Tuesday, April 30, 2019

Bitter Harvest

A movie I have been meaning to watch for some time is Bitter Harvest. The film is set in the 1930's in Ukraine during the attempted genocide known as the Holodomor. No one knows how many people actually died but it was a huge number, from around 2 million all the way to 12 million, so the true number is probably somewhere in the middle. I finally got around to watching it the other night and I highly recommend it. Not because it is a great film, it isn't, but because it gives us a different and interesting look at the most pivotal era in modern history.

What makes this film so interesting is not the acting or plot, which are kind of scattered. What truly makes it so interesting is that it is one of the few films from the era surrounding World War II that expose what a monster Joseph Stalin truly was and what an inhumane system Communism turned out to be. World War II movies almost exclusively focus on the Third Reich, Hitler and the Holocaust but the Soviets, Stalin and the Holodomor were every bit as awful. Given that the Soviets lasted for half a century longer, it is easy to make the argument that the Soviets were worse than the Nazis. I know that is verboten to say because Holocaust but it is nevertheless true.

One of the things that really caught my eye was how helpless the kulaks were when the Soviets showed up. Charging on horseback with swords against men with rifles is suicide. Yet they did it anyway. Twenty men with rifles can easily cow a village of people with only a handful of swords and farm tools to fight back. If that village is armed even with things as simple as hunting rifles and shotguns? That is completely different. There is an important lesson here for Americans. Certainly the citizens of a small town are not going to fight off a concerted effort by U.S. "law" enforcement but partisans with AR-15s and hunting rifles can make life hell for a governing force, especially trying to occupy a nation this large.

Something else was that these utopian ideas of collectivization always require escalating levels of state violence. You can't let people resist collectivization and the only way to get people to comply is to bully them, threaten them, jail them and eventually kill them. Stalin ordered the people of Ukraine to be butchered and starved for "the good of the state". There are plenty of people right now that feel this way. If you stand against "progress" toward a genderless globalist mush of racially homogeneous economic domination, you are a Nazi and white supremacist. Your speech that disagrees with me is "violence" so therefore I am justified in responding to your "violent speech" with actual violence. This is not some conspiracy theory or fantasy. Not that long ago the Weather Underground was apparently casually talking about the need to eliminate 25 million Americans if they refused to be "re-educated". The Weather Underground was headed up by Bill Ayers who was the buddy and mentor of former U.S. President Barack Obama.

The road from America the beautiful, amber waves of grain and all of that, to the Holodomor is not as long as we might think it is.

Monday, April 29, 2019

A Soyboy Sighting!

When last we left Peter Alvaro, Assistant Professor of Computer Science at UC-Santa Cruz, he was virtue posting his hatred of white people and his desire for white genocide. His tweet "all i want for my birthday is white genocide" is so trite, so predictable that when I looked him up and saw his picture, it was exactly as you would expect:

You can almost smell the soy oozing from every pore. As I wrote back in February:

Mr. Alvaro is pretty much a walking cliché, the Assistant Professor with the scraggly beard and obligatory pony-tail. A few generations ago he would have worn a corduroy blazer with elbow patches. As is usually the case, this fella calling for white genocide looks like a sissy so I doubt he is gearing up to start the genocide himself. He is just virtue signaling and trying to be edgy, probably to help him get in the pants of some obese undergrad. A male or female undergrad? Jury is out on that one.

When someone gets into the university establishment, they seem to enter a state of emotional suspended animation, kind of like high school jocks that never adapted to a world where they weren't big man on campus. What sort of adult man allows himself to look like that? Anyway, I emailed a note to his boss and copied him in February and of course got no response. I sort of forgot about him as he is just another degenerate punk. Lo and behold this morning I see in my notifications a reply to a tweet and after a moment I realized who it was.

Why would he make a witty reply to a random tweet months later? I can only assume that like many narcissists he was googling his own name and saw my post, clicked on my twitter account and commented on the first thing he saw.

What cracked me up is some pony-tail wearing soyboy calling anyone else a pussy.

People like this think they are going to be immune from the madness they are trying to unleash but they are all living in ground zero. When the wheels come off, we will see who the pussy is. Assuming Peter survives the initial madness, the best he can hope for is being picked as a pillow boy by an actual tough guy.

In the meantime Pete, if you are ever in the Midwest look me up.

Reporting Crime While White

This is the sort of "news" that comes out with such regularity that it almost turns into background noise. "Oh, more state sponsored race war aimed at me? Oh well, the NFL draft is on!"

It may soon be a crime in Grand Rapids to call the police on people of color for 'participating in their lives'

In Grand Rapids, Michigan, it may soon no longer be just unfair to call the police on people of color who have done nothing wrong. It may be downright illegal.

The City Commission held a public hearing Tuesday on a proposed human rights ordinance that would make it a criminal misdemeanor to "racially profile people of color for participating in their lives," the city said in a statement.

The charge could result in up to a $500 fine, according to CNN affiliate WOOD.

This story sounds like something your average boomercon, civic nationalist, MAGA-types would instinctively shy away from criticizing. "This is great, people shouldn't call the cops on other people because of their skin color! America is just a set of ideals!". According to the media, there is an epidemic of white people calling the cops on black people for doing nothing other than being black. When you start to look into it, the widely publicized incidents turn out to be a little more gray. Someone was trying to enter a secure building without credentials, people were barbequing in a park using an illegal method, someone was parked illegally blocking the road but the caller was white and the person being called on was black so ipso facto hate crimes. Laws like this give the left, especially the self-loathing white left, all the feelz so it will be replicated across the country and I wouldn't bet against seeing something like it turned into a Federal crime if Dems retake control.

Imagine this scenario:

Becky White is at home alone in her safe suburban neighborhood. It is late and the kids are in bed. Her husband is away at a business meeting in another city. She hears a neighborhood dog bark so she peeps out from behind her curtains to see what is going on. On the street she observes three men wearing dark clothing, including hooded sweatshirts with the hoods up. They are walking up to cars parked along the road and in driveways, peering inside as if seeing what is in the car and if they are locked. They do this at several cars as they walk down the street.

Alarmed at this odd behavior, Becky calls the police. Fortunately a cop is nearby and is on the scene in minutes. Becky can't see what transpires but the cop asks the three men what they are doing. Not impressed with their answers, the cop asks for ID. Upon discovering the men are not from that town but are from the neighboring city, he suggests they move on. The three men leave the area, returning to their car parked a street over and head back into the city. Becky sees the cop drive by slowly and goes to bed, reassured that her neighborhood is safe once again.

The next morning the Reverend Lucius Grifter of the Emmanuel African Episcopal Church arrives at the police station. In a strange twist of fate, local and national media happens to be there at the same time, cameras rolling. He makes a statement to the adoring media about an injustice done to three fine young brothers who were minding their own business before being hassled by the police, making them fearful for their lives. Half an hour later, Reverend Grifter comes back out smiling and assures the waiting media that justice will be served.

Becky is at home making muffins and sees the news. She is horrified and saddened that these three brave young men suffered yet another injustice at the hands of white supremacists. First slavery and now this?! But the police are on the job and are being watched by Reverend Grifter and he is a pastor so she feels confident that justice will be done.

15 minutes later three police cars pull into her driveway. The muffins are cooling and The View hasn't come on yet so Becky curiously walks out to see what is going on. Maybe they are following up on the suspicious characters and letting her know what happened? Upon exiting the house she is set upon by the police, handcuffed, Mirandized and thrown in the back of a car. Becky is terrified, she has never had so much as a speeding ticket! 

An hour later she finds herself in front of a judge, charged with making a racially based police report. It turns out the three men she called the police about were black and just "participating in their lives", which in this instance happened to be wandering around a neighborhood casing cars. These young men were turning their lives around and then were the victims of racial profiling, police brutality and a hate crime. 

Becky is mortified. She never realized that she was a racist and white supremacist. She tearfully pleads guilty and throws herself on the mercy of the court. The judge sternly sentences her to pay a fine of $500. Becky writes a check on the spot and apologizes for her crime.

As Becky leaves the courthouse, she is thankful she had the chance to atone for her racist misdeeds. She vows to herself to do better. Lost in her reverie of guilt and shame, she almost walks into a young woman of color wearing a suit. The young woman glares at Becky and hands her a piece of paper. Becky takes it although she is confused. The young woman informs her that she has been served with papers for a civil lawsuit. The three young men are suing her for defamation, emotional distress, loss of employment opportunities and violating their civil rights. Reverend Grifter is signed on as a co-plaintiff for the distress he suffered seeing these promising young men so mistreated by the system. 

