OF MAY AND DECEMBER

     The other day, I was perusing a site on the Blogroll which deals with relationships. A commenter there was relating a story, and one sentence really caught my attention; mostly because I hear far too much of this kind of thing aimed at men. He writes: "It was different with my wife. I’m 9 years older than she is. One co-worker described me as a 'cradle-robbing son-of-a bitch.'" I have to confess that if some guy had said something like to me, the bandages on his nose afterwards would have taught him to mind his tongue in the future, not to mention minding his own business. 

    Unfortunately, we here in the Anglosphere live in zeitgeist where people are conditioned not to mind their own business---especially where sexuality and relationships are concerned. This works out fine for people in so-called alternative lifestyles because such people crave public attention. For the rest of us, not so much. 

   At some point during the last generation, age differences in romantic relationships became socially taboo (at least among heterosexuals). Nobody seems to know why they should be taboo: one would think that in a culture as emasculated as ours would respect a man who was still sexually functional at middle age or beyond. But---as with most postmodern social prohibitions---it's something that people just accept (and become infuriated about) without knowing or caring why.

   To illustrate this point, let us take a hypothetical example. Suppose I was involved in a relationship with a woman 5, 10, or even 20 or more years my junior. How exactly does that effect you? How exactly does it effect our community, our nation, our culture, or our civilization?

    If most denizens of the Anglosphere were struck with a sudden and involuntary spasm of Reason, they might question why glorifying Lesbianism 24/7 to a young woman is harmless, but an older man showing normal romantic interest in her is somehow a grave threat to her innocence and purity. I suspect that this social attitude is driven by three fundamental causes:

   1. Widespread subconscious guilt over failed parenting. 

   2. Sexual Jealousy. 

   3. Cultural contempt for Privacy Rights in general. 

   The first of these is especially pronounced among a certain class of men who have young daughters. Inevitably, they're the loudest ones about how protective they are of their own (and everybody else's) daughters---even though it typically turns out that their extent of fatherhood was getting Visitation Rights on weekends and holidays, and paying Child Support. These types invariably project their own attitudes towards women on any romantic interest their daughter might develop, and the closer her love interest is to her father's age, the worse the projection gets. Her love for another man closer to her father's age is an obvious threat to a failed father's ego.

  Sexual jealousy needs very little explanation: it's particularly pronounced among both male and female Feminists as well as among latent and open homosexuals. Since Envy has been elevated to more or less of a virtue in Postmodern society, those who for whatever reason fail in relationships feel justified in attacking and denigrating whatever relationship others have that they desire. 

  This type of Envy isn't restricted however to the sociopolitical Left: it's fairly deeply entrenched among many on the Right. The Manosphere, especially among the Game/PUA cultists, is filled with the same sort of malicious hatred. Their accusing fingers typically point at the woman instead of the man; but the Envy motivating them is fairly obvious. 

   The third centers on our systemic suspicion of Privacy, which incidentally effects heterosexual relationships in general today. We see this especially in the generations who've grown up post-9/11. Part of intimacy is sharing our deepest selves exclusively with another person. Younger people have been conditioned reflexively to fear anything that isn't open to public exposure and criticism. Degenerate academics and media perverts---alongside the terrible examples set by their Boomer/Gen X parents---has also implanted a deep sexual negativity among younger people. They've largely been educated to see heterosexuality as something shameful, dirty, and even perverse: in their eyes, it's a dark world full of unknown risks, exploitation, abuse, and worst of all (to them), social disapproval. 

   Along with the erosion of Privacy, there has also arisen within our culture an unhealthy aspect of voyeurism, of which our first two points also play a prominent role. This is obvious from our media coverage of sex scandals and sex crimes. To put it bluntly, we've become a nation of Peeping Toms and most of these news stories, documentaries, and analyses are little more than soft-core pornography for the sexually frustrated to weave lurid fantasies around. 

  So, my advice to the commenter would be this: understand what is motivating your critics, and that you are grounded in Reality and they are not. Also, outside of your relationship, build a new network of friends and associates who are also grounded in Reality. We're not living in normal times, so one must act accordingly without compromising what one believes in and stands for. 

     

WHAT A DRAG

     Just in case anybody hasn't noticed, June---formerly the traditional month for weddings---has been replaced with so-called Pride Month. Actually, this began under Obama and a GOP-controlled Congress and subsequent Administration refused to do anything about it. Since the Junta seized power in January 2021 what looked like a Homo Juggernaut in 2014 has turned into a permanently-embedded New Normal. 

