It is the Grifter’s World, We Just Live in It.

Does everyone realize that the Palestinian leadership is merely running a grift? Think about it:

The Palestinian leadership says it wants to “liberate” all of Palestine but they know darned well they’ll never have sufficient military power to carry out this task. So, why keep telling your people that this is what you want to do?

Because you’re a pack of con artists.

And the Palestinian leadership lives pretty well – and its not like their main bank accounts are in Palestine. By keeping up the drumbeat they justify their continued (and legally invalid) control over their own people and keep money rolling in from governments, NGOs and private individuals who buy the grift. That the average Palestinian suffers badly from this, and the Israelis suffer a slow attrition, doesn’t matter: the money keeps coming in…and that is all a grifter ever cares about.

I bring this up because it has become stunningly obvious to me over the past few years that the reason why really stupid things keep going on is because con artists are making money off the stupidity. And the stupidity can go on for quite a long time as long as someone has a vested, financial interest in it going. You ever see that show “American Greed”? It really is one of the few good things on TV these days…but I love it when they try to cast the Narrative that we should feel sorry for the suckers. “I lost my life savings of $750,000.00″…oh, boo hoo hoo! I really feeling nothing but contempt for most of the victims. Yeah, and some con artist came along and said he’d make you 20% per year on that money, which was more than enough, and you, you greedy bastard, went in on it because being a greedy bastard, you wanted more than you needed. Sure, the con artist lied to you…but you deserved to lose that money because you were a greedy bastard. Insensitive? Maybe – but even if it is: seriously, don’t be a sucker. But, man, do we have a lot of suckers these days. And it is the suckers who are ultimately responsible for the grift.

We know the anti-fracking movement is awash in foreign oil money: grift. Global warming provides a high living for a host of people and groups who push the theory: grift. Foreign governments and American companies are making bank off the illegal immigrants: grift. A whole cottage industry now exists of people making a living off pushing the Trump/Russia story: grift. On and on it goes like that – pick your problem, and you’ll eventually come around to the people who are making money off of it and who would lose a stream of income if the problem came to a solution. To be sure, mixed into this are traditional, political ambitions (you know, if the Russia grift works and Trump is forced out: Democrats will take the money as well as the political victory…but, mostly, they’ll take the money). But the reason we find it so hard to just say “we have decided to do X, everyone fall in line” is because once an issue is settled, you can’t make money off it any longer. Or, more specifically, you can’t make un-earned money off it. In other words, you have to put up or shut up…an unresolved issue, though, can be talked about forever and there are always people you can sucker into paying for you to talk.

I don’t quite know what to do about this. I mean, other than a round of hangings. But we do have the problem of people who have a vested interest in everything being a permanent, unresolved mess. How to get around them to a solution (which would turn off their money supply) is a riddle I don’t have an answer to at the moment.

Advertisements

Trump Demands

Back around August of 2016, I was talking over the election with the Mrs and, at that time, was figuring that Trump had a real chance of winning. But I was also thinking that the Establishment would pull out all the stops to prevent this. Not, by the way, because of the policies Trump proposed, nor even because of their false claims that he was a racist or any such thing. No, they were afraid of him winning simply because he would be the first President we’ve ever had who owed nothing to the Establishment. That is the key to understanding the amazing level of hatred directed Trump’s way. He doesn’t care what happens to the Establishment.

And the Establishment is corrupt to the bone – and gets away with it simply because no one does anything about it. They can’t – either they are personally compromised, or fearful that their closest allies will be caught up in an anti-corruption sweep. So, everyone just pretends its all good…with only the odd, egregious violator sent up the river, and even then only if such an action won’t harm the Masters of the Establishment, the Democrats. Trump comes rolling in and, being on the right side of the law, himself, sees no reason to worry about investigations…regardless of where they lead.

I don’t know why, exactly, Trump has allowed the Mueller fiasco to continue as long as it has – I can only assume he’s got his own plan, on his own timeline, and has made the calculation that it isn’t the right time to shut Mueller down. But his demand over the weekend that the DOJ look into Obama Administration spying is clearly a shot across the bow. We don’t know what Trump knows – what he has been able to obtain on his authority as President detailing just what happened. We can count on it that many bureaucrats would do all they can to thwart Trump in getting information…but at least some percentage of them still hold to the old, non-partisan ethic of the bureaucracy and so will obey Presidential orders. Trump likely knows a lot about who was doing what and under who’s orders.

