Thursday, July 18, 2019


     The day promises to be hot, muggy, and lethally busy here at the Fortress, so have a few links and offhand observations in place of the usual animated, highly literate, and maddeningly long soliloquy so many readers label “TL;DR” after a quick glance at the headline.

     (You knew that’s why I deliberately write strange headlines, didn’t you?)

1. Principle Or Pragmatism?

     Principles are important. Ask the man who can’t find his! But in some areas of public policy and legislation, a pragmatic approach – i.e., what’s most likely to benefit the nation, in a statistical sense – is superior. Mike Hendrix provides a pithy observation today:

CRH: I’m all for African immigration, as long as they come the right way.
ME: That’s because you’re a moron. (Gasps from people around me)
CRH (looking at me slyly): Well, what about Ben Carson? (NOTE, I’ve heard him do this schtick on the radio before.)
ME: What about him?
CRH: Well, what if by not having immigrants from Africa, we were eliminating potential Ben Carsons? (At this point, he thinks he’s won.)
ME: Yeah, still good with that. What do you suppose the chances are of getting a Ben Carson from Africa? CRH: Uhhh….what?

     Please read it all – and by all means follow Mike’s trailing link to its origin! (Those who insist that every would-be immigrant has an “equal right” to come to the U.S. may pass on, though I can’t imagine what they’re doing here in the first place.)

2. “Christianity” As Liberals See It.

     Articles such as this one are why I’m a major fan of the Babylon Bee:

     A lot of Christians are criticized for not being very compassionate to the poor. But you can't say that about Larry DeManson, a local believer who is so committed to charity for those less fortunate than himself that he always votes for government to steal money from his neighbor and give it to the impoverished.
     "The Bible calls us to take care of the poor," he told reporters, "but that's tough because it costs money. But then I was looking over at my neighbors and realized they have more money than I do---why not just vote for the government to confiscate their wealth and give it to the poor? Problem solved."
     DeManson no longer has a guilty conscience whenever he sees people in need.

     Apparently all four of my Bibles are misprinted – Jesus didn’t say “love thy neighbor as thyself,” but rather “Subcontract thy love of neighbor to the State.” How late in life we learn these things!

3. The AOC Gaffe Machine.

     Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is perhaps the Republicans’ best weapon against the Democrats in 2020:

     There’s just one teeny problem with AOC’s attempt to associate herself with King: He was a Republican.

     President Trump’s recent tweets have made AOC and her buddies in “The Squad” the face of the Democrat Party. The electorate will not forget, especially as the rest of the Dems are busily straining to defend them without implicitly endorsing their lunacies. Bravo, Mr. President!

4. “Goes To Motive.”

     People do things for a reason. Sometimes the reason is “habit.” But not always:

     Many have argued that the Russian Facebook ads about the 2016 presidential election had no measurable effect on balloting. That might be true; I’m in no position to argue in either direction. But no one spends a six-figure sum on advertising if he’s already convinced that it will have no significant effect. The advertisers clearly hoped for an effect on the balloting, whether or not they got one.

     So it is with Zuckerberg and Facebook. Any argument to the effect that those pro-life ads “probably wouldn’t” have affected the Irish plebiscite are irrelevant. Facebook banned them, thereby forfeiting the revenue from them, because its cadre believed that the ads might have an effect: specifically, that they might bring about the defeat of the pro-abortion initiative.

     We can’t know what might have been; we can know, from their actions, what the conscious actors in the drama hoped for.

5. Contemporary “Patriotism.”

     Warner Todd Huston has compiled a great many inarguably anti-American statements from the ladies of “the Squad.” This is extremely important; the major media, all of which are deep in bed with the Democrat Party, refuse to report on them in an objective fashion.

     Please review the linked compilation – and for God’s sake, save the link! If you should have the misfortune to cross rhetorical swords with a “Squad” defender, you’ll surely need it.

     That’s all for the present, Gentle Reader. I have innumerable chores to address in the heat and the ick. Among them are some so unpleasant that I can’t even hire them out: no one is willing to do them for money! Clearly, there are some jobs Americans won’t do...but illegal aliens won’t do them either.

     Have a nice day.


sykes.1 said...

Re King's Republicanism. He was a black man living in the South. The Democrat Party there were rabid segregationists, and no black man in the South was a Democrat. King was perforce a Republican, but it is rather obvious that his sympathies lay with Northern Liberal Democrats.


1. Good point.

2. I've argued for a long time that so much of liberalism consists of robbing others at gunpoint, giving it away, and then thumping one's chest about how generous you are.

3. Did she also miss the part about the mixed-race marriage license laws being passed by the Democrats?

4. Perfect example of Rule 2: Those who control the information flow control what people believe.

5. PDF it too. If it's truly effective the enemy will work to have it pulled.

Col. B. Bunny said...

King was a Republican by process of elimination as Sykes points out. Maybe his is an "any port in a storm" observation.

BTAIM, King was retreating from what he thought was his Republicanism toward the end of his life. More to the point, King chose to surround himself with communists even though J. Edgar Hoover warned him that his friends were communists.

Too, communists were besides themselves with joy at the opportunities that the "Civil Rights Movement" afforded them to bring down America. Ali Babette there thinks "white supremacy" covers all rhetorical bases but "loathing for communism" is more accurate. But our experiment with something other than Jim Crow actually discredits her. Far from whites caring much about supremacy or, more accurately, about maintaining the 1965 racial proportions, whites have groveled at the feet of blacks like beat dogs. Not a pretty sight.