Becky thinks it is time to call her lawyer. Also her realtor.

If you can be fined for calling the police when someone is acting suspiciously or even when possibly breaking the law, people will be frightened of calling the police. That only serves to embolden criminals.

I wonder what this sort of law will do to things like community policing and neighborhood watch associations? Will you have to try to ascertain the race of a suspicious individual so you don't accidentally call the police on a "person of color" that is just "participating in their lives"? Will this decrease criminal behavior or encourage it? Also, "participating in their lives" is one of those pseudo intellectual sayings that doesn't actually mean anything but makes the user smugly self-assured of their intellectual superiority.

Never mentioned is the fact that black on white crime is wildly more common than the reverse. Even talking about the disproportionate rates of black crime is considered a borderline hate crime and will get you banned on social media.

Laws like this are only the beginning. More laws that will decriminalize behavior depending on the race of the criminal are coming. Instead of focusing on crime prevention, we will instead find ways to make crime race specific.

The results will be very predictable. Bug out now and get somewhere you will be somewhat insulated from the inevitable backlash.

Sunday, April 28, 2019

The Amish Are Coming, The Amish Are Coming!

Just a fun video from Vincent James on the ever expanding Amish population...

He gets a few basics wrong but most people do. We have been deeply involved in their community for years and there are still things we don't quite understand. Even so the rapidly multiplying population of the Amish is causing some issues with local communities and sooner or later the Amish will run afoul of the Cultural Marxists, for no reason other than being white and Christian. Wait until the SJWs realize that the Amish educate their children almost completely apart from the state and Federal education tyrants and no Amish I have ever met thinks that boys can become girls and vice-versa....

Thoughts on the NRA Controversy

As I mentioned last night, my wife and I were at the NRA Annual Meeting yesterday in Indianapolis. It was a great opportunity for us, as an NRA member I get in for "free" although parking downtown in Indy is ridiculously expensive but was conveniently located if you skipped the "semi-official" parking lot miles right off the expressway but miles away from the center. We parked in a garage right across the street from the convention center for $5 more. Since we were carrying about 90 pounds of catalogs and brochures, it was $5 well spent.

Anyway, while we were there pawing guns like Bill Clinton on an intern, the actual business meeting was going on. I didn't attend although maybe I should have. I don't know enough about the political infighting. It sounds like there was a clash between (now former) NRA President Oliver North and long-time NRA executive director Wayne LaPierre and North lost. He is out. It seems to me like there are some serious issues internally at the NRA and some financial shenanigans as well. The NRA is a huge organization with lots of money and that attracts people who take advantage of it. You see this in anyplace where there is money, businesses and civic organizations. People steal from local Girl Scout troops and churches, you know people exposed to million dollar accounts might get sticky fingers. Not even open theft but the sort of things that are being accused, like extravagant travel and wardrobe expenses and leveraging NRA contracts for personal contracts. The board is meeting on Monday for a scheduled event so hopefully they can get this squashed because it is causing hard feelings and everyone knows Trump and the GOP need a strong, unified gun lobby in 2020.

A bunch of gun rights "experts" on social media are clamoring for people to abandon the NRA. Rather than supporting a flawed group, you should instead join another gun rights group like Gun Owners of America. Vote with your wallet and all that. I have a proposal for those people:

I get being upset at the NRA, the internal squabbling is unseemly and unhelpful and the endless fund-raising emails and letters can be annoying. But the NRA is the largest and the most effective gun rights organization in the world. You can tell this is true because of the endless sniping from gun-grabbers. They know who has the best lobbying organization, the best grassroots political groups, the most Congressmen on speed dial. Plus the NRA does a lot of other stuff very well like local shooting events. So I am a member of the NRA and I have no plans on dropping my membership. I agree for the most part with this editorial: Why NRA Members Should Not Publicly Attack NRA For Perceived Wrongs.

Having said that, I also joined Gun Owners of America because we need every voice we can fighting for our rights. A GOA membership is only $20. An NRA membership is only $45 and you can often get a reduced rate, like the $30 rate through hickok45's link. So for $50 per year, less than a buck a week in a nation where people often spend hundreds per month on cell phones, cable and internet, you can join both groups and increase both group's ability to fight for your Second Amendment rights.

People on the political Right spend so much time punching right that we barely have any energy left to combat the Left. Liberals love this internal fighting among gun owners. Every minute we spend fighting with each other, we aren't fighting them. For the Left, all of their plans require a disarmed population. While we snipe at each other and divide our attention, they are laser focused on disarming us so they can do whatever they want without resistance. Destroying this nation and the people that built it so they can replace it with a globalist tyranny is their religion. They eat, sleep and breathe oppression and hatred for liberty. We must match their focus and their drive. We outnumber them by a huge margin but that means nothing when we spend all of our time tearing down our allies via endless purity spirals. Yes, we must hold these groups accountable but we must support them nevertheless.

If you can afford a single coffee from a store each week, you can belong to the NRA and the GOA. Do it today.

Saturday, April 27, 2019

Guns. More Guns. Even More Guns.

My wife and I attended the 2019 NRA Annual Meeting today in Indianapolis and boy the exhibit hall delivered as promised. It would been a hoot to see some simpering soyboy gun-grabber like David Hogg plunked down in the middle of the show, he would have soiled himself and rushed to the fainting couch after seeing enough guns to start, and win, a decent sized revolution. Of course there was probably no safer place to be in the U.S. today than a convention hall with tens of thousands of gun owners checking out thousands of real guns.

Acres and acres of guns, giant set-ups for the big names like Glock, Beretta, Remington, Springfield and Browning. Tons of little specialty shops. Everything in between. I have handled a lot of guns in my life, but I handled more different guns today than I had before combined. There had to be in excess of 10,000 guns in the exhibit hall, including an unreasonable number of .50 sniper rifles.

Big crowd. A lot more women than I expected, mostly with husbands and boyfriends. Lots of younger kids, teens on down. Everyone was very polite even when packed in tightly and endlessly jostling each other. Knowing we are all on the same team and that most of us are armed makes everyone more polite to teach other.

There were the usual pro-gun celebs, Chuck Norris and Ted Nugent, etc. I am not an autograph guy so I wasn't waiting in line.

Lots of hired gun-thots in skimpy skirts and high heels talking about guns to thirsty middle-aged men. Lots of women presenters, the NRA is pretty serious about trying to attract more women and getting them involved in shooting and self-defense. Their "Refuse to be a victim" campaign is pretty good.

Here is some gun porn for ya after the break.....

Friday, April 26, 2019

The Dishonest Media Being Dishonest

This weekend is the National Rifle Association's annual meeting and it is being held in my home state of Indiana. I can neither confirm nor deny that I will show up at the meeting to browse the 15+ acres of guns, fondling each new firearm like Joe Biden at a Girl Scout convention. The President and Vice-President are speaking today and it is expected that over 80,000 people will visit Indianapolis to attend the meeting. You would think that would be exciting and a source of some pride. You would be wrong. While most Hoosiers enthusiastically welcome the President and the NRA, the warm and fuzzy feelings are not universal.

Hometown newspaper, the Indianapolis Star, decided to run this story on Wednesday, right before the NRA annual meeting kicks off.

Indianapolis mother of boy paralyzed by gun violence warns of NRA's 'dangerous agenda'

How terrible! Did some NRA members shoot this poor boy, turning him into a mute quadriplegic? Those monsters!

Well no. The 13 year old young boy (now 18) in question, DeAndre Knox, was at a birthday party in Indianapolis. A fight broke out that his mother claims he was not a part of. As too often happens in DeAndre's community, the fight led to gunfire and DeAndre was struck and permanently disabled by a bullet. That is terrible and it happens far too regularly. But what does that have to do with the NRA?

Nothing. Not a damn thing.

So what is the point of the article headlined with a photo of DeAndre rolled out like a totem for the cameras? According to his mom, it is because of the "dangerous agenda" of the NRA.

Now, just days before the National Rifle Association holds its annual convention in Indianapolis, DeAndre's mother and other gun safety advocates say the NRA is pushing a "dangerous agenda" that has little to do with Second Amendment rights. 

