ihateamericans

‘I love America. It’s Americans I hate.’

This is an abridged version of how it’s been during my lifetime. First it was “I love Soviet communes so let’s bring them to America.” Then it was “American individualism hates superior communism so I hate America.” Then for a long time it was “I hate the troops and America and ugly Americans.” Then for a shorter time it was “I support the troops but not the war.” Then for about a year it was “I was never proud of America until now.” Then for one week it was “America has always been great” which became “Russia is evil and America has always been great.” Now it’s “I love America but hate Americans.” (See The Week.)

Underneath the disingenuous self-serving flip-flopping, the inconvenient truth is that human-nature deniers have always hated the Founding Fathers, the Republic, the Electoral College, the Separation of Powers, America herself, and the free markets which built her. And they’ve always wanted the “pure democracy” promised to the worker-peasant alliance by the “democratically-elected soviet councils.” These days they call it “democratic socialism.”

The rest of us, who have never flip-flopped on America, know that socialism leads to communism (Lenin’s words, not mine) and collective rights always violently oppose individual rights. So we will not give up defending our individual rights, even when it means electing (potentially) the second-worst president ever to keep another progressive human-nature-denying socialist from extending the administration of Her anti-American race-baiting predecessor.

The human-nature deniers may yet win. They have an arsenal of anti-human weapons on their side (the U.N. Human Rights Council, to name just one). But they should know that the rest of us will not go quietly into that socialist night.

hillary_feinstein

The Non-Exhaustive List of Reasons Dianne Feinstein Feels Sorry for Hillary

The name-calling.

The email intrusion.

The misinterpretation of what she had done with the emails.

Because she was blamed for the unfortunate destruction of 12 phones with a hammer.

The bleachbit that got all over her blue pantsuit.

The exhausting work her housemaid did to print all those top secret documents.

The moral heartache of deciding to print 55,000 pages of email instead of sending a thumb drive to the FBI.

The late nights and weekends her staff worked to make sure every single classified email was immediately sent to the authorities (she even selflessly ordered her Secret Service detail to buy pizza and yoga mats when the going got tough).

The insults hurled at her for her compassion and honesty in communicating with those deplorable Americans.

The insulting Attorney General wouldn’t give Bill a blowjob at the Phoenix airport, even after he asked nicely and reminded her that she wouldn’t be AG if it wasn’t for him.

That she can’t visit her beloved Coney Island because it sounds too much like that traitor’s last name.

Those hussies were paraded in front of her at the debate.

She wasn’t able to scream “go fuck yourselves” to her Secret Service detail as they unceremoniously tossed her unconscious body into a van.

All those countries she visited … and for what?

The selfish John Podesta robbed her of the opportunity to give her concession speech.

The cliff off which Clinton Foundation donations have fallen.

She just can’t open up about the alcohol-fueled fits of rage caused by the unclean Donald Trump because it’s too painful.

People weren’t willing to donate enough money and Jill Stein failed execrably to produce enough recounted votes.

The fact that the Electoral College would even think of voting for someone else.

“She’s exhausted, and who can blame her? America just barely missed having this true leader as their president. It’s shameful,” Feinstein said.

The Car of the Future

So … you won’t be able to actually drive the car of the future, but it will have:

  • Automatic Door Locks
  • Automatic Brakes
  • Automatic Governor
  • Automatic Homing Device
  • Automatic LEO Alert (Stingray optional)
  • Automatic DMV Renewal
  • Automatic Insurance Renewal
  • Automated Clearing House Connectivity
  • Fingerprint reader
  • Retina scanner
  • DNA analyzer
  • Breathalyzer
  • Hate Speech Detector
  • Methane Collector
  • CO2 Scrubber
  • Cell Phone Signal Blocker (unless Stingray option is installed)
  • GPS
  • WiFi
  • RFID
  • Inside/Outside Video Cameras
  • Proximity Alarm
  • Facial Recognition Software
  • Real Time NCIC Search
  • Child Restraint System (for all occupants)
  • Video monitor for continuous loop of glorious revolutionary propaganda films
  • “Fidel is my homie” bumper sticker
carter_rights

A Higher and More Powerful Title

Jimmy Carter had an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal yesterday, in which he extols the virtues of human rights. Free speech is a human right. State-sponsored “protection” from free speech (aka “hate speech laws”) is not. People like Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter are nothing more than lawfully-elected criminals running a protection racket: we elect them, they promise to “protect” us from “hate speech.”
 
