Tuesday, November 19, 2019


   Yesterday, we wrote an article about Chick-Fil-A's decision to stop donating to some worthy causes to appease politicians subservient to the homo lobby. This decision has angered Conservatives across the country. In researching our article, we cited The National Review and the website Life Site News, which had several specimens of Conservative reaction to the decision. 

   However, the Red Pills, true to their quasi-Leftist instincts, immediately jumped on the story to vilify Conservatives. Blogger Dalrock, one of the most obnoxious gurus of the cult, penned a borderline-hysterical piece today; flapping his arms over some obscure article that appeared in PJ Media. The author, one Stephen Kruiser, comes across as the sort of world-weary Republican Party donor who thinks that David Souter was a great intellect, and who's been in a depressed state since Mitt Romney lost in 2012. We all know the type...probably wears checkered slacks and drives an Alfa-Romero convertible. 

  The thrust of Kruiser's article seems to be nothing more than stating he's already bored with the whole controversy and has to rush off to the Country Club if he expects to make luncheon before tee-off time. At any rate, Dalrock took the whole thing out of context, punctuating Kruiser's effete observations with interjections like: "Kruiser opens by suggesting that Chic-fil-a has done the nation a great service by cucking to anti Christian SJWs!" and "Next comes the bizarre meat of Kruiser’s argument, a vague suggestion anything less than full compliance to anti Christian SJW activists is really a bold act of defiance!" ; taking Kruiser's obvious sneering sarcasm as literal statements.

   Worse yet, Dalrock tries to spin the whole piece as typical of Conservative positions. This despite the fact that Kruiser himself actually said at the conclusion that, "I realize mine is an unpopular opinion".  Dalrock then bursts into this tirade:

   "This is a textbook case of what I’ve termed conservative militant cluelessness.  It is a bizarre conservative impulse to not only deny reality, but to actively work in the service of SJWs to ensure that others do as well.  The role of conservatives has become muffling any alarm that would otherwise be raised as SJWs annihilate our culture.  This sickness goes far beyond mere inaction in the face of evil, as the impulse is an active one, to prevent any possible action (reaction) by others."
   Applause rose from his gullible followers---none of whom seemed the slightest bit aware of the cultural gains that Conservatives have made since 2016. Kruiser actually does have a valid point; in that against the backdrop of the bigger picture, Chick-Fil-A's decision is probably not going to make much of a difference. Not to say that what they're doing is irrelevant; but compared to something like the gains we've made in reversing religious persecution in America, for example, some fast-food shack selling out to to pad its bottom line really isn't indicative of wholesale capitulation by Conservatives. 
   It just shows once again the Red Pills' true colors. They really represent the Reactionary Left and are no better than the Neocons and Swamp RINOs when it comes right down to it. 


  1. I have raced by all article about Chick-fil-a and really have no idea of what they did or why it matters. It ranks right up there with fartgate.

    1. Well, I think that what they did was disgusting and needed to be called out; but actually even LESS of a social threat than the fake Russia-gate stuff. I do feel badly for the Christian groups who were counting on their donations and got shafted, though.

  2. Okay - fine! I went and looked. Salvation Army for gosh sake? Yes - what they did was a bit disappointing.