Chuh Ching

Great news!  Fantastic news!  My blog has been noticed, sufficiently noticed, and I've been offered a very lucrative deal!  The investors wish to remain anonymous, which is the way I like it, but let's just say that there's no need for a great wall between us.  There may be some peeking, heh heh, but going for a little wok will fix that.  Heh.  

So back to my usual themes.  Global Warming is such a great danger, and america should spend a lot of money saving the environment and going green, or the ice will melt and we'll all be under water by the next year of the pig.  So no more oil drilling, right, pigs?  Because that's so bad and you are greedy and selfish oink oink.

America is super hateful and bigoted and white males are so bad, and transphobic.  Slavery is so bad in america, I mean racism, and you should pay so much money to reparations, and more equity so everyone is the same. And saying that covid came from China is racist.

Trump is so bad and stupid, and he squeezes boobs, and he's a liar and I can't wait to see his mugshot.  That will be so great.  And Biden is probably the greatest most visionary president since for ever, and he's saving the world and the Ukraine, I mean just Ukraine, but Russia is also very good too now.  

And we apologize for popping your balloon.  We're so bad and stupid, but those idiot red neck white privilege Montanans just couldn't keep their fat yaps shut.  And that Palestine thing with the train, that was Trump because he outlawed brakes.

Um, social media is great, like, uh, tick tock.  That's funny.  Tick tock time's up.  There's a lot of pornography on tic tock someone told me, big plastic boobs and weeners, and all that's just typical about what americans are like.  So you should just stay at home and watch pornographic videos like it was covid which we had nothing to do with.  It was bats in a fish market.  And you should get government checks and keep your fat yaps shut until the last check is too late, and it's just too late for you round eyes.  

Well I can't think of anything else right now to fill up more space with words.  If you like what you read tell a friend, because my honorable benefactors are paying me like the capitalist pig I have always aspired to be, and there's nothing too low for me now.  

Sayonara or nihao or whatever, imperialist running dogs.  

J

Three Fifths Equals One Third

 Just off the top of my head I can think of two decent Democrat presidents.  Men that I like, or who loved the Constitution, or were pragmatic or competent in a way I could respect.  Two.  Truman and Cleveland.  

Going back to Jackson, 1828 -- 1829, really, but elected. Jackson was a monster of egotism, like, I'd argue, TR.  Huge and forceful personalities.  TR never fought a duel, but he did love a strenuous life that included charging up a hill not named San Juan, as it was not named Bunker.  But TR was mentally healthy.  

Van Buren invented, crafted the spoils system, which turned into the civil service, which has turned into the bureaucracy we have now, appendage of the apparatchik state.  So, smart, crafty ... what did they call him?  The Red Fox.  Red hair gives us the red, but the fox is from his character.  

Polk was notable, but not good, not good.  But up to a certain point, that's inevitable.  Democrat is the party of slavery.  No Democrat could be good.

Is this Presentism?  I don't think so. That Party had a platform, and slavery was at the heart of it.  You can never wash off that stink.  They don't even have the decency to change the name.  

All but actual Abolitionists had problems with african heritage.  Lincoln said he wouldn't marry a black woman.  To have a problem with that now is Presentism.  Mere ignorance or lack of experience is not the same as the positive assertion that the black man "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect" -- you know, the Democrat position.  The Republican Party was founded on anti-slavery.  Biden's party called us the "Black Republicans" ... the ultra MAGA Black Republicans.  

All Klansmen were Democrats. No Republican was a Klansman.  But I'm being Presentist.  How dare I remember and hold the Democrats to the stink of their hateful heritage.   I should pay them a fine, a sort of reparation. 

Buchanan you should know about already.  The Biden of the Nineteenth Century.  Prince of Chaos.  

Wilson's favorite film was Birth of a Nation, KKK I mean AKA The Clansman.  (The Nation was the CSA.)  (Fun Fact: Hitler's favorite film was King Kong -- he also loved Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.  Which of these three is not like the others...)  

Wilson and FDR were disasters for the Constitution.  JFK was smoke and mirrors, and LBJ was like Jackson -- a monster of ego with only emotion to guide him.  Inept Carter, disgraceful clinton, anti-american BO.  Biden barely exists.  We know where he is by listening for the derisive laughter.  

It's this slavery thing.  Not an american problem -- human.  There's an idiot movie glorifying some african warrior women somehow.  Couldn't they find any african women who were really heroic?  Instead of making these slavers into role models?  How Bidenesque.  In this context I can't say black is white, but down is up and wrong is right. 