  To this sad state of affairs, the Conservative punditocracy has responded. To read the title Should We Normalize Sexual Deviance is alone enough to understand the whole article. It's more a commentary on the true state of the American Right than anything else. Here's the opening paragraph:

  "At the recent National Art Education Association convention, the presenters of a session dealing with “LGBTQ+ artists” began with the rather startling declaration that “we owe it to our kids to normalize these identities.” Not one of the more than 230 other registrants for the session questioned that assertion. I find it deeply troubling, however."

  Really? Yes, it is deeply troubling. But: it's been deeply troubling now for a long time. In fact, I recall questions and concerns about normalizing deviance being raised during the Clinton Administration. Contrary to what this pundit seems to imply, pushing the Homo Agenda on children didn't just start last year. 

  I've really become exasperated listening to this kind of rubbish coming from the so-called Conservatives. Less than a decade ago, these same hypocrites were looking the other way when Obama's thugs were locking up the (few) officials who resisted so-called 'marriage equality.' Many more were forced to resign, though that was rarely reported. Some of us haven't forgotten that.

  Polls have shown that a sizable plurality of Millennials and an even larger slice of Gen Z identify as 'non-binary.' How do we suppose this happened? Maybe staging so-called 'Pride Parades' for decades in every city street? Or flying rainbow flags from every public building? Not to mention the proliferation of the Homo Agenda in the schools, media and organizations like the Boy Scouts. Anybody under the age of 20 has had this deviance shoved in their faces since they were born. 

  Don't tell me any more that nobody knew. Everybody knew it. 'Conservative' parents were telling their kids to "go along to get along" and game the system like they were doing---laughing up their sleeves all the while at the 'chumps' who stood up and sacrificed for a principle---now these same people want to clutch their bowties and shriek that this isn't the result that they wanted. 

  It seems that the author dimly senses this fact, and so takes to waffling on the issue: another tendency of the Postmodern Right. She says:

 "The principle enunciated by Martin Luther King, Jr., with respect to race is also relevant here. Our focus should always be on the caliber of the character—and achievements—of the individual, not on group identity. That meritocratic principle has been at the core of American greatness. It is currently under assault by woke warriors, however, for allegedly promoting white supremacy.The LGBTQ issue highlighted here is but one expression of the present “woke” obsession with group identities that now pervades art education, as well as virtually every other arena of American life and Western society in general. To successfully oppose it, it is crucial to recognize that it is rooted in neo-Marxist ideology deliberately aimed at undermining democratic societies by sowing division."

   Is this kind of 'spin' actually fooling anybody? With a complete ignorance of both history and psychology, her basic argument boils down to a rationalization for the Right's complete failure in defense of our own culture. All that she's really saying here is that "our acceptance of deviance is based on principle; unlike the Left's, which is predicated on Identity Politics." In other words, it's only wrong when they do it. This kind of evasion explains how the Right actually sees (or pretends to see) a difference between Rachel Levine and Bruce Jenner. 

    I prefer following the principle elucidated by Cicero which is more relevant here: "The public welfare is the Supreme Law." The welfare of a Civilization depends upon the strength of its families, which in turn depends upon gender parity. Blurring the distinctions between genders is neither equality nor progress: it is a social regression back to the Jungle---back to the ape as the Evolutionists would say. A Conservative position is not only not to 'normalize' this behavior, but not to tolerate it either and certainly not to celebrate it. 

  In the comments section somebody wrote: "I think it’s possible for kids to be taught to be tolerant, respectful, kind, and to mind their own business, without normalizing sexual deviance. I think that’s what we should do." Fine, except that's exactly what the Left is doing. How do teach tolerance for sexual deviation without exposing children to it? The commenter's statement is another example of rationalizing. It's basically saying that parents who look the other way and teach their offspring to go with the flow are actually subliminally teaching tolerance and individualism. 

  All of this strain of evasion and rationalizing is as bad as those Churchians, who during the Scamdemic thought it expedient not to protest the wholesale embargo on religious assemblies and tried to justify their cowardice by claiming that they were taking the Moral High Ground but not wishing to offend believers who thought that the Pandemic was real. We could have done what our forefathers did during previous epidemics: left the Churches open and the ministers visited the homes of those whose fear of contagion caused them to self-quarantine. Somehow nobody thought of doing that. 

