‘A society of emasculated liars is easy to control’

Some of our fellow humans are hysterically celebrating  Hillary Clinton as “one of America’s most honest politicians” and a “world first” as a “transgender man gives birth to his own baby.”

Of course, Hillary is no such thing, and a female got impregnated by male sperm in the usual way. But all this lying is by design. Leftists have conditioned people to believe anything, and then tell all their friends. The goal is humiliation, because, as Theodore Dalrymple said, “A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.”


Dear ‘not the media.’ Please stop calling us ‘gun owners.’ There is no such thing.

To: “Not the media” generally, and Paul Farhi of the Washington Post specifically

From: A.G. Wallace

Subject: “Gun owners.”

Folks, I know a lot of you don’t like the people who have chosen to own guns. I’m aware you think we’re anti-government theocrats who don’t like firefighters, roads, or libraries (yes, I see your tweets, editorials, and articles, on this topic — thousands of them). Of course, I disagree with you. I know a lot of fine people who own guns. But that’s not why I’m writing.

I’m writing because I have a request: Please stop calling us “gun owners.”

Fact is, there really is no such thing as “the gun owner.” It’s an invention, a tool, an all-purpose smear by people who can’t be bothered to make distinctions.

There are hunters, plinkers, target shooters, skeet and trap shooters, competition shooters, collectors, LEO’s, secret service, active duty military, national guard, long range shooters, short range shooters, indoor and outdoor shooters, cowboy shooters, criminals, bank robbers, gang bangers, contract killers, and mobsters (hey, criminals need roads, too) who use handguns, rifles, shotguns, semi-auto, bolt-action, lever-action, single-shot, tube-fed, black powder, rimfire, centerfire, 9mm, .38, .40, .45, .223, .308, 30-06, 410, 20 gauge, 12 gauge, and a whole lot more that won’t fit here.

All of these, collectively, now constitute “gun owners.”

We are millions of people making hundreds of millions of individual decisions about how we perceive the world and how to characterize it. We all don’t agree on what type of firearm is best, what caliber, or when to use it.

So even if a story in the Washington Post about a mass shooting infuriated you and your editor told you to join the pack in writing about it with the same exact talking points as every other journalist, “gun owners” aren’t responsible for that shooting. Their guns aren’t responsible, either. Nor is Smith & Wesson, Winchester, Benelli, Beretta, Browning, Savage, or Colt. Nor is NRA or NAGR or Gun Owners of America, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, or Safari Club International.

Lumping these disparate entities under the same single bland label is like describing the pack journalists of the newsroom as “the media.” It’s true, but effectively meaningless.

We not only don’t agree from organization to organization, or gun show to gun show, but we don’t agree within our own households. The political arm of the NRA isn’t the editorial side of Shooting Times. Gun bloggers aren’t the Civilian Marksmanship Program. None of these people alone reflects the definitive, collective judgment of Gun Owners.

It’s true that many people – including those in “the media” – say they mistrust “gun owners” and hold us in roughly the same contempt as Vladimir Putin, Colombian drug cartels, or the “gun lobby.”

But I suspect that people don’t really dislike us as much as they say they do. After all, we are the producers that make America function. We buy newspapers and watch TV news (less and less these days, thanks in part to your incessant lying about “gun owners”), we are truck drivers and supermarket workers, school teachers and janitors, white collar and blue collar workers, entrepreneurs and wage earners. Everything we produce is consumed gratefully. People actually like and trust the products they’ve selected for themselves, which is why they keep coming back to our businesses day after day.

And yes, many people say us “gun owners” are biased conservatives. I suppose it would seem that way since liberal politicians and their supporters (including “the media”) have been saying it for decades. Surely, some of us do display a tendency to favor the conservative position. But these are anecdotes. And like all anecdotal “evidence,” they are subject to confirmation bias – the tendency to look for things that reinforce one’s worldview, thus creating a perpetual-motion machine of self-righteousness.

In closing, a word of advice: The next time you’re tempted to grumble about “gun owners” for some perceived trespass against The Truth, subject your grievance to the 27 words that we all learned about back in grade school. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The right. Of the people. To keep and bear arms. Shall not be infringed. Who wrote these words? Where did they write them? Why did they write them? And so on. (Astoundingly enough, the “why” is both the easiest part of the equation and the part that “the media” seems unable to grasp.)

