Category: Politics

Trying not to start the public floggings

Another RINO Gone

Elections, Trumpism

U.S. Senator John Cornyn (TX) was always an Establishment RINO — hell, he only ever got into the Senate because his opponent was some nutcase, and then he’s had the incumbent’s advantage ever since.  And he’s been a royal pain in the ass, too.

Cornyn promised to support Trump’s recess appointments and then blocked the nominees the very next day.  He also announced that Trump could face indictment for insurrection after the events of Jan. 6, 2021, while promoting the fake news that protestors had killed a Capitol police officer.  The incumbent senator even endorsed amnesty for illegal aliens.  Oh, and he supported “red flag” gun laws after the Uvalde school shooting, thus pissing off people like Yer Humble Narrator and a few million other gun owners.

Not anymore.  Yesterday, I and (it appears) a whole bunch of other pissed-off conservative Texans got together and kicked his RINO ass out:

He got Dallas because that’s more or less his home turf, and Austin because a) Austin is asshoe, and b) they voted for him because they must have thought Cornyn would be easier to beat in the Generals later this year, which again shows how delusional the Left can be*.  (And nobody cares what Corpus Christi thinks.)

So long, RINO.

And well done, Pax.  Get up there and start representing Texas.  Just remember who brung you to the dance, and all will be well in the future.

*The Evil Party’s nominee for the U.S. Senate race in November will be one James Talarico, who thinks God is non-binary, abortion is Christian, and Jesus was a pro-transgenderism feminist.  (I am not making this up.)

Oh, and one last thought about elections:

Those Brits…

Dropping Like Flies

Politics

Wow, the Trump Chicks are dropping like flies:

  • DHS chief Kristi Noem:  fired
  • Attorney General Pam Biondi: fired;  and now
  • DNI head Tulsi Gabbard (resigned, albeit for a very good reason — her husband has cancer and she needs to be with him).

What will be really interesting is to see who replaces Gabbard:  will DJT go with one of the establishment security people, or bring in an outsider like Tulsi was?  (I know:  her appointment was really a slap in the face of the agency which targeted her during the  Obama III  Biden years, and there’s nothing wrong with that.)

Excluded!

Politics, Traitors / Fifth Columnists

Firebrand CongressTotty Nancy Mace has an idea:

South Carolina GOP Representative Nancy Mace introduced a joint resolution on Wednesday proposing a constitutional amendment that would explicitly bar naturalized citizens from serving in Congress, the federal judiciary, or holding any Senate-confirmed positions.

The proposed legislation seeks to extend the “natural-born citizen” constraint — which currently applies only to the presidency and vice presidency under Article II of the U.S. Constitution — to all members of the House of Representatives, the Senate, federal judges at all levels, and prominent appointed officers such as Cabinet members and ambassadors.

If passed and ratified, the amendment would establish a strict dual-track citizenship restriction, requiring federal lawmakers and officials to have held U.S. citizenship from birth.

Okay, I need to talk about this because I am a naturalized U.S. citizen (35 years, give or take a few months), and of course I would be affected by such legislation.  (Not that I care, because age and inclination would exclude me from any of the above lofty offices anyway.)

Now I can understand why Our Nancy would be suggesting such a thing, because let’s be honest, I bet there are more than a few naturalized U.S. citizens who are bent on overthrowing the republic rather than thanking their lucky stars (as I do, every day) for being allowed to share in the American Dream.

So I can see why she would be interested in such an action.  The words “Quisling” and “fifth column” (a.k.a. Trojan horse) come to mind here, and probably with some justification.

However, allow me to point out that arch-Nazi collaborator Vidkun Quisling was not a naturalized Norwegian citizen, but native-born.  And let’s be perfectly blunt about this:  for every naturalized citizen who may be harboring evil subversive ideas about his adopted country, I can probably point to several native-born citizens who are just as evil (Ocasio-Cortez comes to mind).

However, Mace’s proposed legislation would also rid us of pustules like Ilhan Omar and Pramila Jayapal, to mention just two, who infest Congress like some malignant cancer.

So:  is Nancy Mace’s proposed legislation a Good Thing?  Here’s what else she said, in support of it:

Mace argued that the amendment simply extends the rigorous constitutional standard already required of the president to other critical positions of national trust.

…and mentions Super-Pustule Ilhan Omar specifically as evidence.

This would mean, by the way, that there’d be in essence two kinds of citizenship:  native-born, to whom all things are possible;  and naturalized, who could do anything except run the country.

This would mean that people like me — super-patriots, despite having been born in the wrong country — would be excluded from the levers of power.