But he can’t act precipitously on such information. It is going to be a lot harder to get convictions than most suspect. First off, Justice is riddled with people who will do all they can to blow cases. Secondly, any trials in the DC area would have a juries packed full of anti-Trump people who could easily be lead to saying “not guilty” no matter what. Also, when it all comes out, it has to come in a way very easy for the broad mass of the American people to understand. The MSM will just flat lie about it, of course…but if it is very obvious, even the most blatant lies won’t keep people from understanding the truth.

Big things are about to happen, I think – and what I think they’ll amount to is a full attack on a corrupt Ruling Class. Stay tuned.

Corruption Everywhere

I absolutely insist that any man who has driven more than one woman over a bridge be forever excluded from the Senate! I will call this the Ted Kennedy Lion of Liberalism Standard for Moral Excellence.

The Conyers story is most interesting on the assertion that, apparently, taxpayer funds were used to payoff his accusers…and some are saying that many millions of dollars over recent years was forked out in such cases. If so – and, in this case, I have few doubts that at least the basics are correct in the story – then this definitively shows the corruption of our government. That there would be even one such payout is an outrage – and all of the Congressional leadership, Republican and Democrat, must have been in on it. I can’t figure a way to get money appropriated for harassment claims without getting sign off from the leadership. This puts Speaker Ryan’s qualities in doubt – I’d always thought him an honorable man. I hope that something comes out to show he wasn’t involved…but I can’t imagine a situation where he wasn’t involved…and even if he’s clear of it, what does that say about his leadership abilities?

Back during 2016, I talked to the Mrs a bit about the overall “swamp” situation. She, naturally, was mostly bored and irritated with me for talking about it because she wisely despises politics…but I still recall saying words to the effect of, “they are working so hard against Trump because they are afraid of him. They are afraid of having someone in the White House who has no loyalty to the system. But here’s the kicker: by turning on him – and they were all his best buddies before he ran – they are making sure that he doesn’t give a damn how many of them go down.”

I think we’re starting to see that play out – possibly with a nudge or two from Trump, who probably knows where a lot of the bodies are buried in Hollywood, Corporate America and government. Right now, the President, Senator Paul and Senator Cruz are the only people I trust in DC to play it straight…there might be more, I hope there are more, but that is it, for now.

Scandal Sheet

We have discussed the overall scandals, but here’s what I’ve got right now:

The Uranium One scandal is a major thing – and Obama’s Administration made sure it happened (with Hillary leading the way) and then covered it up.

The Dossier Scandal is smaller in scale, but very important – paid for at least partially by Team Hillary, it was used by the Obama Administration to justify spying on Team Trump during and after the 2016 campaign (it appears other justifications were used, as well). In the end, this bogus dossier is the central part of the so-called Trump/Russia scandal…it was used, ultimately, to say “there’s something to be investigated, here” and so bring on Mueller.

Mueller, it seems to me, was brought in via Comey’s machinations – and just why would you want that when you know full well that the Trump/Russia concept was a mere figment of the imagination? To make sure the cover-up of the Uranium One scandal stayed in place, as far as I can see.

I don’t perceive a connection at this time between the Uranium One/Dossier scandals and the Awan IT scandal. But, stay tuned.

Flake Out

Ace posts an interesting list gathered by Jason Johnson about Flake:

1) Tempting to comment on Flake’s floor speech. Instead, offering context on his view of “governing” by highlighting a few of his votes.

2) Jeff Flake was 1 of 10 Republican senators who voted to confirm Loretta Lynch for Attorney General

3) Flake voted to fund President Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesty.

4) Flake voted against Sen. Mike Lee’s 1st Amendment Defense Act

5) Flake voted for Obama’s $1.1 trillion Cromnibus 2015 spending bill

6) Flake voted to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank

7) Flake voted for S.2114 which increased Russia’s power at the International Monetary Fund

8) Flake voted for a CLEAN debt limit suspension (2014)

9) Flake was 1 of 11 Republican senators who voted to confirm Janet Yellen

10) Flake voted for the Ryan-Murray budget which lifted spending caps & raised fees (taxes) in exchange for promises of future spending cuts

11) Flake voted for the Gang of 8 amnesty bill

12) Flake voted for the post-Newtown gun grab

13) Flake voted AGAINST The Defund Obamacare Act of 2013 (S.1292)

14) Flake voted to increase debt by $900 billion in exchange for the promise of discretionary cuts in the future (2011)

15) Flake preferred John Kasich over Cruz or Trump in the 2016 GOP Primary.

