Latest Posts

Good Olde Dayes 2

Marketing / Advertising, The Gun Thing

Last week I looked at offensive ads from days gone by — and by “offensive”, I mean things that would “offend” the Permanently Sensitive Set, bless their little snowflake hearts.

While doing the research, I also happened on some still-more offensive ads — guaranteed to get others’ feeeewings all tearful (except for those who frequent this website, that is.  Actually, they are enough to make even me a little tearful, but not for the reasons one would expect).  Here’s a sample:

There’s hunting:

Now it’s time for some cismale gendernormative patriarchal fascism (I think I got that right):

And guns for Christmas — nothing like a visit from ol’ Santy bearing the right kind of gift:

(Note the publication for the above ad…)

Now it’s time for a little “flowers” advertising (back the hearse up to the door, and let them smell the flowers):

And then there’s the simple choice:

And one last reminder:

I wonder what the number is for the AR15 and AK-47?  Let’s look at some other options:

And speaking of which, note the prices:

Now that’s enough to make me weep.

Well Now, Lookee here

Crime, Terrorism

Seems as though the Pantifa Brigade are looking to escalate the thing:

“How’s DC coming along? Cant fight if you cant see. I want to blind as many of you c— suckers as possible. A nice balloon filled with Muriatic acid, covered in wax will so do the job.”

My question:  at what point will our so-called “law enforcement” agencies begin to actually treat this bunch of assholes like the terrorists they are?  It’s not like they can’t be identified:

I’m thinking snipers on rooftops*, with carte blanche  to shoot anyone wearing a mask who makes an overt act of violence.  Tell me that this response wouldn’t end this shit immediately.

*That is, if D.C. SWAT can be wrenched away from the important job of serving warrants for unpaid parking tickets…

Not Buying It

Immigration, Politics

Looks like ol’ Jim Treacher’s getting all bent out of shape about this story, but right out the box I’m not buying Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s story — and nor are others.  Here’s why I feel the way I do.

1) AOC is a habitual liar.  In her short career as a House Rep., AOC has lied, fabricated and exaggerated about just about everything:  her background, her home life, her campaign finances… the list is endless, because she lies every time she speaks, and she speaks constantly:  a nonstop barrage of bullshit.

2) All socialists lie, whether to conceal crimes (e.g. Hillary Clinton and her illegal email server) or to further their agenda (e.g. gun controllers using false data), or in service of their philosophy (“we protect the people against the bosses”), or for immediate political gain (the current border emergency).  AOC is just a poster-child for this lying.

When AOC says that Border Patrol officers threatened her, I don’t believe her.  It’s quite possible they made fun of her or made derogatory remarks to each other about her — but that’s not a threat.

What I think happened was that Representative Snowflake may have felt  threatened by having a bunch of armed officers standing around her — gun-fearing wussies often are — and they may not have given her the respect she felt she deserves — fair enough, considering that she wants to eliminate all their jobs — but none of that is threatening behavior.  The fact is that her “fact-finding” mission was a total bust:  she couldn’t find any evidence of bad stuff to buttress her absurd claims of “border concentration camps”, so she’s made up all these bullshit accusations to compensate (not to mention being overcome with grief at the sight of an empty parking lot).

This silly little girl’s fifteen minutes of fame are almost up, and I hope that the voters of her district show some sense and toss her skinny ass out of Congress next year.

And perhaps Treacher’s pearl-clutching is actually satirical, but it sure doesn’t read like that.

*If actual proof of threats and such become available — note the word proof  — then I’ll change my opinion.  I won’t be holding my breath.

Cheater’s Penalty

Legal Stuff, Men & Women

I read this report with sadness:

A man has sued his unfaithful estranged wife after discovering that he is not the father of her eight-year-old son.
The man wants the woman to return ‘every penny’ he spent on the child he thought was his but was actually fathered by someone she had an affair with.
He also wants damages to compensate for distress and wants her to reveal the name of the other man.

My sadness is because of the effect all this will have on the child.  For the cheating ex-wife?  Not a smidgen of pity.

In the old days, a child born within the marriage was assumed both legally and morally to be the child of the husband — and it made a great deal of sense.  Nowadays, with morality in tatters but with scientific tools such as DNA testing, that old standard is unnecessary.

In fact, I believe that all babies should get DNA-tested at birth.  If the baby is born to a married couple and the husband is found to be not the father, then the actual father should be identified and forced to pay child support.  If the woman is unmarried, of course, then the same should apply.  (If she doesn’t know who the father is, then everything that follows is her own fault.)

Adultery that results in pregnancy should carry a penalty of some sort.  The husband should not be penalized for his wife’s infidelity and carelessness.  Good grief:  if sperm donors  are being forced to pay child support (as is beginning to happen in Europe — pure foolishness), then Roger The Lodger should have to face the same consequence.