Neither Carter nor Obama believe the words they speak. If they did, they would stop trying to redefine “citizen” as “undocumented resident.”
 
Yes, that’s the new phrase for “undocumented immigrant.”
 
In this civic atmosphere of “no borders” and “sanctuary city” resolutions, it is richly ironic (or, more accurately, cravenly pathetic) that Carter writes this paean to America: “In our democracy, the only title higher and more powerful than that of president is the title of citizen.”
 
“President” Obama literally tried to end-run the Constitutional rights of citizens with “a pen and a phone” – that, and the power of the Department of Justice.
 
In contrast, I actually believe that the “higher and more powerful” title is “citizen.” If only Jimmy Carter really believed that.
insidehighered_csus_flyer

Multicultural identity police charge whites with exploiting identity

If you’re worried that White Nationalist groups are forming on your college campuses, good. Because ultra right-wing white nationalist groups are not a force for good; neither in America, nor in Europe where they are vying for power at the national level.

But if you’re not worried about the Black Communist Internationalist groups that have already begun taking over higher education in America, then you either do not care or do not understand that Maoists are vying for control of your campuses.

The Black Liberation Collective that organizes campus protests and compiles The Demands is “dedicated to transforming institutions of higher education through unity, coalition building, direct action and political education. … As an organization, we stand against capitalist notions of infinite profit, homogenized markets, and a privatized means of production. … An international movement is needed to defeat this rotten system.”

If that’s not clear enough for you, then a cursory comparison of The Demands made by Black Lives Matter groups and the 16 Points made by Mao Tse Tung might be helpful. You know that physical intimidation of “reactionary bourgeois academic authorities” has already started, and unless the “revolutionary student” forces are stopped it’s only a matter of time until real violence breaks out. The presence of White Nationalists will make matters worse, but the absence of White Nationalists will do nothing to prevent the revolution from continuing.

The article at Inside Higher Ed – White Nationalist on Campus – focuses on two California State University campuses, so let’s take some examples from their sister campus at CSU East Bay.

CSU East Bay Demand 3. “WE DEMAND an increase in funding for CSUEB’s Ethnic Studies Department … to offer year-round courses to students such as ‘Hip Hop Nation’ taught by Shaida Akbarian.”

CSUEB Demand 4. “WE DEMAND a vote in determining the professors that are tenured at CSUEB’s campus.”

CSUEB Demand 7. “WE DEMAND a mandatory cultural awareness/racial sensitivity training take place for all incoming employees, staff, faculty, and the University Police Department…”

Mao’s Point 4. “Let the Masses Educate Themselves in the Movement: Trust the masses, rely on them and respect their initiative. … Let the masses educate themselves in this great revolutionary movement and learn to distinguish between right and wrong and between correct and incorrect ways of doing things.”

Mao’s Point 10. “Educational Reform: In the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution a most important task is to transform the old educational system and the old principles and methods of teaching. … In every kind of school we must apply thoroughly the policy of education serving proletarian politics … so as to enable those receiving an education to develop morally, intellectually and physically and to become laborers with socialist consciousness and culture.”

CSUEB Demand 1. “WE DEMAND support and funding for a Black Student Government that will … serve as the ultimate support for our black clubs and organizations.”

Mao’s Point 9. “Cultural Revolution Groups, Committees and Congresses: The struggle of the proletariat against the old ideas, culture, customs and habits left over by all the exploiting classes over thousands of years will necessarily take a very, very long time. Therefore, the Cultural Revolutionary groups, committees and congresses should not be temporary organizations but permanent, standing mass organizations [and] should consist mainly of representatives of the revolutionary students.”

