Category: Elections

The Moderates Step Forward

Elections, Marxists

Going back to my earlier observations about the fucking Marxists Social Democrats wanting to “unify the country”, we have this latest little contribution from one of the so-called “moderates” among the Democrat Clown Show:

Amy Klobuchar Says English Should Not Be Official Language of U.S.

Very few public statements by today’s politicians makes me want to pack a picnic lunch, grab my Mauser and head for a tall building in D.C., but this certainly ranks in the top five.

I remember once, in one of my more fevered rants passim, saying this about language in this country:

  • Always — always — insist on speaking, and being spoken to in English, regardless of circumstance.  If the other guy continues to scream at you in Spanish, respond with random Spanish expressions such as “Tierra del Fuego!”  or my favorite, “Huevos y putas!”.  If being yelled at in Ebonics, simply say, “I’m sorry, but I don’t speak Zulu”.

Nothing divides a populace quicker and more decisively than not being able to understand what the other guy is saying, especially if bi- or multilingualism is being mandated by law.  It doesn’t work in Canada, it doesn’t work in Belgium, and it sure as hell never worked in South Africa.   In fact, everywhere bilingualism is tried, it does nothing but cause friction, enmity and in some cases, violence.

As far as I’m concerned, when a politician running for public office makes such a suggestion, it should result in automatic disqualification by their parent party.  And if that party refuses to do so, then it should face legal consequences.

I don’t care if Fernando Castro, Hua Li, Abu Hassam or any other escapees from the world’s shithole countries feel “left out” or “excluded” when they go to the DMV and can’t get anyone to talk to them, or who face incarceration because they couldn’t read the laws of this country.  Learn the language — English — or GTFO.

Not A Chance In Hell

Elections, Politics

Quoth some Democrat “strategist”:

“This has got to be an election fundamentally about Democrats’ vision for bringing the country together and solving the big problems that confront us.”

Really?  This from a party which [deep breath]:

  • encourages urban unrest through its paramilitary Antifa movement
  • thinks voters for The Other Party are rubes, racists and “deplorable”
  • supports “open borders” (i.e. unlimited immigration) and calls those who don’t “racists” and “white supremacists”
  • resists ICE when they try to deport violent illegal immigrants
  • supports early release of violent felons from prison
  • supports Marxist electoral candidates and socialist/communist doctrine, in a nation which won the Cold War against that precise set of principles, and despite the obvious failures and appalling death tolls in all Communist nations since 1917
  • supports infanticide and unlimited abortion rights despite those being incredibly unpopular with the majority of Americans
  • wants to disarm the American population, despite Constitutional protection and (once again) massive popular support for private gun ownership
  • espouses insane social philosophies and policies such as gender-swapping surgery and gender-reassignment treatment for children
  • has Congressional representatives who ignore (and in some cases, even support) Muslim terrorism and the organizations which perform it
  • supports high taxation and increased government spending, when it is obvious that most Americans hate both
  • believes that climate catastrophe is imminent, excoriates all science (and scientists) that disproves their belief, and is willing to sacrifice both national- and personal prosperity to further their goals
  • thinks that America is still a fundamentally racist country
  • believes that international problems are mostly the fault of America, and supports diplomatic appeasement and accommodation of malevolent nations such as Communist China, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela (to name but a few)
  • demands First Amendment protection for themselves, while actively denying it to anyone who opposes their philosophy
  • continues to support failed education policies like Common Core
  • denies school choice to parents when those choices include non-state school education
  • refuses to allow failing and incompetent schoolteachers to be fired because of entrenched union opposition
  • allows radical college administrations to suppress any contrary positions to their own
  • supports radical feminism and its lunatic (and un-Constitutional) positions such as #BelieveAllWomen and similar policies which would deny the accused their right to a fair trial
  • has, through its adherents in the federal bureaucracy, attempted a coup against an elected President
  • has the support of a mainstream media which continues to excuse and obscure all wrongdoing perpetrated by Democrats;  and invents, magnifies and exaggerates the same for any organization or person who opposes them even marginally
  • sincerely believes in tropes such as “toxic masculinity”, Arab-inspired blood-libel of Israelis, and “climate catastrophe”
  • will attempt to enact “climate-friendly” legislation and regulations which will hobble America and indeed the entire Western world’s economies, while giving a pass to the major sources of global pollution:  China, India and the rest of the Third World
  • wants to resurrect ObamaCare and take it to nationalized “single-payer” medical care
  • will end America’s energy independence by outlawing fracking, construction of pipelines, destruction of the coal industry altogether and ending nuclear power generation.

There are more, but I think everyone gets the idea.  And if you think I’m inventing or exaggerating this behavior, feel free to study all California’s legislation and regulations enacted since 1990, or NYFC’s Mayor DeBlasio’s ditto.