DeAndre Knox's mother, DeAndra Yates-Dycus, is yet another useful mouthpiece for the gun control lobby to attack legal gun owners. I would bet all the money in my wallet that stopped on the street, DeAndra wouldn't be able to tell what the 2nd Amendment says, tell you within 50 years when it was ratified and couldn't offer a single concrete example of how the agenda of the NRA has "little to do with Second Amendment rights". The article quotes a different gun grabber talking about people going to the NRA annual meeting because they are "...interested in buying camping equipment". No one is going to the annual meeting because they are shopping for camping equipment. You have to be a member of the NRA in order to attend and people like me don't join the NRA because we want to attend meetings to browse camping gear. We join the NRA and other groups like the Gun Owners of America because we want representation in Washington to defend our 2nd Amendment rights.

Here is a little hard truth for DeAndra Yates-Dycus:

Her son was shot and is crippled for life and I feel for her but it has nothing to do with the NRA. If she and DeAndre lived in a neighborhood made up 100% of NRA members, they would have been as safe as they could be anywhere in America. DeAndre wasn't crippled by the NRA, the NRA's agenda or any NRA members. DeAndre was almost certainly shot by a young black man who lacked the self-control to respond to a fight at a birthday any other way than by getting a gun and randomly shooting into a house, where kids 13 years of age and probably even younger were in attendance, because he was angry.

Someone knows who shot DeAndre but he will never get justice because of the code of silence in the black community. Instead of railing against the people who actually shot DeAndre, with an illegal gun almost certainly, his mother uses him as a photo prop to push an anti-gun agenda, in the same way that Sarah Brady used to roll her crippled husband James out for photo ops. The only reason she is getting any attention right now is that the NRA is in Indianapolis. When the annual meeting ends in a couple of days, the gun grabbers will move on. Meanwhile her son will still be mute quadriplegic thanks to a bullet fired by another young black man. 

The NRA isn't her enemy. As a member of the NRA living in her state, I am also not her enemy and I pose no threat to her, her son or any other young black man that isn't trying to harm me first.

Shame on the Indianapolis Star for such a cynical and exploitative article.

Thursday, April 25, 2019

More Bug Out Bugaboos

I just ran across this guy, he seems a little hokey to me but I liked this video:

He makes some good points. The issue is that your home is your base of operations. If you are storing food in any sort of quantity, it is at your house. Your clothing is at your house. If you bug out and it is late summer, what happens when the weather turns? Oh, your warm clothing is at home. What about all of that ammo you have stockpiled? Ammunition is very heavy and can be pretty bulky. Spending hundreds or thousands of dollars in ammo isn't very smart if your plan is to abandon it. Then there are people to consider. Neighbors, friends, family. Are you going to take off and leave them behind? Maybe you will but that means you are colder than I am and I am not known for my warmth. There are people I care about besides myself, and even besides myself and my family. I want to be able to help those people and I think many of them can help us.

If you live somewhere you think you are likely to have to abandon, then you can assume that when you eventually do come back, your home will have been ransacked. Your neighbor Joe might be a great guy that lets you borrow his tools but if his family is hungry and you are long gone, you can bet he will break into your house and take what he needs. I would and so would you. Infinitely more so if Joe is some urban refugee that has fled for his life and stumbles across an unoccupied home. If you are starving, really starving, and you are out in the weather with inadequate shelter, you will do what it takes to survive. So all that stuff you saved up for any eventuality will be used by someone else or stolen to barter.

Maybe if you are a lone wolf, real solitary kind of person you can pick up your bug out bag and head to the hills. Otherwise you are probably fooling yourself. I maintain that you better bet right now today while things are reasonably stable is to bug out permanently. Today. Get away from the urban death traps and the suburbs that are in walking distance. Find a place where you can start to set up for some self-sufficiency, have a garden and raise a few chickens. Start making friends and at some point maybe have a conversation with them about what you can do for each other in case of a disaster. We have some Amish neighbors across the street that don't have a basement so if there is a tornado we can have them come shelter in ours. That sort of thing. Living a solitary, out in the woods by yourself, kind of life is no kind of way to live. If I am looking at years of eating wild berries and hiding in the forest until I die, I'll pass.

Wednesday, April 24, 2019

Nothing Is Free

Mark Dice has a nice takedown of generic old white lady/fierce Indian warrior Elizabeth Warren and her desperate gambit to get some momentum by promising to wipe out college debt.

Warren's obvious target audience here are the hordes of (mostly white) millennial college grads who took on six figure student loan debt to get degrees in the "History of Renaissance LBGTQ Architecture By Womyn Of Color" and now for some odd reason can't get a real job and therefore have no way to pay back an unsecured loan the size of a home mortgage that is enforced by the near unlimited debt collection ability of the Federal government. It is obvious pandering and that is really what the Democratic primary contest, early as it is, has turned into. Naked, raw pandering. Which candidate can promise the most "free" stuff. Andrew Yang proposes a $1000/month handout. Cory Booker proposes a lump sum for "disadvantaged", in other words non-white, young folks. Bernie promises free everything. So in order to cling to relevance, Warren is proposing not only "free" college but also magically wiping out the hundreds of billions in existing student loan debt. Of course that doesn't happen by actual Hogwarts magic (Debtus Obliterato!). The money was borrowed and the money was spent. Colleges aren't going to give it back. That means either the big lenders like Sallie Mae have to write off an incredible sum from their books, which I would assume would force them into insolvency and out of business, or the government will have to bail out these borrowers, tacking another trillion dollars onto the existing debt.

That sounds like a great idea!

In all seriousness, Warren and others promising "free college" and loan forgiveness are not dealing with the actual underlying problem. The problem is two-fold. First, kids with no business borrowing unlimited sums of money are given loans, no questions asked. Second, this spigot of easy loan money makes it possible for colleges to inflate their prices year after year, because no matter how high it goes, a kid can get loans to pay for it. The demand for college degrees is huge and the supply of loan money, backed by the Federal government's guarantee of repayment, is unlimited so there is no pressure on price.

The only way a student should be able to finance college via loans is to apply for a loan like anyone else. When I worked in banking, there were some things we looked for in a loan application. First, if you borrowed the money, are you likely to pay it back? That comes from your credit history because if you are responsible with credit in the past, you probably will also be in the future and the opposite is usually true, if you habitually are terrible about paying back loans in the past, chances are you will be the same in the future. Second, can you pay it back? It wasn't smart to loan someone money if the required payments were more than they made in a month or if they were already juggling a huge pile of debt (your debt to income ratio and your payment to income ratio). If you make $2000 a month and already have $1500 of that spoken for, I am not going to give you a loan with a $700 monthly payment. Finally, what happens if you don't pay back the debt? That is why we have loan appraisals and car valuations. If you want to buy a house worth $150,000, I am not going to give you a loan for $250,000 (or even $150,000) because if you don't pay and I get your house, I am not going to be able to sell it for enough to recoup my losses. So those are the big three factors.

The problem with student loans is that 1 and 3 are out the window. Most college students are young and don't have a long credit history to work from. Plus student loans usually have no collateral so if you don't pay my only recourse is to hound you for money, an expensive and usually less than fruitful practice. That only leaves the second factor, ability to repay.

When it comes to ability to repay, the lender should look at your course of study and how likely that is to lead to a career where you can service the debt. If you are majoring in electrical engineering or better yet actuarial science, you can almost certainly swing repaying a loan of almost any reasonable amount.

For example (and an opportunity to dad-brag). One of our daughters has always wanted to be a doctor. She is an undergrad now about to finish up her degree in biology and will graduate with distinction for her GPA. She recently took the Medical College Admissions Test and scored in the top 1% of all pre-med students taking the test, with a score well above the average score for Harvard's 2019 incoming medical school class. So she is essentially assured admission to almost any medical school in America. As a graduate of medical school and a practicing physician, depending on specialty, she will be pulling down a six figure salary and perhaps a very high six or even a seven figure salary. As a lender, giving her loans for $200,000 to pay for medical school is a pretty sound decision as she has a better than reasonable ability to pay it back.

Now, what if instead of medical school, she wanted to get a graduate degree in Classical Congolese Literature and it would also require a loan of $200,000. Why would a lender give her that loan? She already has limited credit history and no collateral and now you are adding in the likelihood that she won't get a job that would allow her to service that debt and likely never will be able to keep up with the minimum payments, much less ever pay it back in full. It makes absolutely no sense and no lender would ever give her a loan. Except that they do because the risk equation is all out of whack thanks to the government guaranteeing the loan.