This is Conservatism? This is principled leadership? My comment earlier in the day over an MSM article saying that Flake was “appalled” by Trump that we Conservatives were rather appalled by a guy who thinks cheap labor and trade deals with Chinese tyrants are Conservative.

I’ve seen polling which shows Flake at about 18% approval rating – he was going to lose next year, no matter what. It seems he’s managed to anger both the Democrats and the GOP in Arizona. People just weren’t going to buy it…especially not GOP voters. Everyone knew what he’d do in a re-election bid…talk a huge game of Conservatism, and then just knife us in the back once he was re-elected. Dumping him does put the GOP Seat at risk, but what good has having it in GOP hands done for us?

Corker and Flake out means we’ve got a couple weak members out – and have a very solid shot of replacing both of them with people we can rely on. We also have a good chance of picking up a net of 4 or 5 Senate seats next year. If this gets done, the few remaining RINOs will simply be overwhelmed (either out-voted or terrified of being primaried if they stray). Could be a lot of good things coming our way in 2019.

The Great Turning Point

A bit from Mark Steyn:

The sexual-identity left and the Islamic imperialists have certain things in common: both dislike having to listen to opposing views, and so are ever more openly hostile to freedom of speech. Yet deep down both parties know these two surging forces of cultural evolution cannot co-exist – that the Lancashire Constabulary Transgender Unit marching behind the Forty-Four Ways to Slaughter the Infidel Study Group in the Lancashire Pride Parade is merely a passing phase: It’s as if the World and Opposite World were wedged into the same physical space like overlaid telephone area codes. One will shrink, the other will expand.

Which would you bet on? As I say here, diversity is an interim stage, and, as we already see in certain parts of London and Brussels and Malmö and Toulouse and Frankfurt and on and on, what comes after diversity is the grim uniformity of Islam. And, as I say here, in the end the brave, transgressive left will give up even their bedrock freedom – sexual identity – as they have abandoned all those older, quainter freedoms like free speech. In the face of growing Islamic hostility, men will cease to marry men, and men will cease to be women, and policemen will quietly mothball the bi-cruiser.

Some years back, my father handed me a copy of Hilaire Belloc’s The Great Heresies. Given Belloc’s vigorous Catholicism, I don’t think the book ever got a large amount of interest. A lot of people probably thought when it came out, “hey, its just a Catholic mouthing off about silly heresies” and took no great notice of it. But it is, to me, one of the most important books written in the past century. It very much repays reading and after reading it, you’ll have a vastly better understanding of where we came from and why we’re in our current position. Steyn’s article got me thinking of this passage from Belloc’s book:

Strange as it may seem, there are a certain number of highly educated men, European gentlemen, who have actually joined Islam, that is, who are personal converts to Mohammedanism. I myself have known and talked to some half-dozen of them in various parts of the world, and there are a very much larger number of similar men, well instructed Europeans, who, having lost their faith in Catholicism or in some form of Protestantism in which they were brought up, feel sympathy with the Mohammedan social scheme although they do not actually join it or profess belief in its religion. We constantly meet men of this kind today among those who have travelled in the East.

The other day I was listening to a show on Catholic radio and the host was discussing a conversation he had had with a German some while back. The gist of it was that the host explained to the German that his country fell for Nazism – and is now being swamped by Islamism – because it gave up it’s ancestral, Christian faith and thus could not stand against new faiths, of whatever sort. The host contrasted Germany with Poland and pointed out that Poland remained Catholic – strongly so – and so was able to endure a century of division and foreign rule and then, in turn, rejected and fought against Nazism and Communism…and today still stands firm against Muslim inroads.

