War on ICE

Communism has infiltrated the government, and this is the result of such.

Getting closer to the core

In my opinion, the core of the problem is communism. Antifa is supposedly anti-fascist, but that is a straw-man. Nobody is advocating fascism. These are communists, who are trying to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States. They have been doing this for decades. Antifa may seem new, but it is the same old thing.

The Battle For Chicago – Antifa Wants Real Revolution by AND Magazine

Read on Substack

 

A potential commonality

You should get to know who this article is about, so it says. Never heard of it before, so now I know. If you want to know who is running these assassins who have the same modus operandi, maybe this is a clue.

SpaceX Starship Update ( What about it ), 9/26/25

 

Comprehensive update of the doings regarding SpaceX's development of the Starship.

Appearances are that the assassin was from a good family

9/26/25:

Speculation alert: I am going to keep expounding upon this theory of mine that homosexuals are NOT born, they are made. In the case of this kid from a good family, who went bad.

Being that this is really just a good kid that went bad, we have to ask how did this happen? He may have started out with a predispostion to this kind of behavior, which is what homosexuality actually is. But you say they are MADE, and this conflicts with that--that would be a contradiction. Nope, it is proof. For if sexual identity is a social construct, then his social construct got mixed up ( gender dysphoria). But maybe not that much for he was from a good family.

So he may have gotten sucked into it, ( quite literally ) by getting a blow job from a tranny. If the tranny was obviously a girl, then he might convince himself that there was really no difference, you see. There's an old story from the sixties ( I think) about a transvestite that pretended to be a girl, and who offered blow jobs to a bunch of guys. These guys were tricked into getting their blow jobs from what they thought was a girl. But it was a guy in drag. When these guys found out that the girl wasn't a girl, they got mad. There was an altercation with the transvestite, and the transvestite killed one of the guys who got mad.

That's a true story, by the way. It happened in Houston back in the sixties, if memory serves. I won't name names, but the case did achieve some sort of notoriety.

I think an encounter like that could convince a guy that he was a homosexual if he received a blow job. It could be used as a pivot point in the guy's development.

So fast forward to today. Transvestites are now recognized as transexuals. Now could a normally straight guy be convinced that a guy can become a girl, and that he really isn't a homosexual? I think that he could. It was a CHOICE made, and why those who are homosexual cannot be easily reformed from it. They've built up a lot of internal defenses that allows them to continue with their lifestyle, which cannot said to be normal.

P.S. -- In order for this theory to work, somebody has to be running the assassin.  Maybe it is Antifa, but who is running Antifa?

9/20/25:

Too many people out there blowing smoke in order to confuse people. I laid it out it already. What I'm reading on the other side of the argument tells me that they're probably gonna succeed in deceiving a lot of people about what's really going on here.

The dude is a homosexual. He's at war with it and with society because of it. He resents being an outcast for being homosexual in the world that he likes to live in. He is a prime candidate for manipulation by someone with the requisite skill and MOTIVATION to do so. The motive is hatred, I believe. For the manipulators, they intend to destroy society so that they can replace it with another of their choosing. For the shooter, it is the kind of guy I just described. They have a commonality of interest in striking down a leader of the opposition to the manipulators.

But this is just murky enough that a lot of smoke will be all that is needed in order to confuse millions.

9/15/25:

But who would manipulate the guy, according to the theory set forth in this post (update of 9/13/25, 1:07 PM)

He has his community, but how is that community supported---from within or without? I think the Democrats support them, of course. But who supports the Democrats??? They have some unsavory types who support them. Namely, George Soros. Probably got some Chinese influence in there too.

A short time later...: Whoa! Look at this. "Armed Queers".



9/13/25, 5:41 AM:

But how did this kid turn bad? What switched on or off in his head? There's a lot of theories out there, but it doesn't seem that the magic dirt theory applies.





I could mention my own theories on that matter, but I won't do that for now. More information needs to come out, and maybe my suspicions will be confirmed.

Hint! It involves something that the KGB was once said to have said.---9/13/25, 5:41 AM:

 

Update, 1:07 PM:



continued... Sooooo.... here's the hint explained, and my theory...

What's going on with this guy?

First, it comes from the book linked in the post on this blog.

