Posse Incitatus

Right on cue: Salesforce moves against firearms retailers

The core problem with the David French Quisling Never Turmpers is that they refuse to acknowledge what is going on:  we are in a war.  It is not a war we wanted, but is a war we must fight and win.

Trying to adhere to the old rules and hope that by presenting an example of civility and decorum we will motivate our enemies to a higher morality is a path to sure defeat.

A cynic might observe that the David French faction is fine with that.  They already serve as the controlled opposition and will have to do so indefinitely.

But those who actually take their rights and beliefs seriously cannot accept such a state of dependent servitude.

Salesforce's move against gun retailers is the latest example.  In a truly free marketplace, Salesforces' decision to bar its clients from selling certain items would cause it to look marketshare.  Other competitors would move in and their revenue would suffer.

But we no longer have a free marketplace.  In each tech sector, monopolists or oligarchs openly band together to crush the competition and limit customer choice.

And the David French faction praises them for this.  Government intervention would be the cure that is worse than the disease to these useless, self-righteous tools.

But that is a proper exercise of government.  These are unelected and increasingly unaccountable private entities that use their market power to restrict trade and limit the civil rights of others.  

Now one might ponder the irony of the left deciding that government by vulture capitalists is now suddenly a good thing, but the left has never let consistency or morality get in the way of what it wants.

The David Frenchists would have us believe that to effectively fight back with the tools at our disposal - specifically government regulation and anti-trust actions - would make us no better than our enemies.

This is of course utterly wrong - those laws are in place for precisely this purpose.  Their use is essential to maintaining the liberty that the David Frenchists insist is their lodestar.

What makes this even more hilarious is that French was once a soldier (a fact he reminds us of all the time) and as such, he should be fine with the concept of returning incoming fire.  Of course he didn't serve in a combat arm - in fact his job with to nitpick the soldiers doing the actual fighting.   It's interesting that Kurt Schlichter, who was a real no-kidding line officer - is on the opposite side of this issue with French.  That's because French knows nothing about how to win a war, only a court case where the rules are strictly enforced for both sides.

Schlichter knows that the battlefield isn't a courtroom, and the enemy will constantly create new weapons and tactics.  Battles aren't supposed to be fair.  In fact, the more lop-sided they are (for your side) the better.

The left is fully exploiting this.  They are changing the rules on the fly and refuse to accept that any ground is neutral.  People who believe the personal is political have no regard for anything.  Appealing to the humanity of ghouls who demand the "right" to kill children at the moment of birth and happily call for the murder of high school students wearing red hats cannot be reasoned with or placated.  

They aren't even interested in converts, they want their enemies destroyed.

This is why David Frenchism must be declared anathema.  It is a Fifth Column, sapping our resources and will to resist.

 

More Christian push-back against Quisling Never Trump theology

A couple of weeks ago I mentioned that actual conservatives are getting tired of the useless preening of the Quisling Never Trumper like David French.

The title says it all:  Against David French-ism.

I have to say that the piece is actually too gentle.  It gives French far too much credit for good intentions and the author bends over backwards to say nice things about him.  Naturally French's allies aren't nearly as polite, which is funny since they're always the ones tut-tutting about "civility."

The fact of the matter is that we are engaged in a war not just of ideas, but also over practical things, like whether babies will continue to murdered wholesale for fun and profit.

Hitherto, the left has used every tool at hand, fair or fowl, but social conservatives have handcuffed themselves, insisting that virtue alone will win the day.

It hasn't.

The David French's of the world are content with an unrelenting tale of defeat because they believe that their hands are clean.  The deaths of 60 million infants and the impending mutilation and sterilization of countless confused adolescents is fine with them so long as their hands are "clean."

But they aren't.  The problem with Protestant theology is that it focuses too much on intention and not enough on execution.  When Catholics seek absolution, they do it not just for what they have done, but also for the things they have failed to do.

