Skip to main content


Showing posts from June, 2019

Scumbag Kamala Harris vs. Obama

If Joe Biden has a spotty record on civil rights, why would Obama make him his VP?

Evidently that is a question that didn't occur to Scumbag Kamala Harris as she schemed her bad-faith ambush on Biden.

Terms I've come up with to describe Sen. Harris, descriptors of what people hate in politicians (and it's almost amazing so many observers have failed to notice these in Scumbag Harris): dishonest, phony, opportunistic, panderer, cynical, more clever than wise and not very clever at that, intellectually shallow, race-baiter, malicious, demagogue.
Her role in the Kavanaugh smears when the chips were down says it all; of the Dems getting in on that appalling act, she is surely the most despicable.  How would you feel about having her as prosecutor in a case against you?  Kavanaugh found out the hard way.
And this is the candidate the betting markets are assigning the best chance to win the nomination?

[Addendum 7/6: Others are catching on!]

What makes the Left so loathsome and dangerous?

Two major problems with present-day left-wing American politics:

1. The usual problems with leftism I've discussed before, but in particular the clamor among left-wingers - and the lefter the more bizarro and unhinged - for more government taxes, controls, etc.

2. The left's refusal to engage in a serious, responsible, accountable dialogue with the opposition (much less the strongest representatives among their opposition [e.g.]).  (The irony of the left's defecating all over Habermas on this count is lost on them....)  Today the leftist trend is ever more toward deplatforming, shaming, shunning, ignoring, strawmanning, contempt, hubris, flat-out dishonesty/evasion, ridicule, echo-chambering, mob intimidation, screaming and shouting, gaslighting, crying racism/sexism/transphobia/etc. on razor-thin pretexts, smearing . . . those are some big intellectual vices, and they explain a ton about the deplorable intellectual degeneration/atrophying/disease of the present-day left.


The intellectual collapse of the left accelerates further...

As if the massive overwhelming body of evidence of left-wing intellectual collapse accumulating seemingly by the day under my 'democrats' and 'leftist losers' tags wasn't enough, we get this ("Unsafe" 1930s SF school mural to be destroyed).  This is "cutting edge San Francisco values," unchecked, undiluted.  (The school board voted 6-0; the diversity of viewpoint here . . . I don't know how to finish that sentence.)  To borrow wording from my previous post, I believe that, barring some unforeseen (ahem) and revolutionary turn of intellectual events, this collapse is inevitable and irreversible given the widely shared values, assumptions and episteme of left-wingers as they have "evolved" over recent history.  Where is the wisdom in any of this stuff?  My term for this "development": Slow-mo trainwreck. :(

This mural has been up for decades.  Questions: Why only now do the students and/or faculty get around to being "h…

"Trump's racism" vs. his opposition's dishonesty

[Warning for snowflakes: drill instructor mode below.]

Here's a question that would be asked in a polity governed by reason and wisdom:

If Trump's opposition/haters are correct, Trump said that neo-Nazis in Charlottesville in Aug. 2017 were "very fine people" - purportedly an implication of his statement that there were "very fine people on both sides" in Charlottesville in Aug. 2017.

If Trump's opposition/haters are correct, Trump's statement emboldened and gave succour and comfort to white supremacists, neo-Nazis, racists, white nationalists, etc.

If Trump's opposition/haters are correct, there's nothing that Trump said or did since that time to downplay his giving comfort and succour to white supremacists.

So, the question:

Why hasn't there been a repeat of Charlottesville all around the country since then (close to 2 years now), with emboldened white supremacists running amok and terrorizing non-whites?

Isn't that what Trump's hater…

The intellectual quality of 'Right' and 'Left' today

[The broad category of individuals listed here would be something like "public intellectual figures influential on contemporary mainstream American cultural and political thought."]