Not confirmed yet, but this is going in the direction that I suspected--- Tyler Robinson is homosexual. He was living with a tranny. link:



New information about Charlie Kirk's assassin

here's another link that says he was living with a tranny:

New York Post

It's now being reported in many other places.   So now I explicate my theory.  It begins with a quote from the book cited above

The quote from the book "KGB: The Secret Works of Soviet Secret Agents", p. 280

Contrary to popular supposition, the KGB is not primarily interested in homosexuals because of the presumed susceptibility to blackmail. In its judgement, homosexuality often is accompanied by personality disorders that make the victim potentially unstable and vulnerable to adroit manipulation. It hunts the particular homosexual who, while more or less a functioning member of his society, is subconsciously at war with it, and himself.

The discussion continues in the book, and is too lengthy to include here. It forms an important basis for my thinking on the subject. In my view, homosexuals are NOT born, but made. While the KGB view does not address this question, it simply was interested in exploiting such individuals.

As far as the human condition is concerned, this exploitation may STILL be useful to organizations that seek out such individuals, who can be thus be exploited.

Tyler Robinson may be such a man. The confirmation may well be in the fact that he came from a good family that would not approve of homosexuality. He is trying to adapt to his surroundings by pairing up with a tranny who pretends to be female. It is, in my view, a homosexual relationship all the same. Tyler Robinson and his tranny friend might well be at war with it and his surroundings in such a way. He could be striking out in RAGE at why he has to do pretend to be straight, or normal, while he wants to be considered such.

The Utopian dream dangled in front of such people may make them willing to sacrifice themselves to force change in the culture so as to accommodate them and their unnatural appetites.

What did Jesus mean by saying "turn the other cheek"?

 

Interesting discussion on this video. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

And what about forgiveness? Is it not a holy thing not to be shared with those who are unworthy?

Bentsen-Quayle debate as template for GOP failure and what to do about it

9/25/25:

 

The left voted against civility a long time ago. I remember that debate, and how the Democrats howled in laughter when Bentsen put down Dan Quayle. But Bentsen's behavior really WAS rude, and the Democrats approved of it rather loudly, as I recall. There's no excuse for rudeness. You cannot complain about a lack of civility if you approve of being as rude as Benstsen was.

 

And now the Democrats approve of Luigi Mangione. He's a hero to many of them. Is that what we've come to? In principle, how is this any different than what Bentsen did? Bentsen was losing the debate when he pulled out the rudeness weapon. It's pretty rude to cheer on a murderer. Actually, the Democrats have a moral burden here.

 

Quayle was completely at a loss as to what to do. Not because he was stupid, but he was unprepared for what could face if he wasn't careful. Some may call that proof of stupidity. Whatever you call it, Bentsen really WAS rude. If the response to rudeness is violence, then that is what the Democrats seem to be advocating. If nobody respects you, then maybe the proper response IS violence. But I would avoid that if at all possible. But what if it isn't? Then you know what must follow.

 

6/10/25:

 

When civil society breaks down...

Whatever you may call the events in Los Angeles recently, you cannot escape the fact that civil society seems to be breaking down there, and threatens to go nationwide.

So this reminds me of what happened in the debate between Bentsen-Quayle in 1988. Same thing, it was the end of a civil debate, and the resort to incivility in the place of civil behavior. The aggressor depends upon the less aggressive person to stand down, and therefore "wins" the event. In that case, it was the debate.

How does that apply here? All the Feds were doing was executing a warrant for this Huerta guy. They also arrested 40 illegals, and this was used as a pretext for a riot? A riot by definition is a breakdown in order.

Imagine this from people who have been lecturing us for years about civility, rule of law, and democracy. The democratic process produced Trump, who has sworn an oath to defend the laws of the Union, but this makes some Democrats mad, and therefore, they have the right ( according to themselves ) to riot.

If Trump continues, he's a "dictator". That's the gimmick to get him to stand down. They're depending upon Trump to act like Quayle, and act helpless while they've just mugged him. Bentsen was acting like a thug, but all Quayle could muster was "that's uncalled for Senator".

I've many times pondered upon what Quayle should have done in response. The thing is, it is never called for to act thuggishly in response to a thug, but the thug is the aggressor and the aggressor sets the terms for the exchange. In other words, Quayle should not have let the thing go with no more than that. He should have pointed out that this would be frowned upon in the Senate, as both candidates at the time were Senators, and this behavior is not how the Senate comports itself. Although they weren't candidates for Senate, one would think that the expectations were the same for anyone for high office.