David French is personally moral.  His values are impeccable.  Military service, adopting children - surely he is one who has earned salvation.  He didn't vote for the awful Trump, nor did he vote for Hillary - therefore he carries no guilt.  

But it is not enough to stand aside and claim non-involvement.  The world is a flawed, messy place and sometimes people of conviction have to put their souls at risk - to do things less than optimal - to prevent a greater evil.  This requires judgement, conviction and especially humility.  One's garment will no longer be spotless, but the cause of right and good sometimes requires a little dirt.

One would think that as a soldier, French would understand this.  But French wasn't a trigger-puller, in fact his job was to prosecute trigger-pullers for their transgressions.  His military service was abstract and antiseptic.  He was only concerned with the law, and his task was to determine the guilt of others.  He was never called on to act in the heat of battle.

I think this explains why he thinks one can wage a war and also remain as pure and clean as the wind-driven snow.

Those of us who live in the ranks and serve on the firing line of the culture war know otherwise.

 

 

New Leadership at MSU

After many months of a nationwide confidential candidate search and clandestine job interviews, Michigan State University finally has named its new president: Dr. Samuel Stanley, who has been president of the State University of New York at Stony Brook since 2009.

He formerly served as the Vice Chancellor for Research at Washington University in St. Louis. The MSU board of trustees maintained that it needed to keep candidates' identities secret to protect them from possible firing or reprisals if their employers found out they were interviewing for another position.

Dr. Stanley is a Harvard medical school graduate and a biomedical researcher -- both qualifications that will serve him well as he oversees a major research university that has strengthened its medical and science profile in recent decades. It also helps that Stony Brook, too, is a research-intensive university. MSU boasts the National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory and the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams, and has made great strides in expanding its research into fields such as biochemistry and molecular biology.

During his introductory news conference Tuesday, Dr. Stanley came across as a sincere and affable man, and said he intends to emphasize transparency and accountability at MSU. Let's hope he means it.

Not surprisingly, Dr. Stanley uttered the usual academic claptrap about diversity, inclusion, gender sensitivity and all of the other leftist bromides, but this comes with the territory. It's darned near impossible to rise to this level in academia without spouting off those terms. He promised to meet with victims of convicted sex offender Dr. Larry Nassar, whose appalling deeds at MSU have dragged the university's reputation through the mud in a slow-motion nightmare that's been unfolding for a couple of years (although it feels like 100 years).

I noticed the Detroit papers and local television stations have gone out of their way to interview students and activists at Stony Brook who are glad to see Dr. Stanley go, and who have trashed him as a bad president. They warn that MSU doesn't know what it's in for. One of the criticisms of his tenure at Stony Brook is that the university is under three federal Office of Civil Rights investigations into how it handled sexual assault cases on campus.

But let's face it: In this day and age, such investigations are commonplace. Thankfully, the Trump administration is putting a stop to the outrageous policies of the Obama administration in which college students accused of sexual assault were denied due process, and many non-lawyers (often militant leftists unlikely to give the accused males the benefit of the doubt) sat on panels that judged guilt or innocence using a lower standard of proof than is required in a criminal court.

One huge positive about Dr. Stanley is he has no previous ties to MSU, since the university's insular culture has led over the years to a lack of accountability and massive corruption and coverups not unlike the heinous doings of the Roman Catholic bishops who covered for pedophile priests. The "CYA" mentality, cronyism and old boy networks are largely what got MSU into its present mess.

"Having someone with an outside perspective is so important," said former Michigan Gov. Jim Blanchard, a Spartan alumnus. "We've been inbred in recent years. That can lead to parochialism."

On the down side, Dr. Stanley has not had experience overseeing a major athletic program like MSU's, which offers massive revenues and positive recognition for the university on the one hand, but also can be vulnerable to misbehaving athletes further tarnishing the university's reputation with sexual assaults, drug/alcohol offenses and other lawbreaking behavior. This part of the job will be every bit as crucial as overseeing the multi-million dollar research programs, capital campaigns and building projects.

