are. “How dare you call us groomers!” they’re shrieking, as they demand the right to teach your kids how to use gay sex dating apps in junior high.
This is war. A war for our future, because when the Left sterilizes your kids in the name of tolerance and inclusion you won’t get another generation out of them. You’d better fight like hell. Suing the pants of of the quacks who cut off a thirteen year old girl’s breasts is a good start. But it’s just that. A START. It needs to continue until every doctor out there is afraid to mutilate a teenager’s genitalia for fear of what the parents will do in return.
The crisis of conscience is what kills the right every time. They want to win, but they don’t want to do anything dishonorable in the process. They won’t take a stint in jail to win. They won’t intentionally inflict emotional or psychiatric pain on another person, even if that person is intent on inflicting the same sort of damage upon them. In one way, it makes a person proud to be among such fine people, but if that leads to drag queen story hour with children, it takes the shine off of that pride.
The left suffer from no such crisis. This is not to say they don’t have a conscience, but that they see over the horizon of their immediate actions, or are, more accurately, willing to accept that vision, however clumsily and fraudulently presented, as a cause worthy of soiling their hands.
To the Left, only the acquisition and retention of power matters. Therefore, it recognizes no rules. That makes politics today a combat situation:
“What is combat, Christine?”
“Huh?”
“What is combat? How does it differ from other kinds of human interaction?”
“Well, you’re trying to hurt somebody.”
Louis cocked an eyebrow. “You’re never trying to hurt somebody under other circumstances?”
She thought it over. “Well, yeah.”
“So what’s the difference?”
“Well, you have to have an opponent.”
He waited in silence.
“And he has to be trying to stop you.”
“From doing what?”
“Whatever you’re trying to do!” She was growing impatient.
“And what are the rules?”
“Um, do there have to be any?”
He shook his head. “There have to be none.”
“What?”
“You heard me. If it’s combat, it has no rules, only objectives. That’s really the defining characteristic.”
He went to a wooden rack across from his punching bag and lifted a large, gently curved sword from it. She had never seen him handle the thing before, and had wondered why he had it.
“This is a medieval saber. A thousand years ago, it was one of the most potent weapons a man could carry. Moreover, possession was restricted by law. You had to be a member of the ruling class to own one legally.”
He swung the sword in a complex pattern that defeated her attempt to track it.
“You can kill with one of these, if you have enough strength and skill. Of course, it’s a little conspicuous, and it takes a lot more effort to use than most people would guess. Would you want to have to tote one around?”
“No.”
“And why is that?” He laid the tip of the saber in his left hand and held out the sword as if offering it to her.
“Because there’s better available. We have guns now.”
He nodded. “Yes, we do. And for quite a wide range of combat situations, a gun is a better weapon than a sword. In fact, there are a number of cases where bare hands are better than a sword, but that’s beside the point for now. If you were in a combat situation, where you had this and your opponent had a gun, what could you do about it?”
She looked hard at the old weapon. It had a certain antique beauty and simplicity, but she couldn’t imagine ever wanting to wield it.
“Not a lot. Try to take the gun away from him, maybe?”
Louis snorted. “I hope you never have to do that, Chris. The odds are going to be on his side. But one thing you wouldn’t do is to shout, ‘Hey, that’s not fair.’ Right?”
She laughed. “Silly man!”
His face went dark. “I’m trying to make a very important point here, Chris. Combat means no rules. What he has is what you have to deal with, period. If you can’t face his size, his skills, or his armament, you’d better be prepared to run.”
“Well, you know I can do that.”
He glowered. “I said prepared to run.” His voice had acquired an edge she hadn’t heard before. “Emotionally. You don’t ever duke it out with someone who’s got the edge. A lot of guys have been killed by pride and unwillingness to admit they’re facing superior force. Chris, this might be the most important thing anyone will ever tell you. Do you understand?”
That is the position in which we in the Right find ourselves today. Like it or not, this is a combat situation. The other side, by virtue of our self-restraint, has a huge edge over us. If we’re not willing to do as the Left has done and discard all notions of propriety in politics, the Left will not only defeat us, it will eliminate us. Do we flee, as Louis has counseled Christine above, or do we shed our fetters and fight like crazed dogs?
(I don't endorse any of these sites. I list them to marvel at how many people and organizations want to run a "news site," but have no idea what that entails. -- FWP)