You’ll discover that your complaint is specific to a single violent act of an individual, not generally inclusive of “gun owners.” You’ll discover, too, that calling out “gun owners” makes about as much sense as calling out “people.” Some are violent, some aren’t. But they’re not all the same. It pays to know which is which.



The Frivolous Power of Kings

“You are part of my dominion, and the ground that I am seated upon is mine, nor has anyone disobeyed my orders with impunity. Therefore, I order you not to rise onto my land, nor to wet the clothes or body of your Lord.” – King Canute, to the ocean, as chronicled by Henry of Huntingdon in AD 1129.

It is unclear, as I write this in AD 2016, how many know the story of Canute or what happened next: “But the sea carried on rising as usual without any reverence for his person, and soaked his feet and legs.”

One might be forgiven for thinking that humans have learned something about the quality of their leaders since 1129. But kings still walk among us, as do their followers.

“This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal.” – Barack Obama, to the oceans, after winning the Democratic primaries in AD 2008.

Although Canute did not make his pronouncement in a stadium of screaming fans far from the sea, the primary difference between the two men is not that Canute confronted his opponent. But Canute did command “with the greatest vigor” that his throne “should be set on the shore when the tide began to rise.” And, seated upon that throne, “he spoke to the rising sea.”

Nor can the difference between the two men be estimated by the caliber of their followers. Canute’s men were snickering at him from the beach, while Obama’s followers were cheering deliriously, and writing profusely about the “Lightworker.”

San Francisco columnist Mark Morford, who chronicled the rise of His Holiness Barack I in AD 2008, was prescient enough not to name for posterity the “deeply spiritual” people – “not coweringly religious, mind you” – who identified Obama as “that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment.”

The biggest difference between Canute and Barack is what they did after the sea proved them wrong. Canute is not remembered for his response, and it would be hubris on my part to say that Obama will be remembered for his. But the two men reacted very differently.

King Canute walked out of the sea and delivered his real message: “All the inhabitants of the world should know that the power of kings is vain and trivial, and that none is worthy the name of king but He whose command the heaven, earth and sea obey by eternal laws.”

Barack, on the other hand, doubled down. Not satisfied with his vain war against the oceans, he declared war on war itself. Speaking in AD 2013 at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C., he said, “This war, like all wars, must end. That’s what history advises. That’s what our democracy demands.”

War responded by declaring a new Caliphate – dedicated to the utter destruction of the West – in AD 2014.


Fifty Ways to Dick Your Bimbos

“The problem is all inside your pants”, she said to me
The answer is easy if you’re emotionally
A faithless sex addict like you appear to be
There must be fifty ways to dick your bimbos

She said it really is my habit to be crude
I hope you’ll respond to me by being very lewd
And I’ll repeat myself to ensure that I get screwed
There must be fifty ways to dick your bimbos
Fifty ways to dick your bimbos

Just slip in the back, Jack
Cop a new thrill, Bill
You don’t need a sex toy, Roy
Just yank yourself free
Get on a train, Blaine
Don’t refrain or be vain
Just drop to your knees, Lee
And yank yourself free

She said it pleases me to see you in such pain
I’m glad my bimbos have made you smile again
I said Hillary appreciates that and would you procure again
You know, another fifty bimbos

She said no problem I’ll be back again tonight
And I believe that in the morning my fifty ways will be too slight
And then she untied me and I realized she probably was right
There are more than fifty ways to dick your bimbos
Fifty ways to dick your bimbos

Just slip in the back, Jack
Cop a new thrill, Bill
You don’t need a sex toy, Roy
Just yank yourself free
Get on a train, Blaine
Don’t refrain or be vain
Just drop to your knees, Lee
And yank yourself free


Can I get some muscle over here?

Re the faculty response to the University of Chicago “safe spaces” letter.

Dear professors,

First, can I get some muscle over here? Because the free speech of Leftists stampeding toward their safe spaces can never be legitimately interrupted by concrete pressures of the political.

Second, noted domestic-terrorist-turned-educator Bill Ayers approvingly uses the term “participatory democracy” to describe Venezuela, so if that’s the kind of society you want we’ll see each other across the barricades.

Third, in Newspeak “more discussion, not less” means “shut up” and “openness, not closure” means “did you hear me I told you to shut up you ugly fascist.”