I am cautiously optimistic about Dr. Stanley. Just a gut feeling, I guess. At least he admits he doesn't have all of the answers and wants to tap into the knowledge and expertise of those around him. He also wants to meet with the women whose lives were shattered by the horrendous sexual assaults of a man who should have been removed and held accountable far sooner than he was, and to sincerely listen to them.

I wish him well, and will be closely following his career.

 

 

 

The elites have only themselves to blame for the populist backlash

The weekend blackout on the European elections has lifted, and what a changed landscape now stands before us.

Everywhere the Establishment is in retreat as populist movements rise in the polls.  

The talking heads assure us that these are dangerous "far-right" movements on par with the Nazis.  In fact, they were the predictable consequence of the Ruling Class ignoring the people who elected them.

The UK should not have even been voting.  Outgoing Prime Minister Theresa May insisted more than 80 times that Brexit would happen in March - only to back down at the moment of truth.

The Ruling Class elites no doubt savored their triumph, but the electoral disaster they suffered over the weekend was the direct popular response.  Naturally they are too stupid to understand this and will try to step up their repression, but that will only lead to greater convulsions as the people demand their sacred right to self-rule.

This is why the "nationalists" are working across boundaries and languages to form a common front against the Ruling Class.  These people aren't xenophobes or chauvanists, they simply believe in self-determination and like their national culture as it is.

For more than 50 years, the blame for the wars of the 20th Century has been laid at the foot of "nationalism."  If only people didn't care about their country, no one would have died - or so the theory goes.

But the truth is that the world wars were the result of the Ruling Class, not popular rage.  Russia, Austria-Hungary and Germany were monarchies, not participatory democracies.  

There was even less democracy on display in the years before World War II, with left-wing dictators ruling Russia, Germany, Italy and a host of lesser nations.  The EU is merely a transnational version of these movements - a corporatist entity determined to reduce its subject peoples into a faceless, culture-free proletariat ruled from on high.

When Brexit was thwarted, free people everywhere understood the real meaning:  the Ruling Class will no longer accept the results of popular elections.

Thus they are using their vote to send a message that they strongly disagree.  If the Ruling Class continues to ignore them, the next message will be louder - and more violent.

The most important aspect of a functioning democracy is for the loser to accept the result with grace.  Yet the Ruling Classes - for all their sophistication and alleged intelligence - is failing this basic test.  In the process they are destroying the institutions they rule and putting their own pathetic existance in peril.

Memorial Day 2019: A Tale of Two Soldiers

It is possible to both support an overall course of action while having strident objections to how it is carried out.

That's exactly how I feel about George W. Bush and the Iraq War.

As I noted at the time on this blog, his messaging was muddled and his defense of his efforts was half-hearted at best.  One can argue with whether dissolving the Iraqi Army and starting over from scratch was wise, but at this late date I don't think there can be any debate that his overall execution sucked.

Nowhere was this more pronounced than his muddled war aims.  One cannot sound the attack cautiously - at the moment of decision we must be all-in.  Yet that's exactly the line Dubya tried to walk, in one breath exhorting Americans to sacrifice while in the next demanding that we not hate our enemies.

And it comes to this:  American Taliban "soldier" John Walker Lindh is released from prison less than 20 years after being captured while fighting (and killing) the armed forces of the United States.

A century ago he would have been court-martialed on the spot and shot.  A half-century ago he would have been court-martialed and executed in prison.

Now, however, he walks free and - if reports are true - is unrepentant.

This exemplifies the half-assed approach of not just Dubya but also his father, who similarly wimped out on the brink of victory in 1991.  They did not understand - and still don't, I suspect - that democracies don't go to war to preserve the status quo, they fight for a better world than the one they lost.  It's the only thing that can justify the sacrifices needed for victory.