  The real reason that we're hearing this kind of thing from the Right is because---at least on a subconscious level---everybody realizes that the situation is out of control and nobody wants to confess their own guilt in allowing it to happen. That is also the reason that nobody is taking the Conservative movement of today seriously. Even at modern lowered levels of discernment, most people realize that Conservatives stand for nothing except saving their own egos. Until we understand that trying to beat the Left at their own game doesn't work and start standing upon the principles that we profess, we're going to keep losing.

     

PUSILLANIMOUS ELITES FRAMING THE GUN DEBATE

     So this week, the gang over in Davos have been holding their annual WEF meeting. Appropriately, they're meeting during so-called Pride Month, and as a show of respect for his Masters the nominal American Head-of-State has vowed to starve out schoolchildren who attend schools refusing to bow to the Rainbow Agenda. Most Americans already have forgotten that one of the Junta's first acts was raise the Rainbow Flag to the status of a national flag as well as appointing John Kerry as a special ambassador to the WEF. 

    Evidently these same unelected Oligarchs have been pressing their satraps in Washington and Ottawa to do something about the laws permitting private ownership of firearms, because both the Junta and Tiananmen Trudeau have introduced new restrictions curbing our fundamental rights to own defensive weapons. Trudeau, who is a dictator in all but official name, simply ruled new restrictions by decree although his Rump Parliament still may have to pass a token vote approving them. In the US, the Controlled Opposition vowed to filibuster any new restrictions and then---less than 24 hours later---completely capitulated to the White House. The US has seen about a half-dozen mass-shootings during the last week which has been adding to the public hysteria.

   Now, as mentioned in our previous post, it's likely only a sheer coincidence that these outbreaks of violence just happen to occur during a national debate on gun control, as well as during a WEF conclave that was earlier postponed because of anti-globalist protests in well-armed Switzerland. The mere fact that both Biden and Trudeau have no problem with shipping arms to Ukraine and to the Middle East to murder Russians and Syrians shouldn't be grounds for suspicions that they would incite violence against their own citizens for political gain. Yes, Trudeau did gather mercenaries to massacre protesters in Ottawa recently (we still don't know how many people were killed or where the Regime's stormtroopers actually came from). And, true, we've also heard quite a bit of strident and violent rhetoric from the American Left during the last 18 months as to what should be done to opponents of our own Autocracy. All that actually matters is that Ameroboobs are outraged about gun violence---despite the fact that one's chances of dying in an auto accident are higher than being randomly shot in public---and our public servants absolutely must attend to the problem. 

   In Canada, where mass-shootings are relatively rare anyway, it's unknown what public opinion regarding the new restrictions actually is. Canada has evolved to the point where one group---specifically the Ruling Class---thinks for everybody. At least no one in their de facto state-run Media has questioned why a country with so little gun violence (at least among civilians, that is; in today's Canada one has a better chance of being shot down by the authorities than by actual criminals) needs any gun control. 

     Trudeau's latest act of tyranny prohibits the sale or transfer of any handgun within his domain; which is, of course, the last step before outright confiscation. The U.S. is probably 2-5 years away from reaching the level of general repression that Canada is experiencing right now. Despite whatever the impotent American Right wishes to believe, our culture is well-primed for Canadian-style tyranny. Just recall how simple it was to lock down an entire country and the great compliance shown to Mask and Vaxx Mandates and that is a fair picture of what will really happen when the Junta decides to go full-on with gun control. Neighbors will denounce neighbors; nobody will take a stand for fear of losing economic or social position and our 2nd Amendment will be gone just like the rest of the Bill of Rights. 

    It's difficult to predict how far the Junta and their Republican collaborators will go with this upcoming round of restrictions. It is likely going to be fairly severe relative to other recent legislation. The one thing that we can be sure of is that it won't meet with any significant resistance. Consider that even in a ruby-red state like Florida, fisheries are in danger of being closed because of the levels of narcotics present in coastal waters. 

   Actually, both Americans and Canadians should be a lot more concerned about the fact that our combined national drug-addiction rates have become so rife that it's creating environmental impacts. That also includes the fact that there are strong causalities between narcotics and mass-shootings. But that issue has become a third rail topic in our Corporate Media. Especially recently a trope of censors fact-checkers are denying any ties between dope use and mass violence. The Corporate Media however doesn't mention its own ties to Big Pharma---which constitutes it's largest advertising base---or to the Marijuana Industry, which is heavily invested in by the same banks and trusts which own large portions of media stock. Just another one of those coincidences that the settled science always somehow benefits the Corporate Oligarchy. 