Finally, I understand you want to appear inclusive, but we know that “learning from a wealth of histories and experiences” means “the experiences of Milo Yiannopolous and Hirsi Ali are triggering so we’ll ban them from campus and if that doesn’t work we’ll harass and threaten them loudly and fearlessly.”

Yeah, students have every right to speak up. But when universities allow large numbers of revolutionary young people to become courageous and daring pathbreakers, professors become harassed elderly intellectuals who have one opportunity to turn over a new leaf before being exposed, refuted, and completely discredited.

The New Mangled Banner

O yes you can see, by your phone’s eerie light,
As so glibly we bailed on our nation’s redeeming,
Whose broad shoulders and scars in the abortive fight,
O’er TV we watched, are so valiantly heaving!
And the athletes’ red stares, their scorn lusting for air,
Gives proof in the night that our flag is not there;
But yea does that new mangled banner yet wave
O’er the land of zombies and the home of the slave!

And the slut richly dressed in her garb of the street,
Takes the place of the lady whose robes she despises.
What’s that which the breeze, from new towers doth creep,
As it slithers and slinks, conceals, deodorizes?
Now it catches the stench of the nightfall’s first watch,
In all awful glory, the brine, the biatch;
‘Tis the new mangled banner, O! ever deranged
O’er the land of zombies and the home of the slave!

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the rights we adore and the good not illusion,
A home and a country, should leave us no more?
Their blood still runs red, their hearts beat in fusion,
No zombie, no whore, can dispense with that place,
No terror, no blight, not the gloom of the grave,
While the new mangled banner in disgrace shall be waved,
O’er the land of zombies and the home of the slave!

O thus be it ever, when free men do stand
Between loved ones and homes and cultural desolation.
Damned with purpose and spine for a more perfect land
Praise the Power that gave us the just revelation!
So conquer we will, o’er zombies and whores,
And this be our motto: ‘In God we trust more.’
And a new spangled banner once more shall be waved,
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

An ode to CO2

is there nothing it can’t do
photosynthesis and warming
flora fauna reconforming
judeO2 suborning
calamity construe
remorseful rehabilitation
militia green creation
taxpayer ass dilation
from paris to peru
blarney baal conforming
artificial brain rewarding
scientifical denorming
synthetic peer review
milspec creation complex
ngo citation redux
tax is tithing says my cortex
constipation or i’ll sue
politician duty grifting
little people spit obeying
hammer down to earth relaying
sickle government renew
there is nothing it can’t do


Bill Ayers Lied, Students Died

In 2006, American domestic-terrorist-turned-education-professor Bill Ayers said this: “Venezuela is poised to offer the world a new model of education – a humanizing and revolutionary model whose twin missions are enlightenment and liberation. This World Education Forum provides us a unique opportunity to develop and share the lessons and challenges of this profound educational project that is the Bolivarian [Communist] Revolution.”

Almost exactly 10 years later, a spokeswoman for Venezuela’s Movement of Organized Parents said this: “This country has abandoned its children. By the time we see the full consequences, there will be no way to put it right.”

What has happened to Venezuela is criminally insane, and anyone who believes anything Bill Ayers says or writes should be morally ashamed to the brink of suicide. His books on American education have been in print for decades, and Teachers College Press says he has been “inspiring” teachers nationwide “to follow their own path” and that his books are “essential reading amidst today’s public policy debates and school reform initiatives that stress the importance of ‘good teaching.'”

“Good teaching”? The kind that Ayers said would liberate and enlighten Venezuelan children? The reality could not be more different.

An Associated Press article from June 2016 puts it this way: “No food, no teachers, violence in failing Venezuela schools. … In reality, Venezuelan children have missed an average of 40 percent of class time, a parent group estimates, as a third of teachers skip work on any given day to wait in food lines. At Maria’s school, so many students have fainted from hunger that administrators told parents to keep their children home if they have no food. And while the school locks its gate each morning, armed robbers, often teens themselves, still manage to break in and stick up kids between classes.”


The Most Progressive Man

The official AFL-CIO response to the Orlando terrorist attack is a wonder of cowardly doublespeak masquerading as profundity. Since it’s unlikely that anyone else will do it, I offer my fisking services to the “American community.”