And so it comes to pass that due to the misguided mercy of the president, a violent terrorist lives and walks free among us, and brave men like Capt. Sean Grimes are gone.

Memorial Day is important because the fallen are nothing but memories.  The living go on, have children and we need no reminders because they walk among us.  But slowly, incrementally, the memories of the fallen - and those who remember them - will fade away.

Sean was engaged when he was killed.  By now, he might be the father of a teenager and his parents might look with pride on their grandchildren.  The same is true for thousands of others.

We cannot allow the memory of their sacrifices - and the foolishness responsible for it - to fade.  Today is a grim reminder that the right thing can be done the wrong way. 

Irresolution is not mercy, half-measures are not prudence, and leaders must be held responsible - if not while in office than in the verdict of history.

Another Courageous Liberal

Every now and then, I like to give credit where credit is due when it comes to liberals who have the courage to criticize other liberals and/or failed liberal policy. My March 4, 2015 post, "Kudos to Courageous Liberals" singled out several of them. It takes a tremendous amount of courage to be a liberal and step out of the lockstep, left-wing narrative. Upset that apple cart, and expect to be demonized and ostracized (if not censored and fired from your job).

Today, I say 'hats off' to New York Times columnist Farhad Manjoo, who penned a piece titled,  "America's Cities Are Unlivable. Blame Wealthy Liberals." Manjoo notes that many cities are run by progressives yet have intractable homelessness, unaffordable housing and streets littered with syringes and feces, among other disgusting detritus. 

California, which has fabulous wealth in areas like Silicon Valley and Hollywood, also has large swaths of counties that are struggling badly, a huge underclass and a dramatically shrinking middle class. The Golden State ranks as the most poverty-stricken state in the union. Fully one quarter of the nation's homeless people live in California.

Manjoo says a large part of the problem is restrictive zoning laws in cities that make affordable housing (i.e., apartments, condos, townhouses) scarce. You see, those who fancy themselves tolerant progressives often have an atttitude of "I've got mine!" and they don't want the riffraff to infringe upon their gated communities or neighborhoods with character (historic architecture, yards and landscaping, funky little shops that have been around for decades).

Obviously, other factors are at work, including alcoholism, drug addiction, mental illness, and people who are unemployed or underemployed because of various circumstances include having a criminal record, bad credit record and maybe just the inability to rise above a tough upbringing. But Manjoo pretty much focuses on policy, and that's fine.

One observation he makes, in the obligatory attempt to slam conservatives and Republicans, is that wealthy liberals in big cities are doing the same thing as the GOP and ICE: Trying to keep people out. Um, sorry Farhad, but this is really apples to oranges. The conservatives want border integrity. They recognize that allowing our nation to be swamped by ILLEGAL immigrants attempting to bull rush the border and enter our nation ILLEGALLY is crucial. Trump supporters want to keep out non-citizens who will be a burden to an already hurting nation.

Some of these destitute people smuggle drugs into the country. Some are gang bangers. Many harbor diseases. Many others are decent people with good hearts, but still lawbreakers. Most of these illegal aliens will burden our hospitals, social services, schools, law enforcement and judicial system.

We already have millions of citizens struggling with homelessness, drug addiction, mental health problems, the inability to get healthcare insurance, and in the case of military veterans, often painful physical and/or emotional ordeals. It is sheer insanity to want to bring in more desperate people when we cannot even take care of our own.

Being the glutton for punishment that I am, I read some of the comments, and their idiocy didn't surprise me at all (after all, these are folks who actually think the NY Times is gospel). One in particular sums up the left-wing view: It's not a local issue; it's a national issue: Income inequality.

It's frightening to think there are millions of naive liberals who actually believe the right recipe of laws, regulations, judicial rulings and bureaucratic oversight will bring about some sort of utopian income equality. It's even more disturbing to realize that these dreamers are utterly clueless about the myriad causes of income inequality (Hint: The causes are as varied as different personalities, facial features, skin colors, psychological makeups and hundreds of other attributes). The "solution" for income inequality (a totalitarian, big brother government that lords it over your every move) is FAR worse than income inequality. Yet income inequality is almost as much an obsession among leftists as climate change and the hopeless morass of gender identity politics.