The problem, you see, isn’t that Muslims are moving to Europe – nor that non-Americans are moving to the United States – but that the people of Europe (or, more accurately, their leaders) have lost their faith and thus do not convert the new arrivals. It wouldn’t matter in the least if the primary ethnic group of the United States in 2117 were Nigerian provided that said people had been fully converted to the American ideal. Just as it wouldn’t matter if in 2117 the primary ethnic group of Europe were Arab provided said people had been converted to the European ideal. The slight difference is that the American ideal is embodied in the Declaration of Independence while the European ideal is embodied in Christianity – most specifically Catholicism, but at least as long as it is Christian, it is European.

As Belloc noted – and the book was written more than 80 years ago – there were already highly educated, but faithless, Europeans who were already in line with Islam. Not so much in believing the whole run of Islamic belief, but in believing that it was superior to their ancestral beliefs and was better suited to the human condition. But the catch – and they didn’t see it then, or now – is that the way Europe is only happens because it is Christian. Had the Arian heresy triumphed in the 4th century, then Europe would not have become what it became. Arianism was very much like Islam in that it denied the ultimate divinity of Christ and thus, had it won, European civilization today would likely be very much like Muslim civilization is (my bet is that Islam never would have arisen, as such: Mohammed would have just become an Arian). But Europe in the 4th century remained Catholic Christian and so developed along the lines we know from history – but now Europe is no longer Catholic Christian (my guess is that, overall, no more than 20% of the European population is Christian) and so it has nothing to fight against Islam with…nothing to fight for, that is. And given a choice, I believe the European (and American) Ruling Class would much prefer a triumphant Islam to a revived Christianity.

Part of this is because Islam does have the appeal of simplicity. Remember, it’s primary disagreement with Christian dogma is the divinity of Christ. You’ll not find anyone write or speak with more respect and reverence for Christ (and his mother) than a Muslim…but he denies that Christ is God. Given that Christ isn’t God in the Muslim view, there’s no need for all those sacraments which, especially, the Catholic Church maintains. You don’t need a priest. You can pray anywhere (there are Mosques, of course, but as you can easily see just by looking, a Muslim can discharge his religious duties anywhere quite simply). Islam seems clean and easy – it is certainly much easier to understand than Christian dogmas such as a the Trinity. Additionally, most modern, Progressive ideologies firmly reject the idea of free will – and Islam is very much about all being God’s will while humans only do what they were ordained to do. If the Progressive West is to have a religion, Islam is more likely to be it than anything else.

There would be not much to it, you see? I can easily see our radical feminists adopting the burka in order to free themselves from the “male gaze”. Official Muslim condemnation of usury would be seen as a nice anti-Capitalist touch (it isn’t actually true that interest isn’t charged in Islam, by the way). Your basic Ruling Class person won’t have to give up much to convert to Islam. They’d still be rich and in charge. True, there would be no more topless women on European beaches and popular culture would be highly constrained, but that wouldn’t prevent a rich person from indulging in all sorts of oddities behind the walls of his secured palace; nor in setting aside special areas where sin is abundantly available, but only for the select few (the Ruling Class doesn’t really like the idea that the unwashed masses are currently able to get into swank areas, anyway). It would go badly for open homosexuality – but in the hierarchy of victim status, Muslim trumps gay anyways; and it’s not like you couldn’t still be gay, it would be just that the annual Pride parade would be cancelled.

If you wonder why our Ruling Class, especially in Europe, appears utterly blind to the threat, look no further than the fact that they have little to fear from it. It isn’t their way of life that will be radically altered, but yours. And they are quite ok with that. You might like your Christianity and your Constitution, but such things are entirely meaningless to the Ruling Class. They like power and wealth and are determined to keep it – and if that means importing a new set of voters and eventually joining them, they won’t bat an eye at it. This is why it is crucial that we concentrate on what is most important, and not allow ourselves to get side-tracked into blind alleys. It isn’t, ultimately, the Muslim refugee who is your worry, but a Ruling Class that doesn’t like you.

This makes the election last year stand out all the more starkly. Trump, warts and all, is an American patriot. He loves his country – as it is (or, more accurately, as it was a few decades back). He wants to make it that way, again – strong, dynamic, filled with reverence for what we’ve done and determination to outdo the past. I don’t know if Trump knows the ultimate wellsprings of his nation’s greatness, but he certainly understands that those who have been running the show largely reject whatever it is that made America great. He instinctively knows that if we give up what we are, we give up all we have. Something else will replace it – because a vacuum of any type will always eventually get filled. Getting after those who are in charge thus becomes the primary effort of everyone who cares to save the nation. And anyone, of whatever alleged political complexion, who doesn’t want to get after those in charge has effectively ranged himself on the other side.