So how could there have been a United States without slavery?  Not possible.  There is a United States because of the three fifth compromise.  Certain non-citizens were to be counted as 3/5 of a citizen for purposes of House representation.  It's so inconsistent that it's crazy.  But it's the only way the South would accept the Constitution.  Because of the South's, the Democrats', Peculiar Institution.  

Tough beans.  That's how history works.  But I was wondering about the alternative, the only actually honorable alternative.  No compromise.  So, from the start, a United States, and a Confederate States, in whatever year that would have coalesced, 1789ish.  No President Washington -- not for the North, and he wouldn't have served the Slave South.

The North would have been industrial and commercial.  The South would have been agricultural and slave-based, and martial and expansionist.  Both would have moved westward.  The North would have had no great principle to defend -- the great principle of the Constitution.  It would have tried to keep slavery out of the Northwest Territory.  But an equivalent of the "popular sovereignty" doctrine would have prevailed -- there would have been no "Union" over which to fight a "civil war".  

The South had a military ethos unknown to the North.  So North America would have been mostly slavelands.  Bye bye Mexico.  Louisiana Purchase is a non-starter, given Jefferson was a southerner.  And so on.

With all our enlightened modern principles we don't even know that a human fetus is human.  So why can't a human being be a slave.  If you don't know -- that thing about a fetus -- I'll leave it for you to puzzle out.  You probably know that a human being can't be a slave -- to think otherwise is politically incorrect, and actually incorrect.  No human can be a slave; all fetuses can be aborted; therefore I won't bother to formulate this into a syllogism.  

The outcome of polling data depends on how the questions are asked.  The Civil War was about States rights -- the right to own property ... most notably slaves.  During our current Cultural War, it's about a woman's right to choose ... most notably abortion.  

Finish the euphemism ... moron.  

If there had been no three-fifths compromise, there would have been no need for Hitler.  You know, to create the Nazi Party.  It would have happened many decades sooner, in North America.  And, to be parsimonious with our diction, the Party would have been called Democrat.  I mean, grand Nazi Party planks like eugenics and euthanasia, and other eu- things ... well, we here in america, some of us, have euabortion and eutranz and euequity and eutolerance and I could go on and on because it's ease once you get the idea.  The idea is, label your things doubleplus eugood, and their things ultra maga supremecist.  

These armbands are hard to find.  

The point is that it's complicated.  Purity isn't the virtue we were taught that it was, when we were idealistic and naive children, or adolescents, or sophomores, or educators, or bureaucrats. We all start out as abortable clots of globby goo, not to say viable young-ones with fully developed nervous systems including higher brain function.  But we outgrow that embarrassing awkwardness, and we gain, somehow, human worth, with nuance and gravitas, and suchlike yeswecans.  Tolerance, did I say?  And somewhere along the way, somehow, we have to suppose that in this best of all possible worlds (because it is the only world, and a good God would not allow needless suffering) even such a vile three-fifths of a compromise as tolerating slavery is tolerated, until maturity is suffered to come unto its full term.  

What trimester does 3/5 fall into?  Somehow that math makes it seem like a fetus is 1/3 of a person.  

Somehow this became about abortionism.  Or do you prefer euphemisms. 

J

Pronoun Rules for Radicals

 I now identify as plural. Of course I am They and Them, always in capitals, because orthography is part of my identity, including hyphens.  I will, no, um, I shall accept the pronoun "you",  capitalized, "You", as in Usted.  I shall correct Spanish later.  I believe English also capitalizes some pronoun, but I don't remember which.  

Hmm.  Let's see. Have I left anything out?  Oh.  Oh!  Heh heh.  We.  Of course I am We.  

But it's really the verbs We am talking about.  Not just pronouns -- all their verbs.  No, all verbs, We shall get to all verbs, but all pronoun verbs for now.

When u refer to Us, u shall use only the verbs We lists at some point in OUr future.  Yes, OUR -- I accidentally pressed the caps lock and I like what I see.  We possibly mean verb cases, but We am getting confused.  We hasn't workouted OUR identity yet about that.  

We shall refer to OURselves ... or rather, but ... We did forgotted what We was goed to say.

When We includes other people in OUR Self references, We shall say Wewe.  Wewe is to be used exclusively by Us.  You, when not referring to Us, is never to be capitalized, and is replaced by u ... so it doesn't even exist.  Except historically, which Wewe will no shall correct later -- history, that is.  "u" no longer refers to the plural -- there is now only singular in this regard.  There is no need for Us to distinguish between people. sentences shall no longer start with capitals, to avoid confusion with regard to OUR pronouns.

u may use i/me and my/mine, but we/our and ours/ours are no longer permissible.  u shall replace "them", when plural -- them singular is also to be replaced -- with "those people excluding the person who is speaking".  excluding people is no longer permitted.  "who" is permissible, as it is unnecessary in reference to OURselves.  it is impossible that anyone (permitted) should ask "who is that?" when referring to OURselves.  