THE YEARS OF LEAD AND THE STRATEGY OF TENSION

       So we've experienced yet another mass-shooting in the United States, with the usual hypocritical thoughts and prayers being extended to the victims while in the immediate aftermath both sides of the partisan divide begin pointing fingers. Nobody of course wants to be insensitive and point out that drug overdoses, traffic fatalities, and suicides are more often the cause of American deaths than mass-shootings or terrorist attacks. To admit that would mean admitting that policies like the drug war, mandatory seat-belts and alienating men have been failures. Besides, as we've seen recently, Ameroboobs thrive on hysteria and drama: witness shutting down the entire Constitution over a flu outbreak with a 99.75% survival rate. 

     The nominal Head-of-State was pounding his shoe on the podium shortly after the shooting, which naturally was reverberated by his parrots in the Corporate Media. "We have to stand up to the Gun Lobby!" Biden roared; ironically after two months of flooding Ukraine with weapons and mercenaries. This was pounced upon quickly by the Controlled Opposition, who assured us that these incidents only happen when Democrats are in power. Despite the narrative, they've been happening fairly frequently since the mid-1990s. Even though the US doesn't come close to the murder rates of other countries, mass-shootings grab headlines, which in turn generates mass-hysteria.

    There are a lot of things about these incidents that nobody wants to discuss, for example:

    1. That Media Sensationalism seems to generate more of these events. 

    2. That a fairly high percentage of these perpetrators were using psychoactive drugs of some kind.

    3. That many of these perpetrators were well-known to the authorities who never seem to notice that they might pose a threat. 

   Since knee-jerk reactions are the New Normal in America any kind of reason employed in debating these issues are always glossed over. And certainly no one would dare to suggest or even entertain the thought that our own government might have a hand in these actions. Relative to point 3; it is rather strange however that these attacks always seem to coincide with a big media push against the 2nd Amendment, or for foreign intervention, or against 'extremism', etc. It's also quite peculiar that these killings are always of innocent, ordinary citizens and somehow prominent leaders are rarely ever included among the casualties. 

    Awkwardly enough for the knee-jerk crowd though, our government has not only engaged in such activities abroad, but actually admitted to it. This was a Psyop program based on the concept of Strategy of Tension; which even Wikipedia---not exactly a bastion of Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories---defines as follows:

  "A strategy of tension is a policy wherein violent struggle is encouraged rather than suppressed. The purpose is to create a general feeling of insecurity in the population and make people seek security in a strong government. This is supposed to pave the way for a more authoritarian, or even a neo-fascist government."

   Italy, which experienced a surge in violent crime during the 1970s to early 80s, was apparently the proving ground for this operation. These were known as the Years of Lead in Italy, and exposure of US involvement in these crimes nearly caused a break between Italian and American relations. (It is actually an Act of War under International Law). The violence suddenly stopped after President Reagan issued an Executive Order forbidding US agencies to stage false flags and criminal activity abroad in 1982; but since his time such restrictions have been widely ignored.

    Given the character of the upstanding gentlemen behind America's Psyop programs, nobody would imagine that they would ever use such tactics against American nationals. 

   It is a remarkable coincidence too, that crime in America today bears such a striking resemblance to Italy's of the 1970s: Left-Wing and Right-Wing gangs running amok with impunity; mass-killings which only target civilians, all interspersed with a few terrorist attacks. During the trials which followed in Italy, a Fascist operative testified that:

  “You were not supposed to attack the State or its representatives. You were supposed to attack civilians, women, children, innocent people from outside the political arena. For one simple reason: To force the Italian public to turn to the State turn to the regime and ask for greater security. This was precisely our role in Italy. It placed itself at the service of the State which created a strategy aptly called the "Strategy of Tension" in so far as they had to get ordinary people to accept that at any moment a State of Emergency could be declared. So, people would willingly trade part of their freedom for the security of being able to walk the streets, go on trains or enter a bank." 

    It is likewise a remarkable coincidence that so much of the Strategy of Tension seems to be playing out again in postmodern America: with the Right demanding expansions of Police powers and the Left calling for further restrictions of our rights. It's also an amazing coincidence that so much of the Strategy of Tension's basic techniques are also employed by cults (for example, Satanic ones) to bind adherents psychologically to the cult leader. 

