Tag: Evil Bastards

“Losing”?

Gummint, Law and Order, Media Assholes, Military

I yield to no man in terms of my respect for Victor Davis Hanson, but I’m afraid the worthy professor is extremely late to this party.

Losing Confidence in the Pillars of Our Civilization
Millions of citizens long ago concluded that professional sports, academia, and entertainment were no longer disinterested institutions, but far Left and deliberately hostile to Middle America.
Yet American conservatives still adamantly supported the nation’s traditional investigatory, intelligence, and military agencies — especially when they came under budgetary or cultural attacks.
Not so much anymore.

He then enumerates said institutions:  the FBI, the military (senior officers), Big Tech / Woke journalism, federal health agencies, and the criminal justice system in general.

I will admit that the above are relative newcomers to the conservatives’ hall of shame, but as we all know, we’ve always loathed and distrusted the alphabet soups of the IRS, ATF and DHS, as well as Cabinet departments like the EPA, Energy, Interior and Education — to name but a few.

Wake up, VDH:  they’re all on the shit list.  They are very close to being — and in some cases very much already — not the “pillars of our civilization”, but active destroyers thereof.

And if you Readers want proof of this, ask yourself this question:  would you rather deal with your local law enforcement, or the FBI?  Your county tax office or the IRS?

Q.E.D.

Of Course You Can’t Do That

CRT, Education, Homeschooling, Marxists

It IS the most fundemental issue facing us right now:

The American Left (aided and abetted by some conservatives) believes that the government, not parents, should determine the content of a child’s mind—their ideas, their principles, and their values. A few weeks after McAuliffe’s tone-deaf faux pas, two authors writing in The Washington Post summed up the Left’s position in the title of their op-ed: “Parents claim they have the right to shape their kids’ school curriculum. They don’t.” Parents should have neither the right nor the authority, according to the Post’s writers, to determine the ideas taught to their children. This task should be left to the “experts”—to the experts of the Education Establishment. The authors go on to claim that “education should prepare young people to think for themselves, even if that runs counter to the wishes of their parents.”

And:

“When it comes to society’s interest in protecting children, the legal precedent is unambiguous: The rights of parents come second.” But the question is, if parents’ rights come second when it comes to protecting or educating their children, then whose rights come first? And the authors’ answer is obvious: society’s rights, the government’s rights, the rights of the public-policy experts trump those of parents.

I need to quit now, because bullshit like this makes one of my fingers twitch really badly.  Let’s call it this one, just for the official record:

(but I could be lying)

And that’s even after having completed my own kids’ homeschooling many years ago.  But despite that, this is a hill I’d be prepared to die on, if called to do so.

Quick reminder to the “experts” and the State-sponsored thugs they use for “enforcement” :  if you want to see a serious piece of social upheaval, start fucking with people’s kids.  Virginia parents’ reaction to the CRT curricula isn’t even an appetizer.

Our kids are ours.  They are not the possession of the State.  But go ahead and poke that nest of rattlesnakes with your short little sticks…

And The Vultures Gather

Legal Stuff, Resistance, Two-Minute Hate

Aaarrrrgh:

Denver Attorney Files Civil Action In Kyle Rittenhouse Shooting

“Whether that’s the type of society we want where white nationalists show up to protest Black Lives Matter movements or movements for racial justice with AR-15s.”
Now the civil lawsuits will proceed.
“It’s going to raise questions if self-appointed militias can roam the streets doling out justice as they see.”

If I didn’t want to go Full Rittenhouse before, I sure as hell am tempted now.

Bosom Buddies

Celebrities

We all know about the foul Clintons and their insatiable greed for money (e.g. the Clinton “Foundation” a.k.a. the Clinton ATM), coupled with their need to get “donations” from just about every evil source on the planet so as to subsidize their jet-set lifestyle.

Here’s the Brit version, in the shape of Prince Andrew, Duke of York:

Thames Valley Police have refused to comment on who is paying for the security they provide to Prince Andrew, at an estimated cost of £500,000 per year. It is said that one of the duke’s principal problems is that he and the duchess desire a lifestyle that is beyond their means. Well, yes. And me. I desire that, too. The Duke of York, however, refuses to rub along on an official income of £250,000 p.a. tax free from his mother, the Q.E.II, plus his naval pension of £20,000 p.a. accrued from his 22 years of naval service from 1979 to 2001. Tom Bower, royal biographer, said: “(The Duke and Duchess of York) have an appetite for luxury which is beyond the understanding of mere mortals. There’s a sense of entitlement in it all, that is the real problem. They think nothing is too much for them.” In 2020 Andrew bought a £220,000 Bentley to add to his two Range Rovers. He also has a collection of luxury watches, including several Rolexes and Cartiers and a £150,000 Patek Philippe.

His home life is not simple.

He and the Duchess live at Royal Lodge, a 30-room cottage set in nearly 100 acres of Windsor Great Park in Berkshire, owned by the Crown Estate, to which the duke pays a notional rent, but bearing the costs himself of upkeep and staffing which are estimated to be up to £1 million a year.
He also has a little place in Verbier, a Swiss ski resort, which he bought for £16.6 million, but failed to pay the final installment, of £6.6 million, for which he is being sued.

Norman Baker, a former government minister who has written a book about royal finances, believes that the duke’s extravagance has forced him into trying to supplement his income by building business relationships with a list of dubious associates. He said: “Andrew has had a succession of benefactors, deeply unpleasant people mostly, who want to be associated with someone from the royal family and he’s been prepared to be associated with them in return for money. He once took a diamond necklace worth £18,000 as a gift from a convicted Libyan gunrunner. These are the sort of people he’s dealing with.”

Most notably, of course, the paedophile and sex trafficker, financier Jeffrey Epstein. (Which leads us back to Bill Clinton, Liar Extraordinaire — Kim.)

The Times has revealed that from 2015 the duke was borrowing an average of £125,000 every three months from a credit facility offered by Banque Havilland, an institution owned by the Rowland family. The duke made a final withdrawal of £250,000 in November 2017, then 11 days later the whole debt was cleared by David Rowland. Buckingham Palace conduct rules state that members of the Royal Family should never accept gifts of money, or money equivalent in connection with an official engagement or duty. Time his finances are investigated, at the very least by HMRC – oops – that’s Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs Service. His mum. Oh, well.

Tom Bower described the duke’s business activities as “shameless”. He said: “He is a man of unbelievable bad judgment and remarkable greed. And with each step his past catches up with him.”

Horrible fucking bastard.

No wonder the DoY is such a good friend of Bill Clinton:  their common predilection for sucking cash out of whoever wants to party with them is perfectly congruent.  As is their common predilection for young pudenda.

Just my opinion, of course;  I could be wrong.

Overachiever

Crime

Apparently, the cops have caught the asshole who ran an SUV into a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wis.:

“Brooks is a career criminal with multiple priors and was released from jail two days prior to the incident after posting a $1,000 bail for three misdemeanors and two felonies. He has a history of resisting arrest, obstruction, battery, statutory sexual seduction, strangulation and suffocation, property destruction, illegal firearm possession, bail jumping, domestic violence, drug related charges and is a registered sex offender.”

I’m not too sure that calling him an asshole is sufficiently descriptive, but then again, “someone who needs killing” will probably get me into trouble.

The real asshole in this little escapade is the fucking judge who allowed him out on bail, and Asshole #1a is the public defense attorney who motivated it.