We doesn't need to be comprehensive here.  people should just know what We wants. 

later We shall inform u as to what We has decided about Time.  

J

The Racism of Winning

I'm trying to think of who wins.  But more interesting is who is doomed.  The american aboriginals, "indians" or "native" "americans", were doomed.  The europeans were as numerous as the leaves of the trees, per Sitting Bull after Custer was sent to the place he deserved. 

The Central Powers of WWI had a chance, but they/it was/were central because they, yes they were surrounded.  Custer eventually, finally learned that being surrounded is bad. The Allies, us, need not have had any natural affinity -- no compelling shared self-interest.  Which of these things, allies is like the others: Russian, um, Portuguese, British colingualists (yes, that is a word ... now)?  It's arbitrary.

The Aztecs, so called, were a conquering minority oppressive warrior imperial aristocracy.  So, fitting forefatherx of the racist La Raza Supremacist. I wish we could hear more about that, from Biden and his minions -- he can continue calling all conservatives "White Supremacists", because some ignorance is invincible.  But open it up a little, Joe, inclusiveness -- like the way Hell and america have expanded their borders.  Boarders pay.  'Minion', from French mignon, meaning darling or lover, and earlier dainty or gentle -- cf 'fillet mignon'.  

Words mean more than they mean, but they mean what they mean.  So I am a native american. I am not aboriginal, a word that sounds hard, but it's easy.  Original.  Not that any surviving aboriginal is authentic.  Virtually everyone is here, wherever, because they have displaced someone previous.  Corporately, that is, as in corporate guilt.  We hear too much about guilt, and not enough about shame.

Remember (as if you ever heard of it) the genocidal Bantu expansion further south in Africa.  Reduced the Khoisan peoples into mere clicky freakshow hottentot Bushmen.  The gods must be crazy.  Survival of the fittest, though.  To the victors go the spoils.  But will African Americans pay reparations to the peoples their ancestors enslaved and exterminated?  Just saying. 

Try to cancel me.  Bitches.

The supposedly aboriginal Clovis culture -- 12,700-13,400 years before present (BP) -- did it.  They absorbed, evicted, replaced, appropriated any number of earlier oppressed minorities.  Who?  Well, speaking Hemispherically (like all obedient critically racist theoreticians), the evil racist Clovis culture monsters exterminated (what else?) the ancient authentic cultures of

• Cueva Fell (Chile)  12k-14k BP,  
• Paisley Caves (Oregon)  14.3k BP,  
• Buttermilk Creek complex (Texas)  15.5k BP,  
• Meadowcroft Rockshelter (Pennsylvania)  16k-19k BP,  
• Cactus Hill (Virginia) and the Topper site (South Carolina)  16k-20k BP, 
• Monte Verde (Chile)  18.5k BP, 
• White Sands (New Mexico)  21k - 23k BP,  
• Pedra Furada hearths (Brazil)  32k-48k BP

Are these sites significant?  Sometimes it's just a very few artifacts.  But under the next stone might be found the treasures of Atlantis or Lemuria or Mu.  It's like cockroaches.  If you see one, you know there are unseen thousands. 

Are these dates real?  As real as assumption allows.  There's inevitably major controversy in this fascinating but minor discipline, because the field worker who uncovers the oldest artifacts gets a sort of limited fame, textbook fame, news-byte fame, and the previous record-holding scholar is going to object.  It's not objective, it's competitive, ego plus plausibility.  This sort of truth isn't about reality -- it's about consistency.  

Point is, there's always someone who came before.  Sometimes that's an advantage, and sometimes it's a genocide.

If first really mattered, Antarctica would be Russian and the moon would be American.  Except that any number of hapless mariners will have been cast upon the frigid shelves and floes of the utmost antipodes.  Cretans and Phoenicians and Vikings and Polynesians and Odysseuses and Saint Brendans.  As for the moon, everyone knows the nazis got there first. 

 

The Jews didn't prevail -- they persevered.  The fact that there were always new oppressors simply means that the previous oppressors faded away.  So there it is.  Outlasting is the same as winning.  

J

Cassandra's Hysteria

Seventeen years ago I wrote "When Virtue Is a Vice".  A lifetime has passed.  I might as well be talking about Herbert Hoover -- huge problems looming, their causes similar to those of modern days only in their principles, or rather in the abandonment of principles.  Kellogg-Briand and Smoot-Hawley.  Flappers.  Idealism and theory, and self-expression.  Twenty-three skidoo.    