Here are just a few pictures which encapsulate the incoherence in modern “progressive” thought:

And I’m not making this stuff up.  Look at the numbers in the chart below:

Considering that all the above are largely threats coming from Democrat politicians, supporters and Democrat-controlled organizations, explain this to me:

How will the Democrat / Socialist Democratic Party ever “bring the country together”?

The simple answer is:  they can’t, and they don’t want to.  Their entire philosophy is predicated on the Marxist principle of the class struggle;  and if they don’t have an economic class struggle (as in the U.S.A., where prosperity is the rule and not the exception), they will invent  another class struggle against a different enemy, e.g. “White Patriarchy”, “White Supremacists”, “Racists” or “The 1%” (to name but some), even if their own leaders  belong to said groups in one way or another.  This quite apart from their actual  opponents, e.g. conservatives and Trump supporters, whom they demonize with such exaggeration that reconciliation is quite impossible..

In other words, the Democrat Party thrives on disunity, and all their actions and policies are designed to exacerbate and not reduce it.  So their stated desire to bring the country together is just another political lie, and it’s nothing more than a transparent ploy to try to win the 2020 election.

“No Standing Army”

Elections, Politics

Everybody knows by now about Uncle Pervy’s latest mouthfart:

“So, the idea we’re gonna cut the defense budget significantly, we can cut it some, but we don’t need standing armies, we need to be smarter than we’re dealing now into how we handle this.”

Of course, the general consensus is all about national defense and blah blah blah.

Here’s my  question for the Has-Been VP, though:

If you have no standing army, how the hell do you propose to disarm the American public and confiscate all those eeeevil black assault rifles?

No doubt he and the other Communist presidential wannabes would probably want to create their own private army (e.g. SS, SA, KGB etc.) out of the Pantifa cadres… that’s always worked quite well for the Russian- and European totalitarians in the past.

Don’t think it would work that well with Americans, though.

Upside

Elections, Marxists, Politics

As Californians continue to flee the Golden Shower State and infest other areas with Californianism, there is at least one good result:

Based on Monday’s  [U.S. Census] figures, Texas is poised to gain two congressional seats, and Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina and Oregon are expected to gain one.  Eight states are expected to lose one seat:  California, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and West Virginia.

If this forecast is correct, California will lose one elector in the presidential elections.  No wonder they’re trying to abolish the Electoral College.

What this also means is that the Socialists in the House will lose at least four reliable votes in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Of course, those itinerant liberal assholes are, as I said, infesting other states which in the past have been reliable Republican ones — Arizona, Colorado and Nevada come to mind — so it’s a mixed result for us conservatives, to be sure.

As long as California continues to circle the bowl, however, it’s good news for the United States (i.e. the areas not run by Socialists).

New Wrinkle

Elections, Politics

I remember listening many years ago to a discussion between Derek & Clive (Peter Cook and Dudley Moore respectively) about politics.  Margaret Thatcher was facing reelection, and Derek had a fairly novel suggestion:

“I think that Mrs. Thatcher should broaden her appeal to voters by giving us a brief — but tasteful — glimpse of her vag.”

Now it should be remembered that at the time, the BritPM was quite a babe (by politicians’ standards, anyway):

…and her wardrobe always managed to conceal a rather impressive bust, so Derek’s suggestion was not at all out of left field.

Now before I go any further, you may be thinking that I’m about to suggest that all  female politicians follow Derek’s suggestion, but of course, nothing could be further from the truth — as a simple illustration would show:

Clearly, this is not a vote-catching approach with universal application.

However:  if there is a reasonably-attractive female politician who, for various reasons cannot attract a significant number of voters for whatever reason, how could it hurt?

With that in mind, allow me to show you one such politician who, despite having some fairly decent policy positions (for a Democrat), is still trailing way back in the polls;  it’s the lady from Hawaii, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard:

 

Now granted, young Tulsi is of the Democrat persuasion, and their core constituency seems to be made up exclusively of rabid feminists and wizened lesbians (some overlap), Muslim sycophants if not actual Muslims (who would want the whore stoned if she revealed her pudenda), homosexual men (ergo immune to her charms) and political apparatchiks who, from all accounts, have no sex life outside the Party.  So maybe a quick vag-flash wouldn’t work with them.

Still, given that Rep. Gabbard has managed to garner maybe 1% support in the polls, my question remains:  how much could it hurt?

Or is the basement-dwelling neckbeard incel population too small to matter?

I think we should be told.

Ultimately, Margaret Thatcher didn’t take Derek’s advice but still managed a thumping victory in that election (largely because she organized a thorough thrashing of the Argies for invading the Falkland Islands — can’t go wrong, slaughtering Argies).

But Tulsi can’t even order a carrier battle group to launch attacks against a second-tier target such as, say, Honduras let alone a massive pounding of Iran — always a proven vote-getter (sadly among conservatives, not Democrats) — and in any event, she has gone on record as being against U.S. aggression in foreign lands, so all that’s a non-starter.

All the more reason, thinks I, for her to consider the Vag Option.

Next up:  Nikki Haley.