Former Drummer Knob sent me this excellent video. Make sure your sound is turned on for the full effect.
Also make sure your mouth is not full of the Morning Coffee/Gin. You have been warned.
Category: Politics
Trying not to start the public floggings
What Price Political Endorsements?
I genuinely do not know the answer to this question.
Much play has been given to the fact that a Muzzie mayor in Michigan has endorsed Trump for President in 2024 and not, as one would expect, Her Junior Filthiness. Also the Teamsters, for so long a Democrat lock:
Perhaps even more noteworthy is the non-endorsement that the International Brotherhood of Teamsters issued last week. The union’s internal polling showed that its members strongly favor Trump over Harris, but leadership issued a statement saying that it was declining to endorse either. The statement also shared the polling data, which prompted me to write that it was tantamount to a “soft endorsement” of Trump when I first reported it. Matt wrote last Friday that the move by the Teamsters is causing some agita among the Dems.
Does this matter? I mean, in terms of actual votes? I mean, yeah, symbolism etc. But does his endorsement mean that x number of these constituents are going to suddenly vote for Trump instead of Harris?
I know that if, say, the mayor of Plano decided to endorse a specific candidate or party, that would have absolutely no bearing on how I’d cast my vote. But then I take my political cues from nobody else, so maybe I’m not representative of the average voter.
I’m still interested when, for example, the head honcho of the Fraternal Order of Police announces his endorsement — will rank-and-file cops follow his lead, or make up their own minds? One might hope that the latter would be the case, but perhaps this is giving too much respect to the average cop.
Or maybe an endorsement simply sways the “undecideds” — although how any voter in these United States can still be uncommitted at this stage is quite beyond me.
Here We Go Again
Never one to shrink from pouring water into a sinking ship, Willie Brown’s ex-mistress is supporting an action that everybody knows doesn’t work, is un-Constitutional, and can’t be enforced:
Banning AR-15s, AK-47s, and other firearms that Democrats describe as “assault weapons” has been part of Harris’s gun control agenda since she vied for the Democrat presidential nomination in 2019. Moreover, Harris made clear during the 2019 nominating cycle that she would enact such a ban via executive action if elected.
Well, far be it for me to oppose such silliness, but here’s a little FYI for anyone who may not yet own any such terrible weapons (links are in the pics):
No need to thank me; it’s all part of the service. (And those prices are quite tasty, if I may say so.)
Oh, and I almost forgot the important part:
Guns are no good without a sufficient quantity of boolets, after all.
Turnaround
Speaking of foul political females, I see that Her Filthiness has opened her fat yap again:
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday called for Americans to be “criminally charged” if they engage in speech that sounds like Russian propaganda.
Some might say that just a few decades ago, such charges could have been brought against Clinton herself.
But of course, four decades ago it wasn’t “Russia” but the “Soviet Union”.
Rancid Stalinist bitch.
About Those Hurricanes
…it turns out that this year is not going to see a “supercharged” hurricane season in the Caribbean and southeastern United States, and it’s a worrying prospect to all the Climate Alarmist Assholes like that “Hockey Stick” charlatan:
Penn State celebrity climate scientist Michael Mann announced in April that his research group’s 2024 North Atlantic season forecast was expecting an “unprecedented” 33 named storms, with a range between 27 and 39. That prediction has turned out to be a dud.
With Hurricane Francine hitting the coasts Thursday, the total number of named storms only comes to six, making it one of the quietest hurricane seasons to date.
I’m not going to bother to point out, yet again, that using “climate models” to predict short-term weather patterns is a waste of time, and not just because almost all climate models suck green donkey dicks, statistically speaking.
What needs pointing out is that the great Global Warming Climate Cooling Change© movement is a load of bullshit, not the least for the reasons stated above, but also because fanatical adherence to its so-called “prophecies” is leading towards societal collapse as our power needs are increasingly constrained in pursuit of the movement’s largely-unattainable goals.