    Sadly, though, it's very doubtful that the American people will follow their Italian counterparts and demand any accountability. This is why nothing will happen to curb any of this violence until the dumbed-down doped-up populace begs for the Great Reset Oligarchs to come and save them. The fake inflationary cycle of today, the hyped-up threats of war, and the Scamdemic are part of the same Strategy of Tension. 

   Like all our other problems, mass-violence is one completely of our own making. Americans are too preoccupied with sticking it to those gun nuts or owning those Libtards (and making a profit on the side) to come together and deal with the root causes. Our problems are not political nor economic; this is essentially a spiritual problem. We've become a culture without a soul: a culture where it's everyone for himself. Is it any surprise that we're now under the thumb of a soulless and ruthless Oligarchy? These people are simply playing by the rules we've set up for them. 

   Don't get caught up in the hysteria or political posturing. The Elites are peddling fear. Avoid the fearful and hold fast to the faithful, and one's way will be truly be secure.

 

    

    

    

    

TRUST THE SOURCE?

     The blog Vigilant Citizen had an interesting article up this week, where he went into some detail (with links) on occult practices within the Pentagon's Psychological Warfare Unit. Of course, most Ameroboobs don't know (or even believe in or care about) the Military's involvement in a program which is of dubious ethics; this even though the Unit issued a recruiting ad just within the last few weeks. 

    VC points out that the PSYOPS Unit has been infiltrated by Satanic Cults, and has been for a long time. Lt. Col. Michael Aquino, who also founded the Satanic Temple of Set and was a regular contributor to the cult's newsletter The Cloven Hoof, 'served' for several years in Army Intelligence until rising to prominence in organizing the PSYOPS unit under that great humanitarian and Christian, Jimmy Carter. 

     President Reagan ejected Aquino from the Military after the Colonel's cultish activities came to light; most especially allegations of his involvement in the Presidio Child Abuse Scandal, and the Franklin Sex Ring: neither of which have ever been satisfactorily officially explained. 

    Satanic Cult activities are nothing new to the Beltway Establishment; in fact, people much higher in the Swamp than Aquino also admit to their practice. Even the World Economic Forum has invited occult groups to help them along with their Great Reset agenda at Davos this year. To be honest, though, at this point I'm not certain which is worse: the fact that our self-appointed Elites are doing these things or that---despite all of the personal testimony about---most Americans don't see it as any big deal. It seems a simple matter of common sense that seeing a lot of open devil-worshippers congregating somewhere can't possibly be indicative of anything good going on. Even more obviously, putting them in charge of Psychological Operations should be of especial concern. But here in postmodern America, where today's top-trending news headlines are about the NBA Championships and a new round of free COVID shots, there's little concern about top political officials and economic kingpins running around in black robes and praying to the devil.

    Naturally a society disinterested in cults infiltrating the Pentagon are going to have even less interest in whether or not the Federal Government should be involved in Psychological Operations in the first place. The Pentagon of course says that these programs aren't directed at US Nationals, but given that the program seems to be under the thumb of people who have a professed disregard for the Ten Commandments, one might be a bit disinclined to respect their honesty in such matters. As Aquino himself wrote during the Carter years:

  “In its strategic context, MindWar must reach out to friends, enemies and neutrals alike across the globe – neither through primitive “battlefield” leaflets and loudspeakers of PSYOP nor through the weak, imprecise, and narrow effort of psychotronics – but through the media possessed by the United States which have the capabilities to reach virtually all people on the face of the Earth. These media are, of course, the electronic media – television and radio. State of the art developments in satellite communication, video recording techniques, and laser and optical transmission of broadcasts make possible a penetration of the minds of the world such as would have been inconceivable just a few years ago.”

   Of course, we can trust Satanists not to abuse powers on that level. They would likewise never stoop to deceptions, even though Aquino says:

  “For the mind to believe in its own decisions, it must feel that it made those decisions without coercion. Coercive measures used by the operative, consequently, must not be detectable by ordinary means. There is no need to resort to mind-weakening drugs such as those explored by the CIA; in fact the exposure of a single such method would do unacceptable damage to MindWar’s reputation for truth.”