That may not in itself been enough. The point is that you keep defending civilization, because if you don't, an important degradation has occurred. Trump cannot let up, but if the aggressors continue, force is justified in putting it down. If Trump backs down, the aggressions will get worse.

Newsome is threatening to do some stuff that is definitely illegal. Like withholding tax payments and then spending the funds of California's priorities. There's no authority for him to do that. That would be ramping up the exchange just like Bentsen did. Of course, they've been doing that all along, and nobody has called them on it. Eventually, there must a choice made to do so, or ths system will break down even further.

Updated:

7/26/24:

A shocking poll says over 70% of liberal Democrats would have preferred that Trump had died in the assassination attempt. What does that say about them? Shall we call them "extremists"?



This just in...

Confirmed: The wannabe Trump assassin was a Biden supporter… https://t.co/znxf8XX8xL

— BootsandOil (@BootsandO6892) July 26, 2024

7/24/24:

With the recent assassination attempt on Trump, it may be useful to re-visit this. It is worth studying, for no other reason than how the Democrats reacted to Bentsen's insult of Quayle. They really enjoyed it.

The truth is that the Democrats really enjoyed the attempt on Trump's life. Maybe not all of them, but certainly SOME of them. Maybe even the majority of them. The point is that the Democrats aren't really opposed to violence. The insult of Quayle was just one short step away from violence. It's just like the hate speech that spews from Democrats on a regular basis.

When things don't go their way, the Democrats are not opposed to violence. Seems like there was some violence today in DC. The terrorist sympathizers burned the flag, and raised the Palestinian flag. Tell me again, what country do we live in? Disrespecting the flag and then raising a flag that has a symbolic connection with terrorism? So the Democrats approve of this?

Once again, my assertion here is that the Democrats have no problem with political violence, nor in violating the norms of a civilized society. That is what Quayle meant when he said--"That was uncalled for, Senator." The solution for this is a strong reply. Any show of weakness only confirms the inferiority that the Democrats are trying to establish. Don't play their game, GOP. Be strong.

10.26.18:

Since I mentioned this recently, why not re-post this?  So, here it is. 

It is a good example of what is wrong with the never-Trumper faction.  They are really sympathetic to the lefty cause, and are ashamed of the conservative wing.  They appear to accept the premises of the left, such as what was discussed below, and what is happening today.

For instance, the left will say that the GOP is "violent", but what evidence of that exists?  We have the recent discussion about "bombs", which technically speaking weren't even bombs.  Unless there is evidence of a bomb that is connected to a right wing group, then don't accept the premise that it was a right wing group.  But for some of these never-Trumpers, they are all too ready to accept that premise.  Even if a right winger did it, it is guilt-by-association to blame Trump for it.

I suspect the fear that the Democrats will do a Goldwater on the GOP is what has inoculated the Democrats from counter attacks from the GOP after one of their own attacks.  This also gives the so-called moderate wing of the party a lot more power and influence than what they deserve.  They are the minority within the party, but it often seems like their influence is far greater than their numbers.

Even though Trump may not be the gentleman that the Bushes are, it would make no difference to the Democrats or their flunkies in the media as to how they are treated.  The media doesn't care about this issue.  Why should the rest of us?  It is a pattern.  The Democrats make an issue of something that they don't care about themselves.  If they did care, they would have been ashamed of Bentsen.  But it was the opposite.  They were PROUD of what he did to Quayle.


12.31.13:

The Bentsen-Quayle debate in 1988 has become something of a legend.  But it is more than that.  It is the very model of the GOP's failure to respond effectively to the Democrat's pretensions.  To summarize, what did Bentsen achieve in that debate?  He marginalized conservatism and the GOP itself.  He made it appear weak and stupid, while making Quayle appear the same.  This perceived weakness became a liability for President George Herbert Walker Bush as time wore on.  That liability wasn't unique, nor new to Quayle or the GOP, but has been part of the their problem all along.

To recap what Bentsen did specifically:

• He insulted Quayle personally--- implied that he was inferior---"You're no Jack Kennedy".
• Then he stared down Quayle as Quayle attempted to stand up for himself.  Quayle couldn't look him in the eye.
• Then Bentsen claimed the comparison wasn't apt because of what Quayle stood for.

The consequences were a big advantage for Democrats even if they didn't win that election.  How?

