‘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.”

Advertisements

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.

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