The Great Turning Point is this: that we’ll either chase the Ruling Class from power, or they’ll hand us over, bound hand and foot, to a successor civilization. Back in the 20th century, they wanted to hand us over to Socialist totalitarians, now they’ll just as easily hand us over to Islam. In either case, they don’t care because they are certain they’ll still remain in charge. That they might well be wrong about this is immaterial – it is what they believe (and, come what may, after the end of our civilization most of them will still be on top…just as in the various turns in other civilizations a traitorous Ruling Class still managed to ingratiate itself with the new rulers…plenty of Byzantines converted to Islam and helped run the Ottoman Empire after 1453, after all; the Russian Imperial general Brusilov became a Bolshevik; the German officer corps sold itself to Hitler for as little as 100,000 marks a year…). Getting rid of these people in charge is Job One. It is really the only job we have – and if that means sticking by Trump and just generally fighting and pushing back all the time, that is what it will have to be. It’ll be worth it, if we win.

Balancing the Political Sides

Kurt Schlichter has a new bit up at Townhall – it hits a point I’ve made recently on Twitter:

So, my finger-wagging True Con friends, what’s your plan? How do we go from liberals abandoning the Rule of Law, and such ancillary and associated components of a society based on liberty like free speech and free enterprise, to a liberty-based society operating under the Rule of Law? “Elect more True Cons!” isn’t a plan; it’s an aspiration, and not much of one. I don’t need another cliché, or another citation to general principles, or some variant of my new favorite, all-purpose get-out-of-having-an-actual-plan-free card, the old “We’re better than this” line.

He goes on to note his personal plan: pain. Causing as much pain to liberals as can be achieved in the hope that it will eventually get them to back off. It is certainly a better plan than the idea of doing nothing and trying to pretend that all is well and we just need to get rid of Trump and figure out some way to get Jeb! or Kasich in there. Trump goes down and we all go down with him. There is no separating ourselves from Trump save by agreeing with the left – and agreeing with the left, especially right now, is fraught with the gravest peril for all people who believe in freedom.

Right now, the left is making the demand of “no enemies of the left”. This is an old, Bolshevik tactic. They used it to prevent anyone on the left from opposing them…and then picked off each non-Bolshevik part of the left in turn: starting with the farthest “right” of the left and eventually eating their own who couldn’t stomach the worst aspects of Leninism. When you say “no enemies on the left”, you essentially allow the farthest left tail to wag the political dog. “No enemies on the left means” that no matter how completely radical the far left gets, you can’t say anything against them lest you be classed as a fascist enemy of the people. Until at least part of the left says, “we have enemies on the left”, then they stand foursquare in opposition to all we believe and must be battled on each issue without letup. You think you can make a deal with the left to get rid of Trump and all you’ll find is that you’ve dropped Trump in favor of Lenin.

And, so, everything left is currently our enemy. Even the most decent and reasonable leftist you know is, for now, simply part of antifa. Until such decent leftists turn against the far left and help us to push them completely out of political influence, it will have to be that way. I don’t want it to be this way. I don’t like it to be like this. But it is what it is. Any weakness at this point just helps the left – even if you are just trying to be nice to that swell Progressive friend of yours (I’ve got some, myself), all you’re doing is helping the people who smash windows and beat up people who have a “Nazi haircut”.

And this is where the so-called True Conservatives simply have rocks in their heads right now – so consumed with hatred of Trump (who dared to annul their expertise by winning what they said he couldn’t win), that they have set themselves into a position where they are assisting the most far-left radical elements in the United States. Forget their soft-voiced condemnations of antifa violence – look more to the way they’ve gone ballistic over the pardon of Joe Arpaio. That shows you where their heads are, and how dangerous they are to the side of Conservatism. Everyone with any sense at all knows that the conviction of Arpaio was set in train in a spirit of political vindictiveness. Arpaio was doing things the left didn’t want, so they got a judge to say he was doing it wrong, and then another judge to “convict” him of not doing what the other judge said to do. There is no merit to the case against Arpaio – what he did was a political act to be decided by the political process (and, as it turns out, he was booted from office by the voters at the last election). But the left isn’t having any of that – Arpaio violated not the law, but the demands of the left and so he had to be punished. And for many decades, we on the right have sat still for things like that..Trump just said, “no more”.