• It reinforced a pattern of the GOP's giving in to their premises.  Quayle not only countenanced the insult, but he allowed the GOP to be insulted as well.  That had to hurt on a psychological level.
• It reinforced and reestablished history.  Nixon was bounced even though he was a fighter---Goldwater lost in a big landslide.  The GOP learned not to challenge the left out of fear of the big loss.  

It appears to the GOP that the best way to deal with the left is to give in to them.  Fighting them only makes things worse.  The GOP ends up accepting all the left's premises and caves in again and again.

Ronald Reagan was the only GOP figure that has done well in challenging the left, but even he didn't win a complete victory.  What he did manage to win has been lost already and things are worse today than ever before.

How to fight the left?

It isn't enough to look good on TV as Reagan did.  Their has to be an intellectual foundation for the challenge and besides that, there needs to be an emotional toughness that you just don't see enough of from the GOP.  The emotional weakness could be seen with Quayle.  It isn't unique to him.

When you see Quayle failing to meet the glowering gaze of Bentsen, you can't help but walk away with the feeling that the GOP thinks of itself as inferior.  But the Democrats don't think that way of themselves.  If you don't respect yourself, why should anybody else?  Did Quayle really believe himself to be inferior to Kennedy and what Kennedy stood for?  There was an opportunity to answer Bentsen there, but Quayle missed it.

Why did Quayle miss that opportunity?  He wasn't prepared.  Quayle was warned not to make comparisons with Kennedy, but that preparation wasn't good enough.  There should have been some practice on how to recover from that eventuality if it were to occur.  The media set up Quayle for the thrashing when they asked the same question four different times.  This gave Bentsen his opening, so you cannot put all the blame on Quayle.  I mean the guy had his hands full taking on the media as well as his opponent.  He needed better preparation so as to avoid the debacle that occurred.

Could it be that the GOP just needs to do a better job of presenting itself?  It may have made a difference in that debate.  It may make a difference now.

For example, let's start with the pretensions of the glowering Bentsen.  Was Kennedy really better than Quayle?  Wasn't Kennedy a lot of hype with that Camelot BS?  Kennedy certainly had his good points, but he didn't last, did he?  As for the effect upon the country, by 1968, the country was in a mess.  That has to be some reflection upon Kennedy and the Democrats who were running the country.  Bentsen opened up a weakness that could have been an opportunity for Quayle.  Quayle, if he had been prepared for this, could have pounced.  It was an opportunity missed.  It is the type of weakness that hounds the GOP to this very day.  If the GOP cannot or will not respond to the pretensions of the left, where does that lead them but to the permanent status of a junior partner.

Rationalizing evil IS evil

 

Hillary tries another round of the politics of shut-uppery. It is just an extension of the Charlie Kirk assassination. Lest we forget, Trump was nearly assassinated himself, and MANY on the left approved of it. Many on the left also approved of Luigi Mangione's act of murder of someone he didn't like.

 

If you disagree, then you are at fault for any murders in the future it would seem. The approval of murder only legitimizes it and encourages MORE of the same.

 

It would be a huge mistake for those who oppose political violence to retaliate along the same lines. Indeed, if all that happens after an assassination like this is a few uncomfortable questions, then the political left should consider themselves fortunate.

 

The alternative would be an all out war of all against all. Do we really want that?

 
This is why you speak out unequivocally against the violence. You don't make rationalizations for it. Nor should you approve of it no matter which side of the aisle you're on.  To rationalize evil in response to evil will lose you the moral high-ground in any discussion.  You cannot complain about the evil if you engage in it yourself, and you cannot rationalize it away just because someone says something that you don't like.  You cannot approve of it and complain about it too.  That is, if you want society to be at peace with itself.

As for tit-for-tat retaliation, this is a likelihood if this continues.  There has to be accountability, but if the ballot box doesn't work, then it's on to the bullets.

 

Did Jimmy Kimmel say that Christians must forgive Kirk's assassin?

In reference to Ace of Spades blog post.

Kimmel really shouldn't be speaking to Christians, should he? Is HE a Christian? What does he really know about Christianity?

But first, the question must be asked. Or should it? Perhaps you can leave that to the people who truly believe in Christian doctrine.

Here's a possibility: Kimmel, being sympathetic to the left, isn't really speaking to Christians. No, his audience would be those who already have a problem with Christianity, and are preparing the battleground of the clash of ideas---to discredit those who do not believe Christianity really means that you must always forgive.