When the government is guaranteeing a loan, it suddenly becomes smart to make bad loans. Why not make a bad loan if you don't have to deal with the consequences of it defaulting? That is the whole sub-prime mess in a nutshell. Banks made crappy loans to sketchy borrowers that they never would have normally because there was so little risk to the bank in doing so. Back in my banking days people were taking mortgages for huge amounts of money, some with payments that didn't even cover the monthly interest so just making your regular payment meant the loan balance was going up every month. This easy money meant that housing prices skyrocketed. Lots of available loan money meant that buyers could borrow more easily and that allowed them to stretch their offering price and pay more than they should. Housing prices went up, loan balances went up and the banks got rich making essentially risk-free loans. Then it all went to crap and people who never should have borrowed the money in the first place defaulted and lost their homes. Mortgage backed securities got hammered. The government had to come to the rescue with more make-believe money. Rinse. Repeat. You are going to see this happen again because the elected officials care more about pandering to unqualified buyers than they do about the impact on the economy. Why would they care when they can get the votes, blame the banks and not really feel the impact?

The same thing is happening in student loans. Artificial supply of loan funding has been causing artificial inflation of college expenses so even mediocre colleges offering useless degrees could raise their prices double digit percentages every year and still fill up the classrooms. The big difference is that when you default on a mortgage, at least the bank gets the house and can sell it, although usually at a steep loss. When you default on a student loan, there isn't an asset to seize so you just have to keep squeezing it from the borrower.

While I appreciate those that say that people took these loans of their own free will as adults, and they did, they never should have been approved for those loans in the first place, just like you wouldn't give an 18 year old with no credit history and no job a $25,000 unsecured loan. The government and financial institutions were making bad loans knowing they would fail. So the long-term solution is to stop subsidizing student loans. Again, if you want a loan you go to a lender and make your case. If you can't show how the education degree you are getting will lead to an income that enables you to pay off the loan, no loan for you. That would mean a lot less people getting useless four-year degrees and probably a lot of campuses shutting down and/or laying off staff and faculty. That is a good thing. There are already too many over-educated, overpaid college employees in America. Most people of average intelligence and ability should be learning a marketable skill and a degree in Communications is not a real skill. Nor are most liberal arts degrees. I would argue this is true even of most business degrees. Not that many people I worked with in financial services had business degrees and the ones that did were in no way better at their jobs than people like me with degrees in Political Science. If you want to study Renaissance literature, go to the dang library or use Google. There is no reason anyone needs to spend $125,000 and four years getting a degree in some esoteric field of study unless they can self-finance it.

That will never see the light of day because suggesting that means you are "anti-education" and everyone must slobber on themselves about how much they value "education" to get elected. The average voter has no idea what the word education really means but they do know that more education=good, less education=bad.

Some version of Elizabeth Warren's proposal will probably become law, if not after the 2020 elections then certainly after 2024. It is just one more nail in the coffin of America. We are going to find out pretty soon that when everything is free, it will suddenly become very expensive indeed.

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

Learning From The Past

This is a great video from Sensible Prepper....

Way too many people think that the solution to surviving in a SHTF situation is just the right gear. If I have just the right scope on my super customized AR and optimize the magazine placement on my plate carrier, I will be OK. I get the desire to have the neatest "tacti-cool" stuff. Right now this all seems very theoretical and having the coolest, latest gear gives you bragging rights. When things go sideways? If you lack basic skills and lack a support network, you will pretty quickly be a corpse wearing the most awesome 5.11 tactical gear and some looter will be sporting your awesome AR rig.

We can and should learn from the past. When SHTF, things are going to regress quickly. Things you have come to expect and rely on without thinking, like internet and "flip a switch, lights come on" reliable electricity are not going to be there. Nor will super cheap fuel for vehicles or homes. If you live somewhere really hot and the power grid goes down, how will you deal with that in August? Or if you live somewhere cold and the same happens, how will you survive January? What are you going to do if your coat starts to rip and you can't order a new one from Amazon or if you want to eat corn in the winter but the Wal-Marts are all closed?

This video is a great starting point to start thinking about what sort of old skills we have lost and what you should start to relearn as a family now.

Sunday, April 21, 2019

Is Our Society Worth Saving?

Sometimes I really wonder. Some days I think it is worth fighting for and some days I come down firmly on "nope".

I am having more "nope" days of late.

Stuff like this is why.

What the actual hell is going on here?

The phrase "start a family" has been in existence for a very long time. In less obscenely awful times, the normal course of life for normal people was that a man and woman would meet and decide to get married. At some point after the marriage the wife would get pregnant. Of course this wasn't always the case, infertility has been a problem forever. Some men can't get women pregnant and some women are just barren. But for most of human history in the Western world, "starting a family" was one of the key milestones of life.

Living in the middle of an Amish community we still see a lot of this. The Amish only attend school through 8th grade and then start to prepare for adulthood. High school aged boys learn from their fathers to do something useful, farming or carpentry or some other way to support a family. Girls the same age often take over many of the household chores from their mothers, although many also "work away" for a few years. Marriage is assumed, boys and girls don't start dating until they are 18 and when a boy asks a girl out for the first time, it is because at some point down the road they are thinking marriage. While some wait until later to date and some never get married, for most marriage and children is the reason for dating. They are not stumbling from one dating relationship to another until they finally meet "the one". They are seeking "the one" right off the bat and asking a girl out implies you strongly suspect she might be the one. Most Amish get married, get married fairly young, essentially never divorce, have kids early and often and are generally happy. It is not idylllic, there are plenty of serious issues in their community. The rules are baffling and most Amish don't understand them. Their lack of education can be off-putting and they can be incredibly naive and gullible. They are very stand-offish toward non-Amish and even Amish we have known for years are very private. A decent number of Amish weddings happen on Sunday, which is code for "girl got knocked up and they have to get married right away". Still, it is light-years better than trying to explain how a single woman with a cat or a couple with some houseplants qualifies as a "family:".

This is important. The saying "start a family" is not intended to denigrate anyone. It is just a simple phrase that indicates that a married couple is moving to the next natural stage, having children. Couples getting married and starting a family is how the species and the society is perpetuated. But a lot of people seem to really like this notion of redefining the word "family" to mean any sort of connection between people, or animals or even plants. I posted this short thread about her assertion:

I think those are solid points I made but when I tweeted this, her tweet had 91,000 likes. I checked a few hours later and it was up to 111,000 likes. I just checked again and it is at 149,000 likes and 36,000 retweets. Those are Trump level numbers. The childless late 30s cat ladies are chugging down box wine and creating fake twitter accounts just to like this tweet.

What makes this idea that family can mean anything you want resonate with so many people?

The answer is very complex but it is also very simple. Humans yearn for connections and no connection is stronger than family. We always understood this but some time in 20th century people who hated this idea started to gain ascendancy by infiltrating our cultural institutions: colleges and public schools, the entertainment world, the bureaucracy and "mainline" religious bodies. They started to denigrate the normal family structure, told women that they need a man like a fish needs a bicycle, urged women to find their identity in careers and "education" and to view marriage and child-rearing as onerous punishments that interfere with a happy and fulfilling life, instead of being the main driver of a happy and fulfilling life. Sex became disconnected from reproduction via birth control and abortion on demand, ceasing to be something one only engaged in within the bounds of marriage and turned into a recreational sport. Government, fueled by the tax dollars of men, began to replace those same men as the protector and provider of women and their children. Far too many men were all too happy to go along. Sex without responsibility, not even if it resulted in children? What a great deal for cads and scoundrels. In the early days of the sexual revolution the future seemed bright. Full "equality" between the sexes and all the humping you want, just for the taking.

Fast forward to the turn of the millennium.

More and more women are finding out that the pot of gold at the end of the sexual revolution's rainbow is a toilet bowl. Women have more "opportunity" than ever before. Women are in every professional field. They outnumber men in college, by some pretty wide margins at some schools. A woman came within around 80,000 votes of becoming President in 2016 and the odds are very good that a woman will be President or Vice-President in January of 2021. All of these things are supposed to make women happy.

But women are miserable.

You can see it in the workforce. You can see it on social media with the endless vacillating between empty gushing about how awesome things are to the passive-aggressive complaining. You can see it in stores as women try to fill the void in their lives with purchasing stuff and more stuff. You can see it in the way so many women, especially "professional women" are gulping down anti-depressants like Skittles, washed down with boxed wine. They were promised a utopia and instead things keep getting worse but for some reason they think that if they get just a little more "equality", they will suddenly break free into glorious womanhood and have it all. The dirty secret of the feminist pyramid scheme is that all feminism is accomplishing is spreading the misery of feminist "intellectuals" and cascading it down to normal women. It is trickle down misery, a handful of super homely early feminists looked with jealousy at normal women with happy home lives and decided to make those normal women as miserable as they are. Their plan seems to be working.