CSUEB Demand 10. “WE DEMAND that we receive a response and plan of action from President Leroy M. Morishita by January 6th, 2016 by 12 pm (noon).”

Mao’s Point 11. “The Question of Criticizing by Name in the Press: In the course of the mass movement of the Cultural Revolution … criticism should be organized of typical reactionary bourgeois academic ‘authorities’…”

Since Inside Higher Ed appears unwilling to give equal time to criticizing Black Liberation Collective and other Maoist front groups attacking higher ed, might I make a modest proposal? Change the headline of that article to “Multicultural identity police charge whites with exploiting identity.”

ungovernable

Unification Through Abandonment Rage

“When Barack Obama spoke to the nation on the subject of race in March 2008, he directed our attention to the need for a new politics that could embrace a vision of hope and unity. … Obama grants Blacks and all Americans their justified feelings of abandonment by their country.” – An excerpt from “Barack Obama’s Call to Restore Ethics in Politics” which was excerpted from a longer essay in the volume Communication Ethics and Crisis which was excerpted from the forthcoming volume The Fall of the American Republic.

How’s that working out so far? I may write an essay consisting entirely of direct quotes from His Highness Barack I and select sycophants, circa 2008.

Progressivisms

Some speech is hateful, so this is hate speech. Not all Christians are good, so Christianity is evil. Not all Muslims are terrorists, so Islam is peace. Not all men are rapists, so we live in a rape culture. Some immigrant men come from an actual rape culture, so we call them youths or orphans. Some women choose to raise their children to be suicide bombers, so women who oppose abortion are anti-choice. Some people believe motherhood is the most important work, so conservatives believe that the only job allowed for women is motherhood. Unmarried women who have multiple children but no high school diploma or job are proud single moms, so educated married women with husbands and children are bourgeois enemies of working families. Conservatives have families who feed off the poor, so Conservatism is destructive. All Progressives are conservationists, so taxing and spending is conservation. Paying taxes is patriotic, so only traitors complain about taxation by corrupt representatives. 3% of the population pays 52% of income taxes, so only racists notice that 13% of the population commit 85% of inter-racial crime. Tens of millions of people stop looking for work, so they are not unemployed. Not all employed citizens save for retirement, so those who do must pay for those who don’t. Employed Americans support law enforcement and safe communities, so people who burn down their neighborhoods and shoot police are freedom fighters. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, so Progressives love poor people. American taxes make people on welfare wealthier than 99% of the world’s poor, so the 1% hate the poor. Americans hate the poor, so Western techno-democracies emit the most CO2 pollution. Every living mammal exhales CO2, so humans are parasites. Parasites love electric cars that get their rechargeable batteries from strip-mined precious metals, so the coal industry must die. Coal miners bitterly cling to their guns and religion, so they are anti-progress. Anti-progress families don’t care about women, so there are more men than women in science and technology. There are more women in college than men, so colleges are sexist and women need safe spaces. Colleges prepare students who are thoughtful, well-informed, and resilient, so college students feel invalidated as they protest distressing viewpoints and retreat to safe spaces. College trustees entertain presentations on bullying by faculty and staff, so some professors file First Amendment lawsuits against journalists. Most journalists are bipartisan, so Donald Trump didn’t pay taxes in 1996 and is unfit for the White House. The New York Times didn’t pay taxes in 2014, so it’s a corporation that uses smart power. Hillary Clinton used smart power in her Russian uranium negotiations, so journalists support Hillary Clinton for the White House. The Clinton Foundation took money from foreign dictators, so Hillary hit her head and her staff took the Fifth. Hillary is running for president, so voting is imperative for working families. Some people can’t get a state ID card, so voter fraud doesn’t exist. Some people vote 12 times in one election, so voter ID is racist. I’m a white person of Viking ancestry who is voting for Donald Trump, so I’m a white slaver. Everyone’s ancestors are guilty, so who do you owe?

‘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.”

gun_movie1

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.

Thanks,

A.G.

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.