Forgiveness has a price, I would think. Maybe not in heaven, but on Earth. If you won't admit wrongdoing, nor will you change your ways, then why SHOULD you be forgiven?

It's not a religious argument, by the way. It is, or could be, but in this case, I'm referring to my own opinion. Anyone could disagree or agree with me. So redirect the question to Kimmel, and the question is this: Why should you expect forgiveness? Are YOU a Christian, and what is your reason for believing that Christianity requires unconditional forgiveness? Unconditional forgiveness is NOT my interpretation...

Dick Morris lunch alert

The lunch alert is about a capital gains tax cut

Comment:

The Dems will scream "it benefits the rich", and to a certain extent it will be true. However, others would benefit, including a number of folks who might tend to support Dems. It would help the economy, I agree with Morris there. There's a need for housing availability, and Morris says this would help.

Capital gains tax cuts don't really hurt tax collections, so it won't bust the budget even more. Maybe it could be another BBB, so the Dems cannot filibuster it.

Ternary Computing about to take over the computer world?

 

She makes interesting videos. I might want to keep track of this gal. You have to watch it in order to get the point. It may help if you have some working understanding of how computers work. In my opinion, the most important point may well be one in which no computer knowledge is even necessary.

 

 

Ideology made the left's favorite boogie-man stupid

 

Hitler's spies tried to tell him of the manufacturing advantage of the Allies, and in particular--America, but his ideology prevented him from seeing the truth. This failure to see the truth made Hitler stupid. A perfect example of what I've said before on this blog---ideology can make you stupid. It sure did make Hitler stupid.

Dallas Shooting Suspect Identified as 29-year-old Joshua Jahn

Motive unknown... Maybe the Fairy Godmother did it

Nah! Can't back that up.

Why do you suppose these guys keep whacking themselves? Is that the usual thing? Mangione didn't do it. Oh, he is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Even though there's video of him in the very act. Oh, well. Justice will prevail, I suppose...

A republic if you can keep it

The United States of America DOES NOT have a democracy, and never has. The Democrats like to say that our Democracy is being threatened. But how do you threaten something that does not exist?

It's just rhetoric from these Democrats. They really don't mean it. Democracy? From what democracy we DO have, they do NOT honor it. They won't honor the decision of the people in 2024. They never do honor it. Nor much of anything else, for that matter. They do not value HONOR itself. I know, I've read it on the blogosphere.

If the Democrats win, they'll institute ONE PARTY RULE, and it will be PERMANENT. Some folks call that TOTALITARIANISM. That's NOT DEMOCRACY, either. We DO have a REPUBLIC, for now. We DO have a CONSTITUTION, for now. If Democrats win, they'll pack the Supreme Court, and it will DICTATE to the rest of us. The COURT is NOT DEMOCRATIC. Senator Schumer actually said that packing the court will be in their plans. Their plan to institute one party rule failed by just ONE VOTE in the Senate in the early years of the Biden Presidency. A president who was "elected" with 81 million votes, which nobody with any brains would actually believe that this brain dead fool could get that many votes.

Saving "our Democracy" my ass.

3/11/16:

When the Constitutional convention (that gave the USA its present constitution) ended, Ben Franklin was asked what kind of government did they create, and that was his answer.

After over 200 years, have we managed to keep it, or did we lose it?

There are those who believe that we lost it.  I wasn't among those.  I figured we still had our Republic.  But I had a conversation with someone who said something that gives pause that notion.

He was suggesting what I could write on this here blog, and I invited him to write something himself, and I would post it.  He sort of refused while bringing up the possibility of repercussions.  That didn't sink in immediately, but now it has.  In other words, he was afraid to exercise his First Amendment rights of free speech.  That's the kind of thing that is not supposed to happen in the USA.  But here it is.  Somebody fears the government, so he keeps his mouth shut.

Did we lose our Republic?  Could be.

Change of pace (Astrodome's fate undetermined)

9/24/25:

The latest news about what to do about the dilapidated old stadium ( 60 years old). The best thing is to just tear it down and make a parking lot out of it. But sentimental types have other ideas. I was once sentimental about it, but not anymore. These sports palaces are wearing thin on me.

By the way, the artist rendering makes NRG stadium look far away. Actually, they're just a stone's throw apart. Really close in spots.