Lucy Huber, the author of that very popular tweet, is apparently 30 years old, not bad looking and reasonably intelligent. She has three cats and is engaged, and also has spent too much time pondering and writing about her own breasts. In more normal times she would be married already and have a couple of kids. She isn't unmarried right now because she is hideously ugly, it seems to be because she is incredibly neurotic and has bought into the mystery cult of feminism. I assume she wants a family but doesn't have one yet and that clock is ticking. Biology is pretty hard to defeat. You can freeze your eggs but you can't make yourself younger. Being up every other hour all night for night after night is a game for 23 year old women, not 43 year olds. So she copes for her lack of a family by redefining the very word. Now she and her fiance and her cats are a "family". A couple with a houseplant is a family. People sharing rent are a family. An infinite number of iterations of combinations of humans (or animals or even plants) all qualify as a family. Once you let loose the normal definition of a family, anything goes. The stranger sitting next to you on a bus says good morning? Now you are family! Looking at a row of potted geraniums at a nursery? Congrats, you and the geraniums are a family!

If we can't even agree that a family has certain parameters and that relationships outside of those parameters are not families, then we have lost the foundational structure of human society. We already have no identity as Americans other than people that happen to be within the borders of the United States. Without a real, meaningful definition of family we are all just a bunch of tax cattle and consumers, economic units that bounce from one relationship to another with each other (and animals and plants). That is no way to sustain a society. This is the way we are heading and it probably is time to admit that we need to burn it all down and start over, rebuilding from the ashes because what we have right now isn't worth saving.

Saturday, April 20, 2019

The Genius Of The Gun Grabbers

David Hogg is an opportunistic little liberal weasel that has parlayed the shooting of his classmates into a political career. Despite being a borderline imbecile and having crappy test scores, he was given a spot at Harvard. Side note, if you think going to Harvard indicates you are smarter than average, you aren't really paying attention. Somewhere in America, an actual really bright student is not going to Harvard because he lost his spot so Harvard could have a social justice mascot. David is trotted out like the court jester for the cameras to yammer about gun control even though he has never shot a real gun in his life.

Little Davey isn't content with spreading misinformation about guns. He decided to weigh in on a very short video clip that shows a cop pepper spraying a black guy in the face and then throwing him down. I am not sure what the context here is, there are two cops arresting a different black guy surrounded by a crowd of young folks. It looked pretty excessive but I wasn't there and I am always suspicious of videos that start well into an event. Anyway, this is the sort of logical, critical thinking you get from someone accepted to Harvard.

The gun-grabbing community wants to disarm the civilian population. They don't trust us with guns even though the vast majority of gun violence is restricted to a small percentage of the population using handguns they obtained illegally.

That means that the only people in the U.S. that would have guns are cops. But here is little Davey saying that "at most schools the police ARE the threat". So which is it? He wants the only people allowed to have guns being the very people he thinks are the real threat at schools. If cops are so dangerous, why not disarm them as well? Then the only people that would have guns would be criminals. That certainly sounds like it would be safer.

Hogg is unfortunately typical of younger Americans. Force fed a diet of politically correct "social justice" garbage their entire lives and taught to rely on their feelings instead of thinking critically, they can't see even one step beyond what they are saying. They are unwilling and unable to make the intellectual steps required to see the consequences of their proposals. "I see cop doing naughty thing, cops are the real threat!" even though a young black man is almost entirely in danger from other young black men rather than the cops.  But Davey lacks the intellectual maturity and ability to realize this or even to consider it.

Surrender even a few of your rights to imbeciles like David Hogg and the rest of your rights will quickly follow.

Friday, April 19, 2019

Bug Out Now

One of the main components in the arsenal of people convinced that things are going to collapse soon is the "bug out bag". Designed to hold enough essentials to keep you alive until you can get somewhere safer, some are relatively small while others are trekking backpack sized kits or even multiple huge plastic totes. First aid, food, fire making, spare clothing, water filtration, etc. are all common items in these bags.

That is all well and good. If I lived in a neighborhood where I was concerned about being vulnerable if (when) the wheels come off, having stuff ready to go makes some sense. But if you are serious and are convinced this is going to happen, I would suggest that you don't need a "bug out bag", you need to be bugging out permanently right now. I subscribe to Rule One from Ol' Remus at the Woodpile Report: stay away from crowds.

In the event the existing Cold Civil War turns hot, people in large urban areas are going to be stuck and that means urban areas will be death traps. In a large urban environment fuel and food supplies are going to run out quickly. All it takes is a few trucks being waylaid and the drivers given the Reginald Denny treatment for the deliveries to stop and when gas stations and small urban groceries start to run out it will cause a panic and a run on remaining stores and stations which will accelerate the process. If you are not familiar with Reginald Denny, this is what happened to him:

This was not happening during a mass nationwide civil unrest, this is just looting, rioting and mayhem after the Rodney King verdict. Imagine this sort of unrest, with an additional quarter century of endless reinforcement of resentment, resulting not from an unfavorable verdict but from general collapsing of society. Then multiply this by almost every major city in America. The 1992 riots in L.A. resulted in 52 deaths and over 2000 injuries. The National Guard and the Army and Marines were called out and over one billions dollars in damage resulted. Now if you are a guy driving a gas tanker truck and you see stuff like this happening to other truckers, maybe you don't drive into an urban area especially since you have to leave your truck to make your deliveries.

"But I live in the suburbs so I will be OK."


The suburban area my wife grew up in is a mostly very nice little city adjacent to a larger city. There are around 20,000 people in the town as of 2010. It is over 90% white, mostly ethnic Catholic working and middle class people. It should be fine, right? Well maybe not. Right across the border between her home town and the larger city is a housing project with a reputation for unsavory characters. All of the eastern part of the larger city is pretty sketchy, like make sure the doors are locked and you are aware of your surroundings even during the day sketchy. In other words the trouble in the urban area is in walking distance from the suburban area she grew up in. When all of the stores and gas stations are looted, you can be sure that the crowds will look east to the big box retailers and residential areas a few miles walk away.

But even if you are in a suburb like the one I grew up in on the opposite side of the same city, you are going to have issues. Where I grew up is not a reasonable walk from the main city and there is an intervening suburb. But many of the same problems are going to occur when the gas and grocery delivers stop.

The more urban the area, the worse it will be and the faster it will go sideways. No gas to get away and food running out. You are in trouble and your biggest trouble might come from the neighbor in the apartment next door. Your bug out bag won't help if things go crazy overnight and your car is on empty when you wake up and realize it is time to go.

The best thing you can do right now is create distance between you and trouble. Again quoting from Remus:

There's nothing in this kind of civil war for men of sound mind and good will. Rule One is your best guide: stay away from crowds. If you're in or near a city, especially the coastal urban complexes, plan and commit to self-evacuation. First out is best out.

"But my job is in City X!"

Get a different job.

The number of terrible decisions made by people based on their employment is really uncountable. I moved my family a bunch of times so I could make more money. Now I am out of the corporate world entirely with nothing but some serious health issues to show for it but my kids spent most of their early lives living out of boxes and preparing for the next move. In a world of telecommuting and millions of unfilled jobs, you can get a job anywhere. What value is there in a 401k plan and an health savings account when the economy collapses? I make substantially less right now than I did five years ago. I look at my old W-2s and am shocked by how much I was making but then I realize we are not living worse off now than when I made more money. We adjusted and life went on. We have a nice home on some acreage in the country. We have food on the table and live quite comfortably. You can make these changes. The only question is if you want to.

If you are single, you can throw it all in a decent backpack and walk away from your car but if you have a family, how far do you think you will get trying to walk away with a couple of small kids, your spouse and hundreds of pounds of gear? Not far enough to get to safety and certainly not far enough to get wherever you planned to bug out to in the first place.

It is all well and good to have the best bug out bag in the world, be wearing the dopest tactical clothing from 5.11 and have a super customized AR-15 but if you are sitting stuck in a car on a highway, running out of gas, too far from home to walk back and nowhere near safety, you are about to become a heavily armed, well dressed corpse and some looters will gladly take the contents of your bug out bag.

The best place to bug out to is where you already live, in a place where you are prepared to ride out the storm. The best time to bug out is right now.