When this kind of simpleton, superficial thinking permeates 50 percent of the electorate, it makes me pessimistic about our nation's future.

But I digress. Read Mr. Manjoo's column. It's pretty compelling.

The Democrat panic over declassification

Being a Democrat means never having to say your sorry.

It's funny how the same people who were demanding that grand jury testimony be (illegally) made public are now in a lather over Attorney General Robert Barr obtaining full declassification authority from President Trump.

Which is it, Dems, do you want the truth or not?

Old and busted:  "WE NEED ALL THE THINGS MADE PUBLIC!!!"

New hotness:  "NATIONAL SECURITY SOURCES AND METHODS!!!  KEEP IT ALL SECRET!1!"

The current Dem drive for impeachment can best be understood as a spoiling attack to muddy the waters.  It may get some headlines, but ultimately it will fail because the votes simply aren't there and criminal convictions speak louder than spin.

And that's what worries them.  Barr is a seasoned, shrewd lawyer.  He's going to build air-tight cases that likely won't even need to be prosecuted.

As I've noted before, there is zero loyalty in the modern Democrat machinery.  None of these people are going to jail to cover for someone else.  The public finger-pointing between James Comey and John Brennan is merely a glimpse of the deal-making going on in private.

I'm not one of those demanding life imprisonment for those involved.   It's not necessary.  Even a couple of months in prison will spell personal and professional ruin for these people.  They are lifelong bureaucrats with no other skills.  Having their security clearance pulled and a felony in their record will wreck them.

That's why they are desperate to cut a deal - and so shrill in their attempts to change the subject.

May finally out - UK's worst prime minister ever?

Theresa May has finally announced her resignation, ending one of the most sordid and disgraceful governments in British history.

I say this as a student of UK government.  When people think of awful prime ministers, Neville Chamberlain frequently comes to mind, but while Chamberlain's foreign policy was disastrous, he didn't undermine the core values and rights of the British people.

May has done exactly that.  Her nominally "conservative" government has turned a blind eye to rape gangs, stood helplessly as violent crime has surged and instead wastes police resources on censoring people's social media accounts.

Her political prosecution of Tommy Robinson is a national disgrace to the Sceptered Isle.

Electorally, he's wrecked her party and undermined public faith in the government itself.  She lied about holding a snap-election and then lost it.  She lied about implementing Brexit and then lied about its timetable.  

The Tories have lost their way and Nigel Farage's Brexit Party may be the only hope to rebuild British liberty.  

Set against these follies, Chamberlain looks pretty good by comparison.  When he reluctantly stepped aside, his successor faced a dire strategic situation, but at least could look with hope and confidence at the core institutions and society of the United Kingdom.  May's successor won't have that luxury.  Virtually every institution stands discredited.

Good riddens.

BONUS ANGLE:  Her ouster will likely free Donald Trump of any reluctance to expose British involvement in Spygate, particularly collusion between CIA and CGHQ.  I can't help but wonder if Trump's declassification order might have been a factor.

The Do-Nothing Demagogues

It's bad enough that the Democrat House is still obsessing over RUSSIA!™ and alleged obstruction of justice by President Trump and has not done anything worthwhile during nearly five months in the majority.

But now, in addition to endless subpoenas, testimony, demands for unredacted documents (often impossible to grant if the administration is to follow the law), and scurrilous character assassinations, the Democrats are exploiting the illegal immigrants and border meltdown for their own contemptible purposes.

There have been several unattended children from Central America who have died while in the custody of the Border Patrol during the past few weeks. As I have mentioned before, many of the illegal immigrants swamping our southern border carry diseases. Put them all together in cramped quarters, and sicknesses spread. 