In today’s political climate, though, I’m not sure that that’s a bad thing.

Feel free to argue the point in Comments.

By the way, some might ask why I refer to Nancy Mace as a “CongressTotty”.

Q.E.D.

The Actual Totalitarians

Anarchist thugs, Marxists, Riotous Assemblies, Terrorism

Victor Davis Hanson points out (in not quite so many words) that in politics, there’s nothing new under the sun — most especially since the French Revolution, that is — and that the “Democrat Party” of today should just be honest about it and rename themselves the Jacobin Party.

Why?

Jacobinism aims to divide the nation arbitrarily between the noble oppressed and the toxic oppressors.  (Sound familiar?)

And VDH then goes on to list the offenders and offences:

BLM (actually, it’s Antifa, the only omission he makes), biological men competing in women’s sports, critical legal theory normalizing cashless bail, race-based reparations, violent felons arrested and back on the street hours later, radical abortion on demand until birth, attacks on the concept of the cultural “melting pot” and opposition to organized Christianity.

Read the whole article for the full catalogue.

Here’s the question to ponder.  Never mind what they might say;  which is the political party in the U.S. that actively supports terrorism?  And let’s be clear by what we mean by “terrorism”:  threatening assassination, supporting assassinations or calling for the same, beating up political opponents, calling for violence against those who refuse to support their policies (e.g. Supreme Court justices), using “grassroots” street protests to cow and intimidate opposition… the list goes on and on.

Yup:  that list belongs to the modern-day Jacobins — just as it was back in the late eighteenth century.  They would make history repeat itself, if they could.  And never forget that the term “Reign of Terror” was also coined during the French Revolution, by the Jacobins.  Ipse dixit.

LOL Poll

Foreign Affairs, Funny Stuff, Trumpism

Seen at Don Surber’s place, this tongue-in-cheek poll:

There are two points to be made here.  Surber points out, correctly, that Alberta ain’t Alabama.  Albertans are only conservative compared to, say, their Ontario compatriots.  Adding AB to the U.S. would give the Socialist Party two new U.S. Senators and several U.S. House seats.  This, by the way, is true of all the Canucki fiefdoms (“Fiefdoms, Kim?”  Remember that the actual political leader of Canada — albeit of the rubber-stamp variety — is King Charles III, as Surber also points out).

In the larger sense, this is also true of Cuba, Venezuela and any of our neighboring countries — they’re all frigging Commies, and we sure as hell don’t need more of them in our blessed Republic.  So, as my old friend Patterson would say, fuck that idea for a bowl of cherries.

And as much as the last suggestion (de-stating Minnesota) may seem appealing, that opens Pandora’s Box of Nastiness, because then we’d have to consider the idea of doing the same to (deep breath) California, Massachusetts, Illinois and New York.  (Also, as attractive as it may seem at first, we should forget throwing out New Mexico unless we want an actual Mexican Salient sticking into our underbelly.)

Nah.  Let’s keep all the kiddies in the house, so to speak, and just control their behavior the old-fashioned way:  by whacking their little pee-pees, politically speaking, whenever they get too obstreperous.

Reaction

Anti-Gun Nannies, The Gun Thing

It is a well-known fact of sales and advertising is that if you want to create demand for a product, you show it, extol its features and wonders, and then say, “…but you can’t have it.”

I have a similar reaction to a product when someone might want to prevent me from owning it:  I get one.

Longtime Readers will be only too familiar with my attitude towards the AR-15 poodleshooter and its varmint ammo — the executive summary would be that I despise the frigging things.

However, the more that the anti-gun brigade wants to ban them as eeeevil assault rifles (“only the military”, “designed not to hunt but to kill humans” etc. etc. etc.), the more I think that every American citizen should own one (or more, as the urge takes).

Which is a long way of saying that I am really, really glad that I now have one:  not because of any love I may have for the thing, but because now that I own one, I’m never going to give it up to any government agency, no matter what laws or restrictions the government may pass to make them illegal.

Were the Nanny Hoplophobe Set not so keen on banning them, I wouldn’t own one in a month of Sundays, because let’s just say that I might happen to have alternatives that I would consider far more effective in the AR-15’s purpose.

But regardless, I’m glad that I have a poodleshooter… simply because some asshole doesn’t want me to own one.

And it appears that as many as 15 million Americans feel the same way that I do — and very many likely for the same reason.

So while news items like this are very welcome, we sure as hell don’t need to have some super-lawyers (e.g. the USSC) explain the Second Amendment to us.  We know what it means, regardless of what they think or how carefully they may parse penumbral meanings out of the Constitution.

As for the would-be gun-banning types:  FOAD.