Tuesday, April 16, 2019

The Land Of Look At Me

As all normal people were lamenting the burning of Notre Dame, far too many people saw it as an opportunity to bang the drum for their own pet causes. I don't have much to say right now about the actual fire but I would like to note the weird phenomena of people that can't even give others a moment to express their own feelings.

First Trump, a man incapable of not weighing in on any event, sent out a tweet expressing how horrible the fire was and then making the weird but harmless suggestion of using flying water tankers to put it out. That is pretty common in forest fires but wouldn't work here for a number of reasons. That didn't stop the court jester of "conservatism" from using the heart-wrenching events in Paris as his backdrop for making a dumb joke at the President's expense.

Oh, that is some comedic gold Ben! No wonder everyone thinks you are so clever when "owning the libs", code for "verbally defeating college kids". If a synagogue was on fire, I wonder if he would be amused at someone using that event as the setting for making a joke. He got ripped up and down for it so he deleted his tweet quickly but the internet remembers. So then he started tweeting conciliatory tweets about our "Judeo-Christian" heritage. That ruffled some other feathers so weasel Bill Kristol who still maintains he is the One True Savior of Conservatism replied back with this comment:

Nice that he put philosophy in snarky scare quotes. So as Notre Dame smolders, we have two Jewish guys arguing about the significance of one of the most significant Christian edifices in Western civilization in relation to centuries old religious conflicts between Christians and Jews. You can't make this up.

Others were gleeful about the "karma" of Notre Dame burning, some sort of cosmic retribution for French colonialism (that brought civilization to otherwise backward places). If so, karma isn't terribly timely as the French haven't been a colonial power for a long time and it sort of seems that they got their payback in World War I and II. I am not an expert on karma. Some even suggested that all of Europe was built by black people, a variation on the notion that white people in America just sat around on the porch while black people did all of the work and invention in the U.S.. Like for example self-proclaimed "thinker" Jamil Khan here:

I think he really believes that Africa was full of universities and libraries when European discovered Africa and that these raiders stole all of the knowledge and culture of Africa and appropriated it to create Western Civilization. Meanwhile, Africans apparently were unable to replicate what they had already created and have lagged far, far behind the rest of the world ever since. Also weird that the super advanced Africans were so easily conquered and colonized by the backward Europeans. A topic for another day perhaps.

Where this got really weird was in the "woke" church movement. Instead of Christians lamenting the horrible events which should grieve anyone claiming the name of Christ, some decided to instead take the opportunity to drone on about their own oppression. Duke Kwon is an Asian SJW "pastor" endlessly complaining about racial intolerance. The person he quotes, a black woman going by the handle of "dee2roe", real name apparently DeeDee Roe, is no one I had heard of before but she seems pretty angry.

As a note, the guy arrested was trying to impress a girl he met on Facebook that was a self-described satanist and he was into "black metal" so burning churches seemed to be his weird way of impressing her, like John Hinckley shooting Reagan to impress Jodie Foster. I guess that makes him a "white supremacist", unlike the black guy in Mississippi who burned his own church.

So some churches in Louisiana were burned and got some coverage in the US. A guy was arrested. Meanwhile a cultural icon with almost nine centuries of history is burning with worldwide live coverage. Notre Dame has been visited by tens or hundreds of millions of people, it is where Napoleon's coronation was held and he was married. Henry VI of England was crowned in Notre Dame. It has survived the French Revolution and two World Wars. It held many Catholic relics which, while not authentic in any sense, are still icons of great significance to Catholics and to European culture. But hey, take this opportunity to publicly bitch and moan. If I were a suspicious type I would suspect that the fact that Notre Dame was built in a European nation by European men was the real source of her anger. Duke seems to find this very profound.

Anyone who is a parent of more than one child has observed the behavior of children when another child is getting some attention and they aren't.

Older Brother Tommy: "Mommy, I got a gold star on my spelling test!"

Mother: "That is great Tommy, I am so proud of you!"

Little Sister Suzie: "Look at me mommy, I am standing on one foot!"

Mother: "Just a second sweetheart, Tommy is telling me about his spelling test"

Suzie (turning red): "Mommy, look at me! Look at me! LOOK AT ME!!!"

It is common behavior for kids and most of them outgrow it but obviously many adults never got past that point. A significant chunk of the loudest voices on social media feel that any attention paid to something other than their pet issue is a grave insult to them. Like spoiled children they assume that if you are paying attention to someone else, it is because you hate them. Also it suggests a callous disregard for what anyone else finds important. A 900 year old architectural monument, priceless and irreplaceable, isn't really on the same level of significance as a local church in Louisiana. 

Folks, it really is OK for people to mourn something that you don't care about. It doesn't mean your cause is being neglected. Can we all try to grow out of the pre-school mentality that demands constant attention and reinforcement?

Monday, April 15, 2019

Hate Crime? Nah.

I am sure you didn't see this news story because it doesn't advance the narrative:

Pregnant victim randomly attacked by group of teenagers speaks out

Why didn't you hear about a pregnant woman being assaulted on camera by teenagers in Quincy, Massachusetts? I will give you some quick visual clues, let's see if you can spot the reason:

Here are the teen assailants that were arrested, "Tyrese D. Johnson-Nurse, 19, and David D. Russell, 18". Tyrese has already mastered the head thrown back, "look at what a bad ass" mug shot pose. I am guessing this isn't his first time in front of a police camera.

And here is the victim, Leanne Hindy.

Hit the buzzer if you can guess why this isn't on the national news. Bonus points if you can guess how much wall to wall coverage it would get if the races were reversed.

These fine young gentlemen, who no doubt were on their way to work after volunteering at a nursing home and who had recently turned their lives around, are being held  "...on charges of aggravated assault and battery on a pregnant woman and assault and battery". If convicted you can expect them to spend a number of years in jail. Since the one charming young gentlemen said, in response to the screaming woman saying that she was pregnant, “I hope he dies” while kicking her in the stomach, it wouldn't be out of the question to charge him with attempted murder.

For a fun little game, imagine that the pregnant woman was black. Two white teens decided, apparently for no reason, to spit on her, beat the crap out of her and kick her in the stomach while saying they hoped her baby died.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be on the scene immediately, marching arm and arm with her family. Every Democrat would weigh in about how outraged they were. Trump would be blamed by one and all. There would be trending hashtags about justice. You can also be sure they would be at least investigated for committing a hate crime.

But in the real world where whites are overwhelmingly more likely to be the victims of violent crime perpetrated by blacks than vice versa, this won't be investigated as a hate crime. It will probably end up with a plea bargain and they will get a slap on the wrist. Unless the two black teens were wearing T-shirts saying "I hate crackers" and were caught on video saying "Ma'am we are attacking you strictly because you are white and we hate white people", there will be no suggestion of a hate crime because those laws are not really intended to punish people for committing crimes based on hate.

If you needed further evidence, this should be it. So-called hate crime laws are designed to be punitive and to enhance the punishment of white people involved in crimes against non-whites as a retributive measure to "balance the scales" for past injustices committed by others whites, both real and imagined. That is their only purpose. Who knows what the motivation of these two black teens really was. Would they have assaulted the pregnant woman if she was black? If this was a different state than Massachusetts with restrictive laws on firearms ownership and relatively low rates of concealed carry permits, would they have been so bold? If this happened to my wife, pregnant with my child and one of these thugs attacked her and kicked her in the stomach while expressing his desire to kill my child, I would have killed him right there in the street to protect my wife and unborn child. I guess criminals are more bold where the population is disarmed.

Stop imagining you are living in a country that operates under the rule of law. Everything is now tribal. For one tribe to win, another has to lose and everyone is playing by these rules except for one tribe, which happens to be the largest tribe and the ones responsible for the free society enjoyed by the other tribes. The government, the "education" system, the "entertainment" world, the legal system and very soon even the tax code, are all being weaponized to provide an official enforcement mechanism for this tribal warfare. "Muh Constitution" isn't going to save you. Trump isn't going to save you. Relying on basic human decency isn't going to save you.

We are all living in a clown world and you either adapt or you are going to end up on the train to a gulag.

Sunday, April 14, 2019

At Some Point They Will Punch Back

CBS, a television station that is apparently still on the air although I am not sure I have watched one of their shows in like a decade or more, has a show called "The Good Fight". No idea what it is about but their twitter account had a video up showing one of the characters giving a monologue where he seemed to be justifying attack people because they are "Nazis".

The show pulled the video or it was knocked down by Twitter because it pretty clearly is an incitement to violence. But this is the internet and the internet remembers. Here is just one account that reposted the video.