Try to deal with the illegal immigrants in a rational, humane way that also protects the integrity of the border, and watch some left-wing judge step in with a capricious ruling against the administration. Because of the men and women in black robes, all illegal border crossers must be allowed to seek asylum. We simply don't have enough judges to conduct prompt hearings, and we struggle to process them. So they're released into the interior of the country, and many will never show up for their scheduled hearing. This lax policy encourages more lawbreakers to head north to escape their hellhole conditions. When does it ever end?

Democrat policies have facilitated putting untold young immigrants in grave danger of sexual exploitation and assault, as well as endangered their health and the health of others who journey from thousands of miles away in dangerous conditions. But don't expect the Dems to agree to a reasonable solution for the border. This is too valuable a political weapon for them.

In the past couple days, some Democrats have stepped way over the line with irresponsible and outrageous charges against the administration. Rep. Lauren Underwood of Illinois clashed with Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Kevin McAleenan during a committee hearing, and concluded by saying, "At this point, with five kids that have died, 5,000 separated from their families, I feel like, and the evidence is really clear, this is intentional," Underwood said. "It's a policy choice being made on purpose by this administration, and it's cruel and inhumane."

McAleenan fired back, rightfully calling that "an appalling accusation." He was right.

It is galling to see Democrats bending over backwards to open the floodgates to hundreds of thousands of more destitute people when we have homeless encampments in many cities that are run by Democrats. When we have veterans who are homeless and cannot get adequate medical care of social services. When we have crumbling infrastructure, an opioid epidemic, horrendous big city schools and violent crime in too many urban neighborhoods. 

We're struggling, and people are looking in vain for Washington's politicians to do something. Good luck with that.

 

 

Plead the Fifth or Flee the Country

Diligent investigators are continuing to expose the corruption of many former Obama administration high level operatives, shining light into the dirty, dark places.

It's no surprise that erstwhile allies are beginning to turn on each other. Haven't we heard former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein slamming former FBI Director James Comey of late? And haven't former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper pointed fingers at each other regarding who wanted to use the infamous dossier to obtain a FISA warrant to surveil the Trump campaign? Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe has also been caught up in the scrum. Expect more of this in the coming weeks.

Also expect pleas of the Fifth Amendment and/or attempts to turn tail and flee the country from people being held accountable once Inspector General Michael Horowitz and Attorney General Bill Barr's razor-sharp investigator John Durham get closer to the truth on the origins of the Deep State's Trump investigation. And watch out for more obstruction of justice by the Trump-hating crooks through deleted emails, scrubbing of hard drives -- maybe even the pounding of smartphones! Deja Vu all over again.

Remember what happened 20 years ago in the campaign finance scandal involving illicit Chinese money going to Bill Clinton and the Democrats? Targets of the investigation pled the Fifth Amendment and/or fled the country. Yet the press continued to tout the fantasy that this was strictly a political witch hunt. Wouldn't want to let solid evidence upset a left-wing narrative now, would we?

The latest breathless reporting by the corrupt media has White House Counsel Don McGahn obstructing justice by refusing to testify before a congressional committee. The implication is that McGahn never has and never will cooperate with the investigation into alleged collusion and/or obstruction of justice by President Trump. In fact, McGahn gave 30 hours of testimony to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. He just doesn't want to be used as a Democrat puppet in the continued kabuki theater of the Democrat House.

The timing of the rats fleeing the sinking ship and turning viciously on each other is excellent for the Trumpster's 2020 campaign and chances for re-election. Many self-righteous liberals rage with indignation on Twitter and left-wing cable TV about how big a liar Donald Trump is. There's no doubt Trump lies, just like all politicians. But the lies coming from the likes of Brennan, Comey, Clapper, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and many others who worked for Obama promise to dwarf untruths from Trump -- probably by a 10-1 margin. This could get really interesting. Enjoy!