   Probably a major reason why the ethics surrounding the use of Psychological Operations is never questioned is because Aquino himself wrote the official position on the morality of its use. Personally, I hold that it is never a moral policy whether used domestically or against real or perceived enemies abroad. The obvious problem with its employment on a domestic populace is that there is no accountability from its organizers---nor can there be in actuality since the same entities controlling public opinion are the ones influencing it to suit an agenda. As Everett Dean Martin stated of these methods even a century ago; "An enterprise so uncontrollable, so susceptible to abuse, and so constantly under the temptation to abuse is a public menace." If such an organization arose in the United States, he predicted that: "One effect of propagandistic methods is to greatly increase the susceptibility of the public to slogans, catch-words, and vulgarly stated half-truths. Every real educator and political philosopher in history has noted the danger of this popular tendency. Now the 'knowing ones' are urged to see this mob psychology, not as a social menace, but as a Natural Resource to be exploited for private gain."

    To complete Martin's reasoning after a century of experience, Psychological Operations also tend to form a vicious circle. This actually happened to some extent in Hitler Germany, at least at the Nazi Party level. The Operators have to keep feeding the populace disinformation in increasing doses, which, in turn, dumbs-down and stokes public aggression even more, causing the leadership ultimately to become dependent on the very mob that it created to hold its power. 

    Contrast that disastrous scenario with a well-informed electorate like we used to have in the United States. We've always had corruption and machine politics in our Government, but up until recently it was getting rooted out and destroyed on a regular basis. 

    There is likewise no strategic justification for Psychological Operations in Intelligence or Military communities, except to a limited extent. During WW1, Sigmund Freud discovered the causes and treatment of shell-shock. As a humanitarian gesture, the Austrian Government shared that information with the Allied Powers. In WW2, American psychoanalysts were active predicting the behavior of enemy leaders so that we might anticipate their moves. These were a proper use of psychological methods because they were employed to constructive ends like healing the sick and ending the war. 

    But the way these operations are carried out today are immoral because of their inherent ruthlessness and amorality. A soldier might be wounded in battle and physically harmed for life; a victim of psychological warfare may be damaged at a mental level from which he may not even know exists. It's a dirty form of warfare since it often depends for its success on turning the better---not the worst side---of an opponent's nature against him. Those kinds of actions are not easily forgotten because it brings the fight down to a personal level and certainly is counter-productive to any future peacetime policies.

    Another reason against using these tactics is because (regardless of what they may think of themselves), the operators are not infallible. Psychological Operations can, and do, backfire. In fact, when recently employed against Russia, China, Syria, and Iran the tactics backfire on a regular basis. 

    The road ahead is not going to be an easy one. This is why it is vital that we educate ourselves---while we still can---and know the nature of the foes of freedom and humanity. Knowledge is the best defense against Psychological Operations of any kind. 

WHITE ORCS AND BABY FORMULA

     Back in the days of my youth, a family friend told me of a visit to Germany, circa 1946. We were discussing his adventures during WW2, and he went back on some errand related to the War Crimes Trials. Of the German people he stated that he learned two things: none of them had ever been Nazis, and none of them knew about any of the atrocities that the Third Reich was involved in. He mentioned a conversation he had with a German businessman:

   German: "I don't know, you see I was never...

   Adventurer: "...Yes, I know: you were never a Nazi."

   German: "You don't believe me?"

   Adventurer: "Oh I believe you. If I sound surprised, it's because I'm amazed at how much damage Adolf was able to do all by himself."

   This conversation keeps coming back to mind reading both articles and comments on Republican/Conservative websites. It's truly astounding how so few on the Right knew that our schools, media, military, and healthcare system had been co-opted by Leftist special interests until just last year. Before 2021, we weren't seeing increasing monopolization, or an Opioid crisis, or legal abortion, or the break down of the family, or the need for immigration reform, or an expanding police state... I seem to recall that in 2016, Trump ran on a platform of Making America Great Again: a slogan that would seem to imply that we were in a state of decline and needed reformation. But we don't seem to remember any of that.

  One of things that is really destroying the Conservative Movement is their continued refusal---like the Postwar Germans---to acknowledge that the vast majority of our national problems are entirely of our own making. The Right's continual refusal to address electoral corruption, or remove Neocons from key Party positions, or lack of any Platform or relevant issues except to proclaim that they aren't Democrats is proof that they've learned nothing since from the cultural and economic debacles of the last 30 years.

   The real crisis that the Right faces is a spiritual one. It's becoming increasingly obvious that they don't give a hoot about about any of the issues that effect all of us as Americans: the majority on the Right are perfectly happy with the status quo and their only real complaint is that the Left is grabbing too big a share of the pie. Blogger InsanityBytes addressed this in a good article yesterday. She was speaking about a recent scandal in a church, and how focused the critics were on how the scandal effected themselves: their reputations, their profit margins, their place in the narrative, etc.