The guy narrating talks about Richard Spencer getting punched on TV and was outraged that Spencer had the audacity to be wearing a suit and talking calmly about his positions. That can't be allowed! "Some speech requires a more visceral response", in other words assaulting someone because you don't like what they are saying. "It's time to punch a few Nazis" he says.

I am sure many will defend it because it is just a dramatization from a TV show. First, those same people would freak out if you had a monologue of someone calling for the assault of sexual deviants in libraries grooming school kids even if it was just a TV show and they would immediately boycott the advertisers. Second, we don't live in a sane world where people understand the difference between fiction and reality. A lot of people, especially on the Left, form their worldview entirely through the lens of Harry Potter, Star Wars and comic book movies. They don't understand the difference between acting in a fictional setting and the real world. "What would Hermione do in this situation?" is a completely reasonable question for them when faced with a perplexing issue.

Richard Spencer is a clown, a cartoonish villain that is allowed to keep his platform, unlike Jared Taylor, because he serves a useful purpose. He looks like a d-bag and probably is in real life. He has a pretty tiny actual following, even on the alt-right, but has outsized influence because he serves as useful role as the token "fashy haircut bored rich kid who latched onto far right politics". He is a moustache twirl away from being the modern Snidely Whiplash.

But Spencer is a "Nazi" every bit as much as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a Communist. If I ran up to AOC and punched her in the head while she was peacefully talking to a reporter, first I would be a coward for hitting a woman and for sucker-punching anyone and then running away, but second I wouldn't get praised for it by mainstream conservatives. I would be universally condemned, and rightly so. I would go to jail if the police caught me in time or some lunatic fanboy of AOC would try to assassinate me to curry favor with her.

Punching Richard Spencer and running away is cowardly but it was safe because Spencer is a fop who wouldn't right back. It is the opposite of courageous "resistance" to attack people when there is no chance of retaliation. I am of the opinion that people should be afforded the right to speak as they wish, and in most cases those I consider political enemies do my side a great favor when they speak. I love it when they shove a camera in the face of Ocasio-Cortez or Ilhan Omar or Maxine Waters. All three of them are dolts who should never hold a job more significant than cart crew at a Wal-Mart but when they speak they make my case far better than I ever could. I can tell you Ilhan Omar is dumb as a bag of hammers but listening to her speak is far more convincing. I am also of the belief that if you do think it is necessary to get physically violent with someone, you should do so in a fair fight. Man to man, one on one. Attacking someone when they aren't looking or ganging up on someone when you have them outnumbered is a punk move. It is also something that will get you killed. Being attacked by 3-4 attackers, even if they are not "armed", is something I would consider a lethal threat to my life and I would respond accordingly.

Meanwhile, just yesterday some leftist lunatic was stalking a female conservative: Police Investigating ‘Bias Incident’ at South Seattle College After TPUSA President Stalked by Man in SUV.

“I was at our [TPUSA] recruiting booth when this man started vandalizing and then stealing our organization’s personal property,” said (Katie) Daviscourt to Breitbart News, “I asked him to give us back our signs, he gave it back, and I thought that was the end of it, but he kept coming back [to the TPUSA booth] to yell at us some more.”

The student added that the confrontation continued in the parking lot while she was walking to her car.

“When we left for the day, I didn’t know it, but he was waiting for me in his car,” said Daviscourt, “I could feel a car coming and I didn’t know it was him at first. It wasn’t until he passed me, and I realized it was the same guy from earlier. So I tried to get back to my car as fast as I could. Then, he tried again for a second time, I jumped out of the way and hid between cars.”

Daviscourt told Breitbart News that in that moment, she feared for her life, as she believed the man would try to strike her with his vehicle if she were to step out from in-between the cars.

“When I was hiding between the cars, at this point, I thought he was trying to kill me,” said Daviscourt, “So I tried to get a picture of his license plate, and then I called 911.”

This goes hand in glove with the sort of rhetoric that declares some political speech to be off-limits, needing to be policed and "enforced" by violence, or a "visceral response". This guy didn't like what TPUSA, a very mildly conservative group, stands for or at least what someone told him it stands for, so he decided to harass a girl and vandalize and steal her property to prevent her from exercising her right to free expression. Then he was stalking her in a car while she was on foot. People wonder why so many Americans choose to carry firearms and this is exactly why.

Starting late this year you will see the re-election campaign of Trump start to ramp up with public events. Even before he was elected supporters were assaulted on a regular basis by neo-Marxists and with four years of these same loons being force-fed a steady diet of hatred for Trump and anyone that voted for him, calling them Nazis and racists and every other name they can come up with, it is inevitable that the assaults will continue. This makes it highly likely that someone is going to get seriously hurt. In 2016 at a Trump rally in San Jose, many people were attacked by groups. A woman had eggs smashed on her. An elderly couple was knocked down. Bottles were thrown at people. People were hit from behind and chased by large groups, some were chased into parking garages and their cars were hit. Again, someone at some point is going to stop and make a stand and then someone is going to get killed.

People shouldn't have to fear political assembly because they might get assaulted and even seriously hurt and sooner or later it is going to turn lethal. Tools like Richard Spencer should be able to say what they want to say in public spaces without being assaulted by cowards, just like hate-filled ingrates like Ilhan Omar should be able to spew their nonsense. Inciting people to violence, even when you cloak it in  euphemistic language like "visceral response", will eventually get the violent reaction you are looking for. The people who thump their chests and talk about "punching Nazis" on social media always assume someone else will do the punching for them but when this raging anger finally gets let off the leash, they are going to find out quickly that being an internet tough guy isn't much protection when facing a real world person that has been backed into a corner.

Saturday, April 13, 2019

Behold The Magnificence...

...that is a shotgun made by the master craftsmen at Beretta.

Beretta has been making firearms for half of a millennium. They know what they are doing. No garbage nods to diversity or political pandering. Just master craftsmen at work, unmatched anywhere in the world.

Thursday, April 11, 2019

It's A Clown World And We Are All Just Living In It

A few days ago, the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee held super important "hearings" on the super dangerous rise of "white nationalism" and "hate". The committee hearings were led by the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Jerry Nadler, an obnoxious little goblin.

Anyway, to hear the people giving "testimony" tell it, there are hordes of "white nationalists" roaming the countryside, committing hate crimes and posting naughty memes of frogs and clowns, making the OK white supremacy hand gesture and drinking milk. So of course we needed to hold "hearings" and it absolutely was not a political stunt designed to taint Trump and to have a chilling effect on free speech. Just some good old fashioned whitey hating rhetoric.

Conspicuously absent from the hearing on "white nationalism"? White people.

Three black speakers. A Muslim. Several Jewish speakers, including a guy with Tourette Syndrome which promised to be entertaining but he held it in check. That guy was Mort Klein, the President of the Zionist Organization of America that exists for this reason:

"...the ZOA is dedicated to educating the public, elected officials, media, and college/high school students about the truth of the ongoing and relentless Arab/Islamic war against Israel. ZOA is also committed to promoting strong U.S.-Israel relations."

Mr. Klein's profile brags of his "...successful campaigns against anti-Israel bias in leading textbooks, travel guides, universities, churches, and the media, as well as his work on Capitol Hill...". Yes, a Jewish man is taking it upon himself to correct "anti-Israel bias" in Christian churches. Read that again.

A Jewish ethnonationalist testifying during hearings to warn about the dangers of other people being ethnonationalists. That seems like a perfectly reasonable activity for the United States Congress.

Imagine holding a hearing on black nationalism, which is more common than you might think, and only inviting white and Asian people to testify. Or a hearing on Zionism but having no Jews testifying with maybe Ilhan Omar chairing the session.

The whole thing was a tax-payer funded farce, an hours long screed against heritage America. You had an Asian guy accusing a black woman of being a Hitler-apologist for crying out loud and in response he got torched on live TV. It isn't so much that Ted Lieu used an out of context clip to try to smear the token (very mild) conservative in the hearing that is troubling. It is that everyone, including Candace Owen, knew someone would do that and she had a prepared response ready to go. He clearly thought he was going to score some sort of points but instead came across looking like a dimwit. Probably because he is a dimwit.

Anyway, the whole thing was ridiculous and meaningless for now but it certainly was a trial run for what you should expect from the Congress if one of the Dems wins in 2020. Since Trump seems hell-bent on ignoring his base, that is pretty likely. Our choices in 2020 will be someone who openly hates half of Americans or someone who doesn't but lied to us four years earlier. Some choice.