I've copy-pasted it below.  Aside from an archeology of myself, how little I've changed, while coming more to understand the trivial nature of details and the foundational nature of principles, what it, the post, demonstrates is how, when good and bad men make similar errors, but I suppose I should say people, given the subsequent rise of female influence, and the influence of the destruction of male and female, and the reinvention of gender, as of marriage and equity etc, my this is getting to be a long sentience, the dependent clauses of which maybe tending to obfuscate a rather simple point, errors I say, their intentions are different while the damaging effect might even be the same, just as this sentence could have been simplified, but it amuses me here to be baroque, or rather rococo, and by placing such a demand on my reader I train as well as inform.  

You see how important demarcations are.  Commas are not up to the task always to aid clarity.  They are not just whatever you want them to be.  Periods and parentheses, like borders, are what they are, or nothing at all.

So, to return to clarity, this, from 2006:

I am a Bushman. He’s the only president of my lifetime that I’ve liked, while in office. Far from perfect -- wincingly inept as a communicator, and that is no small failing. But however poorly spoken or delivered are his speeches, he says the right things about the greatest issue of our time -- greatest issue for the world, that is. Islamism, of course. In this, Bush is Churchill without the eloquence. That’s not nothing. It took too many years to find a winning strategy for Iraq, but such things always take too long. He lost a lot of respect from the world, but the world is a coward. The third of the American population that comprise the disloyal opposition are simply true to type -- the only thing they're true to. The wavering middle third have shown the weakness of their characters -- they had not the fortitude to stay the course, and have flopped over to the left. For all the vacillation within this country, however, and for all the high cost, Bush has been right. 

 But. 

 It’s not easy for me to say it. It feels disloyal. Not that I necessarily owe loyalty. The term “Kool-Aid drinker” seems to have enjoyed a resurgence over the past decade – resuscitated from Jim Jones days – and I wouldn’t have it describe me. I suppose if the cause were great enough I would follow a leader unto death. But I’m too old for the military – they won’t have me. In any case, my behavior can be only slightly affected by a concern for the nasty names someone might choose to attempt to insult me with. Screw ’em. No, my loyalty is earned by an adherence to a shared cause. Insofar as we have the same goal, we are in agreement. 

 But. 

 Bush is utterly wrong, on illegal immigration. Wrong to the point of disaster. Wrong to the point where all the calumnies of which he is insanely accused by the moonbats, are true, on this issue. Not true in substance, but true in the degree of wrongness attributed. No, not Bushitler. But leading to ruin. Not a moron, but utterly wrongheaded. 

 Part of the problem, for the right, is that Bush really isn’t a conservative. He is a pragmatist. He sees the goal he wants, and works to achieve it, regardless of what allies he needs to join with. Moreover, for all that he is Texas bred, he is his father’s son. He was raised to consider manners, and he exhibits that old-Republican, WASPish dread of bad-form. Fair play is so important. Bush is, I think, a uniquely honest man. Strange, isn’t it, how opposite my opinion is to the Left’s. But Bush says what he will do, and he tries to do it. Every time, it seems. He wasn’t lying when he said he was a uniter, not a divider. He wasn’t wrong when he described himself as a compassionate conservative. 

 That’s the problem. Bush, because of the man he is, has placed some consideration higher than the fact that he is Executive in Chief -- that is, the head sheriff, the buck-stopping official whose job it is to enforce the laws of the land. For Bush, as his actions clearly show, the issue greater even than national sovereignty, secure borders, rule of law, is compassion for the illegals. He is looking at their side of the problem. He is acting as excuse-maker and conciliator, rather than fulfilling the Constitutional duty incumbent upon him. 

 Bush is not the president of Mexico. Mexico has its own president, who is doing a superb job of tending his proper business -- solving Mexican social problems, in this case by exporting poverty-riven, unwanted population northward in exchange for billions of dollars in remittances. Mr. Bush was hired to do a job of work, not to save the world, and certainly not to save Mexico. His job description in no manner includes compassion or care for citizens of alien nations -- most pointed, any such citizens who trample our law and culture by invading our land by the millions. 

 The president’s job is to aggressively advance the general welfare of this nation and its citizens. The United States isn’t a non-profit organization. It is a corporation, the prime responsibility of which is to its stockholders -- us. A CEO who fails to aggressively seek every such benefit is guilty of malfeasance. Period. 

 So why the laxness on illegal immigration? Is it about cheap labor? We have cheap labor here -- fewer than 25% of those working in agribusiness (the greatest employer of illegals) are illegals. In other words, more than 75% of those working in a job Americans won’t do, are American. They scrub our toilets? This is a job my mother did, in the house I grew up in. There is definitely an insult in the lying, vile slander that there are jobs Americans won't do -- an insult against our mothers, and ourselves. But such is the logic that attempts to justify the inexcusable. No, it’s not about cheap labor. 