1/19/19:

A little walk down memory lane.  On Instapundit, there was something about how kids today are overprotected.  Heck, I thought I was overprotected.  But this story here says it is really unusual for a kid to walk home from school.  I was walking home from school right from the beginning.  It actually took me across a busy street in those days--- Washington Avenue.   There was a crossing guard there, at least.

That thought got me thinking about those times, which led me to the question of what will be the Fate of the Astrodome?  I can remember the time when the Dome was under construction.  (That actually skipped a few steps down memory lane, but I am not going to write about all that.)

It looks like they will not tear it down.  At least not yet.

The Fate of the Astrodome https://t.co/uW1Vwj1B0K

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) January 19, 2019

Windows really sucks

 

Hard for me to believe, but Windows sucks even more than I thought it did. Here's a video that will convince you of that, or you must be brain dead. Unbelievable what they're up to, and how aggressive they are in doing it.

Lost track of this guy for awhile. Bad stuff just keeps on happening.

If this kind of thing works, then why are the leftists seemingly as powerful as they are

 

I haven't heard of this guy, or don't remember seeing him before. I clicked on the tweet, and then on his profile. He's a black dude. From what he said about Kamala Harris, I'd say he's probably conservative. The political left will just call him bad names, and disregard what he says. Not saying he's wrong to post what he posts. I'm just wondering if this is sufficient to make a difference.

I’ve sat through over 50 hours of Charlie Kirk’s videos as an ethnically Black American.

Not one racist word.

Not 1.

What Democrats do is cut snippets, strip context, and shove sound bites at the same gullible slob audience too lazy to fact-check.

That isn’t exposing…

— A Gene Robinson (@AlBuffalo2nite) September 21, 2025

Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots

 

What did the quote of Thomas Paine actually mean? How can it be applied in our modern time?

In that last post, it may be misunderstood as to my intention. Something must be done, but what? Words are not getting it done.

To me, we have gone past words. Now it is time for deeds, but I remain uncertain as to what to do at this point. No call for violence should be inferred.

Are we entertained?

 

Another day of gladiatorial combat, or so it seems. Why use that word-- "gladiatorial"? Gladiators refers to Rome, and gladiators weren't "high class". No, gladiatorial combat aren't the stuff of the hoity-toity. Those folks don't get their hands dirty. A gladiator has to get into the pits, so to speak. They have to contend with the nastiest of the nasty. These leftists are a hard-bitten nasty bunch.

A clean-cut, "nice" guy like Charlie Kirk will just get cut to pieces by he nasties. I was thinking that his widow might be doing the Chrisian thing to forgive an enemy for their evil, but this world requires something a bit tougher.

Today's gladiators might be in the NFL. Gladiators were also used as entertainers in the Roman era. So a thought runs through my mind, is all of this just entertainment for the hoity-toities? Well, you get paid handsomely in these days, if you go out and do that kind of work.

But there's a kind of work that doesn't pay. That means it a game in which the participants play for keeps. What exactly are we playing for, in this modern daily combat of the political world?

It's all about the next election. But if the left cared about elections, then why support a gun-man, who takes out an opponent like Charlie Kirk?

Kirk didn't want bullet proof glass, I have read. He knew the dangers, but he didn't want to hide behind the glass. What's the better choice--- to be able to debate the left in the battlespace of politics; or to go to the grave yard as a martyr, who no longer has anything to say in this world? Do his death speak louder than his words? Maybe. Maybe not.

We know what kind of game Kirk was playing... The left plays a different game, and it isn't debate. They'd rather shoot than to debate. That's what it means to approve his shooting.

We can fight that battle on the ground in this world with the words in a debate, or we can fight it with bullets. Evidently the left doesn't believe in debate, so they want to settle this with guns. Yep, the anti-gun left wants to settle this with guns, as opposed to ballots.

If the left forces us to use guns, are we willing and able to meet them on their own terms? We'll see. This also reminds me of what I've seen before, which is a saying-- being right isn't enough. You might have to climb down from your clean and safe spots, and get into the ring that will get your hands dirty. The left seems to think that they can overwhelm you with their force if they cannot overwhelm you with their argumentation. I think you'd better be prepared to do battle either way.

As for me, I don't know if I am ready for this.  That is, if it comes to violence.  I'd like to think that I could do SOMETHING, though.   Doing SOMETHING is a helluva lot better than NOTHING.

