Nope, Probably Not

According to City Journal‘s Steve Malanga, Californication shouldn’t be as bad as people think:

Conservatives and moderates are the most unhappy with the state and most anxious to leave. Liberals, by contrast, are mostly staying put, and some think life in California is just great. Only 38 percent of Democrats said that they were considering leaving, compared with 55 percent of independents and 71 percent of Republicans. Similarly, those characterizing themselves as “somewhat liberal” were least likely to say that they want to go—fewer than four in ten are considering leaving. But 53 percent of moderates, 66 percent of the “somewhat conservative,” and 74 percent of the “very conservative” would like to migrate. Political affiliation, in fact, was more of a predictor of who wants to go or stay than other demographic information, such as race.

I think that the longtime residents of Colorado (to name just one state infested with ex-Californians) might beg to differ with Malanga’s thesis — and I think I know the problem.

Basically, “conservative” Californians coming to, say, Texas probably aren’t conservative at all.  Compared to other Californians, they might be;  compared to conservative Texans, they’re probably more like moderate Democrats.  And the way to establish the truth of this is to find out if during their first year in a new state, these Cali-expats bought a gun  (if they didn’t bring any with them).  If they didn’t buy a gun, they failed the first unofficial test of conservative American citizenship.

This kills me.  I have very dear relatives who are lifelong Californians, and are making serious plans to leave the state.  They are probably more conservative than I am, and are staunch gun owners to boot.  But I’m positive that Uncle Mike and The Angel In Human Form are in no way representative of these modern Joads-in-reverse.

More’s the pity.


P.S.  The above-mentioned relatives (much to my chagrin) are not moving to Texas because of the heat.  But let’s just say that the political makeup of one of the mountain states is about to become a lot  more conservative.

Diversity

Here’s a pic of Trump’s impeachment defense team:

…and I don’t wanna hear any guff about “DIVERSITEH!” either.  Not when a Jew, two Italians and a token WASP are involved.  And we also have “WOMYNS!” such as Florida hottie Pam Bondi and Jane Raskin, among others.

If that’s not a diverse bunch, then we’re all in deep trouble.

“No Standing Army”

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.

The Story Of The Film So Far

From J.J. Sefton at Ace Of Spades :

On a granular level, I cannot imagine the Democrats succeeding in peeling away not just two or three but 20 GOP senators in order to reach a two-thirds majority for conviction and removal. Despite the Democrats attempt to paint McConnell as a Russian agent and/or rigging the trial in Trump’s favor, this too like everything else before will blow up in their face. And yet, they will continue with more smears, more charges and more attempts to sabotage the President and sway voters from now all the way to November. That’s all they have. They have no candidates or positions that even remotely reflect the politics of the average American citizen. They know it and we know it. The only thing left is to either replace the American people with illiterate peasantry from south of the border or, failing that, round us all up and put us in gulags or mass graves.

And the story of the film to come:

The big question remains whither America in a post-Trump (that is, post 1/20/25) landscape? The attempted coup and the concomitant attempt at impeachment means we have a political party and movement that will stop at nothing to attain power. And that means absolute power going forward. The Constitution when it is to be observed will be used as both shield and cudgel, or more than likely abandoned entirely. There is no way to use legal methods and regular order or precedent to thwart them. It is refreshing to see anecdotal things like Martha McSally calling out Manure Raju, Lindsey Graham calling out the Dems’ lust for power during the attempted high tech lynching of Justice Kavanaugh, and more substantively Mitch McConnell going pedal to the metal to confirm as many Trump judicial picks as possible. I hope it’s a bellwether of things to come, and of a dam bursting wide open with an unrelenting torrent of same from now on. Because, sure as G-d made little green apples, the next time the Democrats gain the White House, it’ll be lights out for sure.

There it is, folks:  the political landscape, admirably (and perfectly) summarized in a dozen or so sentences.

Deal-Killer

Oh, this is charming:

By now you’ve probably heard at least a little something about California’s shocking new “freelancer” bill that went into effect January 1, 2020.  Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) is sweeping and vague but basically it redefines the relationship between employers and employees, effectively ending independent contract work and killing the “gig economy”.

Independent contractors across the nation could soon be suffering the same fate as their California counterparts.  A federal version has passed through committee and now sits in the House of Representatives waiting for a floor vote.  This is not a drill.  This is real.

As someone who depends utterly on the gig economy to supplement my shitty SocSec income, let’s just say that I’m casting a very baleful eye on this development.

I can’t see this bill making it into law — I can’t believe it would make it through the House, Senate and be signed by POTUS.

Its title is H.R.2474 — the “PRO Act” — and I would recommend that everyone reading this send a letter (not email, those assholes in Congress have installed layers and layers of screeners to ignore us) telling their Congressweasel and Senator to treat this foul bill like the rabid dog it is, and shoot it on sight.

I’m not going to threaten anybody or anything, but if this bullshit makes it into Federal law, I guess we’ll see just how “real” this gets.  I’ve been destitute before, and at age 65 I have no intention of going through that again.

And if any political wiseguy tells me to learn how to code… let’s just say I already know  how to code.  I also know how to grease a fucking rope — and I’ll leave it to someone else to tell me which one I’d rather do.

Residential Collectivization

As any fule kno, Communism is all about taking away the individual and replacing him with a cipher that can be controlled and manipulated by a benevolent Big Brother.  Here’s one such manifestation, in the ravings of some Marxist college professor [redundancy alert]:

“If we want to keep cities safe in the face of climate change, we need to seriously question the ideal of private homeownership,” says Kian Goh, who researches urban ecological design, “spatial politics” and social mobilization “in the context of climate change and global urbanization.”

Proposed solutions, including a public takeover of Pacific Gas & Electric, are missing one of the most important factors in climate change-driven destruction, Goh warns: “economic development, aspirations of home ownership, and belief in the importance of private property.”
To prevent catastrophe, Americans must reconsider their ideas about “success, comfort, home, and family,” particularly the single-family homes that followed in the wake of the Homestead Act of 1862 and federally backed mortgage insurance, the professor argues.
These policies benefited white middle-class families and “became synonymous with freedom and self-sufficiency” even though they represented “[e]xpansionist, individualist, and exclusionary patterns of housing.”

So having a house in the ‘burbs is a factor in Glueball Climate We’re All Gonna DIEEEEE! Catastrophe.

As we all know, of course, this whole climate bullshit manifesto is just a fig leaf covering the true aims of people like this asshole academic — there is no climate catastrophe looming —  but it sure as hell allows them to create their little model society, doesn’t it?

What really, really  scrapes these Commie bastards is that home ownership is the end result of individualism, provides the individual a stake in the society in which he lives, and provides for private security in his abode.  Private property ownership also means that people will, in the main, resist any and all efforts of the State to confiscate or otherwise appropriate it — and for the Commies, remember, there is no private property because all property belongs to the State.

So yeah, they’d prefer to have us all live in tiny, State-managed apartments in an urban environment, using public instead of private transport, and working for the State rather than for ourselves.

Already, the eeeevil automobile has been blamed for the non-existent growth of carbon emissions which is going to melt ice caps etc.  Now pricks like this Goh creature can add suburban homes to the list of eco-evils, which means that they too can be circumscribed, reduced and ultimately, banned.

Feel free to dispute anything you’ve read so far in this post, but you’d better have something more than emotion, slogans and hysteria in your argument.

“Spatial politics”, my fat African-American ass.