   "That is what lurks at the heart of our cultural divide, a tone deaf church that just doesn't care. It's really not about abortion or skin color or wokeness, or whether we should believe all women. It's about not even existing, not being seen, being rendered completely invisible. It's really just about how all animals are equal except that some are clearly more equal than others. The thing is, if you genuinely want life to matter in this country, then the suffering of others has to matter, and it has to matter more than your hurt feelings, or your status, or your alleged reputation."

   This was brought once again today by a flurry of bowtie clutching and outrage in the Controlled Opposition Conservative Press. It's seems there's supposedly a shortage of baby formula in the United States right now. I have doubts that the story is even true, considering that just a few months again, the Corporate Oligarchy got caught red-handed withholding shipments of imported goods to drive up inflationary costs, and to create artificial shortages. The stories have since fallen from the Corporate Media, and everybody is blaming the conflict in Eastern Europe---despite the fact that we import practically nothing from Russia, Belarus, or Ukraine. 

    Instead of explaining to the few stay-at-home mothers left in the United States that they can get around the 'shortage' by simply doing what our grandmothers did: heat some milk on the stove and put it in a baby-bottle, the punditocracy is squawking because some RINO discovered that Immigration Detention Centers were stocked with baby formula.

   Now, aside from the fact that these centers usually stockpile such goods a year or so in advance, and that infants probably don't have much say as to whether they enter the country illegally or not; the compassionate Conservatives are infuriated by all of this. Some are even suggesting that we seize these stockpiles and distribute them to American citizens---the fact there probably isn't enough there to feed all of the babies in America for two days at most to the contrary notwithstanding. Nobody also seems to wonder what these babies are supposed to eat once their stockpiles of formula are seized, but none of this is important so long as "I got mine!" and the little ones presumably can crawl back to Mexico and get their feedings there for all that anybody cares.

   Of course, the Government could choose to force the Agribusiness Cartels to release their stockpiles of baby formula and punish them for creating an economic crisis: but no, that would be government overreach and interfering with the free market. Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Ted Turner and all of the other WEF kingpins buying up American farmland wouldn't like that; neither would all of the Conservatives who have money tied up in Agribusiness stocks.

    

   We can't have a functional Democracy based on the idea of every man for himself. Enlightened Self-Interest is one thing; blind greed and Narcissism is another. Enlightened Self-Interest underpins both Democracy and the Free Enterprise System, but it is at its core, an honor system. It cannot realistically function unless it has a generally agreed upon code based in accountability both to God and to one's neighbor. Conservatism has failed in the West because it largely abandoned accountability to all but the official Conservative narrative: which ultimately has made our movement no better than the Left. 

   Conservatism (the real kind) is an ideology and a way of life---not a product to be packaged and marketed; nor a 'narrative' to be controlled. It's completely laughable watching the Right celebrate people like Elon Musk and Bruce Jenner while they criticize Jeff Bezos and Rachel Levine for doing the same things. Or when they applaud applying Cancel Culture to Disneyland Florida but object when the Left boycotts Hobby Lobby or Chick-Fil-A. Then they wonder why nobody takes them seriously. 

   Some actually have objected to the kinds of arguments made here: saying that idealism is different from reality, and that ideals are for a few chumps, but the realistic political approach is to do what works. Fine. Feel free to explain what good the 1994 and 2010 GOP Congressional takeovers or either Bush Administration did to advance the Conservative cause. From 1992 to 2016, every national GOP campaign has been centered on a win-at-all-costs Realpolitik strategy; and for all the good they've done we may as well have elected Democrats. The secret to Trump's successes was that he reached to Americans and cared about solving problems for everyone---not just a select few. That was real Conservatism. But Orange Man Bad and the Right jumped on the anti-Trump bandwagon just as fast when they saw their own special interests threatened. The bottom line though is, that we are going keep losing the Culture War as long as we keep using the means of the enemy.

  

   

   

    

ORPHANS IN THE POLITICAL STORM

      The other day I came across a social media post of a person---I think it was once a female---who was bitterly lamenting the fact that they were put up for adoption instead of being aborted. According to what this creature said, it was dehumanizing to take infants and warehouse them in orphanages to be given away like dogs in a rescue shelter; and growing up with resentment of being a kept child, to use her terminology. 