It is good that the left has now been informed that using the courts to punish political actions is over. This is one of the most important things Trump has done as President and it benefits every single Conservative official and office holder in the land. To hold Trump’s action wrong because you think that Arpaio was wrong is asinine – political suicide of the most stupid sort. It doesn’t matter if Arpaio was wrong – more wrong was the left trying to send him to jail for what he did. So-called Conservatives are saying that Trump’s action violates the rule of law – perhaps it does, but so does trying to send a man to jail for doing things in the course of his official business. Unless Arpaio was taking bribes or some such, no judicial actions should have been launched against him, at all. And the only way we’ll get back to an America where political differences are solved entirely by the political process is to make using non-political means painful to the left.

You can have two types of government: Royal or Republican. A dictatorship or a democracy. There is something to be said for Royalism/Dictatorship…it allows for a bit of flexibility and tact in the performance of government actions. The downside, of course, is if you have an evil king or dictator. Better, of course, not to have any king or dictator because you can never tell who will be the bad one (or which one might turn bad over time – Nero’s first five years as Emperor were actually a model of excellent Royalist government…and then he went nuts). Better to have a Republic – but a Republic only works when it has rules and they are strictly enforced on everyone. You will have Rules, or you will have Rulers: take your pick. I prefer Rules. Right now, however, we have no Rules because the left has arrogated to itself the power to impose new Rules or set aside old Rules at will, as they determine whether or not they help or hinder the left. Each leftist out there is a supreme Autocrat, able to instantly decree whatever comes into his or her head at the moment and insist that we all toe the line. We are to just tremble and obey. I don’t like it like that – and I want my Rules back. The only way I can see to get them back is to demonstrate to the non-insane portion of the left that, on the whole, they would prefer Rules, themselves. And if this takes my agreement to pardoning Joe Arpaio in an irregular manner, then so be it. It is a lot less outrageous than someone getting beaten to the ground by an antifa mob because he wasn’t antifa.

Unless we are to live under a system of brute force, we must have a political balance. Indeed, it must be an artificial balance. Even if one side is 10 people and the other side is 1,000, the system must be set so that the two sides have the ability to thwart the other. Eventually the tiny minority must knuckle under to the prevailing notions of the broad majority – but not easily, and not before that tiny minority secures at least some of it’s demands. Our system is messed up right now because there is no balance – the left has set it up so that whomever has the power can just steamroll over everyone else. The left has gotten away with this because each time our side has gained power, we have refrained from exercising it as the left does. We have to be a lot more flexible about such things if we are to teach the left that they want the losers to still have a say in what goes on.

Yes, we are better than that – we won’t, say, send people to jail like the left does over mere policy disagreements. But even refraining from such egregiously tyrannical actions, there is still much we can do to demonstrate to the left the sweet reason of, well, being reasonable. The pardon was one thing. Making a move to deny federal funds to colleges which suppress free speech is another. Regulating tech giants who use their dominance to suppress free expression is another. Lots of things – and we’ll have to do them. Eventually, enough pain will be inflicted that the sane portion of the left will jettison the antifa types. Probably with a feeling of relief, I should add – do you think anyone really wants to be politically chained to people who wear masks and beat up people? But they’ll only unchain themselves from antifa if we essentially force them to…to give them a choice between going down to permanent defeat with antifa, or getting rid of antifa and making themselves acceptable to a broad electoral majority. Only this time, when they get back in, they’ll hopefully remember how bad it can be when you’re run over roughshod by the winners in the next round.

There can once again be general political balance in the United States – where the policy differences are relatively small and everyone can look at the other side and see reasonable people who merely disagree on the best way to shared goals. But that can’t be while one side is lawless, and is ever more enthralled to the far left radicals who simply hate the United States and all it stands for. Trump, consciously or not, is doing what we on the right should have done 40 years ago – and it is time for all of us who want a just, free and reasonable society to get on board.