 Is it about fairness? Laughable. What of fairness for those who have played by the rules? Aren’t the rule-followers the ones who deserve every first consideration, of fairness? Isn’t that the schoolyard ethos to which such reasoning attempts to appeal? What did we do, to the kid who took cuts? -- who butted into line? Some of us cried, some got mad, some beat him up, some called for the teacher. The only ones who didn’t mind were those who unfairly profited by it -- the kid, and his friends. But that’s why we have rules. We don’t run our society on the basis of getting away with whatever you can because of who you know. That’s such a very, uh, Mexican way of doing things. And who is it that’s supposed to guard fairplay? To whom did we appeal, as children? Teacher. The authority. But the authority now is on the side of the cut-takers. For shame. 

 What remains? Compassion. Bush is animated not by a need to be liked by foreigners. We’ve seen clearly enough that he is unimpressed by the promise of such approbation. He doesn’t need the approval of anyone -- not even his increasingly alienated base. He uses as his guiding principle his understanding of his Christian faith, and so he seeks to welcome the stranger who sojourns in our camp. In biblical times, the law-abiding stranger was welcomed. In this Bush is right. But the lawless stranger was outlawed, banished from the land. What of this principle? Bush has failed to make the distinction. 

 As a Christian, Bush is not wrong to be compassionate. But he was not hired to be a Christian. He was hired to enforce the law. As such, his New Testament model is not the man who gives away his cloak, but the soldier who carries still the sword. The president, too, is a man under authority. And he must raise a sword not only against those declared blood enemies who raid from distant lands, but also against the house-breaker whose motives may not seem malevolent but whose actions are unlawful and destructive to social order. The sword -- that is, coercive force -- is reserved for those incorrigible scofflaws who refuse to abide by the mores of our society. Well? Which are the illegals? We call them by their true name. 

 There is no virtue that cannot become vicious when out of balance. There is always, and must always be, a tension between justice and mercy. Mr. Bush has failed to honor this principle, in his illegal-immigration policy. He owes none but a general regard for Mexico -- human rights ... humanitarian aid ... a prosperous neighbor that adds to our own prosperity. But he has transgressed his proper office, acting now as activist for an inimical force, and in so doing he betrays his oath of office and the sacred bond of trust that even his political enemies expect, although unspoken, and despite the fact that in this instance they are working in collusion with him. He has united with them. 

 If I -- who am so careful, so patient, so willing to understand -- have turned at last away in dismay, then what hope has Mr. Bush and the Republican Party? When the only supposedly-responsible party is out of power in all but the Executive Branch, what hope of any sort can there be? -- in these so-crucial times? 

 The greatest threat to America is not islamism. That is the greatest threat to the world. But islamism can kill only its few thousands, here and there, with its hijacked jets or its toxic powders. The greatest threat to America is its open border, demarked not by a fence but by a long and well-worn trail trampled smooth by millions of north-bound feet. For them, it is a highway of opportunity. For us, it is a sheet-flood of poverty at best, and at worst … well, when the nuke finally does come, it will not be a missile. It will not fall from the heavens. It will be carried in a backpack, across our southern frontier. 

Well, instead of a nuke in a backpack, it's fentanyl, at the moment.  Instead of islamism it's trannies. But it's all the same.  History is becoming Groundhog Day.  In American history it was all one-term prezzes from Van Buren to Buchanan -- prior to the inevitable Civil War.  We haven't had two consecutive one-term presidents elected since Cleveland and Harrison and Cleveland. Trump would be Cleveland, administration interruptus.  You will of course have studied my comparison of Buchanan and Biden.

If you are young, in whatever this most recent generation is called, Bush to you is like Johnson to me.  W, or LBJ.  I'm the last of the Boomers.  You, post-millennial, Gen Z is it? -- but isn't that zombies? Well how nicely that brings me at last to my point, zombies.

Brainless.  Appetites.  

And Biden, the opposite of Bush.  Should I even point out the border issue? Is it even an issue?  Do you care?  Or is it like abortion, just whatever -- or marriage, or gender -- these newly invented words, beyond repurposing -- like unicorn or communism, which, even if they existed, would not be what they're supposed to be.  