Dear AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Elizabeth Shuler and AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Tefere Gebre: You begin your statement with, “Bayard Rustin said to be afraid is to behave as if the truth were not true.” So why does the AFL-CIO behave as if it was not a radical Islamic terrorist in that Orlando nightclub? No, not all Muslims are terrorists (no one really says that except you when you’re falsely attacking someone) but virtually all terrorists are Muslim. That is a terrible truth, but the sooner everyone behaves truthfully about it – especially the moderate Muslim community, because they have the most to lose – the sooner we can deal with it.

“We in the labor movement are not afraid.” You’re afraid to speak the truth about Omar the dead Orlando terrorist. I’m terribly sorry to break it to you, but that means the labor movement is afraid of radical Islamic terrorism. But I understand. I’m afraid of it too. So is most of the world. But being a craven liar won’t keep you safe from it, so man up. (Sorry for that gender micro-aggression, but you really do need to get some cojones.)

“We are resolved to do everything in our power to make sure this never happens again.” What, exactly, is “this” that you resolve to fight? You call it an “attack” or an “act of violence.” If you plan on fighting all violent attacks, it’s useful to name the attackers and their motive. In this case, the attacker himself told authorities what his motive was, so you really have no excuse. I know you want to sound like Winston Churchill giving his “We Shall Fight on the Beaches” speech, but you can’t do that without naming the Germans.

“The truth as we know it is both devastating and infuriating. Forty-nine souls were lost in a cowardly act of violence.” Since you’re in the business of relative “truths” can you please explain why “the truth as you know it” is more valid than “the truth as Omar knew it”? Which of those truths is true, and who is really afraid to act on it? (I hope you’re not saying that the more furious you are the more truth you tell, because Omar seemed much more infuriated than you.)

“For the LGBTQ community, clubs like Pulse are a space where people can feel safe and be their true selves.” Leaving aside Omar’s terrorist intent to kill people because they were being their “true selves,” no one can deny the objective truth that the Pulse club was NOT a safe space. (You keep using the word “true” as if it means one particular objective thing. Who do you think you’re kidding?)

“Sunday’s horrific act is a reminder of how fragile that safety can be.” I agree, so why do you want to limit the ways that people can protect their fragile safety? Why not say you want to arm the gay community with the means to defend themselves? Oh. I get it. Because that actually is the American Way, and you actually hate America.

“While we have made undeniable progress toward equality, too many in our country still face derision, discrimination and violence.” You are not afraid to name those undeniable evils. Why are you afraid to name the undeniable evil that drove Omar to kill those innocent gay people? After all, Omar did interrupt his killing to call 911 and pledge allegiance to ISIS. I really hope you’re not saying that “It depends on what the meaning of ISIS is” because that would really piss off ISIS. They absolutely hate it when we quibble about their genocidal intent.

“These flames of hatred have been fanned by those in public life who want to marginalize an entire group of people for political gain.” Some people do want to marginalize entire groups. For instance, labor unions want to marginalize Republicans, and Republicans want to marginalize labor unions. But ISIS wants to exterminate as many gay people from the planet as possible while they establish a worldwide Caliphate. Apparently, “gay genocide” is too nuanced for you to understand, so you instinctively revert to the lie that Omar was a “coward.” I’m not sure what dictionary you’re using, but “cowards” don’t intentionally arm themselves with “military-style” weapons, declare allegiance to ISIS, and then murder 49 gay people because they’re gay, all the while knowing they’ll be gunned down by the cops. I think the phrase you’re looking for is “radical Islamic terrorist.”

“It’s despicable and it must stop.” Since your official statement refuses to name ISIS, can you specifically identify which groups are being so despicable that we must stop them? Don’t tell me. You mean Republicans and Christians and probably White Privileged People, and everyone knows it’s okay to marginalize those entire groups of people. Silly me.

“But this was more than just an attack on the LGBTQ community. The victims were overwhelmingly young and Latino.” You can’t possibly mean that being young AND gay AND Latino is somehow more valuable than just being gay. But yes, I think you really do mean that, because you’ve been dividing people into subgroups for so long that the 57 “genders” won’t be enough for you next year. And I know I’m getting ahead of myself, but what is that bullshit about embracing our “common humanity” in the last paragraph? Do you ever get tired of lying?