For the time being, I'll just drop this list of names and then explain later how the collected efforts of the 'Right' figures can easily wipe the floor with the collection of 'Left' figures listed.  I mean, isn't it obvious to anyone who's done his homework?  (Hint: which side has more overall aggregate wisdom?  [For instance, only one side has authors of books titled: The Book of Virtues; The Road to Character.]  It's a no-brainer, much like how a Golden State Warriors team with a healthy Curry and Durant wipes the floor with otherwise pretty skilled teams.  I'm sorry to say that I don't think that the "left" side rises to the level of the 2017-2018 Houston Rockets in this analogy, because it really isn't close.  The left side is more like a .…

Prediction: Trump (or a Republican) will win in 2020

Mark my words; I'd be willing to bet 10,000 to 1 odds on this.  Details to come.  Gist: the Republican Party isn't morally and intellectually bankrupt (it's part way there, more in the intellectual rather than moral part, I think), but the Democrat Party is (i.e., in a different category - of primarily-intellectual degeneracy and perversity).  Heck, even I, an ordinary joe citizen with common sense and persistence, could wipe the floor with any of these two-dozen statist clowns.  But for Trump it should be plenty easy enough; just look how he dispatched with Crooked Hillary, the most pretend-qualified candidate in modern history (and my implication her cynical enablers, including it appears all the two dozen clowns).

The American people don't want their fucking statism and controls and their "free" this and that for illegals, their increasingly-expensive intellectual meltdown on college campuses, their hubristic contempt, their being the boy who cried racism a…

Is this blog too abrasive?

Someone sent me the questions/input copypasted below, which I'll answer in a follow-up post.

Meanwhile, if any of you reading this is a fat fucking pig and wants to do something about it, perhaps you just haven't found the proper motivation.  (Anecdote: a Church pastor friend of mine shed 100 pounds of fat and added 15+ pounds of muscle in 7 months using simple Snake Diet tricks.  And there's a shitload of other anecdotal cases that would be widely known about if only snowflakes weren't so triggered by truth and go tattling so much to the ban-happy 'net nannies.)  'Snake Diet Wizard' Cole Robinson is a motivational genius.  Stop fucking eating, fatty!


Hello, I've read your articles of which you've posted recently on [...] I just wanted to make a few comments via pm (Out of respect for you and myself). I thoroughly enjoyed reading your article and quite a few of the links you've posted along with it. I felt that you presented a well defin…

When AOC wept, or: she retweeted the photos

[Point of reference: "When Chomsky wept"]

Another Obnoxious Commie (AOC) retweeted photos of herself weeping at the sight of detained children at the border.  Maybe this insufferableignoramus just doesn't have enough life experience to know this is in poor taste (presumably someone like Chomsky would know better) - which then gives lie to her pretense to being a know-it-all with the intellectual and moral chops to take down all those right-wing jerks in a single tweet.

Her photo-retweeting amounts to a phony display of moral superiority.  I don't mean that her tears are phony - I'm sure that anyone with moral common sense could weep at the tragically shitty situation these kids detained at the border are in - but that her pretense to moral superiority is.  AOC (and the left's) intellectual and moral compasses aren't superior to the rest of ours.

And since AOC is always on the pretend-moral-superiority march - and she's made clear that factual correctness…

On rape accusations against political figures (and today's left/Dem scummery)

The first rule of assessing rape accusations against political figures (news-cycle context) is: be very, very skeptical.  Why?

I might have thought it should go without saying why.  But to spell it out: Because the consequences of a public believing such rape accusations can have major political implications - and people motivated by political considerations know this.  That gives people with political motivations an incentive to make (or promote/hype) the allegations, at little to no cost to themselves.

It's almost as though - in the political context - we should assume that the person making the accusation is doing so out of political motivation, unless there is clear and compelling evidence to support it.

(There's also this: politicians in great numbers are intellectually bankrupt, cynical, hypocritical, etc. - but it tends to ruin political careers when serious and especially criminal wrongdoing is uncovered.  Despite all the intellectual and moral corruption in politics, the…

How shitty is Lisa Duggan, leading Rand-basher du jour?

[Note 2/4/20: I finish up on demolishing Scumbag Duggan's so-called scholarship and credibility here.]

[A follow-up to my earlier post, "How shitty are Rand-bashers?"]

I've already commented on this despicable creature here, primarily on the basis of how she makes a mockery of the very activity of intellectual inquiry.  As with other leftist losers/scum, by perverting the very form of intellectual inquiry and thereby undermining its integrity, they produce junk content.  The way Duggan replied to me in email when I asked her reasonable pointed questions virtually assures that her "scholarship" is shitty.

Lisa Duggan is a Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis at New York University.  She is the latest specimen of an author making the (futile) effort to discredit Rand in book form, with Mean Girl: Ayn Rand and the Culture of Greed (2019).  (How this piece of shit got published by a university press is a good question.  How low are the standards for the serie…