It's like the student radicals in the Sixties.  They weren't really students.  They already knew everything.  They weren't protesting war.  They were entirely about destruction.  Law Professor and Weather Underground Leader Bernadine Dohrn was a fan of Charles Manson.  "Dig it!" she gushed.  "First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even stuck a fork into [8-month pregnant Sharon Tate's] stomach!  Wild!"  (Being me, I imagine the fetus, the child, was still alive.)  BO was a Saul Alinsky acolyte, whose ambition was not to build the Workers' Paradise -- cuz no one who really matters really works -- but to destroy Judeo-Christian civilization.  My hyperbole is not exaggeration.  

Then there's Biden.  Whatever the reality of his leadership -- perhaps they just prop him up, or point him at the prompter, because he can still read, albeit slurred.  And he can walk, even trot.  I stopped paying attention for a decade or so -- did BO or Trump trot?  Biden does it to show his vitality.  His cosmetic surgeons and his tailors have made him look plausible.  There's nothing to do about how he moves, or speaks, or forgets, or snarks.  That he should flounder, verbally so often, or when walking, or trotting up stairs, only to stumble -- it's not that he fails in petty things.  It's that he feels the need to demonstrate a vigor that can be present only because of pharmaceutical enhancement.  

Biden, like they, is given over to a corrupt mind, and he cannot determine good from evil.  But of course he can.  He feels the need to trot, aged 80, when there's no such need.  Presidents of the United States never need to be in a rush.  People will wait.  If a President is courteous, he will leave in time to be on time.  Biden trots to demonstrate that he can trot, because he knows he walks like a feeble old man.  Knows in a deepest and inarticulate part of himself, even more inarticulate than when he speaks off the cuff.  

So much for ad hominem.  But that's the point, in this compare & contrast.  Bush had compassion for aliens.  So did Jesus.  Biden wants to ... well, I really don't know.  The effect of his actions if consummated will be the destruction of America, by (further) destroying the Constitution and the concept of citizenship.  Voting, rule of law, separation of powers, checks and balances, stewardship and public trust ... it's simple junior high school civics.  

Biden was just sincere-ing the story of how he came to stop hating and strangelove gay marriage.  When he was a senior in high school he saw two well-dressed men kissing.  Young Joe turned to his dad, baffled, dismayed, and dad said, "Joey, it's simple.  They love each other."  Gentle music, fade to black.  This should have been c. 1959, but it would be approx 1961, if it were true.  Ignoring Biden's anti-gaymarriage career as a Senator -- a nonexistent issue until the 'Nineties -- it is utterly impossible for two men to have been kissing publicly, let alone Joey's dad having such an attitude, in the Eisenhower era.  

Biden's conversion didn't happen when he was a senior in high school, c 1961.  He transitioned c 2015, when he was a senior, in government, and the Court Most Supreme and Absolute yet again Amended the Constitution, civilization, and the Bible.

But we are stupid, so we of course believe it.  We elected him after all.  We believe impossible things because it's always before breakfast in Biden's mourning Amerixa.  We have self-destructive judgment because we have no judgment and our judgments are hateful.  Borders, citizenship, marriage, gender, life, justice.  Truth.  Hope.  

But nearly 20 years have passed since that previous border crisis and here we are, still.  So what's the problem.  Chill.  It's easy if you try.  

 J

Ectomiphilia

I was going to compare it to islamism.  Back in the day that was one of my things.  Then BO solved the problem, along with the boiling and rising oceans and those other things he hoped and changed.  Talk about a couple of meaningless catchwords.  Hope is insubstantial, and change is open-ended.  No hope to change it to discipline and goals.  

BO saved us from islamism, you remember, when he led Seal Team Six on that mission to neutralize OBL.  I've seen the video -- but who hasn't.  BO kicking in the door, diving in, machine guns in each hand, full autofire, airborne 360 as he mows em down.  They live-streamed it in slo-mo with a soundtrack.  Yeah.  Saddam Hussain was there too.  And Putin.  The current Putin is a body double.  And anyway, Putin is a title now, like Caesar, or rather Tzar.  And the Dixie Chicks were there, all cowering and naked, yeah.  Oh, save us Obama, you're our hero, and he's like, that's right bitches, now shut up and sing.  He writes his own dialogue, as good as Stallone.  

But it's not like islamism.  It's like the pandemic of Satanic rituals that were always happening to little children in the 80s and 90s. The prosecutors would say, and what else did the bad people do to you.  They touched you in your bathing suit area didn't they.  Yes they did.  And they did xxx, and yyy and zzz too, it's okay to tell the truth, they can't hurt you anymore because I'm saving you, because parents are bad but you must always trust the government.  

When I was in second grade I spent my recesses pretending to be a dog.  I had a little fiberglass bone that slightly older kids would throw and I'd fetch it.  Being me, I never broke character, and I never would have.  