For fun, Ramzpaul on the hearings:

Wednesday, April 10, 2019

A Preview Of How Successful Gun Confiscation Measures Will Turn Out

"If I could’ve gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them — Mr. and Mrs. America turn ’em all in — I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here."
California Senator Dianne Feinstein in 1995, regarding the "assault weapons" ban, lamenting that she didn't have enough votes for outright confiscation. 
Democrats haven't gotten less radical over the last 20 years. The obvious end-goal is total confiscation. It was telling how glowingly they spoke of the New Zealand knee-jerk gun ban after the Christchurch shootings. Using "red flag" laws, assault weapons bans, new regulations on gun transfers, increased taxes, magazine capacity limitations, they are slowly trying to incrementally ban all guns. Meanwhile in red states like mine the opposite is happening as laws protecting gun owners become stronger and the availability of concealed carry gets easier. The patchwork of gun laws is pretty disparate and that is going to get worse, especially when states like mine (Indiana) border states with very restrictive gun laws like Illinois.

Recently a ban went into effect for "bump stocks". Most people had never heard of them, I am a lifelong gun owner and enthusiast and I had never heard of them. Bump stocks use the recoil of a firearm to pull the trigger, which makes the gun fire more rapidly and less accurately. They suddenly hit the radar after the 2017 Las Vegas shootings (still no motive announced, weird huh?) and inexplicably Trump decided to ban them. The ban went into effect last month and owners were required to destroy or turn in all bump stocks or face a possible ten years in prison.

So how did that work out?

According to this story, BSTD BUMP-FIRE BAN COMPLIANCE RATE, not so great. The writer estimates between a quarter million and half a million bump stocks exist in the U.S. and he estimates that less than 1,000 were turned over or destroyed. That would be less than one-quarter of one percent compliance. It isn't as though sheriffs are knocking on doors looking for them and there is no tracking mechanism for them. I guess if you get caught with one while committing a crime, it would add to your sentence and people probably won't use them at public gun ranges but otherwise the net result is negligible.

Bump-stocks are gimmicks, toys really. I can't imagine why you would have one other than just for the sheer amusement of blazing through a 30 round magazine in a few seconds. In almost any scenario I can imagine, I would be just as well off rapidly squeezing off those 30 rounds with a little bit of aiming instead of the "spray and pray" model. Plus I can't really afford to blaze away money like that, I would rather use my ammo for serious practice.

This ban was really just a trial run. What happens when the government tries to ban a firearm component that few people understand and that has such a negative public image? The dismal response rate no doubt irritates people like Feinstein. It won't discourage them from pushing for more and more regulations to get closer to outright banning of all firearms and forcible confiscation to enforce the bans. If Trump loses in 2020 you can be sure the clamor to ban more and more guns will be deafening. Like I said, Democrats have not become less radical since the Clinton "assault weapons" ban. The presence of hundreds of millions of guns in the hands of regular Americans is the single greatest impediment to the Left imposing their desired agenda on America.

Fortunately, gun owners are also far more radical now than they were back then. More of us realize this is not a game and that they won't be satisfied with "assault weapons". They want them all. When the Clinton assault weapons ban was in force, sales of guns like Mini-14s were brisk as were pre-existing 30 round mags but everything was pretty expensive. Since the end of the ban, sales of AR-15 and other semi-auto scary looking platforms have skyrocketed, both as a precaution against a future ban and because they are much cheaper. You can get a Ruger or Smith and Wesson AR for under $600 (I saw a special for an optics ready Ruger AR this morning for under $500!). You can buy a build kit and get a basic AR for even less. 30 round magazines are ubiquitous and cheap, a 30 round PMAG goes for under $13. You have a wide selection of solidly built semi-automatic handguns for under $300. I don't think even gun obsessed leftists like Senator Feinstein understand the sheer volume of firearms and ammunition flowing into the hands of the population. When they try to force confiscation, you are going to see a lot of law enforcement flat out refusing to cooperate and tens of millions of law abiding Americans refusing to comply. The only option will be for Feds to kick in doors and I can assure you that will result in a lot of dead civilians and a lot of dead Feds. Ruby Ridge and Waco are going to happen on a daily basis all across the country and that will lead to serious civil unrest.

Perhaps Trump will pull out a win in 2020, but it looks unlikely unless he starts to focus more on what he ran on and won on (immigration controls, securing the border, getting us out of foreign entanglements) and less on other stuff, like Israel. But if he does lose, that means the clock is running right now. I figure you have until October of 2020 before you start to see shortages in ammunition and major price run-ups and shortages in firearms. With useless cucks like Lisa Murkowski and Mitt Romney in the "Republican" Senate majority, a President Kamala Harris will have no trouble pushing through draconian gun legislation. You should be budgeting accordingly. You can buy canned foods and other survival preps for the foreseeable future but the window on firearms and ammo is probably closing soon. Sadly I don't have any firearms or ammo personally, having lost them all in a series of tragic boating accidents.

Tuesday, April 9, 2019

Beto Thinks We Allow People To Farm

Robert Francis "Beto" O'Rourke, a man-child that flails around when he is talking like a 7 year old girl on a Mountain Dew rush, has decreed that farmers should grow cover crops to do their "fair share" to combat "climate change" (words in red my modification). 

If we allow farmers to earn a profit in what they grow, if we allow them to contribute their fair share in combatting Climate Change by growing cover crops, allowing the technologies that invest in precision tilling and farming, capturing more of that carbon out of the air is another way in which they can make a profit. Keep those farms together, pass them on to the next generation, and allow them to provide us our food and national security, our independence from the rest of the world, our ability to provide for the rest of the world.

This is pretty obviously a set of talking points written for him because he has no idea what he is talking about. He sounds like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez talking about like our crops and stuff and like the grains, you know, um, like cow grains that the, um, like cows eat from those, like you know, troughs and stuff. When she says big words like "regenerative agriculture", it is clear she has no idea what that means and has never seen an actual working farm. Likewise Beto couldn't name a single cover crop or explain what a cover crop is without cheatsheets from his handlers.

The thing is, farmers already plant tons of cover crops right now. Not because they are "allowed" to but because it is good stewardship. Cover crops help with soil erosion and keeping the topsoil in place means better yields. They also help with run-off of fertilizer and manure. We live in farm country and we also live in the Maumee River watershed, on the opposite end from where my wife and I grew up at the terminus of the Maumee into Lake Erie. What goes in the drainage ditches around here ends up in the Maumee and in Lake Erie. We know this and that is why many farmers around here already engage in sound soil and water conservation practices. Farmers have been talking about this stuff for decades, back when "Beto" was frying his brain with drugs. The last thing farmers need are people like "Beto" and AOC that don't know anything about agriculture or soil conservation (or really any topic) telling them what they should or shouldn't do.

What I thought was more interesting, other than his obvious ignorance and frenetic flailing around, was the word he kept using: allow. It certainly sounds like "Beto" thinks that having a business and making a profit from that business is a privilege that the government allows you to engage in. It gets back to what I think was one of the central differences between liberals and conservative, back when there actually were differences between liberals and conservatives. Liberals see everything you produce and earn as belonging to the state and what is left over after taxes is what they decided you can have. Conservatives see everything you earn and produce as belonging to you minus whatever you pay in taxes. For "Beto", it certainly sounds like he thinks the Soviet farm collectives are the way to go.
Commissar Beto says grow glorious socialist cover crops to
 thwart the imperialist capitalist running dogs.
The government doesn't "allow" people to make a living, invest in their businesses, make decisions for their families. In general the government is a huge impediment to those things. American farmers feed this country and a big chunk of the rest of the world. We don't "allow" them to farm, we depend on them to farm because otherwise we all starve.

In the early 90s when the Soviet Union collapsed, it seemed for a short time that global Marxism would die with it. As the Iron Curtain fell and we saw what a humanitarian disaster Communism turned out to be, you could be forgiven for thinking that we would never make that mistake again. But here we are in 2019 and the wannabe Politburo members are still trying to push for the same disastrous policies that set Russia and Eastern Europe back half a century (which is why Eastern Europe is disinterested in being flooded with "migrants"). Their rhetoric has shifted a little, away from class warfare to identity politics, from economic Marxism to cultural Marxism, but the totalitarian goals are still the same and they still use the same useful idiots like "Beto" and AOC to push their agenda. 

We will never defeat Marxism by winning the argument of ideas because this is a religion to them and they are violent fundamentalists. You cannot defeat jihadi by reason and logic. You can only defeat them the old fashioned way.