 

Let's talk

 

Bang! "Never mind". But Van Jones is being smart here. The smarter ones will realize that they are going over the cliff and will at least stop for a moment and say, "slow down, pal". Good for Van Jones, but you really need to prove your sincerity. Like Reagan said to Gorby, "trust, but verify".

Van Jones Gets Emotional After a Newly Discovered DM from Charlie Kirk

“After he was murdered, my team called and said he was trying to reach you … This guy is reaching out to his mortal enemy saying, we need to be gentlemen and sit down together … I've sat on it long enough.” pic.twitter.com/3qE1PIEaGl

— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) September 20, 2025

We're saved! Jimmy Kimmel is back! Yay!

/sarc

 

The political left has outdone themselves in hypocrisy. Just when you thought things might turn around, but we can't have THAT, now can we?

Think of it. How wonderful it is now that the left can be a vile as they want, and we get to feel so free. I think the hags on The View might have a collective big "O".

Sure, we can have free speech. But left wants the freedom to celebrate the murder of people with whom they have a disagreement, while at the same time disregarding how they typically try to silence others, INCLUDING CHARLIE KIRK WHO IS NOW DEAD.

The sad thing is that they will never get it. Millions of people might fall for this nonsense.

P.S.

Methinks the political left is in a bit of trouble, and desperately wants to flip the script. Sheesh. It might even work, too. If that happens, I think the country is hopelessly lost. Nobody on the so-called "right" would ever cheer and celebrate a political assassination. (I could be wrong, but I don't think so.) These are the same people toppling statues, and questioning the very legitimacy of America as a nation.

Meat head versus Bill Maher

 

Rob Reiner is on the waw path and scalps are going to be taken... I didn't watch the video, but they say that the media wants to tell the GOP to GFY. They won't even talk to GOP. OH????

The first step toward murder

 Pretty easy to denounce someone as a liar.  Indeed, if there is no truth, as the post-modernists say, then nobody really lies.

But I don't subscribe to the "philosophy" of post modernism.  What is the truth?  Not knowing it could send you down a dark path.

No exit wound said to be a miracle

Bullet found just under the skin, says doctor treating Kirk after the shooting.

Something to save before it's gone

 Here's a most interesting link put out by none other than the blogfather himself, Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit.

At this link you will find another link to a blog that appears to have gotten suppressed.  It might be well to remember that when you hear leftists screech about "censorship".

The blog was called "Armed and Dangerous".  Reynolds links to a post titled "Gramscian damage".   Once you start tracking these ideas, you find a leftist at its root.  The point being is that we are truly in a cultural war that has been going on for decades.  Only now does the left acknowledge the truth of that.  Only when the unwitting targets of such a war finally see it and start to fight back is that fact that this Culture War is recognized for what it is.

Mind you, when Pat Buchanan uttered it at the Republican National Convention in 1992, the political left at that time denied it.  But Pat Buchanan was spot on.  I recall watching that speech on TeeVee back then, and then talking about it the next day with a lady at work.  She called Pat Buchanan a "worm".  I said in reply that I liked the speech.  She withdrew without saying a word.  Maybe she was surprised that someone could agree with the speech.

This has been a long war waged over the generations.  The 18-29 year old group that supports the likes of Mamdami in New York City, weren't even born yet when Buchanan first uttered the phrase "Culture War".  But we see the effects of that culture war, and where it is taking us.  For those of us who haven't been converted to Marxism, it may be time to see the truth for what it is; and to do what we can to reverse it.

The younger generations have no idea of the way things were back before they were born.  For any person can only know about what they come into contact with.   The knowledge of Gramsci is not taught in schools, because I never heard of it until I had already left school with my BS degree.  Therefore, the younger generations may take the current circumstance to be "normal".  But the older generations SHOULD know better, because they lived during a time when things were different.  Alas, many of them do not.  The young get the version of history that the modern left wants them to see.

Then we called them brainwashed, but the younger generation brushes it off.  The young think that they know everything, but that's nothing new.  The young has always thought that way.   I was young once, and I think I know at least that much.  But the young need to broaden their exposure to other views than the ones that have been hammered into their heads from the cradle.

Therefore, the one thing that I will do is to save this essay and make a copy of it somewhere.  At somewhere it will be saved.  Like the monks who saved the works of the ancient Romans, it may be the only thing that might survive the coming holocaust.  Even the memory of once was might be saved.  If this isn't done, then nobody will ever know that such existed.