Those McMartin preschoolers are in their forties now.  Mostly, they won't even remember, and their lives, really, were not ruined.  Same with Falcon Heene, balloon boy.  He hardly remembers.  His parents of course do, but it's only right to suffer for one's unrepented sins.  As for the McMartins, well, absolutely devastated.  Ruined.  I know something about that.  May the evil-doers be anathema.  Or, in Anglo-Saxon, god damn them.  

So wokism is castrating children, or its female equivalent.  Sterilizing them.  The Ayatoola only wanted to do oral sex with them -- his own satanic rituals, but as a religious leader he got to make the rules.  Same thing here, I guess.  Hysterectomies and double mastectomies, and sort of a Play-Doh reshaping of labia and whatever other tissue is manipulatable, to assume a dissemblance of, in this example, a female's external genitalia (or should I say 'a semblance of male' etc.) -- external perhaps in the same way a glans is external even when covered by a prepuce -- female but who could never ever menstruate -- female by declaration rather than birth, like citizenship, not natural born but naturalized.  Nature natal nativity.  Well, literally, manipulate means to handle with the hand, so that's not as precise a word as I should use. Scissorhand.  (Manipulate is just a pun, and we know how hateful puns are.)  Transmogrify, a word of utterly uncertain origin ... well that's perfect.  Precise is a good word in this context: -cise, incision, incisor, concise.  To cut.  Tranz operations are precise transmogrifications.  (And please note that these are not puns.)  Testectomy.  Testictomy.  Ectomists.  Like Mencken's neologism for strip-tease.  Ecteasiast ecdysiast.  (I continue to maintain that these are not puns.) 

Children were exploited to fulfill agendas.  Lawyers and politician and hystericists and cultists.  And now, three, no, almost four decades later, wokists.  

I did not see it coming, in the early years of this blog.  I thought islamism was the enemy -- and of course it was, what with all those bombed children, but since it did not prevail, it subsided, for the time being, and takes on the semblance of irrelevance.  But traitors and haters must have their voice, so here it is again.  America is still bad, as it must be, but tolerance and diversity and equity and castration will save (no) redeem (most certainly not) destroy, yes destroy it.  Finish destroying it, coup de grace.

When you think about it, castration and abortion are virtual synonyms.  Just different points on the same line segment.  Point is, any point on that line is about no more babies.  Life is a dead end, like an artificial vagina.  Even an anus goes somewhere.  

J

Killing Baby Hitler

 It's not even a question.  Duh.  Moronic.  What kind of a monster would do that.  No, not monster.   Idiot.  But maybe that's you.  For shame.  Let me explain it to you.  I would go back, in my magically scientific time machine, kidnap baby Hitler, and raise him properly.  

If anyone needs killing, it's Alois Hitler, the father.  

What's that, you complain?  Well first, don't complain.  It's just whining about something you don't intend to change.  But you say, for the purposes of your thought experiment ... yeah, thought experiment, like what Einstein did to come up with the Special Theory of Relativity.  But anyway you say the only choice allowed is to kill baby Hitler -- not anyone else, and no kidnapping.  Because it would catastrophically disrupt the space-time continuum or something.  Reverse the polarity of the Big Bang, so it's a Little Squeak, is that really how you spell it, squeak?  Why not squeek?  Weak week, so I guess it works.  And I just spelled it quess.  What's that about.  

Alcohol is another word I have trouble spelling.  I just wrote smelling.  Then jut.  Then rot.  At least they're words.  And I did spell alocolhol correctly.  Well not that time, but you know what I mean. 

So here's baby Hitler.  

How about just somehow make him bald?  If we have time travel technology, then bald should be easy.  

But that's pretty shallow.  Hitlers can be bald.  

Mini hitlers.

(For comparison purposes only.  Eisenhower was great.)

Of course, something like this

is not meant to be serious.  And when you think about it, every baby is Hitler.  Absolute will, utterly unreasonable.  Able to be comforted.  Wanting to feel loved.  

Hitler as a tween

This is a boy with stupid parents. 

 And not one smile in the lot -- maybe a few smirks.

This one

-- you can read too much into it.  Many of the kids had their arms crossed.  

What a murderer's row. And him in the middle. But it was the adults who posed them, and no smiling.  We don't hear much about that teacher.  Talk about missed opportunities.  My fourth-grade teacher was Mr Larson.  Turned out he was super gay.  But we didn't have a clue about that.

It's just the angle of his chin, and that doesn't have to mean anything.  But maybe it does

Death to all Baby Hitlers?  Being an American, if there is such a thing anymore, and such a place, what other babies should be killed?  

Baby Woodrow Wilson?

I don't suppose this baby needs killing.  As for

well...  No.  No, of course not.  What were you thinking!  It's always the adults.  Remember?  Am I wasting my time here?