“Sunday’s massacre was an assault on everything our movement stands for: equality, justice, solidarity and inclusion.” See the previous paragraph, and explain to me why – if “equality” is so important to you – it is also so important to note that “the victims were overwhelmingly young and Latino.” I’m guessing it just wasn’t enough to note their “common humanity.”

“It was also an extraordinarily difficult situation for our first responders, who had the traumatic job of sorting the dead from the living, effectively working in a war zone. We thank the police, firefighters and health care providers who saved lives and continue to care for the injured. We will stand with them in the trying days ahead.” I really hope you’re saying that Labor will stop calling the cops racist murderers, because – as you point out so well – they really do have a difficult job in all the inner city “war zones” the Democrat Left has created. Unfortunately, that’s just me wishing the truth were not true. (I’m beginning to see why the Left thinks the whole “truth” thing is pretty damned inconvenient except when you’re naming documentaries after it.)

“Labor is one big family, made up of people of all races, religions, genders, sexual orientations and gender identities. As a family, we will work to provide comfort to our brothers and sisters in Orlando and across the United States. And we will make it our daily mission to ensure America’s workplaces and union halls are safe and free from bigotry.” If that’s true – sorry, “your truth” – then you might consider adding mosques to your list, because President Obama is inviting more and more “Omars” into the country every day, and they’re not assimilating very well. If you could bring Muslim refugees into the big American family I think everyone would truly appreciate it. Oh, who the fuck am I kidding? You don’t want them to be Americans. You want them to be union members first and Democrats second. Unfortunately for everyone, your Western ideas about the Labor Movement and Democracy can only be shared by people who assimilate into Western Civilization. Yeah, I know: that’s too inconvenient to worry about. Forget I mentioned it.

“There will be some who try to use this tragedy to further divide us, to pit communities against each other and scapegoat entire faith traditions.” See paragraph 1, because this sounds suspiciously like you’re behaving as if the truth were not true. The truth is that Progressives have divided America into innumerable “communities” and “multicultural groups.” The “White Privilege” and “Black Lives Matter” movements pit whites against blacks, and race relations are worse today than at any time in the last 50 years. I could go on, but you’re smarter than Lincoln and you know that “unity” can never be realized until you stop behaving like a house divided against itself can still stand.

“Let us be perfectly clear: giving in to division and fear will only add insult to injury. This is a moment for us to come together, embrace our common humanity and take the necessary steps to make our country safer, stronger and more united.” See previous paragraph, and tell me why “your truth” on these subjects is any more valid than “my truth” or “Omar’s truth.” Rest assured: truth does exist, and it doesn’t give a shit about your version or my version. It just is, and the sooner you realize that the sooner we can start building a more perfect union.

And, just to be perfectly clear – since I did link to Barack Obama’s 2008 speech – you had a chance back then to bring America closer to that perfect union, but you fucked it up, everyone knows you fucked it up, and you keep fucking it up with statements like this one on Orlando.

Of course, everyone also knows Progressives don’t believe in turning  back. So I’ll rub salt into the would by quoting C.S. Lewis from Mere Christianity (aka “the religion of hate”).

“Progress means getting nearer to the place you want to be. And if you have taken a wrong turning, then to go forward does not get you any nearer. If you are on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; and in that case the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive man.”


Suppressing Unwanted Memories by Executive Control

There’s failing to learn lessons from the distant past, and then there’s the politically-motivated forgetting of lessons you learned during your own f*ing presidency. Psychologists have a name for this: “Suppressing Unwanted Memories by Executive Control.”

Apparently, Freud said that people can block an unpleasant memory – but that it’s still in there somewhere and has consequences even though they don’t know why.

That theory has been expanded by modern science, which has found a “biological mechanism in the human brain to block unwanted memories … a clear neurobiological basis for motivated forgetting.”

Researchers at Stanford University and the University of Oregon found that controlling unwanted memories is “associated with increased activation of the left and right frontal cortex (the part of the brain used to repress memory), which in turn led to reduced activation of the hippocampus (the part of the brain used to remember experiences). In addition, the researchers found that the more subjects activated their frontal cortex during the experiment, the better they were at suppressing unwanted memories.”

People used to say that Obama is the “smartest president in history.” I think we finally have solid proof of that fact. His frontal cortex is working overtime to oppress his hippocampus.