     As I said before, it's got to be the drugs. People's minds simply can't operate like this unless they've been chemically altered. As someone whose family tree has its roots in more than a few orphanages, I'm rather happy that high-potency marijuana and prescription psych-dope hadn't addled the human mind to the point where they actually believed that Infanticide was a symbol of human progress. An ex-girlfriend of mine was actually a foundling. She was about as pro-life as they get in her views. 

    The Whacko Left Wing has gone so far off the rails that there have been at least ten documented acts of terrorism against churches and adoption centers as of 4 P.M. Pacific Coast Time today. No doubt that this only the beginning. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has been removed to a Secure Location---likely to be joined by Clarence Thomas in the near future. These are the same nutjobs incidentally who invent horror-stories of Russian soldiers killing babies and terrorizing political opponents in Ukraine. 

    Meanwhile, the Republican Party has noticed suddenly that Roe vs. Wade is still a law, and that despite it's repeal being on the GOP Platform since 1974, nobody has bothered to do anything about it since. 

   In 2004, the GOP unanimously endorsed the Neocon Bush for President---with one exception. That was former New Hampshire Senator Bob Smith. Smith said that he would run against Bush and admitted that he was trying to draw attention to the inactivity of the Party in addressing the abortion issue. He was interviewed by Bush toady Michael Medved who flatly sneered, "You're a Senator. Why don't you propose some legislation banning abortion?" 

   "I have proposed some Bills." Smith replied. "I can't even get a co-sponsor to get them to Committee." This was at a time when Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court. Instead of addressing Smith's concerns, Bush---in an act of petty revenge---delegated Neocon John Sununu to challenge Smith for Senate and unseat him. Smith has been completely blacklisted from the Party ever since. 

   That episode tells us all we need to know about the GOP's "commitment" to overturning Roe vs. Wade. It's not going to happen. 

   What is more likely to happen is that the leaked SCOTUS document was a signal from the Regime to turn its thugs loose on American cities again, like they did in 2020. One of the objectives then was to purge defund local police and turn law enforcement over to greater federal control. The Regime has made an especial target of organizations like Oath Keepers---which was prominent in refusing to take part in the illegal Scamdemic tyranny--- as part of this takeover. This leaked SCOTUS and the oncoming violence due to surround is a similar move to take over the Judiciary. The Regime wins either way. If SCOTUS overturns Roe, they will have an excuse to purge "extremist" judges; if they vote to keep Roe, it will be easy to stage a False-Flag allegedly perpetrated by a 'Right-Wing Extremist' and provide an excuse for a subsequent crackdown. As we said here in 2020, Chief Justice Roberts' capitulation to the Junta was only going to buy the Judicial Branch time until their turn came. 

    It has been 49 years since Roe vs. Wade was decided. Think about that. A teenager then is a Senior Citizen now. The majority of Americans have never lived when abortion wasn't considered a "Right." Republican fantasies aside, it's not even realistic to believe that the dumbed-down, doped-up populace of today has the slightest conception of why the Right to Life is important. A large percentage of Americans can't even define gender, let alone how babies are created or when Life begins in the womb. 

    Another matter which these hypocrites prudently avoid is the fact that many Republicans are themselves invested in the Abortion Racket (both financially and ideologically). The most recent reliable polling data shows that nearly 2 in 5 Republicans oppose repealing Roe vs. Wade. It's probable that most of these are personally against the act itself; but the prevalent "I-got-mine-screw-you" attitude of many on today's Right again manifests itself. 

   It ought to serve as a reminder to the Right how many of these 'throwaway children' became prominent contributors to American Society. Of course, they are all dead White males as far as contemporary culture is concerned: but they include former presidents George Washington, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, and Herbert Hoover. The list also includes Statesmen Alexander Hamilton and John Hancock; military leaders William Sherman and Admiral Robert Peary; businessmen Henry Ford, William Boeing, and Colonel Harlan Sanders; scientists Linus Pauling and Blake Van Leer; writers Herman Melville, Edgar Allan Poe, and James Michener; as well as baseball legend Babe Ruth and football legend Jim Thorpe. How many people of this stature were potentially among the millions of dead who ended up getting parted out like old machinery?

   The status quo is not going to change regardless of what SCOTUS says or does. The Left is fanatically devoted to the absurd notion that babies deserve to be executed because their conception somehow violates women's rights. The Right could care less so long as it's other people's babies getting aborted and Big Pharma keeps paying dividends. Stopping abortion is going to require a fundamental change in attitudes---back to one that respects human life, That, sadly, isn't likely to happen any time soon either.