If this were actually baby Wilson, the woman would have been enslaved.

John C Calhoun?

(Regrettably, no baby pix available.)

Roger B Taney

Harry A Blackmun

Ruth B Ginsburg

Slavery and abortion.  Oh, and anti-Constitutionalism, so FDR and LBJ, and BO, and Jerbjer.  But only one is specifically about killing babies.  Well, the Holocaust ... but not specifically.

So then, just as Black Lives Matter, and Never Again, well, um ... hmm.  Um, death to all babies who might grow up to be Hitlers.  Yeah, that works.  Proposed motto for Planned Parenthood™ (the world's largest abortion-services provider): No More Hitlers!  Talk about pro-life!

But I didn't answer the question.  Obliquely, it's about Julius Caesar.  His assassination is one of the greatest crimes in history.  Because he might have wanted to be a king, they got 500 years of military dictatorship.  Ironic, isn't it.  Tsk tsk.  That's your answer.  Kill babies for what they have done, not what they might do.  

All of these people, these destructive people (excluding Eisenhower) thought they were right.

I rarely know how these things are going to end.  

J

"I think never killed."

We saw it, well, forever ago in Tiananmen Square. A spontaneous groundswell, a great yearning for freedom. Sometimes Asians yearn to be free.

And why not? There is such a thing in the world. We have it. We are an example. A beacon.

It is our heritage.


We are an inspiration.


It's almost 35 years ago now, so I can talk about it. Because words have meaning, and actions have consequences. Because sometimes things don't go according to plan. Sometimes life seems more important than liberty.

Hm. Why are these young men hiding from those soldiers?

A student. In the process of being beaten to death.

A grad student.

It has the rough beauty of skewed symmetry.

When the tanks start rolling.

This is a human body.

This is grief. And courage.

Between 200 and 10,000 killed. Sort of a big margin of error, but it wasn't quite yet the internet age. Well, no matter. If there's one thing the world has plenty of, it's chinamen. If they don't value their own people, why should we.

Maybe I'm young, but I'm sorta sick of all the meaningless governmental protests. We are aware of the situation.... We are concerned.... We are monitoring events.... We are busy sterilizing tranz children....

So we have the talkers.

Then we have this young man. This man.



We've seen what tank treads can do.


Let's look at him.
What's that in his hand? A clarinet case?


And this, in his right hand --
--his shopping? No, a jacket.


Let's study him. Because it's not so often that we get to see a hero. Maybe we'll learn something.


Ah. That's what heroes do. Know what he's saying? "Go away. My city is in chaos because of you. Stop killing my people."

Some claim his name is or was Wang Weilin, a student, age 19. Some reports have him as shot within weeks of this event. Some have him hiding in China or Taiwan. When asked of his fate by Barbara Walters in 1990, Jiang Zemin, CCP General Secretary -- that's like what Stalin was -- said, "I think never killed."

Anonymity swallows him like death.

Before the tanks really started to roll, the art students built a 30-foot plaster statue. The Goddess of Democracy.
She needs both hands to carry the torch. Liberty doesn't start out strong.


Those poor naive children. It was ground to rubble by the tanks.

If I had the computer and graphic skills, I would put this picture in the banner of, now, Ultra Mega.  But I have only words. Like the rest of the world.

Burma and Aleppo and Armenia and Kiev and poor Tibet.  Who can be bothered to remember. 

The specifics always grow dated.   What the hell ever happened to Burma?  We're not hearing so much about congressmen wanting to date pageboys.  There's always some hot sexy scandal about porn stars and trannies.  Ah well.  Every day provides diversions and inspiration enough, for those who would profit and be distracted by it.  Or we could quibble about trivialities.  Whatever.

J

President Phido

 Who says spy balloon?  Why does it always have to be balloons? -- let alone spy balloons -- not to say Chinese spy balloons.  

Why not kites?

Box kites?

Chinese box kites

...Butt Biden loves the Chinese, though.  So Japanese kites?

Maybe a paper airplane contest

or a migration of monarch butterflies

or a flock of seagulls

or Jonathan Livingston Seagull

or a stork

or Socrates in a basket

or not-a-friend of Dorothy

or a game of quidditch

or a flying city

or a floating island

or a little planet

or Cloud Cuckoo Land.

It could be so many things:

 

In memoriam, 9/5/40 - 2/15/23

But surely it could not be an utterly incompetent administration overreacting to and overcompensating for its cowardice and indecision and conflicted self-interests and bewilderment as to where its sworn duty lies.

I used to have a dog that would bark at its own farts. Now we all have that dog.  

Phido barks at farts! 

Phido seen [a] BJ!

J