Straining The Influx, Flushing The Excess
When it comes to immigration policy, there are a few options available to you as the host country if the floodgates have been opened too far and the influx starts to threaten the fabric of the settled society.
You can strain the influx of future immigration — not putting stress on — by tightening the restrictions, or setting higher standards for what constitutes an “acceptable” immigrant. Many countries have done this in the past, whether the sieve was academic (minimum education standards such as eighth-grade-, twelfth-grade- or even graduate levels), skills (tradespeople or industry-savvy applicants such as carpenters, steelworkers, forestry specialists or computer programmers), and finally financial: people who have been successful in their home countries and raised their standard of living to the point where their arrival into the host country will not require financial assistance from the government or charity organizations and may in fact become employment creators. (One more is military service for younger men and perhaps women, too, but this approach is fraught with potential problems, which is why the .dotmil generally has fairly strict standards for foreign recruits, or else has a savage, no-nonsense approach to assimilation like the French Foreign Legion.)
When a nation like the Netherlands decides to apply tighter standards or even close entry altogether, you have to realize that even for the famously-tolerant Dutch, immigration has put too much of a stress on their society, both financial and more especially to their culture. Which is what is happening over there:
Prime Minister Dick Schoof has promised to take a tougher line against illegal immigration. The Dutch four-party cabinet has pledged to establish ‘the strictest asylum regime ever known’ to curb immigration.”
The surge in the number of immigrants seeking asylum in the Netherlands, estimated at around 40,000 a year, has put severe pressure on public services from housing to healthcare, fueling growing concerns about the country’s ability to manage the influx.
The ruling coalition in the Netherlands, which includes Geert Wilders-led Freedom Party, has taken a tough stance on immigration. The party is known for its controlled immigration stances, and has been one of the key drivers behind proposals to tighten asylum laws in the country.
Measures on the table include limiting applications for international protection, speeding up deportations and restricting family reunification for refugees under much stricter conditions.
The Dutch government, by the way, is not doing this voluntarily. Whereas the neo-socialist political parties had pretty much universal control of the polity in the past, the election of hardliners like the party of Geert Wilders has changed the political landscape, and government ministers now say things like “a clear mandate from the voters” when framing a tougher immigration policy.
The depth of feeling on this topic is that the Dutch, always the most quiescent of members of the European Union, are now stating quite bluntly that in order for them to enact these new immigration controls, they have to have control of their own borders — ditto the Germans, by the way — but the Dutch are even showing open willingness to leave the EU altogether if such control is denied them.
Note too that the Dutch government is framing this issue purely in terms of financial necessity, and are not touching the issue of non-assimilation. But the Dutch, always cosmopolitan a nation, are undoubtedly looking northward to see what the (also famously-tolerant) Swedes are doing:
Sweden’s migration policy is undergoing a paradigm shift. The Government is intensifying its efforts to reduce… the number of migrants coming irregularly to Sweden. Labour immigration fraud and abuses must be stopped and the ‘shadow society’ combated. Sweden will continue to have dignified reception standards, and those who have no grounds for protection or other legal right to stay in Sweden must be expelled.
And that’s not a news organization speaking: it’s from the Swedish government itself.
By “shadow society” they mean Muslim enclaves, who insist on setting up their own little state-within-a-state pretty much wherever they arrive, and whose establishment was made easy by Sweden’s traditional tolerance. Ditto the many crime organizations and drug cartels, who up until now have had it relatively easy.
Well, it appears that this tolerance has reached its limits, and because the Swedes prefer orderliness over chaos, they’re prepared to do what has to be done: reduce the influx, and expel the unwanted (being Swedes, they’ll pay these assholes over $30,000 each to leave, which gives you an idea of how much the unwanted immigrants are costing the government in terms of aid and policing).
It is in this light that we should look homeward, and think about Donald Trump’s promise that upon election, we’ll see the largest domestic deportation in history.
Let’s hope, and hope still more that when he reaches the Oval Office, this promise doesn’t suffer the fate of that “big, beautiful wall” from his last presidential campaign.